7 ms·
Both China and the US can compel businesses to hand over data. There is no reason to trust any service that doesn't have strong built in privacy.
by villish 4mo ago
Both China and the US can compel businesses to hand over data. There is no reason to trust any service that doesn't have strong built in privacy.
- Vasbarlog 4mo agoIt’s not China that is threatening to annex Greenland though.
- guywithahat 4mo agoThere's nothing wrong with the US buying greenland, which has been done for territories around the world? The US has a long history of protecting individual freedoms, China does not. There's an irony that you're aware of the misgivings of the US because we have free speech protections. You're probably less aware of the misgivings of the EU because they regularly arrest citizens for speech, and no awareness of the issues with China because they'll just disappear journalists in the night.
- kachnuv_ocasek 4mo agoHow long has the history of the US protecting the individual freedoms of non-white or non-rich citizens been?
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- skippyboxedhero 4mo agoSince the late 60s there has been explicit federal legislation. I assume you meant this as a rhetorical question but there is a definite answer because the US is a transparent system. Law is passed, the courts enforce. The fact that you are unable to answer this question about China where it is often unclear why certain people are being targeted should demonstrate how big the gap is. For example, when Xi's first corruption crackdown happened, it turned out that it was being orchestrated in part by someone in their 90s who had left front-line politics twenty years ago (and much of why that happened is unclear, we are only just learning about things that happened in Chinese politics multiple decades ago so it will be a while before we know...we do know that Xi was then able to make unilateral sweeping changes to his own role shortly after that broke every convention of the last 5 decades)...it is difficult to compare this to anything that happens in any other political system. In China, you find out someone has been executed for reasons that are obviously not explicit months after it has happened. It is genuinely quite difficult to compare to anything else. 6 people meet in a room, they have almost all the power, and maybe you will read about what they might have said 4 decades later in a book...that will never be published in China.
- inigyou 4mo agoThere was legislation, sure. Were the people actually protected or did they just write a paper saying they were protected?
- kingofthehill98 4mo ago>The US has a long history of protecting individual freedoms You can't be serious. Was the individual freedom of those 120 Iranian girls protected? Was the individual freedom of Renée Good protected? Alex Pretti?
- skippyboxedhero 4mo agoThe inability to conceive of a country where these things would happen and you would have no idea that it had ever happened...and, perhaps more importantly, wouldn't care that you didn't know.
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- ascorbic 4mo agoYou're kinda missing the important bit there: buying Greenland under threat of invasion
- guywithahat 4mo agoI think you're kind of missing the important bit; there is no threat of invasion and there never has been. People just want reasons to be mad at Trump, and so they make things up
- SideburnsOfDoom 4mo ago> there is no threat of invasion of Greenland by the USA and there never has been. This is a dumb take. You're starting with "I don't take their threats seriously" and conflating it with "it didn't happen at all". But it did happen. > The Trump administration threatened military action to take control of Greenland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_crisis#Annexation_threats https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_crisis#Annexation_th...
- rib3ye 4mo agoWhen it comes to annexation, China doesn't threaten, they just invade and extinguish.
- kingofthehill98 4mo agoYeah, I remember clearly when China invaded/bombed: Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Panama, Syria...
- dragonwriter 4mo agoYou absolutely should remember the Chinese war with the first of those; if you have trouble, a good way to remind yourself is that it was not long after the US one.
- coldtea 4mo agoYeah, so getting 1 out of 10 he mentioned, even if it's their direct neighbor (where disputes happen for all countries), ain't bad! This absolutely means they're the same /s
- dragonwriter 4mo agoIf I had wanted to say “China and the US are the same”, I would have strung together a set of words that looked a lot more like “China and the US are the same” than the ones that I actually posted.
- rib3ye 4mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War
- Xunjin 4mo agoCould you give me some examples? Which wars do you have in mind?
- fc417fc802 4mo agoBecause China has never invaded or annexed a neighbor ... ?
- miroljub 4mo agoYes, but China can't arrest me if they don't like what they see in my data. USA and its vassals can.
- skippyboxedhero 4mo agoCompel? I am confused, all data in China is held in datacentres which the state has full access to, that is the terms of their operation and why some big tech US companies didn't want to operate in China. They don't need to "compel" anyone, the CCP has people at every large company supervising employees, and they already have full access to your data. I am always completely baffled by these comments that not only get basic facts wrong but appear unable to conceive of a situation where the everything is subordinate to the state. There is no negotiation, there is no due process, you give access to everything before you start or you can't operate.