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

Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 335 posts

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#261

Post by germanier »

ubernostrum wrote: post #256
germanier wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like something Gogolian bureaucrats would say. "The purpose of filling out form A38 is to have form A38 filled out." Modern bureaucracy usually doesn't introduce requirements for the heck of it. Checking citizenship worked fine before the introduction of ESTA so "checking citizenship" was not the reason the system was introduced or is still in place. It does that as well but that is not the point of ESTA.…

The fact that the visa waiver program existed earlier has absolutely no relevance. Was there a way to check requirements prior to ESTA being created? Yes. But now , ESTA is the way requirements are checked for the visa waiver program. That is the purpose for which ESTA exists and for which it was created. That is ESTA's job. That is what ESTA does. ESTA is not some separate data-gathering or visa-issuing system; its…

Usually if things are replaced for another there is a reason. If you arguments are not your thing, I can only appeal to authority, namely the people that created the system in the first place:

    The Conference agrees on the need for significant 
    security enhancements to the entire Visa Waiver Program as set 
    forth in the Senate bill and to the implementation of the 
    electronic travel authorization system prior to permitting the 
    Secretary to admit new countries under his new waiver 
    authority. The Conference mandates that the Secretary develop 
    such an electronic travel authorization system to collect 
    biographical and such other information from each prospective 
    Visa Waiver Program traveler necessary to determine whether the 
    alien is eligible to travel under the program and whether a law 
    enforcement or security risk exists in permitting the alien to 
    travel to the United States. The Conference believes the 
    Secretary should check the information collected in the 
    electronic travel authorization system against all appropriate 
    databases, including lost and stolen passport databases such as 
    that maintained by Interpol. The Conference believes that 
    checking travelers from Visa Waiver Program countries against 
    all appropriate watch lists and databases will greatly enhance 
    the overall security of the Visa Waiver Program.
https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/110th-congress...

As you see, the main stated purpose is not the check citizenship but to query various databases in advance.

(For completeness I want to add that nowadays "You haven't travelled to some countries" is another requirement to use the VWP. The ESTA application also asks for things visa applications do not, such as the names of your social media accounts.)

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#262

Post by ubernostrum »

germanier wrote: post #261
ubernostrum wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that the visa waiver program existed earlier has absolutely no relevance. Was there a way to check requirements prior to ESTA being created? Yes. But now , ESTA is the way requirements are checked for the visa waiver program. That is the purpose for which ESTA exists and for which it was created. That is ESTA's job. That is what ESTA does. ESTA is not some separate data-gathering or visa-issuing system; its…

Usually if things are replaced for another there is a reason. If you arguments are not your thing, I can only appeal to authority, namely the people that created the system in the first place: The Conference agrees on the need for significant security enhancements to the entire Visa Waiver Program as set forth in the Senate bill and to the implementation of the electronic travel authorization system prior to permitti…

You are interpreting my statement as "there are literally no other questions on the ESTA form other than citizenship and that's the only thing it looks at". That is not what I said, and you need to stop assuming that's what I said.

ESTA exists to check eligibility for the visa waiver program. The primary criterion of the visa waiver program is... your citizenship. Everything else is secondary. All that stuff in your big quote? It's stuff that the US wants to check on everybody. The fact that ESTA checks it does not mean that ESTA is suddenly not a gatekeeper for the visa waiver program, or that ESTA is doing special extra checks above and beyond anything else, or that ESTA is somehow secretly doing something other than visa-waiver eligibility. The fact that ESTA checks it simply means that everybody, including people eligible for visa waiver, will get checked on those things. The difference between visa waiver and non-visa-waiver is not whether those checks are done; it's what country you're a citizen of. ESTA checks those other things because they have to be checked no matter what, and doing them in the same form makes things more efficient. Period.

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#263

Post by thomastjeffery »

oAlbe wrote: post #201
humanrebar wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Half didn't vote for Trump. Look again at the turnout rates. Also keep in mind that most "Trump voters" voted against Clinton more than they voted for Trump. I think that is kind of silly but that's the thought process of the Trump voters I talk to. I can't comment about your personal experiences in small town America other than to say that my experience is very different and that referring to areas epithetically (1)…

> [...] most "Trump voters" voted against Clinton more than they voted for Trump. That is not a valid argument by any possible mean. Everybody has the right to vote whatever they want of course, but saying what you said is like saying "people eat meat to piss off vegans more than because they like it". And regardless, the driving motive of something doesn't change the end result of such something. People need to take…

> That is not a valid argument by any possible mean.

Now try convincing someone. That is what I tried to do throughout the entire election, but the propaganda machine is treated as fact by many here.

These people get hung up on the idea that we can never leave the two party system, meaning no third party candidate will ever get elected.

Here in Utah, we did manage to give McMullin 20% of the vote, but that was still marginally less than Hillary (after salt lake county) or Trump.

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#264

Post by gergles »

baby wrote: post #228
Capt-RogerOver wrote: post #28

He seems to have tried to enter USA using ESTA. ESTA is not a visa, it's a visa-waiver program. It's specifically created as an easier method of entering a country, but as a trade-off, it says in the terms that they can deny it for any reason with no questions. This does not mean that the person cannot enter the country per se, it just means they need to apply for a real visa.

I do not get your point. The ESTA is the only way to get to the country if you're going to a conference or on holidays or to visit someone. If you're looking for better, you need to find a job to sponsor you and you need to go through the lottery (H1B). Or you need to work for a US company abroad for more than a year (L1). Or you need to get married with an american person.

You can absolutely get a B-1 or B-2 visa. Only VWP-eligible country citizens are even eligible to get an ESTA in the first place.

https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/visit/visitor.html

You fill out a DS-160 and go through the process, but you don't have to get an ESTA. You are always allowed to apply for a full visa instead.

More succinctly, click the "May I apply for a visa instead of using the VWP?" question on this page: https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/visit/visa-waiver-...

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#265

Post by thomastjeffery »

kogepathic wrote: post #210
humanrebar wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Half didn't vote for Trump. Look again at the turnout rates. Also keep in mind that most "Trump voters" voted against Clinton more than they voted for Trump. I think that is kind of silly but that's the thought process of the Trump voters I talk to. I can't comment about your personal experiences in small town America other than to say that my experience is very different and that referring to areas epithetically (1)…

> Half didn't vote for Trump. Look again at the turnout rates. You cannot claim that people who didn't vote don't support Trump (or vice versa, don't support Hillary). There simply isn't any data to support this. > Also keep in mind that most "Trump voters" voted against Clinton more than they voted for Trump. Citation needed.

> Citation needed.

I assume, like me, OP was there. We tried to talk sense into voters, but this was the biggest concern for most of them. Here in the US, we have been stuck in a two party system for decades simply because of this (flawed) logic.

Most Americans won't change their behavior to effect a greater change unless they are sure that greater change will be happen because of their relatively insignificant effort. This is why we struggle so much with climate change, the two party system, monopolies, etc.

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#266

Post by thomastjeffery »

b6 wrote: post #113
nickserv wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Almost all Americans think this sort of thing is nonsense. But the average American has little standing to hold the American bureaucracy accountable for its nonsense. Sorry but they don't get off that easy when almost half of them voted Trump into office. > Americans, especially outside overcrowded urban areas, are courteous, helpful, hospitable people that are very tolerant of other people and ideas. I've found qu…

> Sorry but they don't get off that easy when almost half of them voted Trump into office. Not to rehash the past, but I thought we had gotten it clear by now: voting for the guy does not indicate support. Americans vote for the candidate they fear and despise the least.

> Americans vote for the [Republican or Democratic] candidate they fear and despise the least.

That's exactly the flawed logic that is keeping us in this two party system. If we just vote for the candidate we support, neither Trump not Hillary would stand a chance.

The trouble with convincing people to actually do that is that most Americans feel the need to be on the winning side. "My vote is worthless unless it's for someone who can actually win."

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#267

Post by Piskvorrr »

cjrp wrote: post #194
Piskvorrr wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you get there? USA requires visa even for transfers, and most flights to the Bahamas originate or stop over in the USA, bringing the issue back to square 1.

There are flights via Toronto, for example

Yup, that solves some of the issue to an extent. But again, Europe-Canada is often served by a transfer or stop in the USA, hitting the same UX-funnel. Also, it's a longer (and likely more expensive) trip.

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#269

Post by tptacek »

humanrebar wrote: post #260
splawn wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GOP continues to be impregnated with racism thanks to the southern strategy.[0] If you don't think out in the open racist culture is alive, well and considered normal in the rural south, you are fooling yourself. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

I think there are overt racists, but they are in a minority and certainly not exclusive to any political party. Though this is a hard conversation to have meaningfully since different people mean different things by racism. The context here is a Northern European visiting the U.S. I think it would be a bit of a stretch to say they'll have a hard time in the rural south. I'd say (accented) rural Southerners would have…

Accented rural southerners would have no trouble whatsoever in NYC. This is one of those analogies that sounds like it should be true, but has no basis in fact.

It's also a super weird comparison. Southern intolerance is subtextually about animus towards African Americans and Latinos. Nobody is arguing that a Scandinavian would have any trouble in Mobile.

Further: Mobile is a weird choice for a comparison as well, since it's comparatively urban and well-educated. Mobile is more diverse than many parts of Chicago. When we talk about Southern racism, we're generally not talking about the urban south.

Finally, and I want to make this point gingerly, but if we want to drag US political parties into this discussion, the Republican party is almost mathematically determined to be more racist than the Democratic party, which is a coalition of labor, minorities, and liberal whites. It's also just empirically true that the Republican party harbors more overt racists, but we don't have to dive into a lot of value judgements about conservatism and nationalism to conclude that; we can just observe that the Democrats have African American and Latino voters as one of the foundations of their constituency.

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#270

Post by DamonHD »

ry_ry wrote: post #216
open-source-ux wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BBC News The Guardian And much as I hate to say it: The Mail online

But what viewpoint is the Mail representing? The Daily Mail seems almost entirely Daily Mail centric, reflecting nothing more than it's own bubble of reactionary bile and oxymoronic smug self-loathing.

That's really too kind to it. "Don't lets facts get in the way of whipping up hatred and getting a few more clicks" may be its motto...
Post reply on HN