Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter has re-suspended ElonJet account

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter has re-suspended ElonJet account

#581

Post by fallous »

akiselev wrote: post #395
fallous wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing when/where a private plane lands makes it a lot easier to stalk the passengers of that plane. This is of course entirely separate from whether such info was used against Musk or his family, or whether such a possibility is sufficient grounds for attempting to silence those who make it easily accessible (it's still accessible thanks to ADS-B for anyone with basic technical skills and cares enough).

Step 1. Google “elon musk tail number” Step 2. Copy one of the tail numbers from the first result: “N628TS, N272BG, N502SX” Step 3. Paste one of the tail numbers into any one of the flight tracker apps. If your stalkers can’t even figure that out, you don’t have to worry about them. Otherwise… it’ll take them an extra 45 seconds compared to finding the ElonJet twitter account. Edit: for bonus points Google “site:faa.…

Yes, note that I did not justify banning the twitter account in question and pointed out that it was hardly a leap to get the info even if they banned that account.

I was simply replying to a comment that inferred the only way flight info was useful for a stalker was if you planned on stalking them in another plane... which is obviously incorrect.

Re: Twitter has re-suspended ElonJet account

#582

Post by bnralt »

hackerlight wrote: post #539
donatj wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it comes down to tangible harm vs intangible theoretical harm. Anyone can claim intangible harm from anything. Doxing someone is a real tangible harm with very likely dangerous outcomes. Having an opinion is not.

This is an imaginary dichotomy, though. The proponents of content moderation on social media argue that hate speech causes tangible harm. For example, there are many mass shooters that say that they got radicalized purely online, such as Dylan Roof. This is not intangible harm, it is tangible.

Sure, but where is the line drawn? A lot of political rhetoric across the board is pretty extreme. The guy who shot up a Republican Congressional baseball game at baseball practice was into a lot of anti-GOP and anti-Trump stuff[1]:

> He had also joined several anti-GOP Facebook groups, including “Terminate The Republican Party;” “The Road to Hell Is Paved With Republicans;” and “Join The Resistance Worldwide!!”

I'm all for people toning things down. But the entire online ecosystem seems to be full of various factions warring against each other with extreme rhetoric. Even the discussion of extreme rhetoric is filled with extreme rhetoric ("These people are going to get someone killed!"), which can (and is) used to justify all sorts of bad things.

[1] https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/14/homepage2/james-hodgkinson-pr...

Re: Twitter has re-suspended ElonJet account

#583

Post by wombatpm »

bushbaba wrote: post #560
Meekro wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Don't publish someone's location in realtime (24 hour delay is required)" seems like a simple rule that can be enforced even-handedly against both sides. On the other hand, "don't do speech that causes harm" is so vague that it guarantees endless battles. If the New York Times writes an article criticizing someone, and then a crazy person shoots that someone, is the NYT now required to stop writing articles criticiz…

The jet’s location is public information though. Elon is broadcasting it (by FAA law)

He could always fly commercial

Re: Twitter has re-suspended ElonJet account

#585

Post by jbverschoor »

hakanderyal wrote: post #96

Elon posted some info[0] that gives it some context: "Last night, car carrying lil X in LA was followed by crazy stalker (thinking it was me), who later blocked car from moving & climbed onto hood. Legal action is being taken against Sweeney & organizations who supported harm to my family." Make that what you will. [0]: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603190155107794944

His car is not his jet.

Maybe he should stop phoning home

Re: Twitter has re-suspended ElonJet account

#586

Post by slg »

Meekro wrote: post #540
asdajksah2123 wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blocking speech that may be harmful to a handful of millionaires and billionares = Common Sense. Not promoting speech that may be harmful to tens of thousands of already marginalized people = Woke Mind Virus

"Don't publish someone's location in realtime (24 hour delay is required)" seems like a simple rule that can be enforced even-handedly against both sides. On the other hand, "don't do speech that causes harm" is so vague that it guarantees endless battles. If the New York Times writes an article criticizing someone, and then a crazy person shoots that someone, is the NYT now required to stop writing articles criticiz…

>"Don't publish someone's location in realtime (24 hour delay is required)"...why should LibsOfTikTok be required to stop criticizing liberals or children's hospitals that do gender-affirming surgery?

LibsOfTikTok has called out doctors using their names, photos, and their place of work. Isn't that effectively revealing the location they will be at most days? Is it any less likely that a crazy person will wait outside those medical facilities to attack a doctor than it is that a crazy person will wait outside an airport for Musk? Isn't what LibsOfTikTok is doing even more dangerous considering they intentionally frame these doctors as a threat while ElonJet is purely informational?

Re: Twitter has re-suspended ElonJet account

#587

Post by 77pt77 »

asdajksah2123 wrote: post #321
pgodzin wrote: post #310

Many people have been trying to get the point across that legal, unlimited free speech can put people in harm's way. Elon is happy to say that he's willing to trade harm to those people for his free speech principles, but as soon as his family is the one facing the repercussions, he's happy to change policy and sue.

Blocking speech that may be harmful to a handful of millionaires and billionares = Common Sense. Not promoting speech that may be harmful to tens of thousands of already marginalized people = Woke Mind Virus

It always boils down to

>It's different when I do it!

Re: Twitter has re-suspended ElonJet account

#588

Post by safety1st »

pgodzin wrote: post #310

Many people have been trying to get the point across that legal, unlimited free speech can put people in harm's way. Elon is happy to say that he's willing to trade harm to those people for his free speech principles, but as soon as his family is the one facing the repercussions, he's happy to change policy and sue.

I am not really sure what facts have transpired aside from people being outraged and having political opinions.

As I understand it...?

A) A guy who has a bot that shares public information on Twitter has been banned, sounds like that is free speech being suppressed, not that Twitter is under any obligation to support free speech, as we have been reminded many many times by people who wanted to suppress other speech

B) There is a different guy (?) who allegedly obstructed a vehicle containing Elon Musk's child and climbed on its hood, is this a speech issue? Or assault? Asking that question mostly in earnest

C) InternetGuysRabbleRabbleRabbleAngerPolitical

Re: Twitter has re-suspended ElonJet account

#589

Post by null0pointer »

Master_Odin wrote: post #490
gfodor wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a ridiculous take. It’s widely considered doxxing if you republish public information that makes it easy to find a person’s actual location. Without getting into the weeds on this specific issue, the idea that any public information being republished on social media can’t have safety consequences is absurd. If, for example, the information about where someone lives is buried on a buggy government website…

It's doxxing if the info was not meant to be public, but was leaked via some source unintentionally. It's not really doxxing if you take info that's broadcast to the public by law and use that. I put out my resume that has my name, address, and phone number on my public website and I wouldn't consider it doxxing if someone uses that info. If Musk doesn't want to get tracked, he can take a regular airplane like other…

> It’s doxxing if the info was not meant to be public, but was leaked via some source unintentionally.

I’m not sure you’ll find many who agree with you in this definition. The natural followup to “not meant to be public” is “meant by who?” Oftentimes people are doxxed through collation of various public records, kept and published by the government. I’m thinking things like phone books, arrest records, property transfer records, business registration, WHOIS registration, and many more. Then there’s times when the victim themselves didn’t realize they were leaking information. Even seemingly innocuous photos can be used by determined individuals to get a precise location [1]. I realize this falls under “unintentional” by your definition but would it be fair to say the person doxxed themselves in this case? I don’t think so.

To me the essence of doxxing is putting together otherwise disparate info into an easily sharable package. Something which raises the profile of the individual datapoints and their relation to each other until finding the victims information is trivial for anyone with a basic search.

1: See GeoWizards fantastic series doing exactly this: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL_japiE6QKWqMVC3JbyONau_0...

Re: Twitter has re-suspended ElonJet account

#590

Post by evan_ »

anigbrowl wrote: post #571
ProAm wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't crawl onto the hood of lil X's plane. Big difference.

I find it odd that his son would be traveling in a car with no dashcam and the only video from the whole incident is some guy sitting in the driver's seat of another car looking very relaxed. Also that there's no mention so far of any police involvement, as I'm fairly sure the LAPD would take a violent incident report by professional bodyguards as something worth looking into.

Do teslas have dashcam functionality? If they don’t I bet they will soon.
Post reply on HN