3 ms·

I’m not sure what the hotel is hoping to gain here, and the argument in this thread is very weird. The argument for this in the comments below seems to be just

I’m not sure what the hotel is hoping to gain here, and the argument in this thread is very weird. The argument for this in the comments below seems to be justifying this saying that the hotel is doing safety checks because of a prior mass shooting, which was unrelated to DEFCON, or that they’re looking for “suspicious networking equipment” which none of the staff is trained on how to go find let alone even identify. Moral implication of do not disturb aside, this seems very poorly executed and meaningless. If the management of the hotel for some reason is paranoid and doesn’t like these guests, then don’t accept their business.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
JohnMakin 2y ago
The argument is this has been going on for a long time and isn't anything new or surprising. It's even happened at past events and has always been known to the organizers as commonplace. It isn't justifying the behavior, but attempting to put it into context.
alwa 2y ago
I noticed that a hotel I stayed at reworded their door signs to say “cleaning not required,” which seemed to me a sensible way to reframe expectations. Legal obligations aside, how would a provider of public accommodation figure out who to refuse the business to? Do they size up guests at checkin to see if they look hacker-ish? Is that more fair than a bumbling effort at deterrence by advertising your existing security policy, of casting eyes in every room every day—a policy you apply uniformly to every member of the public who wants to rent a room?
- yencabulator 2y ago
  My understanding from some other conversation was that these rooms were sold as a discounted block to the conference; they knew it was going to be defcon people.
- kelnos 2y ago
  If they don't want to be an attractive lodging option for DEFCON attendees, maybe they shouldn't reserve a discounted block of rooms for DEFCON attendees.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

JohnMakin 2y ago

The argument is this has been going on for a long time and isn't anything new or surprising. It's even happened at past events and has always been known to the organizers as commonplace. It isn't justifying the behavior, but attempting to put it into context.

alwa 2y ago

I noticed that a hotel I stayed at reworded their door signs to say “cleaning not required,” which seemed to me a sensible way to reframe expectations. Legal obligations aside, how would a provider of public accommodation figure out who to refuse the business to? Do they size up guests at checkin to see if they look hacker-ish? Is that more fair than a bumbling effort at deterrence by advertising your existing security policy, of casting eyes in every room every day—a policy you apply uniformly to every member of the public who wants to rent a room?

yencabulator 2y ago
My understanding from some other conversation was that these rooms were sold as a discounted block to the conference; they knew it was going to be defcon people.
kelnos 2y ago
If they don't want to be an attractive lodging option for DEFCON attendees, maybe they shouldn't reserve a discounted block of rooms for DEFCON attendees.