If the data were gathered from already public information, I wouldn't have a problem with it. How is synthesizing data that's already public (indeed, required by law to be public) a problem?

Anyone that actually wanted to use this data to harm Musk would have no trouble simply using the exact same original data.

Based on the evidence (safety claim by Elon, death of Diana) it appears that promoting and publicising it makes it accessible to a wider audience that does have an effect on real world consequences. I presume this is also why marketing works on a platform that enhances the reach and distribution of a particular piece of information.

Anecdotally, I did see the @ElonJet account, and have still never seen the source of the data.

> that promoting and publicising it makes it accessible to a wider audience that does have an effect on real world consequences.

So you'd be okay with banning misinformation about COVID and the COVID vaccine? Misinformation and agitprop had very real consequences in the real world.

Yeah, misinformation and agitprop have very real consequences, but Twitter still shouldn't ban, e.g., Anthony Fauci (if he had an account) or CNN, no matter how much misinformation or agitprop they spread. That stuff should be addressed with replies, community notes, and other commentary.

The test of the truth of a live location is trivial. The test of truth of COVID information is not. In the case are spreading something that is provably untrue eg. 1 + 1 = 3, even in that case, you should just rebut and explain why it is untrue.

Nice strawman!

It's a question of safety of provably true information in this case.

>The test of the truth of a live location is trivial. The test of truth of COVID information is not.

The assertion that posting a 'live location' create dangerous real world consequences is completely absurd. We know plenty about the dead humans COVID misinformation left in its wake.

You are okay with censorship here because you agree with it. Full stop.

>It's a question of safety of provably true information in this case.

Okay, prove the lack of safety.

> It's a question of safety of provably true information in this case.

The information is provably true by going to the location and verifying that the person is there.

> Anecdotally, I did see the @ElonJet account, and have still never seen the source of the data.

It's here: https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a835af

The source code for the bot: https://github.com/Jxck-S/plane-notify

ADSBexchange (and FlightRadar and several other orgs) are just tracking the public broadcasts each plane makes every second with its location, altitude, airspeed, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_Dependent_Surveillan...

> Based on the evidence (safety claim by Elon, death of Diana) it appears that promoting and publicising it makes it accessible to a wider audience that does have an effect on real world consequences.

Wow, you have to reach back 25 years, and it's an absolutely terrible example because it has nothing to do with a constant publication of location to the general public. Instead paparazzi used their own private communications (paparazzi who saw her board in Sardinia told other paparazzi in France). And her death wasn't caused by someone who found out her location and wanted to do her harm.

"Safety claim by Elon" is also completely meaningless since he's literally the person who wanted this shut down.

So two really bad examples over 25 years is not evidence for your claim.

Finally, using public information to say the state or country Elon has recently flown to is a far cry from actually giving away his current location.

Like broadcasting his mother's funeral on live television? Ban the BBC!

Obviously there are times when the rich and famous know that their location is public. At those times they generally have good security.

One is a public setting, the other is inside a private airplane.

Flying in public airspace, using public ATC, and broadcasting its location, speed, and altitude publicly via radio.

Even Air Force One shows up on ADSBexchange when it's in the air. https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=adfdf8

Agreed, but posting passenger manifest that isn’t available wasn’t a good idea.

No one was posting passenger manifests of Elon's jets.

@elonjet

Again, the account didn't post passenger manifests. It posted publicly available ADS-B data, automatically. You can review the source, if you like: https://github.com/Jxck-S/plane-notify

The data comes from https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a835af. You'll see no passenger list there.

This is where we expect another truth drop … from Elon.

Because, it happened.

A truth drop?

Are you ok? Your replies are really weird behaviour.

just re-iterating what others have said.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34013246

Musk is lying. The data broadcast by his ADS-B system is publicly available.

Citation needed!

Ironically this information is broadcast for safety, but it is deanonymised because he is specifically using a private ICAO.

Happens all the time. The Royal jets have ADS-B just like everything else.

"Members of the British Royal Family en route to Balmoral castle to see Queen Elizabeth after news of her failing health, very sad." - https://www.reddit.com/r/ADSB/comments/x91yli/members_of_the...

https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=407d90

The question was "What would you think..." not "What if...".

In this case it appears that you did not think.