3 ms·

that's why I have long maintained CCP is the biggest threat to all citizens currently living in relatively free societies right now. Our democratic governments

by alliao 2y ago

that's why I have long maintained CCP is the biggest threat to all citizens currently living in relatively free societies right now. Our democratic governments are only seemingly disgusted but whoever holds real power are ENTICED "what do you mean with these new tools and policies you've kept a billion people under control"

chmod775 2y ago
The CCP first and foremost keeps control by keeping their people happy, and controlling the narrative in such a way that the people are happy. Surveillance in China is a Damocle's sword at worst - hardly used in an enforcement capacity, transgressions (like using VPNs) are mostly ignored, and it's very easy to slip through the cracks. Everyone is breaking laws all the time - they're a tool only selectively used. Police will look the other way as long as you don't force their hand. Funnily enough you don't even need a surveillance state to create bullshit laws that you selectively enforce. They made a surveillance state... and don't really use it. I'm more afraid of surveillance states in a western countries, because they have a much better track record of consequently enforcing laws as written. If they make it illegal to say bad things about the party and use encryption, you can be sure enforcement will go beyond just silently deleting your critical Facebook post and killing your SSH connection. They'll throw the book at you.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- throwaway290 2y ago
  > Police will look the other way as long as you don't force their hand. They usually don't need to look the other way because people will do it secretly not talk about it openly and most people by a mile would never even use it (because it is illegal and most people don't want to do illegal stuff unless it's necessary and it is not necessary) You don't need to enforce laws strictly to create an obedient population that does not dare think, you just need to have those laws and do a few show trials
  - Gathering6678 2y ago
    Not secretly, at least in terms of "翻墙" (circumventing the GFW). It is commonly talked about in mainland chatgroups and on websites, sometimes with euphemisms (e.g. "科学上网" (surfing the web scientifically), etc.), but no one really bats an eyelid when talking about it. In any case, I find it amusing that the case of UK disallowing E2EE could come back to CCP so quickly. Maybe without the example of CCP, other governments wouldn't realize the greatness of censorship? /s Source: being a native who lives in mainland China.
    - _l219 2y ago
      And in case people think this is just propaganda, I can vouch for this as someone that lived in China for a few years as a foreigner and currently live in the UK. Everyone does it, it's normal, even police do it… I am much more concerned about going afoul of the government here in the uk than back in china
      - throwaway290 2y ago
        If you are in a tech savvy bubble everyone uses VPN. Sometimes because your job requires it (which makes it legal). Outside of it no regular person uses VPN. Guess which circle has more people. Police is a bad example because they obviously can do whatever they want that's not even a question. What are they gonna do put themselves behind bars?
    - throwaway290 2y ago
      You just literally supported my point that people talk about it secretly. They talk about VPN anonymously and/or using various terms that are not "VPN" or its Mandarin equivalent. The term you gave as "circumvent the GFW" actually literally means "climb over the wall". Guess which one is illegal. Yes double meaning words are famous in PRC just like in USSR and this basically illustrates what I mean. You need to be in the know, in the circle or bubble to even understand what is talked about > in mainland chatgroups and websites ... no one really bats an eyelid when talking about it Techies talk techie things. There are more non techies than techies. My point is from police's perspective 90% of the people they deal with don't use VPN.
- UncleEntity 2y ago
  This!!! ...is an accurate description of "prior restraint". The government (in the US at least) isn't allowed to discriminate based on the content of your speech even if it goes against "controlling the narrative in such a way that the people are happy". IIRC, the burden is on the government to prove the censorship is the result of a compelling public interest and there are no lesser solutions which can be employed.
- AlexandrB 2y ago
  > Surveillance in China is a Damocle's sword at worst > Police will look the other way as long as you don't force their hand. This is a recipe for massive corruption. Selective enforcement allows low-level bureaucrats and law enforcement officers to "decide" to enforce the law based on criteria like "has this person paid me this month". A consistently-enforced surveillance state under a democracy is "better" in the sense that its injustice is more obvious to the electorate and there's at least a chance to repeal it at the voting booth. Both are generally terrible however.
- alliao 2y ago
  the internal security measures costs more than military which says how happy the populace is? It is in CCP's interest to make sure everyone's breaking the law all the time, this gives them maximum flexibility to arrest anyone at will (天威難測) also legitimises their long standing claim that judiciary independence is bit of a dirty word. I guess at the end of the day it's down to personal preferences, some do like it hot.

by alliao 2y ago

chmod775 2y ago

The CCP first and foremost keeps control by keeping their people happy, and controlling the narrative in such a way that the people are happy. Surveillance in China is a Damocle's sword at worst - hardly used in an enforcement capacity, transgressions (like using VPNs) are mostly ignored, and it's very easy to slip through the cracks. Everyone is breaking laws all the time - they're a tool only selectively used. Police will look the other way as long as you don't force their hand. Funnily enough you don't even need a surveillance state to create bullshit laws that you selectively enforce. They made a surveillance state... and don't really use it. I'm more afraid of surveillance states in a western countries, because they have a much better track record of consequently enforcing laws as written. If they make it illegal to say bad things about the party and use encryption, you can be sure enforcement will go beyond just silently deleting your critical Facebook post and killing your SSH connection. They'll throw the book at you.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
throwaway290 2y ago
> Police will look the other way as long as you don't force their hand. They usually don't need to look the other way because people will do it secretly not talk about it openly and most people by a mile would never even use it (because it is illegal and most people don't want to do illegal stuff unless it's necessary and it is not necessary) You don't need to enforce laws strictly to create an obedient population that does not dare think, you just need to have those laws and do a few show trials
- Gathering6678 2y ago
  Not secretly, at least in terms of "翻墙" (circumventing the GFW). It is commonly talked about in mainland chatgroups and on websites, sometimes with euphemisms (e.g. "科学上网" (surfing the web scientifically), etc.), but no one really bats an eyelid when talking about it. In any case, I find it amusing that the case of UK disallowing E2EE could come back to CCP so quickly. Maybe without the example of CCP, other governments wouldn't realize the greatness of censorship? /s Source: being a native who lives in mainland China.
  - _l219 2y ago
    And in case people think this is just propaganda, I can vouch for this as someone that lived in China for a few years as a foreigner and currently live in the UK. Everyone does it, it's normal, even police do it… I am much more concerned about going afoul of the government here in the uk than back in china
    - throwaway290 2y ago
      If you are in a tech savvy bubble everyone uses VPN. Sometimes because your job requires it (which makes it legal). Outside of it no regular person uses VPN. Guess which circle has more people. Police is a bad example because they obviously can do whatever they want that's not even a question. What are they gonna do put themselves behind bars?
  - throwaway290 2y ago
    You just literally supported my point that people talk about it secretly. They talk about VPN anonymously and/or using various terms that are not "VPN" or its Mandarin equivalent. The term you gave as "circumvent the GFW" actually literally means "climb over the wall". Guess which one is illegal. Yes double meaning words are famous in PRC just like in USSR and this basically illustrates what I mean. You need to be in the know, in the circle or bubble to even understand what is talked about > in mainland chatgroups and websites ... no one really bats an eyelid when talking about it Techies talk techie things. There are more non techies than techies. My point is from police's perspective 90% of the people they deal with don't use VPN.
UncleEntity 2y ago
This!!! ...is an accurate description of "prior restraint". The government (in the US at least) isn't allowed to discriminate based on the content of your speech even if it goes against "controlling the narrative in such a way that the people are happy". IIRC, the burden is on the government to prove the censorship is the result of a compelling public interest and there are no lesser solutions which can be employed.
AlexandrB 2y ago
> Surveillance in China is a Damocle's sword at worst > Police will look the other way as long as you don't force their hand. This is a recipe for massive corruption. Selective enforcement allows low-level bureaucrats and law enforcement officers to "decide" to enforce the law based on criteria like "has this person paid me this month". A consistently-enforced surveillance state under a democracy is "better" in the sense that its injustice is more obvious to the electorate and there's at least a chance to repeal it at the voting booth. Both are generally terrible however.
alliao 2y ago
the internal security measures costs more than military which says how happy the populace is? It is in CCP's interest to make sure everyone's breaking the law all the time, this gives them maximum flexibility to arrest anyone at will (天威難測) also legitimises their long standing claim that judiciary independence is bit of a dirty word. I guess at the end of the day it's down to personal preferences, some do like it hot.