5 ms·

Hey Tay, just Shake It Off. Really. You have no expectation of privacy using public airspace. If you don't want to be tracked, you probably shouldn't be traveli

Hey Tay, just Shake It Off. Really. You have no expectation of privacy using public airspace. If you don't want to be tracked, you probably shouldn't be traveling in a flying machine emblazoned with registration marks. Maybe try the train. Edit: now that I think about it for more than sixteen seconds, couldn't that be a marketing opportunity in disguise (as if her act needs more marketing)? "Know when she flies over your house! Get a selfie with the contrail in the background! Most likes on a tiktok gets a personal response saying thanks for thinking of me!"

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
alvarezbjm-hn 3y ago
"You have no expectation of privacy using public airspace" Replace airspace with "space". Public figure in a public space. They always want the perks without the cost. Now, not being harrased is another thing. But not being noticed? (Specially in an airplane) Haters gonna hate. Epilogue: Yes, any publicity is publicity. I am even considering her AI releases, and the acompaning complains, a public stunt.
- add-sub-mul-div 3y ago
  > I am even considering her AI releases, and the acompaning complains, a public stunt. What does this mean? Do you mean that she arranged for AI porn of herself to be released?
  - toastgrave 3y ago
    Taylor haters have gone absolutely nuts lately but that idea may be the craziest I've ever heard
  - SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
    "I am the absolute height of my fame and power, time to.... release a fake sex tape?" Isn't that how you turn from a C-lister to a B-lister, not something you do when you're already at the top of the pile?
- williamcotton 3y ago
  Do you have an expectation of privacy when you broadcast signals out of your house using the public electromagnetic spectrum? FWIW, I'm on the side of privacy being an overrated concern. I've been hearing people yammer on about it since the Slashdot days. It's well-tread territory and I've heard every argument in support of privacy on forums like these. What I don't see very often is an examination of the negative sides of privacy and the positive side of public information. After decades of privacy, dare I say extremism, we have people who would, eg, do away with public records for private property ownership, which seems anthemic to the very notion of a republic. EDIT: I'm serious, just downvote away, I know that this is an unpopular opinion, but I would appreciate if at least one person engaged in this dialog beyond clicking a button!
  - AlbertCory 3y ago
    > engaged in this dialog beyond clicking a button OK. "anthemic" does not mean what you think it means. "anathema" maybe?
    - williamcotton 3y ago
      Yup, that's what I meant! Care to comment on something substantive now?
      - AlbertCory 3y ago
        Not really. You wanted some attention; now you've gotten it.
        williamcotton 3y ago
        I didn't want attention, I wanted discussion. Wasn't that clear?
        AlbertCory 3y ago
        Apparently no one is obliging you.
sidibe 3y ago
She should travel by submarine
wolverine876 3y ago
What if someone made a website listing all of everyone's travels, live - where everyone is at all times. It would be dystopian. I think the free speech issue - it's public data - trumps all. And the risk that powerful people will have different laws and protections, where rights are supposed to protect the vulnerable, would be a very dangerous precedent. At the same time, I don't think this data should be public for anyone. > You have no expectation of privacy using public airspace. Perhaps legally, but as we have seen elsewhere, with computing capabilities, that antiquated (IMHO) notion yields dystopian totalitarianism. Walking down the street in 1789 was anonymous unless someone happened to see you, and then the spread of their knowledge was limited to custom-manufactured physical objects moving at the speed of a horse. We do have an expectation of privacy generally, and that is nullified if we reduce it to an EM-shielded, soundproofed basement with the windows boarded up.
- oefrha 3y ago
  There are tons of websites listing all commercial flights. If you don’t want to be tracked, you just need to travel like everyone else rather than on a private jet, the most wasteful form of travel.
  - crtasm 3y ago
    If you're Swift famous, I'm not sure you're going to get onto a regular plane without a load of people tweeting about it.
- vkou 3y ago
  But it's not everyone's travels. It's the travels of an airplane. Which are all public information. Her problem is that she feels entitled to tens or hundreds of thousands of times more airplane travel than the average person (private plane only carrying her/her friends), and is trivial to deanonymize. She should try flying coach. Or at least charter. I've flown on aircraft that also broadcast all their flight information, yet you have no idea about which flights I took - because I am not so vain and self-centered (and wealthy) as to fly in a private, personal jet. (If she can't handle coach, she could always plane-pool with her other billionaire friends. Then we'd have no idea of where she is at any particular moment. But I understand that takes most of the kick out of private jets.)
amelius 3y ago
Not a Swift fan, but I consider it a fact that automated methods can turn publicly available data into a privacy nightmare.
kd5bjo 3y ago
> If you don't want to be tracked, you probably shouldn't be traveling in a flying machine emblazoned with registration marks. Maybe try the train. Note that this exact same argument applies to traveling by private car- The number plates are required by law to be clearly visible, so it must be ok to track as well.
Ferret7446 3y ago
This is blatantly false. Tracking someone in public is still stalking. In fact, it's literally stalking (if you followed someone in a private area, you'd likely get trespassing charges on top).

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

alvarezbjm-hn 3y ago

"You have no expectation of privacy using public airspace" Replace airspace with "space". Public figure in a public space. They always want the perks without the cost. Now, not being harrased is another thing. But not being noticed? (Specially in an airplane) Haters gonna hate. Epilogue: Yes, any publicity is publicity. I am even considering her AI releases, and the acompaning complains, a public stunt.

add-sub-mul-div 3y ago
> I am even considering her AI releases, and the acompaning complains, a public stunt. What does this mean? Do you mean that she arranged for AI porn of herself to be released?
- toastgrave 3y ago
  Taylor haters have gone absolutely nuts lately but that idea may be the craziest I've ever heard
- SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
  "I am the absolute height of my fame and power, time to.... release a fake sex tape?" Isn't that how you turn from a C-lister to a B-lister, not something you do when you're already at the top of the pile?
williamcotton 3y ago
Do you have an expectation of privacy when you broadcast signals out of your house using the public electromagnetic spectrum? FWIW, I'm on the side of privacy being an overrated concern. I've been hearing people yammer on about it since the Slashdot days. It's well-tread territory and I've heard every argument in support of privacy on forums like these. What I don't see very often is an examination of the negative sides of privacy and the positive side of public information. After decades of privacy, dare I say extremism, we have people who would, eg, do away with public records for private property ownership, which seems anthemic to the very notion of a republic. EDIT: I'm serious, just downvote away, I know that this is an unpopular opinion, but I would appreciate if at least one person engaged in this dialog beyond clicking a button!
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  > engaged in this dialog beyond clicking a button OK. "anthemic" does not mean what you think it means. "anathema" maybe?
  - williamcotton 3y ago
    Yup, that's what I meant! Care to comment on something substantive now?
    - AlbertCory 3y ago
      Not really. You wanted some attention; now you've gotten it.
      - williamcotton 3y ago
        I didn't want attention, I wanted discussion. Wasn't that clear?
        AlbertCory 3y ago
        Apparently no one is obliging you.

sidibe 3y ago

She should travel by submarine

wolverine876 3y ago

What if someone made a website listing all of everyone's travels, live - where everyone is at all times. It would be dystopian. I think the free speech issue - it's public data - trumps all. And the risk that powerful people will have different laws and protections, where rights are supposed to protect the vulnerable, would be a very dangerous precedent. At the same time, I don't think this data should be public for anyone. > You have no expectation of privacy using public airspace. Perhaps legally, but as we have seen elsewhere, with computing capabilities, that antiquated (IMHO) notion yields dystopian totalitarianism. Walking down the street in 1789 was anonymous unless someone happened to see you, and then the spread of their knowledge was limited to custom-manufactured physical objects moving at the speed of a horse. We do have an expectation of privacy generally, and that is nullified if we reduce it to an EM-shielded, soundproofed basement with the windows boarded up.

oefrha 3y ago
There are tons of websites listing all commercial flights. If you don’t want to be tracked, you just need to travel like everyone else rather than on a private jet, the most wasteful form of travel.
- crtasm 3y ago
  If you're Swift famous, I'm not sure you're going to get onto a regular plane without a load of people tweeting about it.
vkou 3y ago
But it's not everyone's travels. It's the travels of an airplane. Which are all public information. Her problem is that she feels entitled to tens or hundreds of thousands of times more airplane travel than the average person (private plane only carrying her/her friends), and is trivial to deanonymize. She should try flying coach. Or at least charter. I've flown on aircraft that also broadcast all their flight information, yet you have no idea about which flights I took - because I am not so vain and self-centered (and wealthy) as to fly in a private, personal jet. (If she can't handle coach, she could always plane-pool with her other billionaire friends. Then we'd have no idea of where she is at any particular moment. But I understand that takes most of the kick out of private jets.)

amelius 3y ago

Not a Swift fan, but I consider it a fact that automated methods can turn publicly available data into a privacy nightmare.

kd5bjo 3y ago

> If you don't want to be tracked, you probably shouldn't be traveling in a flying machine emblazoned with registration marks. Maybe try the train. Note that this exact same argument applies to traveling by private car- The number plates are required by law to be clearly visible, so it must be ok to track as well.

Ferret7446 3y ago

This is blatantly false. Tracking someone in public is still stalking. In fact, it's literally stalking (if you followed someone in a private area, you'd likely get trespassing charges on top).