39 ms·

For you and for a lot of people, rglullis. This is the mainstream West media thinking. But I missed your arguments proving that WeChat could be worse to China t

by meira 10y ago

For you and for a lot of people, rglullis. This is the mainstream West media thinking. But I missed your arguments proving that WeChat could be worse to China than is FB to Brazil.

rglullis 10y ago
Please drop the conspiracionist tone if you want a serious conversation, or at the very least drop this silly attempt at sweeping very important arguments under the rug just to make your point. These "simple" things like Freedom of Speech, respect for the Rule of Law and Individual Rights are not is not "Western media thinking". It is the core basis of Western values themselves. Also, you are moving the goal posts. I could go on for a while and give examples on how the Big Chinese Companies are actually bad for the people - e.g, one simple case: censorship in WeChat is worse than in FB and it is demanded by the Government - but my question was actually "How do they benefit 'most if not all' of the population?" I mean, how any of these "benefits" are any different that a FB user from any part of the world can't get on Facebook. Why is that WeChat is better than FB to "most if not all" Chinese by virtue of being closed?
- meira 10y ago
  > Please drop the conspiracionist tone if you want a serious conversation, or at the very least drop this silly attempt at sweeping very important arguments under the rug just to make your point. These "simple" things like Freedom of Speech, respect for the Rule of Law and Individual Rights are not is not "Western media thinking". It is the core basis of Western values themselves. Freedom of Speech, respect for the Rule of Law and Individual Rights to who? Do people from Africa, South Asia and Latin America fit on it? > Why is that WeChat is better than FB to "most if not all" Chinese by virtue of being closed? Because they generate chinese high tech jobs and an extraordinary supply chain. If both of them hurts "freedom", the one that brings more prosperity is better.
  - rglullis 10y ago
    You still haven't showed any convincing argument why Facebook "hurts freedom", at least systemically. The bubbles of these gigantic social networks and the closed walled-gardens are bad for sure, but Zuckerberg isn't the one that gets to decide what can or not be said, and surely he is not the one persecuting anyone with dissenting views, and much less he has a monopoly on how information can be shared, which would allow him to control people that could spread any kind of information that doesn't align with "Uncle Sam's interests". > "If both of them hurts "freedom", the one that brings more prosperity is better." That is a false equivalence (the kind of damage to Freedom is not the same), and still does not show how WeChat benefits "most if not all" Chinese. Even if you reduce to the pure economic argument, you would still have to show that the people not working for WeChat wouldn't be working for Facebook or any other competitor in case China had an open economy.
    - meira 10y ago
      > That is a false equivalence (the kind of damage to Freedom is not the same), and still does not show how WeChat benefits "most if not all" Chinese. Even if you reduce to the pure economic argument, you would still have to show that the people not working for WeChat wouldn't be working for Facebook or any other competitor in case China had an open economy. I don't have to show anything, dude, are you insane? Do you have any point proving that WeChat, a national player, is not better for China than Facebook? If so, tell me why because this is the beginning of the discussion.
      - rglullis 10y ago
        You are the one claiming that WeChat is better. You are the one that claimed that Facebook "made you poorer". So, yes, you are the one that made extraordinary claims, you are the one that needs to bring extraordinary proof. Stop with the smokescreen and mirrors, and start actually defending your principles.
        meira 10y ago
        Man, you're nuts.

by meira 10y ago

For you and for a lot of people, rglullis. This is the mainstream West media thinking. But I missed your arguments proving that WeChat could be worse to China than is FB to Brazil.

rglullis 10y ago

Please drop the conspiracionist tone if you want a serious conversation, or at the very least drop this silly attempt at sweeping very important arguments under the rug just to make your point. These "simple" things like Freedom of Speech, respect for the Rule of Law and Individual Rights are not is not "Western media thinking". It is the core basis of Western values themselves. Also, you are moving the goal posts. I could go on for a while and give examples on how the Big Chinese Companies are actually bad for the people - e.g, one simple case: censorship in WeChat is worse than in FB and it is demanded by the Government - but my question was actually "How do they benefit 'most if not all' of the population?" I mean, how any of these "benefits" are any different that a FB user from any part of the world can't get on Facebook. Why is that WeChat is better than FB to "most if not all" Chinese by virtue of being closed?

meira 10y ago
> Please drop the conspiracionist tone if you want a serious conversation, or at the very least drop this silly attempt at sweeping very important arguments under the rug just to make your point. These "simple" things like Freedom of Speech, respect for the Rule of Law and Individual Rights are not is not "Western media thinking". It is the core basis of Western values themselves. Freedom of Speech, respect for the Rule of Law and Individual Rights to who? Do people from Africa, South Asia and Latin America fit on it? > Why is that WeChat is better than FB to "most if not all" Chinese by virtue of being closed? Because they generate chinese high tech jobs and an extraordinary supply chain. If both of them hurts "freedom", the one that brings more prosperity is better.
- rglullis 10y ago
  You still haven't showed any convincing argument why Facebook "hurts freedom", at least systemically. The bubbles of these gigantic social networks and the closed walled-gardens are bad for sure, but Zuckerberg isn't the one that gets to decide what can or not be said, and surely he is not the one persecuting anyone with dissenting views, and much less he has a monopoly on how information can be shared, which would allow him to control people that could spread any kind of information that doesn't align with "Uncle Sam's interests". > "If both of them hurts "freedom", the one that brings more prosperity is better." That is a false equivalence (the kind of damage to Freedom is not the same), and still does not show how WeChat benefits "most if not all" Chinese. Even if you reduce to the pure economic argument, you would still have to show that the people not working for WeChat wouldn't be working for Facebook or any other competitor in case China had an open economy.
  - meira 10y ago
    > That is a false equivalence (the kind of damage to Freedom is not the same), and still does not show how WeChat benefits "most if not all" Chinese. Even if you reduce to the pure economic argument, you would still have to show that the people not working for WeChat wouldn't be working for Facebook or any other competitor in case China had an open economy. I don't have to show anything, dude, are you insane? Do you have any point proving that WeChat, a national player, is not better for China than Facebook? If so, tell me why because this is the beginning of the discussion.
    - rglullis 10y ago
      You are the one claiming that WeChat is better. You are the one that claimed that Facebook "made you poorer". So, yes, you are the one that made extraordinary claims, you are the one that needs to bring extraordinary proof. Stop with the smokescreen and mirrors, and start actually defending your principles.
      - meira 10y ago
        Man, you're nuts.