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

The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

linkedin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 98 posts

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#71

Post by javert »

sneak wrote: post #58
javert wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was finding some of your comments in this thread inspiring, but you are completlely wrong in this one. To change the USA politically, it's necessary to change it culturally . Attacking the roots means attacking the ideas , not the economy. Say the economy totally collapses, which seems to be the strategy you're advocating. Will the outcome you want come about? No; we will see more facism; the collapse will be blame…

> Say the economy totally collapses, which seems to be the strategy you're advocating. Will the outcome you want come about? No; we will see more facism; the collapse will be blamed on the country not being godly enough by the conservatives, and on capitalists being too greedy by the liberals, who will insist on running even farther from economic freedom (and prosperity). You say "we", as if in that scenario you'd st…

> I see no other practical method of getting the US government off the fiber backbones and out of the closets of carriers short of undermining the country's competitive advantage in the world economy, and even that will take dozens of years.

They're never going to stop doing that, unless we have a complete cultural upheaval. They'd get rid of all other government spending, and then try to tax at up to 100%, to continue domestic spying and other basic violations.

In other worlds, in a total collapse, the last sphere of "economic" activity still existing would be the bad stuff run by government thugs.

> can't be effectively reached en masse save via military-industrial-complex controlled mass media channels that dissenting opinions aren't given access to

If you think there's some kind of conspiracy to control the media, the burden of proof is on you. The incompetence and bizarreness you're observing is because our intellectual culture is just that bad.

I mean, intellegent people still learned about the "major" alternative candidates (e.g. from the Libertarians and Greens) in this election. Things are still way better than in the time of pamphlets and horses and stuff.

But yes, I'm with you that it's possibly too late for the US, and I'm open to leaving in the future, even though I actually love it here and wouldn't prefer to live anywhere else.

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#72

Post by coldpie »

sneak wrote: post #47
amirmc wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "There is indeed something you can do about it. You can go live in a country where there is no TSA" In other words, give up? I find it ludicrous (and terrifying) when statements like this are made. This isn't some web-app whose terms of service you don't like, it's a nation state . People throughout history took to the streets to win freedom/voting right/etc. If no-one's left fighting back then expect to get trampl…

> This isn't some web-app whose terms of service you don't like, it's a nation state. People throughout history took to the streets to win freedom/voting right/etc. Historically, it was much harder and more expensive to move your entire life to another country (and maintain your social and economic ties). People were vastly better off staying put. Today, that's simply not the case. I moved across an ocean to avoid pa…

Where did you move to?

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#73

Post by mikeash »

killermonkeys wrote: post #12
colbyaley wrote: post #5

After an event I was at was targeted to be blown up, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Portland_car_bomb_plot ) I have changed my views on anti-terrorist teams at events and mass-gatherings. I do find it silly, however, that these teams are supposedly a devision of the "Transit Security Administration".

Without belittling the realization of ones own mortality which is a very healthy thing, the question here isn't whether a police state "makes us safer" (it probably does) but what level of trade off between civil liberties and privacy we are willing to make to be safer. Since being safer is infinitely possible and impossible to measure, we should start and end the conversation with civil liberty, not with safety. Do…

Police states are notoriously unsafe. While they may keep you safe from independent criminals, your risk of being victimized by the government itself goes way up.

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#74

Post by skrebbel »

sneak wrote: post #47
amirmc wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "There is indeed something you can do about it. You can go live in a country where there is no TSA" In other words, give up? I find it ludicrous (and terrifying) when statements like this are made. This isn't some web-app whose terms of service you don't like, it's a nation state . People throughout history took to the streets to win freedom/voting right/etc. If no-one's left fighting back then expect to get trampl…

> This isn't some web-app whose terms of service you don't like, it's a nation state. People throughout history took to the streets to win freedom/voting right/etc. Historically, it was much harder and more expensive to move your entire life to another country (and maintain your social and economic ties). People were vastly better off staying put. Today, that's simply not the case. I moved across an ocean to avoid pa…

The problem is that after a while you'll notice that every country's government is partly corrupt and every country has ridiculous laws that, at some point, are going to affect you.

It might be less bad in Luxembourg than it is in the US, but it is a common trend that if a small group of countries move their laws and regulations in a particular direction, other countries with a comparable culture and standard of living are prone to follow sooner or later.

You can keep fleeing to the next non-sucky country, but in theory, you're going to run out of countries at some point. Maybe not in your lifetime, so your solution is practical, but if it becomes widely adopted, I think we're going to get a problem.

Afaik, there's no indication that countries whose people leave en masse change their laws, regulations and institutions to try and fix it. Thus, I doubt that "voting with your feet" like you can do in a market economy works with countries. Try and find a Macedonian with a university degree in Macedonia, for example.

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#75

Post by smokinjoe »

gasull wrote: post #25
jmspring wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A public that is passive and follows "the rules" enables this, unfortunately.

In 2011 and 2012 we had Occupy Wall Street and Anonymous. Probably the broadest protest movement online and offline in a long time, if not ever. And the politicians won. Wall Street won. The TSA won. They all have more power than 2 years ago. If the broadest peaceful protest couldn't make it, what possibly can?

None of the movements had any leadership or organized goals whatsoever. In a world where so many have so much access, those that took part in the protests were essentially cut off from many people who wanted to learn more about them.

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#76

Post by vijayr »

sneak wrote: post #30
city41 wrote: post #10

The broad and vague ruling that enables the TSA to do anything they want in airports[0] can (and will) be applied to just about any public event. It's probably just a matter of a few years or so before the TSA is searching us at virtually all public gatherings. And there isn't a damn thing we can do about it. [0] http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2010/11/20/how-...

The headline should read "everywhere _in the US_". Your comment should read "all public gatherings _in the US_". There is indeed something you can do about it. You can go live in a country where there is no TSA. (This has the added benefit of your productive energies no longer helping fund the TSA, as well, for incomes below about $92,000.) A dozen countries have a similar standard of living as the US, and many of th…

You can go live in a country where there is no TSA.

This is possible/easy only if:

1. You have enough knowledge, skill sets to get a job in the "dozen countries"

2. Or, have enough money to start a business

3. Don't have family commitments, kids etc

4. The U.S is still the best place to be, if you are in tech and few other sectors

Also, it amounts to giving up. What if you relocate to a new country, and the same thing happens there too? There is no guarantee that it wouldn't happen.

That said, could you please list the dozen countries you mentioned? Just curious to know.

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#77

Post by white_devil »

skrebbel wrote: post #74
sneak wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This isn't some web-app whose terms of service you don't like, it's a nation state. People throughout history took to the streets to win freedom/voting right/etc. Historically, it was much harder and more expensive to move your entire life to another country (and maintain your social and economic ties). People were vastly better off staying put. Today, that's simply not the case. I moved across an ocean to avoid pa…

The problem is that after a while you'll notice that every country's government is partly corrupt and every country has ridiculous laws that, at some point, are going to affect you. It might be less bad in Luxembourg than it is in the US, but it is a common trend that if a small group of countries move their laws and regulations in a particular direction, other countries with a comparable culture and standard of livi…

> You can keep fleeing to the next non-sucky country, but in theory, you're going to run out of countries at some point. Maybe not in your lifetime, so your solution is practical, but if it becomes widely adopted, I think we're going to get a problem.

Eventually, some countries are likely to decide they want to suck less, or get changed by revolutions etc, and then you can switch to one of those.

It's complicated, of course. The smaller the ruling elite, the less prosperous the whole country will be, but the ruling elite itself is just fine with that.

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#78

Post by thecoffman »

sneak wrote: post #30
city41 wrote: post #10

The broad and vague ruling that enables the TSA to do anything they want in airports[0] can (and will) be applied to just about any public event. It's probably just a matter of a few years or so before the TSA is searching us at virtually all public gatherings. And there isn't a damn thing we can do about it. [0] http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2010/11/20/how-...

The headline should read "everywhere _in the US_". Your comment should read "all public gatherings _in the US_". There is indeed something you can do about it. You can go live in a country where there is no TSA. (This has the added benefit of your productive energies no longer helping fund the TSA, as well, for incomes below about $92,000.) A dozen countries have a similar standard of living as the US, and many of th…

While I agree with your similar standard of living statement, I'm not sure that I could name a country that is "substantially more free" with a comparable standard of living. We may have differing definitions of free, but things like relatively unrestricted free speech, minmal taxation, gun rights, etc are all very important and many countries just don't have them in the same degree as we do here.

They may have similar, or in many cases higher, standards of living, but I don't think you can make the argument that they're "more free." Not that America is really all that free anymore either....

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#79

Post by polyfractal »

sneak wrote: post #45
smutticus wrote: post #38

How many people here are willing to get arrested? Because that's what it's going to take to reverse this trend. We need hundreds/thousands of non-violent protesters politely and professionally refusing these intrusions and getting arrested for it. Until that happens these intrusions will continue.

None, as the ionizing radiation and sexual assault at airports has clearly and unambiguously illustrated. Your notion of vast public dissent is a fantasy.

I'm not condoning the TSA in any way (I also think it is a deplorable organization), but as a biologist I feel compelled to state that you receive vastly more ionizing radiation looking out the window of your plane than you do in the one of the TSA scanners.

Again, not condoning the invasion of privacy for security theater, but the "threat" of ionizing radiation is almost always over-stated.

Re: The TSA wants to be everywhere in 2013 - here's why we shouldn't let it

#80

Post by gasull »

skrebbel wrote: post #74
sneak wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This isn't some web-app whose terms of service you don't like, it's a nation state. People throughout history took to the streets to win freedom/voting right/etc. Historically, it was much harder and more expensive to move your entire life to another country (and maintain your social and economic ties). People were vastly better off staying put. Today, that's simply not the case. I moved across an ocean to avoid pa…

The problem is that after a while you'll notice that every country's government is partly corrupt and every country has ridiculous laws that, at some point, are going to affect you. It might be less bad in Luxembourg than it is in the US, but it is a common trend that if a small group of countries move their laws and regulations in a particular direction, other countries with a comparable culture and standard of livi…

> is a common trend that if a small group of countries move their laws and regulations in a particular direction, other countries with a comparable culture and standard of living are prone to follow sooner or later.

You can move to a country with a different culture, or at least different enough. Some of them are in the East, like Hong Kong and Singapore, but there are some in the West too, like Iceland. According to Transparency International they are less corrupt than the US.

Post reply on HN