Is it only me, or are half of the companies interested in a similar model. Media streaming, online shopping, banking, or social media are all very interested in your real identity and a strict controlling their interaction with you.
Some social media is interested in my real identity. Reddit, and to some extend twitter is not. Reddit doesn't even care if you have multiple accounts, as long as it is not to evade bans.
Bankers are only interested in my actual identity because the government force them to.
Amazon is only interested in my identity to sell me stuff.
This is a hilarious scaremongering article written for those who are clueless. No surprise as it turns out it is from the comically named neocon outfit Foundation for the Defense of Democracies which is the most bellicose warmongering think tank in DC. They never met a poor third world country that they didn’t want bombed. As for 6G the reason we have no leadership is that Lucent was run into the ground by a mindset…
You completely avoided the main point of the article which is people having their internet access revoked becoming equivalent to losing your drivers license. Right now you cannot be banned from the internet, the only way government can withhold internet access is through imprisonment, the internet should be open for all.
Is it only me, or are half of the companies interested in a similar model. Media streaming, online shopping, banking, or social media are all very interested in your real identity and a strict controlling their interaction with you.
Some social media is interested in my real identity. Reddit, and to some extend twitter is not. Reddit doesn't even care if you have multiple accounts, as long as it is not to evade bans. Bankers are only interested in my actual identity because the government force them to. Amazon is only interested in my identity to sell me stuff.
That'll change. Reddit wants to IPO. Twitter might want to make money eventually.
New IP is an attempt to redesign IP into a top-down governance model. It is not a new "internet protocol." It is a "new internet" protocol where central authority is part of the design. I am morally opposed.
The CCP can force Chinese to use this, but why would anyone else use it? I can’t see the USA or EU changing architectures unless our governments mandate it, and I see no moves in that direction. We are barely able to get people to implement IPv6 after 20 years of kicking people in the ass to do it, so it will not happen organically.
China also provides foreign aid all over the world. I would guess quite a few countries would be willing to consider this in exchange for subsidized infrastructure.
It's becoming clear that their values are completely different from the west. Unfortunately the problem is that consumers here love low prices, but they also love employment rights, social security, free healthcare and other signs of an advanced civilisation - which costs money. The hypocrisy of the society is that they don't care if the product they buy was made in a country that don't respect human rights and was p…
I think looking at the "new IP" proposal and concluding that "the Chinese have really different values then the west" is myopic. The chinese government is authoritarian and has a clear agenda. Assuming it reflects the values of the people is stupid. The chinese people may be goaded into nationalism and tricked (via propaganda) or pressured into supporting the government, but I think it's not correct to conclude from…
I think the propaganda is on the other side. The government gained support over its recent initiatives in building strong economy, city infrastructure projects, vastly improved public services which affects most people’s daily routines.
The next big destination many people have with respect to internet penetration is Africa. And CCP is ahead of west in capturing African market by working best with dictators and being competitive. For example they sold their telecom towers very cheap, and they work best with only chinese phones. With this cycle, china owns major share of African mobile business in just a few years. It would be easier to to get their…
>"And CCP is ahead of west in capturing African market by working best with dictators and being competitive" I guess the West should improve their track record on "working best with dictators".
Dictators aside, the Chinese are considered fairer trading partners than most (possibly all) western countries. ~1000 years of African history makes this point very clear.
I am genuinely curious about CCP plans if they do become a dominant influence in the world. They are attempting to reprogram Tibetans and Uighurs to erase their culture and make them Chinese. Is that the plan for all other cultures? Is the goal to make us all Chinese speaking Chinese?
Honestly, it's a little of both. There are loud groups of people online that will be fine with this kind of logic. In fact there is a good number of those individuals right here on HN. Essentially I outlined what their talking points will be. At the same time, I'm tired of arguing for rights. I'm partially willing to let people burn the system to the ground to prove how right they are with removing rights from those…
Is it only me, or are half of the companies interested in a similar model. Media streaming, online shopping, banking, or social media are all very interested in your real identity and a strict controlling their interaction with you.
IETF already opened up this can of worms with their DRM schemes now part of the Web standard. China is just taking the next logical step here.