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

China’s all-seeing surveillance network

mobile.abc.net.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 87 posts

Re: China’s all-seeing surveillance network

#71

Post by hueving »

mojuba wrote: post #50
ffwacom wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doubt, there's no pure communist states left, they all fell after killing a bunch of their citizens by "knowing what's best". The economy is a chaotic system and any earnest attempt at top down control will fail, let alone communism which historically was more about transferring power to your friends than any real belief in an ideology.

Just FYI (has been said a gazillion times on the Internet): no state on this planet was ever communist. Communism is a society without money, no such thing existed on a state level anywhere. The states you are referring to were 100% socialist, i.e. no private property in any form or share with very very few exceptions; money tightly controlled by the state; all businesses are state-owned. The comment above though pro…

>The comment above though probably meant the true communism, i.e. society without money.

Why would you think that? The term "communist experiment" implies that it's one being conducted right now. There are no states with even hints of plans for this "true communism" you speak of.

Re: China’s all-seeing surveillance network

#72

Post by qubax »

vthallam wrote: post #64
adam-a wrote: post #57

It's an interesting article but it is also worth remembering that western society is not all that far away from this vision. Credit scores are widely used, there are apps for them, they can prevent you from getting housing or loans. A criminal record likewise affects your employment prospects, and many other areas of your life. CCTV may be widespread in China but the USA and UK are still way out in front[0]. Lastly,…

stop this "what about the western world". I see this pattern every time there's a critical article about China. When there's an article about the west's censorship, we would be happy to talk about it, but for now, let's focus on the ridiculous and crazy to be put it mildly things going on in China.

Why? We are not chinese. We don't live in china. I'm more worried about censorship in the US and especially europe since europeans seem so intent on bringing their censorship to the US and the entire world. At least the chinese censorship affects their country mostly.

> I see this pattern every time there's a critical article about China.

Because we get the same story about china multiple times in a day.

Just from "abc.net.au" within the past 19 hours. The same story has been pushed onto the frontpage.

"China’s all-seeing surveillance network"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18030655

"China is building a digital dictatorship to exert control over its 1.4B citizens"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18026060

I'd called this propaganda rather than news.

> let's focus on the ridiculous and crazy to be put it mildly things going on in China.

Why? If china wanted to export their dictatorship to the US, I can see why we should be concerned. But they aren't. It's primarily europe and segments of puritanical leftists and rightist in the US along with parts of the tech leadership.

It's fine to have a story about china once in a while, but multiple times daily just reeks of propaganda.

Re: China’s all-seeing surveillance network

#73

Post by ffwacom »

lightbyte wrote: post #63
ffwacom wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A society without money is even more absurd.

The Inca Civilization had no money was was pretty darn successful http://www.discover-peru.org/inca-economy-society/

Tiny fiefdom. Think of the insane size of what we call society even 100 years ago, money is what makes us cooperate.

Re: China’s all-seeing surveillance network

#74

Post by [deleted] »

infiniteseeker wrote: post #28
Numberwang wrote: post #3

I think the concept of social credit has a lot of merits. But the risk for overreach is substantial unfortunately. I'd love to get rid of people who are unable to ride a train like a social human from the trains and lock people out of cinemas who can't behave as one should expect.

And I’d love to give people who have similar views to you (on this matter) a -1 score for life. Who’s right?

[deleted]

Re: China’s all-seeing surveillance network

#75

Post by apocalypstyx »

yostrovs wrote: post #62
mojuba wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just FYI (has been said a gazillion times on the Internet): no state on this planet was ever communist. Communism is a society without money, no such thing existed on a state level anywhere. The states you are referring to were 100% socialist, i.e. no private property in any form or share with very very few exceptions; money tightly controlled by the state; all businesses are state-owned. The comment above though pro…

Communism in practice is the unending struggle to achieve the imaginary, theoretical communism you refer to.

Couldn't the same be said for what most people call capitalism?

Re: China’s all-seeing surveillance network

#76

Post by maxxxxx »

yostrovs wrote: post #62
mojuba wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just FYI (has been said a gazillion times on the Internet): no state on this planet was ever communist. Communism is a society without money, no such thing existed on a state level anywhere. The states you are referring to were 100% socialist, i.e. no private property in any form or share with very very few exceptions; money tightly controlled by the state; all businesses are state-owned. The comment above though pro…

Communism in practice is the unending struggle to achieve the imaginary, theoretical communism you refer to.

That's pretty much how all ideologies work. Listen to some hardcore libertarians and you will hear them longing for the imaginary, theoretical free market that never has existed and probably never will.

Re: China’s all-seeing surveillance network

#77

Post by maxxxxx »

d4nt wrote: post #51
facialwipe wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or more frightening, the Communist experiment is successful long-term and becomes the dominate model for 'stability' globally.

At first I was terrified of this, in the short term this could cause a lot of suffering but I’ve become convinced it will fail in the long term. Human societies have evolved a very sophisticated mechanism for moving people up and down hierarchies using a distributed reputation tracking system. This system is interesting in that they’re trying to centralise the reputation tracking system and thereby control it. To the…

With enough computing power and ruthlessness it may actually be possible to control 1.4 billions. I don't know how things would have worked out if Hitler or Stalin had had current or soon to be technology. Thank God North Korea doesn't have the money to buy or develop the latest surveillance tech either. They may have succeeded for much longer. In the end I think dictatorships will always blow up but tech makes their life much easier.

Re: China’s all-seeing surveillance network

#78

Post by pas »

qubax wrote: post #72
vthallam wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

stop this "what about the western world". I see this pattern every time there's a critical article about China. When there's an article about the west's censorship, we would be happy to talk about it, but for now, let's focus on the ridiculous and crazy to be put it mildly things going on in China.

Why? We are not chinese. We don't live in china. I'm more worried about censorship in the US and especially europe since europeans seem so intent on bringing their censorship to the US and the entire world. At least the chinese censorship affects their country mostly. > I see this pattern every time there's a critical article about China. Because we get the same story about china multiple times in a day. Just from "a…

China is already exporting its dictatorship (influence = power), look at their One Belt One Road project, and the predatory loans to African states.

And don't forget the clashes and island building on the South China Sea.

Re: China’s all-seeing surveillance network

#79

Post by pdkl95 »

maxxxxx wrote: post #26

Stuff like this will slowly stop further evolution of society and lock down the status quo. Right now we still have ways to change society peacefully but in a surveillance state either nothing changes or change has to come with force. I think societies with massive surveillance will stagnate until they collapse.

Bruce Sterling's book Schismatris, when the technologically advanced decedents of humanity returned to earth:

> "Do you see the cable system? The mausoleum has an information line, the only one in the village. Whoever lives there holds all links to the outside world."

> [...] "Stability," he said. "The Terrans wanted stability, that's why they set up the Interdict. They didn't want technology to break them into pieces, as it's done to us. They blamed technology for the disasters. The war plagues, the carbon dioxide that melted the ice caps... They can't forget their dead."

    "Surely the whole world isn't like this," Vera said.
    "It has to be. Anywhere there is variety there is
     the risk of change. Change that can't be tolerated."
    "But they have telephones. Aircraft."
    "Enforcement technology," Lindsay said.
> [...] The parting had come with hatred: with those in space condemned as antihuman thieves, and Earth's emergency government denounced as fascist barbarism. Hatred made things easier: easier for those in space to shrug off all responsibility, easier for Earth to starve its myriad cultures down to a single gray regime of penance and pointless stability.

> But life moved in clades. Lindsay knew it as a fact. A successful species always burst into a joyous wave of daughter species, of hopeful monsters that rendered their ancestors obsolete. Denying change meant denying life.

Re: China’s all-seeing surveillance network

#80

Post by lightbyte »

ffwacom wrote: post #73
lightbyte wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Inca Civilization had no money was was pretty darn successful http://www.discover-peru.org/inca-economy-society/

Tiny fiefdom. Think of the insane size of what we call society even 100 years ago, money is what makes us cooperate.

I wouldn't call the Inca Empire a "tiny fiefdom", at its height they had 10 million citizens and covered 2 million km2
Post reply on HN