WeChat and the Surveillance State • Hacker News Board

Re: WeChat and the Surveillance State

#271

Post by theseadroid » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 8:34 PM UTC

theseadroid wrote: post #269

komali2 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

India has a big population and doesn't throw thousands of falun gong and Uighurs into reeducation camps, harvesting their organs at whim. India has a big population and doesn't threaten the sovereignty of democratic nations like Taiwan. I'm happy to acknowledge the good things happening in China and the advancements its made since the cultural revolution (of which my partner's mother can tell you stories of from her…

What you are saying is India has a better human rights record than China. But at the end of the day what exactly is human rights? To you it's the ability to speak freely, to nordic countries it can be free education, free healthcare, and even free internet connections. But to a poor country, what is the most important human right? It's be able to be fed! It's not die! According to world bank data, China had 755.8 mil…

And to add education to the data:

In 1970 41% of Chinese are illiterate, comparing to 63% Indians. In 2015 India is at 30%, PRC at 6%.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/projections-of-the-rate-o... ^ this source is interesting. it's actually sponsored by ycombinator. anyway if you look into many categories you'll probably have a good idea how India compares to China now. The many charts of this page is enough for me: https://ourworldindata.org/hunger-and-undernourishment

Re: WeChat and the Surveillance State

#272

Post by theseadroid » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 8:57 PM UTC

komali2 wrote: post #253

theseadroid wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

have you talked to any Chinese people and how many of them oppose this reeducation of entire religions? I'm just curious whether that will still happen in your planned democratic China.

In a democratic China the Uighurs will have representatives. If they don't, it's not democratic yet. Ask other democratic nations if they can get away with voting for systematic oppression of a people via a vote. Historically, decentralizing power (i.e. via democracy) leads to less shittiness for more people. In any case, what possible reason would the average Chinese person have to systematically oppress the Uighurs…

>In any case, what possible reason would the average Chinese person have to systematically oppress the Uighurs or falun gong?

This question is crucial to indicate that you have no idea about ordinary Chinese people. You need to sit down with some Chinese to talk about it if you are really interested. So I encourage you to find some first gen immigrant from mainland China currently living in SFBA. It wont be hard to find them. I can even direct you to relevant social media sites if you like.

Re: WeChat and the Surveillance State

#273

Post by arpa » Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 4:13 AM UTC

rahimnathwani wrote: post #242

arpa wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. It would only be ok if we rework the whole idea of law, base it not in tradition, but perfect rationality and objectiveness. Consider this: i change lanes at 2 a.m. on an empty road. There's no objective need to signal. I get fined for not signalling. I do 50 in a 30 zone (because there's a school nearby) at the same time. I get fined even though there's no objective reason for it. And these are simple examples,…

In your first example, you could just change your behaviour to signal even when you think no one is around (as I do). Your second example (speeding) doesn't incur a fine because in this hypothetical example the automated enforcement is only used for signalling violations. For your third example (self defence), maybe you are forced to change lanes without signalling. How often? Once per year? What if the fine were $2,…

In the first example, the idea is that the primary function of blinkers is to convey information. The law makes it mandatory to transmit that information with presumption that the information will be processed by human beings you are sharing the road with. If there are no humans around, the transmission of this information is meaningless and therefore should not be mandatory. If the road is used by autonomous vehicles which transmit information about their paths via radiowaves, signalling could be obsolete as well. The most important part in law is the underlying idea of the social agreement which is being enforced by it and reasonabless of the law (and enforcement).

My point is that by automating fine dispensaries, you are subversing the underlying idea itself (automatron can't know what or why is it enforcing) and reasonability.

Re: WeChat and the Surveillance State

#274

Post by gastlygem » Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 9:08 AM UTC

tempguy9999 wrote: post #224

sho wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Almost all I know either drink bottled water or only hot, boiled tap water 100% of them drink boiled tap water. But isn't this proving my point? Not like it's poisoned with heavy metals? As for pollution, of course they have a long way to go, but the dystopian picture you paint is hardly fair. It's not perfect but you make it sound like Blade Runner 2049. It's not. I live in Bangkok right now and it is WAY worse th…

> 100% of them drink boiled tap water. But isn't this proving my point? No, it's exactly disproving your point, or at least strong evidence against it. To be explicit: if 100% drink boiled tapwater then 100% feel pollution is present which strongly suggests pollution isn't localised. As for introducting heavy metals, you're trying to fudge the issue: pollution may include, but is not limited to, heavy metals. > I alw…

We drink boiled water just because we like it warm. It's part of the culture. It's also one of the reasons why there are few epidemics when natural disaster strikes.

The tap water quality varies from place to place, but it's generally good enough, granted it is not as good as the first world countries such as the US or Japan or much of the Europe, but after all we are still a third world country.

We are a surveillance state and it's worth discussing and condemning in every aspect, but talking about tapped water just dilutes the topic.

Re: WeChat and the Surveillance State

#275

Post by franciscop » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 1:53 AM UTC

monocasa wrote: post #68

franciscop wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mmh no? I've been without FB account for 3-4 years, and recently opened a new one from scratch because some friends only use FB and absolutely nothing besides confirming my email was required. Yes, it does suggest that I add my phone, and that I verify my friends, and that blablabla, but nothing else is required for me to add few friends and join a chat.

My bet is that they were able to internally link your previous account and the new one. And probably kept building your profile while you were "without" an account.

Oh interesting point of view. I was thinking they might have linked my "ghost profile", not the previous one, but yeah that's a possibility