4 ms·

Doxxing someone's location != "free speech" by most people's definitions.

• mike_d 4y ago
  When you are using the public airspace, airwaves, or waterways there is an obligation to identify yourself to others.
  • hajile 4y ago
    When you use public roads, why shouldn't I be able to track everywhere you go and tell the world exactly where you are?
    • bestcoder69 4y ago
      You can... who's stopping you?
      • monetus 4y ago
        Yeah, it costs money but you can buy someone's location data in real time.
    • to11mtm 4y ago
      Because it's not an airspace where speed/visibility are important for a variety of reasons... FBOW moreso post 9-11
  • slowhand09 4y ago
    Evidently not. I live on the Chesapeake Bay. I see many Coast Guard and Navy vessels regularly that are not broadcasting AIS signals used for the safety of vessels nearby. Yet others do. I also see many military aircraft not broadcasting ADS-B, yet many are.
    • mike_d 4y ago
      The vast majority of military ships and aircraft operating domestically have collision avoidance (ADSB/AIS out) turned on. When conducting sensitive operations they can turn it off, but must be in direct communications with the appropriate controlling authority and almost always have a primary radar system active.
• lxgr 4y ago
  Unfortunately, "most people's definition" does not factor in at all when Elon is claiming to only be upholding the law. It is my understanding that "doxxing" is not only largely legal in the U.S., it is in fact common practice for various administrative databases to be published unredacted by default. Whether the law adequately protects people's privacy is a different conversation (worth having in my opinion!), and so is whether or not public or private non-government entities should step up instead and provide that additional protection. With steps like this, he just clearly shows that he either never was all that serious about that claim, or that he has quickly learned why content moderation isn't as easy as "upholding the law and nothing but the law", especially in the U.S.
  • hajile 4y ago
    Has Musk ever said that he supports doxxing individuals? Court cases or unredacted mass data dumps are far different than data dumps targeting very specific individuals -- usually with the intent of enabling direct harm.
    • bestcoder69 4y ago
      Even more hypocritically than that, he said he supported the ElonJet account remaining online.
    • someNameIG 4y ago
      > targeting very specific individuals -- usually with the intent of enabling direct harm. Like Musk has done with previous Twitter employees? There was reports Roth was threatened at had lot leave his house for safety reasons.
• pas 4y ago
  free speech absolutism is exactly what Elon was parroting though and if he were to acknowledge that he has changed his mind it would be okay-ish, but his whole process is to cause maximum amount of cringe, outcry, gossip/scandals, and so on, because this is what resonates with his personality anyway. so far it led him to the top of that particular game .. so it's unlikely he'll change.
• ssnistfajen 4y ago
  The location is for the private aircraft owned by Elon Musk, not Elon Musk himself. He could stuff a dummy on the aircraft and have it flown across the country and the tracking account would not provide any information that is different. This is not doxxing because whether Elon Musk was aboard the aircraft was never implied.
  • runarberg 4y ago
    He is also free to travel with other means, he can buy ticket in a commercial airplane, he can drive, take the bus, etc. Non of which are trackable with public data (unless he himself broadcasts the fight number of the commercial airplane he’s taking).
• datagram 4y ago
  Yeah, I don't think this account deserved to exist either. Really, it was just a bonehead move by Musk to call this account out specifically as one that he wouldn't ban.