shaobo

8 ms·

1.
by shaobo 4y ago
You wrote: > Shutting down ALL internal Chinese travel from Wuhan, but letting international departures - that did happen, after all the more the merrier, let the world share our misery. ... implying China allowed the flights to leave so
2.
by shaobo 4y ago
You mean flights specifically chartered by the US and British governments to evacuate their citizens and their family from Wuhan? It is all in the articles you linked.
3.
by shaobo 4y ago
It did not. https://www.factcheck.org/2020/05/trumps-flawed-china-travel...
4.
by shaobo 4y ago
One postal service from Hong Kong is a far cry from "all air transport to Wuhan"
5.
by shaobo 4y ago
Do you have a source for this?
6.
by shaobo 5y ago
So where are these videos?
7.
by shaobo 7y ago
It is an everybody thing, why else would the phrase enter popular usage.
8.
by shaobo 7y ago
Does NY Post have a source/reference for this?
9.
by shaobo 8y ago
Like most articles on social credit, it is mistaking a bunch of separate things as a single unified system. from https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/04/03/life-inside-chinas-soci... "The public blacklist has
10.
by shaobo 8y ago
The last one almost certainly refers to "forcibly occupying reserved seats" instead of doing it accidentally. For example, this incident, https://news.cgtn.com/news/3d3d514d7a457a4e79457a6333566d54/...
11.
by shaobo 8y ago
I'd love to know why people downvoted me with no explanation.
12.
by shaobo 8y ago
The references linked in the article specifically mentions smoking on trains and planes.
13.
by shaobo 8y ago
The devil is always in the detail. The "buying too many video games" line came from the gamification aspect of a social network owned by a private enterprise and has nothing to do with the government scheme. And even they have bac
14.
by shaobo 8y ago
> You shouldn't let financial institutions using this kind of coercion at will. This is done by local courts, not the financial institutions. And if you read related article on this kind of name and shame tactic, you find that it is
15.
by shaobo 9y ago
Okay, this is getting way beyond my level of legal knowledge. > China knew this going in, and agreed to it when they signed the treaty. China signed it but they didn't agree to compulsory arbitration. They made declaration to that e
16.
by shaobo 9y ago
I am not comparing it to the UN, but how it is referred to in the media is often misleading, especially the "in the Hague" part. Quite a few articles even dropped that bit and just referred to it as an "UN court/tribunal
17.
by shaobo 9y ago
It is also worth noting that the Permanent Court of Arbitration is only in the Hague, it is not an UN agency, and not a court in the traditional sense. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_Court_of_Arbitration
18.
by shaobo 10y ago
I think the bar for real-life dystopias are considerably higher these days.
19.
by shaobo 10y ago
So they should be less transparent?
20.
by shaobo 10y ago
If they are "shockingly cheap" and can be found in a street market, then they are probably not real.
21.
by shaobo 10y ago
It is not fabricated, it just wasn't accurately reported. Every article I read described it as a government system already implemented and measuring every aspect of your life, when it was actually a scheme created by a private company
22.
by shaobo 10y ago
He is asking why are you overthinking this? People in China have put the cultural revolution behind them, it might be helpful for others to do the same when attempting to psychoanalyse present day Chinese behaviours. Your weight, your age a
23.
by shaobo 10y ago
The book is all well and good, but I would prefer to read an actual article about "allowing their bureaucrats free rein to terrorize local businesses and extract mob-style protection payments". It is easy claim that China is autoc
24.
by shaobo 10y ago
How does the Chinese Government extracts wealth from Hong Kong? I am genuinely curious.
25.
by shaobo 10y ago
The headline is rather clickbaity, it is all based on a tweet from the news agency, it is not a government edict.
26.
by shaobo 11y ago
The Verge (referencing WSJ) says firms are not required to handover encryption keys. http://www.theverge.com/2015/12/27/10670346/china-passes-law...
27.
by shaobo 11y ago
No, but there is also a wide spectrum of opinion/speech available in China between anti-state and pro-state. The point I am trying to make is that people think China is a smidgen way from North Korea, when the actual difference is nigh
28.
by shaobo 11y ago
No one is saying that there is no censorship or repression, but rather it works differently than most people think it does. Though I will concede that the paper is quite a few years out of date. The point I was trying to make is that, a swe
29.
by shaobo 11y ago
No I haven't, but if you have the data to show otherwise, then by all means write it up.
30.
by shaobo 11y ago
It doesn't work that way. For example, from http://gking.harvard.edu/publications/how-Censorship-China-A... "Contrary to previous understandings, posts with negative, even vitriolic, criticism of the state, i

More ›