Slashdot Mirror
Should America Build a Virtual Border Wall? Or Just Crowdfund It... (chicagotribune.com)
As America's government faces its longest-ever shutdown over the president's demands for border wall funding, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has suggested "possible alternatives to a physical wall," according to one Silicon Valley newspaper:
Among the president's justifications for a wall is to stop drugs from coming into the United States, so Pelosi proposed spending "hundreds of millions of dollars" for technology to scan cars for drugs, weapons and contraband at the border. "The positive, shall we say, almost technological wall that can be built is what we should be doing," Pelosi, D-San Francisco, said during her weekly press conference.
That didn't go over well with Fight for the Future, a digital rights advocacy group that on Friday started a petition asking Democrats to drop plans for a "technological wall" that it says could threaten Fourth Amendment rights that guard against unreasonable searches and seizures. "Current border surveillance programs subject people to invasive and unconstitutional searches of their cell phones and laptops, location tracking, drone surveillance, and problematic watchlists," the group's petition says...
In December, the Department of Homeland Security's Office of the Inspector General released a report that showed searches of electronic devices at the border were up nearly 50 percent in 2017. The report also found that border agents were not always following standard operating procedures for searches, including failing to properly document such searches. In addition, information copied by agents were not always deleted as required.
The article also notes that Anduril Industries -- founded by Oculus Rift designer Palmer Luckey (and funded by Peter Thiel) -- is one of several companies already working on "a virtual border wall."
CNN also reports on a GoFundMe campaign started by an Air Force veteran to simply crowdfund the construction of the wall. Though 340,747 people pledged over $20 million, it failed to reach its $1 billion goal, and is now pointing supporters to a newly-formed non-profit corporation -- named "We Build the Wall."
Meanwhile, another 7,121 GoFundMe members have pledged $160,985 to a rival campaign raising money for ladders to climb over Trump's wall.
That didn't go over well with Fight for the Future, a digital rights advocacy group that on Friday started a petition asking Democrats to drop plans for a "technological wall" that it says could threaten Fourth Amendment rights that guard against unreasonable searches and seizures. "Current border surveillance programs subject people to invasive and unconstitutional searches of their cell phones and laptops, location tracking, drone surveillance, and problematic watchlists," the group's petition says...
In December, the Department of Homeland Security's Office of the Inspector General released a report that showed searches of electronic devices at the border were up nearly 50 percent in 2017. The report also found that border agents were not always following standard operating procedures for searches, including failing to properly document such searches. In addition, information copied by agents were not always deleted as required.
The article also notes that Anduril Industries -- founded by Oculus Rift designer Palmer Luckey (and funded by Peter Thiel) -- is one of several companies already working on "a virtual border wall."
CNN also reports on a GoFundMe campaign started by an Air Force veteran to simply crowdfund the construction of the wall. Though 340,747 people pledged over $20 million, it failed to reach its $1 billion goal, and is now pointing supporters to a newly-formed non-profit corporation -- named "We Build the Wall."
Meanwhile, another 7,121 GoFundMe members have pledged $160,985 to a rival campaign raising money for ladders to climb over Trump's wall.
Most of them are not refugees from political violence. Most of them are leaving for financial reasons. And the caravans started because Pueblos Sin Fronteras organized them and told these people their life would be much better if they left for the US. There's a reason the last one hit the border right at election time.
San Diego is an urban area where walls EXIST. Yes, they work there - at slowing people slightly - because THEY ARE MANNED AND PATROLLED NEARBY. That is not happening along the entire border, nor proposed.
The 2006 study on GK's effectiveness noted a 76% drop from 1992-2004 in San Diego County, so I'd put it at more than "slowing people slightly". It's a fair argument that some/many of the would-be crossers tried crossing more East instead (not just into Imperial County, but much further east... past Yuma in AZ, NM, and TX). One doesn't need to build an entire wall everywhere and Trump's proposal doesn't do that. CBP knows where walls are needed and where they're not, and they're fully capable of allocating resources accordingly.
The technology in the budget requests goes to a lot of IR, drones, and the like... Exactly the kind of smart allocation of resources everyone on all sides appears to claim to want.
So, again... What's the problem?
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
The Israel border is 440 miles long - about 22% of the US Southern border. I think we can agree we have more than 5 times the resources available to patrol?
As far as most people coming through the airports - citation needed. We know how many came through because we have paperwork/visa entry information on them. Do we have equivalent data on those illegally crossing the border - those never checked, never vetted, never issued a visa? No? Then how can you make the claim?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Non-citizens should have *zero* voting rights, period,
I can agree with that federal elections but shouldn't it be up to states and cities to determine their own laws so long as they do not conflict with federal law?
and certainly not those who willfully break the law in the first place.
It's true they violated the law at one point but it's reductive and dehumanizing to simply classify them as criminals and then dismiss them entirely.
I'm not sure why liberals think that enforcing immigration to the US using the methods currently legally available
You got me all wrong. I'm all for people legal immigration and I think the onus should be upon those who employ illegal immigrants. That said, it's something that the Republican party has rejected because they want the cheap labor. They pretend to be hardliners against illegal immigration because it gets them votes. Rounding up illegal immigrants and deporting them is just like the wall, they know it wont actually do anything to address the problem but it gets votes.
If they were actually wanted to address illegal immigration then they would go after the corporations that provide them the money to stay here.
and strictly controlling who we let in
We already have a strict immigration process. This comes across as a racist dog whistle to keep brown people out more than anything else.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.