Is a public account, using public data, that tracks a celebrity jets (Elon Musk, Taylor Swift, Bill Gates etc) “stalking”, providing a "public service”, or is a benign ”curiosity”?

[fastfinge@fed.interfree.ca]

@chris It kind of depends on who’s doing the tracking and who’s being tracked. A dude tracking Taylor swifts jet is a creep. An organization tracking bill gates to make a point about climate change is not. As with all types of communication, context matters.

[john@socks.masto.host]

@chris given all applicable laws and regulations, I don't think anyone could object to a blog, which had an RSS output, with the same information.

The drama, such as it is, is what responsibility social networks have to host the same.

I think the RSS is sufficient for the interested.

[ai6yr@m.ai6yr.org]

@chris This is public info...

[chris@mstdn.chrisalemany.ca]

@fastfinge for sure. Though (as devil's advocate) are either of those scenarios dependant on bots repeating the information?

[fastfinge@fed.interfree.ca]

@chris Does it matter? Anyone could look up the info, but the entity creating a bot to post it to social media is communicating a message just by that act of creation. I’m okay with “Bill Gates is a hypocrite!” But less okay with “hey, here’s where Taylor Swift is, just in case you want to go abuse her.”

[chris@mstdn.chrisalemany.ca]

@fastfinge certainly. The question I guess is if the bot owner/creator is saying that. Or if someone using the information is saying that.

[fastfinge@fed.interfree.ca]

@chris Well, the bot owner obviously made the bot for some purpose. Otherwise they’d just go look it up on a flight tracker app if it was just personal curiosity.

[chris@mstdn.chrisalemany.ca]

@fastfinge indeed.

[fastfinge@fed.interfree.ca]

@chris Personally I’m okay with threads banning it. They’re too big to effectively moderate contextually. This points to why the small instance mastodon model is a good one. Instances each get to decide how they feel about any given account.

[chris@mstdn.chrisalemany.ca]

@fastfinge good point!

[_l1vy_@mstdn.social]

@chris I want multi-selection option!

[gorfram@beige.party]

@chris For people who have made themselves celebrities (like those mentioned above), it’s a benign curiously. If they wanted privacy, they could fly commercial, use a charter service, or operate their jet through some sort of holding company/legal entity* not bearing their name.

*I am very much not a lawyer

[chris@mstdn.chrisalemany.ca]

@Gorfram this is a very good point

[markbrigham@universeodon.com]

@mikemccaffrey @bamboombibbitybop @chris Provided the one you already own is a bicycle or a pair of walking shoes

[markbrigham@universeodon.com]

@chris It would. I don’t have the energy or the data to run those numbers.

The principle is paramount. The massive musk & spaysex carbon footprint is a result of unprincipled leadership.

[highvizghilliesuit@newsie.social]

@chris Voted stalking because it wasn't getting much love but don't think it should be criminalized as much as I think it's unfair to make Taylor Swift more responsible for GHG emissions than a less famous private jet owner.

[chris@mstdn.chrisalemany.ca]

@highvizghilliesuit a pretty balanced take!

[mikemccaffrey@drupal.community]

@MarkBrigham @bamboombibbitybop @chris No, you need to drive a gas car an awfully long way in order to use as much energy and produce as much carbon as it takes to build an electric car from scratch.

[markbrigham@universeodon.com]

@chris @mikemccaffrey @bamboombibbitybop

In USA, the carbon payback for EV vs ICE is about 2 years or 25,000 miles. Given that I generally run cars until they have >250,000 miles on them, I think it’s a worthwhile investment.

I did drive the ICE car that I had until it bit the dust; I’m glad to own an EV now. Voting for the Oily Boys every time I bought gas rubbed me the wrong way.

Still, I’d like much improved, electrified transit.