12 ms·

Your home location is also public info. Publishing it on twitter is still doxxing and always has been.

by trident5000 4y ago

joshuamorton 4y ago
"Doxxing" isn't illegal and never has been.
- jacquesm 4y ago
  That is location dependent. NL, Spain and China (and possibly others) have anti-doxxing laws. That said: tracking a plane is not doxxing.
  - koolba 4y ago
    Just because information is publicly available doesn’t mean it’s not doxxing. It’s the act itself. Otherwise every accusation of doxxing could be denied with a single level of indirection.
    - Jarwain 4y ago
      Exactly. Just because information is publicly available, doesn't mean it's easy to find or access. Doxxing makes it easy to access and reference, and bridges the gap between a pseudonyms and real identity
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      The bar for doxxing is that the information is either private or difficult to obtain and pertains to a person. That bar is not met here.
      - catiopatio 4y ago
        No, the bar for “doxxing” is whether you’re disseminating private or sensitive identifying information about a person, and particularly if you’re doing so with malicious intent. Given my real name — which is available on Twitter — my home address is not difficult to obtain from online, public, governmental real estate records. Despite the fact that the information is public, it would still be doxxing — not to mention inappropriate, violating, and frightening — if someone decided to dig up that address and post it to a broad audience on Twitter that would have otherwise been unaware of it. This is even more true if that audience is hostile, and my information is being posted in an attempt to harass and/or intimidate.
        jacquesm 4y ago
        It helps if you use a word if you use the common definition of that word. If you want to expand the definition of the word doxxing then that's fine but you'll have to have that conversation all by yourself. I'll just use this one: "Doxing" is a neologism. It originates from a spelling alteration of the abbreviation "docs" (for "documents") and refers to "compiling and releasing a dossier of personal information on someone".Essentially, doxing is revealing and publicizing the records of an individual, which were previously private or difficult to obtain. " From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing So this isn't doxing, since the information isn't private and it isn't difficult to obtain.
        catiopatio 4y ago
        I’ll just use this one, from the first paragraph of the very same page you cited: > Doxing or doxxing (originally spelled in 1337 as d0xing) is the act of publicly providing personally identifiable information about an individual or organization, usually via the internet. Historically, the term has been used interchangeably to refer to both the aggregration of this information from public source or record databases and social media websites (like Facebook), as well as the publication of previously private information obtained through criminal or otherwise fraudulent means such as hacking and social engineering. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing So this is doxxing, and you dishonestly cherry-picked an incomplete definition. In case any confusion remains, here’s the Oxford Languages’ definition: > search for and publish private or identifying information about (a particular individual) on the internet, typically with malicious intent.
        jacquesm 4y ago
        There is nothing 'personally identifiable' about an airplane, it's a plane, not a person. Posting your home address which you've kept out of the public eye is doxing, posting the whereabouts of any aircraft that broadcasts that information to all receivers is not. That's why you can find this information all over the internet, the only place where you currently can't find Musk's jet is on Twitter. And that's before we get into his free-speech arguments which apparently were a bit inconsistent. Or would you like to accuse the FAA of doxing as well?
  - joshuamorton 4y ago
    Fair, I should clarify: it is not illegal in any of the locations that Musk or Jack Sweeney operate in. Musk going after Sweeney would hopefully get thrown out at the anti-SLAPP stage. Unfortunately, my go-to person for such questions (@popehat) just left Twitter because of how awfully Musk is running it.
- spritefs 4y ago
  It isn't legal in California > Every person who, with intent to place another person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of the other person’s immediate family, by means of an electronic communication device, and without consent of the other person, and for the purpose of imminently causing that other person unwanted physical contact, injury, or harassment, by a third party, electronically distributes, publishes, e-mails, hyperlinks, or makes available for downloading, personal identifying information, including, but not limited to, a digital image of another person, or an electronic message of a harassing nature about another person, which would be likely to incite or produce that unlawful action, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in a county jail, by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=653.2 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...
  - joshuamorton 4y ago
    Despite Musks claims, there's zero evidence that Sweeney has ever done anything with intent to place someone in fear for their safety. And, given that it operated for years without issue, there is in fact compelling evidence to the contrary.
    - spritefs 4y ago
      I mean, I never said what Sweeney was doing is considered doxxing, or whether his behavior could lead to reasonable fear for safety. I'd rather let the lawyers untangle this annoying mess really didn't expect my initial comment to lead to a shitstorm...
  - browserman 4y ago
    > with intent to place another person in reasonable fear for his or her safety This would cover LibsOfTikTok, but not ElonJet
    - NaturalPhallacy 4y ago
      You mean Taylor Lorenz who doxxed LibsOfTikTok?
- stale2002 4y ago
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    No, of course he does not and this comment is against the guidelines of HN.
    - stale2002 4y ago
      - jacquesm 4y ago
        They don't have to do anything because you are breaking the rules here.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        stale2002 4y ago
        dang 4y ago
        Could you please stop posting in the flamewar style to HN? It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. We've had to ask you this more than once: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29629700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29629700 (Dec 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21499309 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21499309 (Nov 2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19342820 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19342820 (March 2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14610460 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14610460 (June 2017) I don't want to ban you, but if this keeps up, we'll end up having to. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

Your home location is also public info. Publishing it on twitter is still doxxing and always has been.

joshuamorton 4y ago

"Doxxing" isn't illegal and never has been.

jacquesm 4y ago
That is location dependent. NL, Spain and China (and possibly others) have anti-doxxing laws. That said: tracking a plane is not doxxing.
- koolba 4y ago
  Just because information is publicly available doesn’t mean it’s not doxxing. It’s the act itself. Otherwise every accusation of doxxing could be denied with a single level of indirection.
  - Jarwain 4y ago
    Exactly. Just because information is publicly available, doesn't mean it's easy to find or access. Doxxing makes it easy to access and reference, and bridges the gap between a pseudonyms and real identity
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    The bar for doxxing is that the information is either private or difficult to obtain and pertains to a person. That bar is not met here.
    - catiopatio 4y ago
      No, the bar for “doxxing” is whether you’re disseminating private or sensitive identifying information about a person, and particularly if you’re doing so with malicious intent. Given my real name — which is available on Twitter — my home address is not difficult to obtain from online, public, governmental real estate records. Despite the fact that the information is public, it would still be doxxing — not to mention inappropriate, violating, and frightening — if someone decided to dig up that address and post it to a broad audience on Twitter that would have otherwise been unaware of it. This is even more true if that audience is hostile, and my information is being posted in an attempt to harass and/or intimidate.
      - jacquesm 4y ago
        It helps if you use a word if you use the common definition of that word. If you want to expand the definition of the word doxxing then that's fine but you'll have to have that conversation all by yourself. I'll just use this one: "Doxing" is a neologism. It originates from a spelling alteration of the abbreviation "docs" (for "documents") and refers to "compiling and releasing a dossier of personal information on someone".Essentially, doxing is revealing and publicizing the records of an individual, which were previously private or difficult to obtain. " From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing So this isn't doxing, since the information isn't private and it isn't difficult to obtain.
        catiopatio 4y ago
        I’ll just use this one, from the first paragraph of the very same page you cited: > Doxing or doxxing (originally spelled in 1337 as d0xing) is the act of publicly providing personally identifiable information about an individual or organization, usually via the internet. Historically, the term has been used interchangeably to refer to both the aggregration of this information from public source or record databases and social media websites (like Facebook), as well as the publication of previously private information obtained through criminal or otherwise fraudulent means such as hacking and social engineering. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing So this is doxxing, and you dishonestly cherry-picked an incomplete definition. In case any confusion remains, here’s the Oxford Languages’ definition: > search for and publish private or identifying information about (a particular individual) on the internet, typically with malicious intent.
        jacquesm 4y ago
        There is nothing 'personally identifiable' about an airplane, it's a plane, not a person. Posting your home address which you've kept out of the public eye is doxing, posting the whereabouts of any aircraft that broadcasts that information to all receivers is not. That's why you can find this information all over the internet, the only place where you currently can't find Musk's jet is on Twitter. And that's before we get into his free-speech arguments which apparently were a bit inconsistent. Or would you like to accuse the FAA of doxing as well?
- joshuamorton 4y ago
  Fair, I should clarify: it is not illegal in any of the locations that Musk or Jack Sweeney operate in. Musk going after Sweeney would hopefully get thrown out at the anti-SLAPP stage. Unfortunately, my go-to person for such questions (@popehat) just left Twitter because of how awfully Musk is running it.
spritefs 4y ago
It isn't legal in California > Every person who, with intent to place another person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of the other person’s immediate family, by means of an electronic communication device, and without consent of the other person, and for the purpose of imminently causing that other person unwanted physical contact, injury, or harassment, by a third party, electronically distributes, publishes, e-mails, hyperlinks, or makes available for downloading, personal identifying information, including, but not limited to, a digital image of another person, or an electronic message of a harassing nature about another person, which would be likely to incite or produce that unlawful action, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in a county jail, by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=653.2 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...
- joshuamorton 4y ago
  Despite Musks claims, there's zero evidence that Sweeney has ever done anything with intent to place someone in fear for their safety. And, given that it operated for years without issue, there is in fact compelling evidence to the contrary.
  - spritefs 4y ago
    I mean, I never said what Sweeney was doing is considered doxxing, or whether his behavior could lead to reasonable fear for safety. I'd rather let the lawyers untangle this annoying mess really didn't expect my initial comment to lead to a shitstorm...
- browserman 4y ago
  > with intent to place another person in reasonable fear for his or her safety This would cover LibsOfTikTok, but not ElonJet
  - NaturalPhallacy 4y ago
    You mean Taylor Lorenz who doxxed LibsOfTikTok?
stale2002 4y ago
- jacquesm 4y ago
  No, of course he does not and this comment is against the guidelines of HN.
  - stale2002 4y ago
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      They don't have to do anything because you are breaking the rules here.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - stale2002 4y ago
        dang 4y ago
        Could you please stop posting in the flamewar style to HN? It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. We've had to ask you this more than once: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29629700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29629700 (Dec 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21499309 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21499309 (Nov 2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19342820 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19342820 (March 2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14610460 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14610460 (June 2017) I don't want to ban you, but if this keeps up, we'll end up having to. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.