5 ms·

Waaay more interested in the American surveillance state, which is global, penetrating, the best funded, attached to a global propaganda system, and sits in the

Waaay more interested in the American surveillance state, which is global, penetrating, the best funded, attached to a global propaganda system, and sits in the hands of the world's premiere superpower. I'm also a citizen there. These Chinese surveillance state stories are all really tame compared to the abuses of the American program.

nabla9 8y ago
>These Chinese surveillance state stories are all really tame compared to the abuses of the American program You are wrong. https://www.economist.com/briefing/2018/05/31/china-has-turned-xinjiang-into-a-police-state-like-no-other https://www.economist.com/briefing/2018/05/31/china-has-turn...
- notveryrational 8y ago
  The American surveillance state feeds a global assassination and propaganda program, and seeks total information domination. The Chinese program is about homeland security and domestic stability. I am completely and entirely correct.
  - zbyte64 8y ago
    Hardly. Homeland security and domestic stability requires a level of international influence. China sees the same value in information as the USA and aren't going to pass on opportunities to collect (or implant). To expect otherwise is incredibly naive.
    - notveryrational 8y ago
      I prefer not to confuse "a level of international influence" with global information domination.
- throwfrijuly 8y ago
  No he's definitely right. The US drone program has a social credit kill list [1]: > In 2014, former CIA and NSA director Michael Hayden said in a public debate, “We kill people based on metadata.” > According to multiple reports and leaks, death-by-metadata could be triggered, without even knowing the target’s name, if too many derogatory checks appear on their profile. “Armed military aged males” exhibiting suspicious behavior in the wrong place can become targets, as can someone “seen to be giving out orders.” Such mathematics-based assassinations have come to be known as “signature strikes.” > “When I learned about signature strikes, that was incredible,” Faisal says. “If the criteria is being armed or having a beard – that is everyone in Yemen.” 1. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/how-to-survive-americas-kill-list-699334/ https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/how-...
  - nabla9 8y ago
    To argue that US is worse than China, you should first compare US to China, not just list what US does. Chinese concentration camps and black jails are at the level of WWII era horrors. They disappear people around the world just by sending made up arrest request and taking them to China.
    - notveryrational 8y ago
      US: Drone assassination program, kills based off metadata score. Global rendition and torture program. Largest prison population on the planet, exhibiting UN criticized torture, forced sterilization. China: Has no drone assassination program. Does not kill based off metadata score. National rendition program.
      - nabla9 8y ago
        > Does not kill based off metadata score. Tortures, disappears, organ harvest, forced rendition from foreign countries based on mass and metadata in thousands or tens of thousands peer year (ethnicity, gender, number of foreign phone calls, or family members outside country). People in concentration camps are executed "on demand" in order to provide organs to recipients.
dnomad 8y ago
You will never see Western journalists go after their own surveillance state even though it is far more extensive and aggressive than China. What's really strange is they accuse China of doing things like exporting compromised telcom equipment -- things that we now know that the NSA actually does. (See eg NSA interception of outbound Cisco routers.) Given this very particular blindspot you really do have to wonder who they think they're fooling.
- vkou 8y ago
  You do see Western journalists go after it, but only from fringe pinko rags, like The Guardian, or The Intercept. You'll never see Fox News or MSNBC take it seriously (Except when it touches identity politics, like gun registries. Then, all of a sudden, it's a huge issue! Imagine, the government having a record of all gun owners!)
  - olivermarks 8y ago
    https://www.cloudwards.net/prism-snowden-and-government-surveillance/ https://www.cloudwards.net/prism-snowden-and-government-surv... The Snowden revelations about Prism seem almost quaint these days...
    - vkou 8y ago
      The revelations about PRISM are quaint, because PRISM was a web form that let NSA employees send requests for user data to the major tech firms. Of all the NSA revelations, it was the least controversial one. It was a glorified fax machine.
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  > You will never see Western journalists go after their own surveillance state... False. You see it all the time. > ... even though it is far more extensive and aggressive than China. Not sure I buy that, either. The US may be more aggressive in terms of information collected, and in terms of global scope. It's less aggressive than China in terms of being used to control the lives of the entire population of the country, though.

nabla9 8y ago

>These Chinese surveillance state stories are all really tame compared to the abuses of the American program You are wrong. https://www.economist.com/briefing/2018/05/31/china-has-turned-xinjiang-into-a-police-state-like-no-other https://www.economist.com/briefing/2018/05/31/china-has-turn...

notveryrational 8y ago
The American surveillance state feeds a global assassination and propaganda program, and seeks total information domination. The Chinese program is about homeland security and domestic stability. I am completely and entirely correct.
- zbyte64 8y ago
  Hardly. Homeland security and domestic stability requires a level of international influence. China sees the same value in information as the USA and aren't going to pass on opportunities to collect (or implant). To expect otherwise is incredibly naive.
  - notveryrational 8y ago
    I prefer not to confuse "a level of international influence" with global information domination.
throwfrijuly 8y ago
No he's definitely right. The US drone program has a social credit kill list [1]: > In 2014, former CIA and NSA director Michael Hayden said in a public debate, “We kill people based on metadata.” > According to multiple reports and leaks, death-by-metadata could be triggered, without even knowing the target’s name, if too many derogatory checks appear on their profile. “Armed military aged males” exhibiting suspicious behavior in the wrong place can become targets, as can someone “seen to be giving out orders.” Such mathematics-based assassinations have come to be known as “signature strikes.” > “When I learned about signature strikes, that was incredible,” Faisal says. “If the criteria is being armed or having a beard – that is everyone in Yemen.” 1. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/how-to-survive-americas-kill-list-699334/ https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/how-...
- nabla9 8y ago
  To argue that US is worse than China, you should first compare US to China, not just list what US does. Chinese concentration camps and black jails are at the level of WWII era horrors. They disappear people around the world just by sending made up arrest request and taking them to China.
  - notveryrational 8y ago
    US: Drone assassination program, kills based off metadata score. Global rendition and torture program. Largest prison population on the planet, exhibiting UN criticized torture, forced sterilization. China: Has no drone assassination program. Does not kill based off metadata score. National rendition program.
    - nabla9 8y ago
      > Does not kill based off metadata score. Tortures, disappears, organ harvest, forced rendition from foreign countries based on mass and metadata in thousands or tens of thousands peer year (ethnicity, gender, number of foreign phone calls, or family members outside country). People in concentration camps are executed "on demand" in order to provide organs to recipients.

dnomad 8y ago

You will never see Western journalists go after their own surveillance state even though it is far more extensive and aggressive than China. What's really strange is they accuse China of doing things like exporting compromised telcom equipment -- things that we now know that the NSA actually does. (See eg NSA interception of outbound Cisco routers.) Given this very particular blindspot you really do have to wonder who they think they're fooling.

vkou 8y ago
You do see Western journalists go after it, but only from fringe pinko rags, like The Guardian, or The Intercept. You'll never see Fox News or MSNBC take it seriously (Except when it touches identity politics, like gun registries. Then, all of a sudden, it's a huge issue! Imagine, the government having a record of all gun owners!)
- olivermarks 8y ago
  https://www.cloudwards.net/prism-snowden-and-government-surveillance/ https://www.cloudwards.net/prism-snowden-and-government-surv... The Snowden revelations about Prism seem almost quaint these days...
  - vkou 8y ago
    The revelations about PRISM are quaint, because PRISM was a web form that let NSA employees send requests for user data to the major tech firms. Of all the NSA revelations, it was the least controversial one. It was a glorified fax machine.
AnimalMuppet 8y ago
> You will never see Western journalists go after their own surveillance state... False. You see it all the time. > ... even though it is far more extensive and aggressive than China. Not sure I buy that, either. The US may be more aggressive in terms of information collected, and in terms of global scope. It's less aggressive than China in terms of being used to control the lives of the entire population of the country, though.