this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2025
125 points (99.2% liked)

politics

22874 readers
4632 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 day ago

$200 from fam... straight to El Salvador

$2billion from Saudi Prince...?

[–] softcat 65 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Odds are you're on a watchlist for using Lemmy

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago

Definitely if you’re on a .ml address.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago

randomized MACs on public WiFi, burner email addresses and Tor are the new fortress phones.

"fortress phone". I'm old. :(

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Can't Tor usage be identified? The encryption pattern, connection to known entry points...?

My thread model doesn't need For, but I'm not sure if it's enough against being singled out by a state actor.

I'm even wondering if to attempt privacy isn't going to be an issue if things get worse.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

No, it can't. Dont spread misinformation. Tor is extremely secure, when used properly. TAILS helps.

Edit: they can see that you're using tor. They can't see your traffic or who you're communicating with.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 23 hours ago

No, it can't. Dont spread misinformation. Tor is extremely secure, when used properly. TAILS helps.

I haven't said anything about it's security, so I'm not "spreading misinformation"

Edit: they can see that you're using tor. They can't see your traffic or who you're communicating with.

Glad you went back and added an edit to agree with what I said. I would have removed the unnecessary abrasive first paragraph too, but it's a step in the right direction.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 day ago

THIS is the Small Government I want! Government SO SMALL that you have to Tell Them EVERY PENNY you Spend!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

Jesus, we should be doubling the $10k threshold to keep up with inflation, not decreasing it

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 day ago

More than 1 million Californians and Texans are about to face a new level of financial surveillance from the federal government. Although cash transactions over $10,000 have long been reported under current law, now many transactions of as little as $200 will have to be reported in 30 ZIP Codes along the border with Mexico. Financial surveillance in the United States has needed reform, but this policy marks little more than another intrusion into the lives of Americans.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 day ago

And in addition to friend and family getting on watchlists, this also means that a LOT of businesses are going to start keeping a lot of cash around if they want to keep prices down.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I've gone back to spending cash only. I keep a credit card for emergencies though.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

This. But monero for online transactions

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago (6 children)

They still have cheques over there? Last time I saw one here was 15 years ago.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

They say "checks" but it is realistically going to mean any transaction over $200

[–] floofloof 4 points 1 day ago

Many US banking systems are surprisingly old fashioned compared to other countries.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Its just a SEPA transfer equivalent on paper.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Do you put a $200 grocery bill/ restaurant tab on your bank card? Congratulations, Uncle Sam is now demanding that your bank report that spending to them.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I last remember seeing my mom write one in the mid 80s. Personally I've never used one, and I'm pushing 50.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hmm. I'm 58 and I've written many.

I guess it just depends on what people like.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Ah, I forgot to mention that I live in Norway, and over here debit cards started taking over from check use in the 80s.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

In the US, checks are still a common way to give money to people as gifts, especially birthdays and weddings and things like that. Also schools will require extra fees like trip costs to be paid by check because they are paid into older bank accounts that they don't have online payment equivalents.

Paper checks are a pain, but they have lower fees than most other ways of giving money. Once you've paid for the book of papers, that's it. Each check only costs your account the exact amount written for and the recipient's bank gives them the exact amount you wrote. No extra percentage or flat fee on the transaction and with smartphones you can scan the check and make the transaction happen electronically between the banks in 5 seconds. Every other way to do this has a flat or percentage fee for the money to move but a paper check is free.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 22 hours ago

That would explain it

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

I still write a cheque to pay the milkman. Remember them too?

[–] besselj -4 points 1 day ago (3 children)

If everyone is on a watchlist, nobody is

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 day ago

gotta disagree. with current electronic processing, storage and forthcoming AI analysis, that axiom no longer applies - everyone is on a watch list.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago

I don't think that phrase really works universally. The original line from the Incredibles makes sense because "super" is a relative term. If we're all on a watchlist that doesn't mean we're not actually being watched or not in danger, it just means we stopped distinguishing levels of suspicion or "saving resources" for the most dangerous people. Think they don't have the resources to watch everyone? That's what AI is for.

[–] adespoton 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Unfortunately, that’s not true.

Also unfortunately, a LOT of people are treated as if they’re on a watchlist, even when they aren’t.

If everyone is on a watchlist, that means everyone is being watched so they can be punished if they do anything that could even be remotely considered outside the law.

Pulled over for speeding and you’re on a watchlist? Off to interrogation for you.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago

The point is that's not a watchlist, that's just a panopticon authoritarian state. Big Brother is always watching.