3 ms·

> 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 pr

by 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.
- wolrah 4y ago
  And they banned it again. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33992412 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33992412
- nailer 4y ago
  It’s not arbitrary. A car with his child in it was attacked. The account was already against the old ToS if you define it as abusive use of public data, the new policy is clearer, and it applies to everyone equally. I’m not sure what you’re complaining about.
nailer 4y ago
> Did you miss the part where this data is legally required to be broadcast openly? No, I specifically pointed out the first part mentions data not shared by the person in the first case. You missed that. > The account isn't tracking Elon's movements. It’s literally called Elonjet. It’s not about anyone else except Musk. > which again are legally required to be publicly broadcast by the very jet being tracked. Again, abusive use of public data is against the Terms of Service. Please read the Terms of Service.
- wolrah 4y ago
  > No, I specifically pointed out the first part mentions data not shared by the person in the first case. You missed that. In what universe is "the person's aircraft is actively broadcasting this information" not data shared by the person? Just because they don't want to share it and are legally compelled to do so doesn't mean they aren't sharing it. That policy is about data not normally, legally, or intentionally shared. > It’s literally called Elonjet. It’s not about anyone else except Musk. It's literally called Elonjet. It tracks Elon's jet. Not him personally. The bot posts when the aircraft takes off and when it lands, so even if he is on the aircraft at the time that information is almost immediately stale. The moment he leaves the airport it's nothing more than "There's a reasonable chance Elon is somewhere in the same metro area as his plane" > Again, abusive use of public data is against the Terms of Service. Please read the Terms of Service. The bot is not abusive, it's there to make a point about Elon's carbon emissions versus his public claims of environmental concern by displaying his use of inefficient private jet travel. That was a thing for a while with a lot of celebrities, but only one of them threw such a fit about it that it remained in the public's attention. Remember that this bot was up for ages, with Elon publicly whining about it, Elon fans reporting it regularly, and I have no doubt he was bringing it up in private conversations with Twitter higher ups once he became involved. Are you telling me that you honestly believe this account and all of its related accounts were posting content that blatantly violated ToS that entire time and was allowed to remain open just because? Note as well that the final banning came along with a (notably after the fact) change in policy to explicitly ban these sorts of accounts. If it was so blatantly against the ToS why would that be needed?

by wolrah 4y ago

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.

wolrah 4y ago
And they banned it again. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33992412 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33992412
nailer 4y ago
It’s not arbitrary. A car with his child in it was attacked. The account was already against the old ToS if you define it as abusive use of public data, the new policy is clearer, and it applies to everyone equally. I’m not sure what you’re complaining about.

nailer 4y ago

> Did you miss the part where this data is legally required to be broadcast openly? No, I specifically pointed out the first part mentions data not shared by the person in the first case. You missed that. > The account isn't tracking Elon's movements. It’s literally called Elonjet. It’s not about anyone else except Musk. > which again are legally required to be publicly broadcast by the very jet being tracked. Again, abusive use of public data is against the Terms of Service. Please read the Terms of Service.

wolrah 4y ago
> No, I specifically pointed out the first part mentions data not shared by the person in the first case. You missed that. In what universe is "the person's aircraft is actively broadcasting this information" not data shared by the person? Just because they don't want to share it and are legally compelled to do so doesn't mean they aren't sharing it. That policy is about data not normally, legally, or intentionally shared. > It’s literally called Elonjet. It’s not about anyone else except Musk. It's literally called Elonjet. It tracks Elon's jet. Not him personally. The bot posts when the aircraft takes off and when it lands, so even if he is on the aircraft at the time that information is almost immediately stale. The moment he leaves the airport it's nothing more than "There's a reasonable chance Elon is somewhere in the same metro area as his plane" > Again, abusive use of public data is against the Terms of Service. Please read the Terms of Service. The bot is not abusive, it's there to make a point about Elon's carbon emissions versus his public claims of environmental concern by displaying his use of inefficient private jet travel. That was a thing for a while with a lot of celebrities, but only one of them threw such a fit about it that it remained in the public's attention. Remember that this bot was up for ages, with Elon publicly whining about it, Elon fans reporting it regularly, and I have no doubt he was bringing it up in private conversations with Twitter higher ups once he became involved. Are you telling me that you honestly believe this account and all of its related accounts were posting content that blatantly violated ToS that entire time and was allowed to remain open just because? Note as well that the final banning came along with a (notably after the fact) change in policy to explicitly ban these sorts of accounts. If it was so blatantly against the ToS why would that be needed?