101–110 of 110 posts
The best way is not to travel with anything that is not needed. Use cloud services and a disposable OS. The best way to play their (CBP) game is not to play. Don’t have anything available for them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any way to quickly wipe and restore a full macOS? or other OS for that matter? As someone who travels, well, all the time, it seems a massive amount of overhead at the moment. If everything is in the cloud, that means I have to be sure to have fast, reliable internet at my destination (which is definitely not always the case). And any way I can think of to securely travel with a copy of my data is just the s…
Chrome is the only OS that makes this ridiculously easy, I think..
this is like suggesting a kids toy in the shape of a power tool is easier to repair than a proper power tool. while true, you can't do the same tasks with the kids toy.
Section 5.1 (page 4) describes new rules for US CBP searches: “Officers may not intentionally use the device to access information that is solely stored remotely. Officers will either request that the traveler disable connnectivity to any remote network…”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have an old Motorola "dumb" phone, but what I want to know is if I am asked "Do you have a Gmail/Facebook etc..account" I am required to tell the truth, am I also obligated to provide the password to access it regardless of whether or not I am carrying a device to access it?
I don't know if you must answer the question or provide a password, but I do know that lying to a federal agent is a crime that can land you in jail for up to 5 years.
If I cross into the US with nothing digital at all (no phone, camera, laptop, etc.) do I have to provide logins and passwords to all my online accounts?
That would be very scary if indeed true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would I google a very idiosyncratic phrase that next to nobody except you is using?
To understand what they're talking about?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Which case are you referring to? Martinez-Fuerte. > Also, I can't tell if you're nitpicking my summary or if you actually do believe there's a 100-mile-wide Constitution-free zone hugging the US border. “100-mile Constitution-free zone” is a simplification that, like any simplification, is somewhat inaccurate; there is a broad (unclear as to it's maximum limits, the 100 miles is current executive policy) in which t…
You should re-read it, because it explicitly rebuts the argument you're making. It holds specifically that Almeida-Sanchez stands, and that: In Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, supra, the question was whether a roving patrol unit constitutionally could search a vehicle for illegal aliens simply because it was in the general vicinity of the border. We recognized that important law enforcement interests were at stake,…
Section 5.3 pertains to requesting passcodes, and that an Officer may ask you for the passcode (I don't see anything about individuals being obligated -- though see 5.3.4, which could be interpreted by "legal remedies"). However, section 5.3.3 says: > If an officer is unable to complete an inspection of an electronic device because it is protected by a passcode or encryption, the Officer may, in accordance with secti…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're doing it, do you think it's ethical? If so, why? (I actually don't care, but your response was ridiculous and I noticed you avoided answering.)
Would you please stop posting uncivil and/or unsubstantive comments to HN? You've done this a fair bit, and it violates the spirit of this site, as described at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html . Your comment would be fine with just the first sentence.
I started to write a whole long thing defending my previous posts but I stopped myself. I did add up all the points from my most recent 10 comments, the total is 17. I'm having a bad run at average 1.7 points. So, yes, you're absolutely right, and I'll try to do better.
(There was one exception to my policy that happened recently, where I snarked at some person who was complaining about how hard it is for white men to speak their truth in silicon valley, from an account with a racial pejorative for username. My comment got flagged. Rightly so.)
I consider myself a hacker, I hope I'm a net benefit to the community, and I'd really like to see HN stay high quality. I did reread both the guidelines and the welcome page you linked and I am "on-board".
But, ...
Just kidding, no "but".
Sorry for the noise dude, I'll try to do better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you please stop posting uncivil and/or unsubstantive comments to HN? You've done this a fair bit, and it violates the spirit of this site, as described at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html . Your comment would be fine with just the first sentence.
Dang, I respect you and the work you do here, and I really value the HN site. I never set out to post uncivil and/or unsubstantive comments, and when I do I usually delete them or at least add an edit or reply to soften them. And if somebody calls me out on something I check myself, and apologise if I think I messed up. I started to write a whole long thing defending my previous posts but I stopped myself. I did add…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dang, I respect you and the work you do here, and I really value the HN site. I never set out to post uncivil and/or unsubstantive comments, and when I do I usually delete them or at least add an edit or reply to soften them. And if somebody calls me out on something I check myself, and apologise if I think I messed up. I started to write a whole long thing defending my previous posts but I stopped myself. I did add…
Thanks! I really appreciate this.