4 ms·

The "apologists" are simply the people who can see past the US propaganda.

by trasz 6y ago

eloff 6y ago
But get suckered by Chinese propaganda? I think there's a bit more nuance on both sides of this story.
- FooBarWidget 6y ago
  Which part is "Chinese propaganda"? I observe that the majority of the banned apps are Chinese, and that one is western, while at the same time lots of western apps remain accessible in China. That's all I base my conclusion on. At no point did I base my conclusion on anything the Chinese government said. To say that they are discriminatory despite the above data, is an assumption. That assumption may be right (because the data is not mathematically solid evidence). On the other hand, it may be not. But I think accepting that assumption is in line with US propaganda.
  - byecomputer 6y ago
    > lots of western apps remain accessible in China And lots of western apps aren't accessible in China. Such as Google, Wikipedia, Facebook, Twitter. Furthermore, did you know TikTok itself is banned in mainland China? No kidding, they have an different version of the app that's Chinese-only. I think the implication that China's being the free-market player here is faulty, to say the least. There's an argument to be made about how censorship of foreign applications conflicts with the US's values, for sure, but the one-way street argument doesn't scan.
    - trasz 6y ago
      Let me get this right, are you suggesting https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E9%A6%96%E9%A1%B5 https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E9%A6%96%E9%A1%B5 is developed only by international Chinese diaspora, since it's not accessible in China?
      - byecomputer 6y ago
        What do you want me to say? It's banned in China. It wasn't always banned in China, but as of April 2019 all versions of Wikipedia are verboten. Here's an article from a little over a month ago describing someone's arrest for going there: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/world/article-china-cracks-down-on-illegal-web-use/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/world/article-china-crac...
        trasz 6y ago
        tl;dr in several provinces there has been a number of cases where folks got verbal warning for doing it. Given the scale (1.5 billion people), it's bit like saying "in US you can call the police to murder your annoying neighbour and they will come and shoot him on the spot". VPN use is ubiquitous in China, it's as simple as that.
        byecomputer 6y ago
        > in several provinces there has been a number of cases where folks got verbal warning for doing it. From that same article: || But police have also issued fines, confiscated thousands of dollars earned through online activity, seized routers and ordered "the suspension of networking,” effectively cutting off users from the internet. In some cases, police have punished trading companies that were using VPN software to access the wider internet for the purposes of “international networking.” || > VPN use is ubiquitous in China, it's as simple as that. || Now, however, detailed records published online by Zhejiang province show authorities moving against the very act of accessing unapproved parts of the internet through VPNs that are not government-approved. ||
        trasz 6y ago
        Thing is, you need to be able to evaluate the scale. How many events like that happened, in 1.5 billion country? As for the second chunk - this alone makes the article suspicious, as, as I've mentioned, and like you'll hear from probably anyone who lives in China, VPN use is ubiquitous. (Might vary from province to province, though.)
addicted 6y ago
The vast majority of people “who see past the US propaganda” also see past the Chinese propaganda. The vast majority of them want to address the privacy issues raised by such apps and companies irrespective of whether it’s the US or China misappropriating our data.
- trasz 6y ago
  That's of course true, but then banning TikTok increases YouTube's monopoly, making Google's privacy and data protection issues even worse.
  - nouveaux 6y ago
    China's abuse of data is far worse than United States[1]. Just as I would push for more privacy regarding how US handles personal data, I would do the same for China. In this case, a ban on TikTok is the best signal we can send to the CCP. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/world/asia/china-surveillance-xinjiang.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/world/asia/china-surveill...
    - trasz 6y ago
      USA doesn't even have personal data protection laws. China does. As for the article - this all sounds like a subset of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_mass_surveillance_projects#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_mass_survei..., until you realize one crucial thing: in case of US, the preferred way of dealing with this kind of minorities is either AC-130, or JDAM. Any kind of surveillance and reeducation camps is better from ethics point of view.
      - nouveaux 6y ago
        This is incorrect. USA has laws protecting against government overreach[1]. In the case of China, the government does not need the court of law to access your data. [1] https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-279-subpoenas https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual...

The "apologists" are simply the people who can see past the US propaganda.

by trasz 6y ago

The "apologists" are simply the people who can see past the US propaganda.

eloff 6y ago

But get suckered by Chinese propaganda? I think there's a bit more nuance on both sides of this story.

FooBarWidget 6y ago
Which part is "Chinese propaganda"? I observe that the majority of the banned apps are Chinese, and that one is western, while at the same time lots of western apps remain accessible in China. That's all I base my conclusion on. At no point did I base my conclusion on anything the Chinese government said. To say that they are discriminatory despite the above data, is an assumption. That assumption may be right (because the data is not mathematically solid evidence). On the other hand, it may be not. But I think accepting that assumption is in line with US propaganda.
- byecomputer 6y ago
  > lots of western apps remain accessible in China And lots of western apps aren't accessible in China. Such as Google, Wikipedia, Facebook, Twitter. Furthermore, did you know TikTok itself is banned in mainland China? No kidding, they have an different version of the app that's Chinese-only. I think the implication that China's being the free-market player here is faulty, to say the least. There's an argument to be made about how censorship of foreign applications conflicts with the US's values, for sure, but the one-way street argument doesn't scan.
  - trasz 6y ago
    Let me get this right, are you suggesting https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E9%A6%96%E9%A1%B5 https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E9%A6%96%E9%A1%B5 is developed only by international Chinese diaspora, since it's not accessible in China?
    - byecomputer 6y ago
      What do you want me to say? It's banned in China. It wasn't always banned in China, but as of April 2019 all versions of Wikipedia are verboten. Here's an article from a little over a month ago describing someone's arrest for going there: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/world/article-china-cracks-down-on-illegal-web-use/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/world/article-china-crac...
      - trasz 6y ago
        tl;dr in several provinces there has been a number of cases where folks got verbal warning for doing it. Given the scale (1.5 billion people), it's bit like saying "in US you can call the police to murder your annoying neighbour and they will come and shoot him on the spot". VPN use is ubiquitous in China, it's as simple as that.
        byecomputer 6y ago
        > in several provinces there has been a number of cases where folks got verbal warning for doing it. From that same article: || But police have also issued fines, confiscated thousands of dollars earned through online activity, seized routers and ordered "the suspension of networking,” effectively cutting off users from the internet. In some cases, police have punished trading companies that were using VPN software to access the wider internet for the purposes of “international networking.” || > VPN use is ubiquitous in China, it's as simple as that. || Now, however, detailed records published online by Zhejiang province show authorities moving against the very act of accessing unapproved parts of the internet through VPNs that are not government-approved. ||
        trasz 6y ago
        Thing is, you need to be able to evaluate the scale. How many events like that happened, in 1.5 billion country? As for the second chunk - this alone makes the article suspicious, as, as I've mentioned, and like you'll hear from probably anyone who lives in China, VPN use is ubiquitous. (Might vary from province to province, though.)

addicted 6y ago

The vast majority of people “who see past the US propaganda” also see past the Chinese propaganda. The vast majority of them want to address the privacy issues raised by such apps and companies irrespective of whether it’s the US or China misappropriating our data.

trasz 6y ago
That's of course true, but then banning TikTok increases YouTube's monopoly, making Google's privacy and data protection issues even worse.
- nouveaux 6y ago
  China's abuse of data is far worse than United States[1]. Just as I would push for more privacy regarding how US handles personal data, I would do the same for China. In this case, a ban on TikTok is the best signal we can send to the CCP. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/world/asia/china-surveillance-xinjiang.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/world/asia/china-surveill...
  - trasz 6y ago
    USA doesn't even have personal data protection laws. China does. As for the article - this all sounds like a subset of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_mass_surveillance_projects#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_mass_survei..., until you realize one crucial thing: in case of US, the preferred way of dealing with this kind of minorities is either AC-130, or JDAM. Any kind of surveillance and reeducation camps is better from ethics point of view.
    - nouveaux 6y ago
      This is incorrect. USA has laws protecting against government overreach[1]. In the case of China, the government does not need the court of law to access your data. [1] https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-279-subpoenas https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual...