jdong

12 ms·

1.
by jdong 4y ago
> That Finnish law you quoted makes exceptions for public channels, so you are wrong about that as well What am I wrong about? It obviously makes an exemption for CB radio which is intended for random people to socialize on. "publ
2.
by jdong 4y ago
>I contend this is no different to yelling out of your window and criminalizing people hearing you. You are deeply wrong. Humans can not listen to radio transmissions without special equipment. Listening to your neighbours baby monitor g
3.
by jdong 4y ago
You have simply disregarded everything that has been said so far and returned to merely repeating the "god-given right"-opinion. > Just because it requires a trivial bit of technology to 'listen' to a radio broadcast
4.
by jdong 4y ago
>Why are you using such extreme language? Is it possible to converse in a way without over-the-top adjectives like 'god-given right'? Because of how you seem to be approaching this, you've made no effort to explain why thi
5.
by jdong 4y ago
It's not like Microsoft just convinced a single judge about this either. https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/08/microsoft-seizes-domains-r... https://arstechnica.com/information-technology&#x2
6.
by jdong 4y ago
Do you believe that it is a net-positive for society to see things this way? If so, can you put in the least bit of effort to explain as to why? You seem to be expressing an ideological belief that you have some god-given right to listen to
7.
by jdong 4y ago
>(This isn't a particularly idle concern. Amazingly Microsoft once got a court to let it take operational control of the domain no-ip.org — that is, to actually hijack the domain — a dynamic DNS service used by countless people — s
8.
by jdong 4y ago
It's the general data privacy regulation, it applies generally , to everything . It treats planes, cars and phones in exactly the same way (in that it never specifically mentions any of them). The GDPR even covers you just writing
9.
by jdong 4y ago
>1. Flight tracking data, collected from ADS-B, is legal and publicly available. Aircraft ownership data is public too. Not legal in Europe. You can't legally collect this (or any other PII) for fun, you'd need particularly str
10.
by jdong 4y ago
GDPR has nothing to do with citizenship, why would you even bring that up? Really, it even has nothing to do with residency. It's all to do with jurisdiction, when Elon happens to be within EU jurisdiction he is protected by the GDPR.
11.
by jdong 4y ago
>edit: Specifically mentioning planes and their locations, I mean, not "extrapolating from cars to planes". You have to be trolling. What leads you to believe that the GDPR which never mentions either aircraft or cars would tre
12.
by jdong 4y ago
Planes are very often registered to individuals, and that doesn't even matter! The plane being company owned doesn't magically change anything, what matters is who's being transported and whether or not they will be easily li
13.
by jdong 4y ago
As far as I can see, nobody here has made any claims regarding anything being illegal in the US. > Please provide some evidence of your repeated claim that they're illegal in Europe https://gdpr-info.eu/ What kind o
14.
by jdong 4y ago
Yes, but in the EU this would be illegal. https://www.privacy-ticker.com/decision-to-fine-the-norwegia...
15.
by jdong 4y ago
Who gives a shit about Elon? What the ADS-B data brokers are doing will continue to be illegal even if Elon never steps on a flight again.
16.
by jdong 4y ago
> Perhaps that's the real issue here. I don't see how it could be, that seems like an entirely separate issue.
17.
by jdong 4y ago
Buddy, not everybody shares your weird Elon obsession. There are interesting phenomena to discuss here, but Elon's mood swings aren't one of them.
18.
by jdong 4y ago
> It has exemptions for data published o based at n a legal requirement (could be the case here) Couldn't, there's no legal requirement for anyone to record and publish ADS-B transmissions. > data that cannot easily linked t
19.
by jdong 4y ago
The comment you're replying to perfectly addresses that.
20.
by jdong 4y ago
Why should anyone involved need to be in European? The jet in question is known to visit Europe with Musk aboard. > a company with a European or UK connection about an EU or UK data subject If you have EU or UK data subjects, you have an
21.
by jdong 4y ago
Why would a plane be treated differently than a car in a GDPR context?
22.
by jdong 4y ago
GDPR does not only apply to people of the EU, GDPR applies within the jurisdiction of the states which have implemented it. GDPR protects Musk when he flies to Europe, you'd have to treat that data differently than flights within the U
23.
by jdong 4y ago
GDPR has nothing to do with whether or not you live in Europe. The plane we're discussing here does frequently visit Europe.
24.
by jdong 4y ago
How could it not be? Your plane's location data is just as personal as your car's, or your cellphone's. There's no special aircraft exemption in the GDPR.
25.
Haunted by hackers: A suburban family’s digital ghost story(fusion.net)
3 points by jdong 11y ago|1 comments
26.
by jdong 12y ago
Are you saying that those Muslims who are driven into these violent deeds by literally interpreting their holy writings are in fact not Muslims? Logically they'd be the biggest Muslims of all. If you identify as a Muslim you identify a
27.
by jdong 12y ago
And a few months after the release of that article, the guy gets caught with large amounts of rough diamonds in his possession. http://www.wired.com/2009/07/organizer-of-worlds-biggest-dia... Sadly I was unable to
28.
by jdong 12y ago
> extremely prone to viruses/malware What?
29.
by jdong 12y ago
Nowhere near this size though, and those selling bigger attacks on e.g. darkode would charge extra for the heat. If they're paying for the attacks, they must be paying closer to $1000 per hour.
30.
by jdong 12y ago
Where does one acquire a botnet with zero skills?

More ›