5 ms·

Anybody with a modicum of self-respect wouldn't accept that counter-offer. The $5K offer was a gift, and publicizing a person's flights is sick behavior.

constantcrying 4y ago
Civilian flights have their data published. If I am flying my plane is publically tracked too.
TapWaterBandit 4y ago
Yea, I'm genuinely curious if the people criticising Musk here are also in favour of doxxing people and then publishing the info online? Cause that's effectively what this is. I'm not sure where I stand on this but I can see why someone of Musk's public stature would be concerned about this. Hell, I am a literal nobody and of someone did this or something similar to me I'd be paranoid as all hell.
- constantcrying 4y ago
  >doxxing people and then publishing the info online? His problem if he uses a means of transportation which, in real time, updates its location. The information is public anyway and it applies to everyone. I really don't see how this is wrong.
- nickthegreek 4y ago
  There is no doxxing. All this information is publicly available to everyone.
  - qu4z-2 4y ago
    Almost all doxxing consists of collecting a bunch of technically public information in one place. We still discourage it.
    - nickthegreek 4y ago
      This isn't collecting data from a bunch of places. Its mirroring data from 1 place to another.
- thatswrong0 4y ago
  When you're one of the richest people in the world, and you're using your power to influence public opinion, having your already publicly available travel information posted online is not at all equivalent to doxxing. Jesus.
  - papito 4y ago
    There are accounts that track Russian diplomats and military brass planes, for example. They turn off transponders if they don't want to be tracked. But the point is, it poses no safety risk to the rich and powerful. It's just a curious thing for the public at worst. If someone was a mark, the perps are not going to use frigging Twitter and go directly to the public source of this data instead.
- MrJohz 4y ago
  In general, I agree. It surprises me that it's possible to follow Musk's whereabouts in this way, and I'd be uncomfortable if someone did this to me. That said, I think there are some mitigating factors here. Firstly, the account doesn't track Musk himself, it tracks his private jet. If Musk wanted to, he could avoid the issue completely by chartering planes or just (heaven forbid!) flying in conventional airlines. Musk is explicitly making a convenience-privacy trade-off here. Secondly, I think we do Musk a disservice by pretending that he is an ordinary person like me or you. He is, depending on your accounting, the world's richest person, which obviously affords him incredible luxury that we should bit begrudge, but it also means that he is one of the most influential people in the world. Bear in mind that he has recently bought one of the biggest media platforms in the world. The problem with this is a principle of democracy is that power requires scrutiny. That's why we usually have a good idea of where our leaders are at any particular time - this obviously makes their lives difficult, but if we are going to hand power over to our presidents, prime ministers, and chancellors, then we should also demand accountability from them. But for Elon Musk, whose power comes solely from his wealth, there is no clear accountability. We have no right to know his whereabouts, or what he's doing with his money, or who he's being influenced by (and who he's influencing). His power is essentially unchecked (at least in the democratic sense) and limited only by the market. So from that perspective, it seems very sensible and practically democratic to keep track of such powerful people.
thatswrong0 4y ago
Sick behavior? In what way? It's publicly available information.
- loa_in_ 4y ago
  "They were so focused on whether they could, that they never stopped to think whether they should" Putting someone's life in a spotlight without their consent is not much different from being an annoying paparazzi
  - thatswrong0 4y ago
    Paparazzi invade into peoples lives and don’t allow them any sense of normalcy in either public or private. They capture intimate moments, draw focus to people’s bodies, and stir up media frenzies about mundane aspects of being human. Posting ADS—B data is not anything close to resembling that. Elon Musk claims to have “started” Tesla in the name of sustainability and yet personally is responsible for dumping more carbon in the atmosphere than god knows how much compared to the average person. Pointing out this hypocrisy with publicly available data is not a bad thing, and is nothing like the paparazzi. > Putting someone's life in a spotlight without their consent Elon Musk acquired Twitter supposedly in the name of free speech. He then chose to post borderline transphobic thoughts on Twitter because he knew it would stir the pot amongst his ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY MILLION Twitter followers. He then chose to go on stage at the end of Dave Chapelle's set in front of a _lot_ of people, and was booed by a large percentage of said people. When someone decided to post a video of this on Twitter, that persons account was banned. Does that sound like someone who doesn't want to have their life put in the spotlight? Or does it sound like an attention seeking hypocrite who is using his money and power to try to silence people who question his extremely questionable actions? There are millions of good hills to die on. I have no idea why one would choose to willingly throw themselves onto a mountainous pyre of bullshit. The rich and powerful do not need bootlickers to defend their shitty actions. And I say this as someone who until recently thought he has caught a bit too much flak for some of his immature antics.
- SamReidHughes 4y ago
  Then why did he ask for $50K to stop doing it?

constantcrying 4y ago

Civilian flights have their data published. If I am flying my plane is publically tracked too.

TapWaterBandit 4y ago

Yea, I'm genuinely curious if the people criticising Musk here are also in favour of doxxing people and then publishing the info online? Cause that's effectively what this is. I'm not sure where I stand on this but I can see why someone of Musk's public stature would be concerned about this. Hell, I am a literal nobody and of someone did this or something similar to me I'd be paranoid as all hell.

constantcrying 4y ago
>doxxing people and then publishing the info online? His problem if he uses a means of transportation which, in real time, updates its location. The information is public anyway and it applies to everyone. I really don't see how this is wrong.
nickthegreek 4y ago
There is no doxxing. All this information is publicly available to everyone.
- qu4z-2 4y ago
  Almost all doxxing consists of collecting a bunch of technically public information in one place. We still discourage it.
  - nickthegreek 4y ago
    This isn't collecting data from a bunch of places. Its mirroring data from 1 place to another.
thatswrong0 4y ago
When you're one of the richest people in the world, and you're using your power to influence public opinion, having your already publicly available travel information posted online is not at all equivalent to doxxing. Jesus.
- papito 4y ago
  There are accounts that track Russian diplomats and military brass planes, for example. They turn off transponders if they don't want to be tracked. But the point is, it poses no safety risk to the rich and powerful. It's just a curious thing for the public at worst. If someone was a mark, the perps are not going to use frigging Twitter and go directly to the public source of this data instead.
MrJohz 4y ago
In general, I agree. It surprises me that it's possible to follow Musk's whereabouts in this way, and I'd be uncomfortable if someone did this to me. That said, I think there are some mitigating factors here. Firstly, the account doesn't track Musk himself, it tracks his private jet. If Musk wanted to, he could avoid the issue completely by chartering planes or just (heaven forbid!) flying in conventional airlines. Musk is explicitly making a convenience-privacy trade-off here. Secondly, I think we do Musk a disservice by pretending that he is an ordinary person like me or you. He is, depending on your accounting, the world's richest person, which obviously affords him incredible luxury that we should bit begrudge, but it also means that he is one of the most influential people in the world. Bear in mind that he has recently bought one of the biggest media platforms in the world. The problem with this is a principle of democracy is that power requires scrutiny. That's why we usually have a good idea of where our leaders are at any particular time - this obviously makes their lives difficult, but if we are going to hand power over to our presidents, prime ministers, and chancellors, then we should also demand accountability from them. But for Elon Musk, whose power comes solely from his wealth, there is no clear accountability. We have no right to know his whereabouts, or what he's doing with his money, or who he's being influenced by (and who he's influencing). His power is essentially unchecked (at least in the democratic sense) and limited only by the market. So from that perspective, it seems very sensible and practically democratic to keep track of such powerful people.

thatswrong0 4y ago

Sick behavior? In what way? It's publicly available information.

loa_in_ 4y ago
"They were so focused on whether they could, that they never stopped to think whether they should" Putting someone's life in a spotlight without their consent is not much different from being an annoying paparazzi
- thatswrong0 4y ago
  Paparazzi invade into peoples lives and don’t allow them any sense of normalcy in either public or private. They capture intimate moments, draw focus to people’s bodies, and stir up media frenzies about mundane aspects of being human. Posting ADS—B data is not anything close to resembling that. Elon Musk claims to have “started” Tesla in the name of sustainability and yet personally is responsible for dumping more carbon in the atmosphere than god knows how much compared to the average person. Pointing out this hypocrisy with publicly available data is not a bad thing, and is nothing like the paparazzi. > Putting someone's life in a spotlight without their consent Elon Musk acquired Twitter supposedly in the name of free speech. He then chose to post borderline transphobic thoughts on Twitter because he knew it would stir the pot amongst his ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY MILLION Twitter followers. He then chose to go on stage at the end of Dave Chapelle's set in front of a _lot_ of people, and was booed by a large percentage of said people. When someone decided to post a video of this on Twitter, that persons account was banned. Does that sound like someone who doesn't want to have their life put in the spotlight? Or does it sound like an attention seeking hypocrite who is using his money and power to try to silence people who question his extremely questionable actions? There are millions of good hills to die on. I have no idea why one would choose to willingly throw themselves onto a mountainous pyre of bullshit. The rich and powerful do not need bootlickers to defend their shitty actions. And I say this as someone who until recently thought he has caught a bit too much flak for some of his immature antics.
SamReidHughes 4y ago
Then why did he ask for $50K to stop doing it?