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

Study Pinpoints Source of Banned Gas That Saps Ozone Layer: Eastern China

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 138 posts

Re: Study Pinpoints Source of Banned Gas That Saps Ozone Layer: Eastern China

#121

Post by BurningFrog »

Joakal wrote: post #99
BurningFrog wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China has definitely become much better on human rights. It's not often mentioned in polite company, but the Chinese communist government killed ~65 million of its own citizens under Mao. I don't want to downplay the current regime's many and serious human rights violations, but they are thankfully on a much more modest level. Internationally, China has focused strongly on peaceful trade, not military confrontation.

They didn't kill them. They went through a government change, a revolution where they were experienced in fighting, not farming. The alternative was living under the old government that they hated. It's like in Zimbabwe, they kicked out the white farmers and suddenly they're no longer the bread state.

You're saying the deaths were from incompetence in ruling, not deliberate murders.

There was plenty of that, but it's not the dominant factor: https://www.heritage.org/asia/commentary/the-legacy-mao-zedo...

Re: Study Pinpoints Source of Banned Gas That Saps Ozone Layer: Eastern China

#122

Post by wtdata »

Sincerely, all this environmentalist's manifestations we are seeing in EU, would actually make sense if they where in front of the Chinese embassies here.

Instead they keep demanding local actions from the EU, as if the EU hasn't been in the forefront of environmental protection for almost half a century now. This way they are just diverting the attention away from the real main issue: China.

Re: Study Pinpoints Source of Banned Gas That Saps Ozone Layer: Eastern China

#123

Post by andrekandre »

nikkwong wrote: post #75
roywiggins wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's plenty of precedent for this sort of thing in the West's industrial past. Being a fast-growing economy and also keeping a strict eye on product purity, has it ever successfully been done before? Not to say that as an excuse, but it's not at all an uncommon pattern.

I think it's pretty much what we'd expect when markets are allowed to operate unhinged; it doesn't necessarily speak to a point in time in an economy's development—it moreso speaks to the fact that less developed economies are less strictly regulated because they've yet to develop the case law and obituaries on which protective regulations are formed. With that in mind it's a bit hard to ignore the irony in the regul…

> it seems that the lawmakers have too perverse an incentive structure and their constituents have too short a memory to realize which regulations are necessary to protect the greater good.

while reading your post half way i was thinking to reply saying the exact same thing

this gives me much pause, because it means that even if more and more these deregulation’s hurt society, they would get drowned out by the (increasingly sensational) daily news cycle

Re: Study Pinpoints Source of Banned Gas That Saps Ozone Layer: Eastern China

#124

Post by andrekandre »

mises wrote: post #117
internet_user wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just too big, they are outside of the US sphere of influence, while Japan is a client state really. We should still shame reprehensible behavior.

They are not a client state, but may become one if we don't change things quickly. They have been an ally of America, because Amerifa projected an extremely strong influence into the Pacific post-WWII. We have had a succession of cowardly politicians afraid to stand up to others (see China's behavior in the S. China Sea, Russian Invasion of Ukraine, Iran building nukes). Both sides talk tough and refuse to act. Now w…

> We need to keep China down at all costs

really?

china is a nuclear armed power, i’m not sure we want to see the result of “at all costs” type of thinking

Re: Study Pinpoints Source of Banned Gas That Saps Ozone Layer: Eastern China

#125

Post by bArray »

anigbrowl wrote: post #89
bArray wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I hate to see the environment getting destroyed, eco-terrorism is not the way forwards. Every normal person is empowered to help: purchase from people whose ideals you agree with, win the hearts and minds of those around you, re-use everything you safely can.

How's that been working out for the last 40 years?

Do you really think that governments have been actively working on this for 40 years? Other than the occasional signalling, there's not been trade sanction or tariffs.

Re: Study Pinpoints Source of Banned Gas That Saps Ozone Layer: Eastern China

#126

Post by andrekandre »

reallydude wrote: post #66
frequentnapper wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This quote reeks of self-righteousness. Western corporations have done as much harm as they could get away with to make a quick buck as well. Jordan Peterson is an individual who seems like he struggled to make sense of the world according to his Christian/Pure-Capitalistic view of the world and decided to concoct wild self-righteous theories to justify his bias rather than change his viewpoint. The only thing he has…

> decided to concoct wild self-righteous theories to justify his bias rather than change his viewpoint To what? Is there a "right" answer that would serve someone better? It's always going to appear self-righteous when you justify your own worldview. The utility of JP's views, is why other people adopt it, not some fictional "messianic cult". JP's reasoning has flaws and gaps as with all people. Even the utility is f…

> Even the utility is from other historical wisdom, not his own, repackaged into a story. Easily digestable and as rational as any other I have seen.

but that doesn’t necessarily make them true

Re: Study Pinpoints Source of Banned Gas That Saps Ozone Layer: Eastern China

#127

Post by bArray »

kjar wrote: post #27
bArray wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I hate to see the environment getting destroyed, eco-terrorism is not the way forwards. Every normal person is empowered to help: purchase from people whose ideals you agree with, win the hearts and minds of those around you, re-use everything you safely can.

I agree we can and should do what we can to prevent the worst outcomes and labeling direct nonviolent action as terrorism is a bit much / counterproductive

I think it's certainly borderline either way [1]. The point at which you're using relatively extreme criminal actions to scare people into considering your political agenda, you become a form of terrorist (in this case an eco-terrorist).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-terrorism

Re: Study Pinpoints Source of Banned Gas That Saps Ozone Layer: Eastern China

#128

Post by bArray »

internet_user wrote: post #15
bArray wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I hate to see the environment getting destroyed, eco-terrorism is not the way forwards. Every normal person is empowered to help: purchase from people whose ideals you agree with, win the hearts and minds of those around you, re-use everything you safely can.

How much choice do you really have if literally all of your choices are from China?

We can bring about political change which makes these practices financially non-profitable. Simply use regulation to price them out of the market.

Re: Study Pinpoints Source of Banned Gas That Saps Ozone Layer: Eastern China

#129

Post by heybrendan »

hobs wrote: post #100
heybrendan wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Western corporations have done as much harm as they could get away with to make a quick buck as well. I'm in agreement (for the most part)--historically speaking. I never said that this was purely relegated to China, although the topic of the article is indeed China. I'll also take this opportunity to remind you about HN commenting guidelines [1], specifically when disagreeing to try to "reply to the argument", as…

Anyone should be opposed to his works, he's a dog whistle artist and his brand of intellectual pablum really shouldn't be quoted in an intellectual forum.

This comment adds very little to the discussion. Could you provide some examples?

Re: Study Pinpoints Source of Banned Gas That Saps Ozone Layer: Eastern China

#130

Post by heybrendan »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #46
heybrendan wrote: post #43

TFA made me think of Dr. Mehmet Oz' interview of Dr. Jordan Peterson [1] from last year (2018). I've transcribed part of the interview below: Dr. Jordan Peterson: > "I've always been obsessed with totalitarianism and authoritarian governments whether they're on the Right or the Left for years--decades really. I spent almost all of my free time thinking about what happened in Nazi Germany and in Russia during the Sovi…

Dr Oz[1]? That quack? Please. He's an astrologer not a doctor. 1: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2018/06/07/a-...

The transcript (and linked video) is only Peterson speaking.

Your feelings regarding Oz and any associated controversy are irrelevant, unless you're indirectly implying that Oz is unfit to conduct an interview, in which case, I think you've got your work cut out for you. It would be impertinent and premature to dismiss an interview simply because you dislike the host: I can easily name any number of hosts I dislike or have a general disdain for yet found the discussions interesting and/or thought-provoking.

That being said, if it's not crystal-clear at this point: it's discussion around Peterson's ideas I'm interested in, in the context of China (and the TFA). Would you care to respond to Peterson's thoughts directly?

Post reply on HN