Information operations directed at Hong Kong • Hacker News Board

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#411

Post by solipsism » Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 9:13 AM UTC

echevil wrote: post #401

qtplatypus wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is it about exposure to the US that will make someone more pro the Chinese government?

Plenty of reasons. To begin with, seeing how biased the Western media are when they report anything related to China is both appalling and disappointing. The impression of what average American has about Chinese government, Chinese people and their relation is light years away from reality. Moreover, people immigrating to US from China tends to be more pro-democracy than average Chinese, but we got disillusioned afte…

we got disillusioned after seeing how things worked out in American politics.

What parts of American politics disillusion you? And why do you think the USA should necessarily be the example? Do the criticisms you have of the USA also apply to other democracies, like the Democratic socialist countries in Europe? If not, why do you think they would constitute an effective argument against Democracy? "The USA has problems" is not an argument against Democracy.

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#412

Post by solipsism » Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 9:17 AM UTC

echevil wrote: post #403

solipsism wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When people question if an account is genuine just because they have pro-China voice, it's just confirming how hypocritical western "freedom of press" is, and pushing us towards more pro-China Firstly, do you mean "freedom of speech"? Few people here are the press. Secondly, can you elaborate on this view? I don't doubt that the situation is as you describe, but if true this shows a misunderstanding of the freedom of…

It's not just the comments but those "free independent media" as well. Having freedom of speech doesn't mean having no bias. None of the US media I've seen doesnt have strong confirmation bias towards China. And even for US domestic issues, it's still appalling to see how media could be so polarized. Even when they report truth, they'd select facts that support their views while simply ignore things that's against th…

You've switched topics. My question was about calling people hypocrites because they support the freedom of speech while criticizing speech you align with. I wonder if you see now why that doesn't make sense and why it implies a misunderstanding of what "freedom of speech" means.

It does not mean everyone likes everyone else's opinions. Just that we don't think governments should control what people say.

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#413

Post by yorwba » Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 9:20 AM UTC

liuliu wrote: post #390

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a question from you. How, as a pro-China person, do you view the Dalai Lama? Because I see a certain inconsistency that nobody can explain to me: the DL insists he doesn't care about the complete autonomy or independence [0] of Tibet, just faving a bit more freedom so that people can practice their religion and cultivate their culture. This, in my opinion, is a moderate view, and in no way a threat to the inte…

HHDL has a long and complicated life. His idealogy cannot be simplified to "seeking peace and religious freedom". Tibet was a slavery society under his ruling 70 years ago, unfortunately. People do change, but there are certain historical bagagges cannot be nullified.

70 years ago, the Dalai Lama was 14 years old. It's unlikely he ruled much. The Panchen Lama was 11. Unfortunately, he had reincarnated as two different people supported by different factions in Tibet. One of them allied themselves first with the Kuomintang and then with the Communist Party, which eventually helped them have their candidate be recognized officially by the Dalai Lama. When the Dalai Lama (now 23) fled to India in 1959, the Panchen Lama sided with the Chinese government instead and was made chairman of the Preparatory Committee for the Tibet Autonomous Region.

So on the one hand there was a lot of realpolitik in Tibetan theocracy; on the other hand the Chinese government had no qualms about continuing the system so long as it served their own purposes.

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#414

Post by jokoon » Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 9:26 AM UTC

yyhhsj0521 wrote: post #410

jokoon wrote: post #392

Are you saying that the CIA is not trying to help the protests? I'm not trying to say that the CIA is involved, but I would be surprised to learn that the US is not trying to get involved to amplify the noise the protests are making. With Trump and his trade war, don't you think he would not ask the CIA to try to damage the reputation of chinese government by using protests? I don't like the PRC and their method, but…

Who says anything about CIA? Please don't bring whataboutism into the discussion.

I'm not trying to downplay what the PRC is doing, I'm just asking about what is the us might be doing.

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#415

Post by utbabya » Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 9:28 AM UTC

utbabya wrote: post #253

dang wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two site guidelines that apply to this. First, it's not ok to use HN primarily for political, ideological, or national battle. If a commenter is posting as you describe, we ask them to stop. Example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20727426 . But by no means does it follow that a commenter behaving that way must be a sockpuppet, astroturfer, shill, spy, foreign agent, etc. That's where the second guide…

Another way to look at it, I get a lower trust score to people holding pro-China view because such disinformation campaign is rampant. It is in a way a social punishment that disincentivize such underhanded technique. Does your good faith measure in a way undermine such natural counter mechanism.

Would be great if down vote is explained. As you probably know for sure by now [0] they do put massive resource into disinformation. Contrast with the "west" their PR statements don't have to be sound nor creditable, as long as it assembles a sentence that supports the party's stance they'll say it. Because a authoritarian government don't have to earn the trust of the people.

Now you have people truly believing those blatant lies, taking the same stance as the party and start spreading it, does it matter whether they truly believe it? Instead of politics, we're talking about basic human values here.

I do think letting disinformation pollute the stance itself naturally is the proper fix. Without that, do true believer of rather good character have he incentive to voice their concern, as one of the driving force to shape decision makers in the party? It's fixing the root cause, not the symptom. Such that disinformation, as a latest major threat to democracy works contrary to its intent thus stopped.

[0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/19/technology/hong-kong-prot...

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#416

Post by standardcitizen » Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 9:31 AM UTC

Is anyway else underwhelmed by the number of accounts?

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#417

Post by xster » Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 9:40 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #409

powerapple wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mostly only comment on China related articles, with a pro-China view. Sometimes I find it necessary to comment because it is rare to see pro-China comment here. I am definitely not state-sponsored, I might be brainwashed in your opinion, but definitely not getting paid for those comments, and those comments are from the bottom of my heart :) I don't really like to read political posts on Hacker News, I am mostly in…

I believe you, but it's against the site guidelines to use HN primarily for political battle (which includes nationalistic arguments), and it seems you have been doing so exclusively. We ban accounts for that, not because we think they're insincere, but because political flames will take over the entire site if we let them, and there's a big difference between accounts that use HN this way and accounts that use HN as…

I think that's sensible. Though reporting by omission, disproportion or passive aggressive submissions are inherently political in nature.

Suppose for a moment that all the front page China articles are other 'tech news' such as "Israel creates novel way of demolishing buildings in settlements".

Not that I have anything concrete to suggest but consider the possibility that sometimes, half of the work is already done before anyone writes the first comment 'for political battle' or not.

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#418

Post by dvfjsdhgfv » Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 9:51 AM UTC

powerapple wrote: post #383

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a question from you. How, as a pro-China person, do you view the Dalai Lama? Because I see a certain inconsistency that nobody can explain to me: the DL insists he doesn't care about the complete autonomy or independence [0] of Tibet, just faving a bit more freedom so that people can practice their religion and cultivate their culture. This, in my opinion, is a moderate view, and in no way a threat to the inte…

I don't care so much about Dalai Lama to be honest. I think religion has its place, but shouldn't be the center of stage. In my view, if you don't allow kids to vote before 18, why pushing religious view to them when they are young? I think that's more important to a person than political views. On personal level, I find religion is fundamentally exclusive (where you believe something is the ultimate truth), I think…

I understand but could you explain why the Chinese government freaks out so much about the DL when in fact he has such moderate views?

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#419

Post by lawrenceyan » Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 9:51 AM UTC

bobjordan wrote: post #359

lawrenceyan wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is your perspective that as long as you aren’t personally targeted and can make money, it doesn’t really matter what the government does? You talk a lot about how nice/safe it is for you personally as you enjoy the benefits of living in China as an expat, but at the same time, you do have to realize that your current situation is one of extraordinary privilege and not necessarily representative of the reality for vas…

There is a lot of virtue-signaling going on here, but understanding the state of today's USA education systems, I'll try to parse it. > Is your perspective that as long as you aren’t personally targeted and can make money, it doesn’t really matter what the government does? [Bob]: No. My perspective is that of a person who spent their first 32-years in America, who one day about a decade ago during the depths of the e…

> There is a lot of virtue-signaling going on here, but understanding the state of today's USA education systems, I'll try to parse it.

I’m not sure what you mean exactly by virtue signaling here. Can you highlight what parts of my comment you feel like weren’t genuine?

> My perspective is that of a person who spent their first 32-years in America, who one day about a decade ago during the depths of the economic downturn, decided to try to eat the dogfood of living and operating a bootstrapped business in China so that I could better understand it and the world I live in.

From my original comment, I’d like to reiterate that I’m not trying to attack you as an individual or the path you ended up taking to get where you are today. I realize now after more careful consideration and reading your response, your ability to freely speak on certain aspects might be constrained due to existing attachments to your business and marriage in China. You have every right to make sure that those things you currently have are safe and protected, and if that precludes you from being able to fully express yourself I totally understand.

I’m sure you’re doing the best you can right now with what you have to work with, and I’m not trying to saddle you with obligations to try and reform deeply entrenched systems of governance by yourself. Small consistent steps taken over time can lead to a surprising amount of meaningful impact and change though.

> I do realize, there may be many non-Han Chinese communities I'm not exposed to where the freedom to express themselves is not so great.

I appreciate that you can see that your experience might not necessarily be entirely representative of what it’s like to live in China.

> And now, I'm a much more rabid proponent of American's protecting their free speech and privacy, at all costs. Otherwise, it's a slippery slope to end up with what they've got here in China.

I completely agree with you here. Having to constantly be careful of what you say for fear of being silenced or jailed, is a reality for the vast majority of Chinese citizens. My parents directly experienced the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989 back when they were going to college. I know better than most, that I enjoy a great deal of privilege in being able to have the freedoms I do today that my parents didn’t necessarily get to have at the same age. That’s personally why I’m such a strong proponent of voting and political participation for myself and my peers. From my perspective, young people in America are becoming far more politically active, and I think you’ll see the effects of it in the upcoming 2020 elections next year.

Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong

#420

Post by echevil » Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 10:08 AM UTC

solipsism wrote: post #412

echevil wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just the comments but those "free independent media" as well. Having freedom of speech doesn't mean having no bias. None of the US media I've seen doesnt have strong confirmation bias towards China. And even for US domestic issues, it's still appalling to see how media could be so polarized. Even when they report truth, they'd select facts that support their views while simply ignore things that's against th…

You've switched topics. My question was about calling people hypocrites because they support the freedom of speech while criticizing speech you align with. I wonder if you see now why that doesn't make sense and why it implies a misunderstanding of what "freedom of speech" means. It does not mean everyone likes everyone else's opinions. Just that we don't think governments should control what people say.

Did I ever say "freedom of speech"? English is after all my second language, and I don't expect I could articulate like a native speaker.

Just to make it clear, the most irritating part is that people's opions are clearly shaped by what they read from media, which you'd expect to be more neutral as "freedom of press" is "so great" but it's just not the case.

In China, at least people are generally aware of media censorship, and would take a grain of salt in what they read, but with independent press, people are generally less critical about their reports unless it directly contradictory with to what they know for a fact. As a result you got so many people commenting like they know more truth, even when the "truth" is so absurd. When they are presented a different side of the story, ok, that must be "government propaganda", and whoever supporting them need to be banned?