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

US demands social media details from visa applicants

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 355 posts

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#201

Post by briandear »

HeavenFox wrote: post #74

As any US Visa applicant can attest to, the DS-160 is already some of the most annoying form you have to fill - in fact for most people it's less pleasurable than doing 1040. In addition to asking for details of every school you went to, every job you had, every country you've been to, they ask you questions like this: >> Have you ever violated, or engaged in a conspiracy to violate, any law relating to controlled su…

> And don't get me started on the stupid fact that you cannot renew your US visa within the US

Ever been to Korea? Ever had a Chinese visa? How about India on a visa? If Indians want an easier time with US visas, then the Indian government should stop with their draconian visa process. Chinese and Korean work visas aren’t much better. Americans trying to get work visas for the EU also have a very difficult time as well. A DUI on your record years ago can mean an American can’t even visit Canada. Those complaining about the US visa process seemingly have limited experience with the rest of the world. You can get 5 year visas to the US; unheard of for Europe or many other countries.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#202

Post by codedokode »

HeavenFox wrote: post #74

As any US Visa applicant can attest to, the DS-160 is already some of the most annoying form you have to fill - in fact for most people it's less pleasurable than doing 1040. In addition to asking for details of every school you went to, every job you had, every country you've been to, they ask you questions like this: >> Have you ever violated, or engaged in a conspiracy to violate, any law relating to controlled su…

> engage in terrorist activities

> member or representative of a terrorist organization

This is an ambigious question. For example, some groups are considered terrorists by one country and "legitimely elected government" by other. So the terrorist by opinion of country A can answer "No" without lying because in country B he is not considered a terrorist. So maybe they should add "from the point of view of the US government" to the question.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#203

Post by humanrebar »

jimmaswell wrote: post #164
diveanon wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly think that is one of the primary factors. That and how health care is tied to employment. When Europeans change jobs they tend to go on vacation for a while, Americans immediately scramble for a new job out of fear of getting sick.

> Americans immediately scramble for a new job out of fear of getting sick. Or in fear of paying a tax penalty unless they buy some substandard marketplace plan (yes, I know the marketplace plans were sabotaged for political reasons in some cases, but that doesn't change the result)

> Starting with the 2019 plan year (for which you’ll file taxes in April 2020), the Shared Responsibility Payment no longer applies.

https://www.healthcare.gov/fees/fee-for-not-being-covered/

Of course this is new, so fears in recent history were definitely real.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#204

Post by codedokode »

refurb wrote: post #165
godelski wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that circles back to my original question. How does the gov not have the power to boot you out (or jail) just from committing the terrorist act in itself? OR even just from finding out that said person has terrorist ties? I don't buy the answer of needing the question to boot someone out. You can already boot them out for committing crimes. And I'm sure there's a question along the lines "Do you intend to commit…

As per the previous comment, most of it comes from the way the laws were written. If immigration law says “members of a terrorist group can’t get citizenship”, then USCIS has to have a process for following it. In addition to background checks, they ask the question. In terms of booting them out, the question makes it much easier. If they are a member of a terrorist group and they said “no”, well it’s an open and shu…

But doesn't proving that the person has lied also require additional efforts, and if that person will contest the desicion in court, can become a long process?

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#205

Post by apo »

School-Cotton wrote: post #72
apo wrote: post #39

Very discouraging to see this, especially because the overreach appears to have no limit. Today it's visa applications. Tomorrow it could be US citizens trying to get passports, driver licenses, or collect social security/medicare benefits. On the other hand, a growing awareness of the many dangers posed by poor digital hygiene could ultimately lead to greater interest in privacy tools and practices. Along the road,…

> Tomorrow it could be US citizens trying to get passports, driver licenses, or collect social security/medicare benefits. Not really, since jurisprudence gives the executive a very wide latitude in deciding which foreigners to grant the privilege of entering the US. Much wider than it would give if it were a question of citizens applying for documents that they’re entitled to.

The groundwork for domestic implementation is already in place:

https://theintercept.com/2018/12/17/israel-texas-anti-bds-la...

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#206

Post by briandear »

refurb wrote: post #181
godelski wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like the job for the NSA or CIA though. To flag these individuals.

There is an FBI database they use to do background checks. Last time I heard there is a huge backlog and it’s delaying cases by a lot.

It’s actually Department of State databases, specifically, CLASS (Consular Lookout and Support System) and the TIDE (Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment) systems that are used. There is also (as you mentioned,) an FBI fingerprint and name check that is completed, but that’s for domestic (US) criminal records and not specific to overseas terrorism.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#207

Post by baroffoos »

jkaplowitz wrote: post #17
benevol wrote: post #2

"The State Department regulations say people will have to submit social media names and five years' worth of email addresses and phone numbers . When proposed last year, authorities estimated the proposal would affect 14.7 million people annually." [0] [0] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48486672

I don't think they've thought about how precise 100% compliance is literally impossible for those of us with catch-all email domains, unless we have a record of every email address at that domain we've ever given out or through which we've received unsolicited email. (Yeah, I realize that in practice they will probably accept partial compliance in that scenario, and that it won't affect me as a US citizen. But it cou…

Couldn't you just write something like "All emails @mydomain.com" if asked you could explain how it works and they can't say that you ever lied.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#208

Post by School-Cotton »

apo wrote: post #205
School-Cotton wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tomorrow it could be US citizens trying to get passports, driver licenses, or collect social security/medicare benefits. Not really, since jurisprudence gives the executive a very wide latitude in deciding which foreigners to grant the privilege of entering the US. Much wider than it would give if it were a question of citizens applying for documents that they’re entitled to.

The groundwork for domestic implementation is already in place: https://theintercept.com/2018/12/17/israel-texas-anti-bds-la...

Yes and the federal courts are taking her side (so far): https://www.texastribune.org/2019/04/26/Texas-bahia-amawi-sp...

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#209

Post by Bakary »

didericis wrote: post #175
pixl97 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And? If you had $150,000 last year then only $50,000 this year you're relative situation is worse. You don't take how well someone in Africa is doing.

Yeah, for a lot of people it's more about trajectory than the numbers. Even going up doesn't necessarily mean anything with inflation. And it's very hard to find essentials like housing here if you don't have a lot of money. I'm not very educated on the details of all this, but something about using long term mortgages as investment vehicles seems to be screwing with the market. I don't really understand why a low en…

It sounds to me as though the setup only appears wonky and unnatural to us because it's an equilibrium of various needs and interests that clash against one another.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#210

Post by briandear »

human20190310 wrote: post #10
AaronFriel wrote: post #7

This will have a chilling effect on speech in this country, which is extremely sad. Academic and trade conferences would be best taken elsewhere. And job seekers? Prefer remote. For me as an American, this is, I guess, fine now. I won't be affected right away. But I fully expect other countries to institute reciprocal policies.

1) Doesn't the First Amendment restrict the US government from curtailing free expression and free association anyplace, not just within US borders? 2) Isn't anything that results in a "chilling effect" tantamount to restriction? I expect this will have a chilling effect abroad, among people who travel to the US, more than within the US.

The Constitution also gives Congress the right to regulate immigration and naturalization.
Post reply on HN