Now every time I hear one of these stories I’m just waiting for the other shoe to drop and hear about how the frog biologist attended Prigozhin’s funeral (purely out of recognition for his work as a chef, of course)
This is for the simple reason that I have determined, based on a large body of cases that are accumulating at a disturbing rate, that the current US administration considers themselves "above the law". Furthermore, the administration has shown that they are eager to carry out actions that violate due process and freedom of speech against anyone they perceive as opposing their policies/views.
EDIT: I'm happy to document such cases for those who have not been paying attention, but I also encourage those who are doubtful to simply search the many examples that have been posted here on HN (unfortunately, many flagged in an attempt to suppress discussion).
Pretending this is "Trump's America" or "Obama's America" or "Bush's America" is ridiculous. They've all participated in building these walls around the country and our freedom.
Designated by whom? I personally have never once felt "terror" from the existence of Hamas nor do I feel confronted by those who would go to the funerals of it's leaders.
(https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-task-force-combat-ant...)
A scientist should not worry about having a "wrong" finding about the actual world stored on their digital devices, period.
A don't have a burner phone and within the extended European continent never have felt the need to, including things like the Balkans.
I hope that picture of reality stays in Black Mirror.
It would represent a huge decline in personal liberty in the West so I’m betting it will be so unpopular as to be impossible, especially as older voters are replaced by digital natives who are aware of the problem.
I feel like I’m living on a different planet. I am not saying things are OK in the US at the moment, but … are you kidding me? This is one of the most asinine statements I’ve ever read.
It's as transparent as it is craven. In the 1960s 50% of white people polled said that MLK was hurting the effort for civil rights. It's because they didn't want to want those civil rights to begin with, in the same way that you're clearly totally cool with the genocide and don't want rights for those who opposed it.
CS Professor arrested today https://www.reddit.com/r/immigration/comments/1jmrtzz/indian...
The idea that politics and science as a practice is separated is a myth.
Thomas Payne published "Common Sense" anonymously, and had that not happened the United States may not exist. It is a relatively obvious fact that there can be no freedom of speech without anonymous speech. Especially in the face of tyranny.
Those are either some seriously tricky terrorists or this designation was never meaningful to the citizens of this country.
I don't get bothered and every one is nice to me. But I base my experience on what is in front of me and not what I read online.
""First They Came" (German: Als sie kamen lit. 'When they came', or Habe ich geschwiegen lit. 'I did not speak out'), is the poetic form of a 1946 post-war confessional prose piece by the German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984). It is about the silent complicity of German intellectuals and clergy following the Nazis' rise to power and subsequent incremental purging of their chosen targets. Many variations and adaptations in the spirit of the original have been published in the English language. "
When you see things happening to those outside your circle you might feel safe, but many times you are just further down the list and your time will come.
For some countries like Russia it can be even more strict. They only get laptops not connected to the company network at all, and are only allowed to put a few files onto it via a flash drive. The smartphone is replaced by a feature phone without internet.
I have lived in a country far worse than the US is now or is likely to be - things like journalists being disappeared. Even there the Nazi comparison was excessive. People pushed back and things are much better now.
I have friends who fit in the categories you are describing, who have definitely put up with some shit occasionally here in Canada that would not dream of even visiting the USA, and know people in the USA who are actively looking to escape northward, in fear for their literal lives.
With a looming election that has a cartoonishly, Trumpian, "populist evil" candidate for the leadership of our country, yeah it could definitely get worse, and even to the same amount quite easily. But at least for now, there's a very real -- though definitely not perfect -- refuge for LGBTQ2A+ of all stripes up here.
Anecdotally, I work with many people who frequently travel to the US, as well as a fair few academics over there. There is a clear general consensus that people are significantly altering their plans to reconsider travel to the US, and that others are actively looking to relocate.
There is a very real—not imagined—possibility that some of those people will be subject to being rounded up and detained. The situation isn't obviously as severe as Nazi-era Germany, but it is absolutely true that people are being reminded of this. So why is the comparison anything other than apt?
The state has been able to prove precisely zero crimes in a court of law thus far. By Rubio’s admission, they may be arresting without warrants. The criminals are the ones covering their faces while pretending to act under the colour of law.
In addition, SS requires a budget so is more open to controversy. Respecting individuals is free; violating their rights requires a budget as well.
Problem with that approach is it makes you entirely blind to change right up until the moment you experience it personally.
It's entirely possible to have a dozen good encounters at borders and only the 13th is bad. Or maybe the situation changed in the last week and you just didn't travel in that timespan.
Casting the net a bit wider and considering other people's experience increases the sample size & liveness of data. (at the cost of some reliability ofc)
This is it, friend. You're in it. The visible damage hasn't accumulated too much yet, but all the things that fascist regimes do, are being done now. You might argue that Americans are fighting back, that lawfirms targetted by EO are refusing to comply, that the ACLU is fighting in court, that protestors are in the streets. This was all happening in Germany in the mid 30s too. It didn't stop what happened, and the passivity of the "it's not that bad" crowd was a big part of that.
Anti-intellectual populism is the new normal, and any thinking person who values their safety should be weighing anonymity and silence as viable options.
The Trump administration drastically cut the budget of basically every govt agency that does or supports scientific research and decimated staffing. Is that not an objective fact? Is there some alternative one?
I have never been robbed, never broken into, never been shot at, never had my car stolen and don't know anyone who has.
I do generally happen to think that diversity, gender equality, freedom of speech, and public health are causes that are important. I don't feel like being told to shut up about it because someone else is a fascist is very productive.
Not really possible in the US since 2023. Specific political speech, even writing op-eds, has been criminalized or black-list-worthy by both sides of the political spectrum -- democrat and and republican.
Permanent residents a people with student visas are advised to not travel due to the risks or arbitrary detention, search of social media, and deportation on trumped up charges. This researcher, asked to carry frog embryos by her advisor in the way back from France, has been detained becuase od the paperwork around them and may be deported to a hostile nation on those grounds:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/27/russian-scie...
I only link to this one because it's closest to my very narrow area of biology but this sort of thing is happening daily and on even more egregious grounds.
We currently live in an authoritarian state, we just don't all realize it equally, yet.
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
—Martin Niemöller
However vast the darkness, we must supply our own light.
- Stanley Kubrickhttps://open.substack.com/pub/unsafescience/p/we-tried-to-wa...
Science has been completely destroyed through grant revocation at Colombia on the pretense of unconnected protests about Israel and Palestine.
There is no targeting based on who did what, just being in the same institution is enough.
And many of these physicists have workers from other countries doing research for them. Even if they are US citizens, their thought crimes will have severe problems for those employees.
That’s what’s supposed to happen. The pendulums swing. It’s fairly definite at this point that the buyer’s remorse from trump will cause a swing back to the left. And so on and so forth.
If we’re going to insist on living in a two party system, then this is the consequence. This is how the system moderates.
The right and the left never moderate. It’s always the system that keeps order over time.
Burner devices may work when you want to protect sensitive information the adversary does not already have. But if you are more worried about authorities making your life difficult, because they don't like you, burner devices may just make your situation worse. From their perspective, it's clear evidence that you are actively trying to hide something.
We do not have a left. I honestly am impressed at the system that has somehow made the democrats seem like "the left".
They're quite literally right wing politicians. Their primary difference with Republicans are that "we have a good thing going for our pockets right now, let's not shock the boat too much."
There are _exceptions_ to democrats that may be considered _slightly left_, but those are exceptions. Not the norm.
No, I don’t think it’s ok, and I don’t understand how you would make this assumption about my opinion unless you’re just speaking emotionally or intentionally rage baiting.
It’s like you didn’t read my comment.
https://www.idsnews.com/article/2025/03/iu-professor-bloomin...
That's rich. That hasn't been true for our "elite institutions" for some time now, although I do remember some notable exceptions... University of Chicago comes to mind.
Maybe you haven't felt terror from them because you aren't one of the innocent Jewish civilians who have been deliberately targeted. Can you go back to reddit where your similarly deranged opinions are tolerated, and stay off of what is meant to be a relatively sane forum?
E.g. This story of the French researcher which started as, "A French scientist has been denied entry into the United States, apparently because the scientist had expressed a personal opinion on the Trump administration's research policy"
In fact turned out to be, "The French researcher in question was in possession of confidential information on his electronic device from Los Alamos National Laboratory — in violation of a non-disclosure agreement— something he admitted to taking without permission and attempted to conceal,”
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/21/world/europe/us-france-sc...
I’ll keep reiterating: I don’t think what’s happening in the US is ok. But I also don’t think the analogy is ok.
As I said elsewhere in this post, most adults now read below the sixth grade level. Popular media has been getting shorter and shorter, all while relying less and less on the printed word. Meanwhile the most popular news sources are targeted to people with the comprehension and reading skills of children, and the most popular movies are literally based on children's comic books. Hell, video games outsell movies by an ever increasing margin and the majority of adults now find it impossible/unpleasant to sit through even an entire comic book film without checking their cell phones. Even music has become increasing simple and repetitive, designed not to challenge the listener. Our shared culture is almost entirely the culture of children.
So then, do we really expect these adult-sized children to be capable of facing down hard choices, or making rational informed decisions? No, they accept the "obvious" (but often incorrect) answers offered by charlatans and simpletons in lieu of genuine reason and the hard work of finding actual (and often painful) solutions for the very messy real world.
Really? Completely?
What Trump is doing right now is nothing but an application of this “domestic security” framework.
Heck, the government even gave everyone a taste of what’s to come with the repression of pro-Palestine college protests across the country, and the dystopian shutdown of any criticism of a foreign country.
You can always ignore the use of repression on people or causes you don’t agree with, but don’t start complaining when you or your cause is the one being repressed.
Because if you read into its history, I mean we started with a genocide and chattel slavery. Then created & implemented an entirely novel and comprehensive social-legal framework to justify and manage an apartheid society for another few generations. Lynching was a beloved public spectacle just a century ago. Hitler & Hendrik Verwoerd looked to us for inspiration.
I'm american and not particularly an america-hater overall, I could create an equivalent list of positive things we've accomplished. But both are true, and the above are facts. What's happening now has always been part of our country too. We have never really reckoned with this, and it will keep coming back until we do.
As the stewardesses say, you should always put on your own oxygen mask first.
Does that sound plausible to you? Or even a better argument? If I was fully onboard with America is the only country that matters I would be apoplectic to find out they let a known spy just leave
"A slippery slope fallacy occurs when someone claims that a position or decision will lead to a series of unintended negative consequences. These negative consequences are often bad and/or increasingly outlandish. The person using the slippery slope fallacy takes these consequences as a certainty and does not analyze the logic of their own position. A slippery slope fallacy can be used as a deflection to avoid discussing the merits of a position, shifting the field of debate."
Also I find it very hard to believe that random border guards would find such thing during a spot check.
Ps IANAL. So take this with a gain of salt but I've never heard of someone actually being jailed for not giving access.
I would describe attending this "funeral" as merely "arriving too late". Hitler was dead, Germany was in ruins.
I'd have more questions about somebody who travelled for the funeral of Levrentiy Beria, because it appears some people (unaware, or deliberately without thinking about what Hitler had ordered done) liked Hitler, I can't find any records of people who liked Beria, they only feared him.
We've been though only 60 days now and institution after institution is being completely dismantled.
Health, Education, Science, Weather Service, soon USPS, aid to the world with medication to stop HIV etc and food for children, all gone.
They paid a torture prison to take people out of US jurisdiction so judges couldn't order hearings, there are people who were legit seeking asylum and have obviously never been in a gang or criminals who might never see the light of day again
Russel Vought, Stephen Miller, Steve Bannon are full blown fascists following the Project2025 plan page by page.
Imagine this country in 200 more weeks.
Imagine what's going to go down once Congress and the Supreme Court are out for the summer and can't react quickly enough to all the illegal activities.
It's going to take DECADES to recover from this damage.
Why would you make an assumption in this case with no evidence or data? Are you saying the majority of FBI arrests are now driven by politics? Would you be surprised to learn that there have been similar foreign national arrests under previous administrations?
>>> the use of minimalist phone and a laptop is something I'm planning for all my travel
I don't think their comment has any PII or even signals to adversaries how to fight back. It's just common for people to have lots of information. Sure, adversaries can press you about this but at that point they're probably going to press you for another reason anyways.
As for whether they knowingly let a spy leave, that would depend on a full timeline.
Not going to waste my time any longer flagging and downvoting political content and trying to keep HN good. The propagandists and hate have won and have majority control over it now. Every day a third of the front page is political/social/mainstream news content which isn't supposed to be here. Adios. Time to find the next place.
You can spot the same playbook in Germany, where they’re scheming to strip citizenship from dual-nationality migrants if they dare speak out against Israel. In Berlin, police are brutally pummeling pro-Palestine protesters—scenes you’d never expect to see in Germany.
Then there’s the clampdown in UK and other European countries on journalists and everyday folks calling out Israel’s moves in Palestine.
Across the West, these anti-free-speech tactics are piling up, all to muzzle anyone who questions Israel.
https://people.math.harvard.edu/~ctm/home/text/others/shanno...
No it does not if the defense for denying him entry was knowing that he was a spy?
Stop arguing out of both sides of your mouth. So far both proffered explanations are unacceptable.
To be clear the two answers so far have been,
1: we found personal comments of him on his phone critical of the administration and denied him entry based on that, which is unacceptable on free speech grounds
Or
2: he was known or found to have secrets from one of our nuclear labs and was denied entry based on the fact that we knew he had these forbidden files, and we let him go. This is unacceptable on national security grounds.
You can’t mix and match from the two scenarios
https://acoup.blog/2024/10/25/new-acquisitions-1933-and-the-...
The transgression against the groups does not change, it is just repeated on different "troublesome" out groups. I guess you can argue that the last line, where the I of the text is taken, is the slippery slope. But that seems a bit contrived.
My reading of it is that it is an admonishing against accepting injustice against groups that you yourself is not part of, and that if you do not speak up. Then who will speak up for you, if you need it.
Instead we have a French beurocrat complaining about it on his behalf himself pushing the bad messages found narrative. This all smells of cover-up.
A plausible explanation would be that the US knows confidential information ended up in France and the person who was denied entry was the only plausible vector but was not caught red handed. Instead he was shadow banned and was nabbed for interrogation at the border where he confessed. And it could well be that the border agents scraped together a story about his messages as an excuse to bounce a persona non grata to keep the diplomatic issue quiet because banning a guy for Trump hate is a better diplomatic choice. (i.e. what is to be gained from holding him vs letting France burn him for getting caught). This all seems extremely plausible to me.
In any case there's obviously more to the story and that's the point. Not knowing who this guy is really underscores there's something diplomatically delicate at play here and the US has sent France whatever message it needs already IMHO.
Put another way: if you are affiliated with France's nuclear weapons program maybe there's something work-related going on between France and the US. That's how I interpret this story.
The US hasn’t historically had high literacy rates though I definitely agree we are back to McCarthy levels of anti-intellectualism. Probably worse.
> Here he is giving a pep talk to Zionist students on how to takeover student gov to reverse democratically voted policies “just like how AIPAC does it in Congress”
Deportation to the country that would certainly incarcerate her for her political position is a bad idea on may levels; first of all, it's inhumane. If the case really devolves down to the deportation for real, I wonder if some other countries would offer her asylum, because it's definitely better that a prison, especially a prison in Russia.
[1]: https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/protecting-agriculture/i...
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00954-y
https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-plan-overhauli...
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00780-2
https://arstechnica.com/health/2025/03/report-us-scientists-...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/03/28/trump-adm...
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2025/03/trump-ame...
The journey from serfdom to modern human rights was a long one, but it had a clear upward trend.
Five eyes, Russia, China, etc are happy you’re comfortable.
Wow, in your country does the entire criminal justice process take place in the course of the same day of the arrest? Interesting. Care to share details?
What I read was that it was a paperwork oversight — it wasn't that she wasn't allowed to bring the materials into the country, it was that she didn't check some kind of box on a form.
Semantic nihilism. It’s a basic fact of political science that governments enact policies in order to achieve outcomes. Or if you prefer cybernetics, there’s always Stafford Beer: “The purpose of a system is what is does.”
Monarchs grew steadily more circumscribed from a de jure point of view. Eventually they became constitutional monarchs, then mere figureheads. Their de facto power also went from absolute steadily downward.
The same trend happened with Christianity: at one time the Pope was so powerful, he broke up the Holy Roman Empire. But there were many reformations, revolutions, Protestantism.
There's a clear trend of decentralization across the entire West, spanning a thousand years - because of individuals insisting on what we now call their inalienable human rights.
I have a 4th grade child. When she was in 3rd grade, I realized that a 3rd grade education allows you to function in many different forms. A 3rd grade reading level is more than enough for living in nearly every situation.
I would hope that full grown adults develop other "intellect" skills that help them in life, but as far as reading level - 3rd grade is plenty.
Just evolutionary biology and psychology.
You see an ‘other’.. Assume the worst.
That’s worked for hundreds of thousands of years. Millions actually.
Everyone does it. Because no one can help doing it. No one who is human anyway.
In reality, given the pattern of intimidation and lies from this government, it was probably something innocuous that was trumped up even just to be a violation of an NDA (e.g. maybe a draft of a not-yet-published non-unusual research paper that included an author from Los Alamos), or else this government would have emphasized the sensitive or dangerous nature of that "confidential information".
No, in my country--America--when an officer goes out to arrest someone for crimes, they typically need a warrant. I am unaware of a single one of these recent ICE arrests having even met that threshold.
Like, we've got plainsclothes officers wearing masks conducting illegal arrests and then a separate cadre of Stadtpolizei moving said warantlessly detained across state and national borders in a blatant attempt to outrun court orders. Each of these people is wilfully and knowingly breaking serious laws. They won't be punished under this administration. But we need to absolutely make an example out of them in the future.
If no one talks about politics, no one gets challenged. Maybe that used to be ok, but now we can retreat to pseudo anonymous communities online or consume algorithm suggested content that only reinforce or create more extreme positions.
Do you also reveal your hand when playing card games? On the basis that the other players already know all the cards anyway?
I'm not saying it can't be determined, but it feels like an issue that can't be easily resolved during a border check within a few hours.
Any large slice of humanity will contain lots of jerks; but our progress over the past couple of thousand years has been too widespread and consistent for me to think that they'll hold us back permanently.
>No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
We get ~200,000 foreign visitors flying into US airports a day. That we have a handful of people over months who had issues seems more like the normal rate, and evidence there is no weird screening policy, which would probably affect thousands, not dozens.
This, of course, is a rather fictitious scenario.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
---
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43223083 (March 2025)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42661453 (Jan 2025)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42526674 (Dec 2024)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38225621 (Nov 2023)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37358816 (Sept 2023)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36994995 (Aug 2023)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35646889 (April 2023)
I won't be surprised if we see some calls to have voting _by household_ come back, potentially under the (nonsense) guise of fighting rigged elections.
I traveled a lot around 2010, long before Trump. Phone searches at the border were common even then. I had to give my passcode to Canada and European countries.
I can attest that this kind of frightening incident did not start with Trump. As a traveler, I heard horror stories back then, but not many people talked about them. I feel like most of the sudden interest in these stories has an obvious motive.
But what I am alluding to is that that account signed up just to leave that Russian-sounding comment. And now it has been flagged. Russo-bot.
A simpler thing to make up would be a family matter, some unverifiable criminal record or whatever. Even noncooperation which is a valid reason to refuse entry. Or most likely: simply "no comment" would have done.
It doesn't help that we don't know the identity, no. But I'd keep my head down too if it happened to me. Science is a field where everyone knows everyone and it's not one where you want to be known as a troublemaker.
I agree we don't know the details and that there's probably more to the story but I don't think the criticism thing is made up.
It just keeps seeming to be these things where the press is really pushing this narrative but the stories they bring always carry an asterisk.
To be quite honest I have alarm fatigue when these keep popping up. They all register as clickbait. I have not encountered a single one yet that wasn't smoke spun up for clicks and outrage.
The worst stance of all of course is demonstrated over and over in this thread and HN in general where you have people calling Trump the second coming of Hitler, yet are too fat and comfortable to find the courage to have their actions match their words.
So we'll be getting these types of threads about how HNers need to be carrying burner phones for the next four years -- may god grant us some Sorelian heroes before then.
I understand the allure of the simple answer, but "Trade schools are good enough, we need more plumbers anyhow!" only works until Joe the Plumber has to sign a contract, read a EULA, or steer the fate of our entire nation by voting.
Having revealed my strategy for keeping you from seeing my cards, were you able to learn more about my cards after I have revealed my strategy for preventing you from seeing my cards? If so I'd like to learn. If not, then reread my previous comment.
If you(the royal you) disagree, then please point out the last pro democracy advocate who didn’t get demolished by their local authoritarian leader in the past 30 years
If he stole documents I don’t want my government only flagging him for denial to reentry. If he stole documents from our nuclear labs I want him in cuffs.
How am I being inconsistent if your “false dichotomy” claim persists?
Are you aware that an enormous amount of chemistry, mathematical, computer science, physics, etc. is funded through the NIH?
The poster I responded to complained I gave too many examples, and now your post is a complaint that I didn't give examples in scientific areas you deem important.
For tedious completeness here are a variety of other examples all of which involve math, physics, chemistry, computer science and other non-biomedical fields.
* Proposed cuts to NIST -- https://www.npr.org/2025/03/26/nx-s1-5340687/trump-cuts-nist...
* NASA -- https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/03/white-house-may-seek-t...
* Department of Energy -- https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/29/energy-departments-...
> Perhaps that’s because most of British academia still can’t get its head around the idea that the US is now an enemy, not an ally, and that the “special relationship” is yesterday’s story.
That's a bold statement. John is using language in a manipulative way. By moving the word "enemy" into a context where it is not justified (is it really war, rather than typical negotiations?), he aims to create a dramatic perspective on a thing that is not obviously dramatic. Drama is the basis of the argument. The cases he bring up do not seem to justify the conclusive dramatic language.
Doesn't matter what side,... An echo chamber is bad regardless. If I want one, I would go elsewhere. Perhaps there's an idea in this community that "we are better than the rest, and can carry out political discussions, because, after all, we are right in our opinions, and we only do it when 'necessary'".
Aren't there a solution, like create HN/pol... Or create a separate TLD for it.
If you are going to have political content, can't there be a way to filter it out?
I limit myself to analyze the political stuff for the sport of pointing out bad rethorics and such, not because I care about either side or any side, but for the sake of analysis.
Typical negotiations don't look anything like the policies they're inacting, not like retracting research or cancelling funding on the basis of including keywords that the party deems problematic (regardless of actual content), and certainly not like threats of annexation or extra-judicial disappearances if students writing political pieces in their college magazines.
It is a bold statement and it does sound dramatic, but it's still probably an understatement if you look at what has been happening. It's honestly dumbfounding to continue to see people defending this as in any way normal.
Hasn't the Secretary of State said that several hundred people have already been targeted this way? This picture of reality is already real life for many people, their colleagues and their families.
Some EU countries have more of a Russian position on these things!
I very much is a question of national, not EU law so you cannot generalise about the EU.
Where the EU does have laws on these things it has been very anti-privacy and pro-surveillance.
(Trying to think of another good example and the Watchmen series tackled racism head-on, also Persepolis is a great animation covering the Iranian revolution)
If we had back then it wouldn’t have struck me as crazy if we’d considered the IRA a terrorist group. That we didn’t do this doesn’t mean we’re locked out of it forever.
My entire point is that these things are seldom so black and white as put forward. The US administration has a self serving answer, but so do the French and this anonymous scientist. Which do you think is less professionally damaging for a European, being denied entrance due to views on American politics or being denied based on mishandling of classified material?
In an ideal world, I would prefer to see any mishandling of classification prosecuted, that seldom is how it works.
Without knowing a timeline, it isn't even clear which administration was running things under which events.
Keep in mind we're talking about people with a moral framework that reduces the situation to these two choices. They'd need to abandon their sense of morality to maintain the status quo.
I don't give a fuck what the French or Europeans think. I am holding my own government accountable to what are ostensibly the values we share(freedom of speech and national security) and finding them lacking. It requires zero input from the French scientist in question for me to be upset with the situation
And no, I don't need a timeline to understand this because my problem with the government's own explanation does not have a time based component
What would conservatives done if Obama said the same? Trump is “ingroup” and the law only protects him, it does not bind him.
Obama? Definitely outgroup, and definitely bound by the law.
Liberalism, in the classic sense, is the opposite: the law protects and binds all, equally.
I doubt you are as “in group” as you might think you are.
That's exactly what I would question. Does the author look just as hard in the other direction and, with intellectual honesty, defend those cases? (should he? why? why not?...) My general sense is the "other side" may have experienced similar treatment that is now being complained about. No, I don't mean it is therefore necessarily justified. I really mean that—I do not think it is therefore necessarily justified.
If I side with any of them, either side may decide I'm no longer in the in-group. Rather than either side being right, both have the same potential for corruption, and that's the real enemy.
This is not a specific answer to the effort you offered in explaining the situation. I would have to look deeper into it.
Reading isn’t just about successfully understanding words. It’s the ability to decipher context, particularly in long texts in which metaphor and subtext are important.
You need look no further than the current crop of VCs and tech leaders who can all clearly barely read. Andreessen, Musk, Zuckerberg all love to point at classic science fiction and modern media while making comments which articulate how completely they have missed the point. When musk says the Cybertruck is “…something Blade Runner would drive” or Andreessen quotes Marinetti as a hero, or Zuckerberg unironically uses “move fast and break things” as a motto it’s clear how little of what they have read they understand.
People today are praising translations of Hitler’s speeches. They do this because they cannot connect the points he’s making to the inevitable outcomes of those attitudes. They lack the ability to see into the text and truly understand it.
That’s why a 3rd grade reading ability is a problem. Zuckerberg and Musk are dropouts. It’s shows.
Occasionally, a [dead] post is actually good for HN. (Even banned accounts sometimes post good submissions or comments, and we don't necessarily want those to remain invisible.) In such cases, users can vouch for the [dead] post to unkill it, i.e. to take it out of the [dead] state and restore it to full public visibility. Only a tiny fraction of [dead] posts get restored in this way, so the vast majority of posts by banned accounts remain [dead].
We're sometimes asked why we allow banned accounts to continue to post to HN (albeit in a [dead] state). Wouldn't it be better to block them altogether? It's a bit counterintuitive, but this would actually be worse. Many of the banned users would simply create new accounts—and those comments would be publicly visible until we caught them and banned them again. So, paradoxically, allowing banned accounts to keep posting (but in a default-invisible state) is the way to minimize their effect on HN. Trying to restrict them further would just end up exposing more people to the abusive posts.
The main disadvantage of this design, in my experience, is that users sometimes forget that they turned 'showdead' on in their profile, and then wonder why they're seeing such dreadful stuff in the comments! So if you turn 'showdead' on, please remember what this means: you're basically signing up to see the worst stuff that the internet has to offer on this forum.
Why turn the setting on at all? Well, many HN users are the curious sort who either want to see everything under the hood, or who feel strongly about censorship and want the freedom to decide for themselves what they think about banned accounts. Also, not all the posts that end up in the [dead] state are bad—there are many ways for a good post to end up [dead] by mistake (including false positives by spam filters), and users with 'showdead' turn on are able to vouch for those and restore them.