Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China state CCTV avoids crowd close ups at the World Cup

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 353 posts

Re: China state CCTV avoids crowd close ups at the World Cup

#281

Post by rippercushions »

philliphaydon wrote: post #155
rippercushions wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can probably add a zero to that number, but it's quite clear that unlike literally every other big country in the world, China has not gone through a major wave of nationwide infection that would lead to considerable fatalities... yet.

That we know about... Remember, information is suppressed.

Chinese social media is heavily censored, but by necessity the censorship is reactive and information leaks out before it gets nuked, as we're seeing right now with the protests. If there was another city in China that had experienced a Wuhan-level outbreak, much less a nationwide wave, we'd know about it.

Re: China state CCTV avoids crowd close ups at the World Cup

#282

Post by leokennis »

hunglee2 wrote: post #202
hanoz wrote: post #19

What is going on with China's continuing zero-covid policy? Either it's the most expensive face saving exercise the world has ever seen, or they know something about it that we don't.

they know something we do also know - Covid is bad. Mass infections in Western countries is already an identifiable factor in reduced labour force participation - millions of people not working because of long covid, or need to take care of people not working. Add in the long term (maybe permanent?) cognitive impact, letting Covid run free is a objectively a bad idea. The problem for China is that the entire world ha…

> (...) letting Covid run free is a objectively a bad idea (...) there are increasing problems with being an outlier (...) they were not wrong to do covid zero - we all should've done this, together

I do not understand this argument. It seems to me like you're saying that zero-COVID is better in the long term, but now worse for China in the short term as they are the only ones clinging on to it.

If we all had done zero-COVID together, then now the entire world would still be in some form of lockdown - can you explain how that would be better than the situation we are in now?

Example: in The Netherlands, the last Omikron wave basically was a small bump with very little hospitalizations...how would a zero-COVID lockdown like China has now have been better?

Re: China state CCTV avoids crowd close ups at the World Cup

#283

Post by JumpCrisscross »

nashashmi wrote: post #254
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> saw all the unmasked foreigners at The World Cup it spawned a lot of ideation Is there any evidence this is about masks versus gatherings? > the Geneva convention has a clause against going to war with a nation stricken by a pandemic The U.S. would go to war with China if it invaded Taiwan, conventions or not. (I also believe the relevant text is with respect to medical personnel, not a general prohibition on armed…

The US would not go to war and attack china over Taiwan. MAYBE They will fund Taiwan to attack. Maybe they will just put their troops there. And not fight. But they won’t go to war.

> US would not go to war and attack china over Taiwan

Attack the Chinese mainland, perhaps not, at least not without plausible deniability. Sink Chinese ships in waters the international community considers international or Taiwanese and Beijing Chinese, absolutely.

Were China to retaliate by hitting an American ship, then yes, we would likely go to limited war against its port and missile facilities.

Re: China state CCTV avoids crowd close ups at the World Cup

#284

Post by solumunus »

whb07 wrote: post #163
agumonkey wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm stumped they didn't consider buying other vaccines. Maybe they don't want to be reliant on the west. They're indeed doing a mistake keep the lock strategy...

Quoted post unavailable.

> Perhaps they know the risks of COVID and correctly weighed them to the risk of the shot

How could you possibly consider this as a possibility? We have enough data to see clearly, with no reasonable debate, that this is complete nonsense.

Re: China state CCTV avoids crowd close ups at the World Cup

#285

Post by JumpCrisscross »

vkou wrote: post #277
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> saw all the unmasked foreigners at The World Cup it spawned a lot of ideation Is there any evidence this is about masks versus gatherings? > the Geneva convention has a clause against going to war with a nation stricken by a pandemic The U.S. would go to war with China if it invaded Taiwan, conventions or not. (I also believe the relevant text is with respect to medical personnel, not a general prohibition on armed…

If the US is ruled by a government that will start a war with a nuclear power for any reason other than an attack against it, we need to do everything possible to replace that government. Because doing that is insane, and we cannot let madmen in charge of a nuclear football. Taiwan isn't worth ending the world over.

> doing that is insane, and we cannot let madmen in charge of a nuclear football

Zero nuclear is failed policy. It’s lead to war in Ukraine and encourages appeasement with China. We need more flexible doctrine. I’m not sure what it is, but it can’t be no war at all ever with a belligerent nuclear power at all costs. (Conventional only, no sinking capital ships and no strikes on core territory or any civilians would strike me as reasonable, but that also plays to American strengths.)

Re: China state CCTV avoids crowd close ups at the World Cup

#286

Post by HDThoreaun »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #283
nashashmi wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US would not go to war and attack china over Taiwan. MAYBE They will fund Taiwan to attack. Maybe they will just put their troops there. And not fight. But they won’t go to war.

> US would not go to war and attack china over Taiwan Attack the Chinese mainland, perhaps not, at least not without plausible deniability. Sink Chinese ships in waters the international community considers international or Taiwanese and Beijing Chinese, absolutely. Were China to retaliate by hitting an American ship, then yes, we would likely go to limited war against its port and missile facilities.

There’s no limited war between China and the us

Re: China state CCTV avoids crowd close ups at the World Cup

#287

Post by JumpCrisscross »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #286
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> US would not go to war and attack china over Taiwan Attack the Chinese mainland, perhaps not, at least not without plausible deniability. Sink Chinese ships in waters the international community considers international or Taiwanese and Beijing Chinese, absolutely. Were China to retaliate by hitting an American ship, then yes, we would likely go to limited war against its port and missile facilities.

There’s no limited war between China and the us

> no limited war between China and the us

“Limited” as in not seeking unconditional surrender. As long as the U.S. doesn’t threaten the CCP’s existence, limiting its aims to thwarting Xi’s policy goals, i.e. taking Taiwan, it’s irrational for Beijing to escalate to nuclear Armageddon. But Xi is a dictator, and dictators do not make for rational states, so who knows.

What is clear: a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would meet with an American and allied military response. And the decisions around what that response looks like (or if it happens) would give zero weight to whether China says it’s in a pandemic.

Re: China state CCTV avoids crowd close ups at the World Cup

#288

Post by jahnu »

amluto wrote: post #199
jahnu wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's even worse than that; hazard ratio increases significantly with each re-infection https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-02051-3

You’re reading that paper wrong. It says that the cumulative risk of death, long Covid, etc increases with the number of infections. Of course it does: the only was it wouldn’t would be if reinfections has zero or negative risk. (I’m ignoring whether the paper is correct in the first place.)

I’m not sure what you think I’m saying wrong. Here is the salient quote from the abstract

“The evidence shows that reinfection further increases risks of death, hospitalization and sequelae in multiple organ systems in the acute and postacute phase.”

Re: China state CCTV avoids crowd close ups at the World Cup

#289

Post by mensetmanusman »

tartoran wrote: post #191
philliphaydon wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything get's blamed on the west. I was just reading on facebook about the lockdowns and even the replies are blaming the US for covid and so its the US fault that China has lockdowns.

It’s mental gymnastics to blame the west on locking down large swaths of people and not allow them or bring them food and other necessities. It seems to me Chinese people are quite patient but even that starts running thin after a while. These 0 covid policies seem absolutely idiotic while at the same time I doubt Xi is that stupid and not following other personal agenda.

Everyone is stupid at some things (and usually capable in other areas).

It’s entirely possible that Xi’s ideology-induced blindness in combination with being surrounded by yes-men make him an incredibly stupid leader in these circumstances.

Re: China state CCTV avoids crowd close ups at the World Cup

#290

Post by warinukraine »

smcl wrote: post #262
ohbtvz wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know if it's correct to call China a "dictatorship" but I'll humour you for a moment. Seriously? What's your definition of "dictatorship"? Let's take Wikipedia's one for example: > A dictatorship is a form of government which is characterized by a leader or a group of leaders which holds governmental powers with few to no limitations on them. Can you sincerely say that it doesn't apply?

China is a lot of things, it's nominally communist but that doesn't quite capture the whole situation on its own, it's technically a "dictatorship" by that definition (probably more so recently with Xi Jinping consolidating power) but that also doesn't quite capture it all either. I don't want to debate terminology because it's tedious and detracts from the actual point I was making - that just because the CCP has a…

Guys you're both right.
Post reply on HN