zlacker

>>prawn+(OP)
It's interesting that many are debating the value of this 'rule', when this action is blatant abuse of his powers to silence his critics. He has now a lengthy and growing history of this type of behavior, so it was 100% foreseeable. He could just come out and say that its his twitter and he can do what he wants, but no, because he also wants to be seen as a 'defender of free speech'. He acts like a-hole, but then expects unquestioning adoration.

>>Eddy_V+Xv1
> It's interesting that many are debating the value of this 'rule', when this action is blatant abuse of his powers to silence his critics.

I think it’s you that’s missing the point here. It’s only abuse of power if the rule against doxxing is invalid. So it does come down to the rule and whether or not doxxing is acceptable. If we decide that doxxing is acceptable and posting anybody’s real-time location data is acceptable (without their consent), then he is abusing powers. If that is your conclusion, then you don’t have the right to complain should it happen to you. If you believe the opposite, that doxxing is unacceptable, then the rule should apply equally to everybody. Critics and journalists do not get a free pass to break the rules.

>>eric_c+uE1
Nobody is posting his whereabouts; someone wrote a bot which grabs public API data which was pulled from ADS-B (which you can receive with a 20 EUR DVB-T receiver) which includes his private jet. His private jet may or may not contain him, and his whereabouts after he left his plane are not included. F.e. if he used a public transport, nobody would post his whereabouts automatically on Twitter.

>>Fnoord+ZQ1
I understand regarding the jet account. Here are the sources I was using for my comment:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603587970832793600

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603181423787380737

Here he is claiming that his pinpoint location was shared and that the rule in place is against sharing real-time location data.