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

Defeated

orenhazi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 445 posts

Re: Defeated

#171

Post by thomasfl »

mosburger wrote: post #89
jballanc wrote: post #32

There is an extremely simple solution: leave. I've not lived in the US for almost two years now. I've only had to travel back twice in that time. Meanwhile, in the same time I've visited France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany multiple times. None of those travel experiences were nearly as unpleasant or stressful as my two trips to the US. Furthermore, the technology communities that are growing up in these pla…

"Extremely simple?" There's lots of reasons it isn't so simple for people. 1) Barriers to work and emigration 2) Language barriers - I know that learning a new language isn't impossible (I know a little Spanish but I'd hardly call myself fluent), but I speak only English fluently, which limits me to a handful of nations, many of which are nearly as bad as the United States (hey UK, how are those surveillance cameras?…

We can speak english in europe. In scandinavia by the age of 10 most kids speak english fluently.

Re: Defeated

#172

Post by jballanc »

amirmc wrote: post #61
jballanc wrote: post #32

There is an extremely simple solution: leave. I've not lived in the US for almost two years now. I've only had to travel back twice in that time. Meanwhile, in the same time I've visited France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany multiple times. None of those travel experiences were nearly as unpleasant or stressful as my two trips to the US. Furthermore, the technology communities that are growing up in these pla…

Airports are only a symptom of a wider problem and I see this as running away. Much like when a bear is chasing you, you only have to be faster than those around you. Eventually the bear will chase you again and you'll be the only one left. To make that a little more concrete, you can only keep moving while there are viable places to move to . Sure, that's probably fine for our lifetimes but we're handing on a legacy…

I'd like to replace your bear with a pendulum. History has shown that public sentiment towards authoritarianism is cyclical. Certainly Nazi Germany represented an authoritarian regime that was more repressive than the current US government (history will tell how long this remains true...), but that played out. Now Germany has a wonderful framework of laws and regulations to guard personal privacy.

What leaving does is control how far the pendulum swings. Imagine if Fermi hadn't left Italy? Or consider Lise Meitner who didn't leave Germany when everyone else did (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lise_Meitner). In her words, "It was not only stupid but also very wrong that I did not leave at once."

Re: Defeated

#173

Post by goatforce5 »

madaxe wrote: post #105
mosburger wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Extremely simple?" There's lots of reasons it isn't so simple for people. 1) Barriers to work and emigration 2) Language barriers - I know that learning a new language isn't impossible (I know a little Spanish but I'd hardly call myself fluent), but I speak only English fluently, which limits me to a handful of nations, many of which are nearly as bad as the United States (hey UK, how are those surveillance cameras?…

It's extremely simple. You just pull your finger out and do it. I've hopped continent four times so far in my life, and have no intention of stopping. Sure, family, ties, etc., but it's not like you can't visit them, and languages you learn on the go. People are patient. Anyway. Better to go now, than to wait for them to take your passports away.

I'm on my fourth country, but only my third continent. But my feet sure are getting itchy of late.

Moving country is real easy. It's something everyone should try for at least a year or two.

Re: Defeated

#174

Post by einhverfr »

amirmc wrote: post #61
jballanc wrote: post #32

There is an extremely simple solution: leave. I've not lived in the US for almost two years now. I've only had to travel back twice in that time. Meanwhile, in the same time I've visited France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany multiple times. None of those travel experiences were nearly as unpleasant or stressful as my two trips to the US. Furthermore, the technology communities that are growing up in these pla…

Airports are only a symptom of a wider problem and I see this as running away. Much like when a bear is chasing you, you only have to be faster than those around you. Eventually the bear will chase you again and you'll be the only one left. To make that a little more concrete, you can only keep moving while there are viable places to move to . Sure, that's probably fine for our lifetimes but we're handing on a legacy…

When a bear is chasing you, if it is a black bear (scared of you) you play dead. When a bear is chasing you and it is a grizzley, you stand tall, don't run, yell, and act combative. Otherwise the bear may see you as lunch.

I think that is a great metaphor here. If the government no longer respects the people, then the right approach is to stand tall and say things loudly. If they do then compliance is better.

Re: Defeated

#175

Post by Ziomislaw »

mosburger wrote: post #89
jballanc wrote: post #32

There is an extremely simple solution: leave. I've not lived in the US for almost two years now. I've only had to travel back twice in that time. Meanwhile, in the same time I've visited France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany multiple times. None of those travel experiences were nearly as unpleasant or stressful as my two trips to the US. Furthermore, the technology communities that are growing up in these pla…

"Extremely simple?" There's lots of reasons it isn't so simple for people. 1) Barriers to work and emigration 2) Language barriers - I know that learning a new language isn't impossible (I know a little Spanish but I'd hardly call myself fluent), but I speak only English fluently, which limits me to a handful of nations, many of which are nearly as bad as the United States (hey UK, how are those surveillance cameras?…

On the other hand, at the moment you are still free to leave. You might not be so lucky if you wait.

Re: Defeated

#176

Post by ubernostrum »

bane wrote: post #102
raverbashing wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with the general spirit of your post, however: Amsterdam Schipol has (a lot of) scanning machines as well. Germany has more freedom in certain areas and less freedom in others. (you can't take your empty bottles to the recycling bins on Sunday for example)

I'd also add that the three worst travel experiences I've ever had were: immigration at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport, anything at all London-Heathrow, immigration at Toronto Pearson. Schiphol, El Prat, Marco Polo, Dublin, da Vinci, Kloten and Munich get me in and out without any fuss at all. Though security at Schiphol was about what you'd contend with at Dulles. Domodedovo and Koltsovo are very mediocre and busy,…

immigration at Toronto Pearson

I'm kind of scratching my head here, because that doesn't jive with my experiences (and I do have plenty of experience of entering Canada there as a non-Canadian -- in fact, I've done it twice in the past month). Some times of day the lines are a bit longer than others, but I just don't know of anything else that I'd consider to be bad about it.

Re: Defeated

#177

Post by regularfry »

rayiner wrote: post #131

I just don't get the deal with the millimeter wave scanners. Did everyone raise a fuss like this when airports had you walk through metal detectors? How is a millimeter wave scanner different than a high-tech metal detector? Aren't we always talking about how the law needs to "catch up to technology?" Don't get me wrong, I think the TSA is a huge waste of money and I hate being ordered around by flunkies who can't ge…

> I just don't get the deal with the millimeter wave scanners. Did everyone raise a fuss like this when airports had you walk through metal detectors?

When metal detectors were introduced, they weren't sensitive enough to pick up the change in your pocket. They were only sensitive enough to pick up large metal objects. This meant that to start off with, you didn't have to empty your pockets to go through, and the average passenger was almost totally unaffected by them. That frog was slowly boiled, and now we take off our shoes.

We were also pretty certain back then that the way metal detectors worked had no health implications. There was simply no danger attached to being near one, nor was it even slightly suspected.

> I don't see anyone raise a fuss when you have to walk through a metal detector to get into the local Barnes and Noble...

That's not a metal detector, except in the loosest sense.

Re: Defeated

#178

Post by gergles »

kghose wrote: post #100

Sorry, but I'm going to be the token "sheeple" here. Did you make such a fuss when you had to go through metal detectors? Did you make such a fuss when you were wanded? Did you make a fuss when you were carded (at the bar, or at the airport?) I think we should protest when the TSA is unprofessional and does not monitor their people and they do unprofessional things, (like circulate photos or make fun of people) but p…

The scanners are already worthless. They can be defeated by being overweight and putting $dangerousitem under a fat fold, or between your butt, or any of a million other places.

They are actually less secure than magnetometers, which is my primary objection to them. They take longer, are more invasive, and are less effective. Why would I support that when the magnetometers exist and work well?

Re: Defeated

#179

Post by jellicle »

arnarbi wrote: post #169
imsofuture wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a metal detector, it's a system designed to scan for tagged items. My problem with the scanners is that they are invasive AND ineffective. They aren't protecting me, but they do train me to complacently subject myself as an innocent, not-charged-with-a-crime citizen to pre-emptive searches. That's just not alright by me.

I don't like them either, but why are they invasive?

They produce naked images of your body, which are stored indefinitely.

Re: Defeated

#180

Post by imsofuture »

arnarbi wrote: post #169
imsofuture wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a metal detector, it's a system designed to scan for tagged items. My problem with the scanners is that they are invasive AND ineffective. They aren't protecting me, but they do train me to complacently subject myself as an innocent, not-charged-with-a-crime citizen to pre-emptive searches. That's just not alright by me.

I don't like them either, but why are they invasive?

They scan my naked body through my clothing. I consider that invasive.
Post reply on HN