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

China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 602 posts

Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains

#241

Post by Slansitartop »

jdietrich wrote: post #141
awakeasleep wrote: post #7

To me the principle of “once untrustworthy, always restricted” sounds like the beginning of a new caste system. Everyone's children are going to make mistakes. The wealthy are going to be able to cover up their children's mistakes, the poor are going to be put on 'the list' and become 'restricted.' The restrictions will grow, and eventually you'll have a new group of 'untouchables'

Consider the restrictions that US law places on convicted felons. Millions of Americans have been stripped of constitutional rights, often for infractions as minor as stealing a coat or possessing half an ounce of marijuana. Felons often face considerable difficulties in finding employment and housing. "Once untrustworthy, always restricted" is a practical reality in the US.

> Consider the restrictions that US law places on convicted felons. Millions of Americans have been stripped of constitutional rights, often for infractions as minor as stealing a coat or possessing half an ounce of marijuana. Felons often face considerable difficulties in finding employment and housing. "Once untrustworthy, always restricted" is a practical reality in the US.

I understand the US isn't perfect, but I feel the real effects of comments such as yours do as much to excuse China's brand new system as they do to bring light to flaws in the US's system.

I think it must be emphasized that "once untrustworthy, always restricted" is a new policy in China that's being implemented, while in the US it is a historical principle that's coming under increased skepticism and criticism.

Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains

#242

Post by [deleted] »

heedlessly2 wrote: post #238
DoreenMichele wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. That's pure prejudice. There are lots of upper class criminals. Maybe you have heard of Elizabeth Holmes, the blonde woman in charge of Theranos? Major fraud case.

you only prove my point further because you've forgotten that Theranos raised $700 million and her board of directors was a list of very respected researchers, physicians, and businesspeople. If she was a black women, it would never have gotten to that point ever without a legit product. Holmes was the perfect posterface for Silicon Valley's version of "progressiveness" that caters upperclass white folks, without car…

[deleted]

Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains

#244

Post by matte_black »

huehehue wrote: post #125
matte_black wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was hell. To buy one item I would have to go to a physical store and search through a bunch of crappy options with little to no information about which was better. It could easily take an hour if I didn’t rush or traffic sucked. Now, I could just wake up in the morning and get the same thing done in 5 minutes AND select a product I feel confident about based on reviews. Instead of wasting an hour of my life I coul…

To each their own, but I think the whole "schlepping to the store and sifting through products and maybe you overpay or get something you don't like" is a valuable part of the human experience. That's not to say every trip is enjoyable, but I wonder what people might be missing by forgoing those trips (and automating everything they can, in general). You miss the trip there, and everything you might experience along…

Look, I find nothing heart warming about the experience of shopping for things in physical stores.

I liken the rise of Amazon as something analogous to the agricultural revolution. Before agriculture, everyone had to hunt and gather food, it was a laborious process similar to shopping. Once people discovered agriculture however, and similarly Amazon, it was no longer necessary to spend so much effort in getting life's basic necessities, freeing us to spend our time on more noble pursuits.

This is the world I would much rather live in. I do not care for the retail days of olde.

Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains

#245

Post by Reedx »

dragonwriter wrote: post #207
Reedx wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If an upper-middle class blonde hair, blue eyed woman gets accused of a crime, a higher degree of people would at least give her the benefit of the doubt Which would make sense, no? They're playing the odds. It's exceedingly rare for any upper-middle class woman to commit a crime. So to be surprised by that is understandable. Take color and class out of it, you need only compare "man accused of crime" vs "woman acc…

> Which would make sense, no? They're playing the odds. It's exceedingly rare for any upper-middle class woman to commit a crime. Our “knowledge” of who commitd crimes is distorted by societal biases that influence the ascription of blame; there is no set of crime statistics that is immune from that. So, when you justify those biases on the bases of the understanding that they distort, you make a circular argument, w…

Women commit very few crimes compared to men. That's not bias, it's a fact. I wasn't talking about how it should be used in court (it shouldn't).

Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains

#246

Post by Slansitartop »

coldtea wrote: post #221
adventured wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The country you're countering about, China, executes people in stadiums before cheering crowds instead of going the felony route when it comes to drug policy. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/18/thousands-chin... Meanwhile, back in the US, we've actually begun to recognize our mistake as a culture. Thus eight states have legalized marijuana, and another dozen will go that way soon. Decriminalization of drug…

> Over a decade ago the US recognized the huge mistake of mass incarceration, as such the US prison population has peaked and has begun to decline, with both sides of the political aisle now openly discussing how to correct that broken system. Until the US has a share equal to its percentage of the global population of incarcerated people (instead of 4-5 times that), and has abolished the death penalty, the shame tha…

> Btw, regarding China, let's cut it some slack.

No, let's not "cut it some slack" on human rights abuses in the making.

Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains

#247

Post by SamReidHughes »

scrumption wrote: post #156
pishpash wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The eras of growth have been the most free in the history of China. People allowed to own land, allowed employment of their choice, allowed to move, and allowed to start private enterprises. There is a one-to-one correlation between how much people are allowed to do and ... what they do.

>most free >People allowed to own land Not sure the mental gymnastics you have to go through to convince yourself private ownership of land == freedom American by chance?

If you own land you can do what you want with it.

Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains

#248

Post by tokai »

johan_larson wrote: post #55

To be fair we ban people with felony convictions from huge swathes of jobs, formally or informally, even if the crime happened decades ago. Also, good luck finding a place to live legally if you've been convicted of a sex crime.

>we ban people

We are not all Americans. Most of the Free World does not see the USA as a lodestar in how to treat criminals.

Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains

#249

Post by wil421 »

jdietrich wrote: post #141
awakeasleep wrote: post #7

To me the principle of “once untrustworthy, always restricted” sounds like the beginning of a new caste system. Everyone's children are going to make mistakes. The wealthy are going to be able to cover up their children's mistakes, the poor are going to be put on 'the list' and become 'restricted.' The restrictions will grow, and eventually you'll have a new group of 'untouchables'

Consider the restrictions that US law places on convicted felons. Millions of Americans have been stripped of constitutional rights, often for infractions as minor as stealing a coat or possessing half an ounce of marijuana. Felons often face considerable difficulties in finding employment and housing. "Once untrustworthy, always restricted" is a practical reality in the US.

That is a terrible comparison. Social credit is more like a credit report or score than something criminal.

Re: China to bar people with bad 'social credit' from planes, trains

#250

Post by vanadium »

mikeash wrote: post #171
DamnYuppie wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stealing a coat or possessing 1/2 and ounce of marijuana are generally not felonies. Stealing would be larceny and there are cost thresholds associated with that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony

In Virginia, felony larceny starts at $200, easily within coat range. I once had jury duty and was faced with the prospect of sentencing the defendant to up to 20 years in prison for the crime of receiving stolen goods valued at least $200. I got rejected from the jury, probably because I said I couldn’t possibly consider 20 years in prison for that.

Jury nullification is still definitely a thing. The trick is actually getting on the jury.
Post reply on HN