4 ms·

um... last sentence of the introductory blurb: "The gag order was ruled unconstitutional as an infringement of free speech, in the Doe v. Ashcroft case.[1]" I

by falien 16y ago

um... last sentence of the introductory blurb: "The gag order was ruled unconstitutional as an infringement of free speech, in the Doe v. Ashcroft case.[1]" I don't necessarily disagree with your sentiments, but alot of the arguments and especially analogies you're using in this discussion are intellectually dishonest.

jacquesm 16y ago
The fact that it was ruled un-constitutional does not take away the fact that this law was in effect for several years. And it's not the only example of such a law, and not all of them have been ruled un-constitutional. I don't know what you mean with 'intellectually dishonest', all I'm trying to do is to point out that there is plenty wrong in China but we in the so-called 'free west' have enough beams in our own eyes to preclude us from going all 'oh my' about China without qualifications. The anti-China sentiment here seems to be for the most part based on media and fear of the unknown rather than on solid facts, and you could make exactly the same case about the US and various other 'free' countries. I'm all for criticizing human rights violations, but then let's be fair and even handed about it, instead of suggesting that a simple request could get you in trouble with the law in China, which as far as I know from those that I know that live and work in China is simply not true. I also note that I was the one to step up and actually do something about this particular problem in this particular instance.
- falien 16y ago
  Like I said, I don't disagree with most of your sentiments. However, the fact that it was ruled unconstitutional refutes your assertion that it is illegal in the US, when in fact that law itself was determined to be illegal. I'm well aware that free speech in the US is limited, but I'm not aware of any other such draconian limitations that have been determined to be constitutional in the recent past. I would be interested to know about them (or possibly argue with you about them :P) if you cite some. While I'm painfully aware that the US is at a point on the spectrum far from what I consider to be ideal, that point is very much closer to my ideal than the point China occupies, and even the point most other western democracies occupy (that last was hugely disappointing to me when I realized it). The comment that struck me as most intellectually dishonest was the parallel you drew between the arrest of the British(?) businessman engaging in business which is illegal in the US, with US customers residing and present in the US when the business was conducted, with the arrest of a US citizen and/or foreign provider of marijuana in which the transaction occurs completely outside of the US where they claim no jurisdiction. To be sure there are many cases in which the US Govt oversteps its jurisdictional boundaries and they are not hard to find, so I found that comparison to be questionable. Lastly, I saw lower down in the comments that you volunteered your services to the OP and found it admirable, but I fail to see what that has to do with anything. Edit: I'm also not sure why you're getting downvoted on valid comments, even if I don't agree with them.
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    I'm sorry, I keep up as good as I can with US law but every now and then something slips by me. I should have read that piece in its entirety before linking to it, I just wanted to have a reference to the kind of abuse I had in mind. If you're just as up-to-date to Dutch law as I am on the laws of the United States and you're an American than my hat is off to you ;) Once again, apologies. The things that most bother me about the US is the increased collaboration behind the scenes when it comes to telcos and the NSA, most of that is invisible but every now and then you get a glimmer of what's going on and it is simply scary. Furthermore, the US intelligence services have already at least once in the past used their information to conduct industrial espionage on behalf of a US company abroad (search for enercon). The fact that any or all of that is in the past makes little or no difference to me, it suggests strongly that there is stuff going down today, just that we won't know about it for a while, if ever. As for the Marijuana/Betonsports analogy, I think it is perfectly legal, in both cases the United States has nothing to do with what is going on, they are illegally projecting their laws to have effect outside of their borders. The real reason why this case went down the way it did is not because betting in the US is illegal, the US government would simply like their cut. Here in NL the exact same thing is happening and I'm as much against it as I think betonsports should have been allowed to operate. A government should not have any say in how a foreign company runs its business. > Lastly, I saw lower down in the comments that you volunteered your services to the OP and found it admirable, but I fail to see what that has to do with anything. As for what that has to do with anything, I thought that it showed that I concede there is a problem, but instead of berating the OP for making stupid choices in life (which I think he has not made, even though I suggested that he could move, but that's some of the sentiment above) instead of the 'wise' ones to go and live in a 'free' country instead I chose to act. Talk is cheap. > I'm also not sure why you're getting downvoted on valid comments, even if I don't agree with them. As for the downvotes, it goes with the territory, HN used to be the place where you could have an argument and be on the un-popular side of it without a bunch of downvotes but that time is mostly gone. I agree with you that China and the US are not at the same point when it comes to 'freedom', but both have a long way to go (as do most other countries), and the situation in China is not nearly as bad as some here would have you believe. That's just fear mongering.

by falien 16y ago

jacquesm 16y ago

The fact that it was ruled un-constitutional does not take away the fact that this law was in effect for several years. And it's not the only example of such a law, and not all of them have been ruled un-constitutional. I don't know what you mean with 'intellectually dishonest', all I'm trying to do is to point out that there is plenty wrong in China but we in the so-called 'free west' have enough beams in our own eyes to preclude us from going all 'oh my' about China without qualifications. The anti-China sentiment here seems to be for the most part based on media and fear of the unknown rather than on solid facts, and you could make exactly the same case about the US and various other 'free' countries. I'm all for criticizing human rights violations, but then let's be fair and even handed about it, instead of suggesting that a simple request could get you in trouble with the law in China, which as far as I know from those that I know that live and work in China is simply not true. I also note that I was the one to step up and actually do something about this particular problem in this particular instance.

falien 16y ago
Like I said, I don't disagree with most of your sentiments. However, the fact that it was ruled unconstitutional refutes your assertion that it is illegal in the US, when in fact that law itself was determined to be illegal. I'm well aware that free speech in the US is limited, but I'm not aware of any other such draconian limitations that have been determined to be constitutional in the recent past. I would be interested to know about them (or possibly argue with you about them :P) if you cite some. While I'm painfully aware that the US is at a point on the spectrum far from what I consider to be ideal, that point is very much closer to my ideal than the point China occupies, and even the point most other western democracies occupy (that last was hugely disappointing to me when I realized it). The comment that struck me as most intellectually dishonest was the parallel you drew between the arrest of the British(?) businessman engaging in business which is illegal in the US, with US customers residing and present in the US when the business was conducted, with the arrest of a US citizen and/or foreign provider of marijuana in which the transaction occurs completely outside of the US where they claim no jurisdiction. To be sure there are many cases in which the US Govt oversteps its jurisdictional boundaries and they are not hard to find, so I found that comparison to be questionable. Lastly, I saw lower down in the comments that you volunteered your services to the OP and found it admirable, but I fail to see what that has to do with anything. Edit: I'm also not sure why you're getting downvoted on valid comments, even if I don't agree with them.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  I'm sorry, I keep up as good as I can with US law but every now and then something slips by me. I should have read that piece in its entirety before linking to it, I just wanted to have a reference to the kind of abuse I had in mind. If you're just as up-to-date to Dutch law as I am on the laws of the United States and you're an American than my hat is off to you ;) Once again, apologies. The things that most bother me about the US is the increased collaboration behind the scenes when it comes to telcos and the NSA, most of that is invisible but every now and then you get a glimmer of what's going on and it is simply scary. Furthermore, the US intelligence services have already at least once in the past used their information to conduct industrial espionage on behalf of a US company abroad (search for enercon). The fact that any or all of that is in the past makes little or no difference to me, it suggests strongly that there is stuff going down today, just that we won't know about it for a while, if ever. As for the Marijuana/Betonsports analogy, I think it is perfectly legal, in both cases the United States has nothing to do with what is going on, they are illegally projecting their laws to have effect outside of their borders. The real reason why this case went down the way it did is not because betting in the US is illegal, the US government would simply like their cut. Here in NL the exact same thing is happening and I'm as much against it as I think betonsports should have been allowed to operate. A government should not have any say in how a foreign company runs its business. > Lastly, I saw lower down in the comments that you volunteered your services to the OP and found it admirable, but I fail to see what that has to do with anything. As for what that has to do with anything, I thought that it showed that I concede there is a problem, but instead of berating the OP for making stupid choices in life (which I think he has not made, even though I suggested that he could move, but that's some of the sentiment above) instead of the 'wise' ones to go and live in a 'free' country instead I chose to act. Talk is cheap. > I'm also not sure why you're getting downvoted on valid comments, even if I don't agree with them. As for the downvotes, it goes with the territory, HN used to be the place where you could have an argument and be on the un-popular side of it without a bunch of downvotes but that time is mostly gone. I agree with you that China and the US are not at the same point when it comes to 'freedom', but both have a long way to go (as do most other countries), and the situation in China is not nearly as bad as some here would have you believe. That's just fear mongering.