4 ms·

Motives are unknowable (irrelevent), it's only actions that matter. I'm no fan, but this does pass the 'would probably do this too' test. As, I could see this

by dpweb 4y ago

Motives are unknowable (irrelevent), it's only actions that matter. I'm no fan, but this does pass the 'would probably do this too' test. As, I could see this being a recommendation from one's personal security team. Not to mention a doxing that is my understanding violation of T's policy. But yes, you then have to ban Gatesjet, Puinjet and so forth. The free speech argument is kinda stale for me at least, it's easy to virture signal 'in the interest of free speech', but obviously there will always be some speech that is not acceptable (ie.. doxing, illegal)

wolrah 4y ago
> Not to mention a doxing that is my understanding violation of T's policy. But yes, you then have to ban Gatesjet, Puinjet and so forth. https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/personal-information https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/personal-info... Twitter's policies define doxxing as the posting of private information that was not made publicly available by the owner. They also specifically allow "sharing information that is publicly available elsewhere, in a non-abusive manner". ElonJet and all of the other similar bots tracking interesting aircraft are using information that is broadcast unencrypted by the aircraft itself to anyone within radio range (sometimes hundreds of miles) who has a compatible receiver (including the famous $15 RTL-SDR) and publicly shared through multiple aggregators like ADS-B Exchange, FlightAware, and FlightRadar24. This data is legally required to be broadcast, so it's definitely not private, and it's definitely publicly available elsewhere. Elon would probably argue that it was abusive, but that's a lot more subjective. As far as I'm aware the account never tweeted anything but the facts of his jet's movements.
- nailer 4y ago
  > Twitter's policies define doxxing as the posting of private information that was not made publicly available by the owner. Musk didn’t make the data available so we can discount that. > They also specifically allow "sharing information that is publicly available elsewhere, in a non-abusive manner". Yes. Sharing information to make people track a person’s movements could be considered abusive. I suspect this is a mistake though and Musk will have twitter re enable the account.
  - wolrah 4y ago
    > Elon didn’t make the data available so we can discount that. Did you miss the part where this data is legally required to be broadcast openly? This isn't private information, so whether or not Elon wants it to be shared is irrelevant. > Yes. Sharing information to make people track a person’s movements can be considered abusive. The account isn't tracking Elon's movements. It's tracking his jet's movements, which again are legally required to be publicly broadcast by the very jet being tracked. Aside from the time he's actually on the jet, the extent that this allows a person to track his movements is "he's probably somewhere within the general region served by whatever airport the plane is at" which is not exactly a significant privacy issue nor unusual for anyone of sufficient celebrity. He always has the choice to not fly everywhere by private jet, which I believe was the entire original point of this bot. Making a note of the carbon impact of his choice to fly all over while promoting himself as a leader in reducing carbon footprint. There was a whole thing for a while with calling out a variety of celebrities for the same thing, just Elon was the only one who took it personally. > I suspect this is a mistake though and Musk will have twitter re enable the account. Given that the head of the company has a known public vendetta against this particular account and it was just the other day publicized that direct Musk subordinates were involved in "shadowbanning" it, and we know for a fact that Twitter has systems to flag accounts for special treatment such as Musk's previous promise to not ban it, this really doesn't pass the smell test. What's more likely, that after all that they somehow accidentally banned both this account and later the operator's account, or that Musk got angry and changed his mind?
    - wolrah 4y ago
      Well this is a surprise turn of events, at least at this time the ElonJet account is back (though the author's personal account and his other interesting aircraft tracker accounts remain suspended at this time). https://twitter.com/ElonJet/status/1603166460746104833 https://twitter.com/ElonJet/status/1603166460746104833 Twitter has changed their policies to not allow posting of same-day location information even if it's from public sources. https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1603165959669354496 https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1603165959669354496 That seems to confirm that this was intentional and one of two things happened: 1. Someone jumped the gun and started enforcing the new policy before it was public, entirely coincidentally only enforcing it against this specific user's accounts before realizing their error but doing nothing to undo or even acknowledge it for hours after. 2. Someone in a position of substantial power made an arbitrary move and then changed the policy to justify their actions after the fact. I know which one of those two I'd bet on.

by dpweb 4y ago

wolrah 4y ago

> Not to mention a doxing that is my understanding violation of T's policy. But yes, you then have to ban Gatesjet, Puinjet and so forth. https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/personal-information https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/personal-info... Twitter's policies define doxxing as the posting of private information that was not made publicly available by the owner. They also specifically allow "sharing information that is publicly available elsewhere, in a non-abusive manner". ElonJet and all of the other similar bots tracking interesting aircraft are using information that is broadcast unencrypted by the aircraft itself to anyone within radio range (sometimes hundreds of miles) who has a compatible receiver (including the famous $15 RTL-SDR) and publicly shared through multiple aggregators like ADS-B Exchange, FlightAware, and FlightRadar24. This data is legally required to be broadcast, so it's definitely not private, and it's definitely publicly available elsewhere. Elon would probably argue that it was abusive, but that's a lot more subjective. As far as I'm aware the account never tweeted anything but the facts of his jet's movements.

nailer 4y ago
> Twitter's policies define doxxing as the posting of private information that was not made publicly available by the owner. Musk didn’t make the data available so we can discount that. > They also specifically allow "sharing information that is publicly available elsewhere, in a non-abusive manner". Yes. Sharing information to make people track a person’s movements could be considered abusive. I suspect this is a mistake though and Musk will have twitter re enable the account.
- wolrah 4y ago
  > Elon didn’t make the data available so we can discount that. Did you miss the part where this data is legally required to be broadcast openly? This isn't private information, so whether or not Elon wants it to be shared is irrelevant. > Yes. Sharing information to make people track a person’s movements can be considered abusive. The account isn't tracking Elon's movements. It's tracking his jet's movements, which again are legally required to be publicly broadcast by the very jet being tracked. Aside from the time he's actually on the jet, the extent that this allows a person to track his movements is "he's probably somewhere within the general region served by whatever airport the plane is at" which is not exactly a significant privacy issue nor unusual for anyone of sufficient celebrity. He always has the choice to not fly everywhere by private jet, which I believe was the entire original point of this bot. Making a note of the carbon impact of his choice to fly all over while promoting himself as a leader in reducing carbon footprint. There was a whole thing for a while with calling out a variety of celebrities for the same thing, just Elon was the only one who took it personally. > I suspect this is a mistake though and Musk will have twitter re enable the account. Given that the head of the company has a known public vendetta against this particular account and it was just the other day publicized that direct Musk subordinates were involved in "shadowbanning" it, and we know for a fact that Twitter has systems to flag accounts for special treatment such as Musk's previous promise to not ban it, this really doesn't pass the smell test. What's more likely, that after all that they somehow accidentally banned both this account and later the operator's account, or that Musk got angry and changed his mind?
  - wolrah 4y ago
    Well this is a surprise turn of events, at least at this time the ElonJet account is back (though the author's personal account and his other interesting aircraft tracker accounts remain suspended at this time). https://twitter.com/ElonJet/status/1603166460746104833 https://twitter.com/ElonJet/status/1603166460746104833 Twitter has changed their policies to not allow posting of same-day location information even if it's from public sources. https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1603165959669354496 https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1603165959669354496 That seems to confirm that this was intentional and one of two things happened: 1. Someone jumped the gun and started enforcing the new policy before it was public, entirely coincidentally only enforcing it against this specific user's accounts before realizing their error but doing nothing to undo or even acknowledge it for hours after. 2. Someone in a position of substantial power made an arbitrary move and then changed the policy to justify their actions after the fact. I know which one of those two I'd bet on.