4 ms·

yeah. why would they want to verify we're allowed to leave? the default assumption should be that everyone is allowed to leave...

atonse 8y ago
At first this didn't add up, but I think they want to be able to prove that you overstayed your visa. But with the current process, you can come, overstay your tourist visa, and leave, but they don't stamp you on departure, only on arrival, so they can't actually tell that you left. Again, is this a real, rampant, dangerous problem? Probably not. But it's a real use-case (so they don't have to give fake reasons) for state-wide surveillance. Since it also claims to target foreigners (which by definition aren't voters), most locals/voters/politicians won't care, thinking it doesn't apply to them. Not that I'm defending this, I think this level of surveillance is extremely dangerous. And the most obvious thing is that they'll slowly and quietly expand this to everyone else.
- rtkwe 8y ago
  It has kind of been a thorn in the side of immigration enforcement though that determining who has potentially overstayed their visa because of the lack of exit tracking. Because of that trying to enforce visa overstays was really hard because you just have a huge list of people who have come with not much info about who actually left so trying to check up on visa overstays would waste a lot of time on people who had just come and gone as required. This trims down that list to be muuuch smaller so they can more easily check without wasting a lot of time.
alter_eco123 8y ago
You know, in practice, even your passport has always been a "permission to leave". It's also a "permission to enter" some other country. But without it, you won't be flying anywhere. Then you've got visas, which are "permissions to exist" in a certain geographical area (within a certain time-frame). We've all had a default assumption that we can get a new passport any time, but it's actually never been guaranteed.
- gambiting 8y ago
  Not long ago even European countries had double borders - you had to go through one checkpoint of your own country, that would verify that you can leave(you are not a wanted criminal for example), and then another checkpoint of the country you wanted to enter, to check if you have the right to enter it. The area between the two was the no-mans-land. This arrangement still exists between some South American and African countries, you have to go through two separate checkpoints.
  - alter_eco123 8y ago
    > Not long ago even European countries had double borders Our current situation might be marginally better than "double borders", but you're probably aware we're headed in a police statey direction all over the world.
ihsw2 8y ago
To catch criminals trying to escape the long arm of the law.
- gowld 8y ago
  The long arm of the law makes everyone a criminal.

atonse 8y ago

At first this didn't add up, but I think they want to be able to prove that you overstayed your visa. But with the current process, you can come, overstay your tourist visa, and leave, but they don't stamp you on departure, only on arrival, so they can't actually tell that you left. Again, is this a real, rampant, dangerous problem? Probably not. But it's a real use-case (so they don't have to give fake reasons) for state-wide surveillance. Since it also claims to target foreigners (which by definition aren't voters), most locals/voters/politicians won't care, thinking it doesn't apply to them. Not that I'm defending this, I think this level of surveillance is extremely dangerous. And the most obvious thing is that they'll slowly and quietly expand this to everyone else.

rtkwe 8y ago
It has kind of been a thorn in the side of immigration enforcement though that determining who has potentially overstayed their visa because of the lack of exit tracking. Because of that trying to enforce visa overstays was really hard because you just have a huge list of people who have come with not much info about who actually left so trying to check up on visa overstays would waste a lot of time on people who had just come and gone as required. This trims down that list to be muuuch smaller so they can more easily check without wasting a lot of time.

alter_eco123 8y ago

You know, in practice, even your passport has always been a "permission to leave". It's also a "permission to enter" some other country. But without it, you won't be flying anywhere. Then you've got visas, which are "permissions to exist" in a certain geographical area (within a certain time-frame). We've all had a default assumption that we can get a new passport any time, but it's actually never been guaranteed.

gambiting 8y ago
Not long ago even European countries had double borders - you had to go through one checkpoint of your own country, that would verify that you can leave(you are not a wanted criminal for example), and then another checkpoint of the country you wanted to enter, to check if you have the right to enter it. The area between the two was the no-mans-land. This arrangement still exists between some South American and African countries, you have to go through two separate checkpoints.
- alter_eco123 8y ago
  > Not long ago even European countries had double borders Our current situation might be marginally better than "double borders", but you're probably aware we're headed in a police statey direction all over the world.

ihsw2 8y ago

To catch criminals trying to escape the long arm of the law.

gowld 8y ago
The long arm of the law makes everyone a criminal.