6 ms·
What exactly is this "legitimate" interest?
by wfme 4y ago
What exactly is this "legitimate" interest?
- kasey_junk 4y agoThe general premise about why flight data is public is because the planes are using a public good. The airspace of a place is a commons, what happens in the commons is everyone’s to know.
- wfme 4y agoSince military planes use this same public good, is their flight data also published?
- kasey_junk 4y agoNo but the most accepted premise is we give up public goods for national security not because rich guys don’t like it.
- _kbh_ 4y agoYou can actually track a large number of military flights on websites such as https://www.adsbexchange.com/ https://www.adsbexchange.com/ a large amount of the time they fly with there transponder on because they don’t want to hit other aircraft.
- matkoniecz 4y agoIn general yes, for example https://www.flightradar24.com/ https://www.flightradar24.com/ shows right now FORTE10 plane (Northrop Grumman RQ-4B Global Hawk) which is UAV heading toward Black Sea where it will be spying over Russian invasion of Ukraine and launches of Russian missiles from Black Sea in their bombing of Ukrainian cities. Flights supplying Ukraine were routinely top viewed flights on that website (they were flying to Rzeszów in Poland, so there was no real risk of Russian shooting them down). AWACS planes and tanker flying in holding patterns over Poland, Romania and Baltic Sea used to be top observed planes on flightradar24 but I should be now working not looking through flightradar24 planes over Poland ( so I will link https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-60612255 https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-60612255 that has video of inside one of them ). Obviously planes flying combat missions are not publishing data there. Presumably ones training in restricted airspace are not either for also obvious reasons.
- _djo_ 4y agoIn Western countries, in peacetime, and in regular shared airspace, yes. They broadcast on ADS-B and are visible on flight tracking websites too. ADSB Exchange even has a ‘military’ filter to focus on them.
- stingraycharles 4y agoHow is that different from e.g. cars? The roads are a public good as well, not?
- kasey_junk 4y agoIt’s generally accepted that reporting on car movements is allowed as well. You don’t have a right to privacy of movement on public roads. Transponders are in planes mostly for safety. Their automated dissemination is part of the safety mechanisms of that transport medium and putting up with them (when required) is part of the privilege of using that public good. Similar to requiring drivers licenses to drive.
- rosnd 4y ago>It’s generally accepted that reporting on car movements is allowed as well. You don’t have a right to privacy of movement on public roads. This is certainly not true in Europe, and in the US there's generally zero restrictions on publicly sharing any kind of PII.
- jjav 4y ago> How is that different from e.g. cars? The roads are a public good as well, not? For one thing, it's different because there is no law that cars need an active transponder while operating. But cars do have a license plate anyone is free to look at while they drive by so in that sense it's the same.
- detaro 4y agoIsn't it pretty established in the US that e.g. companies selling bulk license plate scanner data is completely legal, and any "right to privacy" isn't really a thing in public space? (very different in other parts of the world, but US seems to be the relevant context here)
- zajio1am 4y agoThe same argument could be used about cars using roads or even pedestrians using sidewalks.
- kasey_junk 4y agoYes. And it is. Pedestrians don’t have any right to privacy in public and we demand behaviors of them for the privilege of using public commons.
- forgotpwd16 4y agoWould love to read HN reactions if pedestrians were mandated to wear a GPS bracelet when outside.
- jeanloolz 4y agoWe all do it already with consent, using our phones.
- forgotpwd16 4y agoNot everyone holds a cell phone onto them neither there's public data for the position of each one.
- kasey_junk 4y ago“We should remove transponders from private airplanes as the occupants privacy is more important than the safety they provide” is certainly a plank someone could run on if they wanted to change the current laws.
- zajio1am 4y agoInstead of removing transponders, perhaps just randomize identifiers before each fly, so individual planes cannot be tracked?
- the_only_law 4y ago
- rosnd 4y agoWhy would the public need to know which plane is where, as opposed to just a plane being somewhere?
- detaro 4y agoMy understanding is that in the US this kind of thing doesn't work on "need to" basis. It's something planes broadcast (for air traffic control reasons) unencrypted, anyone can receive it, there is nothing banning people "hearing" unencrypted radio from telling others what they hear. (Similarly to how police scanners or listening to ATC radio is legal)
- rosnd 4y agoIn Europe it's not always legal to listen to unencrypted radio transmissions if you're not the intended recipient, but this is heavily country dependent and not rabbit hole worth diving into here. But what's definitely not legal anywhere in the EU is to record unencrypted radio transmissions, use it to construct a database full of PII, and distribute it like Flightradar and friends do. E: can't reply below due to ratelimits >Hence why I said "in the US"... Hence why I said "in Europe"...
- detaro 4y agoHence why I said "in the US"...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- MallocVoidstar 4y agoTesla HQ is in Austin Texas, Twitter HQ is in San Francisco California. Tesla shareholders have been criticizing Musk for spending far more time at Twitter than he said he would while Tesla's stock has dropped. Therefore, there's a public interest in whether he is in San Francisco or Austin.
- wfme 4y agoThis reads along the same lines as "we must watch our employees because we don't trust them to get their work done". This doesn't seem like a genuine public interest so much as reaching for a justification given the circumstances.
- dicknuckle 4y agoI don't trust him to get work done. It's common knowledge he's not actually doing anything useful at any of the companies he "runs". There's a whole culture of "handling Elon" so he can't make terrible decisions and run a company into the ground. Twitter doesn't have that, so we're seeing everything out in the open.
- Dylan16807 4y agoCEOs of public companies get special treatment. In this context it is a bit of a reach but I don't think they're wrong, and I don't think there's a reason to expect normal workers and CEOs to follow the same logic.
- AlexandrB 4y agoThis is a ridiculous comparison because there is little to no power differential between Elon and his shareholders while a significant one exists between an employee and his employer. These kinds of comparisons, where two vaguely similar situations are considered equal regardless of the wealth, power, or influence of the participants remind me of this quote by Anatole France: > The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.
- HWR_14 4y ago
- dillondoyle 4y agoholding people in power accountable (musk visit D.C. musk flies to china. whatever). tracking & pointing out grossly polluting means of travel. market making information (musk spends more time visiting ___ faltering plant or ignoring ___. Musk makes trips to __ location, acquisition in the works)? elon is a public figure and his movements/actions create legitimate news. same as any other celebrity or politician. gawker did this first and that was actually stalking precise irl real time locations of celebs.