6 ms·

That's probably true, but constant suspicious behavior shouldn't normalize behaving suspiciously.

baq 5y ago
If you're approaching this with a western democratic frame of mind, yes. This is not suspicious behavior in China, as the GP said - it is standard operating procedure.
- eloisius 5y ago
  I don't expect it to be suspicious or odd _in China_. What I am saying is that internationally we should not just shrug it off as "aww, it just China, they're always so sneaky and secretive even when it's nothing!" We should treat the situation as if they are indeed hiding something important every time, because otherwise, constantly acting suspiciously about everything is an effective strategy for them conceal anything important. Barring foreign scientists, arresting journalists, and destroying evidence is always suspicious, even if they always do it, and it should always make people from open and free societies curious of why they are doing it, not shrug it off because it's the norm.
  - theskypirate 5y ago
    So should we just pretend to think that it's suspicious even though it doesn't seem suspicious, or do we really need to soak our minds in the void until we actually believe that it is? How many IQ points do I need to lose before I am no longer normalizing totalitarianism?
  - lamontcg 5y ago
    It is being used as proof that they leaked it from a lab, when it is just how societies built like China behave. You can't infer anything from normal behavior. It is similar to the way that Hussein's actions in blocking access to presidential palaces was considered to be highly suspicious and therefore proof that he was hiding his weapons program. Turns out he was just trying to save face domestically by standing up against the weapons inspectors over something that he considered symbolic and immaterial in order to not look like a total pushover (a desperate need of dictators). It had nothing to do with weapons programs at all.
    - eloisius 5y ago
      Didn’t work out well for him.
      - prox 5y ago
        And the search for WMD was also politically motivated, not based on any evidence afaik.
    - bellyfullofbac 5y ago
      Yeah, holding strong to the logic that's like a mom concluding of her kindergartner "You're being evasive, this means definitely that you're hiding something" is ridiculous. If the outbreak started in Colorado, and Russia wanted access to the CDC lab there, Americans (officials and public) would also be crying and screaming...
      - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
        If Russia wanted access to a CDC lab, the Americans would be crying and screaming regardless of whether something happened there or not.
        baq 5y ago
        Exactly. Same thing in the China-not China relations.
        cloverich 5y ago
        Said hypothetical should include the disease originating around the lab, numerous conspicuous coverups and missing people, and a lack of transparent investigation. Should such a scenario happen, I think your argument becomes a bit of a strawman (i.e. that a segment of every nation's population would always cry foul in said scenario). I would expect more than just Russia would want access, and likewise that plenty of US citizens would protest as well.
        seanmcdirmid 5y ago
- tim333 5y ago
  Some of the details are unusual though especially the Wuhan Institute of Virology taking down it's previously public pathogen sequence database before the thing kicked off.
  - baja_blast 5y ago
    They took it down in mid September of 2019, a previously public database. They still refuse to share the data with anyone, which is weird since the database was public to begin with.
slg 5y ago
It is really weird how HN talks about this in comparison to similar topics. For example, this is the exact same logic that leads people to believe that encrypting data or using Tor is evidence of someone trying to hide criminal behavior. Almost everyone here would object to that type of thinking, but when it comes to China it suddenly becomes "Why would they object to transparency unless they had something to hide?".
- krisoft 5y ago
  Yes. Countries and people are two different thing and the expected and acceptable behaviours are different too. If you write an officially sounding letter to your neighbour demanding to know how they come to choose the paint to repaint their bikeshed you are a weirdo and they are in their right to ignore you. If you write the same letter to a city official about a public bikeshed you are sending a freedom of information request and they are expected to respond promptly and accurately.
  - pasquinelli 5y ago
    yeah, but what if you send the letter to an official of another country? countries and people are different things; countries are generally much more secretive than people.
  - Maursault 5y ago
    You missed GP's point, which apparently was equating personal privacy with China's national security. I didn't think twice about China's lack of transparency. It's normal and expected behavior from China, so I would never suspect it to mean they were hiding something that was actually salient to the global pandemic... they're just hiding everything, but all it amounts to is hiding whatever corruption comes with government. IOW what they're usually hiding is often well known and is nothing interesting. Suspicion of things being hidden, wild speculation on it and tenuously attaching it somehow to common strife seems to be a conservative theme. What always interests me is: 1) How many pandemics have there been? 2) How many lab leaks have there been? 3) How many lab leaks have caused outbreaks, epidemics and pandemics? 4) What is the cause of every other pandemic? The answers lead me to believe a lab leak of virulent COVID, if it occurred, and let's assume it did, is only a coincidence, and the hidden cause of this pandemic is, while somehow the most unsuspected in light of the assumed lab leak, was the same cause as every other pandemic, ever. I think the article just shows that experts are human and subject to human bias, and as such, like everyone else that similarly succumbed to bias, foolish for considering or believing in something with literally millions, tens of millions, or hundreds of millions to one odds against (lab leaks happen occasionally, there have probably been hundreds to thousands of lab leaks in 100 years, but over eons there have been millions of pandemics, and in recorded history, there have been enough of them to see a clear pattern: viruses jump species, people living and working in close proximity to animals are infected, the infection spreads).

baq 5y ago

If you're approaching this with a western democratic frame of mind, yes. This is not suspicious behavior in China, as the GP said - it is standard operating procedure.

eloisius 5y ago
I don't expect it to be suspicious or odd _in China_. What I am saying is that internationally we should not just shrug it off as "aww, it just China, they're always so sneaky and secretive even when it's nothing!" We should treat the situation as if they are indeed hiding something important every time, because otherwise, constantly acting suspiciously about everything is an effective strategy for them conceal anything important. Barring foreign scientists, arresting journalists, and destroying evidence is always suspicious, even if they always do it, and it should always make people from open and free societies curious of why they are doing it, not shrug it off because it's the norm.
- theskypirate 5y ago
  So should we just pretend to think that it's suspicious even though it doesn't seem suspicious, or do we really need to soak our minds in the void until we actually believe that it is? How many IQ points do I need to lose before I am no longer normalizing totalitarianism?
- lamontcg 5y ago
  It is being used as proof that they leaked it from a lab, when it is just how societies built like China behave. You can't infer anything from normal behavior. It is similar to the way that Hussein's actions in blocking access to presidential palaces was considered to be highly suspicious and therefore proof that he was hiding his weapons program. Turns out he was just trying to save face domestically by standing up against the weapons inspectors over something that he considered symbolic and immaterial in order to not look like a total pushover (a desperate need of dictators). It had nothing to do with weapons programs at all.
  - eloisius 5y ago
    Didn’t work out well for him.
    - prox 5y ago
      And the search for WMD was also politically motivated, not based on any evidence afaik.
  - bellyfullofbac 5y ago
    Yeah, holding strong to the logic that's like a mom concluding of her kindergartner "You're being evasive, this means definitely that you're hiding something" is ridiculous. If the outbreak started in Colorado, and Russia wanted access to the CDC lab there, Americans (officials and public) would also be crying and screaming...
    - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      If Russia wanted access to a CDC lab, the Americans would be crying and screaming regardless of whether something happened there or not.
      - baq 5y ago
        Exactly. Same thing in the China-not China relations.
      - cloverich 5y ago
        Said hypothetical should include the disease originating around the lab, numerous conspicuous coverups and missing people, and a lack of transparent investigation. Should such a scenario happen, I think your argument becomes a bit of a strawman (i.e. that a segment of every nation's population would always cry foul in said scenario). I would expect more than just Russia would want access, and likewise that plenty of US citizens would protest as well.
        seanmcdirmid 5y ago
tim333 5y ago
Some of the details are unusual though especially the Wuhan Institute of Virology taking down it's previously public pathogen sequence database before the thing kicked off.
- baja_blast 5y ago
  They took it down in mid September of 2019, a previously public database. They still refuse to share the data with anyone, which is weird since the database was public to begin with.

slg 5y ago

It is really weird how HN talks about this in comparison to similar topics. For example, this is the exact same logic that leads people to believe that encrypting data or using Tor is evidence of someone trying to hide criminal behavior. Almost everyone here would object to that type of thinking, but when it comes to China it suddenly becomes "Why would they object to transparency unless they had something to hide?".

krisoft 5y ago
Yes. Countries and people are two different thing and the expected and acceptable behaviours are different too. If you write an officially sounding letter to your neighbour demanding to know how they come to choose the paint to repaint their bikeshed you are a weirdo and they are in their right to ignore you. If you write the same letter to a city official about a public bikeshed you are sending a freedom of information request and they are expected to respond promptly and accurately.
- pasquinelli 5y ago
  yeah, but what if you send the letter to an official of another country? countries and people are different things; countries are generally much more secretive than people.
- Maursault 5y ago
  You missed GP's point, which apparently was equating personal privacy with China's national security. I didn't think twice about China's lack of transparency. It's normal and expected behavior from China, so I would never suspect it to mean they were hiding something that was actually salient to the global pandemic... they're just hiding everything, but all it amounts to is hiding whatever corruption comes with government. IOW what they're usually hiding is often well known and is nothing interesting. Suspicion of things being hidden, wild speculation on it and tenuously attaching it somehow to common strife seems to be a conservative theme. What always interests me is: 1) How many pandemics have there been? 2) How many lab leaks have there been? 3) How many lab leaks have caused outbreaks, epidemics and pandemics? 4) What is the cause of every other pandemic? The answers lead me to believe a lab leak of virulent COVID, if it occurred, and let's assume it did, is only a coincidence, and the hidden cause of this pandemic is, while somehow the most unsuspected in light of the assumed lab leak, was the same cause as every other pandemic, ever. I think the article just shows that experts are human and subject to human bias, and as such, like everyone else that similarly succumbed to bias, foolish for considering or believing in something with literally millions, tens of millions, or hundreds of millions to one odds against (lab leaks happen occasionally, there have probably been hundreds to thousands of lab leaks in 100 years, but over eons there have been millions of pandemics, and in recorded history, there have been enough of them to see a clear pattern: viruses jump species, people living and working in close proximity to animals are infected, the infection spreads).