Oh honey, you talk like you have a deep unsatiated need to trust technocrats.

Yeah I think you'd change your tune as well if some psychopath attacked your infant child.

Whether the data is public or not isn't the point. People's home addresses are also public, but the aggregation of movement data in real-time is creepy. I don't think you would justify what is essentially stalking for any other person, in any other scenario.

I’m trying to understand the threat vector here.

Elonjet is in the air transmitting ADSB. From what I remember it’s a Gulfstream that flies higher and faster than anything commercial. A would-be attacker using this data wouldn’t be able to get anywhere elonjet is destined for before elonjet.

Elon almost certainly has armored vehicles that can protect against any small arms fire and entire teams of security at each source and destination that almost certainly secret service-esque secure the area in advance. He also likely has security that secures the plane at rest.

So he arrives at the source/destination and likely goes directly to a secured hangar for the movement between armored road vehicles and the plane.

What are we worried about here, someone with an RPG, Stinger, or maybe a .50 cal in some advantaged position? Someone planting an IED on the route, runway, etc? Any sophisticated and determined actor who would be able to deploy such means could definitely get the location data with or without a Twitter bot.

Meanwhile he’s regularly at Twitter HQ, Tesla, his favorite restaurants, his kids go to schools, etc. People walk around in the open…

Elonjet is almost certainly the strongest and most secure aspect of his and his family’s life. If some murderous wacko (or group) wanted to go after him or his family there are much “easier” ways to harm, kidnap, etc.

This almost certainly has to be about wealth and power exceptionalism that essentially says “I didn’t buy a Gulfstream AND Twitter so people can track MY jet on MY platform".

> A would-be attacker using this data wouldn’t be able to get anywhere elonjet is destined for before elonjet.

If he flies random routes, that’s true, but I doubt he does. You could figure out where he flies regularly, move there, and prepare your ambush.

Having real-time data adds that you can tie it to your alarm clock, and better time your final preparations. You wouldn’t have to suspiciously camp out for hours at an airport, for example, getting tired and risking discovery.

Now, is that significant? Maybe, if he’s paranoid enough to put a lot of variation in his flight patterns, but I doubt it. Also, as you say, “Any sophisticated and determined actor who would be able to deploy such means could definitely get the location data with or without a Twitter bot.”

Every person (no matter how wealthy or powerful) has routines in all aspects of life and you're right that elonjet flies somewhat predictable routes. All of my points about the security of any routine aspect of elonjet movement applies to Elon and his family outside of elonjet. Again, restaurants, external meetings, offices of his various companies, etc. For his family it's likely even more predictable - schools, playdates with friends, extracurricular activities, etc.

I am genuinely trying to understand the "security risk" argument for this move. At the risk of the internet classic "I have a friend..." I do have a retired Army Special Forces (Green Beret) friend who's former "co-workers" I've met do high profile executive protection and have described what their work looks like because it's obviously fascinating - that's where I got this general "security playbook" from. They literally adapt head of state, diplomat, etc active warzone-level security measures for their services.

It's been mentioned by guests on the Joe Rogan podcast that even at his level he's surrounded by former elite-level military security at all times. Comments like "Wow, when I got to the studio today I wasn't expecting there to be Navy SEALs everywhere".

I still believe, all things considered, that elonjet almost certainly has to be the most secure aspect of movement for Elon and his family.

...Flight plans are public record, and must be filed ahead of time. I'm not aware of the acceptability of deviating from them; IFR I believe may be verboten, but VFR you might have leeway.

Besides which, taking the "scenic route" while flying completely defeats the point of flying being the most direct way to get from point A to point B. Hence the front loading of the airport security model.

You do as little "in air" security as possible, because that crap is horrifyingly expensive because physics.

I've personally flown on private IFR flights where the flight plan was filed something like 10 minutes (or even less) before departure (or amended several times, etc). It doesn't seem like a good way to go about knowing where someone is. Everything regarding elonjet only applies to the aircraft and it's likely he loans out his aircraft to other execs/employees at his companies, miscellaneous friends and family, etc. So even if you somehow developed some methodical and resource-intensive master plan to attack the aircraft or movement associated with it you wouldn't have any guarantee you'd get your intended target.

A missile defense system was announced for Gulfstream aircraft at a cost of about $3.5m[0], which for a ~$65m aircraft isn't really that expensive...

[0] - https://www.aerospaceonline.com/doc/farnborough-gulfstream-o...

Can I track the real-time location of well-known LGBT activists?

The rules should be simple and the same for everyone.

  - Have free speech, so you can argue for OR against any idea (abortion, immigration, LGBT, cryptos, whatever);
  - Harassment, abuse, threats, doxxing, etc. are not tolerated against anyone.

Basically, target ideas but not individuals. It's a simple rule, really.

> Can I track the real-time location of well-known LGBT activists?

Before the narrative changed with this incident, you would have been accused of stochastic terrorism.

If you own Twitter and they use your app. You can track them every time they open your app. Which for a lot of people is often.

> I’m trying to understand the threat vector here.

No I don't think you are. The MO of unhinged leftist psychopaths is to dox and intimidate people wherever they're at. A dedicated individual could find where anyone is at anytime. The issue with some aggregating and advertising it in a convenient manner is now many people who may not have been resourceful enough to find it will have access.

1. The PD in question couldn't confirm that Musk even filed a report about this incident (but that they were reaching out to Musk) according to a journalist who send an inquiry. We have no proof that this happened to begin with beyond claims by Musk and a blurry picture of a car. Musk banned the journalist who send the inquiry to the PD from Twitter. I would note that the journalist did not mention ElonJet in any form, just that there was no verifiable proof that it had happened.

2. Said picture of a car was location-traced by someone involved with Bellingcat to be extremely far away from any nearby airports; Musk suggests that someone was tailgating the car in question from the airport if I recall, but this would be absurd and not really possible given the distance. If the incident happened to begin with, it was most likely unrelated to ElonJet. He's blatantly using an incident with his child to ban an account he personally doesn't like.

To be clear, it's his full right to do this, but there's some irony in how the guy bloviating about free speech absolutism for weeks on end changes tune to "only the speech I like" the second he finds an excuse to do so.

Also going after journalists reporting on this is pathetic, not to mention shows a blatant disregard for freedom of the press, and as history has shown us time and time again, getting a journalist to shut up tends to just make them more vocal because of the Streisand Effect. More people than ever know about ElonJet than before he banned it and his repeated attempts to prevent people from linking to Mastodon.social and other big Mastodon instances because that's where the ElonJet guy went have only caused more reporting on it.

> We have no proof that this happened to begin with beyond claims by Musk and a blurry picture of a car

He posted a video of the guy, his car, and his license plate

But no video of the incident actually taking place. Quite surprising that Elon apparently is not aware of the dozen or so cameras on a car made by the company he owns!

But Elon is supporting extreme versions of free speech so he should be held to the same standard. Anything else is hypocritical.

Has anyone actually made a link between a plane being tracked, and his car somehow being tracked too? Probably not because they are unrelated, but it sure sounds scary in a short angry tweet

His plane and the car being attacked were in different states at the time, and the car was nowhere near an airport.

This is the second time in a month now that Elon has justified actions which go directly against his previous statements by using his children as props (not to mention we have no idea if the events that he claims happened with said children even happened).

It's strange how often he uses children as props, whether by examples like this or by accusing people of pedophilia.

Children are sacred, just the possibility of harming one makes you inhuman, so the easiest way to shut down and dehumanize your opponent is imply they hurt children. They used to do it with accusations of communism and before that witchcraft.

There is no proof that actually happend.

rules for thee but not for me. or: once an issue affects me personally it suddenly matters!

> Yeah I think you'd change your tune as well if some psychopath attacked your infant child.

This is demonstrably false; last I checked, Elon didn't even file a police report.

> Sweeney said he hasn't received any notification of legal action, and the last time his bot tweeted anything was Dec. 12, "which is not last night, so I don’t get how that’s connected.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/twitter-suspe...

Ok, but that doesn’t explain why Musk himself specifically said this was ok.

It wouldn't be a lie if @elonjet posted something else more revealing other that it was bot'ed to do.

I personally think this is an emotional overreaction and @ElonJet was not involved in the recent incident (and probably doesn't pose any threat to Elon), but I don't think it means his previous statements were a lie.

Anyone would change their mind and overreact after an attack on their child.

And in a broader context, the new policy seems like a good idea. In general, I suspect real-time location tracking does more harm than good, and none of us would tolerate a website tracking our location.

*after an “attack” on one of the children that they care about.

an alleged attack, the evidence for which is a single video that was a shot not at the airport when the plane wasn't in the same city; note, too, no police report was filed about the supposed incident.

I generally take people at their word, but Musk in particular has used up every last bit of benefit-of-the-doubt credit I had for him. I pretty much gave up on Musk when he tried to insert himself into the Thai cave rescue, and wound up calling the guy who actually saved the kids a pedophile because his mini-sub idea was bad and he couldn't handle the perceived slight.

Do you think the video was staged?

Let's say it wasn't. Let's say it went down exactly as described. That leaves Musk with a lower threshold for banning legit journalists than he for filing a police report. Not impossible, but rather weird.

Why is there no footage from any of the multiple cameras on the Tesla that was allegedly attacked? It would be trivial for him to obtain that if it exists.

There won't be a police report. Many people have investigated Elon's claims, and determined that the alleged incident could not have taken place when or where he claimed it did.

Filing a false police report is a crime. It's only a misdemeanor, but if Elon's stupid enough to go down this route a conviction for a crime of dishonesty can be used against him in court to impeach any testimony he gives until his dying days.

> He specifically said that @elonjet was ok and then reversed course on that

Why did he reverse course? This part is missing from your appeal so I'm wondering if you know the answer, but just find it irrelevant.