441–450 of 484 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given your background and opinions on the matter, I'd be interested to hear what you think goes on in the large, barbed-wire lined, centers they regularly ship Uyghurs in and out of. Do you think they are genuinely good places meant to help an under privileged minority group?
If you really want to know, feel free to reach out to me in private. See my profile. Twitter preferred.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Literally the first reference/citation of "Broad Daylight" is attributed to Zenz. The Washington post does no additional verification but attribute to "researchers" who will no doubt also quote Zenz. It's also Washington Post. There are no verifiable sources alleging coerced labour that doesn't trace back to Zenz. Bitterwinter or HKFP are also far from reliable, on par with Epochetimes bias. >Hugo Boss Chinese branch…
The “Broad Daylight” is an academic research, which necessarily cites related work or previous work, including of Zenz. This is how academic research works. Citing Zenz per se does not make the the “Broad Daylight” less credible. If people are against Zenz, please judge the “Broad Daylight” report by ignoring all reference to and evidence provided by Zenz. If you find specific flaws with “Broad Daylight”, please list…
Broad Daylight presumes Zenz conclusion of coerced labour as basis for rest of supply chain analysis. It can only be judged in that context, which makes it, and any research that use Zenz as starting point, less credible.>Citing Zenz per se does not make the the “Broad Daylight” less credible.
On par =/= equal. HKFP better than epochetimes, but not by much. The bias of Bitterwinter/HKFP is presuming PRC branches are going off script when acting "two faced" that gets "disavowed" by HQ is the kind of face saving behavior that multinationals do to stay in good graces of east and west. What Intel is doing here. Publishers like HKFP and Bitterwinter bias is characterizing typical corporate doublespeak as unique Chinese misbehavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> At least three people you’re responding to here don’t see how Intel is being “woke” in any pejorative sense. That's because they (claim to) not know what it means and are unwilling or incapable of finding out. And your hypotheses are laughable. My hypotheses is that they are based on nothing but an infantile emotional reaction to somebody using the word woke, which is now well entrenched in common vernacular whethe…
> That's because they (claim to) not know what it means and are unwilling or incapable of finding out. The definitions which you yourself have given, lead to my hypotheses. The fact you are digging in, using insults like “infantile” when you’re being given the chance to supply an alternative, actually makes me think worse — I always prefer to assume good faith, and in this case good faith was to assume you didn’t rea…
Lashing out like a toddler having a tantrum doesn't change meanings of words, sorry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please don't post generic flamewar comments to HN, and certainly not generic nationalistic flamewar comments. It's against the site guidelines and everything we're trying for this forum to be. No, I'm not defending genocide. I'm just trying to defend this forum from burning itself to a crisp. There are lots of other places on the internet to hurl platitudes at enemies. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Sorry, I didn't think about it. In that case I would suggest avoid the posting the news like that one, if it is against site rules.
I don't mean to pick on you! this problem is obviously widespread.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nationalistic flamewar is not allowed on HN and posting this sort of nationalistic denunciation is not ok, regardless of which country you have a problem with. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
But the parent is? Han Chauvinism actually is an academic topic you know. It's not any denunciation, it's a fact. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_chauvinism
Re "fact": it's of course good to be talking about facts as opposed to fantasies, but it's not sufficient for good discussion here. There are many other variables, including (1) which facts people select to talk about (there are infinitely many, after all), and (2) how they talk about them. Those things are choices, not facts. Past explanations here if anyone wants more: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please do not respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That just makes everything worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: we've had to warn you repeatedly in the past: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27875046 (July 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25826399 (Jan 2021) Continuing like this will get you banned here, so please don't.
Then you need to do a better job of moderating the bad comments in the first place. We're all trying to make HN a good and enjoyable place the best way we can, and you warn "both sides" like that helps anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please don't use HN for generic nationalistic flamewar. It's exactly what this site is not for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: you've unfortunately been doing this a ton - in fact you may even be using HN primarily for nationalistic battle at this point. That's seriously not ok (regardless of which country you have a problem with) and we ban accounts that do it. If you'd please review https://…
I can’t win with you can I. Basically mentioning the word “China” is to get a reply from you claiming I’m stating a flame war. I stop replying to certain people or to comments cos you keep warning me with stuff not mentioned in guidelines, and now you’re claiming I think my country is superior. Basically you just don’t want any discussion that might invoke a response. I even avoid replying to tombh insulting me and I…
> Intel, which has 10,000 employees in China, said in its apology that it "respected the sensitivity of the issue in China." This reminds me of a recent British politics round-table interview, where a member of the ruling party told the world that we shouldn't call politicians liars - despite the current Prime Minister lying through his teeth at almost every opportunity simply because he can get away with it - becaus…
> a member of the ruling party told the world that we shouldn't call politicians liars - despite the current Prime Minister lying through his teeth at almost every opportunity simply because he can get away with it - because it would undermine people's faith in the political system that keeps lying to them. I didn’t follow the event, but I have to agree with whoever said that. There’s nothing more toxic to democracy…
Which, now that I say it out loud, do sound very very similar.
But this feeling that they are all liars is not new.
In fact, at least with politicians they have a very easy "tell": You know when a politician is lying because their lips move.
(That joke has been around since before I was born, and I was born in the 80s.)
The difference isn't that the country thinks politicians are liars. That has not changed. The difference is that there has always been this "honour code" in politics, where if your sleaze was found out, you fell on your sword. But this was not ever backed up with any law with teeth, and so when the likes of Boris repeatedly lies, he can just throw another flunky under the bus to appease the crowds, or do something stupid to make the crowds laugh, and carry on as normal.
I don't think politics ever needed any outward credibility. It never had any. It needed external accountability. And without encouraging the media and the public to hold them to account when they do lie, we'll never get that accountability. In effect, the post-truth weakness you describe should never depend on public perception. In a well functioning government, repeated unrepentant deception should always trigger some form of legal jeopardy.
Seeing this reminds me of a link I posted recently. This youtube video features investigation into supposed concentration camps in Xinjiang: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI8bJO-to8I I'm posting it again because it seems like the kind of video that needs to be seen.
^ you may want to watch this video, an analysis of the video from guanguan, your own judgement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ro9kyS-NgAY
Seeing this reminds me of a link I posted recently. This youtube video features investigation into supposed concentration camps in Xinjiang: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI8bJO-to8I I'm posting it again because it seems like the kind of video that needs to be seen.