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

321–330 of 355 posts

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#321

Post by diveanon »

tim333 wrote: post #305
diveanon wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo, have you been?

I've been. Last time I thought I'd pop in from Singapore I found they'd discontinued the flights there which can't help with US tourists who don't want to schlep about with busses and boats.

They discontinued flights because of the environmental impact it was having on the island.

The big resort on the island (Berjaya) wanted to build a bigger airport a few years ago and the locals flat out said no.

Tioman is entirely owned by the local population and they have the first and last say on what gets developed there.

So far they are doing a great job, Tioman has the only growing reef in Malaysia and is seeing a lot of rare wildlife returning year after year.

The bus from Singapore takes a few hours, and the ferry about the same. We get more than enough tourist who are willing to make the trip.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#322

Post by oddx »

slaymaker1907 wrote: post #182
klipt wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well traveling through the Schengen area is like traveling between US states. You don't even need a passport once you're in. If you're traveling on a non-EU passport, I don't know if entering the EU is much better. IIRC flying through Frankfurt once the customs people rifled through my carry-on for no apparent reason.

You need a visa for each country in the EU if you are from China since they don’t have a visa agreement with the EU. I know this because my friend was dealing with it this year because of SIGMOD.

This is not true, you need one schengen visa even if your country doesn't have visa agreement with EU (my country doesn't have).

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#323

Post by kwhitefoot »

tallanvor wrote: post #296
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had no issues living in Norway for the past 5 years and I'm not sure if I've ever been asked if I were a terrorist. I certainly haven't been asked for my social media information. Not only that, but I could visit Europe for 2 months without a visa. No paperwork, nothing. I had passport control in Copenhaven, but nothing whatsoever in Norway. In contrast, a Norwegian citizen must fill stuff out to have the same l…

You don't go through passport control in Norway unless you are departing or arriving from a non-Schengen country. So flying between Copenhagen and Oslo, for example, doesn't involve passport control. Work permits in Norway used to be 3 valid for 3 years at a time, but they've had to shorten this to 2 years due to EU requirements. If you get permanent residency you also have to renew it every two years by making an ap…

> If you get permanent residency you also have to renew it every two years by making an appointment and visiting the police station.

Not any more.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#324

Post by jki275 »

llukas wrote: post #256
jki275 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you write your reply on parchment with elderberry ink, seal it with wax, and have it delivered by pony express we can have a discussion on the limitations you are proposing on the first amendment with your long debunked argument. Also there were repeating rifles, cartridge based rifles, and citizens owned artillery pieces and war ships in the era in which the Constitution was written. You should read Heller - Ju…

False equivalence. First amendment understanding evolved since 1789 [1]. Protecting speech of corporations was unthinkable in 1789. [1] https://www.brennancenter.org/blog/constant-evolution-first-...

It has to a very small degree.

But not to the point of banning speech.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#325

Post by fastball »

tialaramex wrote: post #292
fastball wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? If you don't want a visa, why do you care about this?

They explained that pretty clearly. The US insists that you are entering their country if your route of travel passes through US territory. So sensible routes to lots of other countries that don't themselves have obnoxious rules are off limits if you don't want the US nosing thorough everything.

If your social network accounts are public, the NSA can already see them, it doesn't matter if you explicitly give them your username.

If your accounts are not public, giving them your username won't really do anything.

I'm still not sure I see the problem? "Oh no, I'm traveling through the US and now they know that I have a social network account!" ?? They already knew that if you were actually a person of interest.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#326

Post by fastball »

cr1895 wrote: post #268
fastball wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which visa was that?

Highly-skilled migrant. Then, after that, permanent resident also renewable every 5 years.

So... easy to get a visa if you're a highly-skilled migrant.

That's not everybody.

That's not most people.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#327

Post by mac01021 »

godelski wrote: post #231
mac01021 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's possible to want more diversity, to believe the infusion of immigrants makes America great (or just better) and also believe we need to tightly regulate who is able to enter the country.

I agree, but that's not really what is happening here is it? The American people clearly don't agree on how tightly to regulate.

It's true that there is no consensus.

But the change described in the article is, in fact, compatible with the view that we should hive more immigrants and more diversity while at the same time screening immigrants more thoroughly to eliminate specific undesirable elements.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#328

Post by AaronFriel »

briandear wrote: post #210
human20190310 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The first amendment comes afterward, but I have to admit I have no idea if there's any case law that it's unconstitutional to deny a visa on the basis of the applicant's viewpoints.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#329

Post by cr1895 »

fastball wrote: post #326
cr1895 wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Highly-skilled migrant. Then, after that, permanent resident also renewable every 5 years.

So... easy to get a visa if you're a highly-skilled migrant. That's not everybody. That's not most people.

Sorry...where did I imply that anyone could get one? Most anyone who graduates and finds a job sure can; and from what I gather it's a far easier and less Kafkaesque process than in the US, too.

I was primarily responding to the point that 5 year visas are unheard of in Europe (which is plainly false).

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say.

Re: US demands social media details from visa applicants

#330

Post by llamataboot »

mysterypie wrote: post #225
llamataboot wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

oh, make no mistake the US /already/ screened this stuff. My now-wife had all her social media pages printed out and waiting for her on an entry to the US in the Obama years. Difference is now they can ban you for lying...

Since you have actual first-hand knowledge of border officials doing social media questioning, could you tell us more about this? What did they ask her? What prompted them to print out the social media pages? Which social media sites? What country was she coming from? How long did they question her?

I mean, keep in mind this was 8 years ago.

Not sure why they had them printed out - could have been to review them, could have been for intimidation.

IIRC they asked her why she had changed her FB location to the American city she would stay in for the next 3 months, asked a bunch of questions about past posts in the US talking about helping build our home, buy decorations, etc (all as proof she was intent on overstaying her visa, which was vaguely ridiculous as we had applied for a fiance visa at that point, so she was pretty clearly intending on living here, but we were also pretty clearly intending on going through the legal visa process)

Also asked a bunch of questions about some posts she had made seeking design clients in the US as proof she was working here illegally (even though she owned her own design business and paid taxes on it in Europe, obviously are allowed to take on US clients, but they were sketched out that she was soliciting US clients while in the US)

They questioned her for about an hour with no access to phone/lawyer/etc and gave her the option of immediately voluntarily leaving the US. At the end of the process they told her that it would be the last time she could enter the US on an ESTA and next time it would have to be on the fiance visa, they also told her verbally she had to leave within 14 days, but they still stamped her for a 3 month entry as per regular ESTA guidelines.

--

It was mostly a bunch of silliness about work/residency/intent to work without a work permit/intent to stay in the US without a visa even though all things were aboveboard. The most concerning to me remains that her facebook at the time was not in any legal name, certainly not the name the passenger manifest, but she was still obviously tracked down

Post reply on HN