zlacker

[return to "Twitter applies 7-day suspension to half a dozen journalists"]
1. barbar+Ae[view] [source] 2022-12-16 03:00:08
>>prawn+(OP)
> Update: Musk just weighed in on the suspensions, characterizing them as intentional. “Same doxxing rules apply to “journalists” as to everyone else,” he tweeted in a reply.

> It’s worth noting that the policy these accounts violated, a prohibition against sharing “live location information,” is only 24 hours old.

It seems like a good rule, but in this case the application of the rule seems less impersonal than it could be

Let’s try to make a comment that creates less outrage than most…

This is why it would be interesting to post public information about politicians collected from the online spyware that tracks all of us. It would rapidly motivate new laws that at least somewhat improve privacy.

This always happens when rule makers are personally affected by a problem: the problem starts getting attention

◧◩
2. Goofba+uh[view] [source] 2022-12-16 03:15:48
>>barbar+Ae
Those journalists weren't reporting specific locations of his jet...they were reporting on a legit news story about it. Musk didn't like it so the journalists are now banned.

The dude is truly off his rocker now. The "rules" are whatever he makes up on the spot. He's self-destructing before our eyes...no longer the richest man in the world. Telsa stock tanking all because he can't STFU and acts like a spoiled 12 year old.

◧◩◪
3. Natura+Gl[view] [source] 2022-12-16 03:37:09
>>Goofba+uh
>Those journalists weren't reporting specific locations of his jet...they were reporting on a legit news story about it.

Come on now. They were linking directly to the tracker that Sweeney was banned for, not just reporting on the story about it.

It was a childish petulant doxxing on purpose and they got treated the same as Sweeney.

◧◩◪◨
4. Malloc+wm[view] [source] 2022-12-16 03:42:51
>>Natura+Gl
His jet's location isn't doxxing and the public has a legitimate interest in it.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. wfme+9p[view] [source] 2022-12-16 03:58:47
>>Malloc+wm
What exactly is this "legitimate" interest?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. kasey_+Kp[view] [source] 2022-12-16 04:03:31
>>wfme+9p
The 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.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. stingr+ur[view] [source] 2022-12-16 04:14:21
>>kasey_+Kp
How is that different from e.g. cars? The roads are a public good as well, not?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. kasey_+2s[view] [source] 2022-12-16 04:17:46
>>stingr+ur
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.

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.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. rosnd+rI[view] [source] 2022-12-16 06:18:53
>>kasey_+2s
>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.

[go to top]