This is amazing.

Sigh.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/12/12/musk-tw...

its just more clear to more remote/casual observers the last two months

I genuinely think he just found it irritating that someone was trying to make him look bad. I don’t blame him, I’d probably feel the same way. But then I haven’t bought a social media platform and loudly and repeatedly proclaimed that I am a free-speech absolutist.

Unless Elon plans to ban the FAA from doing its job, people will know where Elon Musk's airplane is at all times.

Banning a silly Twitter account that copy/pastes data from the FAA won't change a thing.

The paparazzi have been using these things to follow celebrities since forever. It's an exorcise in ignorance to ignore the nature of FAA regulations / airplane tracking.

Ms. Barbra Streisand, on the white courtesy phone...

It may be more of an exercise of Elon flexing his $44B investment over the heaters and the poor people: by this point he knows that anyone even slightly left of center is not going to love him, so he's full on embracing the far/alt right crowd by "owning the libs". "Free speech" is lip service at max that some people fell for hook, line, and sinker.

AFAIK all you need to gather ADS-B information for your own location is Android Phone, $30 USB dongle and some Antena.

He has all rights to ban whoever he wishes since he owns the platform, but common sense should suggest him to stop talking about free speech since he's in no position to lecture anyone on the matter.

I'm sure stuff like antidiscrimination law etc. in several jurisdictions would make such behavior illegal.

Of course it does.

When you make something easier to do, the effect is it increases the chance of people doing it.

If your contact information is listed in a telephone book, it is publicly accessible information. Anyone can look that up. But who's going to do that? (to prank call you for example). But if some posts your info to a twitter account that reaches millions, chances are someone's going to call you. Why? Because popped up in millions of peoples' twitter feeds. And since it's so low effort, one or more people with nothing better to do will call.

so why does he actively mock some people or groups and make them seem unreasonable when they ask for twitter to help with their safety?

do only billionaires get help from twitter now?

People get threatened by random weirdos all the time.

Even if congress shutdown ADS-B receiving or encrypting it somehow, people would just get out the long range camera lenses and take pictures of the tail numbers as the planes land and report it on a web site.

Congress could presumably pass some law but it would have to be ICAO or some other global organization that would formalize the change. Updating the systems on all aircraft would take many years. The current roll-out has been in progress for more than a decade.

Step 2: Repeat Step 1 for a long time

Step 3: Enough people believe it it's true.

When the twitter obituary is written, people will say this was the death knell.

Even your comment emphasizes the concept of "public information"

Now, if I'm pseudonymous, that's a different matter: someone would be revealing my real name's association with that pseudonym, which may be a problem.

To each his own.

As for me liking Elon Musk: I used to. And then somewhere along the line it changed and now I in fact do not like him. But my liking or not liking him has nothing to do with simply holding him accountable, he made some pretty expensive statements and he fails to live by them, even for a very short period. And conveniently just when he's decided to ban that account a stalker of his family pops out of the woodwork. I'm sorry but Musk has lost the benefit of the doubt with me, too many lies over too many years.

This is after very publicly saying he would stand up even to people posting his flight info just last month.

I get being emotional about the kid being stalked but the mixed signals are just frustrating.

Explain Libs of Tiktok.

He supported it in theory until he learned that it could affect not just him but his family.

He's done good things with SpaceX and Tesla. He's flawed. Shrug.

Elon has an extensive history of vindictiveness.

He was derisive of Musk, who wanted Tesla engineers to help rescue the trapped children.

Musk responded to this criticism by calling Unsworth a "pedo" and "child rapist". After Unsworth sued him for defamation, Musk hired a private detective to investigate Unsworth, presumably hoping to intimidate him.

Flawed is liking pineapple on pizza, not using your platform of millions of followers to call someone a child rapist. That's worthy of contempt to me.

I'm cynical though, I only see lesser evils as all you can wish for in politics and culture. Trusting in politicized public figures = pure disappointment

The most sympathetic scenario re: twitter (ignoring the other Musk issues around FSD/pre-Twitter stuff): a few very public examples of him censoring people for petty reasons VS pre-Musk twitter banning (or silently shadowbanning) many thousands who happened to fall outside the current-thing Overton Window, using equally or worse biased/misguided reasons (ie, 'misinformation') and quietly taking requests from gov/intel agencies... still a net gain over all. But tons of work to be done.

And I think Elon does some really dumb things but in general I want him to succeed on what he is doing.

Either:

1) This is a change to policy, or

2) Twitter didn't enforce the rules evenly to punish people they didn't like, like Elon

It fits pretty well with Musk's "woke" obsession. He should be able to do and say whatever he wants. But if he gets booed in response, then "The woke mind virus is either defeated or nothing else matters". Because the booers couldn't possibly be equal humans using freedom of speech to express their feelings.

At this point if you believe anything Musk claims you are the dullest, most gullible shit I can imagine.

  while not sufficient_hype:
    controversial_account.suspension = random.randint(0,1)
    ???
    profit()

Might as well ban people posting photos of celebrities at random places, it's way more accurate.

Obviously it’s still way better situation than censorship for everyone outside the Overton window and via gov request vs a tiny group of cases for a billionaire’s petty exceptions to the rule, but it’s not helping the cause in the culture war pushing for censorship.

And so far I think the direction he's taking Twitter looks very promising in injecting some diversity into the social media landscape and shaking the government-corporate attacks on speech. Maybe not very much and may be futile in the long run with a meek subservient populace who beg to be ruled, but certainly better than before.

The lesson for others to not be hysterical and look at the bigger picture of the net gain of reducing censorship (and the fact Twitter was already an ideological disaster that can either only get better from here.... or die - win/win) is probably going to hit a brick wall.

They have their own ideological battles to pick. And Elon handed it to them wrapped in a bow. So they might as well take the victory lap.

It's not quite the anything-that-is-not-illegal that Musk was blathering about (although it's possible it could run afoul of stalking laws in some countries/jurisdictions), but it's really nothing compared with the politically motivated and government involved censorship and banning that had been going on there.

which was to shadownban-2.0 the account when needed to delay news of certain travel. he came up with the idea when we pointed out other smaller accounts started to post the info and we were considering flagging them as bot last week.

one thing is broadcasting personal information about a citizen, one is protecting a citizens right to object to actions by their government.

collecting public information is still doxxing. most doxxing involves only public information as it happens across the internet.

edit: a downvote is not a rebuttal, sorry, try again.

Moreover we've warned you before:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33267564 (Oct 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29847640 (Jan 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29621408 (Dec 2021)

Besides that, someone has pointed out to me that your username is trollish (yes, I'm slow sometimes). We don't allow that - see https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme.... Between that and your comments that have been breaking the rules, that's too much. I've therefore banned the account.

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email [email protected] and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

Publicly available location of Musk's private plane? Serious threat to human safety.

The idea that posting publicly available information to Twitter transforms it is silly.

Whether you are finding someone's email, or real name, or jet location, or home address, and then announce it, you are doxxing them.

We used to have a thing called the phone book that put everyone's name, phone number, and address together in a book and sent it out. None of those is a piece of private information.

It is just an automobile after all, and vehicles aren't citizens...

Cue fallback argument.

EDIT: added clarification to distinguish between Tweeting coordinates and Onstar services.

https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certifica...

That does not sound unreasonable to me at all. In other words, the idea that some posts might warrant a delay for a range of issues or to allow for investigation. That, to me, again, sounds very sensible.

In the case of the travel plans of certain high-profile people, you know, with so many crazy folks out there, yes, sure, give the news enough of a delay so the person can safely get to their destination. The world doesn't need to know when Elon, Messi, Buttigieg, Oprah or David Letterman in real time unless they choose to disclose details.

I think calling someone an idiot is against HN policy...but, what do I know, I am obviously an idiot.

That said. OK, well, let's publish everyone's travel plans. Name, flight, seat, from/to, etc. Make the system 100% open to for anyone to see who is travelling, where and when.

You know, so folks profiting from breaking into homes while people are travelling can be more efficient in their scheduling.

In our neighborhood we've had a few cases of homes being burglarized when people travelled out of town and posted about it on Facebook. Lots of people are not aware that they might be posting to the entire universe. Those wonderful pictures of your vacation in Hawaii let smart crooks know you are not home in Los Angeles.

I am 100% certain everyone would be against their personal, family and business travel itineraries being posted in a publicly accessible website or database in real time. Understandably so. Why, then, is it to that this is OK for those who might be obvious targets of violence and other potentially negative outcomes?

One argument I saw in this thread is about not creating special rules for a small group of people. Fine with that. Let's publish everyone's travel plans then. Or, on the other hand, have the common sense to understand that personal safety is important to everyone and move to make posting such information illegal and protect everyone, no matter their station in life.

I get it that on HN there exist a subgroup of people who are millionaire/billionaire haters. Good for you! Enjoy the hatred. That group aside, once common sense enters the room, it is generally clear that privacy is good for everyone, regardless of who they might be.

As much as I dislike politicians, this should also extend to them. Yes, of course, their travel details should be released and made available for all to review. However, this can be done well after the fact.

Safety first. For everyone.

This is the definition of concern trolling on Elon's part, and you're carrying water for his bad faith arguments in favor of restricting the republishing of information that is free and open to the public by design. I don't think you even really understand the implications of what you're saying.

I don't understand hatred based on financial standing.

However, I do not think this is the real motivation in Musk's case. I can see people hating on Musk these days because he is uncovering just how deep and wide one political party has reached in the United States in order to control the media and messaging. Something that Putin and totalitarian regimes have done for ages in other nations has been achieved in the US by brainwashing people at universities and then asking them to restrict or reshape the message in favor of that ideology.

Anyone who does not think this is revolting and should not exist in the US should take a moment to imagine a scenario where the same level of indoctrination and control would be had by the other party. This would be just as revolting and just as undesirable. Universities should not be centers of indoctrination. Political parties should not have any control on what the public can and cannot hear. That's a formula for progress, not one where one or the other party can exercise ideological control.

> I don't think you even really understand the implications of what you're saying.

I don't think you have taken a single minute to explain what you think the implications might be.

Interestingly enough, I am arguing in favor of privacy/security for all. You seem to be saying that someone with money does not deserve it. Why?

But there is still an order of magnitude difference between Pelosi and the wealth of someone who can afford to own and fly their own superjet. That you don’t believe better security can be had does not mean it does not exist, it does.

I think you’re revealing your ideological biases. The Twitter files did not just contain information about censorship by the democrats. The Trump White House was also heavily implicated. That is not the partisan issue that you want it to be. Instead, perhaps the liberal ire towards Elon could come from the fact that he is catering towards the right?

As far as public safety goes, it’s ultimately moot. If you choose to own your own plane and fly it using public infrastructure paid for with US tax dollars, you have no expectation of that data being private. Reporting that data is protected by the first amendment, which of course doesn’t apply to posts on Twitter, a private company. Someone who wants privacy should choose to travel via other means, it’s really that simple. Flying via your own private jet is not a constitutionally protected right, it’s a privilege that is subject to the terms and regulations of the United States of America and it’s regulatory bodies. And arguing that we should change the rules for the ultra rich is an absolutely tyrannical prospect, lord knows we do it enough already.

Did you read about Musk's kid being stalked by someone who ended-up threatening him and jumping on the car?

How do you feel about that? It's OK because the guy is rich? C'mon.

> I think you’re revealing your ideological biases.

Happy to spell it out: I am a Classical Liberal. I detest what both Democrats and Republicans (the parties, not the drones who follow them blindly) have become. I also understand that the extreme left and right have cause more destruction around the world and across time than one could probably list.

Today, in the US, we are in the grips of the extreme left. And that's a problem. They tyranny, today, in the US, is coming from the left.

Our universities have become extreme left indoctrination centers. Our media is brutally dominated by the left. Our social media and internet companies, same (I forget the number, something like 96% to 98% of those employed by places like Twitter, FB and Google donated to the Democratic party?). Etc.

The narrative and the "news" people are exposed to is overwhelmingly controlled by leftist ideology. I have spoken to people who only watch networks like CNN. As an example, they have no clue whatsoever what is going on at our southern border, none at all.

This is a formula for disaster. And, yes, I would be saying exactly the same thing if the dominance belonged to the right. Neither one is good for a society. History has proven this time and time again.

I mean, the left claims to be for women's rights and the protectors of, well, just about everyone. And yet, we are having a human trafficking crisis at the southern border and EVERYONE on the left is ignoring all of it. In two years, nearly five million people have poured in. Millions of pills of the most dangerous drugs have been smuggled into the country. And human trafficking has grown by leaps and bounds. All we get from the administration is "the border is secure". Really?

This, BTW, is also a historical fact. The way the left works is to claim to solve the problems of all those who (they convince) are oppressed and make enemies of everyone else. If you study the history of pretty much every country in Latin America you will discover patterns that, today, might be familiar to all Americans. One of the problems in the US is that people are not educated well enough to know much about history. That's why this population is so easy to fool.

Look at the minimum wage mess. They promised $15 per hour would solve the problems of millions. This is how they bought these votes. And then gasoline goes from $2 per gallon to $5, $6, $7 per gallon; food prices go up 30% to 100% (our dog food alone doubled in cost). And more. Now $15 per hour is more like $5 per hour. And, on top of that, we let in five million people who will more than likely take minimum wage jobs away from the very people who were promised this new minimum wage would help them.

How much more of this nonsense is it going to take for people who support these politicians to understand they are being played for fools?

What is being uncovered at Twitter is important because the vast majority of Americans have been led to believe none of this was happening. The vast majority of Americans have been the subject of carefully engineered ideologically-driven shaping of the messages. Having the FBI interact at the level they have with Twitter staff (and likely FB and others) IS NOT GOOD FOR SOCIETY.

I always say the same thing: Imagine a scenario where the ideological right had this level of control over universities, social and traditional media. If you think that would be horrible, first, I agree, second, you should be incensed about the fact that the ideological left is in that position today. The fact that riots have broken out at universities when speakers with contrasting viewpoints are invited should have everyone take pause. Again, imagine if the roles were inverted before you opine.

> which of course doesn’t apply to posts on Twitter, a private company

Oh, please, what these people have done is criminal. If not criminal, immoral. If not immoral, unethical. If none of those, it is horrible and detrimental to any society. You don't build progress, harmony and tolerance this way. You build hatred, resentment and destroy a society from the inside-out.

Not sure what the laws, requirements or practices say about the entire universe knowing where any aircraft might be in real time. I mean, if a bad guy wanted to aim a SAM at any given aircraft and this data is live and real-time...

Again, I don't know how this works in terms of the law. Opinions don't matter. What's the law?

US civilian aviation rules require that an on-craft transponder emit altitude and location information so that other craft can avoid collisions. Obviously, this makes aircraft more vulnerable to surface to air missiles. Thankfully, that's a vanishingly remote threat, so the FAA has decided that valuing collision avoidance over missile evasion is the correct set of priorities. I don't know how this would work in situations where surface to air missiles are a real threat, but I would guess military aircraft only follow civilian rules when it doesn't compromise their mission.

As far as "the entire universe knowing," I think the relevant legal principle at play is that there's no expectation of privacy associated with flying a private aircraft (for the reasons stated above). Airpsace is a shared, national security-sensitive resource, civilian regulators get to set the rules governing use.

Expanding the concept beyond Elon, I personally don't like the idea of anyone being hounded by elements unknown just because of being famous. Do actors have the right to travel with their kids an not be mauled? I think they should have that right.

There seems to be this general idea these days that acting like a complete jerk and without one ounce of civility is now acceptable. Harass people at restaurants, threaten to hurt politicians and their families, stalk actors and celebrities, burn down entire business districts, etc. What the hell is wrong with people?

Well, that's not public information. Private jet owners can loan it out to friends (according to [0], Taylor Swift does this often), and you can't tell from flight plans who will be a passenger (or whether it will be carrying passengers at all).

Just like you dislike people being rude at restaurants, I object to billionaires trying to carve out new kinds of privacy to hide their excesses. Civilian use of the skies requires cooperation and is an act that occurs in public.

[0]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2022/08/0...

It's public information. Are you literally trying to ban the ADS system?

He just needs 3, or 4 or 5, more jets. Each flies off in a different direction.