Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter • Hacker News Board

Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter

#431

Post by radmuzom » Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 6:44 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #426

radmuzom wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice talk, but you are one of the biggest offenders by using moderation powers to curtail discussion around topics which may not fit the majority world-view while refusing to treat the view of ignorant morons similarly. I have seen it happen several times over the last decade. And no, I am not going to present any "evidence" here.

I'll match your evidence-free comment with one of my own: you have no idea how hard we work to do just what I described above, and how much pressure we come under because of it. Re what you've "seen happen several times over the last decade": I'm sure you've seen some dots, but how you connect them into the picture you've got is not a thing you've seen, but something you yourself have made out of the dots. If you sta…

> you have no idea how hard we work

I'll believe it when I see "anti-China" posts being removed from the first 3-4 pages with as much enthusiasm as much as "anti-US" posts. Or when flags are removed from posts related to death of Kobe Bryant (or conversely, discussion about the death of a nobody like Bill Gates' father demoted by moderation action).

Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter

#432

Post by the_af » Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 7:21 PM UTC

KerrAvon wrote: post #372

forgotmyoldname wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think China was some North Korean-style hellscape and hated the country. Then I had a flight transfer through China and decided to take a couple days there just to see how bad it was. Ended up realizing most internet comments and news articles are posted by people who are absolutely obsessed with China and only get their information through seventh-hand sources--it's that insanely distorted. Left loving the…

You don’t even need to go to a foreign country for this experience. I read bullshit about how bad conditions in California are all the time from right-wingers who just want to propagandize for their own political benefit. However: you seem to be telling a native Chinese person that they’re wrong about their impressions of their own country. Do you want to maybe add some nuance to that?

> However: you seem to be telling a native Chinese person that they’re wrong about their impressions of their own country. Do you want to maybe add some nuance to that?

I don't read forgotmyoldname's comment as telling chunghuaming that they are wrong about their impressions of China. It's more about forgotmyoldname's own impressions, and his/her assessment of people in general who comment online about China.

In follow up comments, forgotmyoldname also provides first and second hand supporting experiences. Do you have any of yours that would contradict theirs?

Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter

#433

Post by dang » Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 7:34 PM UTC

johnsolo1701 wrote: post #124

fc373745 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This might be hard for you to believe, but there are a lot of people who have genuine and consistent empathy for needless suffering, no matter where it happens. You might not hear from us much online, because we often get crushed under the relentless cynicism your comment chillingly embodies.

Personal attacks like this are not cool on HN, regardless of how wrong someone is or you feel they are, and regardless of how much empathy you embody.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter

#434

Post by atomicity » Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 7:35 PM UTC

dillondoyle wrote: post #360

atomicity wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood why people support the escalating US-China conflict since it's so easy to just keep focusing on win-win collaborations but your comment gave me an insight. Please let me know if this is wrong, but I think this is the argument: 1. The US is a better leader than China because it is a significantly better place. Notable US problems that cause lots of suffering are significantly less severe than not…

What evidence would you present to me - an American - that the US is not a significantly better place than China?

My assumptions:

1. Hedonism is "fairly correct". In a well-fed and low-violence society, the pleasure/pain axis explains >40% of what every human cares about, especially chronic pleasure/pain.

- 1a. Both the US and China are low-violence and well-fed.

2. Obesity is responsible for a high amount of pain. Furthermore, there are few things in society that don't kill you which are worse that obesity.

- 2a. People don't die that much in societies like China.

3. Modern entertainment is a good painkiller. However, obese people that consume it still experience great amounts of pain throughout the day. Entertainment that distracts people from fixing the chronic pain they feel is a negative to society.

With these assumptions, the US doesn't look like a significantly better place than China. In theory, the freedom enabled by the US allows people to do well on the pain/pleasure axis. In practice, the US enables companies to do things that lead people into greater chronic pain.

Note that I think that Taiwan could be a significantly better place than China by this logic.

Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter

#435

Post by dang » Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 7:36 PM UTC

fc373745 wrote: post #66

[flagged]

You started a hellish flamewar with this comment, exactly what the site guidelines ask you not to do. You also fueled it egregiously. That's seriously not cool and will get you banned here, regardless of how right you are or feel you are.

If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting to HN, we'd appreciate it.

Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter

#436

Post by dang » Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 7:36 PM UTC

isoprophlex wrote: post #71

fc373745 wrote: post #66

[flagged]

[flagged]

Please do not take HN threads further into generic, hellish flamewars. This sort of shallow, angry denunciation is not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for.

If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it. You've broken them in other places recently, too—not cool. Fortunately your good comments are good.

Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter

#437

Post by matt123456789 » Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 7:41 PM UTC

justicezyx wrote: post #425

mthoms wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're changing the criteria? >We discuss that. That was viewed as a western media propaganda. I.e., no hard proof from any reputable organizations (UN for example). In response to that comment, I linked reports from the United Nations, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. Those are 3 of the most reputable organizations in the world in the field of human rights (the links also point out that it's impossible…

They are allegations based on western media reports, which themselves are based on dubious evidences. Everything so far regarding Xinjiang are all one-sided news rehashing from a few individuals, while the US intelligence with its cutting-edge spy satellites, field agents, cannot find any concrete evidences. Just coincidence?

The Liberian Ministry of Agriculture hasn’t presented any evidence publicly, either. And there’s no mention of it in the Beatles’ 1969 album Abbey Road. I guess you would like to enter these facts into the record as well.

You don’t get to pick and choose the evidence that is presented against you. Evidence that you have failed to explain beyond claiming a grand “media conspiracy”. This is textbook misdirection.

Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter

#438

Post by atomicity » Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 7:42 PM UTC

bllguo wrote: post #323

atomicity wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood why people support the escalating US-China conflict since it's so easy to just keep focusing on win-win collaborations but your comment gave me an insight. Please let me know if this is wrong, but I think this is the argument: 1. The US is a better leader than China because it is a significantly better place. Notable US problems that cause lots of suffering are significantly less severe than not…

Chinese people don't believe the US system is inferior solely based on improvements in their own country. I think this discredits them. Chinese students study English and America in school, many have come as exchange students, they consume American media - they are comparing things firsthand in a way that Americans mostly refuse to do. Believe it or not, Western ideals used to have a good amount of traction in China.…

Nice anecdote, I tried to speak more to the point that I think that most US citizens are right to support the US escalating the conflict against China. Their values align with their actions.

Furthermore, people that think they can convince US citizens that they should not escalate the conflict are focusing on a lost cause. This does not mean no discourse should happen, but people should understand that differences in opinions are due to very big differences in values.

I did not look much into why a Chinese citizen would support China escalating the conflict against the US nor have I done much research on how China builds up anti-US sentiment.

Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter

#439

Post by dillondoyle » Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 8:36 PM UTC

atomicity wrote: post #434

dillondoyle wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What evidence would you present to me - an American - that the US is not a significantly better place than China?

My assumptions: 1. Hedonism is "fairly correct". In a well-fed and low-violence society, the pleasure/pain axis explains >40% of what every human cares about, especially chronic pleasure/pain. - 1a. Both the US and China are low-violence and well-fed. 2. Obesity is responsible for a high amount of pain. Furthermore, there are few things in society that don't kill you which are worse that obesity. - 2a. People don't d…

Those are definitely good quality of life indicators.

Every country can do better. The US should do better at a lot of things and poverty, inequality, and racism are for sure big drivers of things like childbirth death rate, lack of education and more!

But to OP's comment, there is no way in hell you can convince me or even a significant minority of Americans that China is better on the whole or even on a minor slice.

Lol even life expectancy and health seems like a lot of people here don't care about and are perfectly happy to guzzle cola and sit in front of a tv lmfao.

In terms of do better, China's list is ginormous and some of the things on it - like not building interment and forced 'integration' for millions of their citizens - are so extremely opposite of the values most here hold that it far outweighs any good weights on this 'better than' scale. It feels farcical to say otherwise.

I commented an open ended question in the first place is because these one off comments similar to OP feel to me exactly like what the article shows are active campaigns to interact on social networks like HN. But pointing that out without proof (impossible for me to get) is against HN ethics. I'm guilting of doing it though this is a moral and emotional issue for me.

Plus we americans are pretty self confident and often beligerantly arrogant. Makes it hard to convince people anything beyond american exceptionalism even on obviously nice things. Like that historical pamphlet comparing French lifestyle during the war that was posted here a long time ago. Yes they can value family and well being over working, that's horrible and un american ;) !

Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter

#440

Post by thaumasiotes » Thu, Dec 23, 2021, 8:57 PM UTC

CorrectHorseBat wrote: post #414

thaumasiotes wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes I know how Wuhan sounds like and I clearly hear a w sound in there, don't you? No? > Don't 我 and 武 start with the same sound? You could make that argument. But 武 never transitions out of it. That transition is how you get a glide (or semivowel) as opposed to a vowel. 我 is /wo/, with a brief /w/. 武 is /u/, and that vowel persists through the entire syllable. If you wanted to call it /w/ instead of /u/, you'd hav…

> Am I right that you're a native Mandarin speaker? No I'm not. Are you? I'm open to the idea that I'm mislead by pinyin, but I really cannot unhear the w sound there. How do you pronounce Wuhan? Do you start with you lips closed or can you do it with your mouth open? > seanmcdirmid mentioned 服务 - do you also clearly hear a W sound there? Not really, but syllables changing depending on what comes before (or after the…

> How do you pronounce Wuhan? Do you start with you lips closed or can you do it with your mouth open?

I don't understand this question. The only sounds you can make by closing your lips are P, B, and M.