3 ms·

I definitely don’t agree with your political belief that automated location stalking broadcast on social media should be protected speech, or the belief that th

I definitely don’t agree with your political belief that automated location stalking broadcast on social media should be protected speech, or the belief that the US 1st amendment actually does protect it. I get where you’re coming from, though. Replace “Elon’s location data” with “Elon is horrible” or “we should tax billionaires at 99%” and I’d also support the right to broadcast it far and wide.

wpietri 4y ago
Is there any evidence for your first amendment claims here? I'm pretty sure not, but I'm willing to be surprised.
ncallaway 4y ago
> I definitely don’t agree with your political belief that automated location stalking broadcast on social media should be protected speech As is absolutely you right! And, were this more private data (like the location of his car being published), I’d be much closer to agreeing with you position. I think the SCOTUS position on “reasonable expectation of privacy” is not great for taking into account the way our panopticon is able to process so much data that used to be public, but hard to gather at scale. I’d be pretty willing to be convinced that we should have a serious discussion on the merits and drawbacks of significantly expanding privacy rights, to make some of that illegal. That being said, the movements of airplanes are inherently public information right now, and already public “at scale”, so I just don’t see a world where I’d agree that aircraft movements should be a part of that framework. > the belief that the US 1st amendment actually does protect it. This is a less subjective claim, and is just not accurate. The first amendment absolutely allows someone to publish that information. It’s published publicly by the government! The first amendment absolutely unambiguously protects that information currently.

wpietri 4y ago

Is there any evidence for your first amendment claims here? I'm pretty sure not, but I'm willing to be surprised.

ncallaway 4y ago

> I definitely don’t agree with your political belief that automated location stalking broadcast on social media should be protected speech As is absolutely you right! And, were this more private data (like the location of his car being published), I’d be much closer to agreeing with you position. I think the SCOTUS position on “reasonable expectation of privacy” is not great for taking into account the way our panopticon is able to process so much data that used to be public, but hard to gather at scale. I’d be pretty willing to be convinced that we should have a serious discussion on the merits and drawbacks of significantly expanding privacy rights, to make some of that illegal. That being said, the movements of airplanes are inherently public information right now, and already public “at scale”, so I just don’t see a world where I’d agree that aircraft movements should be a part of that framework. > the belief that the US 1st amendment actually does protect it. This is a less subjective claim, and is just not accurate. The first amendment absolutely allows someone to publish that information. It’s published publicly by the government! The first amendment absolutely unambiguously protects that information currently.