Live data from Hacker News

China's Xinjiang surveillance is the dystopian future nobody wants

engadget.com

211–220 of 280 posts

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

#211

Without pointing a finger, I will say I would be really surprised if this discussion - and HN in general - was not subject to a discourse control by paid state agents (sophisticated trolls) from China and elsewhere. Assuming that it is, what can we learn or do to miting such influences? Asking for independent source to all claims is obviously the first step.

I don't know about HN - I'm not sure its users are good targets for manipulation, but I'm starting to see lots of what I suspect is political activity in Reddit and BBC (the comments are trash, but the user activity comes across as very organised)

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

#212
post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand and I agree with you on that matter. But do you think that west is not part of that oppression by imposing sanction of various countries and resulting in degraded quality of life ? Don't you think they armed rebels that resulted in much chaos and death and inhumanity ? If someone is dead there is no talk of humanity and liberty. Liberty starts with peace. I understand that there are certain area where Ch…

i think you’re missing my point - i am not the west, i don’t like the way things are unfolding in “the west”. i’m not trying to say the west is better, or right. all i am saying is this - china is wrong.

Nor I am trying to say that China is right ! But building narrative based on half-cooked idea that some country thinks works for her should also work for whole humanity is insane.(that is directed at main article not you sorry)

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

#213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been to Xinjiang also (Urumuqi and other parts of Beijiang). I didn't see a Uyghur get beat up or anything, but this was (a) way back in 2006 before the riots of 2009 and (b) I don't think we would notice much as tourists even IF there was something going on. Beijing used to have a lot of Uyghurs before the 2008 Olympics, but they were mostly all driven out and not allowed to return after the event.

"Beijing used to have a lot of Uyghurs before the 2008 Olympics, but they were mostly all driven out and not allowed to return after the event." Any source on that? You can still easily see Uyghurs' barbecue stalls and restaurants in many cities including Beijing. Though security check on stations has strengthen since 2009 riot.

Well, I was living there at the time, and lived in Beijing from 2007 to 2016, I saw it happen. It was no secret either, the gov was open about the evictions. The chuan places took a super long time to recover, and it still isn’t what it was like in 2007, especially in northwest Beijing where most of migrants used to live.

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

#214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I presume you have reliable sources for those claims?

I grew up in China. When I was little, there was a time that if a Uyghurs person get on the bus, everybody else on the bus would get off. Even nowadays people tend to get nervous when they see Uyghurs wandering on street.

That doesn't necessarily mean it's reasonable to be suspicious towards an entire ethnic group. Not many Uyghurs support violence, and not all Uyghurs are separatists.

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

#215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's called a rebellion, and it's rebellion for a very simple reason - cultural genocide by the CCP.

so I guess you are happy about terrorists killing your families for a 'holy sacrifice'?

I don't know how you can jump from stating an observation to conclude how I feel about it. I'm merely stating a natural course of human affairs.

To answer your question, I'm not happy to see any violence, but as someone who has some humility, and pragmatism, I don't see how more oppression can solve the problem of violence. For the Uyghurs, they view what they do as self defense, just like the Chinese, is self defense wrong? Some would argue only if the force used is not proportional to the offense sustained. For over a century, Chinese of various factions have invaded and massacred tens of thousands of Uyghurs in the region under different pretexts, what exactly can you expect from an ethnic group fighting for their very own survival?

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

#216
This seems as good an article as any to ask: in people's opinion here, is there any risk for Americans going to China and continuing normal Internet browsing activities? (I know the following is not the best attitude, but I really do mean on a "nothing to hide" basis.)

Someone in this thread mentioned $4.7 billion (quoted as 30B RMB in this thread) on the security and surveillance, for just Xinjiang, which has a population of 21m give or take, out of China's 1.37 billion people. That's obviously a lot of money (for comparison the entire US intelligence budget is maybe an order of magnitude higher annually), so I'd assume that when in China, and maybe outside of it, basically whatever you do can/could be monitored.

I get the impression that if you're not, I don't know, doing detailed dissident planning it's not an issue, so this would seem the same standard as pretty free Americans would expect. In America, yeah if you spend 18 months downloading textbooks on bombmaking, buying laboratory equipment on Amazon, and then eventually industrial sizes of fertilizer, ammonia, and remote demolition detonators on Ali Express, while getting hundreds of thousands of dollars in bitcoin from seling a 1-page haircut ebook which has 1 review stating it was useless, while you spend most of your time travelling between Syria and Washington DC, where you're at home on the dark net all day over tor, reading arabic language anti-American calls for terrorism and jihad, you would expect to get a visit at some point between when you start that journey and when you're on skype bidding your mother back home goodbye, saying that you will die for a worthy cause in your Jihad against the U.S. imperialist pigs and asking for her bank account information. I mean sure everything I've just stated (literally the entirety of this paragraph) falls under freedom of expression, freedom of thinking, and freedom of commerce, but as a practical matter you'd expect to be stopped at some point.

So is that the standard? If I go to Beijing but I'm not spending eighteen months travelling between Beijing and Taiwan reading about how to arm rebels for a military coup, how to get what you want by taking political hostages, and taking geographic survey equipment across the street from state buildings in Beijing with a notebook and a "Insurrection for Dummies: How to lead an armed rebellion and communicate with your followers while toppling Beijing's military hegemony" book, as an American could I expect to continue my normal Internet browsing (including reading or posting about "sensitive topics" or whatever)?

I mean on an everyday basis. Note that my Chinese example didn't include purchasing fertilizer and detonators, so I get that the standard could be a bit lower - but does normal American online behavior count? Or would an American not be able to enjoy their usual online freedom without getting lots of problems?

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

#217
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.

Don’t forget the massive Chinese re-education camp for 120,000 uighers. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2018/...

Typical HN pedantry forthcoming, but I fucking hate AMP, so here's the direct link: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/25/at-least-12000...

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

#219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I presume you have reliable sources for those claims?

I grew up in China. When I was little, there was a time that if a Uyghurs person get on the bus, everybody else on the bus would get off. Even nowadays people tend to get nervous when they see Uyghurs wandering on street.

Replace "when I was little" with "1930s Germany" and "Uyghurs" with "Jews".

A seed of distrust and paranoia was sown and was allowed to grow. That does not mean it has any basis in fact.

You should also look at how the Chinese government has oppressed the Uyghurs (and Tibetans and Taiwanese, to name a few).

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

#220

Without pointing a finger, I will say I would be really surprised if this discussion - and HN in general - was not subject to a discourse control by paid state agents (sophisticated trolls) from China and elsewhere. Assuming that it is, what can we learn or do to miting such influences? Asking for independent source to all claims is obviously the first step.

So I've been in trouble on HN (probably rightly so) once before for pointing the finger. With that in mind...

The problem is that 'their' only objective is to undermine 'our' goal of having a balanced, honest discussion that arrives at some kind of valid, valuable truth. If a troll or discourse control agent can undermine that process, then they've 'won'.

And it's pretty easy to do. Actually, demanding sources is a great tool for undermining absolutely any discussion you like.

Someone claims something you don't like? Demand evidence/sources. If they can't produce them, you've won. If they can produce them, call into question the bias or veracity of the sources. You win again.

The basic tools of the troll trade are well known - derail, distract, discuss to death. Question motives and bias, use whataboutism, sling mud, lead a discussion into the long grass, debate every single point to death, ad hominem attacks, play the victim...

I think communities perhaps need to become more aware of those discussion patterns and vote according to whether something is using troll tools, rather than whether you agree/disagree.

Post reply on HN