Earlier quoted context omitted.
It turns out you can spice things up on social media with relatively modest ad spends, the mob are so desperate to be incited that you dont even need to light the match.
We need to stop talking about "the mob" as if these people came through a membrane from another universe and are fundamentally non-humans and different from us. Instead of being condescending to people maybe it would be more useful to understand why this behavior happens, instead of dismissing it as "weak mindedness" or "anger issues". The "mob" are people that are probably finding little meaning in life. Their "matc…
Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter
441–450 of 463 posts
Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter
#442Earlier quoted context omitted.
> that they think they will trick communists, people who grew giving their whole lives to intrigue Please don't do that here.
Why?
Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter
#443Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
No, the original evidences from Adrian and some Australian reports were througly debunked by normal youtuber like Daniel Dumbril
Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter
#444Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at this immediate thread above your comment, majority vote did decide the truth about how Chinese people think (they're brainwashed!). Then you scolded someone who got salty about it.
If you want to have some actual influence over how we handle these situations, I need you to engage with the detailed explanation I gave above. If you think you know a better way to handle it, I'd like to hear how, but if you don't even try to respond to the argument (and worse, if you just post glib dismissals), that comes across as blaming us for a difficult situation that we actually work hard as hard as we can to…
You'd probably like to ban the topic entirely, but it'd be weird to have one banned topic and you've said that doesn't work, so that's out.
So what's left, being even-handed, I guess. Except it's a 10-1 ratio, so being even-handed, ban people from both sides leaves you with a 9-0 ratio.. congrats? Even if you're really, really, really trying to be even-handed with regards to content, most people would bias towards handing out 50-50 to feel fair, while 10-1 (or whatever ratio) is actually statistically fair. But that would feel quite biased if you did it! Practically taking a side! So we get a phenomenon where a bad Chinese-adjacent comment (or even a polite one) is super likely to be moderated, but you can't possibly moderate all of the really bad anti-China comments in this thread, there's too many, they rule the day and they establish truth for passersby.
Tech is one of the few industries with a large Chinese minority during this time of rising tension. It would vastly improve the intellectual tone of the site if we had more of them explaining their viewpoint and less of people telling them they're brainwashed.
Failing that, I think the actual real-world answer is to pro-actively push down the repetitive anti-China stories that hit the front page multiple times a week, and then just deny it if anyone asks. They're not intellectually interesting, they're hostile to a significant tech minority, and you don't like the flamewar. Why keep them?
Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter
#445Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "an" is only used in front of words that begin with a vowel sound Yes, that's what I'm saying. > For example, "womb" starts with the same sound as "wumao" No, it doesn't. "Oops" starts with the same sound as "wumao". "Womb" has a /w/ sound before that. There is no /w/ in 五毛. What did you think I meant by saying "the initial W doesn't represent a sound"?
I don't think 五 ("wu", which means "five") is pronounced the same way as the "oo" in "oops", at least in Mandarin Chinese. I hear the "w" very clearly in this counting video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eLP3FuuEVs I think there is a lot of irony in this subthread, since it is responding to a comment about derailing the discussion by distracting from the main topic as a strategy: https://news.ycombinator.com/item…
Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter
#446Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why?
Because we enjoy HN as one of the few places on the internet where meaningful discussion can still occur, which is what comments like yours ("communists grow giving their whole lives to intrigue") undermine. The world is a lot more nuanced.
It's cutthroat, it's one sided, and is exactly as boringly simple as the history textbook tells. I lived in communist hellholes for 18 years of my life, and I will not be entertaining a wish of people wanting to rewrite these textbooks to say that black is white.
It's a bad tendency I see more, and more: people drawing nuance when there is none, for a want of being "nuanced," "sophisticated," "succinct"
Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter
#447Earlier quoted context omitted.
So where exactly do you draw the line between "whataboutism" and asserting similarities?
The point is that if you disagree, counter the argument. Asserting similarities does not counter the argument. If I say: "Bob is bad because he steals apples." Saying "But you also steal apples!" does not counter the argument at all. It's changing the subject.
Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter
#448Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter
#449Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want to have some actual influence over how we handle these situations, I need you to engage with the detailed explanation I gave above. If you think you know a better way to handle it, I'd like to hear how, but if you don't even try to respond to the argument (and worse, if you just post glib dismissals), that comes across as blaming us for a difficult situation that we actually work hard as hard as we can to…
Ok, fine. Food for thought: You'd probably like to ban the topic entirely, but it'd be weird to have one banned topic and you've said that doesn't work, so that's out. So what's left, being even-handed, I guess. Except it's a 10-1 ratio, so being even-handed, ban people from both sides leaves you with a 9-0 ratio.. congrats? Even if you're really, really, really trying to be even-handed with regards to content, most…
I agree with you that it would be better for HN if Chinese users, and users of Chinese background, could share more of their experiences and observations. I've been arguing that for a long time, as I believe you know. But it's not super cool of you to be making that argument as long as your own contributions to HN are undermining that possibility. We're each responsible for how we individually affect the collective situation, and pointing the finger at others—even if they're behaving badly, and even though they're benefitting from an unfair, lopsided fight—is not helpful.
Re: Buying Influence: How China manipulates Facebook and Twitter
#450Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the connection of this to the parent? High power is always corrupted. Even today we have Kennedy assassination, Eperstein, Assange. Desmond Shum is connected to Wen Jiabao. No 2 in China at its time. You think dealing with these people is not dangerous? CCP is bad in different way than any other political organizations. That does not make China unique in any significant way at all.
Quoted post unavailable.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29124368 (Nov 2021)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27763551 (July 2021)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26459099 (March 2021)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24319310 (Aug 2020)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22990413 (April 2020)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22781294 (April 2020)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22543721 (March 2020)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22343386 (Feb 2020)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21740392 (Dec 2019)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21667959 (Nov 2019)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20805021 (Aug 2019)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19010638 (Jan 2019)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17822100 (Aug 2018)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15270562 (Sept 2017)
As I told you last month, this is seriously not cool. I hate to ban an account with this much established history, so I'm going to give you one more chance. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and fix this.