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

Naomi Wu and the Silence That Speaks Volumes

hackingbutlegal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 216 posts

Re: Naomi Wu and the Silence That Speaks Volumes

#61

Post by ksherlock »

univerio wrote: post #41
Hydraulix989 wrote: post #26

What is going on with the DNS name resolution here? Can somebody please share the resolved IP address?

It seems to resolve against 1.1.1.1 but not 8.8.8.8. $ dig www.hackingbutlegal.com @1.1.1.1 ... www.hackingbutlegal.com. 1730 IN CNAME target.substack-custom-domains.com. ...

It's working now (8.8.8.8) but definitely wasn't earlier. The substack subscribe popover says it was launched 5 hours ago (which seems odd since hn has links from 36 days ago and whois says it was registered 2 years ago) but maybe that's got something to do with it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=hackingbutlegal.com

Re: Naomi Wu and the Silence That Speaks Volumes

#62

Post by mcpackieh »

reducesuffering wrote: post #56
paleface wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> […] since her sexuality was outed by a Western journalist […] South Korean journalist, self declared [supposed] “feminist”, and anti white racist - Sarah Jeong - working for Western media outlet Vice. I hope she’s satisfied with her handiwork!…

You’re refuting her being a Western journalist because of her ethnicity? She’s been in the US since she was 3 years old, raised Southern Baptist, attended Ivies, and is a US citizen…

Paleface is citing her as an example of such a western journalist...

Re: Naomi Wu and the Silence That Speaks Volumes

#63

Post by goodbyesf »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #21

It's depressing how many Americans and Europeans seem utterly allergic to any kind of nuanced discussion or deeper understanding of China. I think the same applies to the former USSR. I'm not sure why this is.

> I'm not sure why this is.

Do we have a nuanced discussion or deeper understanding of iran? Libya? Vietnam? Ethiopia? Myamnar? Niger? Of course not. People just follow state propaganda. Doesn't matter who it is, americans, europeans, chinese, russians, etc.

Besides, nuanced discussion or deeper understanding of china wouldn't change the geopolitical realities of the situation. Whether it was the ussr, ottoman empire, japanese empire, etc, our enemies have to be caricatured and destroyed.

The real question is why the china, ussr, ottoman empire, japanese, etc aren't doing or didn't do the same. Why is it that china or the chinese are so desperate for american approval or understanding? While we don't give a shit whether the chinese have a nuanced discussion or deeper understanding about us.

Re: Naomi Wu and the Silence That Speaks Volumes

#64

Post by ronyclau »

0cVlTeIATBs wrote: post #10
yardie wrote: post #3

For context her last Tweet: "Ok for those of you that haven't figured it out I got my wings clipped and they weren't gentle about it- so there's not going to be much posting on social media anymore and only on very specific subjects. I can leave but Kaidi can't so we're just going to follow the new rules and that's that. Nothing personal if I don't like and reply like I used to. I'll be focusing on the store and the…

From my reading it sounds like her girlfriend Kaidi is under house arrest, and potentially both of them under surveillance. I'm guessing frequent checkins with the local police. Hope I'm not misinterpreting. Article also notes her historic calling out of potential keyboard app keystroke siphoning threats in China could be related. Sogou input recently found to transmit every keystroke by Citizen Lab.

I don't think she meant her girlfriend is under house arrest (though possibly too), I guess she meant she can leave the country but her girlfriend can't.

Uyghur are systematically suppressed and discriminated in China. It's very hard for them to get even a passport, let alone be allowed to leave the country legally. Given the situation of Naomi now, it's practically impossible for Kaidi to leave China.

Re: Naomi Wu and the Silence That Speaks Volumes

#65

Post by [deleted] »

ajross wrote: post #54
jacquesm wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This goes well beyond just censorship.

No, this is just censorship. The government showed up and told her to stop saying stuff, so she did. The problem is that the word has been diluted in contemporary usage. Almost everything that people call "censorship" in the discourse mostly amounts to "People disagree with me and I don't liek that", or occasionally "I got banned on so I'm yelling about it on ". This is what actual censorship looks like.

[deleted]

Re: Naomi Wu and the Silence That Speaks Volumes

#66

Post by brigandish »

goodbyesf wrote: post #63
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #21

It's depressing how many Americans and Europeans seem utterly allergic to any kind of nuanced discussion or deeper understanding of China. I think the same applies to the former USSR. I'm not sure why this is.

> I'm not sure why this is. Do we have a nuanced discussion or deeper understanding of iran? Libya? Vietnam? Ethiopia? Myamnar? Niger? Of course not. People just follow state propaganda. Doesn't matter who it is, americans, europeans, chinese, russians, etc. Besides, nuanced discussion or deeper understanding of china wouldn't change the geopolitical realities of the situation. Whether it was the ussr, ottoman empire…

> Why is it that china or the chinese are so desperate for american approval or understanding?

They are?

Re: Naomi Wu and the Silence That Speaks Volumes

#68

Post by mcpackieh »

flangola7 wrote: post #24
barry-cotter wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, censorship can totally be the answer to getting people to stop saying things you don’t want them to say if you don’t have any commitment to free speech. See how Tucker Max or Milo Yiannopolous are no longer culturally relevant. Censorship works.

If I can find it again there's a really great video explaining how, to have free speech, you must restrict some speech. Because bad actors use speech and claims om they are "defending free speech!" in bad faith as a weapon to further their ends, and once they're in a position of power will shameless drop the pretenses and restrict any speech that doesn't entrench their position.

> If I can find it again there's a really great video explaining how, to have free speech, you must restrict some speech.

It's nonsense. Constitutional governments with checks and balances can and do hold up to criticisms against them, even speech advocating against free speech. The paradox doesn't exist because the premise of the paradox, that tolerance of the intolerant inevitably results in the victory of the intolerant, isn't true.

Re: Naomi Wu and the Silence That Speaks Volumes

#69

Post by tbrownaw »

ajross wrote: post #54
jacquesm wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This goes well beyond just censorship.

No, this is just censorship. The government showed up and told her to stop saying stuff, so she did. The problem is that the word has been diluted in contemporary usage. Almost everything that people call "censorship" in the discourse mostly amounts to "People disagree with me and I don't liek that", or occasionally "I got banned on so I'm yelling about it on ". This is what actual censorship looks like.

Censorship is not solely its most extreme form. Getting banned from your favorite baseball forum because you keep talking about hockey does in fact count, even if it's relatively minor and most people would even agree with it.
Post reply on HN