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

Homeland Security Wants Social Media Sites to Expose Anti-ICE Accounts

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 269 posts

Re: Homeland Security Wants Social Media Sites to Expose Anti-ICE Accounts

#241

Post by rayiner »

Herring wrote: post #203
rayiner wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m citing a fact that’s plain in the data. Germany, the UK, and Italy spend slightly more of a larger economy on social welfare than they did in 2000. If you have a contrary case based on different data, then make it. We’re intelligent people here, we don’t need to resort to appeals to authority, especially in a subject like political sentiment that isn’t amenable to expert analysis. This stuff isn’t rocket science.

I'm not having this conversation. It's like creationism or anti-vaccine. You can solve this YOURSELF in 10 seconds by googling "UK austerity" or "Germany austerity" but instead you just want to argue from ignorance. Get informed first.

It’s funny you’re complaining about creationism when you’re the one invoking social studies papers as scripture for ideas you can’t explain yourself.

Re: Homeland Security Wants Social Media Sites to Expose Anti-ICE Accounts

#242

Post by rayiner »

asveikau wrote: post #239
rayiner wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s the same as the subpoena I could send you if you had information relevant to a litigation. And you have to give it to me or else go to court to quash the subpoena. But the key difference with judicial warrants is that judicial warrants can be enforced immediately while subpoenas and administrative warrants require the cooperation of the target or else going to court to enforce the subpoena. It’s weird but the…

Sorry, it's pretty clear that you like what ICE does and you're working backwards with what you think is a legal argument that justifies it. What ICE is reportedly doing has absolutely nothing in common with a lawful subpoena.

I do like ICE, but this point about administrative warrants is a rant I’ve been doing since the Obama administration. The only thing new is that these tactics are now being used for immigration enforcement.

Re: Homeland Security Wants Social Media Sites to Expose Anti-ICE Accounts

#243

Post by lokar »

gmerc wrote: post #191
jmclnx wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plus in Nov or 2026, get out and vote, no matter how hard it is to get to the polls. This happened because people sat on their behinds and did nothing in Nov 2024,

Won't matter. Donny put the epstein files out, redacted, to remind every single influential person in the blast radius that unless he keeps holding the redaction pen, all their lives will be over.

One thing to consider: it’s clear he was very widely connected in American elite circles. It’s likely that almost all prominent people (in finance, business, the arts, science, government, etc) all came across him. We know he worked pretty hard to get intertwined with everyone he could.

And yet, although the list of his connections is large, it’s very far from most of these people. It seems plenty of people saw him for who he was and steered clear.

Re: Homeland Security Wants Social Media Sites to Expose Anti-ICE Accounts

#244

Post by iugtmkbdfil834 »

throwawayq3423 wrote: post #211
iugtmkbdfil834 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think for a moment of arguing that throwing people in jail is the only way to impede someone's liberty, you are in for a world of a surprise.

It's the standard we're discussing. It's what Donald Trump's DHS is doing right now and the Snowden comparisons are irrelevant and imo a bad faith attempt at trying to muddy the waters. Stop both sides-ing everything the Trump administration does to give them more oxygen to operate. These are uniquely awful times.

Friendo,the sooner you recognize it is both sides, the sooner you can step off the merry go round.

Re: Homeland Security Wants Social Media Sites to Expose Anti-ICE Accounts

#245

Post by iugtmkbdfil834 »

salawat wrote: post #168
iugtmkbdfil834 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The interesting thing is that the time to oppose it these encroachments was somewhere between 2001 and say.. 2015 ( some events, but nothing in particular other than general acceptance by general populace ). And now the masses are crying foul? Now is absolutely not the time to try to get online invisibility cloak.

Some couldn't vote then broskie. In particular because of things like age, and school, and parents being spoonfed propaganda and having the desire for vengeance stoked for dat Middle East invasion and things. So since that couldn't happen, it seems the next best time to address the issue is now.

Here is a thing. I am not sure anyone really can at this point. I am not being hyperbolic.

Re: Homeland Security Wants Social Media Sites to Expose Anti-ICE Accounts

#246

Post by throwawayq3423 »

esseph wrote: post #235
throwawayq3423 wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The info was already out there when they were going after him. This was of course not known at the time. The only thing that was known is that a single individual was responsible for the greatest breach of classified secrets in the nation's history, and that individual was still at large. > was protecting national security So yes, it was.

The federal government was found violating the constitution, and yet he's the bad guy. Nonsense.

> The federal government was found violating the constitution

This was of course not known at the time.

Re: Homeland Security Wants Social Media Sites to Expose Anti-ICE Accounts

#247

Post by sejje »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #212
myvoiceismypass wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should review actual history if you are trying to pin the Patriot Act on Obama.

> I equally blame the previous administration for leaving a privacy invasive apparatus, as stated by others here this goes back to the Patriot Act. I was talking about Bush administration. I don't know a lot about that time period since I was just a teenager during that administration and didn't care about politics back then, but I vividly remember Obama because I've always been passionate about not having the govern…

Didn't Obama call Snowden a traitor, too?

They're all pro-spying.

Re: Homeland Security Wants Social Media Sites to Expose Anti-ICE Accounts

#248

Post by juanani »

lokar wrote: post #243
gmerc wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Won't matter. Donny put the epstein files out, redacted, to remind every single influential person in the blast radius that unless he keeps holding the redaction pen, all their lives will be over.

One thing to consider: it’s clear he was very widely connected in American elite circles. It’s likely that almost all prominent people (in finance, business, the arts, science, government, etc) all came across him. We know he worked pretty hard to get intertwined with everyone he could. And yet, although the list of his connections is large, it’s very far from most of these people. It seems plenty of people saw him f…

[dead]

Re: Homeland Security Wants Social Media Sites to Expose Anti-ICE Accounts

#249

Post by salawat »

iugtmkbdfil834 wrote: post #245
salawat wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some couldn't vote then broskie. In particular because of things like age, and school, and parents being spoonfed propaganda and having the desire for vengeance stoked for dat Middle East invasion and things. So since that couldn't happen, it seems the next best time to address the issue is now.

Here is a thing. I am not sure anyone really can at this point. I am not being hyperbolic.

Not with the assholes we have running the tech industry right now trying to groom every nation state into letting them help them morph into a technocratic hellhole, no.

Re: Homeland Security Wants Social Media Sites to Expose Anti-ICE Accounts

#250

Post by praptak »

everdrive wrote: post #197

Extraordinarily troubling. This recent case was especially dystopian. https://newrepublic.com/post/206088/homeland-security-67-yea... The letter written by Jon was about as benign and constructive as possible. There was not even the possibility of pretense in this case, but nonetheless his gmail got subpoenaed. The privacy community seems extraordinarily bad at dealing with nuance, so I want to lay this out specifica…

I'm in EU and I'm 100% okay with being blacklisted from ever entering US. Just as I'd be okay with being blacklisted by 1933 Germany. To be honest I don't even think it's ethical to work for a US company anymore. (This is admittedly easy for me to say because I left Google some time ago for unrelated reasons. Call this "virtue signalling" if you want - I still believe it is good to discuss virtues and vices).
Post reply on HN