WeChat suspends new user registration for security compliance • Hacker News Board

Re: WeChat suspends new user registration for security compliance

#201

Post by dang » Wed, Aug 04, 2021, 4:06 PM UTC

tpm wrote: post #199

dang wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've banned this account. It's a pity, because you've posted good HN comments like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26978491 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27176286 , but vandalizing the site like this after we specifically asked you not to is seriously not ok.

Maybe you could try to do something with the Chinese trolls too? It's becoming a serious problem.

I'm always happy to look at specific links. But from my perspective the serious problem is users' tendency to project such categories as "paid shill", "bot", "troll", and so on, onto other users who simply have different backgrounds than they do and different views than they do. There is years' worth of explanation here:

https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...

and lots of specific explanations here:

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Re: WeChat suspends new user registration for security compliance

#202

Post by hamburgerwah » Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 2:11 AM UTC

onethought wrote: post #191

nerbert wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not suggesting but saying that the CCP has a pool of members to tap into and is able to force companies to make them members of their board. Junior members will grow older, can be board member of small companies in the countryside in the beginning, then evolve as they grow. Older members can be board members of 10+ Big companies.

There are 26 million (official) companies in china. Just to orchestrate such a thing would require an entire department/ministry... could you point out which part of the chinese government apparatus that is? This is just the normal Chinese gov control everything narrative that people who've basically not spent a lot of time in china tell themselves for whatever reasons. CCP preserves CCPs power. That's its main focus…

How is that remotely relevant. At any time a senior figure in the CCP can wipe out the company, hire or fire anyone, put anyone in jail, get anyone out of jail, changes it's managerial direction with a memo, outlaw it's entire industry, make legal it's formerly illegal business, etc, etc. There is not even the concept of private property under the hilarious pretext of chinese "law". Everything is "leased" from the government to be taken back for any reason or no reason at all at any time. There are probably a lot of companies the CCP does really give a shit about but that doesn't mean they aren't the ultimate bosses of them.

There are a lot of broken things in the US but it does have some modicum of separation between business entities and the government as well as a sort of psuedo attempt at rule of law.

Re: WeChat suspends new user registration for security compliance

#203

Post by onethought » Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 9:12 AM UTC

hamburgerwah wrote: post #202

onethought wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 26 million (official) companies in china. Just to orchestrate such a thing would require an entire department/ministry... could you point out which part of the chinese government apparatus that is? This is just the normal Chinese gov control everything narrative that people who've basically not spent a lot of time in china tell themselves for whatever reasons. CCP preserves CCPs power. That's its main focus…

How is that remotely relevant. At any time a senior figure in the CCP can wipe out the company, hire or fire anyone, put anyone in jail, get anyone out of jail, changes it's managerial direction with a memo, outlaw it's entire industry, make legal it's formerly illegal business, etc, etc. There is not even the concept of private property under the hilarious pretext of chinese "law". Everything is "leased" from the go…

I agree with you. Businesses definitely operate with the power of gov in mind. But that is very different to the government actively directing them.