141
It’s about Swift and not one of the richest people in the world who lives in the kleptocracy that passed this legislation and historically has made a big fuss over this issue?
He is also in the article, yes.
I blind clicked hoping that wasn't the answer
Congress is working on issues that matter to the American people.
Like making sure the wealthy are even less accountable.
Its the Tragedy of the Commons. No single individual really has an incentive to stop flying, outside of the marginal impact on PR. So everyone just says its someone else's problem.
The FAA is toothless. The EPA is toothless. The individual industry leaders are more legally beholden to shareholders than any regulatory body. Even in aggregate, the emission volume of flights pale beside the emissions caused by coal stacks and automotive emissions and bunker fuel from bulk cargo shipping, so its the billionaire equivalent of saying "At least I'm recycling" when pushed about what you're doing to curb greenhouse gases.
At the end of the day, what we need is a comprehensive investment in high speed mass transit. But fossil fuel companies hate that. Aeronautics companies hate that. Politicians fixated on quarterly budget figures hate that. And the folks that would actually build rail in this country no longer exist.
So whatchagonna do? Shrug, blame "the system", and go with the flow because everyone else is doing it.
bill that was passed last week will allow private aircraft owners to anonymize their registration information
Private planes fly anonymously? Even if order and justice was restored to the world, we couldn’t find the next Epstein’s island.
And how will this affect drug trafficking? If you can’t trace private planes, it becomes the Wild West.
Oh, the anonymity only counts for the public. The alphabet soup guys will know.
investigative reporting should exist
Bezos owns the Washington Post
You don't know? Rich people is above suspect and law
Neo feudalism just checked another box against democracy.
Right, they did it for Taylor Swift.
It definitely had nothing to do with Elon Musk or Ken Griffin. Definitely not.
So if the only thing hidden is the airplanes ID seems like it would still be relatively easy to have a program sift through the data.2
Yeah all we need is to track which private plane specifically went on the exact pattern of her tours
Personally I don’t care where celebrities are at any given time. But I do think it’s interesting, for example to see how international climate summits are some of the biggest environmental impacts as far as carbon footprint etc for example, or seeing how celebrities take personal jets to go to the convenience store
Dammit, I guess we can't complain anymore about how much fuel they waste every day, so we are fine. Oh wait, no they are still pieces of shit.
So when her plane goes missing, we’ll all treat her like Amelia Earhart. She doesn’t fly her own plane though; not quite Amelia.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Celebrities and billionaires have long complained that it’s just way too easy for random people on the internet to monitor how much fuel exhaust they waste as they flit through the skies via their private jets.
An amendment in the Federal Aviation Administration re-authorization bill that was passed last week will allow private aircraft owners to anonymize their registration information.
Jet tracking has been made possible up until this point because private plane owners were forced to register aircraft ownership information with the FAA civil registry.
The Warzone originally reported that the new FAA reauthorization bill, which was introduced last June, will effectively make it impossible (or, at the very least, very, very hard) to track the jet activity of the well-to-do.
That’s a bummer, since in an age of environmental concerns, it’s been helpful to know which members of America’s gilded class are spewing jet fuel into the atmosphere.
Elon Musk famously threatened to sue Jack Sweeney, an undergraduate at the University of Florida, after the student made a Twitter account that tracked the billionaire’s private jet activity, ElonJet, in 2020.
The original article contains 598 words, the summary contains 182 words. Saved 70%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
So congress does actually work?
Of course they do, just not for you
Is it "impossible" or is it "exceedingly difficult?"
Yeah well figuring out who owns what jet will bearginally harder. Like with metadata if you have a few data points it will be easy to figure out who owns what plane. And it is not like these people don't travel much so the data points will Stack up fast.
does this actually anonymize it or just give the jet a tracking number?
You will still be able to track jets by their transponder. Planes are required to broadcast their location at all times.
What has changed is if there is a name attached to that transponder. This lets the owners of private planes can now have the FFA remove their name from the public record.
It's a big club, and we ain't in it.
I’ve never wanted to be in that club. In fact, I think I’m happier because I’m not.
I'm glad for people like you, because I've spent a good chunk of my life desperately wishing to be in that club, and then another chunk being sad that I wouldn't be able to be. I was miserable and latched onto something that I believed would alleviate it, but I nowadays definitely think I'm happier not being in that club.
I've never really wanted to be in the private jet billionare club but I have always wanted to be in the "have a nice paid off house and enough money to safely start a small business" club. Sure, being a billionare would get me that but what would I do with the other 99.999% of the money?
I think I mostly just wanted to be in the "so rich I never have to think about money again. Growing up super poor left its marks on me and now even though I am relatively secure and comfortable, I still have a background anxiety about whether I'll have enough.
There's an instinct within me that screams that I shouldn't share resources with other people unless I'm sure I have more than enough for myself. If I indulged that instinct, that would mean that in a situation where there's enough for everyone, I'd feel most comfortable with 3 or more shares, because then even if I gave away one of my shares to someone else, I'd still have what I need, plus some buffer. There's a reason I work very hard to not indulge that instinct though, because I don't want to hoard at the expense of other people like me.
Like I say, it's just part of a wish of not having to think about money at all. I had some very rich friends in uni, and sometimes they'd shop in places where the clothes didn't have price tags, the kinds of places where if you had to ask, you couldn't afford it. I envied the fact that they didn't have to think about money more than I did the material luxuries they could afford
Unfortunately, this will also make aviation safety analysis more difficult for us.
The plane crash we don't hear about is one we don't worry about. Good news for the aviation industry.
This is going to help bring down everyday prices, stop Genocide and will ensure another Epstein type billionaire who privately flies people to his pedophile island will receive swift Justice!
Tracking of any wealthy person by terrorists could become a huge potential problem.
You misspelled solution.
For who?
this post was submitted on 24 May 2024
141 points (96.7% liked)
politics
19104 readers
2495 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS