zlacker

That's worse IMO.

I can (and would) opt out of taking my phone to China. I can't easily dodge US' requirements.

These two bully super-powers really give me a bad feeling about the future...

>>Iv+(OP)
I can (and would) opt out of going to China.

I'm all set with authoritarian dictatorships with torture camps and organ harvesting.

>>Iv+(OP)
What if you just say no? I don't use any social media and it can't be that unusual

>>nullwa+Y7
IANAL but that could be interpreted as lying to a federal officer, given your participation in Hacker News discussions

>>newsca+Ib
But when internet forums count as social media, few can provide a complete list of websites they have engaged with.

I definitely can't recall every one of those I had been on in the last decades.

>>newsca+Ib
I wonder if one could truthfully state "no, I'm not on any social media [at this exact moment, since I'm talking to you and not actively using any social media]" and avoid any potential legal trouble, or if there's some clause or mechanism in whatever law applies here that's designed specifically to address intentionally misleading word choices.

>>tatami+Qc
The law will have to define explicitly what it means to have an active social media account.

>>Iv+(OP)
I think it's far easier to offer up dummy social accounts (even for non-techies) vs being forced to install malware on your phone.

>>chaost+bj
I am not very good at lying. I would not be able to look an officer in the eye and say that I wasn't on social media.

Leaving a posh phone at home to take my old phone I could do without moral complications. I could even say I left my posh phone at home because I didn't want it lost/stolen on my travels. That would not be lying even if the real reason was that I didn't want it violated by a customs officer.