The Painful Price of Becoming Jackie Chan • Hacker News Board

Re: The Painful Price of Becoming Jackie Chan

#171

Post by yawaramin » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 12:03 AM UTC

vinceguidry wrote: post #87

AchieveLife wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey Vince I think we agree with you regarding the inspiration that Chan brings to his people. There is more than inspiration, sweat, tears, and blood that plays the part of viral success as Chan has achieved. Luck and opportunity are the missing pieces. The phrase "if Chan can do it then anyone can" is victim to survivorship bias ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias ) To conclude: Chan achieved awesome t…

Hi. I'll admit to getting a bit frustrated because I seem to need to repeat the same point over and over again, and the responses aren't addressing the point made. Yes, you need luck and opportunity to become Jackie Chan . But there's more ways to be successful than becoming Jackie Chan. He can inspire them to be themselves and not let their situations get them down. That's what is meant by "anyone can do it." Not an…

> But anybody can use the same inner tools that Chan did that got him famous,

What inner tools were those? From the article, it seems that it was a willingness to do extreme, mortally-dangerous stunts? Is that the lesson people should take away–forget about being successful unless you're willing to constantly put your life on the line?

Re: The Painful Price of Becoming Jackie Chan

#172

Post by stcredzero » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 12:06 AM UTC

phs318u wrote: post #157

stcredzero wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do the answers to your rhetorical questions matter? As someone who was a child who was sent away to school by his parents, let me tell you that they matter a great deal. (Particularly from the POV of an adult looking back vs. the experiences of a child.) They are precisely the questions that should be asked to distinguish manipulations of "Think of the children!" hysteria and genuine issues of the human rights of min…

Your last paragreaph sounds contradictory to me. In order to "regulate conditions", the government must reserve the power to intervene should said conditions fail to meet regulatory minima. Failure to reserve such power automatically neuters any "regulation". There are only two distinct choices - no government power over these conditions and therefore no regulation (in effect, irrespective of contrary claims), or reg…

In order to "regulate conditions", the government must reserve the power to intervene should said conditions fail to meet regulatory minima.

Of course. Read the whole thread as if I think the government should reserve that power. My position is that the government should use such power as sparingly as possible.

There are only two distinct choices - no government power over these conditions and therefore no regulation

False. There is a "dial" here. The question is how much government should intervene. In that, there are far more than 2 choices.

Re: The Painful Price of Becoming Jackie Chan

#173

Post by darkpuma » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 12:07 AM UTC

Hasknewbie wrote: post #65

stcredzero wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just read the article, and I didn't see any mention of human trafficking. The Hong Kong opera school is described as indentured servitude. And I'm sure a lot of that goes on there as well, but it's hard to track for obvious reasons. I think that summarizes the constant emotional undertones in this article. This article strikes me as a deliberate re-spinning of a story meant to be triumphal, making it the sneakiest…

"This article strikes me as a deliberate re-spinning of a story meant to be triumphal" ^ This right here. There are many things to say about the damages caused by colonialism, but complaining that it's not covered in a book about Chan (who got immensely successful), in Hong Kong (which became very wealthy) in the 1960/70s (while the rest of China was basically burning down) misses the mark. There is a historical cont…

> "I am of the opinion that when a colonised city surpasses even the UK's GDP without being granted any meaningful democratic rights, they succeeded despite your rule, not because of it)."

Democracy is often cited as economically advantageous, but as Singapore demonstrates, authoritarian dictatorships are not necessarily fated to economic ruination. Sometimes authoritarian dictatorships do better than they would have under democratic rule. The trick to democracy is the results are more consistently in the middle; it's not as likely to go catastrophically wrong, but it's also not as likely to go spectacularly well. That's why we generally prefer it; it's the same reason we generally prefer compensation in the form of paychecks instead of lottery tickets. Sometimes people who play the lottery win, and sometimes authoritarian governments are effective governments.

Hong Kong during the colonial era might be another example of an non-democratic regime actually performing well. Or maybe not, I don't really know. It's hard to run a "parallel Hong-Kong experiment" to find out for sure.

Re: The Painful Price of Becoming Jackie Chan

#174

Post by stcredzero » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 12:10 AM UTC

phs318u wrote: post #160

stcredzero wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Hong Kong opera school is described as indentured servitude. Which is considered by many to be a form of human trafficking. My own family history has a lot to do with indentured servitude. If you watch Korean historical dramas, you'll find the condition described as being a "servant" but at other times, the same condition will be described as being a "slave." In terms of being signed up as minors, exactly how d…

> The line should be firmly held at physical coercion. I disagree. Mental coercion is a thing. Also, children (and often adults too) don't have the knowledge that there exist alternatives i.e. that they have choices. Denying people that knowledge removes their agency. In the case of children they look to their parents as providers - not just of nurture but of knowledge. They trust them and often accept without questi…

I disagree.

No you don't. "The line should be firmly held at physical coercion," is meant as a statement of a baseline minimum. Principle of charity, please.

Mental coercion is a thing. Also, children (and often adults too) don't have the knowledge that there exist alternatives i.e. that they have choices.

Been there. I've been in the position of having a mob, powerful community leaders, and people with police connections arrayed against me, not knowing the law was actually on my side.

Re: The Painful Price of Becoming Jackie Chan

#175

Post by selimthegrim » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 12:11 AM UTC

bsder wrote: post #159

jdietrich wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lack of respect Chan gets in the west is a travesty IMO. His fight choreography is rooted in the traditions Chinese opera while being constantly fresh, playful and imaginative. He shows absolute technical mastery, but there is always a sense of child-like joy underpinning that mastery. The fact that his films are often regarded as frivolous and lightweight says something profound about what is valued in our cultu…

> The lack of respect Chan gets in the west is a travesty IMO. I don't think he gets lack of respect. Directors have studied his stuff for years. Anyone who has watched his movies has been impressed for years. However, let's face it, the average person didn't have any inkling who he was until Rush Hour. As for Jackie Chan's work, the problem is that you get injured . No stuntmen in their right mind would do the kind…

He broke his back in the first (or second depending on how you count) Operation Condor movie.

Re: The Painful Price of Becoming Jackie Chan

#176

Post by phs318u » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 12:15 AM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #162

phs318u wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A contra point to the example you give regarding gay teenagers (last para), is the persistence in many parts of the world of "honour killings" contrary to government proclamations against such practices. In these situations, government failure to intervene (and educate, and...) renders legislative protections useless. Also, it seems to me that in the past (and the present!) gay teenagers had just as much (if not more…

A contra point to the example you give None of those are contra points. In these situations, government failure to intervene (and educate, and...) renders legislative protections useless. No one would disagree that intervention at the level of preventing murder is probably a good idea. I'm sure no one would disagree that intervention by the state at the level of injections of hormones and anti-gay "therapy" would be…

In reading your comments I felt they came across as "absolutist" i.e. "governments should not have the power to intervene". My apologies if I misunderstood. If in fact we agree that governments must have the power to intervene in support of the safety of its citizens, then all we (perhaps) disagree on is the threshold at which such powers kick in.

e.g. in my state in my country we have "no jab, no play" laws to penalise parents (and indirectly, their children) that refuse to vaccinate their kids. Note, that in this example, vaccination is not forced, however there's plenty of stick to "encourage" desired behaviour. I think this is a valid use of the intervention power. Others disagree.

Re: The Painful Price of Becoming Jackie Chan

#177

Post by phs318u » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 12:21 AM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #174

phs318u wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The line should be firmly held at physical coercion. I disagree. Mental coercion is a thing. Also, children (and often adults too) don't have the knowledge that there exist alternatives i.e. that they have choices. Denying people that knowledge removes their agency. In the case of children they look to their parents as providers - not just of nurture but of knowledge. They trust them and often accept without questi…

I disagree. No you don't. "The line should be firmly held at physical coercion," is meant as a statement of a baseline minimum. Principle of charity, please. Mental coercion is a thing. Also, children (and often adults too) don't have the knowledge that there exist alternatives i.e. that they have choices. Been there. I've been in the position of having a mob, powerful community leaders, and people with police connec…

Did not intend to be uncharitable but I think I've misunderstood your statement "The line should be firmly held at physical coercion". In the context of the discussion, I took that to mean, "the line (e.g. the point at which government intervention in the private affairs of individuals is justified), should be firmly held at physical coercion (i.e. where one party is being physically coerced into a situation)" with the logical (to me) implication that in the absence of physical coercion, government intervention is not justified - a position with which I do not agree.

EDIT: last sentence - clarified my position.

Re: The Painful Price of Becoming Jackie Chan

#178

Post by tivert » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 12:33 AM UTC

chaostheory wrote: post #167

wenc wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> China is a low trust society that doesn't have a strong rule of law. What this translates into is fake medicine, fake food, newly built buildings and bridges that either fall apart or are falling apart, police and low level government officials who need bribes for mundane things and so on. I'm sure this is all true, but I'm curious, have you lived in China? What's your take on the lived experience in China? I just…

Yes. My perspective is skewed though. I know it as a child who didn't know any better, and now as an adult Americanized outsider with ties that keep weakening with time, exacerbated by differences in culture. While some things have stayed the same, a lot has also changed since I lived there. Anywhere is livable, if you either don't have a choice or you're ignorant of alternatives. Looking at it as an American, parts…

> Aside from occasional food poisoning

I swamp my system with probiotics whenever I go there and I haven't had any food poisoning issues. I used these on my last visit: http://www.jarrow.com/product/662/Jarro-Dophilus_EPS

YMMV. I haven't been to China without doing the probiotics thing, but I have gotten sick in other places without them.

Re: The Painful Price of Becoming Jackie Chan

#179

Post by phs318u » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 12:34 AM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #172

phs318u wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your last paragreaph sounds contradictory to me. In order to "regulate conditions", the government must reserve the power to intervene should said conditions fail to meet regulatory minima. Failure to reserve such power automatically neuters any "regulation". There are only two distinct choices - no government power over these conditions and therefore no regulation (in effect, irrespective of contrary claims), or reg…

In order to "regulate conditions", the government must reserve the power to intervene should said conditions fail to meet regulatory minima. Of course. Read the whole thread as if I think the government should reserve that power. My position is that the government should use such power as sparingly as possible. There are only two distinct choices - no government power over these conditions and therefore no regulation…

> My position is that the government should use such power as sparingly as possible.

Apologies. I misunderstood and it seems we agree on the fundamental principle that the government should have such power and disagree only on it's extent, as per my other reply to another comment of yours: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18870396

> False. There is a "dial" here.

Which is exactly what I go on to say in the rest of the sentence you quoted - "...there is broad scope for where the threshold for intervention is set"

Re: The Painful Price of Becoming Jackie Chan

#180

Post by the_af » Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 12:37 AM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #166

the_af wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the clarification. I didn't think this was caused by colonialism (for the record, I think it's caused by unchecked capitalism rather than "globalism"). > Definitely not a "colonial hell-hole" which I find to be incredibly offensive. It does sound offensive. The article doesn't even try to argue this, either. Those aren't my words either, since I know next to nothing about colonial Hong Kong.

More housing regulation would prevent some of the coffin sized bedrooms. I'm not sure if human dignity would be increased or decreased in that case, if such regulation would cause more homelessness.

I wasn't arguing for more housing regulation (or arguing at all), though now that you mention it, I think living in coffins is probably not the best for human dignity.

I was just commenting that a series of photos titled "Trapped" about an underclass living in coffin-sized bedrooms in Hong Kong, posted -- not by me, mind you -- in reply to your question "is there an underclass trapped there?" is both eye-opening and remarkably relevant.

Wouldn't you agree?