5 ms·

>I don't think they're explicitly a CCP data-collection front In China you cannot not be explicitly a CCP data-collection front. China doesn't bring evidence

>I don't think they're explicitly a CCP data-collection front In China you cannot not be explicitly a CCP data-collection front. China doesn't bring evidence to a judge in order to get a subpoena for data. They just go to DJI an get it. DJI has zero legal recourse if the CCP wants access to all DJI's stored data. Doesn't matter where that data is stored. Same thing for tiktok and why legislators are killing that too. You're a Chinese company? You ultimately work for the state. No discussion. China is not the US. People need to stop fitting the way things work in the US to the way things work in China. Edit: For the whataboutists: Yes, everyone is aware that american three letter agencies have backdoor access to every computer, broken RSA and AES, and control the USA's puppet government. Thanks.

kanbara 2y ago
do you think that national security warrants and subpoenas actually stand up to evidentiary claims? it’s not like the US actually cares and does the right thing— it’s just force hidden behind “process”
sofixa 2y ago
> China doesn't bring evidence to a judge in order to get a subpoena for data Do you think that e.g. FISA courts or the CIA kidnapping random civilians based on their name/watch type have a high threshold of evidence?
andrepd 2y ago
Ahaha, as opposed to the US where... 3-letter agencies don't bring evidence to a judge, they just go to google/meta to get it.
- FactKnower69 2y ago
  Pointing out obvious bad-faith hypocrisy is actually called "whataboutism", you're doing a hecking fallacy!!
- Brananarchy 2y ago
  This is absolutely a false equivalence. Google and Meta choose to give the government all sorts of data that they're not required by law to give, because they don't see it as worthwhile to go to bat for their users. You can choose to use a vendor who will protect your privacy and demand full due process on the part of government requestors. In China there is no due process and no choice of vendors who would demand it, even if they could.
BlobberSnobber 2y ago
> China is not the US Not a very good comparison in terms of the state forcing companies to give out their customers' data... Also love how, in your opinion, anyone pointing this out must of course be a conspiracy nut.
redserk 2y ago
To start: I do not trust the CCP, but my trust in the American legal system has been waning. What's the legal recourse for a US Citizen served with a dodgy FISA-related subpoena/warrant? Or if a government agency wants to purchase tracking data that includes my phone from a data collection agency? Say the state of Texas purchases geotracking data for app users who cross state lines.
- rainsford 2y ago
  Apple famously told the FBI to go pound sand when asked to help access an iPhone in an actual terrorism case (i.e. it wasn't about going after dissidents or journalists or anything), even though such help was definitely within Apple's technical power. Now, while admitting that I am no way claiming the US is perfect, does anyone actually think something even remotely similar would ever happen between a Chinese company and the Chinese government?
  - janalsncm 2y ago
    There is a good book on the American surveillance apparatus Means of Control by Byron Tau. People are a lot more watched than they think. The Apple example is well-known because it is an exception. Much more common is not only compliance but making an entire business out of selling private data to the government. https://theintercept.com/2022/04/22/anomaly-six-phone-tracking-zignal-surveillance-cia-nsa/ https://theintercept.com/2022/04/22/anomaly-six-phone-tracki... It really doesn’t matter that China is worse. It’s not a competition. The fact that people in other places have even less privacy doesn’t make me feel better.
    - redserk 2y ago
      > It really doesn’t matter that China is worse. It’s not a competition. The fact that people in other places have even less privacy doesn’t make me feel better. This is exactly the sentiment I wanted to convey. I'd feel far more comfortable if we didn't settle for "at least we're not as bad as..." levels of rhetoric. Unsavory surveillance practices in one country shouldn't give us a justification to accept the declining status quo here.
deciplex 2y ago
> For the whataboutists: Yes, everyone is aware that american three letter agencies have backdoor access to every computer, broken RSA and AES, and control the USA's puppet government. Thanks. You're deliberately overstating the issue, to the point of absurdity, to avoid legitimate criticism. Three-letter agencies do have a high level of access to this data, and in many cases that's because the companies involved just voluntarily hand it over (no need to get the courts involved). Even when the courts do get involved, these are secret courts where the decisions are classified, and in any case from what we do know they act as a rubber stamp anyway. So, this is a matter of the US wanting access to that data in addition to, or possibly exclusive from, the CCP. Frankly, as I'm not currently under the jurisdiction of the Communist Party of China, I'd prefer they have unlimited access to that data as opposed to the US government, if I have to choose one or the other.
fouc 2y ago
I remember reading somewhere that all large companies in China are effectively state-owned, they basically always have a CCP member of the party on their board, which even the CEO is beholden to.
montag 2y ago
> In China you cannot not be explicitly a CCP data-collection front Unintelligible. Rewrite as “in China it’s very hard to avoid turning over data to the CCP.”
- snypher 2y ago
  It's a written rebuttal mirroring the original wording. This is a common writing and debate style; please don't ask people to rewrite their posts when it is fairly clear what they meant¡
rrr_oh_man 2y ago
> China doesn't bring evidence to a judge in order to get a subpoena for data. They just go to DJI a get it. DJI has zero legal recourse if the CCP wants access to all DJI's stored data. Doesn't matter where that data is stored. Is this an assumption or do you have first-hand knowledge of how this works operationally, in practice?

kanbara 2y ago

do you think that national security warrants and subpoenas actually stand up to evidentiary claims? it’s not like the US actually cares and does the right thing— it’s just force hidden behind “process”

sofixa 2y ago

> China doesn't bring evidence to a judge in order to get a subpoena for data Do you think that e.g. FISA courts or the CIA kidnapping random civilians based on their name/watch type have a high threshold of evidence?

andrepd 2y ago

Ahaha, as opposed to the US where... 3-letter agencies don't bring evidence to a judge, they just go to google/meta to get it.

FactKnower69 2y ago
Pointing out obvious bad-faith hypocrisy is actually called "whataboutism", you're doing a hecking fallacy!!
Brananarchy 2y ago
This is absolutely a false equivalence. Google and Meta choose to give the government all sorts of data that they're not required by law to give, because they don't see it as worthwhile to go to bat for their users. You can choose to use a vendor who will protect your privacy and demand full due process on the part of government requestors. In China there is no due process and no choice of vendors who would demand it, even if they could.

BlobberSnobber 2y ago

> China is not the US Not a very good comparison in terms of the state forcing companies to give out their customers' data... Also love how, in your opinion, anyone pointing this out must of course be a conspiracy nut.

redserk 2y ago

To start: I do not trust the CCP, but my trust in the American legal system has been waning. What's the legal recourse for a US Citizen served with a dodgy FISA-related subpoena/warrant? Or if a government agency wants to purchase tracking data that includes my phone from a data collection agency? Say the state of Texas purchases geotracking data for app users who cross state lines.

rainsford 2y ago
Apple famously told the FBI to go pound sand when asked to help access an iPhone in an actual terrorism case (i.e. it wasn't about going after dissidents or journalists or anything), even though such help was definitely within Apple's technical power. Now, while admitting that I am no way claiming the US is perfect, does anyone actually think something even remotely similar would ever happen between a Chinese company and the Chinese government?
- janalsncm 2y ago
  There is a good book on the American surveillance apparatus Means of Control by Byron Tau. People are a lot more watched than they think. The Apple example is well-known because it is an exception. Much more common is not only compliance but making an entire business out of selling private data to the government. https://theintercept.com/2022/04/22/anomaly-six-phone-tracking-zignal-surveillance-cia-nsa/ https://theintercept.com/2022/04/22/anomaly-six-phone-tracki... It really doesn’t matter that China is worse. It’s not a competition. The fact that people in other places have even less privacy doesn’t make me feel better.
  - redserk 2y ago
    > It really doesn’t matter that China is worse. It’s not a competition. The fact that people in other places have even less privacy doesn’t make me feel better. This is exactly the sentiment I wanted to convey. I'd feel far more comfortable if we didn't settle for "at least we're not as bad as..." levels of rhetoric. Unsavory surveillance practices in one country shouldn't give us a justification to accept the declining status quo here.

deciplex 2y ago

> For the whataboutists: Yes, everyone is aware that american three letter agencies have backdoor access to every computer, broken RSA and AES, and control the USA's puppet government. Thanks. You're deliberately overstating the issue, to the point of absurdity, to avoid legitimate criticism. Three-letter agencies do have a high level of access to this data, and in many cases that's because the companies involved just voluntarily hand it over (no need to get the courts involved). Even when the courts do get involved, these are secret courts where the decisions are classified, and in any case from what we do know they act as a rubber stamp anyway. So, this is a matter of the US wanting access to that data in addition to, or possibly exclusive from, the CCP. Frankly, as I'm not currently under the jurisdiction of the Communist Party of China, I'd prefer they have unlimited access to that data as opposed to the US government, if I have to choose one or the other.

fouc 2y ago

I remember reading somewhere that all large companies in China are effectively state-owned, they basically always have a CCP member of the party on their board, which even the CEO is beholden to.

montag 2y ago

> In China you cannot not be explicitly a CCP data-collection front Unintelligible. Rewrite as “in China it’s very hard to avoid turning over data to the CCP.”

snypher 2y ago
It's a written rebuttal mirroring the original wording. This is a common writing and debate style; please don't ask people to rewrite their posts when it is fairly clear what they meant¡

rrr_oh_man 2y ago

> China doesn't bring evidence to a judge in order to get a subpoena for data. They just go to DJI a get it. DJI has zero legal recourse if the CCP wants access to all DJI's stored data. Doesn't matter where that data is stored. Is this an assumption or do you have first-hand knowledge of how this works operationally, in practice?