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

331–335 of 335 posts

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#331

Post by bborud »

y0ghur7_xxx wrote: post #40

This may be unpopular on an US-centric site like HN, but the US looks more and more like they want to isolate themselves from the rest of the world: very strict immigration policy, travelers molested by TSA on airports, ... These conferences where people around the world meet should start to be hosted somewhere else. Not in the USA anymore. Somewhere in a country that welcomes people instead of treating all of them l…

I can confirm this is actually happening. I occasionally attend somewhat narrow mini-conferences that used to be held in California, NYC etc. Just in the last 6 months none of those will be held in the US anymore since almost nobody from outside the US wants to travel to the US. And these people come from countries that are not on any list of dodgy countries.

I would assume that for larger conferences the tendency won't be as strong, but it'll definitively be noticable.

I also see this when doing business; when interacting with companies where face to face interaction is needed there is a tendency to avoid business that requires travel to the US. Either they come here or we find partners outside the US. I know of several concrete business deals that have been made with non-US companies for precisely this reason.

It is tempting to think that this might end when the current administration ends, but it may not. The reason is that the last 6 months have demonstrated how volatile the policies can be in the US and how easily and quickly things can change for the worse. This affects long term planning. You don't want to make long term commitments when you have no faith in there being a moderating force to smooth out the more extreme forces acting on policy.

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#332

Post by hueving »

tptacek wrote: post #327
hueving wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>almost mathematically determined to be more racist than the Democratic party, which is a coalition of labor, minorities, and liberal whites The assumption you build this on is that those groups are not more racist than the groups in the Republican party. The only way you could even make that kind of jump is if you subscribe to the definition of racism where you can't be racist if you are systematically oppressed in…

I'm making a pretty simple demographic point and not really interested in hacking my way through this briar patch of value judgements and careful parsing. Substitute whatever term you like --- maybe "anti-black anti-Latino racism" --- for the simple one I used.

Ok. That's still not backed up by sound reasoning though. Just because one party has more white people does not correlate with anti-Latino racism. Why would you think that's the case?

Living in the bay area, I've encountered more anti-black racism from Chinese people than any white people. Should I take that to presume whichever party has more asians is automatically racist against black people?

Just because a party has more people of a specific skin color than another says nothing about racist behavior. Anything else would imply that the Bernie Sanders crowd is the most racist group of them all (skews very heavily white).

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#333

Post by tptacek »

hueving wrote: post #332
tptacek wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm making a pretty simple demographic point and not really interested in hacking my way through this briar patch of value judgements and careful parsing. Substitute whatever term you like --- maybe "anti-black anti-Latino racism" --- for the simple one I used.

Ok. That's still not backed up by sound reasoning though. Just because one party has more white people does not correlate with anti-Latino racism. Why would you think that's the case? Living in the bay area, I've encountered more anti-black racism from Chinese people than any white people. Should I take that to presume whichever party has more asians is automatically racist against black people? Just because a party…

This is pretty silly. Less than 30% of Latinos and less than 5% of African Americans are Republicans. The balance are Democrats. The Democratic party simply can't be institutionally bigoted against those groups and survive as a party; those groups are core parts of the Democratic coalition; the Democrats in a real way simply are the Latino and African American vote.

That's all I'm saying. I am not psychoanalyzing Republicans in general. Most Republicans probably aren't racist. That's not my point.

I'm really not interested in what you think Chinese Americans think, sorry.

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#334

Post by hueving »

tptacek wrote: post #333
hueving wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok. That's still not backed up by sound reasoning though. Just because one party has more white people does not correlate with anti-Latino racism. Why would you think that's the case? Living in the bay area, I've encountered more anti-black racism from Chinese people than any white people. Should I take that to presume whichever party has more asians is automatically racist against black people? Just because a party…

This is pretty silly. Less than 30% of Latinos and less than 5% of African Americans are Republicans. The balance are Democrats. The Democratic party simply can't be institutionally bigoted against those groups and survive as a party; those groups are core parts of the Democratic coalition; the Democrats in a real way simply are the Latino and African American vote. That's all I'm saying. I am not psychoanalyzing Rep…

>The Democratic party simply can't be institutionally bigoted against those groups and survive as a party; those groups are core parts of the Democratic coalition; the Democrats in a real way simply are the Latino and African American vote.

Of course it can be bigoted. Those minorities do not make up a majority of the party and as long as they feel the goals of the party overall help them more than Republicans they will put up with whatever racist crap that comes from Democrats (e.g. "tell em you're a Muslim" Pelosi).

It's all about tradeoffs, a party that offers racist policies in your favor and/or the refusal to enforce laws that affect many of your people is better than a party with no favors offered, even if the former is filled with bigoted morons.

>I'm really not interested in what you think Chinese Americans think

And I never offered you what I thought they think, so go attack some other strawman to attempt to gain some moral high ground.

Re: Author of cURL denied entry to the USA

#335

Post by throw2016 »

GuB-42 wrote: post #90
ajeet_dhaliwal wrote: post #32

The no explanation is the worst part for anything like this. Impossible to determine what to do or what reason they had, just denied. It's not just the government either, look at how some tech companies have a policy of providing no explanation for interview rejections too. It's a lack of respect for anyone but oneself.

There are some privacy and national security reasons for this too. The reason for this refusal may come from very personal reasons. Maybe an intelligence agency discovered that he had sex with the wrong person or something like that. It is not a bad thing if the border control guy doesn't know. The national security reasons may be if he is tied to some suspicious activity. He may not be part of it but the risks are c…

The word Kafkaesque comes to mind. I get the feeling Franz Kafka would have a problem with you.
Post reply on HN