351–360 of 398 posts
Honest question: How US border controls compare to China border controls? Edit: worded it better.
They are exceedingly polite... Granted it may be because you have to receive a visa prior and the application is pretty extensive.
On other hand, being Canadian I have been grilled several times at both Canadian and US immigration.
I am no fan of CBP, but the guy apparently admitted to placing sex ads on Craiglist. The article doesn't state what the ads said... but depending on their content, it may be reasonable to suspect him of prostitution... an argument could be made that it shouldn't matter, and I don't think CBP should be demanding passwords like this, but the denial may not have been so absurd as the article would like you to think.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's all up to you. But I personally chose not to go to US conferences because of the TSA. The risk of being jailed is real: If you chuckle while they ask questions then lose your temper because he's not happy and you lack sleep; If you have a false name on Facebook (Are you lying about your identity to any US company?); If you know the wrong person; If you've watched underage porn (knowing that even with above-age p…
Yeah, the U.S. throws people in jail because women claim they were harassed at conferences all the time. The risk is real!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> France French Guiana?
France can be divided into Metropolitan France (the main hexagon of France, along with Corsica), Départements d'outre-mer (including Martinique, Guyana, and others), and Collectivités d'outre-mer (such as Saint Martin). In terms of US geography, the rough equivalents are the continental US, Alaska and Hawaii, and unincorporated territories of the US (like Puerto Rico). If you don't understand the latter term, think o…
I also don't know that excluding French Guiana from "Latin America" is actually correct anyway. French is a romance language.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True, but it'd be especially painful if you use a password manager. Presumably they're going to demand the master password, so you're left changing everything. If you were dealing with a reasonable system, a compromise might be to unlock the accounts for them (without them seeing the password) and allow them to review the contents in your presence. That way you know exactly what they've seen, and that they're not hol…
>True, but it'd be especially painful if you use a password manager. Presumably they're going to demand the master password, so you're left changing everything. So you have to change everything + the master password, that is 1 more than you would have to change, had you not used it. Without a password manager, you could just give them the passwords they wanted, if you remember 20+ different random passwords. Otherwis…
And yes, I agree that having to show border guards your facebook account isn't ideal. It's a hell of a lot more reasonable than just giving them all your passwords and having them run rampant through your digital life without your even knowing what they've done or seen though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn't a national origin ban if it only covers Muslim-majority countries with a priority process for religious minorities: > "to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual's country of nationality." I wouldn't go as far as to say that it's a ban on Muslims, but it strategically bans…
The countries on the list date from 2016. No President "signed it", it was established and extended by DHS and State Dept as part of Visa controls. The EO extended those controls from "no waiver, manual review" to "no access"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
US has very strong political opposition to denying services to illegal immigrants in many states. Given how many there are, in is understandable - if you have 10 million population, you can not just deny them all healthcare or access to housing. That'd create tons of problems. It could be done if tightening the rules is combined with finding solution for having so many illegal immigrants, one way or another (in vario…
I think you and parent are talking about separate things. They say, "housing assistance," and you say, "access to housing." Housing assistance is a government service. Access to housing would mean controlling the private housing market, I guess. Those are very different ideas in terms of feasibility, morality, economics, etc.
Second, many illegal immigrant are poor, or comparatively poor (e.g. housing in SF Bay Area is crazily expensive as you know, but in other parts of California is not super-cheap either usually) - and thus the government has a choice - either provide at least some assistance, or deal with tons of homeless people and all the problems that arise from that. California has pretty mild climate, which can be good because people won't freeze to death, etc. in most places most of the time, but that also means they can actually live on the street in most places most of the time, and the rest of the population usually gets uncomfortable when this happens. So they ask the government to solve this somehow.
Everyone proposing clever technical solutions. Burner phones and encrypted cloud data etc... you are solving the wrong problem. Instead of engineering a way for the few people who care deeply to avoid this at great effort, engineer a way for this to not be legal. Write your congressperson, donate time and money to political parties, make privacy at the border for ALL (not just citizens) a priority in every election.
They're attempting to solve the problem that they, as individuals, can solve. I have no realistic chance of convincing enough of my fellow Americans that the privacy of foreign nationals who wish to enter this country is more important than maintaining the false sense of security we get by violating it to put any pressure on lawmakers or enforcers of policy and get things changed. What you can do, today, is employ te…
Please, by all means use whatever technical measures you want at the border. My criticism was of hn commenters armchair quarterbacking, as thought the ability to bypass these checks (at great effort) makes it ok that you have no expectation of privacy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The DHS under the direction of the President. Are you suggesting that the US needs looser border controls and screening?
> Are you suggesting that the US needs looser border controls and screening? I would suggest that, yes. If a gay man wishes to come to the US to prostitute himself, I think that's a fair trade-off for not forcing everyone to bend over for the digital equivalent of a rectal exam.
My point is that some people are worked up about what you equate to a "rectal exam," but don't you think there's good reason for these procedures? If not, how would you prevent terrorists from entering? That is, what if your male prostitute is a terrorist?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure I read the parent same way you did. What he proposed is a way to circumvent border data check by having no data on your devices during that time. If there's no encrypted data then device passwords will do nothing for them.
Did you fail to notice that the 2nd time the Canadian tried to visit he was turned away because he had no data on his phone?