5 ms·

The Chinese government is right to require all of it's citizens data to be stored in domestic datacenters. The danger of the Chinese government accessing your

The Chinese government is right to require all of it's citizens data to be stored in domestic datacenters. The danger of the Chinese government accessing your data is 1) Non-existent if you didn't declare you're Chinese 2) Not any different than the danger of the US government accessing your data By the way, since so many of you feel so strongly about your data being stored abroad, don't you think the Chinese should feel the same? Why should they trust their data to a foreign government?

abtinf 9y ago
> The Chinese government is right to require all of it's citizens data to be stored in domestic datacenters. "The only proper purpose of a government is to protect man’s rights, which means: to protect him from physical violence. A proper government is only a policeman, acting as an agent of man’s self-defense, and, as such, may resort to force only against those who start the use of force. The only proper functions of a government are: the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others, to settle disputes by rational rules, according to objective law. But a government that initiates the employment of force against men who had forced no one, the employment of armed compulsion against disarmed victims, is a nightmare infernal machine designed to annihilate morality: such a government reverses its only moral purpose and switches from the role of protector to the role of man’s deadliest enemy, from the role of policeman to the role of a criminal vested with the right to the wielding of violence against victims deprived of the right of self-defense. Such a government substitutes for morality the following rule of social conduct: you may do whatever you please to your neighbor, provided your gang is bigger than his." - from "For the New Intellectual" https://www.amazon.com/New-Intellectual-Philosophy-Anniversary-Signet/dp/0451163087 https://www.amazon.com/New-Intellectual-Philosophy-Anniversa...
- Nomentatus 9y ago
  No sewers? I like sewers.
wmf 9y ago
Some people take the position that it's better for the US government to have access to Chinese people's data than for the Chinese government to have access their data because the US government is better (e.g. more due process).
- John_KZ 9y ago
  Does PRISM count as due process? I get how americans could be biased thinking "I live here and nothing has happened to me", but that's a very naive mode of thinking. Masking strategic actions under the "just helping you from yourself" umbrella isn't new, but isn't very convincing either. It's like trump saying he'll nuke north korea because it's an oppressive regime. Caring doesn't work that way.
- tzs 9y ago
  I think one could make a decent case that in general if you are a citizen or resident of country X, you are probably better off having your data stored in some country Y that you are neither a citizen or resident of...simply because (1) Y has less reason to be interested in your data, and (2) if they do look at your data, it is less likely they can use what they find against you. A counterargument might be that since Y has no connection to you, Y has less interest in protecting your data from third parties than your own country, X, would.
  - wmf 9y ago
    MLATs can throw a wrench in that, though.
- darpa_escapee 9y ago
  Serious question: what due process does a foreign citizen not in the US have?
nappy 9y ago
>1) Non-existent if you didn't declare you're Chinese This is ridiculous equivocation between a democratic society with a rule of law and an authoritarian regime. You're kidding yourself if you don't think the Chinese government has an interest in data owned by foreign nationals that they could gain access to.
contingencies 9y ago
I am sorry you are being downvoted as I live here and fully agree with your "same as anywhere" notion. One great example of this "everywhere else" is the EFF domestic surveillance post today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16446716 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16446716 I do think that China would look at foreign residents or corporation's data, but they would really have to have a reason to care and this is a kind of moot point since if you had any secret data you cared about, you wouldn't be trusting third party cloud storage anyway.
forapurpose 9y ago
> The Chinese government is right to require all of it's citizens data to be stored in domestic datacenters. Why? > Why should they trust their data to a foreign government? The word "government" is creating a false equivalency because it covers a very broad range of entities: Democratic governments are chosen by their citizens, operate under rule of law, and are dedicated to protecting their citizens rights and welfare, and to democracy and liberty at home and abroad (obviously, they are very imperfect in such things). The Chinese government is an authoritarian dictatorship, an armed group that seized power ("political power grows out of the barrel a gun") and imposes itself on the people of China, and is dedicated to its own perpetuation.

abtinf 9y ago

> The Chinese government is right to require all of it's citizens data to be stored in domestic datacenters. "The only proper purpose of a government is to protect man’s rights, which means: to protect him from physical violence. A proper government is only a policeman, acting as an agent of man’s self-defense, and, as such, may resort to force only against those who start the use of force. The only proper functions of a government are: the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others, to settle disputes by rational rules, according to objective law. But a government that initiates the employment of force against men who had forced no one, the employment of armed compulsion against disarmed victims, is a nightmare infernal machine designed to annihilate morality: such a government reverses its only moral purpose and switches from the role of protector to the role of man’s deadliest enemy, from the role of policeman to the role of a criminal vested with the right to the wielding of violence against victims deprived of the right of self-defense. Such a government substitutes for morality the following rule of social conduct: you may do whatever you please to your neighbor, provided your gang is bigger than his." - from "For the New Intellectual" https://www.amazon.com/New-Intellectual-Philosophy-Anniversary-Signet/dp/0451163087 https://www.amazon.com/New-Intellectual-Philosophy-Anniversa...

Nomentatus 9y ago
No sewers? I like sewers.

wmf 9y ago

Some people take the position that it's better for the US government to have access to Chinese people's data than for the Chinese government to have access their data because the US government is better (e.g. more due process).

John_KZ 9y ago
Does PRISM count as due process? I get how americans could be biased thinking "I live here and nothing has happened to me", but that's a very naive mode of thinking. Masking strategic actions under the "just helping you from yourself" umbrella isn't new, but isn't very convincing either. It's like trump saying he'll nuke north korea because it's an oppressive regime. Caring doesn't work that way.
tzs 9y ago
I think one could make a decent case that in general if you are a citizen or resident of country X, you are probably better off having your data stored in some country Y that you are neither a citizen or resident of...simply because (1) Y has less reason to be interested in your data, and (2) if they do look at your data, it is less likely they can use what they find against you. A counterargument might be that since Y has no connection to you, Y has less interest in protecting your data from third parties than your own country, X, would.
- wmf 9y ago
  MLATs can throw a wrench in that, though.
darpa_escapee 9y ago
Serious question: what due process does a foreign citizen not in the US have?

nappy 9y ago

>1) Non-existent if you didn't declare you're Chinese This is ridiculous equivocation between a democratic society with a rule of law and an authoritarian regime. You're kidding yourself if you don't think the Chinese government has an interest in data owned by foreign nationals that they could gain access to.

contingencies 9y ago

I am sorry you are being downvoted as I live here and fully agree with your "same as anywhere" notion. One great example of this "everywhere else" is the EFF domestic surveillance post today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16446716 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16446716 I do think that China would look at foreign residents or corporation's data, but they would really have to have a reason to care and this is a kind of moot point since if you had any secret data you cared about, you wouldn't be trusting third party cloud storage anyway.

forapurpose 9y ago

> The Chinese government is right to require all of it's citizens data to be stored in domestic datacenters. Why? > Why should they trust their data to a foreign government? The word "government" is creating a false equivalency because it covers a very broad range of entities: Democratic governments are chosen by their citizens, operate under rule of law, and are dedicated to protecting their citizens rights and welfare, and to democracy and liberty at home and abroad (obviously, they are very imperfect in such things). The Chinese government is an authoritarian dictatorship, an armed group that seized power ("political power grows out of the barrel a gun") and imposes itself on the people of China, and is dedicated to its own perpetuation.