4 ms·

> What exactly is the question that you think I dodged? It was the top of my comment but I'll help you out also with the background, although it leaves me with

> What exactly is the question that you think I dodged? It was the top of my comment but I'll help you out also with the background, although it leaves me with the strong impression that you neither read it, nor are willing to actually have a worthwhile conversation. OP>>> this is exactly how the rest of the world feels about US-based companies harvesting dna data for years YOU>> The US isn't actively committing genocide against a specific ethnic group right now ME> Is this the bar to pass in order to be allowed to collect any kind of data from any person around the world? You're justifying why everyone else should be OK with the US to collect DNA but not for China because "genocide". So tell me, is that the bar you have to pass to collect DNA data from around the world or any similar effort? So you tell me how either of these countries is entitled to do it. Is everyone else bound to lower the standards and necessarily use the lowest bar to judge a matter? The problem is some people would justify eating a baby because China ate two. That's an easy way to make all the wrong choices and justify all the wrong things: China does even worse. Will you accept any abuse from US leadership as long as it's not outright genocide?

atlasunshrugged 5y ago
... My answer to that was literally in the first lines of my response. Here it is again. "I will 100% die on the hill arguing that the US is a better global actor than China. Should the committing of genocide be the bar? No, of course not, but it's the most egregious example I could think of that demonstrates what a bad actor the CCP is."
- buran77 5y ago
  > Should the committing of genocide be the bar? No, of course not My friend, you read that "this is exactly how the rest of the world feels about US-based companies harvesting dna data for years" and came up with something that looked like a justification of why exactly it would be different for the US. You pointed out China's genocide. But if that isn't the bar (at least because both countries fail it) then why bring it up at all? For China to be compared to the US it's a step up. Not so much the other way. If you analyze the world through a narrow slit you miss that whatever chasm you see when you look at China, most Europeans see when they look at the US. So collecting all that DNA data is unacceptable for any country, certainly not any of the superpowers.
  - atlasunshrugged 5y ago
    I lived in Europe for years and even worked for a European government representing them in international fora like the United Nations (I also lived in China and studied econ there). I won't say I know how all Europeans feel, but I certainly have a wider perspective than the average person. I can see that this conversation is just us talking past one another so I'm going to quit wasting my time now but thanks for a stimulating debate.
    - buran77 5y ago
      > I certainly have a wider perspective than the average person All the worse that with that background you decided to respond to OP's statement with "but here's a thing China does worse". Looking at what they do better would yield some insight, looking at what they do worse, especially in the context of justifying something bad, is like saying "because water is wet". But since you brought it up, I have probably been strongly involved in high level policy making and international politics in multiple European states and institutions with quite some success for longer than all but a potential handful of people on HN. If it's one thing that I know it's that if it looks like the knee jerk reaction of the usual internet comment, it didn't come from people who've been too long, if ever, in that setting. It simply doesn't bring any value, it doesn't shift a perspective, it doesn't re-frame anything. Your choice of reference says a lot about where you see your starting position. That's like going into a negotiation by saying you don't know the value of your goal. Even if I'm sure you already thought of that, try to sit on it for a bit longer.

atlasunshrugged 5y ago

... My answer to that was literally in the first lines of my response. Here it is again. "I will 100% die on the hill arguing that the US is a better global actor than China. Should the committing of genocide be the bar? No, of course not, but it's the most egregious example I could think of that demonstrates what a bad actor the CCP is."

buran77 5y ago
> Should the committing of genocide be the bar? No, of course not My friend, you read that "this is exactly how the rest of the world feels about US-based companies harvesting dna data for years" and came up with something that looked like a justification of why exactly it would be different for the US. You pointed out China's genocide. But if that isn't the bar (at least because both countries fail it) then why bring it up at all? For China to be compared to the US it's a step up. Not so much the other way. If you analyze the world through a narrow slit you miss that whatever chasm you see when you look at China, most Europeans see when they look at the US. So collecting all that DNA data is unacceptable for any country, certainly not any of the superpowers.
- atlasunshrugged 5y ago
  I lived in Europe for years and even worked for a European government representing them in international fora like the United Nations (I also lived in China and studied econ there). I won't say I know how all Europeans feel, but I certainly have a wider perspective than the average person. I can see that this conversation is just us talking past one another so I'm going to quit wasting my time now but thanks for a stimulating debate.
  - buran77 5y ago
    > I certainly have a wider perspective than the average person All the worse that with that background you decided to respond to OP's statement with "but here's a thing China does worse". Looking at what they do better would yield some insight, looking at what they do worse, especially in the context of justifying something bad, is like saying "because water is wet". But since you brought it up, I have probably been strongly involved in high level policy making and international politics in multiple European states and institutions with quite some success for longer than all but a potential handful of people on HN. If it's one thing that I know it's that if it looks like the knee jerk reaction of the usual internet comment, it didn't come from people who've been too long, if ever, in that setting. It simply doesn't bring any value, it doesn't shift a perspective, it doesn't re-frame anything. Your choice of reference says a lot about where you see your starting position. That's like going into a negotiation by saying you don't know the value of your goal. Even if I'm sure you already thought of that, try to sit on it for a bit longer.