4 ms·
This illustrates the difference between having laws and enforcing them. Some countries have strict laws, but little enforcement, so marginalized people can brea
by dev_throw 9y ago
This illustrates the difference between having laws and enforcing them. Some countries have strict laws, but little enforcement, so marginalized people can break these laws as long as they fly under the radar. With technology, it becomes trivial to implement enforcement for even draconic laws at a scale previously unfathomable. Also, they seem to be rolling it out slowly. It reminds of the metaphorical boiling frog syndome[1], where the frog realizes what predicament it is in, but too late.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog
- rrggrr 9y agoNext steps: 1. Extend social credit to non-Chinese living in China. 2. Expand to companies and individuals doing business with or visiting in China. 3. Export the program to finance dependent nations outside China. 4. Require companies depending on Chinese income to enforce the regulations in a 'know your customer'-esque format. There will be less resistance to this than one might think.
- wetback 9y agoAnd just like that, Compliance becomes a virtue.
- SubiculumCode 9y agoHaving too many laws that are only selectively enforced nearly equals the absence of the rule of law, and invariably hurts those that are poor or otherwise not afluent more than others.
- elgenie 9y ago> Some countries have strict laws, but little enforcement, so marginalized people can break these laws as long as they fly under the radar. Strict laws with little enforcement also means that the enforcement can be restricted squarely towards marginalized people and discretion used to avoid enforcement against anyone else.