[AlchemistCamp]

That's not an accurate representation of what I said and it's completely tangential to this article. Given that you have "Fuck Elon Musk" in your Twitter bio, I'm guessing that this is a major issue for you and possibly part of your identity.

That said, doxxing people's location in real-time absolutely is a security risk and kidnapping is nothing to laugh about.

I believe it's an unethical choice to donate to the legal fund of someone intentionally and stubbornly engaging in that kind of behavior (and even working around technical barriers built by regulatory bodies to do so).

[mthoms]

Well, here's your previous quote:

>Even with the knowledge that the doxxing is leading to stalkers endangering not just the wealthy target but also his young child, you would fund the doxxer? That’s pretty monstrous. If there is a kidnapping or murder down the line, your money will have helped enable it.

It looks like there was a perfectly accurate representation of what you said. At least your current claim is a little more tempered:

>I believe it's an unethical choice to donate to the legal fund of someone intentionally and stubbornly engaging in that kind of behavior

Your characterization of supporting @ElonJet seems to have changed from complicity in child murder to merely making an "unethical choice". That's quite the walk-back.

[AlchemistCamp]

> That’s quite the walk-back.

No, it’s not. I still do think the donation would be monstrous, and that if there were a murder or kidnapping enabled by the doxxing, that it would be on the donor’s conscience for the rest of their life.

That doesn’t mean I have to help ceejayoz derail and inflame this thread, more than two months later. Phrasing my position less aggressively was an intentional choice.

Also, taking the most extreme snippet of what I said in an extended conversation out of context is not an accurate representation.

A key part of what I said is the conditional you quoted from my post that ceejayoz removed. I said, if there were a murder or kidnapping caused by the doxxing activity then the money donated in support of it will have…supported it.

[ceejayoz]

> Given that you have "Fuck Elon Musk" in your Twitter bio, I'm guessing that this is a major issue for you and possibly part of your identity.

Part of my job is working with the Twitter API. If someone gave you a week's notice of a major breaking change, with no details, then delayed it multiple times - still without any details, to this date! - you'd be feeling some frustration with Musk as well.

https://twitter.com/TwitterDev/status/1621026986784337922

https://twitter.com/TwitterDev/status/1623467615539859456

https://twitter.com/TwitterDev/status/1625234161010343941

(I'm one of the luckier ones; it's only part of what I do. The Tweetbots and Twitterifics of the world have even more reason to be upset.)

> That said, doxxing people's location in real-time absolutely is a security risk and kidnapping is nothing to laugh about.

The claim that ADS-B tracking results in kidnappings is laughable.

[AlchemistCamp]

One of my friends had a big hassle with the Twitter API back in the day, when they reversed their previous policy of actively encouraging devs to make 3rd party clients.

It definitely gives some context that you're dealing with similar issues now, so thanks for sharing that point.

> The claim that ADS-B tracking results in kidnappings is laughable.

Please respond in good faith. As you know, the account in question was doing extra work to de-anonymize planes enrolled in the Privacy ICAO Address (PIA) program. You also know that rich people and their children are very common kidnapping targets. At no point did I say "ADS-B tracking results in kidnapping". I said the doxxer was creating a clear security risk.