Live data from Hacker News

We Chat, They Watch

citizenlab.ca

231–240 of 555 posts

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#231
post #217
post #90

Honestly curious: knowing what everyone knows, why would any person who is not of Chinese origin, use WeChat? What's the use case?

While inside China, it is virtually impossible to work in any capacity, in any field, without using WeChat. Outside China, it is the most reliable means of communication to people without access to unrestricted internet. This has become even more difficult within the past year with the blocking of Shadowsocks proxies. You are unlikely to have friends with the ability or knowledge to install v2ray+vmess+websocket+tls…

Does vmess still work? I haven’t been to China for 2 years but that’s what I relied on then to binge watch youtube

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#232
post #83

It's not just WeChat. They own stakes in many american media companies and movie production houses. They use this influence to also change our Media and push pro-Chinese propaganda to the American public.

Can you show an example of blatant Chinese propaganda from those production houses? One that are clearly separated from opinion? Or are we using propaganda and opinions interchangeably here

Don’t think of it like traditional old world propaganda that’s obviously promoting China. The propaganda can be anything that divides the country. Both are the same result as far as China’s concerned.

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the ban may not be perfect, but as a Canadian, I can say unequivocally: I don't need perfect to be the enemy of good. There's no reason to possess these weapons any more than there's a reason to possess nuclear warheads. The next bill can ban more, fix the bugs, etc, but the flag has been planted: there's no room for those weapons in Canada. A huge number of people have wanted to ban weapons like these since Eco…

PAL/RPAL holders, or weapons stolen from them, account for virtually no gun crimes in Canada. Essentially all are carried out with illegal weapons smuggled in from the US. Therefore, the ban is ineffective in serving its mandate, punishes law abiding, statistically harmless individuals needlessly and saddles the taxpayer, of which only 60% of households in Canada are, with yet more debt for nothing. It has also set a…

> It has also set a very dangerous precedent in Canada as to how "unpopular" rights, not explicitly in the Charter, can be stripped by the pen stroke of a populist.

To be fair, if it's not in the charter, it's not a right. You are of course correct re the pendulum and unpopular privileges.

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#234
post #141

It’s worth noting that Facebook Messenger also intercepts and filters messages. For example, it’s impossible to send a message containing the link “joebiden.info”. On the mobile app, it will simply say “failed to send.” On desktop, it will tell you the link violates its “community standards” and cannot be shared.

The differences are: (1) with Facebook it's a private company doing the censoring and there's no issue with that, no First Amendment issues at all, unlike WeChat where the censoring is heavily linked to the government; (2) Facebook at least tells you when a message can't be sent but WeChat fails silently.

A private company with a massive user base and global presence I should add. Which fights for complete market dominance in every way it can, buying every Platform they can, that has large adoption. It’s not only bound by the American constitution. It’s like saying Windows is not an almost de facto monopoly because “people have choices”.

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#235
post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's not a single social network that has begun to require phone verification because of the risk of "toxicity or hate speech". It's all to fight spam and to better track user activity (and, if we're being charitable to them, perhaps to stymie deliberate propaganda/fake news).

This. A service I built+run started getting overrun with bot users. The signup CAPTCHA didn’t help because they’d sign-up for accounts using humans - then after that’s done they’d copy their access tokens to the bot users. We couldn’t use a CAPTCHA for every operation on the platform. But by requiring a real phone number that we verify (by placing a TTS phone call - not an SMS - as processing received TTS calls is mu…

I despise services that require to have a real phone number. Being locked out of something when you travel, have no reception, lost your phone or got it stollen is just a pain. Bonus hate points for banks that implement a sms code check for online payments with your visa/mastercard (common in France at least). I changed bank for one that provided me with a device generating one time codes from my CB

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the ban may not be perfect, but as a Canadian, I can say unequivocally: I don't need perfect to be the enemy of good. There's no reason to possess these weapons any more than there's a reason to possess nuclear warheads. The next bill can ban more, fix the bugs, etc, but the flag has been planted: there's no room for those weapons in Canada. A huge number of people have wanted to ban weapons like these since Eco…

I’m a Canadian and I find that absolutely the opposite. 1. > I don't need perfect to be the enemy of good. There's no reason to possess these weapons any more than there's a reason to possess nuclear warheads Slipper slope don’t you say? Quite a lot of guns on that list were not even available in Canada or would be available. Furthermore, we have some of the strictest gun laws around. What you said above to me sounds…

Re 1: If McDonalds were handing out firearms I'd agree with ya ;) The difference is of course that the burger only kills the person ingesting it where a gun kills someone other than the owner. This makes the former a personal responsibility issue and the latter a public safety issue.

And of course, you can eat McDonalds safely in moderation without developing obesity, but you can't really get shot safely or in moderation without developing death.

Re 2: I have not tried to get a PAL, though I do understand it to be quite an arduous process.

Re 3: Indeed more should be done to keep weapons on the US side, however I don't think there's any reason we can't do both things at the same time.

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#237
post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Outside of China, we're pretty lucky that we can just register for random sites like HN with nothing more than a username and password and start talking. Every Chinese site I've ever used requires phone number or ID verification. Most of them only allow Chinese-registered phones, meaning it's absolutely impossible to communicate with Chinese people from the outside world, aside from a very small number of carefully v…

> Every Chinese site I've ever used requires phone number or ID verification Frankly, this happens a lot in the West these days, too. Take OKCupid, for instance. And the third-party doctrine.

Probably a decent security idea to have minimal PIE requirements for a dating site.

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#238
post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While inside China, it is virtually impossible to work in any capacity, in any field, without using WeChat. Outside China, it is the most reliable means of communication to people without access to unrestricted internet. This has become even more difficult within the past year with the blocking of Shadowsocks proxies. You are unlikely to have friends with the ability or knowledge to install v2ray+vmess+websocket+tls…

Does vmess still work? I haven’t been to China for 2 years but that’s what I relied on then to binge watch youtube

I can confirm that this method worked at least until early March of this year.

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah i literally dont get why the guy brought up race, they should be bringing up shit like video game companies making their black characters white to sell to china. or how about the basic example of blizzards fumbling of the pro hong kong competition winner last year

> i literally don't get why the guy brought up race They brought up race because they were replying to a racist conspiracy theory amounting to them running Hollywood and pushing their agenda. Hacker News is one of the few sites - others being Stormfront, Daily Stormer, 8chan - where that kind of shit still flies.

That opinion is more mainstream then you give it credit. It is backed up recently by the nba losses (2 billion reported) for letting a player give support to Hong kong.

China has increased their power. Calling that notion racist discounts all of the different people who make up China's population. China is a country with people of many different colors, backgrounds and religions. Thinking of China as a single color is a little racist.

Re: We Chat, They Watch

#240
post #141

It’s worth noting that Facebook Messenger also intercepts and filters messages. For example, it’s impossible to send a message containing the link “joebiden.info”. On the mobile app, it will simply say “failed to send.” On desktop, it will tell you the link violates its “community standards” and cannot be shared.

The differences are: (1) with Facebook it's a private company doing the censoring and there's no issue with that, no First Amendment issues at all, unlike WeChat where the censoring is heavily linked to the government; (2) Facebook at least tells you when a message can't be sent but WeChat fails silently.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN