Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns • Hacker News Board

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#81

Post by gruez » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 4:58 PM UTC

wombatmobile wrote: post #70

onelovetwo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the argument is china was once invaded by foreign gunships (not american) so they should be allowed to ban american companies (Google, Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Whatsapp, Netflix & hundreds more) but allowed to operate any company they want in the U.S?

That's a different argument to the one you are inferring. Both arguments could benefit from more context. Boxer Rebellion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_Rebellion Eight-Nation Alliance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-Nation_Alliance

And what context does those articles add, other than what's already presented?

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#82

Post by quicklime » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 4:58 PM UTC

softwaredoug wrote: post #54

kolanos wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans don't need to try to understand the effects of mercantilism. They were subject to the same draconian economic policies by the British Empire. This is largely what prompted the American Revolution. [0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteen_Colonies#Economic_pol...

I think it's more accurate to say the US had a temporary (1 decade) diversion from the norm of "Benign Neglect"[1] which pissed off Americans to the point they sought explicit Independence. China has a much longer cultural history of being "self contained" (and suspicious of outsiders) which was deeply reinforced in the 19th century Opium Wars, etc. 1 - http://community.weber.edu/weberreads/salutary_or_benign_neg...

Yep. A better analogy would be if the US had lost the revolutionary war, and was subjected to a century or more of British mercantilism, which they were only now starting to recover from.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#83

Post by gwright » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 4:59 PM UTC

12xo wrote: post #26

By far the most egregious overreach of Federal authority in recent memory. Noting about this is reasonable. Its 100% the act of a desperate and weak minded despot who knows nothing about technology but acts out of ignorance and pettiness. A truly illegal and Anti-American act.

If you read the Executive Order (https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-or...) you'll see that this is yet another aspect of Trump's overall policy of confronting China's growing influence. You may disagree with that policy but I think it is a mistake to attribute these actions to "ignorance and pettiness".

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#84

Post by alextheparrot » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 4:59 PM UTC

wombatmobile wrote: post #70

onelovetwo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the argument is china was once invaded by foreign gunships (not american) so they should be allowed to ban american companies (Google, Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Whatsapp, Netflix & hundreds more) but allowed to operate any company they want in the U.S?

That's a different argument to the one you are inferring. Both arguments could benefit from more context. Boxer Rebellion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_Rebellion Eight-Nation Alliance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-Nation_Alliance

It might be helpful to make the argument explicitly rather than just link to historical events when people have reached to attempting to infer it.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#85

Post by srtjstjsj » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 4:59 PM UTC

pizza wrote: post #41

Causality1 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are valid concerns. I also think the opposite side of that coin is worth considering. That is to say, should we allow WeChat to gain an even greater foothold on American soil or should we minimize total damage by cutting it off now instead of later? As for me, I believe allowing WeChat to become anything like the structural institution it is in China in any part of the US would be a mistake. Imagine if Google w…

You really need to explain your point more thoroughly. - "allow WeChat to gain an even greater foothold on American soil" - does this mean have more users? - "minimize total damage" - it would be good if you articulated the damage being done - "Imagine if Google was as controlled by and as much of a cheerleader for the US government as WeChat is for the Chinese" - according to Julian Assange, https://wikileaks.org/go…

Google employees being fans of the person who lost the Presidential election doesn't make Google a cheerleader for the government.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#86

Post by tatrajim » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 4:59 PM UTC

wombatmobile wrote: post #16

When trying to understand China's commercial policies which America is supposedly retaliating against, consider that China has experienced a different mercantile history to America. America has never been invaded by foreign gunships and forced to allow foreign merchants to import opium to addict its citizens in order to fix their own countries balance of payments problems. Opium Wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opi…

How long is China going to put on the mantle of victimhood over events 160 years in the past?!

By that standard surely Korea can complain endlessly about China and Yuan Shikai lording it over their kingdom in the 1880s, and the Czechs can cry over their subjugation for centuries by Austria-Hungary, etc. etc.

In 1949 Mao Zedong famously declared "China has stood up." Apparently though he meant, "We're such a weak people that we cry to mommy everytime others demand reciprocity."

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#87

Post by seanmcdirmid » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:00 PM UTC

srtjstjsj wrote: post #76

loceng wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had an interesting conversation with a Lyft driver, they were clearly from China from the knowledge/insights they shared. It was their belief that China's populations are much more densely populated, the family unit remaining - parents living with their children and their parents - because the previous generations didn't have pensions to rely on; another pressure I imagine is that I don't believe health care and ot…

China healthcare funding seems pretty similar to US https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_China

It’s a bit different from the states, rather than big deductibles and no caps, you have small deductibles and lowish caps. So if you break a leg, things are very affordable, but you are quickly on your own if you get cancer.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#88

Post by frankharv » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:00 PM UTC

12xo wrote: post #26

By far the most egregious overreach of Federal authority in recent memory. Noting about this is reasonable. Its 100% the act of a desperate and weak minded despot who knows nothing about technology but acts out of ignorance and pettiness. A truly illegal and Anti-American act.

Just because some Magistrate Judge declares this a First Amendment violation does not mean it will stand up. My guess is it goes to a Federal Judge who overturns it.

Presidents are allowed wide latitude in National Security matters.

I expect the sanctioning of WeChat will happen eventually.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#89

Post by horsemessiah » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:00 PM UTC

shiado wrote: post #22

Free speech concerns on an app built by a nation where people have no rights that bans people for bringing up the Tiananmen Square massacre and Uyghur genocide, unreal.

> no rights This is not true.

> Uyghur genocide This is a lie being spread by far right fundamentalist Adrien Zenz that the U.S. media had eaten up.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#90

Post by zeroonetwothree » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:00 PM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #53

aphextron wrote: post #42

From the beginning of this I never understood how there could be any legal basis whatsoever for the ban. Apparently that's because there was none.

Like so many other attempted Trump executive actions, it really needs to be passed by Congress. Trump doesn't even have anyone competent in the White House telling him what he can and can't do.

He fired everyone that told him he couldn’t do something.