Unit2Sucks said:
BearGoggles said:
WalterSobchak said:
BearGoggles said:
oski003 said:
DiabloWags said:
WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE???
Rihanna was "doxxed" last night too. I don't see a lot of outrage from people who can't tell the difference between live broadcasting of someone's travel whereabouts versus showing a picture of someone at a public place. Perhaps, people aren't as dumb as you thing they are? Maybe they can tell an apple from an orange.
I'm used to Unit2 arguing in bad faith, but this is literally one of the worst reasoned arguments he's made on this board. People can choose to appear in PUBLIC or otherwise choose to disclose their own real time personal information. It doesn't give a third party the right to do that. It is not hard.
It sure seems hard for you to grasp that third parties explicitly DO have that right.
I'm not saying the third party should go to jail for sharing public information though in extreme cases (not applicable here), that could happen.
https://esfandilawfirm.com/what-is-doxxing/#:~:text=The%20Anti%2DDoxxing%20Law%20of%20California&text=A%20maximum%20fine%20of%20up,against%20anybody%20under%20this%20law.
This entire argument is about Musk/Twitter choosing to not allow that on their platform and then being criticized for it by people like you and Unit 2 .
I am saying that: (i) most internet companies have policies against doxxing even if its is not criminal (including this website); (ii) the fact that a third party can obtain real time information from public information doesn't mean an internet company like Twitter or Facebook (or Bearinsider) will allow you to post it - they will not; and (iii) there is a huge distinction between a person choosing to disclose their own location in public (e.g., by tweeting about it or being shown on TV) vs. a third party disclosing real time geolocation information that has not been broadcast by the individual.
So unit2 posting that Elon and Rihanna "doxxed themselves" by appearing in public at the super bowl has literally no bearing on whether said parties have forfeited the right to object to being doxxed on social media in other circumstances. It is another bad faith argument.
Most people here would not be ok with a third party identifying them by real name and then following them around town and broadcasting their location in real time (or that of their family). This is not hard.
My point still stands and has been unrebutted. If Elno really thought that his real-time location information created a security risk for him, he wouldn't constantly post it (and re-design the algorithm to expand his reach) on the social media platform he owns.
Further, pretending (as you and others have) that posting the location of his airplane is the same thing as posting his real-time location is non-sensical. According to the tracker his jet is in Oakland but none of us have any idea where Elno is right now unless he happened to post it on twitter, which he does a few times per week.
My position has always been and remains that Elno's complaint is that this jet tracker is a subjective violation of his privacy. Whether he had a reasonable expectation of privacy or not is irrelevant because this is subjective. This isn't a security threat (which some people have disingenuously claimed) and this isn't "doxxing" in any way. No amount of pretending that this is something that it isn't will make those arguments legitimate. Jet tracking is not the same as putting an airtag in someone's backpack and following them around. All it tells us is that his plane goes back and forth between Tesla/SpaceX/Twitter offices. Big freaking deal.
And by the way, this isn't a unique problem to Elno. There are other high-profile people who have figured out how to operate without this risk. For example, Kelly Loeffler, the unqualified appointed senator in Georgia from a few years ago, was heavily criticized for taking advantage of a Trump tax break for the purchase of her private jet. That's not the relevant part though, this is:
Quote:
Records show the plane is chartered under TVPX Aircraft Solutions, which specializes in a form of "owner trust" that some in the business aviation industry have adopted. Among the benefits of the system, the company says on its website, is offering U.S. clients "anonymity."
Indeed, the plane was listed as "not available for public tracking per request from the owner/operator" on Flight Aware, a commonly used flight-tracking system.
So many logical fallacies in this post.
Maybe when Musk posts about his location - again his choice - he takes additional security measures that he doesn't take 24/7? I can think of 100s of reason why celebrities/public figures sometimes post their real-time location and at other times don't want that information known. You're argument that a person posting their location/appearing in public is a permanent waiver of the right to object to others doing so at a different time is just silly.
Where are Nancy and Paul Pelosi tonight? If i started following them 24/7 and posting that information, do you think I'd be visited by the secret service or worse? Of course I would.
Beyond that, it is not just Musk that is a target. His entire family is potentially a target - largely because people on the left feel completely justified in harassing their political opponents (or doing worse). The fact that his plane is parked in oakland tonight is largely irrelevant. When its moving, there's a good chance he, his family, or someone close to him is on that plane. The issue is tracking its real time movement, not where it is parked.
Its great that you think the security risks are no big deal and that Elon is exercising his "subjective" right/views. But the reality is that every social media site has a policy similar to Twitters revised policy.
Here is facebook changing its to no longer allow the posting of publicly available residential addresses:
https://www.theverge.com/2022/4/10/23019046/meta-no-longer-allow-private-residential-address-doxxing-facebook-instagram-oversight-boardWhy did FB make that change? Precisely because they recognize that spreading publicly available information on social media presents a security risk.
And yes, disclosing real time location on social medial is doxxing by any reasonable definition. Revealing personal information - even if derived from a public source - is considered doxxing. With enough investigating, I'm guessing I could determine - from PUBLICLY available information - the names and addresses of many people posting on this website. Yet that clearly would be against the board's terms of service and considered doxxing. And if I used that information to then post your real time location, how would that not also be doxxing?
