4 ms·

If we counted the number of people the PRC has killed by finding them through their "great" firewall, does the OP think that number is less than bad baidu medic

If we counted the number of people the PRC has killed by finding them through their "great" firewall, does the OP think that number is less than bad baidu medical ads? I don't understand is the false equivalency between baidu's advertising and PRC's notorious human rights violations. This post doesn't address any of the concerns brought up by the original letter they decry?

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
Leary 8y ago
Your argument would make sense if ending DragonFly would end the Great Firewall too.
- codemac 8y ago
  They were making utilitarian arguments, notably the famous trolley one. Just because you can't stop something, doesn't mean you should actively support it.
  - yourbandsucks 8y ago
    Yes, they were making utilitarian arguments about the welfare of the people affected. It's awfully easy to stand on principle when it's the other guy who sacrifices for it.
    - codemac 8y ago
      > It's awfully easy to stand on principle when it's the other guy who sacrifices for it. Is the other guy me? or are the other guys those killed by the PRC? You would sacrifice them to search Google, I would sacrifice your Google searches for them. We do not have to agree.
      - publub 8y ago
        Why is having Google in China going to get anyone killed? If Google isn’t there they’ll just search Baidu or Bing and whatever was going to happen is still going to happen. It’s just another search engine, albeit a much better one than what’s already there.
        PavlovsCat 8y ago
        > Why is having Google in China going to get anyone killed? That's not the point. People already DID get killed, and ARE getting killed. Millions and millions of them. Totalitarianism is the fact on the table. That's not just "another market", and the benefit to China gained by Western complicity in it, is nothing compared to the damage we are doing to ourselves. I doubt you understand how important this is and how deep it runs. We're not going to throw millenia of evolution of thought, and ultimately thought and human agency itself away, just to make not resisting more comfortable for "the large chunk of non-dissidents" or Silicon Valley or whoever may come. > The older dictators fell because they could never supply their subjects with enough bread, enough circuses, enough miracles and mysteries. Nor did they possess a really effective system of mind-manipulation. In the past, free-thinkers and revolutionaries were often the products of the most piously orthodox education. This is not surprising. The methods employed by orthodox educators were and still are extremely inefficient. Under a scientific dictator education will really work -- with the result that most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution. There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown. > Meanwhile there is still some freedom left in the world. Many young people, it is true, do not seem to value freedom. But some of us still believe that, without freedom, human beings cannot become fully human and that freedom is therefore supremely valuable. Perhaps the forces that now menace freedom are too strong to be resisted for very long. It is still our duty to do whatever we can to resist them. -- Aldous Huxley, "Brave New World Revisited" (1958)
fermienrico 8y ago
It’s a ridiculous rhetorical rebuttal without ever mentioning the dystopian motives of the entire Chinese tech industry puppetted under the Xi Jingpin’s vision. From Baidu to Tencent, everyone is in bed with the government. Weak arguments are covered up with emotional rhetoric about deaths and such. Please do not respond to my comment about “what about US Federal agencies in bed with the FANG”. Before we discuss, China is not even on the same ballgame. It’s not the same sport. It’s like going to another planet where your entire identity is linked to your cellphone number. I visit China multiple times a year and without WeChat, I can’t do anything. On HN, I often see comparisons to the US and the west but it’s just shifting the discussion somewhere else. US has democracy, open and fair justice system and I can sue the government, I have Miranda rights, freedom of speech and the whole American dream enchilada. It’s still alive despite of the shit president and it is here to stay. Negativity against the US is rampant here.
- yourbandsucks 8y ago
  You like using Bing when you visit? Don't ever miss YouTube? Or checking your Gmail without a VPN?
  - fermienrico 8y ago
    I have my company’s VPN access so it’s not a problem for me. But contacting people is really difficult without WeChat. You could do EVERYTHING with this one app.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- TACIXAT 8y ago
  If they're in China they probably don't have the luxury of bringing up those points in their argument.
- 12qw12 8y ago
  CCP spy . Communist spies want to control the world by using the so-called market. 共产党间谍想通过利用所谓的市场控制全球。
ehsankia 8y ago
And what about the false equivalency between PRC's human right violation and Dragonfly?
- codemac 8y ago
  Well that's an interesting discussion, but not one the OP is having. Google employees post letter saying DragonFly enables human rights violations. OP posts letter saying DragonFly creates an alternative to baidu's fraudulent and dangerous advertising, and that this is a reasonable response to the letter. It sounds like the op thinks that Baidu's advertising and human rights violations are either related, or somehow interact.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

Leary 8y ago

Your argument would make sense if ending DragonFly would end the Great Firewall too.

codemac 8y ago
They were making utilitarian arguments, notably the famous trolley one. Just because you can't stop something, doesn't mean you should actively support it.
- yourbandsucks 8y ago
  Yes, they were making utilitarian arguments about the welfare of the people affected. It's awfully easy to stand on principle when it's the other guy who sacrifices for it.
  - codemac 8y ago
    > It's awfully easy to stand on principle when it's the other guy who sacrifices for it. Is the other guy me? or are the other guys those killed by the PRC? You would sacrifice them to search Google, I would sacrifice your Google searches for them. We do not have to agree.
    - publub 8y ago
      Why is having Google in China going to get anyone killed? If Google isn’t there they’ll just search Baidu or Bing and whatever was going to happen is still going to happen. It’s just another search engine, albeit a much better one than what’s already there.
      - PavlovsCat 8y ago
        > Why is having Google in China going to get anyone killed? That's not the point. People already DID get killed, and ARE getting killed. Millions and millions of them. Totalitarianism is the fact on the table. That's not just "another market", and the benefit to China gained by Western complicity in it, is nothing compared to the damage we are doing to ourselves. I doubt you understand how important this is and how deep it runs. We're not going to throw millenia of evolution of thought, and ultimately thought and human agency itself away, just to make not resisting more comfortable for "the large chunk of non-dissidents" or Silicon Valley or whoever may come. > The older dictators fell because they could never supply their subjects with enough bread, enough circuses, enough miracles and mysteries. Nor did they possess a really effective system of mind-manipulation. In the past, free-thinkers and revolutionaries were often the products of the most piously orthodox education. This is not surprising. The methods employed by orthodox educators were and still are extremely inefficient. Under a scientific dictator education will really work -- with the result that most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution. There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown. > Meanwhile there is still some freedom left in the world. Many young people, it is true, do not seem to value freedom. But some of us still believe that, without freedom, human beings cannot become fully human and that freedom is therefore supremely valuable. Perhaps the forces that now menace freedom are too strong to be resisted for very long. It is still our duty to do whatever we can to resist them. -- Aldous Huxley, "Brave New World Revisited" (1958)

fermienrico 8y ago

It’s a ridiculous rhetorical rebuttal without ever mentioning the dystopian motives of the entire Chinese tech industry puppetted under the Xi Jingpin’s vision. From Baidu to Tencent, everyone is in bed with the government. Weak arguments are covered up with emotional rhetoric about deaths and such. Please do not respond to my comment about “what about US Federal agencies in bed with the FANG”. Before we discuss, China is not even on the same ballgame. It’s not the same sport. It’s like going to another planet where your entire identity is linked to your cellphone number. I visit China multiple times a year and without WeChat, I can’t do anything. On HN, I often see comparisons to the US and the west but it’s just shifting the discussion somewhere else. US has democracy, open and fair justice system and I can sue the government, I have Miranda rights, freedom of speech and the whole American dream enchilada. It’s still alive despite of the shit president and it is here to stay. Negativity against the US is rampant here.

yourbandsucks 8y ago
You like using Bing when you visit? Don't ever miss YouTube? Or checking your Gmail without a VPN?
- fermienrico 8y ago
  I have my company’s VPN access so it’s not a problem for me. But contacting people is really difficult without WeChat. You could do EVERYTHING with this one app.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
TACIXAT 8y ago
If they're in China they probably don't have the luxury of bringing up those points in their argument.
12qw12 8y ago
CCP spy . Communist spies want to control the world by using the so-called market. 共产党间谍想通过利用所谓的市场控制全球。

ehsankia 8y ago

And what about the false equivalency between PRC's human right violation and Dragonfly?

codemac 8y ago
Well that's an interesting discussion, but not one the OP is having. Google employees post letter saying DragonFly enables human rights violations. OP posts letter saying DragonFly creates an alternative to baidu's fraudulent and dangerous advertising, and that this is a reasonable response to the letter. It sounds like the op thinks that Baidu's advertising and human rights violations are either related, or somehow interact.