31–40 of 226 posts
Scary stuff. I don't have social media, but from time to time I would create and delete Facebook/Twitter/Instagram accounts. Never posted anything. Just used them for auth/developer/Marketplace...etc. But I don't know all the logins I used in the past... So if I fail to provide a login to an empty profile, do I get permabanned from the US?
> Omitting social media information could lead to “visa denial and ineligibility” for future visas, the embassy added. The state capture by big tech is getting insane. No national ID because privacy and government overreach but sure force everyone to register an account with a private entity that specifically profits by selling your personal information. I am curious if they'll reject me for not having any active mai…
Basically letting people creating astro surfing accounts that only benefit the social media platforms and politics again.
I remember that there was such a text box even on ESTA applications several years ago, but it was optional. This article uses the word "required" but it doesn't give a direct quote saying that it truly is mandatory, it reads a bit waffly.
It seems to me one of the methods of control in oppressive States is to have a multitude of rules, which are impractical to actually adhere to, where failure to adhere provides leverage to State - a "justification" for State to then do whatever it is it decides to do with you (such as deportation without due process).
Play the devil's advocate with me for a bit. Say you let someone in who suicide bombs himself and takes out several Americans. Then a reporter asks the DHS spokesperson how they let someone in the country that had "Death to America" posts all over their social media out in the open for everyone to see but they didn't. Nobody would forgive the government for such a grave oversight. At the airport you already let them…
To me, this seems like a grave transgression of privacy with little to no actual safety benefits.
It seems to me one of the methods of control in oppressive States is to have a multitude of rules, which are impractical to actually adhere to, where failure to adhere provides leverage to State - a "justification" for State to then do whatever it is it decides to do with you (such as deportation without due process).
Play the devil's advocate with me for a bit. Say you let someone in who suicide bombs himself and takes out several Americans. Then a reporter asks the DHS spokesperson how they let someone in the country that had "Death to America" posts all over their social media out in the open for everyone to see but they didn't. Nobody would forgive the government for such a grave oversight. At the airport you already let them…
So this only provides the government means to oppress and intimidate regular people while having no effect on crime and terror.
I think what the US wants is for nobody to visit them any more. For nobody to do trade with them any more. Basically Shogunate Japan?
I think part of the point is to put the squeeze on companies that have been abusing the H1B program in spirit if not by the letter by making it hard for their talent to enter the country easily and giving the executive fairly unilateral right of denial. Though I think this is an ancillary motive.
I think what the US wants is for nobody to visit them any more. For nobody to do trade with them any more. Basically Shogunate Japan?
I think part of the point is to put the squeeze on companies that have been abusing the H1B program in spirit if not by the letter by making it hard for their talent to enter the country easily and giving the executive fairly unilateral right of denial. Though I think this is an ancillary motive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Play the devil's advocate with me for a bit. Say you let someone in who suicide bombs himself and takes out several Americans. Then a reporter asks the DHS spokesperson how they let someone in the country that had "Death to America" posts all over their social media out in the open for everyone to see but they didn't. Nobody would forgive the government for such a grave oversight. At the airport you already let them…
"takes out several Americans" is a Tuesday in the US right now [1]. The main people attacking Americans on American soil are...other Americans. The US has decided to do almost nothing to address the issue. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_...
Haven't these guys heard of the "reciprocity principle"? When I went to Brazil a few years ago, the basic price for a tourist visa was like $25 and could be done online. But, if you were a US citizen, it cost $150 and you had to schedule an attend an interview in person -- because , those were the costs and burdens placed on Brazilian citizens to apply for a US visa. Does the US want other countries inspecting our ci…
It seems to me one of the methods of control in oppressive States is to have a multitude of rules, which are impractical to actually adhere to, where failure to adhere provides leverage to State - a "justification" for State to then do whatever it is it decides to do with you (such as deportation without due process).
Play the devil's advocate with me for a bit. Say you let someone in who suicide bombs himself and takes out several Americans. Then a reporter asks the DHS spokesperson how they let someone in the country that had "Death to America" posts all over their social media out in the open for everyone to see but they didn't. Nobody would forgive the government for such a grave oversight. At the airport you already let them…
Since the leading sentence with the devil's advocate, it's hard to presume the post is mostly sarcastic. If not - the inability to see the difference is rather staggering.