Elon Musk has security scare

Yesterday Elon Musk has a very bad security scare. Last night, in direct response, he suspended a large number of accounts of “journalists.” All have a leftist bias, and all have ties to the legacy media. So legacy media organs announced “re-evaluations” of their relationship with Twitter. Sadly, very few people, even among his allies, understand the real risk to which Elon Musk had to respond.

What spooked Elon Musk?

The scare started two days ago when Elon Musk discovered, and suspended, an account called “elonjet.” This account was reporting – in real time – the coordinates of his private jet. After suspending the account, Musk promulgated a simple rule: do not give anyone’s location in real time. Musk would consider that a “physical safety violation” and would suspend any such account forthwith.

But the thread did not end with that. It continued with footage of a stalker accosting the limousine carrying his son.

The footage shows someone with a mask covering the mouth (but not nose or eyes). The person-of-interest is driving a late-model white Hyundai sedan, license number CJ82G38. Musk asks anyone who has seen man or car to contact the Los Angeles Police Department. In addition, Musk spoke of legal action against Jack Sweeney, owner of the “elonjet” account, and anyone else wishing harm upon himself and/or his family. That started a debate, which turned snide when a certain user tried to excuse the act of “doxxing.” Herewith one thread:

and another along the same vein:

Read the Twitter Rules!

No one, now making snide comments about Elon Musk “making up rules as he goes,” seems to have read the Twitter Rules. The Private Information and Media Policy provides that no user, without the consent of an affected party, may share:

home address or physical location information, including street addresses, GPS coordinates or other identifying information related to locations that are considered private;

or

live location information, including information shared on Twitter directly or links to 3rd-party URL(s) of travel routes, actual physical location, or other identifying information that would reveal a person’s location, regardless if this information is publicly available.

The Wayback Machine shows that Twitter administration added the second paragraph at or before 7:11:36 p.m. Before then, only the first paragraph applied. But even that might cover the suspension of “elonjet,” especially in the context of a direct attack against an individual or member of his family. The footage Elon shared clearly shows such an attack. And the most disturbing observation is that certain users actually said the assailant was within his rights.

Bear this in mind when judging what Elon Musk did next.

Elon Musk and the Thursday Night Massacre

Apparently several journalists, all with a leftist bias, shared either the address of “elonjet” or some of the information upon which “elonjet” relied. First to do this, apparently, was Keith Olbermann. At 8:34 p.m. EST, the “Hodgetwins” account noted the suspension, and the grounds:

Musk then suspended at least five more, according to Good Morning America.

Jack Posobiec covered the suspensions better than anyone. Beginning at 8:05 p.m. EST he listed as many of the suspended accounts as he could find, in real time. The names are: Aaron Rupar, Drew Harwell, Ryan Mac, Donie O’Sullivan, It’s Going Down News, and Keith Olbermann.

Libby Emmons reported that last in The Post Millennial. Basically, Elon joined a “Twitter Space” with several journalists to tell them they have no special privilege to break the Private Information and Media Policy.

Since 10:56 p.m. EST, Elon Musk has been polling users asking for recommendations on when to lift these suspensions. He closed one poll after half a million had voted in it.

The results were:

Musk then pointed this out, to show how hypocritical his critics can be:

At time of posting, Elon has another poll running.

The options are “now” or “seven days.” At this time nearly 60 percent say “now.” For the record, CNAV votes for a seven-day suspension.

Reaction

Reaction varies from “How dare you!” to “Welcome to being a public figure” to “I would do the same.” Libby Emmons’ article has the best available collection of tweets:

Tim Pool has more room to criticize than most. Last week some “unknown subjects” attacked his house. He wasn’t there, and his staff opened fire, thus putting them to flight.

That policy seems definite enough.

A workable compromise. The best time delay is after a reasonable observer would assume the person wasn’t there anymore.

In other news, followers of the Twitter Files are still waiting for the release of the sixth installment.