Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China's Xinjiang surveillance is the dystopian future nobody wants

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 280 posts

Re: China's Xinjiang surveillance is the dystopian future nobody wants

#81

Post by Barrin92 »

gugudollz wrote: post #68

There has never been internet shutdown in Kenya. TV stations were switched off but never internet. If China establishes autocratic regimes in the global South it will seize those governments and leverage that to gain power over the West. It's myopic to think their goal is anything less than absolute domination of the world.

It's probably safe to assume that China wants to increase its influence, but accusing any country of plans of 'absolute domination' based on domestic surveillance probably says more about the psyche of the accuser than anyone else

Re: China's Xinjiang surveillance is the dystopian future nobody wants

#82

Post by mysterypie »

el_benhameen wrote: post #49
akira2501 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is sourced from a New York Times _opinion_ piece without any documentation or second sourcing to back it up. I'm comfortable putting this in the "dubious" and/or "overblown anecdote" bin unless evidence shows otherwise.

I was curious and found this article ( https://www.fastcompany.com/40510238/in-xinjiang-china-some-... ) which references this series of tweets ( https://twitter.com/joshchin/status/943159015994880000/photo... ).

Thank you for finding that! Why didn't Engadget or the New York Times put that photo into the article? Engraving kitchen knives with your ID number sounded like hyperbole. Nothing proves it like a photo or video. Same with articles on security or privacy compromises -- you need an actual exploit before (most) people take it seriously.

Direct link to the photo:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRbGEKdVAAAtVis?format=jpg

Re: China's Xinjiang surveillance is the dystopian future nobody wants

#83

Post by PhasmaFelis »

thinkpad20 wrote: post #73
testvox wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably referring to the hatred many in the United States have towards urban development. In pretty much every city in the United States development has been slowed to a crawl due to zoning restrictions, despite increasing huge demand. People love to use SF as a prime example but I will point to my city, Somerville MA where rents have been soaring, yet there are only 22 lots that meet the residential zoning requirem…

That is weird, and saddening. As a lifelong city dweller (primarily Chicago) I love the character, chaos, and depth of dense cities. Visiting some of the big cities in China, I was really taken with their bustling nature, the crowded street markets, the densely packed housing, and the diverse architecture. They seem to me so much more "alive" than the sprawling, strip-mall-filled anonymity of many American cities. I…

When people rhapsodize about the aesthetic appeal of densely packed cities, I always wonder how that translates into quality of life for the majority of residents, especially those below the poverty line.

Re: China's Xinjiang surveillance is the dystopian future nobody wants

#84

Post by PhasmaFelis »

PricelessValue wrote: post #31
Haydos585x2 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This post is clearly suggesting that the PEOPLE of those nations don't want that dystopian future. What China is doing in Xinjiang is not something many, if any, citizens around the world want.

> This post is clearly suggesting that the PEOPLE of those nations don't want that dystopian future. What people want a dystopian future? That's a pointless statement. Also, Nithin Cota is not chinese nor ughyur. How can he speak for those people. > What China is doing in Xinjiang is not something many, if any, citizens around the world want. You can say that about the same things that happened in the US, britain, eu…

> What people want a dystopian future?

The people creating these surveillance networks, presumably. So, I guess, politicians in China, the US, Britain, Europe, and Russia (among others).

Re: China's Xinjiang surveillance is the dystopian future nobody wants

#85

Post by clouddrover »

akira2501 wrote: post #45
otoburb wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent's comment was taken directly from the OP article.

Which is sourced from a New York Times _opinion_ piece without any documentation or second sourcing to back it up. I'm comfortable putting this in the "dubious" and/or "overblown anecdote" bin unless evidence shows otherwise.

An article on the order that kitchen knives must be engraved with IDs with pictures of the order and the QR codes:

https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2017/10/xinjiang-household-kni...

Re: China's Xinjiang surveillance is the dystopian future nobody wants

#86

Post by musage »

toephu2 wrote: post #71

On the plus side, I just visited China last month and never felt safer. Before you would wear your backpack on the front of your chest when taking public transportation for fear of thieves. Now, with surveillance everywhere (and random ID checks at subways), you can freely wear your backpack on your back where it belongs without fear of theft.

When you were there, did you visit or even help anyone who got, say, jailed for their dissenting opinion? Dare I guess?

If we could make magically avoid all buffer overflows in all languages, forever, by imprisoning all red headed people forever, would that be okay? Would our increased comfort be worth their increased discomfort?

If George Orwell and others had known that we'd end up welcoming total surveillance because then we don't have to wear our backpack on the front of our chest, they probably wouldn't have bothered to write. My head is kinda spinning from that, to be honest. I knew it's bad, but I had no idea it's this bad.

Re: China's Xinjiang surveillance is the dystopian future nobody wants

#87

Post by thinkpad20 »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #83
thinkpad20 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is weird, and saddening. As a lifelong city dweller (primarily Chicago) I love the character, chaos, and depth of dense cities. Visiting some of the big cities in China, I was really taken with their bustling nature, the crowded street markets, the densely packed housing, and the diverse architecture. They seem to me so much more "alive" than the sprawling, strip-mall-filled anonymity of many American cities. I…

When people rhapsodize about the aesthetic appeal of densely packed cities, I always wonder how that translates into quality of life for the majority of residents, especially those below the poverty line.

Poverty exists within cities and without. I’m not sure how suburban sprawl is helpful to those in poverty.

Re: China's Xinjiang surveillance is the dystopian future nobody wants

#88

Post by clouddrover »

stevenjohns wrote: post #20
monocasa wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Uighers may be the first population to sign up for satellite subscriptions If they can at all. Uighers can't even buy a knife without it being engraved with a QR code of their national ID number.

I recently traveled to China and went to a fairly remote area dominated by Uyghurs and didn't see anything that would indicate that level of oppression. They seemed quite free to do what they wanted to between themselves (such as buying a knife) although I imagine their political rights wouldn't be very strong.

The Wall Street Journal did a report on life in Xinjiang last year. It demonstrates the security check points, the "study centers", and having to get your kitchen knifes engraved with your ID:

http://www.wsj.com/video/life-inside-chinas-total-surveillan...

Re: China's Xinjiang surveillance is the dystopian future nobody wants

#90

Post by adventured »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #63
nerfhammer wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost as if growing cities are economic growth multipliers and perhaps even a key part of that whole civilization thing. Meanwhile over here it's taken as assumed that cities cannot and/or should not grow ever again.

America's and Europe's urbanization rates have basically stabilized. I'm not sure where growth would come from, except via immigration and from other less prosperous cities (e.g. moving from Detroit to Seattle).

> America's and Europe's urbanization rates have basically stabilized.

That's a lot more true in parts of Western Europe than the US. The US has seen a burst of further urbanization, after a few decades of flatlining. Cities like Las Vegas, Seattle, Portland, Phoenix, Austin, San Jose, San Diego, Charlotte, Denver, El Paso, Orlando, etc. are still 'young' in their most recent expansions.

Charlotte NC, for example, has doubled in size since 1990, as has Raleigh NC. Charlotte is now comparable to Frankfurt and Stockholm in size.

Or take Gilbert, Scottdale and Chandler Arizona, as part of the Phoenix metro area. Gilbert has gone from barely existing (30k), to 240,000 since 1990. Scottsdale nearly doubled. Phoenix has grown by 60% since 1990, adding about 600k people.

Urbanization in the US over time:

1970: 73.6% -> 1980: 73.74% -> 1990: 75% -> 2000: 79% -> 2015: 81.6%

That urbanization increase since 1980 is nearly equivalent to three NYC size cities.

On urbanization, the US now matches up with the UK (83%), Spain (80%, France (80%) and Norway; is far ahead of Italy (69%), ahead of Germany (75%); and far behind the Netherlands (91%) and Denmark (88%).

I'd expect US urbanization to continue. It's likely heading toward 85% in the next 20 years. The income and opportunity is extreme between rural and urban in the US, that will continue to drain the rural areas (which almost universally have zero population growth).

Post reply on HN