zlacker

>>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

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

I don't think it seems like a good rule. Not only is the information public but I think it is not hard to dream up reasons why it would legitimately be in the public interest to report on the comings and goings of someone's private jet.

>>emoden+Ly
Public or not, it is a security concern, especially for a celebrity/politicized figure/widely hated person.

I wouldn't want my live location posted on the internet either, and there's a lot fewer people who want to hurt me than Musk (AFAIK, no one wants to hurt me).

>>nearbu+5D
I don't find it credible that someone is committed enough to doing you harm that they're willing to rot in prison for the rest of their lives but not quite committed enough to look up the public data themselves instead of finding it conveniently collated for them.

>>emoden+MD
That is literally what happened with the Pelosi attacker. He wrongly assumed she would be present (she was definitely not). He absolutely intended her physical harm- and attacked the husband with a hammer in full view of the police.

>>zdragn+KJ
The Pelosi attacker got motivated by DECADES of Republican hate propaganda. Not responsible journalism speaking truth to power.

The rich and famous cannot have anonymity because you can't be rich and famous being anonymous. Of course the elite wants to have it both ways: report only what I want you to report.

>>Weylan+Zt1
> because you can't be rich and famous being anonymous

What about Satoshi? And funnily enough it was exactly Musk status circa 2017. A billionaire known only by people following the stock market and tech/auto sector specifically.

He made his own bed ever since the accusation of pedophilia against Vernon Unsworth who was participating in the Thai cave rescue.

The combined wealth of Brin and Page also would land them at #1 in the Forbes list but nobody knows them. So it's possible to a degree, it was never possible for Musk however because he has a deep need to be a primadonna