Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Evidently the man has a difference of opinion.Brett Kavanaugh was almost attacked at his house, and Steve Scalise was attacked as part of a group of Republican congressmen at a public baseball field, and actually didn't seem to have been targeted. ElonJet would tell you what city he's in. At a stretch, you can also tell what airport he's in, but not really with enough time to get there to do any harm unless you are already there.
To summarize Musk.
Any info on twitter that may jeopardize my private safety: banned.
Any info on twitter that may jeopardize public safety: all good.
Evidently he does, and that is certainly his right. However, the primary issue here is that Musk took over Twitter vowing to "protect free speech" - even specifically calling out the @elonjet account as something that he would permit, even though he didn't like it. In the weeks since, he's proved that to be a blatant lie - banning disgruntled Twitter employees, journalists, and now plane tracking accounts. He's also apparently blocking the posting of links to the primary Twitter competitor that's been growing since he took over (Mastodon - their Twitter account is also suspended). I - and many others - feel that it's important to call him out on his hypocrisy.Evidently the man has a difference of opinion.
How difficult is it to just honor the man’s wishes not to be stalked in real time.
Have a good time with that.Evidently he does, and that is certainly his right. However, the primary issue here is that Musk took over Twitter vowing to "protect free speech" - even specifically calling out the @elonjet account as something that he would permit, even though he didn't like it. In the weeks since, he's proved that to be a blatant lie - banning disgruntled Twitter employees, journalists, and now plane tracking accounts. He's also apparently blocking the posting of links to the primary Twitter competitor that's been growing since he took over (Mastodon - their Twitter account is also suspended). I - and many others - feel that it's important to call him out on his hypocrisy.
Sounds like negotiation to me. Sweeney was not threatening Musk in any way, nor was he doing anything illegal. Musk offered him money to stop, and Sweeney counter-offered. Musk declined to accept the counter-offer, and now here we are.Let's remember the history behind this:
Elon Musk offered teen $5K to delete Twitter tracking his private jet
Musk reached out to 19-year-old college student Jack Sweeney to express concern about a Twitter account he runs called @ElonJet.nypost.com
He offers the teen 5,000 to stop - the teen countered with $50,000.00 .
Sounds like extortion to me.
Tesla founder Elon Musk offered to pay a tech-savvy teenager $5,000 to shut down an account that kept tabs on his private jet due to concerns about his personal safety.The billionaire reached out to the 19-year-old college student, Jack Sweeney, last November to express concern about a Twitter account he runs called @ElonJet, which provides regular updates on flights of well-known figures by using publicly available data, according to direct messages reviewed by the Post and first reported by Protocol.“Can you take this down? It is a security risk,” Musk wrote to him in a direct message on Twitter dated Nov. 30.The pair exchanged several more messages, with Musk pressing for details on how Sweeney set up the bots and what he earned by operating them. Eventually, Musk offered $5,000 to delete the account.
Considering neither you nor I know what happened behind the scenes in the past eleven months of this happening, at best we have conjecture.Sounds like negotiation to me. Sweeney was not threatening Musk in any way, nor was he doing anything illegal. Musk offered him money to stop, and Sweeney counter-offered. Musk declined to accept the counter-offer, and now here we are.
If Musk felt threatened by the account, then there were a number of legal avenues that he could have pursued (cease-and-desist, restraining order, etc). To my knowledge, he has not done this.
Right. It only cost him $44 Billion to get him to stop. He should have taken the counter offer, but then he wouldn't have gotten to play god. Meh.Sounds like negotiation to me. Sweeney was not threatening Musk in any way, nor was he doing anything illegal. Musk offered him money to stop, and Sweeney counter-offered. Musk declined to accept the counter-offer, and now here we are.
If Musk felt threatened by the account, then there were a number of legal avenues that he could have pursued (cease-and-desist, restraining order, etc). To my knowledge, he has not done this.
Terms of service. All media platforms have that. Subscribers can read it before they agree to them. Musk is free to have the wild wild west of social media he advocates. Of course Musk is spouting nonsense. He says it's a free speech public square replete with a soapbox, but takes the soapbox away as he makes rules on the fly. The very same thing he criticizes twitter's previous ownership of doing in the "twitter file" release. If someone is so enamored with the idea of Musk himself is expressed in "hey, I want to literally see where he goes and what he does", then that IS an ideological viewpoint being expressed. That was the actual case with the elonjet guy. It was out of admiration. Frankly to me if people are spreading Islamic terrorist ideology on a social media platform, that should be banned. To you, I guess not. Frankly to me if during a pandemic where millions are dying, if people out of sheer greed and grift are exposing dangerous information, that should be banned. To you, I guess not. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the blatant hypocrisy in Musk's managing of twitter. My safety, then ban. Public safety, who gives a rip.For starters, I don't think it's the job of a public speech platform to be banning either one (if the platform is what it says it is) provided it's not outside the law.
Having said that, with regards to intent:
I don't think we're talking about "any old info" here.
I think the core of the conversation is freedom of speech and expression. What political/ideological viewpoints are being "expressed" by posting someone's location while they're in an area considered to be public?
"It's public information and legal, so I can" (while technically true) is a flimsy justification if it's a conversation about freedom of expression.
Sort of like the guys who "exercise their right to open carry" in public parking lots outside of venues where their ideological opponents are meeting. Sure it's technically legal, but the real intentions behind them doing so are pretty thinly veiled.
It's a means of attempted intimidation under the guise of "I'm just doing this thing that's technically legal"
"I hate pineapple on pizza" is legal to say
"Here's the grocery store where the wife of the guy who likes pineapple shops" (without specifically calling for any illegal action) is legal to say
But anyone looking at it honestly knows the intent behind the two are very different in their intent.
Elon Musk warned he faces EU sanctions after booting journalists off Twitter
The sudden, sweeping purge comes after controversy over Twitter suspending an account which tracked Elon Musk's private plane. The billionaire had previously indicated that he was so committed to free speech on Twitter, that even the jet bot would not be banned.news.sky.com
So much for his commitment to free speech.
Of course, though the lack of any legal proceedings against Sweeney and the fact that his tracker remains up (just on sites other than Twitter) suggests that either Musk did not take any legal action or he had no legal leg to stand on.Considering neither you nor I know what happened behind the scenes in the past eleven months of this happening, at best we have conjecture.
I fail to see how that's obvious. Seems to me that he did it as a combination of coding/development practice, an interest in aircraft (apparently his dad works for an airline and he's been playing with flight trackers since middle school), and an interest in Elon Musk.It's obvious the student was doing it for the purpose of making money.
From the link provided:I fail to see how that's obvious. Seems to me that he did it as a combination of coding/development practice, an interest in aircraft (apparently his dad works for an airline and he's been playing with flight trackers since middle school), and an interest in Elon Musk.
Yeah, Musk asked him to get a baseline of what the account might be worth. Apparently, he was making no more than $20/month off of it at that point, per this article: Elon Musk offered a college freshman $5k to delete a Twitter accountFrom the link provided:
The pair exchanged several more messages, with Musk pressing for details on how Sweeney set up the bots and what he earned by operating them. Eventually, Musk offered $5,000 to delete the account.
Musk asked Sweeney how much he made off the Twitter accounts, which Sweeney said was no more than $20 a month. Then Elon Musk made his own offer: $5,000 to delete the account and help the billionaire keep “crazy people” from tracking his location. Sweeney told Musk to add another 0. “Any chance to up that to $50k? It would be great support in college and would possibly allow me to get a car maybe even a Model 3.”
Yes now he has. But he created the rule, then banned people for tweets they made before the violation of the rule. The backlash seems to be the only reason he reinstated the accounts of the journalists, who were simply reporting on something he had done.Now he has
So, they were reinstated and he created a rule. No biggieYes now he has. But he created the rule, then banned people for tweets they made before the violation of the rule. The backlash seems to be the only reason he reinstated the accounts of the journalists, who were simply reporting on something he had done.
I don't think he advocated for absolute anarchy, did he?Terms of service. All media platforms have that. Subscribers can read it before they agree to them. Musk is free to have the wild wild west of social media he advocates. Of course Musk is spouting nonsense. He says it's a free speech public square replete with a soapbox, but takes the soapbox away as he makes rules on the fly.
"I want to show everyone where Elon Musk is at, at all times" isn't an ideological viewpoint. At best, it's an unhealthy obsession, at worst, it's a potential security risk.The very same thing he criticizes twitter's previous ownership of doing in the "twitter file" release. If someone is so enamored with the idea of Musk himself is expressed in "hey, I want to literally see where he goes and what he does", then that IS an ideological viewpoint being expressed. That was the actual case with the elonjet guy. It was out of admiration.
I've said anything that's against the law should be banned...last time I checked, committing terrorism and promoting and encouraging acts of violence is against the law, yes?Frankly to me if people are spreading Islamic terrorist ideology on a social media platform, that should be banned. To you, I guess not.
Actually, if you were familiar with some of my previous posts, you'd know that I was against people trying to profit off of selling quack cures and promoting quack cures for profit.Frankly to me if during a pandemic where millions are dying, if people out of sheer greed and grift are exposing dangerous information, that should be banned. To you, I guess not.
...but the subject matters that people were getting banned for weren't all rooted in public safety.Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the blatant hypocrisy in Musk's managing of twitter. My safety, then ban. Public safety, who gives a rip.
Evidently he does, and that is certainly his right. However, the primary issue here is that Musk took over Twitter vowing to "protect free speech" - even specifically calling out the @elonjet account as something that he would permit, even though he didn't like it. In the weeks since, he's proved that to be a blatant lie - banning disgruntled Twitter employees, journalists, and now plane tracking accounts. He's also apparently blocking the posting of links to the primary Twitter competitor that's been growing since he took over (Mastodon - their Twitter account is also suspended). I - and many others - feel that it's important to call him out on his hypocrisy.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?