Earlier quoted context omitted.
When slavery was legal, sure. But in the last, say, 50 years (e.g., since the 64 Civil Rights Act)? I don't see it. Also, I'm not aware of multiple definitions for the US government.
https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/private-government-how-employers-ru... While private government isn't US government, they are very much interlaced, pair-evolving and authoritarian being governments.
Information operations directed at Hong Kong
361–370 of 480 posts
Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Police brutality Actions taken by individuals who are employed by the government--especially when such actions are explicitly illegal--hardly count as an abusive government. > racially targeted drug operations by the CIA/FBI Got a link? > ignoring of the AIDS crisis Allocation of scarce resources in a way that you personally disagree with is not the same as an abusive government.
Homie. Chill.
Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
> so long as someone is speaking their opinion respectfully and in good faith, it matters not what that opinion is; and that the defense of this necessitates a generous presumption of good faith Isn't that the point of a discussion forum such as HN? > I think it's reasonable to suggest that certain viewpoints are simply not welcome on Hacker News I disagree that contrary viewpoints "no matter how eloquently stated" s…
The problem comes to distinguishing genuinely held beliefs from subversive comments designed to manipulate the HN audience. The fact that an idea comes from your peers is a powerful one. The average commenter on HN is not so different from you, after all, if they independently came to a conclusion then it might have some merit. However, if they came to that conclusion because they will be rewarded for expressing it o…
How do you propose to do that? Clearly one must look for evidence. When evidence shows such abuse, we ban the account. Far more often, though (and I'm understating things when I put it that way), evidence shows the opposite: the user was expressing their genuinely held beliefs. Should others be allowed to denounce them as astroturfers, shills, or spies, based on nothing but how strongly they disagree? On HN the answer is no. That follows from the values of this site, and we have a rule in https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html saying so.
Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not an advocate for the US Political system. Having grown up in Europe and moved to Australia. Therefore your assumptions that I'd use the US as the benchmark I set for my democratic wishes is misguided and the majority of your argument falls flat as a consequence. Democracy allows the very thing your discouraging, _choice_. Your democracy or rather the US democracy is not my own. And for the arguments you've mad…
Clearly it is an alternative to democracy. It’s existed more or less successfully for some 80 years now. The question is if it’s really a place any of us (who grew up in a democracy) would want to live. The ethos of the CCP is just fundamentally incompatible with my own worldview, even though I can admit to their effectiveness so far. I’m not really willing to accept the existence of such a country in my world either…
When I say I don't see Totalitarian Dictatorships as an alternative, I don't mean in the literal sense, I mean in the viable sense. In the literal sense, yes, it's an alternative to Democracy. As is building a house on sand is a literal but not viable alternative to building a house on concrete.
I don't think many would want to live under a Chinese authoritarian rule given the Democratic alternatives. Or perhaps they would until they're rounded up in Xinjiang camps, shot in the face with rubber bullets for wanting to protect their current way of life or ran over by Tanks by asking for change to better their way of life.
But if we've seen what the conversations that are occurring in China about these violent acts taken by the CCP, it's clear the populace think it's in their best interests at this time. Though it's worth adding that the message we receive about the CCP's actions is very different to those living in China. I recommend anyone to watch the documentary created by Vice below about the atrocities that are occurring in Xinjiang and the first hand opinions of those that live there.
I would guess the opinions of those being interviewed are honest with a side of oppression.
Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think that, practically, countries have often gone from authoritarian to democratic without violence.
Ahem. South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan. They were authoritarian before they were democratic.
Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong
#366What makes coordinated activity from government entities different from brigading performed in coordinated ways by non-government people with political or activist agendas? Isn’t that also manipulation? Or is it that Twitter just has its own political and economic agenda and their TOS/rules/blog posts are self-justification?
A government from a wealthy nation could also send law enforcement into Twitter HQ at any time and force Twitter to shut down another government's propaganda campaign.
In conclusion, "the ability to start WWIII" is an important, obvious, and relevant capability that "non-government people" do not possess.
Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't summarize what I said that way at all.
Having reviewed your comment several times, I still feel that my representation of it is a good-faith interpretation of what you said. Yours has much more depth and nuance, justifying that perspective and elaborating on how you go about accomplishing it, but I think my summary is an accurate portrayal of your core principles. Can you clarify in what way it's not?
What I wrote was narrowly scoped and is mostly an empirical claim: in the majority of cases when users invoke astroturfing/shillage/spying against others in arguments, there is no evidence to support the accusation and usually evidence to refute it. Because this comes up so frequently, it seems there's some sort of bias (probably a universal one, because I don't think we're wired so differently) that causes users to reach for this mud and throw it at other users, even though they have no basis for it other than that person having an opposing view—which is to say, no basis for it at all.
Since there's usually no evidence and yet these accusations are so common and so damaging, the site guidelines ask users not to post them in the threads. At the same time, real abuses exist, so concerned users are invited to email hn@ycombinator.com with links so we can look for evidence.
That was the gist of my comment. The rest was an attempt to plead for tolerance by offering an explanation of how HN ends up with so many posts that can seem disingenuous: it follows from the size and diversity of the community. Humans are not wired for anything that big, and HN is an intimate-seeming place that doesn't feel as large or diverse as it really is, so when views show up that are more than an arm's length away from what one is comfortable with, it activates the circuitry for perceiving enemies and invaders.
If HN is to thrive in accordance with its value of intellectual curiosity, we all need to work on managing that circuitry in ourselves, and not simply jump to where the limbic system would take us. That's really what the call for evidence is getting at. It requires a person to stop, interrupt the mechanical reaction, invoke the slower and more reflective circuits, and then look more closely at what might really be happening. If we could learn to do that as a community, 99% of the accusations of astroturfing, shilling, and spying against other users would vanish. That would make HN a better place, and would also help clarify which cases really do need investigating and taking care of.
Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
i think the problem is that the current chinese government is going further and further away from what average chinese citizens would probably want, and them using misinformation to keep order hong kong has demonstrated, with some of the largest protests in global history, that they do not want the chinese government to interfere with the autonomy that they currently have. the chinese government has responded with mi…
> further and further away from what average chinese citizens would probably want Like "being raised out of poverty"? For large parts of the Chinese population, the biggest concern isn't 4G coverage or cultural appropriation at some college party.
Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong
#369HongKonger here. I have some friends in China posting similar anti-protest posts on WeChat social media. It's like the news they read has a completely different story than what it's being told in legitimate new sources. The problem of fake news does become very apparent, and I hope people in China can eventually gain awareness or at least start to question the validity of their news sources.
Native Chinese here. Hacker news have been a great place to learn new things to me for 5 years. But the political views on Hacker news are somewhat naive to me. It seems that the Chinese Government is always evil and wrong, but why haven't the government collapsed after so many years if there were no people supporting them? People in China, at least those millions people who are able to cross the Great Firewall, know…
Also, the people who are protesting are crushed like what happens in Tibet or Xinjiang.
A strong central government might be good for the majority but surely when it suppresses the minorities to just get them in line with the rest, you can't overlook that.
Re: Information operations directed at Hong Kong
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
> HN is not blocked by the great firewall Your information is 16 days out of date: https://en.greatfire.org/news.ycombinator.com There's now a partial block where it can be accessed from some locations and not from others. That's not necessarily going to prevent "pro-China" views from appearing. People who circumvent the Great Firewall e.g. to follow celebrities on Instagram may not like the censorship, but could be…
Semi-tangential, but many Chinese tech companies just have a perma-VPN company wide and use GSuite and Google search by default. And Hacker News is a tech-leading forum (though it's not that big of a thing in China AFAIK).