7 ms·

While I'm not sure why Chinese government is not sharing the virus, I really don't like the way the article is written. The entire article is about guessing th

While I'm not sure why Chinese government is not sharing the virus, I really don't like the way the article is written. The entire article is about guessing the reasons and developing a conspiracy (even the relation to trade war). No response so far from the official channel of Chinese government. Also for this section: >> The Chinese government has refused to share clinical data from infected patients, according to scientists[1], and claims to have all but eradicated H7N9 through a single poultry vaccination campaign. [1]: Citation needed.

justboxing 8y ago
> No response so far from the official channel of Chinese government. So? Do they ever respond to anything? At the core of a communist regime is secrecy. They seldom respond to any request for information or allegations, and when they do respond to anything, it is usually by way of exerting (physical) force or a war.
- techVentureStar 8y ago
  Dude your allegation sounds so paranoid.
- dang 8y ago
  Please don't take HN further into flamewar with grand nationalistic rhetoric. We're interested in specifics here, not loud generics. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
Krasnol 8y ago
The only conspiracy here is, that you can be sure to find someone downplaying the issue every time something regarding China comes up here.
- throwahate1231 8y ago
  I am posting anonymously here because of all the toxicity of this comment. Take away "Chinese" from his argument and he still has an argument. Your comment on the other hand, is just throwing your emotions around. I suspect other commenters downvote him for the same reason. I find this every time an article about China comes up. Its infuriating because there is not legitimate discussion going on. It simply a downvoting war.
  - hd4 8y ago
    Its not emotional when what he says is borne out by the direction any such discussion takes. What's wrong with questioning the obviously-concerted effort of downplaying anything done by the Chinese government, especially when we have a good idea of who is behind it (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party , https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://gking.harvard.edu/files/gking/files/50c.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiKhoT10JDdAhXOZ1AKHU1YArIQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw0__waOhf3eQCocbRdb45jj https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/...)?
    - dang 8y ago
      That accusation doesn't hold up at all when we look at the data. Indeed you could easily know that for yourself by looking at the histories of most HN accounts that post on the topic. The "50 Cent Party" didn't show up in 2014 to argue about Emacs so they could astroturf HN today. (I'm making that example up, but it's typical.) This is really just a cheap shot, and there's a site guideline that specifically asks you not to: "Please don't impute astroturfing or shillage. That degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about it, email us and we'll look at the data." What's true is: (1) HN users are divided on divisive topics, such as political questions surrounding China, so opposing views naturally show up here; and (2) HN commenters need to post substantively, avoid flamewars, and follow the rules at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
bovermyer 8y ago
The Chinese government has proven time and again that it's supremely untrustworthy. That alone gives the article some credence.
- some_account 8y ago
  Unlike the US government which is completely sane and trustworthy.
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > Unlike the US government which is completely sane and trustworthy Compared to the Chinese government, yes. Competitive governments are more transparent and less corrupt than dictatorships. If one divides the world into binary categories of “never lies” and “has ever lied,” sure, both Beijing and D.C. lie. But in frequency and magnitude, the former knocks it out of the park.
    - some_account 8y ago
      It's not about lying. It's about using weapons of mass destruction. Only one country did this. Twice. It was not China. You guys are just used to the devil you know, and scared of the devil you don't know. I am also in a way. But worrying about China having a virus? What do you think the US have? Both China and US will blame any virus on someone else if it comes out to play.
      - captain_perl 8y ago
        Just to correct the record, several nations have used poison gas both in combat and against civilians. The USA used 2 atomic bombs on dual civilian/military targets in WW2 after Japan refused to surrender, but there were also firestorms started by multiple countries using conventional bombs.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
emodendroket 8y ago
I don't see what's conspiratorial when it identifies several recent examples of governments doing exactly what the scientists they've interviewed speculate is happening here. If we followed your standard, the Chinese government would be able to get away with anything without scrutiny indefinitely simply by refusing to respond to inquiries.

justboxing 8y ago

> No response so far from the official channel of Chinese government. So? Do they ever respond to anything? At the core of a communist regime is secrecy. They seldom respond to any request for information or allegations, and when they do respond to anything, it is usually by way of exerting (physical) force or a war.

techVentureStar 8y ago
Dude your allegation sounds so paranoid.
dang 8y ago
Please don't take HN further into flamewar with grand nationalistic rhetoric. We're interested in specifics here, not loud generics. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

Krasnol 8y ago

The only conspiracy here is, that you can be sure to find someone downplaying the issue every time something regarding China comes up here.

throwahate1231 8y ago
I am posting anonymously here because of all the toxicity of this comment. Take away "Chinese" from his argument and he still has an argument. Your comment on the other hand, is just throwing your emotions around. I suspect other commenters downvote him for the same reason. I find this every time an article about China comes up. Its infuriating because there is not legitimate discussion going on. It simply a downvoting war.
- hd4 8y ago
  Its not emotional when what he says is borne out by the direction any such discussion takes. What's wrong with questioning the obviously-concerted effort of downplaying anything done by the Chinese government, especially when we have a good idea of who is behind it (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party , https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://gking.harvard.edu/files/gking/files/50c.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiKhoT10JDdAhXOZ1AKHU1YArIQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw0__waOhf3eQCocbRdb45jj https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/...)?
  - dang 8y ago
    That accusation doesn't hold up at all when we look at the data. Indeed you could easily know that for yourself by looking at the histories of most HN accounts that post on the topic. The "50 Cent Party" didn't show up in 2014 to argue about Emacs so they could astroturf HN today. (I'm making that example up, but it's typical.) This is really just a cheap shot, and there's a site guideline that specifically asks you not to: "Please don't impute astroturfing or shillage. That degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about it, email us and we'll look at the data." What's true is: (1) HN users are divided on divisive topics, such as political questions surrounding China, so opposing views naturally show up here; and (2) HN commenters need to post substantively, avoid flamewars, and follow the rules at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

bovermyer 8y ago

The Chinese government has proven time and again that it's supremely untrustworthy. That alone gives the article some credence.

some_account 8y ago
Unlike the US government which is completely sane and trustworthy.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > Unlike the US government which is completely sane and trustworthy Compared to the Chinese government, yes. Competitive governments are more transparent and less corrupt than dictatorships. If one divides the world into binary categories of “never lies” and “has ever lied,” sure, both Beijing and D.C. lie. But in frequency and magnitude, the former knocks it out of the park.
  - some_account 8y ago
    It's not about lying. It's about using weapons of mass destruction. Only one country did this. Twice. It was not China. You guys are just used to the devil you know, and scared of the devil you don't know. I am also in a way. But worrying about China having a virus? What do you think the US have? Both China and US will blame any virus on someone else if it comes out to play.
    - captain_perl 8y ago
      Just to correct the record, several nations have used poison gas both in combat and against civilians. The USA used 2 atomic bombs on dual civilian/military targets in WW2 after Japan refused to surrender, but there were also firestorms started by multiple countries using conventional bombs.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]

emodendroket 8y ago

I don't see what's conspiratorial when it identifies several recent examples of governments doing exactly what the scientists they've interviewed speculate is happening here. If we followed your standard, the Chinese government would be able to get away with anything without scrutiny indefinitely simply by refusing to respond to inquiries.