I'm still pretty sure copying the contents of an hard drive without a warrant is illegal - there as in another other democratic and "free" country. A country adopting such a measure, be it for nationals or foreigns reaching their borders is a police state.
Lets also not forget the news originating this thread only reveal the opinion of two judges. Or at least that's how I read it, on wired (link a few posts down after the first).
illegal? unethical? bad practice? tyranny?
i do not care. the point is it is useless and so easy to evade
/* some people will just get even worse ideas about usa after such practices. mario seems to be most disturbed by now */
People get caught with a bag of weed all the time. Easy to evade, but people are lazy. If nothign else it serves as a deterant, forcing the enemy to use other means, which may be easier to track. You have to look at the big picture, not whether this action produces results, but how it effects the overall environment to cause other methods to yield results.
Originally Posted by (::)
It's like you're not even listening... the other means are not easier to track. That's the whole point. You can't track every piece of traffic on the internet. If a guy wants to store plans to blow up a building on an jpeg image called "mydaughtersbirthday.jpg" on a foreign server, come to the US, and download it in an internet cafe... he could. And he could do it with much greater ease than the guy who has to stick his baggie of weed up he bum. You can't call it a deterrent if it isn't the primary means of importing electronic data. Like I said before, it's like trying to deter a criminal from breaking into your house by locking the window while you're leaving the door wide open. You're doing nothing but forcing a criminal to use a safer, more secure means of breaking the law. You won't be stopping any real criminals with this... the only "lazy" people you might catch are the pedophiles like the guy in the case law of the bill.
Originally Posted by abachler