31–40 of 151 posts
If we counted the number of people the PRC has killed by finding them through their "great" firewall, does the OP think that number is less than bad baidu medical ads? I don't understand is the false equivalency between baidu's advertising and PRC's notorious human rights violations. This post doesn't address any of the concerns brought up by the original letter they decry?
You must not use "Must", just let DragonFly die, use true google or stick with Baidu, in the meantime feel grateful that github.com is still accessible.
So your solution to the Chinese people that wants alternative is to just pray? There is no easy way to "use true google", so not really an option. The situation is mostly the government's fault, the people just want options, any options would be better than nothing.
If we counted the number of people the PRC has killed by finding them through their "great" firewall, does the OP think that number is less than bad baidu medical ads? I don't understand is the false equivalency between baidu's advertising and PRC's notorious human rights violations. This post doesn't address any of the concerns brought up by the original letter they decry?
Weak arguments are covered up with emotional rhetoric about deaths and such.
Please do not respond to my comment about “what about US Federal agencies in bed with the FANG”. Before we discuss, China is not even on the same ballgame. It’s not the same sport. It’s like going to another planet where your entire identity is linked to your cellphone number. I visit China multiple times a year and without WeChat, I can’t do anything. On HN, I often see comparisons to the US and the west but it’s just shifting the discussion somewhere else. US has democracy, open and fair justice system and I can sue the government, I have Miranda rights, freedom of speech and the whole American dream enchilada. It’s still alive despite of the shit president and it is here to stay. Negativity against the US is rampant here.
is the implication that somehow Google would know more about the fraudsters than Baidu does?
If we counted the number of people the PRC has killed by finding them through their "great" firewall, does the OP think that number is less than bad baidu medical ads? I don't understand is the false equivalency between baidu's advertising and PRC's notorious human rights violations. This post doesn't address any of the concerns brought up by the original letter they decry?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they won't. And that has real consequences for actual people. Google has the option to improve those people's lives by going there, even if it means bowing to the demands of Chinese censors. Nothing is gained by staying out. China isn't going to magically change its opinion on censorship because Google won't enter their market. The objections of the Google employees are shortsighted and naive.
As always, the most intolerant wins. For good or for bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok. Play your tape all the way through. What are the negative consequences of doing so? The positive consequences of entering the Chinese market are obvious.
The negative consequences are that Google are the best at cataloguing and searching information. This expertise can now be leveraged by the Chinese government to search for dissidents. Edit: Do you honestly think that once the Chinese government has some leverage over Google (because they now make a portion of their revenue from the Chinese market) they wouldn't use that to get additional concessions? As an example,…
By abdicating that responsibility to an actor like Baidu, who is much more aligned with the Chinese government, they make the problem worse. By agreeing to their demands, and then doing the shittiest job possible of complying, they actually have a lot more power and influence.
> Edit: Do you honestly think that once the Chinese government has some leverage over Google (because they now make a portion of their revenue from the Chinese market) they wouldn't use that to get additional concessions?
Yes, but that's a two way street. Chinese citizens will come to rely on Google search, and will be unhappy when its taken away. So both sides become enmeshed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok. Play your tape all the way through. What are the negative consequences of doing so? The positive consequences of entering the Chinese market are obvious.
The negative consequences are that Google are the best at cataloguing and searching information. This expertise can now be leveraged by the Chinese government to search for dissidents. Edit: Do you honestly think that once the Chinese government has some leverage over Google (because they now make a portion of their revenue from the Chinese market) they wouldn't use that to get additional concessions? As an example,…
The only information that the Chinese government would have access to from Google is info they already have from Baidu.
If we counted the number of people the PRC has killed by finding them through their "great" firewall, does the OP think that number is less than bad baidu medical ads? I don't understand is the false equivalency between baidu's advertising and PRC's notorious human rights violations. This post doesn't address any of the concerns brought up by the original letter they decry?
It’s a ridiculous rhetorical rebuttal without ever mentioning the dystopian motives of the entire Chinese tech industry puppetted under the Xi Jingpin’s vision. From Baidu to Tencent, everyone is in bed with the government. Weak arguments are covered up with emotional rhetoric about deaths and such. Please do not respond to my comment about “what about US Federal agencies in bed with the FANG”. Before we discuss, Chi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Nothing is gained by staying out If a lot of companies decided to refuse to follow China's oppressive methods (and thus making life slightly worse for some of the people of china) it might slightly push the residents of china towards revolting and gaining more freedom. This is all theoretical of course, I doubt that anything like that could happen in real life.
Revolution would kill tens of millions, minimum. Compared to that, continuing to enjoy the greatest rise in living standards in human history doesn't look half bad.
This is extremely poor reasoning. An overall "bad" thing does not become "good" or justified because it has improved conditions in some way. By the very same token, slavery has both good sides and bad sides, and by your dismissive style, we ought not to consider the bad sides - the slaves should continue to enjoy the greatest rise in living standards (having food and shelter provided by the master) and the slave owners should continue to enjoy the greatest rise in profits in human history - isn't it clear that everyone wins?
What is even more ironic is that for China, a state which claims to be Communist, is being supported by your argument which was specifically repudiated by Marx in criticizing Proudhon for exactly the view you are expounding!
>The good side and the bad side, the advantages and drawbacks, taken together form for M. Proudhon the contradiction in every economic category. The problem to be solved: to keep the good side, while eliminating the bad. Slavery is an economic category like any other. Thus it also has its two sides. Let us leave alone the bad side and talk about the good side of slavery. Needless to say, we are dealing only with direct slavery, with Negro slavery in Surinam, in Brazil, in the Southern States of North America.
>Without slavery North America, the most progressive of countries, would be transformed into a patriarchal country. Wipe North America off the map of the world, and you will have anarchy – the complete decay of modern commerce and civilization. Cause slavery to disappear and you will have wiped America off the map of nations.
>What would M. Proudhon do to save slavery? He would formulate the problem thus: preserve the good side of this economic category, eliminate the bad.
I will also note that your immediate dismissal of revolution is historically shaky at best, as great advances in history and freedom were gained from revolution - of both country (France, America, many wars of independence, Germany) and economy (the bourgeois revolution in means of production). Just remember this:
>If money, according to Augier, “comes into the world with a congenital blood-stain on one cheek,” capital comes dripping from head to foot, from every pore, with blood and dirt.