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

Boycott IETF 127

boycott-ietf127.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 396 posts

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#21

Post by cma »

mmooss wrote: post #15

[flagged]

> yet it was actually no threat at all to US security or even NY security, beyond ~two buildings.

If we're talking about carried out threat and not achieved aims: there were more than those two flights and more than those two buildings targeted. And even if you are talking about achieved aims only: the Pentagon was hit as well if you are forgetting that or maybe that just belongs in the '~'. In fact more than two buildings in NYC itself were destroyed, even if only two there were targeted.

The seat of the main elected branch of government (US Capitol) was targeted and likely would have been struck without the passenger interventions (fighter jets had been sent out towards the atlantic ocean and FAA had not yet ordered all planes grounded even if NORAD had been alerted by that point). We were very lucky passengers and crew had made airphone calls and some disallowed cell phone calls to get enough critical mass to fight back.

I think the subsequent war on terror, used to invade Iraq without any relation to the attack, was terrible, but this kind of deflation is pretty insane to read.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#22

Post by nextts »

spiderfarmer wrote: post #12

I heard last night from my friend who works in astronomy that they decided to cancel their event in the US and let the US attendees travel to Europe instead. I can’t get used to the fact that the US seems dead set on destroying its reputation in the world. But with the direction the comment section of HN has taken over the last few years I’m sure there will be lots of commenters who will dismiss this as virtue signal…

It is real. It is interesting, because I don't think US wars or international interference over the years have caused this effect but now people are avoiding the US for pure "look out for number 1" reasons. I.e. it isn't safe enough for them to enter and it ain't worth the risk for some conference, holiday or work thing.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#23

Post by oldgradstudent »

Is this a parody?

> Beyond problems at the border, the current Secretary for Health and Human Services - Robert F. Kennedy Jr. - has said that he will send those with ADHD to camps. Source: Futurism.

What he actually said:

> "I’m going to dedicate that revenue to creating wellness farms — drug rehabilitation farms, in rural areas all over this country," he said during the podcast. "I’m going to make it so people can go, if you’re convicted of a drug offense, or if you have a drug problem, you can go to one of these places for free."

That what happens when you rely on Futurism as a source.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#24

Post by jeltz »

oefrha wrote: post #18
mmooss wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People are randomly arrested and detained base on official government policy. Right, but you did not give examples of that happening previously.

Once again, when I say “not new” I’m talking about > The fact is if you care about people from all around the world being able to attend your conference, the U.S. hasn’t been a good location for a long time. TFA says > As an Internet community we strive to include everyone. Holding a meeting in the US is incompatible with our values. It’s been incompatible with their values for very long.

You are arguing with someone who agrees with you but wanted to point out that your examples were bad and did not support your position that well.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#25

Post by [deleted] »

arketyp wrote: post #20

I understand the sentiment that the Trump administration is draconian, especially for people traveling from abroad considering the new border policy. But, pardon me, how is that executive order about sex a "threat"? Listed as the top issue undermines the credibility of this petition I think.

[deleted]

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#26

Post by throwawayk7h »

arketyp wrote: post #20

I understand the sentiment that the Trump administration is draconian, especially for people traveling from abroad considering the new border policy. But, pardon me, how is that executive order about sex a "threat"? Listed as the top issue undermines the credibility of this petition I think.

It's a threat to transgender travellers; I know many in the tech industry. The U.S. is now denying entry visas to transgender travellers as well.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#27

Post by oefrha »

jeltz wrote: post #24
oefrha wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once again, when I say “not new” I’m talking about > The fact is if you care about people from all around the world being able to attend your conference, the U.S. hasn’t been a good location for a long time. TFA says > As an Internet community we strive to include everyone. Holding a meeting in the US is incompatible with our values. It’s been incompatible with their values for very long.

You are arguing with someone who agrees with you but wanted to point out that your examples were bad and did not support your position that well.

No, I’m arguing with someone who thinks I’m saying arbitrary arrests are not new (in fact I believe those aren’t new either, but I’m not arguing that and can’t be bothered to dig up sources), when I’m saying not being able to attend conferences in the U.S. is not new.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#28

Post by _2d30 »

oldgradstudent wrote: post #23

Is this a parody? > Beyond problems at the border, the current Secretary for Health and Human Services - Robert F. Kennedy Jr. - has said that he will send those with ADHD to camps. Source: Futurism. What he actually said: > "I’m going to dedicate that revenue to creating wellness farms — drug rehabilitation farms, in rural areas all over this country," he said during the podcast. "I’m going to make it so people can…

Yes and some of the links to the “traumatizing” deportations are for people who are clearly in violation of their visas.

I had a friend deported from Denmark when he overstayed his visa and it was basically the same thing.

Some of these look really bad and could be sensible justification for the proposed boycott/cancellation (see French scientist eg) but a lot of it looks completely hysterical.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#30

Post by tossandthrow »

anfilt wrote: post #17

RISC-V moved to Switzerland as well a while ago. I think it's a shame to see stuff like this happening. Regardless, of where one stands currently in the current environment making standards bodies want to move or move events to other countries is not a good.

Regardless of the political situation, the EU is probably a more friendly environment for a standards body taking their stance in interoperability into account.
Post reply on HN