Live data from Hacker News

US Customs wants to collect social media account names at the border

theverge.com

171–174 of 174 posts

Re: US Customs wants to collect social media account names at the border

#171
post #166
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact is that US military are in fact terrorists, as is the citizenry that supports this terrorist regime with tax money. Please don't post shrill ideological denunciations to HN. It's not what this site is for, there's no substantive argument that requires it, and one needn't be a militarist to know that.

Oh come on. That was the substantive argument, expanding on what was said before in good faith and providing a reason why it matters to the discussion. Several other users here seem to think it has at least something to contribute, and it has already provoked a somewhat more nuanced discussion below. Calling it a "shrill ideological denunciation" is, itself, a shrill ideological denunciation. ("Shrill" in particular…

That's not an accurate description of a comment that didn't only call the U.S. military terrorists, but U.S. citizens terrorists for paying taxes. By that logic Chomsky himself is a terrorist. That's absurd, and it's hardly politicized moderation to call it a bad comment for this site. (Actually I'm surprised that you'd defend this low-quality subthread to begin with, which started with a dose of political snark and descended from there. It ought to be obvious that that doesn't belong here, regardless of one's politics.)

The moderating principle is that comments should be civil and substantive. Heated rhetoric is neither, so it lowers the signal/noise ratio at both ends.

I'd be delighted to use more neutral, more precise, less pejorative language than I currently do to express what's wrong about that sort of comment. But I'm at the limit of what I know how to say, especially ex tempore. If you can think of a better phrase than shrill, etc., I'd like to know what it is—of course it would require suspending your politics to think of a good one, which isn't always easy to do.

Re: US Customs wants to collect social media account names at the border

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's necessarily a stupid question, because of the psychology involved with lying. This question would likely weed out any wanna-be small time people intent on causing harm to the US. Something similar to how many criminals in the US are arrested due to routine traffic stops. If asking this "stupid" question prevents 1 single undesirable person from entering the US, then it's served it's purpose.

At what cost?

The extra 30 seconds per person to answer this question, I imagine.

Re: US Customs wants to collect social media account names at the border

#173
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, the brand new account shows up to defend the Israeli policy of apartheid and overt ethnocentrism. In before criticising Israel is antisemitic.

Ok how's this? Every (almost every?) mass-casualty attack inside Israel borders in the last say, almost 70 years, have come from ethnically/religiously similar people. These attacks happen at an alarming rate. You would like them to, for the sake of making you feel warm and fuzzier on the inside, not profile the people most likely to carry out such attacks in the future? That would be ridiculous. Edit: before I get d…

You and I both know they're doing a lot more than just "profiling".

Re: US Customs wants to collect social media account names at the border

#174
post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opt out may not be an option[0]. Even though the scanners don't work[1]. [0] http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/23/travel/tsa-airport-screening-c... [1] http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/airport-security-price...

"Pat-downs may not find weapons, so an officer will pat you down after the scanner says they should." Airtight logic there.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN