5 ms·

It's highly unlikely. It is required by CCP law to record user activities up to 90 (or 30? vague memories) days.

by nooneknowswhy 6y ago

BelenusMordred 6y ago
> 90 days Actually sounds pretty good. In Australia it is 730 days.
- ardy42 6y ago
  >> It's highly unlikely. It is required by CCP law to record user activities up to 90 (or 30? vague memories) days. > Actually sounds pretty good. In Australia it is 730 days. No, it doesn't. China requires the content of user activities to be saved, so your chat history is literally being sent to the local police in real time for scanning. The result is stuff like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiMLVYK4hEc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiMLVYK4hEc (Chinese police casually asserting their dominance by locking some poor guy in a tiger chair for badmouthing them on a private WeChat chat). A few years back someone found an analyzed an unsecured Mongo DB that was storing these messages: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/open-mongodb-databases-expose-chinese-surveillance-data/ https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/open-mongodb-... IIRC, Australia only has metadata retention requirements.
  - La1n 6y ago
    I am sorry, but how do we know that youtube video is real? The channel it is uploaded to doesn't seem trustworthy at all. >China requires the content of user activities to be saved, Do you have a source for this? I find it hard to find information on this, I assume it's because I don't speak Chinese.
    - uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh 6y ago
      Hi Xi!
    - loceng 6y ago
      Another different case, but part of the same tyrannical complex, video and an in-depth article you can read: https://twitter.com/Terrence_STR/status/1291013545547661312 https://twitter.com/Terrence_STR/status/1291013545547661312 https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/i42wif/secret_footage_shows_uighur_mans_detention_inside/ https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/i42wif/secret_fo... The other signal is that the CCP prevents the United Nations from sending anyone to investigate these cases to interview people imprisoned, etc. But stories leak out regardless. There's a spectrum to understand. Even here in Canada we don't treat those who are imprisoned very well - but relative to other countries, perhaps better. Likewise I our health care system, contrast to the foreign narrative, really isn't that good - but relative to say a country without any publicly funded health, of course it is in comparison amazing that we've reached that point; there's still regulatory capture to deal from industrial complexes to deal with, along with indoctrination and groups of professionals who have weight behind them and their survival (keeping their jobs) is also something to counter - where they dictate the quality of care and what quality even means, what acceptable even means, and currently at least in Canada with almost no accountability or oversight - so there's no one keeping things in check.
      - La1n 6y ago
        I didn't need to see more "CCP oppresses people" proof. I asked specifically for the linked video and the specific law. Just because other bad things happen doesn't mean all things are true. You are bringing unrelated topics into the conversation that are sure to start a nationalistic flamewar.
        dkdk8283 6y ago
        The CCP is horrible and inhuman. Any denial of this is effectively supporting the regime.
        La1n 6y ago
        And how is asking for sources denial?
    - perfobotto 6y ago
      Good try Xi
      - dang 6y ago
        This breaks the site guidelines and we ban that sort of account. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here. Also, if you could please stop posting unsubstantive comments generally, we'd be grateful—we're trying for something a bit different on this site.
    - ardy42 6y ago
      > I am sorry, but how do we know that youtube video is real? The channel it is uploaded to doesn't seem trustworthy at all. The copy I linked is clearly a re-upload of a re-upload, it was just the first copy I found. How do we know anything is real at all? I don't have a specific chain of custody for the video, but I judge that it's likely true because the practices shown are consistent with other reports (e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8PgCUap1Vg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8PgCUap1Vg, https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/05/13/tiger-chairs-and-cell-bosses/police-torture-criminal-suspects-china https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/05/13/tiger-chairs-and-cell-...). It gets other details right, like the anti-motorcycle crackdown. Also, the low-level Chinese police that would create a video like that very likely do not understand how bad the optics of it are when seen by foreigners. > Do you have a source for this? I find it hard to find information on this, I assume it's because I don't speak Chinese. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeChat#State_surveillance_and_intelligence_gathering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeChat#State_surveillance_and_.... It wasn't hard to find.
      - La1n 6y ago
        >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeChat#State_surveillance_and_ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeChat#State_surveillance_and_.... It wasn't hard to find. This says nothing about the amount of days. Neither do the sources. >Its parent company is obliged to share data with the Chinese government under the China Internet Security Law and National Intelligence Law. Can be said about the US as well, companies can be forced to share their data with the government. edit: Thanks for the HRW report, I'll have a read
        ardy42 6y ago
        > This says nothing about the amount of days. Neither do the sources. Is the amount of days really the most important aspect of this? > Can be said about the US as well, companies can be forced to share their data with the government. While the US is definitely not perfect, that's a false equivalency. One can only draw superficial parallels between the US and China on this topic. The key difference is actually in the area of political culture. For instance: both the US and China make a big deal about the "rule of law," but they're actually talking about very different things. The the US, it means the law is applied consistently and even constrains the government. In China, the government is in a very real sense above the law, and the phrase merely means that they demand you comply with their rule through the laws they make.
  - david422 6y ago
    That's eye opening if true.
    - kogus 6y ago
      Surveillance in China is completely ubiquitous to an extent that most westerners don't realize. There is an excellent book on the subject, "We Have Been Harmonized" by Kai Strittmatter that discusses it. As an example, if you jaywalk in Shenzen, facial recognition technology will trigger and have your face and name posted on a television screen before you have even finished crossing the road.
  - shakna 6y ago
    The Australian implementation is "metadata", but what that is and means is still rather ambiguous. After a five year court case, the Federal Court decided in 2017 that the average citizen isn't allowed to access all data that may be about them, despite being allowed to do so under the Privacy Act. If that sounds ambiguous... It's because it is. Without an ability to say with is metadata and what is not, everything may be getting stored, and some companies will be overly conservative in how much data they are storing. Not to say that this is worse than the Chinese implementation which is far more explicit in its demands for privacy invasion, just that the Australian case is... Worse than it sounds.

It's highly unlikely. It is required by CCP law to record user activities up to 90 (or 30? vague memories) days.

BelenusMordred 6y ago

> 90 days Actually sounds pretty good. In Australia it is 730 days.

ardy42 6y ago
>> It's highly unlikely. It is required by CCP law to record user activities up to 90 (or 30? vague memories) days. > Actually sounds pretty good. In Australia it is 730 days. No, it doesn't. China requires the content of user activities to be saved, so your chat history is literally being sent to the local police in real time for scanning. The result is stuff like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiMLVYK4hEc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiMLVYK4hEc (Chinese police casually asserting their dominance by locking some poor guy in a tiger chair for badmouthing them on a private WeChat chat). A few years back someone found an analyzed an unsecured Mongo DB that was storing these messages: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/open-mongodb-databases-expose-chinese-surveillance-data/ https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/open-mongodb-... IIRC, Australia only has metadata retention requirements.
- La1n 6y ago
  I am sorry, but how do we know that youtube video is real? The channel it is uploaded to doesn't seem trustworthy at all. >China requires the content of user activities to be saved, Do you have a source for this? I find it hard to find information on this, I assume it's because I don't speak Chinese.
  - uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh 6y ago
    Hi Xi!
  - loceng 6y ago
    Another different case, but part of the same tyrannical complex, video and an in-depth article you can read: https://twitter.com/Terrence_STR/status/1291013545547661312 https://twitter.com/Terrence_STR/status/1291013545547661312 https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/i42wif/secret_footage_shows_uighur_mans_detention_inside/ https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/i42wif/secret_fo... The other signal is that the CCP prevents the United Nations from sending anyone to investigate these cases to interview people imprisoned, etc. But stories leak out regardless. There's a spectrum to understand. Even here in Canada we don't treat those who are imprisoned very well - but relative to other countries, perhaps better. Likewise I our health care system, contrast to the foreign narrative, really isn't that good - but relative to say a country without any publicly funded health, of course it is in comparison amazing that we've reached that point; there's still regulatory capture to deal from industrial complexes to deal with, along with indoctrination and groups of professionals who have weight behind them and their survival (keeping their jobs) is also something to counter - where they dictate the quality of care and what quality even means, what acceptable even means, and currently at least in Canada with almost no accountability or oversight - so there's no one keeping things in check.
    - La1n 6y ago
      I didn't need to see more "CCP oppresses people" proof. I asked specifically for the linked video and the specific law. Just because other bad things happen doesn't mean all things are true. You are bringing unrelated topics into the conversation that are sure to start a nationalistic flamewar.
      - dkdk8283 6y ago
        The CCP is horrible and inhuman. Any denial of this is effectively supporting the regime.
        La1n 6y ago
        And how is asking for sources denial?
  - perfobotto 6y ago
    Good try Xi
    - dang 6y ago
      This breaks the site guidelines and we ban that sort of account. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here. Also, if you could please stop posting unsubstantive comments generally, we'd be grateful—we're trying for something a bit different on this site.
  - ardy42 6y ago
    > I am sorry, but how do we know that youtube video is real? The channel it is uploaded to doesn't seem trustworthy at all. The copy I linked is clearly a re-upload of a re-upload, it was just the first copy I found. How do we know anything is real at all? I don't have a specific chain of custody for the video, but I judge that it's likely true because the practices shown are consistent with other reports (e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8PgCUap1Vg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8PgCUap1Vg, https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/05/13/tiger-chairs-and-cell-bosses/police-torture-criminal-suspects-china https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/05/13/tiger-chairs-and-cell-...). It gets other details right, like the anti-motorcycle crackdown. Also, the low-level Chinese police that would create a video like that very likely do not understand how bad the optics of it are when seen by foreigners. > Do you have a source for this? I find it hard to find information on this, I assume it's because I don't speak Chinese. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeChat#State_surveillance_and_intelligence_gathering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeChat#State_surveillance_and_.... It wasn't hard to find.
    - La1n 6y ago
      >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeChat#State_surveillance_and_ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeChat#State_surveillance_and_.... It wasn't hard to find. This says nothing about the amount of days. Neither do the sources. >Its parent company is obliged to share data with the Chinese government under the China Internet Security Law and National Intelligence Law. Can be said about the US as well, companies can be forced to share their data with the government. edit: Thanks for the HRW report, I'll have a read
      - ardy42 6y ago
        > This says nothing about the amount of days. Neither do the sources. Is the amount of days really the most important aspect of this? > Can be said about the US as well, companies can be forced to share their data with the government. While the US is definitely not perfect, that's a false equivalency. One can only draw superficial parallels between the US and China on this topic. The key difference is actually in the area of political culture. For instance: both the US and China make a big deal about the "rule of law," but they're actually talking about very different things. The the US, it means the law is applied consistently and even constrains the government. In China, the government is in a very real sense above the law, and the phrase merely means that they demand you comply with their rule through the laws they make.
- david422 6y ago
  That's eye opening if true.
  - kogus 6y ago
    Surveillance in China is completely ubiquitous to an extent that most westerners don't realize. There is an excellent book on the subject, "We Have Been Harmonized" by Kai Strittmatter that discusses it. As an example, if you jaywalk in Shenzen, facial recognition technology will trigger and have your face and name posted on a television screen before you have even finished crossing the road.
- shakna 6y ago
  The Australian implementation is "metadata", but what that is and means is still rather ambiguous. After a five year court case, the Federal Court decided in 2017 that the average citizen isn't allowed to access all data that may be about them, despite being allowed to do so under the Privacy Act. If that sounds ambiguous... It's because it is. Without an ability to say with is metadata and what is not, everything may be getting stored, and some companies will be overly conservative in how much data they are storing. Not to say that this is worse than the Chinese implementation which is far more explicit in its demands for privacy invasion, just that the Australian case is... Worse than it sounds.