15 ms·

China’s web censors go into overdrive as President Xi Jinping consolidates power

195 points by anthonyleecook 9y ago

phyller 9y ago
It's amazing to me how China is so effectively creating a 1984-type situation without much stir among the rest of the world. These chat programs are super important for everyday life in China. The same company that provides chatting also provides your ability to pay for everything, and a credit score that determines what you can buy, how much you pay, and more. So if you say something you shouldn't, this could very easily be something where your entire life is destroyed. If they choose, these ultimately government controlled companies can easily make it so you can't buy things anymore, you are not trusted anywhere, and even your friends all disconnect with you because your bad score could affect theirs. Pretty scary. It will be interesting to see how the Chinese government reacts to globally available, unfiltered internet via satellite, like the one SpaceX is making https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_(satellite_constellation) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_(satellite_constellat...
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  What scares me more is the cheerleading and defense of this in the West, and the way this is voluntarily happening here. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01J24C0TI https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01J24C0TI This is a telescreen.
  - api 9y ago
    China's GDP is doing great, and GDP growth is the only thing that matters to quite a few people.
    - yusuke10 9y ago
      FAKE gdp. most likely 0% gdp growth, if not negative. China’s 2015 GDP Was Exaggerated By Fake Data, Analysis Shows (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-01/china-s-2015-gdp-puffed-up-by-fake-economic-data-analysis-shows https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-01/china-s-2...) Another Chinese city admits 'fake' economic data (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-data/another-chinese-city-admits-fake-economic-data-idUSKBN1F60I1 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-data/anothe...) This Is How China's Regions Fare in the Fake GDP Data Stakes (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-19/this-is-how-china-s-regions-fare-in-the-fake-gdp-data-stakes https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-19/this-is-h...)
      - ShorsHammer 9y ago
        Two of your links suggest gdp growth of around 6% still. They fake data to move gdp fractions of a percent. Outright lying doesn't help further your argument. There's some excellent independent estimates of Chinas gdp out there.
      - dang 9y ago
        This account has only used HN to engage in political battle—in this case national battle about China. Regardless of what you're battling for, that's an abuse of the site as explained at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html, so we've banned the account. Please don't create accounts to break the site rules with.
  - jjaredsimpson 9y ago
    Anonymity paired with speech is a new modern invention which didn't always exist. I don't this it is necessarily true that that kinds of speech is always for the ultimate good. I'm fine with societies experimenting with more surveillance with the aim of improving people's behavior. It just seems like the modern version of sitting around a fire face to face and not being an asshole.
    - zentiggr 9y ago
      > I'm fine with societies experimenting with more surveillance with the aim of improving people's behavior. If only that surveillance didn't open up avenues for exploitation, targeting, and suppression even more. And I'm pretty sure we've got a little too much "cpmpliance" monitoring as we are right now... I'm ready for ALPRs, Stingrays, and a bunch of other LEO practices to get curtailed or even stopped outright.
      - jjaredsimpson 9y ago
        We can't only experiment with structures and tools that have only upside positive consequences. The existence of a bad outcome is something to be avoided and guarded against, but I don't see why any possible tool which has a potential to be abused should be avoided.
    - gurkendoktor 9y ago
      Echo Show is not an anonymous broadcast platform. Using it to talk to friends is the modern version of doing it face to face; why do we suddenly need to have corporations or the government in the middle? It is true that societies are experimenting with policing what people say online; Germany's attempts to combat hate speech and fake news come to mind. But that is (hopefully) different from punishing political dissent. Do you honestly believe that it is better for society if people can't openly say "I disagree with removing presidential term limits"?
    - gaius 9y ago
      I'm fine with societies experimenting with more surveillance with the aim of improving people's behavior. A listening device in private homes is a genie that won't go back in its bottle. Are you willing to stand up and say, I trust every official, elected or otherwise, for the rest of my life, and the lives of any descendants I might have? Because you have just written a blank cheque that says exactly that.
- bwang29 9y ago
  There is already a "sesame" score built in Sesame Credit by Alibaba (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sesame_Credit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sesame_Credit) The Wired article is a little more exaggerating (https://www.wired.com/story/age-of-social-credit/ https://www.wired.com/story/age-of-social-credit/) but here is the rough breakdown of your score according to https://www.zhihu.com/question/27844479 https://www.zhihu.com/question/27844479 1. Identity Characteristics (15%) Public Security Real Name Authentication Identity Information Information Stability ... 2. Credit History (35%) Credit Card Repayment History Micronesia Repayment Record Utilities Fee Ticket ... 3. Compliance Capability (20%) Payment Account balance balance balance balance car information real estate information ...... 4. Personal connections (5%) relationship circle circle of friends credit level of social influence ... ... 5. behavior preferences (25%) account activity level consumer level payment level consumer preferences ...
- smaili 9y ago
  > So if you say something you shouldn't, this could very easily be something where your entire life is destroyed. According to the article, this has already happened: Over on WeChat’s top messaging service, there were reports that some users had been banned or restricted based on the content they had shared. WeChat owner Tencent has disputed claims that it stores or reads chat logs, but — regardless — the app includes a social media-like feed where users can share public messages with friends.
- davesque 9y ago
  At this rate, it seems reasonable to assume they'd use a kill vehicle to take the satellites out.
  - snerbles 9y ago
    You'd see wide-spread jamming well before then.
  - nradov 9y ago
    The Chinese government isn't stupid enough to commit an act of war and open up their own satellites to retaliation. They'll just ban possession of the ground terminals like they ban firearms, drugs, "subversive" literature, etc. It won't be completely effective but will prevent most people in China from having unfettered satellite Internet access.
    - Slansitartop 9y ago
      > They'll just ban possession of the ground terminals like they ban firearms, drugs, "subversive" literature, etc. They probably already have. I think their customs forms have a checkbox to declare radios and telecommunications equipment, sort of like the US has for agricultural products. My guess is you'll get extra scrutiny, at a minimum, if you check the box.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- gurkendoktor 9y ago
  Using WeChat can already destroy your life: http://www.zeit.de/feature/freedom-of-press-china-zhang-miao-imprisonment http://www.zeit.de/feature/freedom-of-press-china-zhang-miao...
- coldtea 9y ago
  >It's amazing to me how China is so effectively creating a 1984-type situation without much stir among the rest of the world. This is perhaps because of several things: 1) That's the way "the rest of the world's" governments and corporate interests want their own countries to go, and have been pushing towards since decades. The rest of the world's leaders (most of them) could not care less for the lip service they pay to "freedom" et al. 2) A superpower gets to do whatever it likes "without much stir from the rest of the world". Heck, France and Britain had 1/3rd of the world, outside or their national borders, enslaved "without much stir from the rest of the world" until well after WWII. And suddenly the "rest of the world" will care for what China does to its own citizens? 3) It's nobody's business really what China does to its own citizens. There are other countries with the worlds largest prison population and most police shootings (by crazy amounts, like having 25% of the worlds prisoners for 4% of the worlds population), and they continue in that path "without much stir among the rest of the world". Why would it be different here?
  - wpasc 9y ago
    I think you have raised false equivalencies here
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - mygo 9y ago
    It’s amazing to me that the argument of “don’t go after those guys for what they are doing when those other guys are doing bad things too” never dies. Even with all of its blatant fallacy. It will persist until the end of time. And solve nothing.
    - Passthepeas 9y ago
      I think it does more to illustrate hypocrisy and priorities than anything; it's like worrying about another driver's flat tire, when your own car is literally on fire. Though I do understand and agree with your overall sentiment.
- notyourwork 9y ago
  What should the rest of the world do?
  - samlevine 9y ago
    Hopefully not what was done to open up imperial China to the opium trade.
- staplers 9y ago
  If they choose, these ultimately government controlled companies can easily make it so you can't buy things anymore, you are not trusted anywhere America already has that, it's called a credit score and it does this exact thing.
  - phyller 9y ago
    Your credit score isn't affected by what you post on Hacker News. Your credit score is affected if you don't pay your bills. You'll find it harder to get credit in the future. I don't see the relation with state sponsored suppression. Also, you can still buy things with cash. In China they use these apps to pay for things, you can't buy some things with cash.
    - tyfon 9y ago
      A lot of companies use publicly posted stuff + friends on facebook to create a credit score though so it does happen in the west. Just not quite in the same way as in China.
      - claytonjy 9y ago
        Is this true of the US? I see articles from 2015/2016 about credit rating agencies (FICO in particular) looking into "alternate data" to inform scores, including social media stuff, but it looks like FB was fighting that to some extent (more regulatory burden) and the tone is "this is coming" not "this is here".
        sedachv 9y ago
        Source: worked for an online payday lender. There are a lot of commercial APIs from "Consumer Reporting Agencies," providing public information beyond credit rating agencies, that are in use to determine lending decisions. The Wikipedia article on the FCRA[1] has a brief list of these firms and a summary of the laws around data collection and dissemination. IMO the United States needs to both step up enforcement of existing data privacy laws, and more legislation protecting people. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Credit_Reporting_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Credit_Reporting_Act
- joe_the_user 9y ago
  "The rest of world" occasionally complains about China's dictatorial measures as it occasionally complains about dictatorial measures in other areas. The only time there have been angry crusades against a given dictatorship (NAZIs, Soviets, etc) is when a given group of nations view these dictatorships as enemies. Which isn't to say these areas weren't dictatorships but that it's always taken more than dictatorship to get the ire of even those nations claiming to care most about democracy and human rights.
- daodedickinson 9y ago
  99% of the population could oppose a policy, but no individual could never know they aren't alone and they'll be disarmed against disciplinary power requiring fewer and fewer people at the top to control the rest with machines. Just a handful of decision makers controls search results, the new Google shopping censorship of the last two days, the massive purge of even very moderate conservative YouTube channels over the past few weeks... the only difference here is that the rulers skewing our discourse are "private". One "engineer" at a computer can silence the voices of over a billion people, whether in China or California.
  - Slansitartop 9y ago
    Which makes it all the more important to maintain offline connections, and resist the pressure to include the online world in everything.
- trevyn 9y ago
  >can easily make it so you can't buy things anymore This actually happened to me on a small scale with a legitimate US company, as a US citizen placing a legitimate order. The company deals in high-fraud-risk physical goods, their system decided that I was a high fraud risk, and outright banned me for life. I would have been happy to provide any kind of ID, sent them cash in the mail, whatever. But nope, banned for life, end of story. Truly a bizarre, bizarre experience. After their support line was no help, I emailed their CEO with no response so far. Their investors are up next.
  - k_sh 9y ago
    What company was this?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
saagarjha 9y ago
> “Winnie the Pooh” — the Xi’s online nickname Anyone have the backstory for this? EDIT: I see a couple of links below that compare him to Winnie the Pooh in pictures. Is the intent behind it to be derogatory or is it just poking a bit of fun?
- taoistextremist 9y ago
  As far as I've always understood it (I poke around on Chinese internet from time to time), it was mostly just a little joke because Xi is kinda pudgy. I think the backlash is because this kind of messes with an attempted cult of personality.
- bwang29 9y ago
  https://www.google.com/search?q=winnie+the+pooh+tigger+xi+jinping https://www.google.com/search?q=winnie+the+pooh+tigger+xi+ji...
  - aje403 9y ago
    They look really cute together
- ddeck 9y ago
  China bans Winnie the Pooh over internet jokes comparing him to President Xi Jinping http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-18/winnie-the-pooh-falls-foul-of-the-chinese-government/8720556 http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-18/winnie-the-pooh-fal...
jwilk 9y ago
Apparently they also banned the letter "n": http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=36939 http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=36939
cryptoz 9y ago
> "I don’t agree"...phrases banned... Wait, so you can't say "I don't agree with term limits" in China on Weibo? Edit: Removed comment about Google.
- kevin_b_er 9y ago
  They don't care. Authoritarian banning of conversations that might criticize their new dictator is better than letting anything through.
eddieplan9 9y ago
Many sites hosted outside of China that Chinese expats frequent (like http://mitbbs.com http://mitbbs.com) have also been flooded with pro-amendment messages. Google Translate of the site: https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mitbbs.com%2F https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&...
- yasp 9y ago
  Related: How the Chinese Government Fabricates Social Media Posts for Strategic Distraction, not Engaged Argument (PDF) >The Chinese government has long been suspected of hiring as many as 2,000,000 people to surreptitiously insert huge numbers of pseudonymous and other deceptive writings into the stream of real social media posts, as if they were the genuine opinions of ordinary people. Many academics, and most journalists and activists, claim that these so-called “50c party” posts vociferously argue for the government’s side in political and policy debates. As we show, this is also true of the vast majority of posts openly accused on social media of being 50c. Yet, almost no systematic empirical evidence exists for this claim, or, more importantly, for the Chinese regime’s strategic objective in pursuing this activity. In the first large scale empirical analysis of this operation, we show how to identify the secretive authors of these posts, the posts written by them, and their content. We estimate that the government fabricates and posts about 448 million social media comments a year. In contrast to prior claims, we show that the Chinese regime’s strategy is to avoid arguing with skeptics of the party and the government, and to not even discuss controversial issues. We show that the goal of this massive secretive operation is instead to distract the public and change the subject, as most of the these posts involve cheerleading for China, the revolutionary history of the Communist Party, or other symbols of the regime. We discuss how these results fit with what is known about the Chinese censorship program, and suggest how they may change our broader theoretical understanding of “common knowledge” and information control in authoritarian regimes. http://gking.harvard.edu/files/gking/files/50c.pdf http://gking.harvard.edu/files/gking/files/50c.pdf
  - vfulco 9y ago
    I have always assumed as much. Like the chaff that defensive systems on a fighter plane has. Shoot out a bunch of garbage to confuse the highly targeted offensive action.
mrybczyn 9y ago
I wonder if any tech companies are for or against this "surprising" turn of events... https://phys.org/news/2017-10-china-xi-zuckerberg-cook-beijing.html https://phys.org/news/2017-10-china-xi-zuckerberg-cook-beiji...
justinzollars 9y ago
Interesting, a day and a half later Trump announces he is running for a second term: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/brad-parscale-trump-2020-campagin-manager-announced-today-2018-02-27/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/brad-parscale-trump-2020-campag...
- analogmemory 9y ago
  He filed papers to run right after he was sworn in. His campaign office never closed. They just named a campaign manager today.
AnimalMuppet 9y ago
I could go downtown tonight, stand on the street corner, and shout "F--- the president!" at the top of my lungs. What would happen? I might get dirty looks. I might get some people shaking my hand. And I might - might - get an angry tweet from the president. I probably would not get either arrested or beaten up. (And this isn't a political statement. I could have done the same under the previous president, with the same results except for the tweet.) China's touchiness on these matters reveals the Communist Party's insecurity.
- echevil 9y ago
  I think it's more just because of them afraid of "losing face" like almost all Chinese people do. That's quite deep in Chinese culture. Even the most powerful emperors in Chinese history (who would have nothing to be afraid of) still executes those who talked ill of them
  - jerf 9y ago
    It's not just China. Being able to publicly yell "Fuck the $RULER" is an anomaly in human history, not the norm. In the US, the current party in power is always on the verge of instituting totalitarianism. My plan is to start worrying about it when people face systematic government consequences for actually mouthing off about the ruling party. Right now, to a first approximation, nobody has in a long time. Any examples that anxious partisans will rush to contradict me will simply further demonstrate my point with how minor and unsystematic they are in the US. (If anything gets you in trouble in 2018, it's not mouthing off about the ruling party, it's pissing off the social media mob. That may yet be something we have to culturally reckon with, but it remains the case that it's not the government doing it.)
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - AnimalMuppet 9y ago
      I suspect you're getting downvoted for this line: > In the US, the current party in power is always on the verge of instituting totalitarianism. And I'm pretty sure that you didn't mean it like people are taking it. Let's start with, I don't know, FDR. He was on the verge of implementing totalitarianism. Really! Just ask the Republicans of 1933! Clinton was. So was Bush. So was Obama. So is Trump. Or so some vocal minority says. I'm pretty sure jerf is dismissive of all that noise, and intends to ignore it... within limits. > My plan is to start worrying about it when people face systematic government consequences for actually mouthing off about the ruling party. Right now, to a first approximation, nobody has in a long time. Any examples that anxious partisans will rush to contradict me will simply further demonstrate my point with how minor and unsystematic they are in the US. Downvoters, I think you're misreading one line, and reacting based on your misread.
gigatexal 9y ago
I hope that in my lifetime we see a revolution in China that overthrows the current authoritarian state and things like the great firewall and quasi-private/state run agencies go the way of the dodo bird. Unfortunately I don't see big American companies doing anything but continuing to court China and their growing class of wealthy consumers.
- abecedarius 9y ago
  Google did not. There are things I dislike about the company, but they deserve props for that.
  - vthallam 9y ago
    Exactly. Unlike Facebook which actively try to get into the Chinese market, Google doesn't try as much or it seems like it.
- analyst74 9y ago
  yeah, let's have an revolution, or better, let's have another world war over ideology, since it went so well last time. as much as it pains me to see China regressing on the freedom front, I hope we will sort things out in a less violent manner.
  - gigatexal 9y ago
    i pictured said revolution being internal -- but it'd be squashed before it began so it's only wishful thinking.
- blackrock 9y ago
  Are you saying that you want to see 100 million dead Chinese people? Because that is what you are implying. You will not have a revolution without spilling blood.
  - tree_of_item 9y ago
    Don't know why you're downvoted, you're 100% correct. It's really easy to call for a revolution when it's not your country thrown in to turmoil.
ilamont 9y ago
I have one Chinese friend who employs a double entendre, calling him "Xitler" In all seriousness, this is a black period for Chinese people and China's neighbors. The fledgling democracy in Hong Kong, and democratic nations around China's periphery including Taiwan, Japan, Nepal, and India should be very wary dealing with a strongman who will stop at nothing to further his power and nationalism-focused legacy.
- antichronology 9y ago
  I wonder if it will have some sort of long term impact on the economy. Is there a way of measuring relative government authoritarianism on economic development of a nation?
  - woolvalley 9y ago
    China was already an authoritarian nation, how much of an effective difference would this make?
    - antichronology 9y ago
      provide an economic argument for not implementing additional authoritarian policies. Seems that these decisions are incredibly hard to measure. For example how much did Turkey's economy suffer from the previous failed coup?
      - martimarkov 9y ago
        That for me personally only strengthens my belief that it was orchestrated.
    - ilamont 9y ago
      When strongman-based cults of personality (real or wannabe) appoint themselves ruler for life, policy can go off the rails. Wars, purges, persecution of minority groups, and civil unrest are more likely. Corrupt systems of checks and balances, which may have already been weak, slide ever further. Mao, Stalin, Chavez, Castro, Hitler, Mussolini, Chiang Kai-Shek ... a few of these strongmen presided over brief periods of spectacular economic growth, but always under unsustainable conditions. Many citizens (and the citizens of neighboring countries) paid a terrible price.
JustAnotherPat 9y ago
Remove everything and then let a merciful Xi Jinping give a little semblance of freedom back. The Chinese will be cheering his name in the street!
briga 9y ago
From the outside looking in it seems like Xi has been doing a great job leading China. Are there any serious contenders for Chinese leadership like Navalny in Russia? Not to mention that historically there have been many excellent leaders who rules for decades. An arbitrary term limit can be useful to prevent corruption, but it's also the reason for the fiasco that is Washington in 2018.
- ythn 9y ago
  > Not to mention that historically there have been many excellent leaders who rules for decades There are probably more historical examples of not-so-excellent (incompetent, evil, tyrannical, etc) leaders ruling for decades than excellent ones. The problem with tyranny is that the only way out is revolution. You may have an excellent dictator for decades, but then he dies and his son/crony/not-so-excellent replacement arrives for the next N decades... At least with Trump there are a variety of strategies besides bloodshed to get rid of him if people decide they don't like him.
  - AnimalMuppet 9y ago
    Well, in fairness, there are probably more historical examples of not-so-excellent leaders than excellent ones, regardless of whether they ruled for decades. The problem is, if you've got a not-so-excellent one and you're stuck with him/her for decades, that's a really big chunk of your life...
- IntronExon 9y ago
  Can you name six of those “great rulers” and as a bonus, make those sure those six allowed for a peaceful transfer of power when they were done. No fair if you pick rulers who were “great” and the whole place suffered terribly upon their death or removal from power.
  - briga 9y ago
    Off the top of my head: Solon, Trajan, Hadrian, Marcus Aurelius, Akbar, Charlemange There are many more examples, those are just some that come to mind right away. You can argue whether or not they were "good", but they certainly did good things for their empires.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
lgleason 9y ago
The same thing is happening here in the US, on a smaller scale, by private companies under the guise of "hate speech".
- opportune 9y ago
  so, not the same thing
jakecrouch 9y ago
This is why the US should not worry about China as a long-term economic threat - authoritarianism has never worked. The Soviet Union, 1930s Germany and Italy, all collapsed. I think the Chinese realize this and are pessemistic about their own future. The Constitution was designed to make the US Government as weak as possible, because a strong government ultimately turns on its people.
- phyller 9y ago
  The US has been an instrumental part of a system where we all benefit when others are successful, it is not a zero-sum game. China's economic success is good for America. What is not good for an America is a new xenophobic super power that doesn't share our values. A stable, prosperous, democratic China is ideal. An easy way for an authoritarian government to keep internal dissent down is to make an external enemy. Think of all the examples you mentioned. So this is probably bad news for the U.S. and the whole world.
- etrevino 9y ago
  I'm not sure why you say this. Germany and Italy didn't collapse-- they were conquered. The Soviet Union did collapse, it's true, but it collapsed because of external pressures and sclerotic bureaucracy causing an inability to adjust to internal problems. In all three cases there was an external force contributing to the problem. However, there's no reason to assume that China's authoritarian rule will collapse as well. Indeed, in several Soviet successor states (including Russia), authoritarianism has reasserted itself. Authoritarianism is easy to impose and democracy is fragile; the civic discourse required for a strong and stable democracy relies upon a considerable amount of mutual respect and rhetorical restraint.
  - irq-1 9y ago
    South Korea had decades of dictatorship with a relatively easy transition to democracy and liberal capitalism.
    - etrevino 9y ago
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
natecavanaugh 9y ago
My core belief has always been that as long as China has this culture of authoritarian and heavy handed internet control, it will always have a self-imposed limit on their ability to compete. I understand they have a deep rooted value of stability and that they believe they're keeping their society from running off the rails, but if they were to allow their citizens to contribute more to the direction of the government, then the end of the U.S. hegemony would not just be a possibility, but practically a foregone conclusion (some seem to think it already is inevitable, but it's been predicted for so long now, it's starting to feel like the forever predicted rise of Linux on the desktop). However, I'd be curious to hear good reasons for China's economy to dominate the world stage even with this sort of thing constantly happening. I can kind of understand the brute-force approach of just pure production from a gigantic population, but India has a comparable population size, but not a comparable economy, so I tend to think that a large population doesn't guarantee a large economic output. There is so much innovation I see happening in the tech of China, but their fear of their own citizenry and fear of transparency make me think they'll stay behind their potential. This could all be my own Western bias for democracy, so I'd love to hear other thoughts on this.
- diego_moita 9y ago
  I want to think like that but would like to understand the details before believing in it. Recently, I read "China's Future" by David Shambaugh. He argues along the same lines as you. He claims that the development driven by exports and government investing is exhausted because of growing protectionism, competition from nearby countries and growing inefficiency on government companies. Meanwhile the country still has a lot inequality to solve, between west and the east coast and rural and urban population. It is also getting old very fast and doesn't have a good welfare network. Therefore, the only path ahead is development of internal market. He claims that for this the country needs transparency, the rule of law and diversity of ideas but I don't think he made it very clear to me, however. Truth is that autocratic countries (e.g: Russia, Turkey, Cuba, Belarus, etc) are very, very bad at creating diversified economies. Let's see if China finds a way to do it.
  - germainelol 9y ago
peterwwillis 9y ago
This seems like a fun new opportunity to find new ways to avoid censors. One way would be to seed messages or websites with pre-loaded meanings, and use new, unrelated comments to refer to them. Example of a social media feed: 8/15/2017: "Today at noon in the square." 9/15/2015: "I think it's evil and corrupt and we can not stand for it!" 10/22/2017: "The government has taken a new decision today that affects us all." 11/10/2017: "We must protest this injustice!" 2/27/2018: "10-22-2017 + 9-15-2017 + 11-10-2017 + 8/15/2017" Obviously this is clunky, but in theory you could chain together random bits of other people's messages to post a new one, and a censorship bot would have to be written to merge them all together to filter them; if some of these were behind logins on other sites, this could be very difficult. You could also make them less literal and more made up of memes and concepts with hidden meanings.
vfulco 9y ago
Western corporate types will be freaked out and the dis-investment here will accelerate

It's amazing to me how China is so effectively creating a 1984-type situation without much stir among the rest of the world. These chat programs are super important for everyday life in China. The same company that provides chatting also provides your ability to pay for everything, and a credit score that determines what you can buy, how much you pay, and more. So if you say something you shouldn't, this could very easily be something where your entire life is destroyed. If they choose, these ultimately government controlled companies can easily make it so you can't buy things anymore, you are not trusted anywhere, and even your friends all disconnect with you because your bad score could affect theirs. Pretty scary. It will be interesting to see how the Chinese government reacts to globally available, unfiltered internet via satellite, like the one SpaceX is making https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_(satellite_constellation) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_(satellite_constellat...

aaron-lebo 9y ago
What scares me more is the cheerleading and defense of this in the West, and the way this is voluntarily happening here. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01J24C0TI https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01J24C0TI This is a telescreen.
- api 9y ago
  China's GDP is doing great, and GDP growth is the only thing that matters to quite a few people.
  - yusuke10 9y ago
    FAKE gdp. most likely 0% gdp growth, if not negative. China’s 2015 GDP Was Exaggerated By Fake Data, Analysis Shows (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-01/china-s-2015-gdp-puffed-up-by-fake-economic-data-analysis-shows https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-01/china-s-2...) Another Chinese city admits 'fake' economic data (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-data/another-chinese-city-admits-fake-economic-data-idUSKBN1F60I1 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-data/anothe...) This Is How China's Regions Fare in the Fake GDP Data Stakes (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-19/this-is-how-china-s-regions-fare-in-the-fake-gdp-data-stakes https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-19/this-is-h...)
    - ShorsHammer 9y ago
      Two of your links suggest gdp growth of around 6% still. They fake data to move gdp fractions of a percent. Outright lying doesn't help further your argument. There's some excellent independent estimates of Chinas gdp out there.
    - dang 9y ago
      This account has only used HN to engage in political battle—in this case national battle about China. Regardless of what you're battling for, that's an abuse of the site as explained at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html, so we've banned the account. Please don't create accounts to break the site rules with.
- jjaredsimpson 9y ago
  Anonymity paired with speech is a new modern invention which didn't always exist. I don't this it is necessarily true that that kinds of speech is always for the ultimate good. I'm fine with societies experimenting with more surveillance with the aim of improving people's behavior. It just seems like the modern version of sitting around a fire face to face and not being an asshole.
  - zentiggr 9y ago
    > I'm fine with societies experimenting with more surveillance with the aim of improving people's behavior. If only that surveillance didn't open up avenues for exploitation, targeting, and suppression even more. And I'm pretty sure we've got a little too much "cpmpliance" monitoring as we are right now... I'm ready for ALPRs, Stingrays, and a bunch of other LEO practices to get curtailed or even stopped outright.
    - jjaredsimpson 9y ago
      We can't only experiment with structures and tools that have only upside positive consequences. The existence of a bad outcome is something to be avoided and guarded against, but I don't see why any possible tool which has a potential to be abused should be avoided.
  - gurkendoktor 9y ago
    Echo Show is not an anonymous broadcast platform. Using it to talk to friends is the modern version of doing it face to face; why do we suddenly need to have corporations or the government in the middle? It is true that societies are experimenting with policing what people say online; Germany's attempts to combat hate speech and fake news come to mind. But that is (hopefully) different from punishing political dissent. Do you honestly believe that it is better for society if people can't openly say "I disagree with removing presidential term limits"?
  - gaius 9y ago
    I'm fine with societies experimenting with more surveillance with the aim of improving people's behavior. A listening device in private homes is a genie that won't go back in its bottle. Are you willing to stand up and say, I trust every official, elected or otherwise, for the rest of my life, and the lives of any descendants I might have? Because you have just written a blank cheque that says exactly that.
bwang29 9y ago
There is already a "sesame" score built in Sesame Credit by Alibaba (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sesame_Credit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sesame_Credit) The Wired article is a little more exaggerating (https://www.wired.com/story/age-of-social-credit/ https://www.wired.com/story/age-of-social-credit/) but here is the rough breakdown of your score according to https://www.zhihu.com/question/27844479 https://www.zhihu.com/question/27844479 1. Identity Characteristics (15%) Public Security Real Name Authentication Identity Information Information Stability ... 2. Credit History (35%) Credit Card Repayment History Micronesia Repayment Record Utilities Fee Ticket ... 3. Compliance Capability (20%) Payment Account balance balance balance balance car information real estate information ...... 4. Personal connections (5%) relationship circle circle of friends credit level of social influence ... ... 5. behavior preferences (25%) account activity level consumer level payment level consumer preferences ...
smaili 9y ago
> So if you say something you shouldn't, this could very easily be something where your entire life is destroyed. According to the article, this has already happened: Over on WeChat’s top messaging service, there were reports that some users had been banned or restricted based on the content they had shared. WeChat owner Tencent has disputed claims that it stores or reads chat logs, but — regardless — the app includes a social media-like feed where users can share public messages with friends.
davesque 9y ago
At this rate, it seems reasonable to assume they'd use a kill vehicle to take the satellites out.
- snerbles 9y ago
  You'd see wide-spread jamming well before then.
- nradov 9y ago
  The Chinese government isn't stupid enough to commit an act of war and open up their own satellites to retaliation. They'll just ban possession of the ground terminals like they ban firearms, drugs, "subversive" literature, etc. It won't be completely effective but will prevent most people in China from having unfettered satellite Internet access.
  - Slansitartop 9y ago
    > They'll just ban possession of the ground terminals like they ban firearms, drugs, "subversive" literature, etc. They probably already have. I think their customs forms have a checkbox to declare radios and telecommunications equipment, sort of like the US has for agricultural products. My guess is you'll get extra scrutiny, at a minimum, if you check the box.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
gurkendoktor 9y ago
Using WeChat can already destroy your life: http://www.zeit.de/feature/freedom-of-press-china-zhang-miao-imprisonment http://www.zeit.de/feature/freedom-of-press-china-zhang-miao...
coldtea 9y ago
>It's amazing to me how China is so effectively creating a 1984-type situation without much stir among the rest of the world. This is perhaps because of several things: 1) That's the way "the rest of the world's" governments and corporate interests want their own countries to go, and have been pushing towards since decades. The rest of the world's leaders (most of them) could not care less for the lip service they pay to "freedom" et al. 2) A superpower gets to do whatever it likes "without much stir from the rest of the world". Heck, France and Britain had 1/3rd of the world, outside or their national borders, enslaved "without much stir from the rest of the world" until well after WWII. And suddenly the "rest of the world" will care for what China does to its own citizens? 3) It's nobody's business really what China does to its own citizens. There are other countries with the worlds largest prison population and most police shootings (by crazy amounts, like having 25% of the worlds prisoners for 4% of the worlds population), and they continue in that path "without much stir among the rest of the world". Why would it be different here?
- wpasc 9y ago
  I think you have raised false equivalencies here
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- mygo 9y ago
  It’s amazing to me that the argument of “don’t go after those guys for what they are doing when those other guys are doing bad things too” never dies. Even with all of its blatant fallacy. It will persist until the end of time. And solve nothing.
  - Passthepeas 9y ago
    I think it does more to illustrate hypocrisy and priorities than anything; it's like worrying about another driver's flat tire, when your own car is literally on fire. Though I do understand and agree with your overall sentiment.
notyourwork 9y ago
What should the rest of the world do?
- samlevine 9y ago
  Hopefully not what was done to open up imperial China to the opium trade.
staplers 9y ago
If they choose, these ultimately government controlled companies can easily make it so you can't buy things anymore, you are not trusted anywhere America already has that, it's called a credit score and it does this exact thing.
- phyller 9y ago
  Your credit score isn't affected by what you post on Hacker News. Your credit score is affected if you don't pay your bills. You'll find it harder to get credit in the future. I don't see the relation with state sponsored suppression. Also, you can still buy things with cash. In China they use these apps to pay for things, you can't buy some things with cash.
  - tyfon 9y ago
    A lot of companies use publicly posted stuff + friends on facebook to create a credit score though so it does happen in the west. Just not quite in the same way as in China.
    - claytonjy 9y ago
      Is this true of the US? I see articles from 2015/2016 about credit rating agencies (FICO in particular) looking into "alternate data" to inform scores, including social media stuff, but it looks like FB was fighting that to some extent (more regulatory burden) and the tone is "this is coming" not "this is here".
      - sedachv 9y ago
        Source: worked for an online payday lender. There are a lot of commercial APIs from "Consumer Reporting Agencies," providing public information beyond credit rating agencies, that are in use to determine lending decisions. The Wikipedia article on the FCRA[1] has a brief list of these firms and a summary of the laws around data collection and dissemination. IMO the United States needs to both step up enforcement of existing data privacy laws, and more legislation protecting people. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Credit_Reporting_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Credit_Reporting_Act
joe_the_user 9y ago
"The rest of world" occasionally complains about China's dictatorial measures as it occasionally complains about dictatorial measures in other areas. The only time there have been angry crusades against a given dictatorship (NAZIs, Soviets, etc) is when a given group of nations view these dictatorships as enemies. Which isn't to say these areas weren't dictatorships but that it's always taken more than dictatorship to get the ire of even those nations claiming to care most about democracy and human rights.
daodedickinson 9y ago
99% of the population could oppose a policy, but no individual could never know they aren't alone and they'll be disarmed against disciplinary power requiring fewer and fewer people at the top to control the rest with machines. Just a handful of decision makers controls search results, the new Google shopping censorship of the last two days, the massive purge of even very moderate conservative YouTube channels over the past few weeks... the only difference here is that the rulers skewing our discourse are "private". One "engineer" at a computer can silence the voices of over a billion people, whether in China or California.
- Slansitartop 9y ago
  Which makes it all the more important to maintain offline connections, and resist the pressure to include the online world in everything.
trevyn 9y ago
>can easily make it so you can't buy things anymore This actually happened to me on a small scale with a legitimate US company, as a US citizen placing a legitimate order. The company deals in high-fraud-risk physical goods, their system decided that I was a high fraud risk, and outright banned me for life. I would have been happy to provide any kind of ID, sent them cash in the mail, whatever. But nope, banned for life, end of story. Truly a bizarre, bizarre experience. After their support line was no help, I emailed their CEO with no response so far. Their investors are up next.
- k_sh 9y ago
  What company was this?

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

saagarjha 9y ago

> “Winnie the Pooh” — the Xi’s online nickname Anyone have the backstory for this? EDIT: I see a couple of links below that compare him to Winnie the Pooh in pictures. Is the intent behind it to be derogatory or is it just poking a bit of fun?

taoistextremist 9y ago
As far as I've always understood it (I poke around on Chinese internet from time to time), it was mostly just a little joke because Xi is kinda pudgy. I think the backlash is because this kind of messes with an attempted cult of personality.
bwang29 9y ago
https://www.google.com/search?q=winnie+the+pooh+tigger+xi+jinping https://www.google.com/search?q=winnie+the+pooh+tigger+xi+ji...
- aje403 9y ago
  They look really cute together
ddeck 9y ago
China bans Winnie the Pooh over internet jokes comparing him to President Xi Jinping http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-18/winnie-the-pooh-falls-foul-of-the-chinese-government/8720556 http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-18/winnie-the-pooh-fal...

jwilk 9y ago

Apparently they also banned the letter "n": http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=36939 http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=36939

cryptoz 9y ago

> "I don’t agree"...phrases banned... Wait, so you can't say "I don't agree with term limits" in China on Weibo? Edit: Removed comment about Google.

kevin_b_er 9y ago
They don't care. Authoritarian banning of conversations that might criticize their new dictator is better than letting anything through.

eddieplan9 9y ago

Many sites hosted outside of China that Chinese expats frequent (like http://mitbbs.com http://mitbbs.com) have also been flooded with pro-amendment messages. Google Translate of the site: https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mitbbs.com%2F https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&...

yasp 9y ago
Related: How the Chinese Government Fabricates Social Media Posts for Strategic Distraction, not Engaged Argument (PDF) >The Chinese government has long been suspected of hiring as many as 2,000,000 people to surreptitiously insert huge numbers of pseudonymous and other deceptive writings into the stream of real social media posts, as if they were the genuine opinions of ordinary people. Many academics, and most journalists and activists, claim that these so-called “50c party” posts vociferously argue for the government’s side in political and policy debates. As we show, this is also true of the vast majority of posts openly accused on social media of being 50c. Yet, almost no systematic empirical evidence exists for this claim, or, more importantly, for the Chinese regime’s strategic objective in pursuing this activity. In the first large scale empirical analysis of this operation, we show how to identify the secretive authors of these posts, the posts written by them, and their content. We estimate that the government fabricates and posts about 448 million social media comments a year. In contrast to prior claims, we show that the Chinese regime’s strategy is to avoid arguing with skeptics of the party and the government, and to not even discuss controversial issues. We show that the goal of this massive secretive operation is instead to distract the public and change the subject, as most of the these posts involve cheerleading for China, the revolutionary history of the Communist Party, or other symbols of the regime. We discuss how these results fit with what is known about the Chinese censorship program, and suggest how they may change our broader theoretical understanding of “common knowledge” and information control in authoritarian regimes. http://gking.harvard.edu/files/gking/files/50c.pdf http://gking.harvard.edu/files/gking/files/50c.pdf
- vfulco 9y ago
  I have always assumed as much. Like the chaff that defensive systems on a fighter plane has. Shoot out a bunch of garbage to confuse the highly targeted offensive action.

mrybczyn 9y ago

I wonder if any tech companies are for or against this "surprising" turn of events... https://phys.org/news/2017-10-china-xi-zuckerberg-cook-beijing.html https://phys.org/news/2017-10-china-xi-zuckerberg-cook-beiji...

justinzollars 9y ago

Interesting, a day and a half later Trump announces he is running for a second term: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/brad-parscale-trump-2020-campagin-manager-announced-today-2018-02-27/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/brad-parscale-trump-2020-campag...

analogmemory 9y ago
He filed papers to run right after he was sworn in. His campaign office never closed. They just named a campaign manager today.

AnimalMuppet 9y ago

I could go downtown tonight, stand on the street corner, and shout "F--- the president!" at the top of my lungs. What would happen? I might get dirty looks. I might get some people shaking my hand. And I might - might - get an angry tweet from the president. I probably would not get either arrested or beaten up. (And this isn't a political statement. I could have done the same under the previous president, with the same results except for the tweet.) China's touchiness on these matters reveals the Communist Party's insecurity.

echevil 9y ago
I think it's more just because of them afraid of "losing face" like almost all Chinese people do. That's quite deep in Chinese culture. Even the most powerful emperors in Chinese history (who would have nothing to be afraid of) still executes those who talked ill of them
- jerf 9y ago
  It's not just China. Being able to publicly yell "Fuck the $RULER" is an anomaly in human history, not the norm. In the US, the current party in power is always on the verge of instituting totalitarianism. My plan is to start worrying about it when people face systematic government consequences for actually mouthing off about the ruling party. Right now, to a first approximation, nobody has in a long time. Any examples that anxious partisans will rush to contradict me will simply further demonstrate my point with how minor and unsystematic they are in the US. (If anything gets you in trouble in 2018, it's not mouthing off about the ruling party, it's pissing off the social media mob. That may yet be something we have to culturally reckon with, but it remains the case that it's not the government doing it.)
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - AnimalMuppet 9y ago
    I suspect you're getting downvoted for this line: > In the US, the current party in power is always on the verge of instituting totalitarianism. And I'm pretty sure that you didn't mean it like people are taking it. Let's start with, I don't know, FDR. He was on the verge of implementing totalitarianism. Really! Just ask the Republicans of 1933! Clinton was. So was Bush. So was Obama. So is Trump. Or so some vocal minority says. I'm pretty sure jerf is dismissive of all that noise, and intends to ignore it... within limits. > My plan is to start worrying about it when people face systematic government consequences for actually mouthing off about the ruling party. Right now, to a first approximation, nobody has in a long time. Any examples that anxious partisans will rush to contradict me will simply further demonstrate my point with how minor and unsystematic they are in the US. Downvoters, I think you're misreading one line, and reacting based on your misread.

gigatexal 9y ago

I hope that in my lifetime we see a revolution in China that overthrows the current authoritarian state and things like the great firewall and quasi-private/state run agencies go the way of the dodo bird. Unfortunately I don't see big American companies doing anything but continuing to court China and their growing class of wealthy consumers.

abecedarius 9y ago
Google did not. There are things I dislike about the company, but they deserve props for that.
- vthallam 9y ago
  Exactly. Unlike Facebook which actively try to get into the Chinese market, Google doesn't try as much or it seems like it.
analyst74 9y ago
yeah, let's have an revolution, or better, let's have another world war over ideology, since it went so well last time. as much as it pains me to see China regressing on the freedom front, I hope we will sort things out in a less violent manner.
- gigatexal 9y ago
  i pictured said revolution being internal -- but it'd be squashed before it began so it's only wishful thinking.
blackrock 9y ago
Are you saying that you want to see 100 million dead Chinese people? Because that is what you are implying. You will not have a revolution without spilling blood.
- tree_of_item 9y ago
  Don't know why you're downvoted, you're 100% correct. It's really easy to call for a revolution when it's not your country thrown in to turmoil.

ilamont 9y ago

I have one Chinese friend who employs a double entendre, calling him "Xitler" In all seriousness, this is a black period for Chinese people and China's neighbors. The fledgling democracy in Hong Kong, and democratic nations around China's periphery including Taiwan, Japan, Nepal, and India should be very wary dealing with a strongman who will stop at nothing to further his power and nationalism-focused legacy.

antichronology 9y ago
I wonder if it will have some sort of long term impact on the economy. Is there a way of measuring relative government authoritarianism on economic development of a nation?
- woolvalley 9y ago
  China was already an authoritarian nation, how much of an effective difference would this make?
  - antichronology 9y ago
    provide an economic argument for not implementing additional authoritarian policies. Seems that these decisions are incredibly hard to measure. For example how much did Turkey's economy suffer from the previous failed coup?
    - martimarkov 9y ago
      That for me personally only strengthens my belief that it was orchestrated.
  - ilamont 9y ago
    When strongman-based cults of personality (real or wannabe) appoint themselves ruler for life, policy can go off the rails. Wars, purges, persecution of minority groups, and civil unrest are more likely. Corrupt systems of checks and balances, which may have already been weak, slide ever further. Mao, Stalin, Chavez, Castro, Hitler, Mussolini, Chiang Kai-Shek ... a few of these strongmen presided over brief periods of spectacular economic growth, but always under unsustainable conditions. Many citizens (and the citizens of neighboring countries) paid a terrible price.

JustAnotherPat 9y ago

Remove everything and then let a merciful Xi Jinping give a little semblance of freedom back. The Chinese will be cheering his name in the street!

briga 9y ago

From the outside looking in it seems like Xi has been doing a great job leading China. Are there any serious contenders for Chinese leadership like Navalny in Russia? Not to mention that historically there have been many excellent leaders who rules for decades. An arbitrary term limit can be useful to prevent corruption, but it's also the reason for the fiasco that is Washington in 2018.

ythn 9y ago
> Not to mention that historically there have been many excellent leaders who rules for decades There are probably more historical examples of not-so-excellent (incompetent, evil, tyrannical, etc) leaders ruling for decades than excellent ones. The problem with tyranny is that the only way out is revolution. You may have an excellent dictator for decades, but then he dies and his son/crony/not-so-excellent replacement arrives for the next N decades... At least with Trump there are a variety of strategies besides bloodshed to get rid of him if people decide they don't like him.
- AnimalMuppet 9y ago
  Well, in fairness, there are probably more historical examples of not-so-excellent leaders than excellent ones, regardless of whether they ruled for decades. The problem is, if you've got a not-so-excellent one and you're stuck with him/her for decades, that's a really big chunk of your life...
IntronExon 9y ago
Can you name six of those “great rulers” and as a bonus, make those sure those six allowed for a peaceful transfer of power when they were done. No fair if you pick rulers who were “great” and the whole place suffered terribly upon their death or removal from power.
- briga 9y ago
  Off the top of my head: Solon, Trajan, Hadrian, Marcus Aurelius, Akbar, Charlemange There are many more examples, those are just some that come to mind right away. You can argue whether or not they were "good", but they certainly did good things for their empires.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

lgleason 9y ago

The same thing is happening here in the US, on a smaller scale, by private companies under the guise of "hate speech".

opportune 9y ago
so, not the same thing

jakecrouch 9y ago

This is why the US should not worry about China as a long-term economic threat - authoritarianism has never worked. The Soviet Union, 1930s Germany and Italy, all collapsed. I think the Chinese realize this and are pessemistic about their own future. The Constitution was designed to make the US Government as weak as possible, because a strong government ultimately turns on its people.

phyller 9y ago
The US has been an instrumental part of a system where we all benefit when others are successful, it is not a zero-sum game. China's economic success is good for America. What is not good for an America is a new xenophobic super power that doesn't share our values. A stable, prosperous, democratic China is ideal. An easy way for an authoritarian government to keep internal dissent down is to make an external enemy. Think of all the examples you mentioned. So this is probably bad news for the U.S. and the whole world.
etrevino 9y ago
I'm not sure why you say this. Germany and Italy didn't collapse-- they were conquered. The Soviet Union did collapse, it's true, but it collapsed because of external pressures and sclerotic bureaucracy causing an inability to adjust to internal problems. In all three cases there was an external force contributing to the problem. However, there's no reason to assume that China's authoritarian rule will collapse as well. Indeed, in several Soviet successor states (including Russia), authoritarianism has reasserted itself. Authoritarianism is easy to impose and democracy is fragile; the civic discourse required for a strong and stable democracy relies upon a considerable amount of mutual respect and rhetorical restraint.
- irq-1 9y ago
  South Korea had decades of dictatorship with a relatively easy transition to democracy and liberal capitalism.
  - etrevino 9y ago

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

natecavanaugh 9y ago

My core belief has always been that as long as China has this culture of authoritarian and heavy handed internet control, it will always have a self-imposed limit on their ability to compete. I understand they have a deep rooted value of stability and that they believe they're keeping their society from running off the rails, but if they were to allow their citizens to contribute more to the direction of the government, then the end of the U.S. hegemony would not just be a possibility, but practically a foregone conclusion (some seem to think it already is inevitable, but it's been predicted for so long now, it's starting to feel like the forever predicted rise of Linux on the desktop). However, I'd be curious to hear good reasons for China's economy to dominate the world stage even with this sort of thing constantly happening. I can kind of understand the brute-force approach of just pure production from a gigantic population, but India has a comparable population size, but not a comparable economy, so I tend to think that a large population doesn't guarantee a large economic output. There is so much innovation I see happening in the tech of China, but their fear of their own citizenry and fear of transparency make me think they'll stay behind their potential. This could all be my own Western bias for democracy, so I'd love to hear other thoughts on this.

diego_moita 9y ago
I want to think like that but would like to understand the details before believing in it. Recently, I read "China's Future" by David Shambaugh. He argues along the same lines as you. He claims that the development driven by exports and government investing is exhausted because of growing protectionism, competition from nearby countries and growing inefficiency on government companies. Meanwhile the country still has a lot inequality to solve, between west and the east coast and rural and urban population. It is also getting old very fast and doesn't have a good welfare network. Therefore, the only path ahead is development of internal market. He claims that for this the country needs transparency, the rule of law and diversity of ideas but I don't think he made it very clear to me, however. Truth is that autocratic countries (e.g: Russia, Turkey, Cuba, Belarus, etc) are very, very bad at creating diversified economies. Let's see if China finds a way to do it.
- germainelol 9y ago

peterwwillis 9y ago

This seems like a fun new opportunity to find new ways to avoid censors. One way would be to seed messages or websites with pre-loaded meanings, and use new, unrelated comments to refer to them. Example of a social media feed: 8/15/2017: "Today at noon in the square." 9/15/2015: "I think it's evil and corrupt and we can not stand for it!" 10/22/2017: "The government has taken a new decision today that affects us all." 11/10/2017: "We must protest this injustice!" 2/27/2018: "10-22-2017 + 9-15-2017 + 11-10-2017 + 8/15/2017" Obviously this is clunky, but in theory you could chain together random bits of other people's messages to post a new one, and a censorship bot would have to be written to merge them all together to filter them; if some of these were behind logins on other sites, this could be very difficult. You could also make them less literal and more made up of memes and concepts with hidden meanings.

vfulco 9y ago

Western corporate types will be freaked out and the dis-investment here will accelerate