7 ms·

> Is there any reason not to assume that the Chinese government is surveilling Zoom calls en masse? The burden of proof lies on you to prove they are.

• jessaustin 6y ago
  How on earth could a user "prove" this? Mention some secret on a call and then watch for the Chinese government to act on that secret? Give us a break. It's much safer to assume surveillance and protect oneself accordingly.
  • knolax 6y ago
    We have definite proof of surveillance by the Five-Eyes, why would China would be better at hiding evidence of surveillance. Claiming that something can't be measured at all doesn't help your argument either. That type of reasoning is only acceptable in theology.
    • jessaustin 6y ago
      The Chinese Edward Snowden is not currently living in Moscow. "I see no reason" is not a good way to start fallacy-measuring.
      • knolax 6y ago
        There are plenty of Chinese dissidents, including the the activist that is the subject of TFA. The default assumption is to assume noncorrelation between things until proven otherwise. That's a defensible position, yours isn't.
        • jessaustin 6y ago
          I only said that it is safer to assume surveillance. I didn't say it was more fair or more "defensible" or whatever. In reply you've offered "default assumptions" and "burdens of proof" and "theology". Whom do you attempt to convince with this [EDIT:] sophistry? Oh and nice job implying that Chinese dissidents have the duty of "proving" to the world that the Chinese government surveils them. Snowden is not a dissident, he is a whistleblower. Also, in general, telling people who suffer that they ought to educate the rest of us about the particular details of their suffering is not cool.
          • knolax 6y ago
            > Oh and nice job implying that Chinese dissidents have the duty of "proving" to the world that the Chinese government surveils them. Chinese dissidents didn't make the claim that the Chinese government is surveilling Zoom, you are. They're not your rhetorical shield. > I only said that it is safer to assume surveillance. This thread was started by: > Is there any reason not to assume that the Chinese government is surveilling Zoom calls en masse? You seem to be taking all of this very personally for some reason.
            • jessaustin 6y ago
              They're not your rhetorical shield. That's handy because you're the one who brought them up only to imply that they aren't as worthy of our sympathy as Snowden. This thread was started by... ...someone with the good sense to ignore your verbal incontinence. Eventually I'll learn the lesson; downvote and move on.
              • knolax 6y ago
                > That's handy because you're the one who brought them up. There's a difference between bringing up the fact that somebody exists and putting words in their mouths to help your point. > ...someone with the good sense to ignore your verbal incontinence. Eventually I'll learn the lesson; downvote and move on. You're getting unreasonably mad right now. Please calm down.