Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Social Media Needs a Travel Mode

idlewords.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 228 posts

Re: Social Media Needs a Travel Mode

#211

Post by cronjobber »

idlewords wrote: post #49
tacostakohashi wrote: post #19

This is completely naive. Firstly, social media's only incentive is to make your data as widely available as possible (in the interests of ad revenue), and maintain a good relationship with the government in their jurisdiction. Every other existing "privacy" setting on Facebook, LinkedIn, etc is already obfuscated to the point of unusability, for this reason, and "travel mode" would be no different. Secondly, lets im…

People who care deeply about these issues work at Facebook and Google.

You also wrote

> They can do whatever they want to do, including organize, work to rule, walk out, or go on strike.

Observationally, they don't organize or go on strike. Maybe some "work to rule", get PIP'd and walked out. Maybe some actually walk out on their own.

In the long run, the "People who care deeply about these issues" get boiled off.

In fact, they probably are largely boiled off by now. Probable, because that's consistent with observable Google behavior.

I see no actual reason beyond "be nice to everybody" to assume a random Googler "cares deeply".

Re: Social Media Needs a Travel Mode

#212

Post by mustafabisic1 »

delegate wrote: post #204

Delete your 'social media' accounts. I'm talking Facebook, LinkedIn, G+ and so on. I did that and life goes on perfectly - I don't miss them a bit and I don't think anyone noticed. My wife and daughter are right here at home, I use Skype, Whatsapp or Slack to talk to my friends and colleagues. So there is nothing that's missing. Social networks are brainwashing farms (yes, advertising is a form of brainwashing) so st…

Agreed and plus we'll have a little bit safer environment ...

Re: Social Media Needs a Travel Mode

#213

Post by delegate »

gmac wrote: post #206
delegate wrote: post #204

Delete your 'social media' accounts. I'm talking Facebook, LinkedIn, G+ and so on. I did that and life goes on perfectly - I don't miss them a bit and I don't think anyone noticed. My wife and daughter are right here at home, I use Skype, Whatsapp or Slack to talk to my friends and colleagues. So there is nothing that's missing. Social networks are brainwashing farms (yes, advertising is a form of brainwashing) so st…

tough times are coming and these accounts will become a liability, even if you have 'nothing to hide' That looks like a major chilling effect[1], and it makes life that much easier for those instigating the toughness. It's not obvious to me, therefore, that opting out now is the right choice. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect

Respectfully, I disagree.

Social media is not the best nor the only place to share your opinions, political or not.

In fact this is the exact danger that these networks pose - people start thinking that it's the only place where we can express our right to free speech.

But this is not what social networks were designed for. They were designed to distribute advertising; all the rest of the features are just clever ways to disguise the real purpose of the SN. Even people who work at these companies are delusional about their company's real purpose.

The place to express our right to free speech is 'the Internet'.

Distributed, resilient, no central control.

Plenty of space for anyone to shout as loud as they like and 'share' it with their friends, without selling their soul.

Re: Social Media Needs a Travel Mode

#214

Post by AnAnonyCowherd »

delegate wrote: post #213
gmac wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

tough times are coming and these accounts will become a liability, even if you have 'nothing to hide' That looks like a major chilling effect[1], and it makes life that much easier for those instigating the toughness. It's not obvious to me, therefore, that opting out now is the right choice. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect

Respectfully, I disagree. Social media is not the best nor the only place to share your opinions, political or not. In fact this is the exact danger that these networks pose - people start thinking that it's the only place where we can express our right to free speech. But this is not what social networks were designed for. They were designed to distribute advertising; all the rest of the features are just clever way…

I know my personal views about sexuality and proclivity, expressed on my personal web site, cost me at least one possible job, and maybe a couple others as well, over the years. If my views on these issues were to be discovered on the internet, either on a personal site, or some social network, by someone in the HR department of the Fortune 150 I work for, I would probably be summarily dismissed. So, the "chilling effect" has already happened, and it's only working against one side of the ideological spectrum. Oh, sure, we still have "freedom of speech" in the US, but only if it's politically correct. Otherwise, you'll also be exercising your "freedom to be out of work."

Re: Social Media Needs a Travel Mode

#215

Post by NoGravitas »

Kluny wrote: post #176

Instead of that, I'd like a way to clone everything on my phone and save it on a USB. Every app, logins, contacts, photos, settings, factory updates, wallpaper, lock screen password, everything, in an encrypted archive that I can put on a USB in my checked baggage, or mail ahead to my destination, upload to my personal server, whatever. Then I'll just do a factory reset, install some cover apps, and go. Then reinstal…

On a rooted Android device, TitaniumBackup can be used this way (not factory updates, but those don't get wiped by factory reset anyway).

However, it doesn't solve your real problem, which is that you can be compelled to log into your social media accounts in the presence of the border control officers. You can do that from the browser on a wiped phone, or on their equipment.

Re: Social Media Needs a Travel Mode

#216

Post by manyxcxi »

AnAnonyCowherd wrote: post #214
delegate wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully, I disagree. Social media is not the best nor the only place to share your opinions, political or not. In fact this is the exact danger that these networks pose - people start thinking that it's the only place where we can express our right to free speech. But this is not what social networks were designed for. They were designed to distribute advertising; all the rest of the features are just clever way…

I know my personal views about sexuality and proclivity, expressed on my personal web site, cost me at least one possible job, and maybe a couple others as well, over the years. If my views on these issues were to be discovered on the internet, either on a personal site, or some social network, by someone in the HR department of the Fortune 150 I work for, I would probably be summarily dismissed. So, the "chilling ef…

It sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too. I believe our right to free speech is the most important thing we have. However, if someone reads a post they don't like why should they HAVE to hire you?

As an employer if I read something that genuinely offended me (I have no idea if that's even possible) I wouldn't hire them. I hire people I think are going to make the team better and that I think we would want to work with.

So, yeah, if that hot take you wrote on the internet was a tad incendiary, why is it bad that people passed on you?

I'd like to think that I'm evolved enough that I could disagree with someone's opinion and work just fine with them- but if what they said struck a chord, I can't say that I wouldn't pass on them.

At the end of the day your freedom keeps you out of jail and my freedom gives me the ability to say no thanks. What you say in the public square isn't consequence free.

Re: Social Media Needs a Travel Mode

#217

Post by AnAnonyCowherd »

manyxcxi wrote: post #216
AnAnonyCowherd wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know my personal views about sexuality and proclivity, expressed on my personal web site, cost me at least one possible job, and maybe a couple others as well, over the years. If my views on these issues were to be discovered on the internet, either on a personal site, or some social network, by someone in the HR department of the Fortune 150 I work for, I would probably be summarily dismissed. So, the "chilling ef…

It sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too. I believe our right to free speech is the most important thing we have. However, if someone reads a post they don't like why should they HAVE to hire you? As an employer if I read something that genuinely offended me (I have no idea if that's even possible) I wouldn't hire them. I hire people I think are going to make the team better and that I think we would…

I believe I specifically said that I understand my free speech has a cost. Now, I don't know if you'll get this, since my original comment seems hidden or shadowbanned from the main discussion now, which just goes to prove the point brilliantly.

What I had originally written on my personal web site was standard, old-fashioned Christian teaching about homosexuality, based on the Bible. Hate the sin; love the sinner. That sort of thing. (No, it wasn't incendiary calls to violence against people.)

If I'm not allowed to say what I want to say, by being fired by my employer and blackballed from further employment, or by being downvoted to oblivion or filtered or shadowbanned by Ycombinator or Facebook or Reddit, or having my account cancelled at the web host provider I use, what good are my Constitutional rights of freedom of speech and religion? You may find this situation wonderful because you hate what I have to say, but I think everyone should find the trend alarming.

Maybe you really are arguing that freedom of speech and religion only grants someone the right to not being jailed when all they have left is to stand, homeless, on the street corner with a sign, shouting at passerby -- and then they'll be jailed for not having a permit, or something -- but I would have thought that the Constitution meant the First Amendment for more protection than that.

And, furthermore, if it's only Christians that are being affected by these discriminations, then hasn't the government declared a side? All this talk on the left about how the US government is prejudiced against anything other than Christianity, and, yet, I have no doubt that my company would LOVE foreign nationals to preach their religion to people in the work place, when I would be fired for it, if overheard.

I'm saying the consequences are one-sided.

Re: Social Media Needs a Travel Mode

#218

Post by kefka »

fakeshoes wrote: post #179
kefka wrote: post #106

(Read on the screen) "$Company noticed an intrusion by the US Federal Agents, Border Guards, and have marked this as a compromised account. Please have your designated friend, if set, to authenticate your account." Its now out of the persons sphere to fix, even if coerced. And companies can defend this by fact of an Acceptable Use Agreement violation itself is breaking a federal law: CFAA. That, and it seems the only…

And if you're a permanent resident with a green card or any other type of visa, you won't be allowed in at all. All these solutions assuming you're a citizen aren't all that helpful to every other person.

That's the difference. You complied, and the company is road-blocking you.

Frankly, denying everyone at the border is probably a good thing due to the brain-drain it causes. We're not going to get saner laws without some serious economic impairments to punish these 'lawmakers' (really, religious zealots WRT to a very narrow system).

In all honesty, I'm looking at other countries that have saner laws, and less overall problems. I'm looking at the Nordic countries right now, along with Australia... But no country is free from really nasty influences of xenophobia, racism, and hatred.

Re: Social Media Needs a Travel Mode

#219

Post by jethro_tell »

username223 wrote: post #140
deong wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wiping your stuff does no good at all. As pointed out in the article, they know who is on the flight hours before you land. They'll know you have a Facebook profile. The difference between having a laptop already logged into Facebook and a wiped laptop with no data is quite literally the time it takes them to tell you to type in the password for them. Ignorance isn't an escape clause. Which is, I think, the same prob…

> The difference between having a laptop already logged into Facebook and a wiped laptop with no data is quite literally the time it takes them to tell you to type in the password for them. I have no idea what most of my passwords are. They're complex strings of ASCII stored in an encrypted file on my personal machine and a few backups. If I travel internationally, I can just leave my personal machine at home.

I don't think that gets you entry into the country though. There's not much difference between can't and won't. I suppose, that if you were a citizen, you could take that up with a judge, but if you're not, you don't even get the opportunity.

Re: Social Media Needs a Travel Mode

#220

Post by Kluny »

NoGravitas wrote: post #215
Kluny wrote: post #176

Instead of that, I'd like a way to clone everything on my phone and save it on a USB. Every app, logins, contacts, photos, settings, factory updates, wallpaper, lock screen password, everything, in an encrypted archive that I can put on a USB in my checked baggage, or mail ahead to my destination, upload to my personal server, whatever. Then I'll just do a factory reset, install some cover apps, and go. Then reinstal…

On a rooted Android device, TitaniumBackup can be used this way (not factory updates, but those don't get wiped by factory reset anyway). However, it doesn't solve your real problem, which is that you can be compelled to log into your social media accounts in the presence of the border control officers. You can do that from the browser on a wiped phone, or on their equipment.

Yeah, it's true. I guess it would be one part of a strategy. Mine also involves saying "pardon me?" a lot and telling them that I'm deaf. 98% of people in uniform don't have the patience to try to communicate with a deaf person, and just tell me to move along. Also, they probably won't believe that I don't have facebook or email, but I can avoid telling them about things like okcupid, instagram, and disqus logins at least long enough to delete those accounts if I do get searched. Like any security, it's more of a deterrence than an absolute block.
Post reply on HN