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. Tulliu+Lr[view] [source] 2022-12-16 04:15:44
>>Natura+Gl
How is it "doxxing" to use public flight data? Am I missing something here?
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. rosnd+YI[view] [source] 2022-12-16 06:22:26
>>Tulliu+Lr
What adsbexchange, flightradar & co. are doing is almost certainly illegal in Europe under the GDPR.

This isn't exactly "public flight data", in many cases it's illegally collected and published flight data.

E: I can't reply to "imnotjames" below thanks to HN ratelimits, but here you go:

It's an obvious GDPR violation, just like it'd be an obvious GDPR violation to publish a similar database but with phone IMEIs and associated locations instead of aircraft.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. seanhu+UP[view] [source] 2022-12-16 07:08:43
>>rosnd+YI
Not sure how GDPR is relevant since Elon Musk isn’t the EU data commissioner so it’s not up to him to enforce GDPR, and neither Musk, nor Twitter itself, nor the journalists, nor the sites concerned nor the information in question is in any way European[1].

Here’s the definition of personal data under GDPR[2] for anyone who’s curious. If this information hypothetically were to be published by a company with a European or UK connection about an EU or UK data subject and that person were to complain to their national data protection authority we might be in GDPR enforcement territory.

[1] or UK because UK GDPR is a thing even though the UK is no longer in the EU

[2] https://www.gdpreu.org/the-regulation/key-concepts/personal-...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. jdong+OQ[view] [source] 2022-12-16 07:14:51
>>seanhu+UP
Why should anyone involved need to be in European? The jet in question is known to visit Europe with Musk aboard.

> a company with a European or UK connection about an EU or UK data subject

If you have EU or UK data subjects, you have an European or UK connection and have entered GDPR enforcement territory.

[go to top]