News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
This doesn’t seem like a dickheaded move to me. First, it was a C&D letter, which has no legal status, and second, the stalker thing is a legitimate concern, especially since the MAGA camp is all riled up about her.
But a stalker could just check the same publicly available information right?
All they've done is saved a little bit of effort for the stalker.
She could just not own a private jet and use a company instead.
A stalker could also check her concert schedule.
They make that highly sensitive info public?!?!
"highly sensitive", LOL
Too late you are already getting a C&D from tay tays legal team
Yeap, this is a lot more to do with people utilizing his data to point out exactly how bad her private jet use is for the environment than it is about personal privacy.
It's not like his data is giving any more information than her social media accounts or tour schedule. What exactly is a stalker supposed to do with the information? Are they going to break into the airport and then elude her security detail? Wouldn't that be a lot harder than just following her after a show?
There's a huge difference between the info being public and it being broadcasted in an easily-readable format with her plane number labelled.
Wouldn't be a problem if she didn't have a jet 🤷
Not for someone to be a stalker. You're saying the only thing keeping some people from being a stalker is how easy the info is to find, or parse, even.
They're not saying it is the only factor, only that it is a relevant factor. Which it obviously is.
What is the bar for difficult or easy to read data? Is a CSV difficult enough? How do you even quantify difficulty of readability to meet that standard? If I build a tool to parse that new data, does that mean every agency would have to change formats and make the data harder to read?
But like, shouldn't she be taking it up with the FAA then? I'm sure you can apply for delay or exemption in extraordinary situations like this one undoubtedly is?
That is the source of the data after all. If you don't actually stop the data source from publishing your data, others will continue to use it.
It's a dumb approach that makes it look like a hurt ego thing rather than a legitimate concern.
It's a lot cheaper to have your lawyers lean on a college student than it is to have them negotiate with the federal government.
Who’s easier to convince to change, the FAA or a college student?
FAA LADD and PIA programs are just there. Swift has no excuse outside of her getting called out for CO2.
This was a non issue when Musk did it. It continues to be a non issue whilst Swift does it. Aircraft enrolled in both programs do not prevent lookup databases from third parties from getting the data eventually, but prevents in most cases real-time tracking unless there’s literal people standing at the airport watching and reporting.
No, she’s just being petulant about this issue because she’s embarrassed that she’s being told her flying around in a private jet is destroying this planet we’re all living on.
The FAA. Have you met college students?
The FAA obviously. It's publically available data, so it's totally useless to keep one person from publishing the data when anyone can take over and continue.
The data comes from the FAA. It's public data. All this guy has done is put an interface on it. Unless Swift's legal team can prove that each individual stalker used an interface hosted by this guy I don't see how he can be thought of as responsible for anything. And even if they did use an interface hosted by him, he's still not doing anything other than showing public data. Data that the FAA clearly believe is in a legitimate public interest to make public. If she's got an issue with that, they're the people to go after.
Did you make the same noise when musk did it?