Truly horrifying. China isn't afraid to use technology and psychology to oppress its inhabitants in the maximum possible extent...
This is what North Korea would look like if they had money.
China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains
421–430 of 602 posts
Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains
#422Here are the original documents in Chinese:
http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/gzdt/201803/t20180316_879653.html
http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/gzdt/201803/t20180316_879654.html
The documents do not make "bad social credit" (whatever that means) a punishable cause. There is one clause relating to spread of false information but it specifically says "false terrorism information related to civil aviation safety".
There are two classes of offenders. Air travel and luxury/sleeper/high speed G-train travels are banned; regular trains are not.
The first class of offences pertain to directly violating transport regulations, like refusing to quit smoking on an airplane, forcing one's way onto the runway, or refusing to pay for a ticket even after getting caught riding the train without one.
The second class is credit related and has six categories. The first four categories are mostly targeted at resourceful people who have misdeeds but somehow are not criminally punished. One thing that conceivable casts a wider net is for those that refuse to pay social security insurance premiums or obtain social security payments through false documents. The fifth category is about people refusing to follow court orders. The sixth category about "others" that could be added is more elastic but it did say that changes need to be published by editing the document.
Google Translate of the six categories:
1. The party who has the ability to perform but refuses to perform major tax violations;
2. In the field of fiscal fund management and use, there is a person responsible for serious dishonest behaviors such as fraud, false reports, fraud, fraudulent taking, interception, misappropriation, arrears of international financial organizations and foreign governments’ due debts;
3. Those who have serious acts of dishonesty in the following areas in the field of social insurance: employers fail to participate in social insurance in accordance with relevant regulations and refuse rectification; employers have not faithfully applied for social insurance payment bases and have refused to make corrections; Those who have insurance premiums but have the capacity to pay but refuse to pay; conceal, transfer, embezzle, misappropriate social insurance funds or operate in violation of the regulations; fraudulently forge social insurance benefits through fraudulent or forgery proofs or other means; and social insurance service agencies violate the service agreement Or related regulations; refuses to assist the social insurance administrative department in the investigation and verification of accidents and problems;
4. Securities and futures are illegally punished with fines and no overdue payment; overdue entities of the listed company fail to perform their public commitments within the prescribed time limit;
5. The people's courts have taken measures to restrict consumption in accordance with relevant regulations, or have included the list of those who have been breached trustees according to law;
(6) Other Restricted Persons Recognized by the Relevant Departments Responsible persons who commit serious acts of dishonesty in a civil aircraft shall be clearly identified by modifying the document.
Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains
#423Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Whatever you think the West is doing is not even close to this. But I worry the West will be watching this closely to see how they might implement something similar.
How could they? Americans are too paranoid to allow an ID card, much less a centrally tracked loyalty-points number to use at party-owned shopping, transit, utility, housing....
In the US there are mandatory Social Security numbers; one needs photo ID to do much of anything; and there certainly are credit scores.
Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains
#424I am deeply disgusted by false equivalency used in many posts this thread. Whatever you think the West is doing is not even close to this. The Chinese government owns and runs more than 50% of the economy and 100% of the industries they deem essential. They can not only cut your off completely from planes and trains, but also your electricity, driver license, internet, telephone, banks, ability to get any travel docu…
You're right I hold the US government to a higher standard.
When I or many others say "China's doing this but look what the NSA is doing", I am not trying to be a CPC apologist by pointing at the NSA. I am being pro civil liberties by using the CPC as an example of what happens when you don't hold your government to account.
America gets to enjoy its relatively high degree of civil liberties precisely because its population is so often critical of and suspicious of its government. Even when the criticism is laughable in comparison to other countries.
Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains
#425Earlier quoted context omitted.
False equivalency is a tool that's deployed often on HN these days to steer (or derail) threads. I assume it's due in part to PR/propaganda teams working to manage/manipulate sentiment.
It certainly feels like that, but I doubt this is the direct result of modern propaganda teams. What I think is more likely is the propagandists were so successful decades ago that their whataboutist memes got so integrated into the American/English discourse that many people repeat them unthinkingly.
Whether they are "hired guns" or not, there are usual suspects that invariably whataboutism on these stories. Anybody can figure out who they are on their own.
Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains
#426Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I am a Chinese expat, and thanks to this policy, I cannot fly in China because I don't have a National ID. A Chinese passport won't do. This is patently not true. There are plenty of Chinese in the previous generation that gave up their hukou/ID card as required when they gained permanent residency in another country, and use their passport internally (when returning to work in China) like us foreigners must (it se…
Have your extensive comments about the CCP on HN caused you any hassles? The fact that comments cannot be deleted is increasingly unethical as ML makes privacy easier and easier to pierce. People who made rational decisions about the risks of sharing various opinions on a small site in 2010 are now locked into the consequences a decade later when both technology and political landscapes have changed. It would be trul…
I sometimes censor myself online by deciding not to comment or reply to things - both here and on other places for precisely this reason. Not fear of imprisonment or execution, just a concern that the comments might cause me hassle or grief at some point.
Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains
#427To me the principle of “once untrustworthy, always restricted” sounds like the beginning of a new caste system. Everyone's children are going to make mistakes. The wealthy are going to be able to cover up their children's mistakes, the poor are going to be put on 'the list' and become 'restricted.' The restrictions will grow, and eventually you'll have a new group of 'untouchables'
You can extend this metaphor to employment and job performance as well, as explored by Marshall Brain in his short story "Manna" [0]: > You can imagine what would happen. Manna fires you because you don't show up for work a couple times. Now you try to go get a job somewhere else. No other Manna system is going to hire you. There had always been an implicit threat in the American economy -- "if you do not have a job,…
Such a legal environment existed in the US between the Civil War and WWII.[1]
> On March 30, 1908, Green Cottenham was arrested by the sheriff of Shelby County, Alabama, and charged with "vagrancy." Cottenham had committed no true crime. Vagrancy, the offense of a person not being able to prove at a given moment that he or she is employed [...] capriciously enforced by local sheriffs and constables [...] and, most tellingly in a time of massive unemployment among all southern men, was reserved almost exclusively for black men. Cottenham's offense was blackness.
> After three days behind bars, twenty-two-year-old Cottenham was found guilty in a swift appearance before the county judge and immediately sentenced to a thirty-day term of hard labor. Unable to pay the array of fees assessed on every prisoner—fees to the sheriff, the deputy, the court clerk, the witnesses—Cottenham's sentence was extended to nearly a year of hard labor.
The description goes on to describe how his hard labor was sold to US Steel, and he was sent down into a mine. There he was subject to whipping for not delivering a required 8 tons of coal per day, and threatened with torture for disobedience. More than a thousand other black men were subjected to the same slavery at "Slope 12", 45 years after the Emancipation Proclamation.
[1] https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=890511...
Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains
#428Earlier quoted context omitted.
Black people are 12% of the population but over half those imprisoned for drug offenses, and GP's advice is, "If you wish to stay out of the felon caste, do not break obvious laws, like those regarding drug possession." I mean, that's bigotry. That's something I expect to read on the_donald.
If two groups of people commit the same crimes at similar rates, and individuals in one of those groups are imprisoned more frequently than those in the other group, that's unfair on a systematic level. Nobody here said otherwise. What aspect of this situation makes the GP's advice untrue? For any individual in either group, the best way to avoid becoming a felon is to avoid committing felonies.
But race is not the primary difference between the two groups you're talking about. The biggest difference is socio-economic and that drives everything else - health, education, opportunity, world view, etc. You could, of course, make the argument that the underlying cause of the socio-economic discrepancy is rooted in racism and bigotry.
Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains
#429I am deeply disgusted by false equivalency used in many posts this thread. Whatever you think the West is doing is not even close to this. The Chinese government owns and runs more than 50% of the economy and 100% of the industries they deem essential. They can not only cut your off completely from planes and trains, but also your electricity, driver license, internet, telephone, banks, ability to get any travel docu…
Whatever you think the West is doing is not even close to this. The Chinese government owns and runs more than 50% of the economy and 100% of the industries they deem essential. Thank goodness. However, what you're pointing out is that the difference is not because the principles are different. The difference is primarily that in the west, the people who would do this, don't yet have 100% coverage over society.
>However, what you're pointing out is that the difference is not because the principles are different.
Yes, they are. The reason "the people who would do this don't yet have 100% coverage over society" is precisely because, at least for now, principles in the West find this sort of authoritarianism repugnant. This is exactly the kind of false equivalency the parent is talking about.
Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains
#430Earlier quoted context omitted.
13th Amendment: Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. ---------------- Slavery is ALLOWED if guilty of a crime. So go on ahead and keep espousing "rah rah USA". We're still in a slave country.
This isn't addressing what was said. You posted this in response to someone else's comment, and made clear that you are trying to argue with something else. You were arguing with "rah rah USA," and that just ain't what was said. Come on, brother, let's grow up for the sake of us all.
The comment you're referring to is exactly what the parent was talking about. The usual pattern is something along the lines of:
"[OTHER COUNTRY] is doing something bad."
"WHAT ABOUT AMERICA?!"
"It's not equivalent."
"Oh, so America is perfect, then?"