Live data from Hacker News

DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

wired.com

121–130 of 139 posts

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#121
post #86
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An article like what? I voted or and contibuted to Obama because I felt he would fight for public schools and against nationwide voucher programs, and because he supported meaningful health care reform. I had absolutely zero expectation that Obama would waste political capital revamping CBP. The TSA is a far bigger problem for ordinary Americans than CBP is, and a more constitutionally offensive one. I think we can a…

Sometimes, when faced with a terrible set of game theory circumstances, the only winning move is not to play.

It's better to vote for a third party that's somewhere toward your side of the political spectrum.

If you don't vote, that's just a smaller pool that each side will get approximately half of, and you've voted for a candidate that can't win: nobody. You haven't affected anything (not that you are required to affect anything).

If you vote for a third party, that's still someone that probably can't win, but you've moved the needle a bit away from the other two.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#122
post #86
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An article like what? I voted or and contibuted to Obama because I felt he would fight for public schools and against nationwide voucher programs, and because he supported meaningful health care reform. I had absolutely zero expectation that Obama would waste political capital revamping CBP. The TSA is a far bigger problem for ordinary Americans than CBP is, and a more constitutionally offensive one. I think we can a…

Sometimes, when faced with a terrible set of game theory circumstances, the only winning move is not to play.

It's better to vote for a third party that's somewhere toward your side of the political spectrum.

If you don't vote, that's just a smaller pool that each side will get approximately half of, and you've voted for a candidate that can't win: nobody. You haven't affected anything (not that you are required to affect anything).

If you vote for a third party, that's still someone that probably can't win, but you've moved the needle a bit away from the other two.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#123
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here "the border" is a 100 mile wide buffer zone near the border. This is just ridiculous.

Again: that is something crazy the DHS said, and it's something SCOTUS has refuted. The idea of a 100 mile border search zone is obviously absurd.

Reference, please? If this has been challenged in court, I'd love to see some evidence so I can stop worrying about it.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#124
post #123
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again: that is something crazy the DHS said, and it's something SCOTUS has refuted. The idea of a 100 mile border search zone is obviously absurd.

Reference, please? If this has been challenged in court, I'd love to see some evidence so I can stop worrying about it.

Ameida-Sanchez v. US

    But the search of the petitioner's automobile by a roving patrol, on a
    California road that lies at all points at least 20 miles north of the
    Mexican border,[5] was of a wholly different sort. In the absence of
    probable cause or consent, that search violated the petitioner's
    Fourth Amendment right to be free of "unreasonable searches and
    seizures."

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have to wonder what happens when those Obama supporters with left-wing sentiments read an article like this. Most liberals I know just shrug. It's why the far left has so much contempt for liberals in general. Every time I criticize Obama, I have to go out of my way to qualify that I'm _not_ a Republican, either.

Strangely, I feel the same way about the far left. Just because they hold an extreme position doesn't make their opinions any more valid; frankly I find far-left and far-right thinkers to be alarmingly similar, and am appalled by by their inflexible and unreasoning ideological approaches.

I can certainly see how you'd think that, and in the interest of keeping this civil, will just let it be.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#126
post #68
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, Obama just signed the NDAA allowing indefinite detention of US citizens without a trial, and then said "Don't worry, I won't use it" Right, he said he won't use it, so lets not worry! Good thing the courts have currently put the brakes on it! I voted for Ron Paul last election (primary) and Gary Johnson in the final election, not because I agree with his (Ron Paul's) religious sentiments, or even his economic i…

That's an extreme oversimplification of what the 2012 NDAA said. In fact, the 2012 NDAA limited executive authority over US detainees; it did not expand it.

I'm sorry, but you're wrong. If you were right, this lawsuit wouldn't have been filed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_...

>A lawsuit was filed January 13, 2012 against the Obama Administration and Members of the U.S. Congress by a group including former New York Times reporter Christopher Hedges challenging the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012[62] The plaintiffs contend that Section 1021(b)(2) of the law allows for __detention of citizens and permanent residents taken into custody in the U.S.__ on “suspicion of providing substantial support to groups engaged in hostilities against the U.S. such as al-Qaeda and the Taliban.[62]

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#127
post #126
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an extreme oversimplification of what the 2012 NDAA said. In fact, the 2012 NDAA limited executive authority over US detainees; it did not expand it.

I'm sorry, but you're wrong. If you were right, this lawsuit wouldn't have been filed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_... >A lawsuit was filed January 13, 2012 against the Obama Administration and Members of the U.S. Congress by a group including former New York Times reporter Christopher Hedges challenging the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012[62] The plaintiffs con…

I'm probably not wrong. The 2002-2003 AUMF resolutions provided more or less open-ended detention capabilities to the executive. The NDAA limited those to settings in which Al Qaeda was directly implicated. It's not my claim that the Obama administration lacks indefinite detention capability (every "wartime" administration has that); it's my claim that the NDAA is a bad example of overreach on the part of the executive.

Put differently: the opposition party in Congress at the time the 2012 NDAA was proposed was lobbying for a much broader capability. The administration had to spend political capital to limit the degrees of freedom they had.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#128
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes, when faced with a terrible set of game theory circumstances, the only winning move is not to play.

A wonderful quip, but what is its explanatory power here? What is it here "not to play"? I'm as much Fuck the Man as the next person, but let's try to dig a bit deeper.

I suppose not playing could be to just accept that you're going to get fucked regardless, and so don't spend any time or energy on politics as it'd be a waste compared to doing anything else.

The idea that that could be the least-bad strategy is pretty depressing, but I guess it's not impossible.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#129
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes, when faced with a terrible set of game theory circumstances, the only winning move is not to play.

It's better to vote for a third party that's somewhere toward your side of the political spectrum. If you don't vote, that's just a smaller pool that each side will get approximately half of, and you've voted for a candidate that can't win: nobody. You haven't affected anything (not that you are required to affect anything). If you vote for a third party, that's still someone that probably can't win, but you've moved…

ack - nothing showed up, then three, and now I can't delete anything. Apologies.

Re: DHS Watchdog OKs ‘Suspicionless’ Seizure of Electronic Devices Along Border

#130
What I find amazing is how people continue to push for political solutions like "term limits" while ultimately taking no action. Even as we lurch towards an obvious fiscal iceberg, undoubtedly responsible for the abrupt hike in tyrannical measures we've seen as of late, there are plenty of otherwise capable, intelligent people, and even hackers who are seemingly unable to abandon ship.

Whatever. History has shown the rich are always the first to leave. I suspect it's because they know more truths about human nature than some would like to believe.

Political action towards positive change is absolutely pointless. There's nothing any political party - not left, right nor libertarian - can do to stop America's path to inevitable fiscal crisis and subsequent self-destruction. Not with the political gridlock in Washington. Not with the bozo Ivy League clowns and TBTF banks running the show. Not with more and more people waking up every day to the corruption and lies spewing from the mouths of virtually everyone in Washington DC and all of their supporters and cronies. In short their shit just stinks too badly, and the average person has become too educated and capable to sit there and take all the abuse.

America is $16.5 trillion in debt and rising, and there's nothing you can do to make that debt disappear short of printing trillions more dollars to debase it and insodoing completely wipe out the average individual's savings, not to mention piss off other countries. All viable economic and political solutions are too little, too late. You'd better pray for our continued military might every night before you go to sleep, because that's the end game given the way things are going.

The only viable move for the U.S. elite is to sink America like Enron, and pray they can keep things under control. Thus the advent of tyrannical control measures.

Let the elite continue to have their follies with the savings of average Americans and others who are too blind to see the storm brewing, or too proud to abandon ship. Let them have their gold, their silver, and their perceived political capital aka giant circle jerk. Let them have their warplanes and battleships. Let them continue to send our young to die in their places in exchange for worthless paper green rectangles.

The only viable move for the individual is to evacuate the USD before their savings are wiped out. Everyone on HN has the capacity and the short-lived opportunity to move their economic and political activities into the cryptographic realm, where any and all central planning efforts are rendered irrelevant. Therein lies the only remaining true safe haven for economic activity.

Love it or hate it, you have no other option but to embrace strong encryption and Bitcoin before your nation, and perhaps the entire global economy descends into a fiscal default scenario right out of your worst nightmares. If you fail to see this risk and the danger it entails, I implore you to utilize public transportation extensively.

"Truthfully I do not expect much to change. Practically speaking, history has demonstrated the ability of sovereign nations to justify themselves, and postpone the moment of crisis. This will be even more true for the United States as the largest economy by far with the strongest central bank. As a result, over the course of your lives, you will experience withering but stealthy attacks on your quality of life, as government attempts to manage its faltering finances. You will see declines in the quality of healthcare, the quality of education, the quality of public safety, and the quality of our currency. Of course this is a false prophecy. I am simply describing what is already happening."

- Dr. Michael J. Burry [1]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CLhqjOzoyE

Post reply on HN