3 ms·

That's a great solution if you're a US citizen and want to enjoy showing off to a border guard before being guaranteed entry, but for migrants (who are most aff

That's a great solution if you're a US citizen and want to enjoy showing off to a border guard before being guaranteed entry, but for migrants (who are most affected by this), this kind of 'gotcha' logic would likely be considered insubordinate grandstanding, and get them denied entry.

eridius 9y ago
> this kind of 'gotcha' logic would likely be considered insubordinate grandstanding I'm not sure what you mean. I don't think it's unreasonable for anyone, migrants included, to tell CBP "I don't feel safe traveling with sensitive data, so I don't have any of that data on my computer". What's the 'gotcha' here? CBP isn't the only reason to want to have Travel Mode, there's also the increased risk of having your laptop stolen or misplaced.
- confounded 9y ago
  In your original post, I took > Only if you know them. ... You can't log into the website without that account key. To mean that you'd openly have access to information in front of the guard, and then let them know that you can't access it at this time because of your elaborate scheme (e.g. tell them that it exists, but that they can't have it). That's quite different to just not travelling with the data (or evidence of it existing) at all. > CBP isn't the only reason to want to have Travel Mode No, but it's the only 'reason' that's likely to use serious, life-altering coercion to make you to disable it, if they detect that it exists. It may be better to have no data that suggests capabilities, than openly posses partially disabled capabilities. There's no way for a border agent to tell if you're refusing to disable travel mode because you won't or you can't (and little reason for them to care).
- doubleunplussed 9y ago
  Of course it's not unreasonable, but 'reasonable' is not the relevant criterion here.

3 ms·

That's a great solution if you're a US citizen and want to enjoy showing off to a border guard before being guaranteed entry, but for migrants (who are most aff

by confounded 9y ago

eridius 9y ago
> this kind of 'gotcha' logic would likely be considered insubordinate grandstanding I'm not sure what you mean. I don't think it's unreasonable for anyone, migrants included, to tell CBP "I don't feel safe traveling with sensitive data, so I don't have any of that data on my computer". What's the 'gotcha' here? CBP isn't the only reason to want to have Travel Mode, there's also the increased risk of having your laptop stolen or misplaced.
- confounded 9y ago
  In your original post, I took > Only if you know them. ... You can't log into the website without that account key. To mean that you'd openly have access to information in front of the guard, and then let them know that you can't access it at this time because of your elaborate scheme (e.g. tell them that it exists, but that they can't have it). That's quite different to just not travelling with the data (or evidence of it existing) at all. > CBP isn't the only reason to want to have Travel Mode No, but it's the only 'reason' that's likely to use serious, life-altering coercion to make you to disable it, if they detect that it exists. It may be better to have no data that suggests capabilities, than openly posses partially disabled capabilities. There's no way for a border agent to tell if you're refusing to disable travel mode because you won't or you can't (and little reason for them to care).
- doubleunplussed 9y ago
  Of course it's not unreasonable, but 'reasonable' is not the relevant criterion here.