Rednote right now

For real imagine living in a country where a faceless entity logs all of your financial activity without your consent and distills that information to summarize a person's character into a numerical score used to lock people out of securing housing or finding work, dystopian nightmare

- Facebook turned over chat messages between mother and daughter now charged over abortion.
  This woman is serving two years in prison. But yeah, tell us how the US isn't "Orwellian".
- If you have bad credit in the US, it prevents you from getting housing, or even renting an apartment.
  As people posted to you several times, china's credit score exists to keep tabs on companies, and prevent excesses and corruption. Basic regulatory things that the US used to do in a few decades ago, but is now considered "authoritarian".
  
  And prevents from getting a car, the main mode of transport in the US. Talking about being able to ride a bus in the US is comical.
  
  Talking about being able to ride a bus in the US is comical.
  Depends where you live. It's much more doable in the densest urban areas than it is somewhere rural. I have a friend who lives in Boston for example and he doesn't have a car, at all. Because Boston's mass transit is good enough for his routine needs. I can't do that here, however.
  
  If you have bad credit in the US, it prevents you from getting housing, or even renting an apartment.
  it also prevents you from getting a job nowadays and more and more employers are insisting on it.
  
  It's kinda weird honestly, capitalists should like when the worker is in debt because then the worker would be more desperate to get a job and agree on worse conditions. not to mention entire system is set up to put workers into debts and thus prevent them from organising and instead forcing them to work more for less.
  
  it's another filter
- There’s also no credit-score check in the US for job applications, so no, it doesn’t “lock people out of finding work.”
  Employers may use credit report information to verify an applicant's identity and to look for signs of excessive debt or past financial mismanagement. Source: https://www.experian.com/blogs/ask-experian/why-employers-check-your-credit-report-and-what-they-see/
  Employers discriminate very openly against applicants for a variety of reasons. Nepotism is one such way, AI filtering is an emergent way - there are plenty of other practices.
  Good luck getting a job if you were ever convicted of a crime, no matter how innocuous, or even had a police report filed against you (for certain jobs with clearances) - with no convictions, evidence, or arrest. Even being arrested with charges dropped can disqualify you effectively.
  And you better believe if you actually got arrested, every local newspaper has doxxed you - with full name, mug shot, even potentially your employment history and rough home address. All it takes is a name to get somebody's address because people search websites exist to compile all of the wonderful publicly available information.
- Read beyond that point. The West distorts the scope and nature of the credit system to ludicrous degrees, nobody claims that there’s no such thing.
  
  As I responded to you elsewhere, I did read beyond that point. Are you sure that you did?
  I read the whole article, as it went on to describe more of what has been reported as having a “social credit score”, and gave more details about how it’s administered.
  Basically, the headline is “no, it’s not at all what you’ve heard”, and then the article goes on to describe exactly what has been reported in the US. I’m not sure your point about “there’s no credit score that is administered by the Chinese government with a mechanism for blacklisting you and restricting you everywhere” is well-supported by an article that describes a credit score that is administered by the Chinese government that operates blacklists that are enforced under the slogan “whoever violates the rules somewhere shall be restricted everywhere.”
  If that’s not actually how it works, then you need to provide a credible source that proves that’s not how it works. Providing a source that reports that yes, that’s exactly how it works doesn’t serve your argument. And “well but the West is totally lying, maaan” isn’t proof; it’s an unverified claim by a random internet commenter.
  
  No, it does not describe "exactly as what the western media depicted." The west reported utterly nonsense and unfounded ideas of facial recognition and tracking, among other ludicrous ideas out of a necessity to sensationalize.
  
  I literally live in China. The scores apply to businessmen and not the average citizen. China isn't North Sentinel Island, you can literally come here.
  
  So which part of this do you think is the part that addresses the clear and salient arguments you're arguing against?
- Use your critical thinking skills, imagine a bus in a city of 10 million people during rush hour at a busy stop -- do you honestly think they're checking everyone's credit score before they get on? This shit is fake you have been duped
  And how exactly would an individual be subject to oversight in matters like "taxation, the environment, transportation, e-commerce, food safety, and foreign economic cooperation, as well as failing to carry out court judgments"? I know we have citizens united but corporations are not people lol
  
  I know we have citizens united but corporations are not people lol
  Citizens United didn't make corporations people. Corporate personhood had been a thing for a very long time, largely about whether or not forming a business means you lose legal rights operating under it (Does a business entity have freedom of speech? What does freedom of the press even mean in an 18th century context if it doesn't apply to a business [aka a newspaper]?) and whether or not regular old laws prohibiting a person from doing a thing can be applied to businesses.
  
  Ok
  
  Does this "being obtuse so as to not have to engage with an argument" shtick normally work?
  
  Why would such a feature need facial recognition? Just use the ID on the travel pass and done - cheaper, faster, and harder to fake if done properly.
  
  The bus and metro passes are literally transferrable because they're just a token not tied to any ID. Also they accept cash, and you can buy passes at a kiosk.
  I have personally even purchased a metro ticket for another person because we were going somewhere together and they left theirs at home. Within the last 2 weeks.
  You have been lied to. There are no WMDs in Iraq, MSG isn't toxic, and Napoleon wasn't short either, if you just blatantly swallow everything you see.
  
  Instead of speculating on how it could be done, show us how it actually is done.
  
  Use your critical thinking skills, imagine a bus in a city of 10 million people during rush hour at a busy stop – do you honestly think they’re checking everyone’s credit score before they get on? This shit is fake you have been duped
  Again, citation needed. "There's literally no way an internet-connected society that already requires payment to board a bus, usually via something like tap-to-pay, could ever possibly check your ID against a list of IDs before you get on the bus" is not convincing. Evidence is convincing, and I've seen none so far. I've only seen an article reporting that it actually happens.
  The quote you're saying is ridiculous is from the article provided describing how the social credit system actually works in real life. If you can give me a credible source that demonstrates this isn't happening (instead of just your own lack of imagination to conceptualize tech that is already broadly implemented worldwide) then maybe that'd be more convincing than "I can't personally imagine how that would work, so it's impossible!"
  
  A still from some random persons shitty travel blog taken 6 months ago of her getting on the bus in China. What do you think that box is for, cookies for the driver?
  https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C0Ie9HYWejc
  Feel free to watch for yourself, this is around minute 23. It took me 30 seconds to find this
  By the way exchanges like this is why many people on left instances are outright hostile to liberals, making outlandish claims while being too fucking lazy to do even the bare minimum of independent research, racism to discount the voices of the people who are actually fucking from there saying 'no this is bullshit'
  Like who are you going to believe a regurgitation of a state department talking point or a website full of normal ass Chinese people
  I know the answer bc like all liberals you are racist and intellectually lazy
  
  I live in China. You put ¥2 into the slot and you get on. You can be wearing a fully balaclava, a face mask, or nothing. No-ones running ID on you to make sure your magical score is high enough before you are allowed to get on. You can get a transit token so you can tap on if you're cashless. They're sold without ID checks, foreigners can get them without speaking a word of Mandarin.
  You have been lied to and now you're repeating those lies on the internet without even getting paid.
  
  ¥2
  u fukin wot
  that's 10p
  I can't get a bus 200m for less than a pound
  
  Again, citation needed.
  But not if it's you saying racist shit lmao
  
  Alright, then let's see the citations
- Here, drew a picture of you
  
  Imagine having the internet at your disposal, being able to immediately investigate your own assumptions, but instead you choose to just state blatantly wrong things and then get mad when you're called out for it.
  Consider wether digging a hole and then staying in it would be right for you. Consult your doctor
- If I have bad credit in the US, I don’t get locked out of riding the bus
  You might!
  I know a lot of areas are switching to digital-only bus fares, and those, of course, require a bank card or credit card...
  Guess what can lock you out of getting those, and thereby, riding on the bus?
  There’s also no credit-score check in the US for job applications, so no, it doesn’t “lock people out of finding work.”
  Do you live in the US? Lots of employers run credit checks as a part of their normal background checking. I've see people fired for bad credit scores.

Edit: the removed comment said that the social credit score existed based on this Wikimedia article.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System

In the Wikipedia article itself:

There has been a widespread misconception that China operates a nationwide and unitary social credit "score" based on individuals' behavior, leading to punishments if the score is too low. Media reports in the West have sometimes exaggerated or inaccurately described this concept.[7][8][9] In 2019, the central government voiced dissatisfaction with pilot cities experimenting with social credit scores. It issued guidelines clarifying that citizens could not be punished for having low scores, and that punishments should only be limited to legally defined crimes and civil infractions. As a result, pilot cities either discontinued their point-based systems or restricted them to voluntary participation with no major consequences for having low scores.[7][10] According to a February 2022 report by the Mercator Institute for China Studies (MERICS), a social credit "score" is a myth as there is "no score that dictates citizen's place in society".[7]

no "Winnie the Pooh" refs

"they won't let me call the chinese man yellow" good, die mad

- fuck off racist shitbag
  
  You're the one who wrongly assumed it was about race, not me.
  
  i'm not here to judge how chinese people use memes. i'm here to tell you, a racist, to eat shit
  
  You're the only one talking about race, here, making you the racist.
  
  Dutch guy getting beat up after doing blackface: "Waah! It's a important cultural practice! You don't understand, it has nothing to do with race, Dutch people just have folklore stories about dark skinned fantasy creatures coming and stealing our stuff! You're the ones making it about race!"
  
  Buddy you're the one comparing my personal friend Xi Jinping to a yellow bear, how do you not see how close to blackface that is
  
  You're fucking smearing a chinese person as yellow you shitbag
  
  You’re deeply unserious if you’re actually bringing up Jon Stewart and John Oliver.
  Since you’re such a big fan, maybe you can tell me when Stewart is gonna apologize for that horrible transphobic joke he did about 20 years ago?
  
  did you just step off a tardis from 2015
  
  talking about race doesn't make someone a racist. comparing chinese people to yellow-skinned cartoon animals does.
  
  New tagline dropped @CARCOSA@hexbear.net
  
  go back to reddit you deplorable shitbag
  
  This tactic didn't work in kindergarten either. Try to move on and grow up
  
  wasnt the whole thing literally started by chinese people? were all those weibo users cia assets or people with internalized racism?
  
  Black people started using the n word among themselves casually, doesn't mean other people can just copy it and shield themselves from accusations of racism by saying Black people were doing it first.
  
  so comparing xi to pooh is the same as calling a black person the n word? i wonder if chinese or asian people hold the same opinion
  
  Now you're just being obtuse. It's really sad you think what you're doing isn't obvious. For the onlookers: This is what happens when you don't get mental and social stimulus.
  
  Yeah I should hope what I'm doing is obvious, I'm being honest and upfront about it. You should try it some time.
  Hey please point out the propaganda I've been hit by. Educate me please, I love to be wrong. Cite your sources.
  
  This is your brain on microplastics
  
  And are you Chinese?
  I'm happy you've got a Chinese friend that tells you it's okay to be racist.
  The fact that you're unwilling to acknowledge the fact that this redditor shibboleth got popular amongst a bunch of white people has nothing to do with them finding yet another socially acceptable way to be racist is telling a lot we already knew about you.
  If a reactionary org of black people (I dunno of one but I'm sure there's some church or something) had satirically depicted Obama as curious George, do you think you could get away with calling him a monkey without being (rightfully) called a racist?

It really is astounding how much every sinophobes source is inevitably just Wikipedia.

Which in turn its Adrian Zenz 😂
- Umm no it isn't sweaty, it clearly says the source is [organisation founded by Adrian zenz] and [organisation that funds Adrian zenz]
More and more I see them just sending either a duckduckgo search, or the first few links from that search, which is of course always from anglo-supremacist news sources.
It's too bad the people of China aren't allowed to edit Wikipedia, and correct the facts, because of their oppressive state.
- 🤣 https://www.vice.com/en/article/the-internet-is-flooded-with-wikipedia-edits-made-by-government-and-big-oil/
- They literally dont care since they have a dozen better alrernatives 😂
  
  Are they better, though?
  I mean, last I checked, Wikipedia is far more accurate than most encyclopedias professionally assembled. And, to add to it: Wikipedia is certainly well sourced, and admits its biases quite openly, and in fact are working to correct those biases.
  So, what Chinese-based wikipedia alternatives are out there? And I mean, communally owned, maintained, and edited encyclopedia, which, quite frankly, is one of the best examples of a communist endeavors one can find on the internet at this time...
  
  I mean, last I checked
  Lol, what do you mean "checked"? You're just assuming its accurate based on your pre-existing biases.
  
  I'm assuming it's still as accurate as the data previously showed, and because I'm an active editor there, who works quite hard to ensure what I edit is reliably sourced.
  
  Oh, so you didn't check.
  
  If you have evidence of the contrary, I'd be happy to see it.

To be clear, it is overwhelmingly Westerners that wish to depict a Chinese man as a yellow bear. You can talk about Pooh, just not in the way westerners tend to want to.

As for the Social Credit system, the version reported in western media is false and exaggerated. There is a credit system, but it's largely for businesses and other social entities, not some Orwellian big brother system.

To be clear, it is overwhelmingly Westerners that wish to depict a Chinese man as a yellow bear.
Really? Because all sources that I can find trace the origin to Xi’s visit to the Philippines back in 2017.
http://hongkongfp.com/2018/11/20/filipinos-flood-social-media-winnie-pooh-memes-xi-jinping-visits-manila/
https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2018/11/21/2003704655
https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/11/21/1870392/winning-pooh-images-flood-social-media-xi-jinping-arrives
- It originated as a group picture of Obama as Tigger with Xi as Pooh in 2013, not 2017. Your own sources dispute what you're saying. What has come from that isn't a continuation of that trend of group pictures, but a singular insistence of depicting a Chinese man as a yellow bear.
  
  The blocking of Winnie the Pooh might seem like a bizarre move by the Chinese authorities but it is part of a struggle to restrict clever bloggers from getting around their country's censorship.
  First paragraph from your source. China blocks it to prevent bloggers in China from making the comparison (kinda hard for them to block it on Facebook as China does not have control there). That's also where this meme started.
  I'm also fairly certain that Pooh having yellow fur is mostly just coincidental (it'd be a bit surprising if Chinese citizens created a racist meme against another Chinese man). The offensiveness of the meme is much more related to Pooh being quite dim and just general fatshaming, not racism. That's not to say you can't use the meme in a racist way, just that the origins seemingly aren't racist.
  
  In my understanding the racist part of the original meme is the Obama been Tigger(one letter away from the N word)
  
  Really?! Unsurprising, but that makes the entire thing even worse.
  
  Hmm, could be. Although the meme did take off way more with Xi than it ever did with Obama. And other comparisons were made with Eeyore and Piglet, which iirc were mostly due to facial expressions and choice of clothing (it was a shorter lady wearing pink I believe).
  But I hadn't thought of that connection yet. I figured it was mostly physical resemblance (posture and size).
  
  I'm aware that it's China that takes down the racist caricatures. The meme started more innocently, with Pooh being Xi and Tigger being Obama. This turned into western users overwhelmingly sticking with Xi as Pooh. The origins and what stuck are different entirely in intent and character.
  
  But as far as I know China isn't taking down Obama-Tigger comparisons. So Chinese netizens are also sticking with the Xi-Pooh comparison (otherwise China wouldn't bother taking it down anymore), which doesn't seem to match with what you're describing as likely intent, nor with who is making the comparisons.
  You seem pretty convinced it's mostly racist westerners using the meme, but do you have anything other than a gut feeling to back this up? Because the actions of the Chinese government seem to suggest it's mostly a domestic problem to them. And for those Chinese users it seems to have taken off as a way to avoid the censors (which is now ineffective, and has morphed into a point of principle).
  
  I missed that. Thanks. So does that meme from the west outweigh Xi’s entire Philippino welcoming and barrage of memes, prompting the banning of the word Pooh in Chinese media, justify your claim that it’s overwhelmingly Westerners?
  
  "Pooh" is not banned in China. Taking down racist attacks against Xi happend prior to the visit to the Phillipines, read your own articles. Some users used it in the Phillipines to protest Xi because the racist caricatures were taken down, which was a western thing.
  
  You evaded the question with semantics. Is one meme ‘overwhelmingly’ more than a nation of Philippinos?
  
  I didn't evade anything, you've been fundamentally wrong about reality several times. Secondly, it wasn't "the nation of the Philippines," it was some users, and the fact that the yellow bear caricature is overwhelmingly western does not mean non-western users don't exist.
  You're going to massive lengths to defend depicting a chinese man as a yellow bear.
  
  Pooh having yellow fur is entirely irrelevant to any usage I've seen. I don't think anyone is using it in a racist manner and if you examing its usage I think you'll agree that it wouldn't make sense for that to be the primary motivator; it's posted because it's censored, not for any racial motivation.
  
  Why do you think it was censored?
  
  We can test whether it is, go on rednote right now and post about winnie the pooh and get back to me
  
  Again, you change the disagreement when you’re being disproven. You can’t support the claim that it’s ‘overwhelmingly’ Westerners, which is the point I challenged.
  Go ahead a re-read this thread rather than wasting both of our time changing your point to continue a needless debate.
  
  What did you "disprove?" You didn't discredit anything, you just said non-western users of the Pooh caricature exist, not that they make up a majority of the users. This is intense debatelording to defend the use of racist caricatures.
Did you read your own link, or just grab the headline from a google search and call it "good enough?"
It’s true that, building on earlier initiatives, China’s State Council published a road map in 2014 to establish a far-reaching “social credit” system by 2020. The concept of social credit (shehui xinyong) is not defined in the increasing array of national documents governing the system, but its essence is compliance with legally prescribed social and economic obligations and performing contractual commitments. Composed of a patchwork of diverse information collection and publicity systems established by various state authorities at different levels of government, the system’s main goal is to improve governance and market order in a country still beset by rampant fraud and counterfeiting.
Under the system, government agencies compile and share across departments, regions, and sectors, and with the public, data on compliance with specified industry or sectoral laws, regulations, and agreements by individuals, companies, social organizations, government departments, and the judiciary. Serious offenders may be placed on blacklists published on an integrated national platform called Credit China and subjected to a range of government-imposed inconveniences and exclusions. These are often enforced by multiple agencies pursuant to joint punishment agreements covering such sectors as taxation, the environment, transportation, e-commerce, food safety, and foreign economic cooperation, as well as failing to carry out court judgments.
These punishments are intended to incentivize legal and regulatory compliance under the often-repeated slogan of “whoever violates the rules somewhere shall be restricted everywhere.” Conversely, “red lists” of the trustworthy are also published and accessed nationally through Credit China.
- Yes, I have. Have you read beyond that point? The West distorts the scope and nature of the credit system to ludicrous degrees, nobody claims that there's no such thing.
  
  It's besides the point how it is talked about. The Second screenshot literally says "Social credit. We don't have this at all" and your link very much proves that they do. Therefore propaganda in my eyes.
  
  They very much have a credit score that is not anywhere comparable to the Orwellian depiction in western media, and furthermore the credit system is largely for businesses, not individuals. The western depiction simply does not exist.
  
  The western depiction simply does not exist.
  I can and will not argue this point since I lack the proper knowledge on the subject.
  We all agree on the fact that a system exists.
  From the post:
  
  "Social credit. We don’t have this at all" is a lie. Again, I am not saying anything about how to system works or how it is preceived. I am saying that it exists and the post claimed it does not, nothing else.
  That makes it propaganda to me.
  TL;DR:
  The post claims that something that exists does not. This is a fact.
  I believe this to be propaganda in some form. This is an opinion.
  
  It's overwhelmingly clear that you need to do more legwork to prove that that user genuinely thinks there is no credit score, and is not directly responding to the Orwellian version. This is clearly taking a dogmatic reading of one sentence to come up with the absurd claim that Chinese citizens believe that publicly stated policy doesn't actually exist.
  
  It is overwhelmingly clear that you are not arguing in good faith. You are trying to argue points I explicitly said I am not arguing or discussing. But I will explain again. I will also use the word image instead of post to make it more clear what I mean, just in case that was confusing you.
  Let us break this down.
  It’s overwhelmingly clear that you need to do more legwork to prove that that user genuinely thinks there is no credit score
  I have never tried to prove this. I said that the image claims that there is no system for social credit score. I do not equate the image to users in general. I even suspect that this image could be fake.
  and is not directly responding to the Orwellian version.
  Was I not clear enough? I am not discussing anything about any version of the system in question, only it's existance. Image says it does not exist, we both agree that it does. Again, I am not saying anything about how it works or how it is perceived.
  This is clearly taking a dogmatic reading of one sentence to come up with the absurd claim that Chinese citizens believe that publicly stated policy doesn’t actually exist.
  You are right, it would be an absurd claim to make, one that I am not trying to make. I am trying to point out that the image claims something to be true. We both agree that this is not true, or are you going to say at the system does not exist now?
  I also said that I believe this some form of propaganda, but that does not have mean that I endorse or refute any claim regarding the west part of the world's view on this matter.
  Please discuess my arguments. Please refrain from "attacking" points I explicitly said I was not making.
  
  I read the whole article, as it went on to describe more of what has been reported as having a "social credit score", and gave more details about how it's administered.
  Basically, the headline is "no, it's not at all what you've heard", and then the article goes on to describe exactly what has been reported in the US. I'm not sure your point about "there's no credit score that is administered by the Chinese government with a mechanism for blacklisting you and restricting you everywhere" is well-supported by an article that describes a credit score that is administered by the Chinese government that operates blacklists that are enforced under the slogan "whoever violates the rules somewhere shall be restricted everywhere."
  If that's not actually how it works, then you need to provide a credible source that proves that's not how it works. Providing a source that reports that yes, that's exactly how it works doesn't serve your argument. And "well but the West is totally lying, maaan" isn't proof; it's an unverified claim by a random internet commenter.
  
  No, it does not describe "exactly as what the western media depicted." The west reported utterly nonsense and unfounded ideas of facial recognition and tracking, among other ludicrous ideas out of a necessity to sensationalize.
  
  So why do you do what you're trying to do? For what purpose?
- bro is a fed or just an average american who can't read
- This "being obtuse and belligerent" thing that all you dumbasses do is honestly sad. What's sadder is that it's not only encouraged and rewarded in your echo chambers.
  The western forum is a sad state of affairs really. Just chock full of the most obvious and base level rhetorical parlor tricks. Wish you worms at least had to do basic work, but you do a debate club when you're 8 and you never move on. To quote the president: SAD

When they reference Xi negatively they use Palpatine or some literary villain as a comparison. Using a yellow bear beloved by most of the world seems counter productive. Imagine if people compared Hitler to Charlie Chaplain due to likeness and not, say, Satan.

I mean, he did actually portray him...

I have some sources on the child and slave labor, if that helps.

https://worldwithoutgenocide.org/genocides-and-conflicts/genocide-of-the-uyghurs-in-western-china/china-tibet-and-the-uyghurs

https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/02/01/china-carmakers-implicated-uyghur-forced-labor

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/extra/nz0g306v8c/china-tainted-cotton

This last one is ‘Western propaganda’ but is very helpful in identifying the types of products to avoid. It’s near impossible in the US, unless you make your own textiles/clothes or only buy second-hand.

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/reports/child-labor/list-of-goods-print

Your first link is a few paragraphs with no sources whatsoever.
The second one sources Human Rights Watch, who got bodied even on reddit the last time they tried to spread this line. They pretty much source only from Zenz (a far-right anti-semitic christian evangelical who thinks birth conrtrol is genocide).
The third link has Zenz again as its main source.
Its so exhausting to have to debunk the same recycled sources over and over, so here's a megathread:
https://dessalines.github.io/essays/socialism_faq.html#whats-going-on-with-the-uyghurs
- I appreciate a someone making the effort to debunk but your megathread is absolute garbage, I checked a couple links, got redirected toward twitter and quora threads, so ty but don't spread misinformation.
  
  I need to check a lot of those links and archive them, because predictably a lot of the ones posted to US run websites like twitter get removed for going against the US-zenz narrative.
  Also does the fact that these ppl use twitter or quora automatically mean they're misinforming people?
  
  Your sources have to come from an US State Dept approved news media like the New York Times.
  
  It certainly doesn't signal credibility
- So all of the nations with a free and open internet are pushing propaganda, and we should just take the firewalled nation of oppressively regulated speech at their word?
  
  No nation should allow the US surveillance arms like Facebook, twitter, instagram, youtube and reddit to operate within their borders. These are US controlled entities that serve to push pro-US foreign policy, and hoover up all global communications.
  For example, the most popular social media platform in India, is facebook. The US controls the main communication platform of a country with a population much larger than its own.
  Countries should realize what a dangerous threat it is to have US companies control your social media.
  
  It's funny that we're arguing this on a platform that's legal in the US, and banned in China. Is lemmy.ml a US surveillance op too? Are you? Am I?
  
  There is a difference between a corporation manipulating their own service and a government controlling the entire internet for the nation.
  No one is forcing you to use US corporate social media. Everyone needs internet access.
  
  There is a difference between a corporation manipulating their own service and a government controlling the entire internet for the nation.
  There really isn't a fundamental difference here. US capitalists run the country, control its media, and stand above it's political system. It's military/defense apparatus, and police function as their hired goons.
  
  US corporations are the US government. They outright own it. US media is state media with extra steps.
  
  You don’t need to use social media to access the internet.
  How many times must I write the difference between corporate controlled platforms and governmentally controlled internet?
  
  How many times must I write the difference between corporate controlled platforms and governmentally controlled internet?
  Oh, the burden you must bear dealing with us know nothings.
  The same corporations that own the media own the government. There is no difference between the two in the United States. This "democracy" is a sham. This is an oligarchy. How many times do you need to be told this before you get it?
  
  You honestly don’t understand the difference between being limited on car choices and being forced to use specific streets?
  Absurd. Good day.
  
  dude, the CIA controls everything. Probably since at least the 60's. Use your brain. Why do you think the most far right and "far left" media agree on the SAME THINGS when it comes to US foreign policy? US media is JUST as free as Chinese media, which is not at all. Read about the twitter leaks. Feds just emailed them to take shit down and they did it.
  
  Yeah? Do a quick search on how to overthrow the government. Can’t do that in China.
  
  They already overthrew their government and embraced socialism. You act like they want to overthrow their current government. They live decent lives. Better than ours. Our media lies to you about them. They are largely happy. I know it's impossible to imagine that, what with living in this nightmare, but it's possible when your government treats you as more than consumables to be exploited for profits.
  
  I have been protesting the Sinicization of Tibet since the 1980s. You’re not convincing me that the actions they’ve taken since the 1950s is any different that Israel’s intended eradication of the Palestinians.
  I’m also an educated consumer. Every respected nation that has investigated the incarceration, monitoring, beating, forced sterilization, and forced labor of the Uyghurs has concluded to be true.
  You’re telling me I should believe the offending nation and their allies over their critics, while simultaneously telling me the opposite about the West. How do you not see the hypocrisy?
  
  The Chinese people overwhelmingly approve of their government, so they have no reason to overthrow it.
  What kind of democracy does China have, and how is it different from the west?
  In contrast to low US political approval ratings, 96% of Chinese are satisfied with the national government (Edelmans 2016). World Values Surveys says that 83% think the country is run for their benefit rather than for the benefit of special groups. A Harvard research center study of long-term public opinion survey finds that > 95% of Chinese citizens approved their government.
  Meanwhile the US congress government have gotten <20% approval ratings for years. You should probably take some lessons from the PRC on how they overthrew an oppressive government and internal reactionaries, because they have more experience at it than most countries.
  
  I wouldn't trust statistics from relating to political issues that could get one punished in a country, people won't want to voice their true opinion in fear of punishment
  
  Literally a study from harvard, because we know you western supremacists consider anything from a non-western source to be inferior.
  
  Oh, I’m in no way defending the US or suggesting that it’s right and China’s wrong, but that was an example. The point is the limited ability to access information, not the need to obtain information specifically to overthrow the government.
  I’m saying they’re not free to use the internet like other nations, and that it’s an oppressive and authoritarian way to gatekeep information. The US absolutely manipulates media, but at least you maintain access to the counterpoint. Neither is right, but this comment section is so quick to deflect criticism of China back to the West that they truly don’t see how both nations could be two different flavors of suck.
  
  No nation has "free and open internet" in reality. Some are just more open about their biases while others try to obfuscate how they censor.
  
  Do you know the difference between the internet and the World Wide Web?
  Accessing the dark web is illegal in China, for example. They reduced access to the internet to government regulated websites, who must apply and be approved by the Chinese government to be accessible within the Great Firewall.
  https://www.goclickchina.com/insights/the-complete-guide-to-the-great-firewall-of-china-gfoc/
  
  Sure, and in the US companies like Google heavily distort search algorithms to make it so that the vast majority of people see only what's already approved.
  
  You're still confusing the internet and the web.
  
  So you don’t like that your point was disproven and are now comparing corporate manipulation of their own services to governmental control of the entire internet?
  Get real.
  
  What did you "disprove?" It's absolutelty comparable to acknowledge that no matter where you are, the internet is deiberately censored and distorted to curate a narrative, regardless of if its corporate owned or government owned.
  
  Are you serious? Read the thread again.
  Just because you either refuse to accept, or fail to comprehend the difference between a corporation manipulating an elective platform and a government maintaining complete control over anything transmitted over the internet, does not mean you are correct.
  It means you’re stubborn. Lol
  
  Does google own all yanks?
  
  dunno what your talking about ive never been blocked by government mandate only corporate mandates, and I can just vpn around those.
  
  Chinese users use VPNs all the time. Additionally, western countries deliberately distort search results so the most approved sources are front and center.
  
  I've been to China. VPN access requires jumping through insane hoops and disguising your traffic as different traffic. Tor is blocked. Most commercial VPNs are IP blocked. HTTPS proxy or HTTP proxy over SSH tunnel gets blocked very quickly due to traffic analysis.
  
  You're also not, presumably, a Chinese citizen, who know better how their own internet works. Why would you immediately jump to doing what you know?
  
  uh obviously? do you not understand the distinction between corporate and government mandates? I can explain it if you need me to because its kind of critical to this whole conversation. and if you do understand the difference, then wtf is your point.
  
  My point is that there is no such thing as a truly "free" internet, whether it be by corporations or governments. You might as well be defending unicorns.
  
  lol, there absolutely is. you just dont partake in it. pray tell me what precisely am I prevented from doing on the internet in my US hellscape, that isnt illegal in general internet not withstanding, which you think should be allowed.
  
  The US government literally just effectively banned a social network through government mandate.
  
  true! of course your hand waving why it was banned and the options they were given. tiktok could have divested from chinese control in the US region they chose not to. in no way has the US government censored information from individuals as a result of that bill. they censured the business operating procedures. two very different and distinct issues when it comes to access to content.
  In no way have americans been prevented from accessing the information within tiktok. compare and contrast that with say trying to find tiananmen square information in china.
  in fact i'll help everyone out, here is the ruling
  
  US users make up about 17% of TikToc's global user base. Selling their addictive algorithm to keep a small number of users was never going to happen.
  And what hand waving? It was banned because the US government could not control the flow of information to its own people like it can with all the other US corporate/state owned media. The data collection nonsense is just that. If they cared they could have regulated data collection across the board. Foreign countries abide by host countries laws all the time, see GDPR and similar. But that would have cut into the profits of other corporate/state controlled media outlets like Meta and Google.
  
  I didnt say they should/would sell it, just that they had options. The data collection is actually important, thats the hand waving your doing by dismissing it. it is literally a national security problem. you can extrapolate state secrets from mobile location data.
  If they cared they could have regulated data collection across the board.
  they did. they regulated limits on data collection for foreign adversaries. but again that'd require you read and comprehend the bill.
  in no way have they limited speech or prevented people from speaking. the fact the oligarchs control the media is absolutely a problem, but tiktok ban wasnt about information dissemination, it was about information exfiltration.
  so again what information has the US government banned americans from accessing? Im honestly curious, because I'd love to know what information i can't access.
  
  lol "free and open internet" have you not been reading the news the last two decades, or especially the last year? USA has its own set of "great firewalls", the latest one built against tiktok
wow you have a LOT to learn. I recommend you start at the grayzone on youtube.
- Are you aware the channel you’re recommending is blacklisted China?
  Way to prove my point. Lol

Wikipedia

Can you site a source more credible than a crowd sourced encyclopedia run by Americans

The invisible white supremacy at the center of liberalism: "You can't believe what those people say about their country; they're inherently untrustworthy. Only the word of white people is credible."
*feds. and the criteria for a credible source for them as they need to be western-aligned media. it's a complete joke.
- Can you provide evidence for that claim?