zlacker

>>dang+(OP)
This is a terrible decision. The tech industry has built powerful tools of social control, and runs vast databases of private data on pretty much everyone in the country. We have a golden period of forty-some days before a new administration comes to power that has shown every intent of using that information to deport people and create a national Muslim registry.

We need to be talking about the political implications of what we've built, and figuring out how to fix our mess. This is like the period before the hurricane: everyone should be busy boarding up windows, and you can't do that if you decide you're just not going to talk about the coming storm because it makes you feel bad.

>>idlewo+ck
>We have a golden period of forty-some days before a new administration comes to power that has shown every intent of using that information to deport people and create a national Muslim registry.

This is why I support a moratorium on politics here. This kind of assumption and hyperbole is really off-putting. I'm happy to debate these topics, but not here.

Now, that said, it's going to be a little murky. For example, I want to examine Ed Ou's detention at the US border. What if something breaks about Snowden or Assange? How about net neutrality?

>>ibejoe+Vt
This is not hyperbole.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/11/20/donal...

> Donald J. Trump, who earlier in the week said he was open to requiring Muslims in the United States to register in a database, said on Thursday night that he “would certainly implement that — absolutely.” Mr. Trump was asked about the issue by an NBC News reporter and pressed on whether all Muslims in the country would be forced to register. “They have to be,” he said. “They have to be.’’ ... Asked later, as he signed autographs, how such a database would be different from Jews having to register in Nazi Germany, Mr. Trump repeatedly said, “You tell me,” until he stopped responding to the question.

>>ryboso+Oy
you put Trump quotes after descriptions of the questions he is answering, but why not quote the questions too?

NYTimes didn't provide those, right?

"While many headlines came out after this exchange saying Trump would "absolutely" require Muslims to register in a database, it’s not entirely clear that’s what he said."

"Through the end of the conversation, it’s possible Trump thought the exchange was about illegal immigration."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/nov/24/...

Tell me what you think of Trumps reply wrt that last "Nazi Germany" question from NBC?

>>Chris2+Wu1
Interesting, there was more ambiguity than I was initially aware of. From the article you've linked, it does sound plausible that Trump thought he was talking about illegal immigration (for at least the initial question, not sure about the follow up questions). However, as the article notes, further attempts to clarify his position later do not show him unequivocally distancing himself from it.

I think it's fair to say that we can't be totally certain what the intention of his administrations are; though this is trivially true in all cases, I never seriously questioned the possibility of such a thing with previous administrations. As I mentioned in another comment, failing to distance himself from such a comment when given the opportunity later does alarm me.

> Tell me what you think of Trumps reply wrt that last "Nazi Germany" question from NBC?

I read it as ducking the question. What do you make of it?