this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2025
8 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

2679 readers
223 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago (4 children)

if applicants refuse to unlock their accounts or otherwise don’t maintain a social media presence, the government may interpret it as an attempt to evade the requirement or deliberately hide online activity.

Here I was, wondering why people don't just say they don't have a social media account.

[–] OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

So I have to create a Facebook account just to enter the country? It was bad enough having unrelated websites demand it.

Good thing I have no plans to ever visit again. Elbows up.

[–] Zedd_Prophecy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I've recently deleted all my accounts except here - Now I look guilty by lack of social media.

[–] IhaveCrabs111@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

So what happens when you don’t have any?

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

if applicants ... don’t maintain a social media presence, the government may interpret it as an attempt to evade the requirement or deliberately hide online activity.

Presumably it's disqualifying.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Straight to the gulags

[–] refalo@programming.dev 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I have not seen any language that suggests that, nor what EFF is saying.

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

A separate cable, obtained by multiple news outlets, directed embassies and consulates to vet applicants for “hostile attitudes towards our citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles”

...

Applicants for student and exchange visas will now have their “entire online presence” vetted, per the cable reportedly said. If students refuse to change their accounts to “public” and “limited access to, or visibility of, online presence could be construed as an effort to evade or hide certain activity.”

Seems like a reasonable assumption to me

[–] refalo@programming.dev 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I don't see how that even implies that not having a presence in the first place is inherently a red flag...

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago

limited access to, or visibility of, online presence could be construed as an effort to evade or hide certain activity

Do you really not? Can you not connect the dots between "limited access to, or visibility of, online presence" and not having a social media account? Do you truly not understand how these two things are related?

[–] refalo@programming.dev 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I guess nobody can really know for sure, but in my opinion, if you truly don't have anything, nothing happens, as that's what they want, complacency.

I think EFF is just what-ifing things they could theoretically do in the future... which they do a lot. Not saying EFF is bad, but they do speculate a lot. Sometimes it's a good thing though.

[–] Vulwsztyn@programming.dev 1 points 1 week ago

"don't maintain a social media presence" covers not having any social medium account

[–] omgitsaheadcrab@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Ez solution: don't go there

[–] Wooki@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Even better.

Dont go. & delete your accounts.

Getting out from behind the screen and being present in the world around you will do lots for mental health, relationships, and give you back a lot of free time.

[–] kebab@endlesstalk.org 1 points 2 months ago

Doesn’t Lemmy also count as social media?