I am also curious here. I have used and advocated strongly for Keybase with a couple of local government clients to send sensitive files back and forth (not sensitive in the sense of national security, but more to preserve privacy and store encrypted at rest).
But I want to get ahead of the concern that Keybase is now owned by a Chinese company, which instantly compromises it.
PGP is dead on arrival, since it's an overcomplicated mess.
Keybase felt like WireGuard for its use case, just dead simple and also secure.
Update: I just want to clarify that I am happy for the Keybase team. This is clearly an Aquihire meant to bolster Zoom's security talent. And as a Zoom user, I'm generally happy about this development. But there will definitely be a concern about them being acquired by a Chinese company.
Update #2: I thought about FooBarWidget and others' comments, and I'm going to alter my wording. Zoom isn't a Chinese company, but their development team has been entirely based in China all this time and there have been concerns about that (which are entirely legitimate for certain groups like governments, in my opinion), especially given their communications aren't e2e encrypted.
Yeah, Zoom is a US based company. Yes, they have a development team in China. It is valid to be concerned about the Chinese government exercising control of some sort over the local development team to put in a backdoor, just as our government seems to want to do to US developed products. No politicians really seem to like encryption very much. This is an overall geopolitical risk not unique to Zoom. But Zoom is not a Chinese company, it falls under US jurisdiction. And sovereign security risks are not unique to Chinese companies. Just saying that Zoom needs to be treated with caution because it is a "Chinese company" is lazy and inaccurate, and incorrectly characterizes both Zoom and where that risk originates.
Yes, and I've clarified and fixed my originally badly described wording. I'll let Zoom describe this themselves.
From Zoom's S-1 [1]:
"In addition, we have a high concentration of research and development personnel in China, which could expose us to market scrutiny regarding the integrity of our solution or data security features. Any security compromise in our industry, whether actual or perceived, could harm our reputation, erode confidence in the effectiveness of our security measures, negatively affect our ability to attract new customers and hosts, cause existing customers to elect not to renew their subscriptions or subject us to third-party lawsuits, regulatory fines or other action or liability, which could harm our business."
Thanks for clarifying that, and yes, Zoom's s-1 writers did a good job of laying it out. The risks are real, and presenting them in an incorrect way makes it easy for people to dismiss the risks when they shouldn't. If the times comes because they're a Chinese company, and you check and see that they're a delaware c corp founded by a US citizen headquartered in the US, that would lead you to discount that risk. Clarifying that the risk comes from the development team being in a country where the government is in a contentious trade relationship with the US with an authoritarian regime (especially if the dev team isn't in one of the special economic zones) helps highlight what the risk is and confirm that it is a real threat.
> It is valid to be concerned about the Chinese government exercising control of some sort over the local development team to put in a backdoor, just as our government seems to want to do to US developed products.
> It requires network operators to store select data within China and allows Chinese authorities to conduct spot-checks on a company's network operations.
More has been reported about the implications of the law:
> China’s National Intelligence Law from 2017 requires organizations and citizens to “support, assist and cooperate with the state intelligence work.”
As others have pointed out, without rhetoric, over 700 Chinese nationals work for a couple of companies Zoom owns. Legal entities based in China. So, it's a China company and a US company. My wife works for an Indian/US company. It happens, and it's a thing.
The "rhetoric" of public opinion isn't always backed by logic, but it usually is backed by some good reason to be upset or irritated by the thing they (us in mass) are judging.
In this case, it's pretty clear that the Chinese government is acting divisively and is doing that either to protect itself (the leaders/their control) or the people (which is then implied they can't care for themselves or know better).
Either way, the route China (the govt.) has taken with business, politics, history, culture or whatever, is viewed less than desirable by Western culture. If you don't like the judgement, you can bitch about it or forget about it.
Not my horse, not my wagon. We've got bigger, oranger problems here.
So how do you call a company whose operations are more than 90% in China, employing Chinese engineers, under the supervision of the CCP? You may be technically right, on paper it's a "US company", but come on...
Their development team is entirely based out of China.
Please, spare me the rubbish about anti-China rhetoric. This has nothing to do with the Chinese people or culture. I clarified that this is for local _government_ clients. It absolutely matters, whether you get offended or not. I also mentioned that my company is a Zoom customer and this move generally has me happy.
We had the same conversation about Russian owned antivirus companies months ago as well. I understand there is legitimate concern about anti-Asian rhetoric. I just wanted to clarify that it's not where I'm coming from. As someone who introduced Keybase to these clients, these questions are going to come to me. And I want to have an answer for my government clients for this legitimate concern.
If you want to clarify that that's not where you're coming from, aggressive swipes like "please spare me the rubbish" have to go. It's against the HN guidelines to post like that, so please edit it out in the future.
This “development team entirely based out of China” bullshit is so easily debunked it’s not even funny. A simple glance at the list of open positions could tell you it’s false. https://zoom.wd5.myworkdayjobs.com/Zoom
If someone first makes a false accusation, then post a “correction” only to double down on a lesser yet still false accusation, I’d say it’s reason enough to conclude that they’re arguing in bad faith and attempting to slander.
You don’t need to spread false information to make a possibly valid point. People also increasingly use this sort of “yeah, they play fast and loose with facts but they have a point so cheers” to defend garbage journalism and I’m not a fan at all.
> If someone first makes a false accusation, then post a “correction” only to double down on a lesser yet still false accusation, I’d say it’s reason enough to conclude that they’re arguing in bad faith and attempting to slander.
You aren't listening to what he's saying: "If you have reason to be concerned about the CCP undermining your communications infrastructure, it's a distinction without a difference.
The reason they brought it up remains valid with the correction."
For me I just stop responding to anyone focusing on minor details and missing the point
Anything related to China CCP has large enough security concern chance. This is due to political motive to have control of information flow on everything they can.
Any team in China can be enforced to provide one or more means to obtain more data or can't operate smoothly. (See Google)
This is not "anti-China", more like "anti anti-privacy" (what's the opposite of privacy?). Same goes for any US company that does anti-privacy things like Google.
We're not talking legalese, we're talking about privacy. It's quite easy to defame an argument by nitpicking, but the holistic view that anything developed or with tightly or loosely coupled links to China by default. Explicitly should be called out as being untrusted.
If you're getting hung up about the difference of me saying "entirely" and "largely" – yeah ok you're right. Mathematically, for the word "entirely" to be true, it would have to be every single breathing soul at zoom that ever touches any tech.
I actually did mis-read from an older article that all their development is done in China (the language is that their R&D and tech teams are concentrated in China). Hence I said entirely. But yes let's go with largely. This is an argument about who has jurisdiction to force the altering of parts of their tech stack.
Entirely vs Largely: Does that do _anything_ to alter my concerns? Nope.
> I am very put off by this anti-China rhetoric. Everything that even has a remote connection to China is now under suspicion. This is madness.
Personally, I don't want companies even having development groups in China simply because I don't want China deriving any benefit from the outside world given their behavior over many things (Great Firewall, Hong Kong, Uyghurs, general human rights, covering up Covid-19 to start, etc.).
We are well past the point that "giving to China" will normalize them. Evidence shows that attitude has failed. It's time to treat them like the persona non grata that they deserve to be.
C'mon: Hong Kong, persecution of Uighurs and Falun Gong and political prisoners and artists and journalists and anyone who talks about Taiwan or the Tienanmen Square Massacre, IP theft, cyber attacks, political aggression in the South China Sea ("Nine-Dash Line"), not to mention trying to expend their censorship apparatus internationally!
C'mon: Hong Kong, persecution of Uighurs and Falun Gong and political prisoners and artists and journalists and anyone who talks about Taiwan or the Tienanmen Square Massacre, IP theft, cyber attacks, political aggression in the South China Sea ("Nine-Dash Line"), not to mention trying to expend their censorship apparatus internationally!
This isn't just about one or two people who are criminals. The rioting, the violence, the hate for mainlanders (hate for PEOPLE, not just CCP) has completely taken over the movement. Heck, I don't even dare going to Hong Kong anymore -- as someone with a mainland background, I fear for my life.
Furthermore, 'Liking China but opposing CCP' is, in actuality, a statement that doesn't make much sense once you understand how the CCP - Chinese people relationship actually works: https://twitter.com/Bkerrychina/status/1253635970236375040
The CCP enjoys a pretty high level of support in China. Real support. Even many people who use VPN to use Twitter say they support the CCP. This support has grown tremendously in the past decade, in no small part thanks to all the demonization bullshit that western media tries to pull on China. Many Chinese read western media, think 'wtf is this overblown nonsense?', and end up supporting CCP more, even if they were previously neutral or slightly anti.
My point: by listing all those terms, you are painting a one-dimensional, stereotypical, overblown and distorted view of China. If you really want to help Chinese people, you gotta first understand where they come from. This begins with gaining an accurate image of what China is, not the media stereotype.
> You list a bunch of terms as if in a 'gotcha' manner, but pretty much all of those things have a different side to the story.
I'll start with one thing, because addressing them all takes too long.
What is the "different side to the story" of involuntary organ harvesting of political and religious prisoners?
> You think the Hong Kong rioters are fighting for freedom?
Anyway, I don't get my news from Twitter. I also don't get my news from mainstream Western new media because they are biased (I agree with you about that.)
> Furthermore, 'Liking China but opposing CCP' is, in actuality, a statement that doesn't make much sense once you understand how the CCP - Chinese people relationship actually works: https://twitter.com/Bkerrychina/status/1253635970236375040
I'll read that article, FWIW. Cheers.
But I can tell you what I mean when I say that. Chinese culture is a part of my culture. I grew up in San Francisco. There has always been a Chinese cultural influence in my life. The first Chinese New Years Parade was held here in 1851 (predating the communist party by ~70-80 years, eh?)
So China as a people and a culture is much much older and larger than the communists. That is the China that lives in my affections. I want to add that Lao Tzu's "Tao Te Ching" is the greatest book of wisdom in the world (in my opinion.)
CCP != China
> The CCP enjoys a pretty high level of support in China. Real support. Even many people who use VPN to use Twitter say they support the CCP. This support has grown tremendously in the past decade, in no small part thanks to all the demonization bullshit that western media tries to pull on China. Many Chinese read western media, think 'wtf is this overblown nonsense?', and end up supporting CCP more, even if they were previously neutral or slightly anti.
You cannot possibly know that with any certainty in a regime that punishes criticism!
You just can't.
People lie when you've got a big stick in your hand to beat them with if you don't like what you hear, eh?
> My point: by listing all those terms, you are painting a one-dimensional, stereotypical, overblown and distorted view of China.
"...of the CCP" you mean. I don't blame Chinese people for the crimes of the CCP.
> If you really want to help Chinese people, you gotta first understand where they come from.
A billion and a half people don't need any help from me.
> This begins with gaining an accurate image of what China is, not the media stereotype.
I don't know what to tell you. Like I said, I don't follow the media.
FWIW, I straight up studied China for awhile until I realized how vast it was and how silly and arrogant I was to think that I could possibly encompass it. Now all I want is for the CCP to stop trying to edit history, stop locking people in mass concentration camps, stop stealing their organs, and stop fucking with the South China Sea. Those seem simple enough for even me to opine on, in all my ignorance.
There was harvesting going on of prisoners that have already been executed. China admitted as much: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbxvZ2lIR08
This practice has stopped since 2015.
> Anyway, I don't get my news from Twitter.
Unfortunately, there's not much I can do about the fact that most media outlets don't publish videos like these. But the video footage speak for themselves. Here's evidence of rioters setting a man on fire for disagreeing with them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gblPwStlsQs
If you are interested in a more long-form discussion about what's going on in Hong Kong, check out Daniel Dumbrill, a Canadian who lived in Hong Kong and now lives in Shenzhen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQx5NKAfueg
> I'll read that article, FWIW. Cheers.
Thanks. I'm already plenty glad that you're at least willing to take a look, even if you disagree.
> But I can tell you what I mean when I say that.
All right, point taken.
For the sake of discussion, I'll limit my scope here to mainlanders, not the diaspora.
I'll also tell you my point of view. I was born in the mainland, I now live in the Netherlands. My wife is a mainlander too. You're right that China as a culture and civilization is older than the CPP. Having said that, having studied China's history, I do think the CCP is the legitimate government of the mainland.
> You cannot possibly know that with any certainty in a regime that punishes criticism!
The claim that it's a "regime that punishes criticism" is overblown. There's a core of truth, but overblown. Things haven't been that extreme since the 70s. Nowadays there are many people who do in fact criticize the government.
For some perspective, try this video. This is an interview between an American and a Canadian, who both live in China. They discuss their experience with Chinese society, and things (including things about the government) are different from what they thought it is based on western views: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufxfSJgQuSI
It also kinda depends on what you mean by criticize. If you try to incite riots or government overthrow, or if you work with foreign agencies -- yeah they REALLY don't like that sort of stuff, and you'll get into a lot of trouble. But for more perspective, try this example:
In 2019 there were protests in Guangdong about the building of a crematorium. https://mothership.sg/2019/12/news-china-protests-wenlou-hua...
The government did not arrest the peaceful protesters. They did arrest the violent ones, but even those were released later. Eventually, the government gave the protesters what they wanted.
> People lie when you've got a big stick in your hand to beat them with if you don't like what you hear, eh?
The people I talked to are on a VPN, operating on western websites, talking to me in private. The Chinese government is not monitoring those conversations.
Having lived in the west for so long, I also studied China for quite a while. The more I study, the more I realize that the western view of CCP is... not exactly wrong, but very very problematic.
> The more I study, the more I realize that the western view of CCP is... not exactly wrong, but very very problematic
What's problematic to me is that a government censors information that could change people's minds. How can we call "legitimate" a government that is not allowing those who are supposed to be the source of its legitimacy, to access opinions and ideas that could influence their choice of which party they would legitimise?
Of course it would be hypocritical to say that our western governments don't try to do the same. But at least they are forced to limit the scope of their control to information that can somewhat fit under the umbrella of "National Security" -and at least their propaganda is forced to compete with everything else out there. Censoring by force books, websites and public media that express vastly opposing ideas is out of the question -as it should be -don't you agree?
There is an alternative perspective wrt what generates legitimacy. It is improving people's livelihood. Food, health, security, education, economic prosperity. Given the huge number of low income people in China, China is still very much a developing country. And China HAS made lots of progress in those fronts, much more than any other country.
As for disallowing criticism: nowadays it's not as bad as you think. Check my other threads.
Why should this progress in economic development be enough to make it legitimate? I mean, even if we assumed that the end justifies the means and that all that matters is economic prosperity, they didn't even have to do a lot of things right -just less badly than before (which admittedly wasn't that hard when someone looks at how bad they were).
And if this progress happened to coincide with loosening up the restrictions of personal freedoms and the censorship that you mention, perhaps the case is that a government that allowed more freedoms might had facilitated even more progress.
There is no proof that your latter claim is true. South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan were all authoritarian before they got economically prosperous. Only after that did they become democratic.
The states in the middle east, which had democracy forced upon them, aren't doing that well either.
It takes a while to get there, and not all stages of development of a country is a good match for democracy.
And you say that it is not that hard to do things less badly than before. I disagree. The CCP is literally the first functional and competent government they've had in 150 years. I think you are massively underestimating how difficult it is to develop China.
I am not saying economic concerns should forever be their number one priority. At some point that has to change. But is democracy really the best path for China right now? Do they deserve no credit for what they have already achieved?
Ok, I suppose we all have our priorities and biases. I can see how being able to feed for one's family can feel more urgent than being able to exercise their freedoms.
Perhaps the (late) CCP deserves credit for improving economy, infrastructure, efficiency and quality of life, to the extent that it did. And for being less cruel than its predecessors.
It is just that from the perspective of westerners, it is hard to judge positively a government that still has no respect for individual freedoms and private aspects of people's lives -i.e. looking the social score system, it is a step to the wrong direction.
My worry is that if the Chinese people become complacent and just feel grateful that they have more prosperity than before, the day where they are able to enjoy the freedoms that every person deserves will be far. And that, if they are not used to having free access to information and being in control, it will be more likely for someone less peaceful than the current CCP leadership in the future to start a war or something.
It's not as good as the west, censorship exists. But gone are the days where your neighbors report you for every little thing you may say wrong. You can file complaints against the government, and they do look into those without punishing you. You can even file lawsuits against the government (admittedly, not very effect yet, with a success rate of 30%, but not nothing).
Does China have problems? Yes, many. But my point is rather that it's not the hellhole many people think it is.
In re: the organ harvesting, I really hope you're right. I mean I really fervently hope you're right.
(It reminds me of the Walled City of Kowloon. I saw a BBC documentary about it and was haunted for years. Then one day I looked it up and, lo and behold, they had torn it down years ago. Always value new information, eh?)
> But the video footage speak for themselves.
But they don't. I'm not going to watch that (I have firm policy not to watch footage of IRL death. I watched "Faces of Death" in high school with my friends and regretted it.) but whatever it shows I'm not a video expert so I can't tell what it actually is: it could be fake, or even deepfake.
(FWIW I am firmly against setting people on fire, under pretty much any circumstance, for pretty much any reason. I think we can all agree that things have gone too far when someone gets immolated.)
When you get right down to it, I have no idea what's really going on over there, and no way of finding out.
The best I can do is go by things like the actual formal actions of the CCP, which don't seem good. (Although, as I say that, I recall that they presided over one of, if not the, greatest economic transformation on Earth. So: good job on that. Credit where credit is due.)
> check out Daniel Dumbrill
Despite what I just said, I'll do that. Always value new information, eh?
> I'll also tell you my point of view. I was born in the mainland, I now live in the Netherlands. My wife is a mainlander too. You're right that China as a culture and civilization is older than the CPP. Having said that, having studied China's history, I do think the CCP is the legitimate government of the mainland.
Cheers! Well met.
FWIW, I'm serious when I say I like China. Y'all are like a stern and distant Grandfather: wise and kind but also a little frightening. Don't tell the other Americans I said that, though, okay? ;-)
For me, it's useful emotionally to distinguish and blame "the Commies" because that way I can say to myself that Chinese people aren't to blame for the fucked up things the CCP does. In the USA, I feel that we are kind of all to blame for things like invading Iraq on a pretext, or electing a human cartoon character to be POTUS.
> I do think the CCP is the legitimate government of the mainland.
Yeah... * sigh * me too. But I don't like it.
It's been long enough IMO, and they are stable enough (again in my almost-worthless opinion) and the UN let them in, yeah?
Honestly, we over here were all set for the great Eastern Glasnost, if you will, and it's really a downer that China seems hung up on sabre-rattling. Can't we all just settle down and make some money? There are asteroids and Mars and places to go and things to do...
> The claim that it's a "regime that punishes criticism" is overblown. There's a core of truth, but overblown. Things haven't been that extreme since the 70s. Nowadays there are many people who do in fact criticize the government.
Again, I really and sincerely hope you are right!
As an American the very idea that someone from the government would get on my case for speech is preposterous. "Donald Trump is a pathetic excuse for a President!" See? No one cares. But jokes aside, as long as the CCP is punishing criticism at all they'll never be fully legitimate (again, in my all-but-worthless opinion!)
It's a weakness. Same with trying to rewrite history.
They either have to get their act together and be big enough to admit mistakes -or- pressure the rest of the whole wide world into toeing the line on their political picture-show. That sets them on an inevitable clash with Western-style freedom of speech. It's bad policy even for a legitimate government.
The stability of China is crucial to the whole world. If the legitimate government is weak that's a cause for concern.
But again, I know just enough about China to know how inadequate my knowledge is, so this is all just the ranting of a rando on the internet, eh? :-)
> For some perspective, try this video
I will. Despite it all, always value new information, eh?
> In 2019 there were protests in Guangdong about the building of a crematorium. https://mothership.sg/2019/12/news-china-protests-wenlou-hua.... The government did not arrest the peaceful protesters. They did arrest the violent ones, but even those were released later. Eventually, the government gave the protesters what they wanted.
Okay, but that happens here too. That wasn't the same thing as standing in front of the White House with a sign saying "Donald Trump is Winnie the Pooh".
> The people I talked to are on a VPN, operating on western websites, talking to me in private. The Chinese government is not monitoring those conversations.
Alright, I'll credit that. Cheers.
> Having lived in the west for so long, I also studied China for quite a while. The more I study, the more I realize that the western view of CCP is... not exactly wrong, but very very problematic.
Now that I agree with. Thank you for an enlightening conversation, and I really will read/watch those links (not the one with the person getting burned to death, but the other ones) FWIW.
FYI, SCMP is based in HK, though they are partly owned by a mainland company. Still, I find that SCMP as a whole is pretty balanced. The site has a mix of pro and anti CCP articles. The sentiment varies between authors.
> For me, it's useful emotionally to distinguish and blame "the Commies" because that way I can say to myself that Chinese people aren't to blame for the fucked up things the CCP does.
I understand.
To me, the people are to blame too. As explained in the article, CCP has 90 million members. Just the party only has more people than many EU countries. Many members are normal people: doctors, nurses, factory workers, businessmen. The CCP isn't a small elite who rules over the mainland, they are the fabric of mainland society.
The madness of the cultural revolution wasn't a CCP only thing. Many people supported the madness, that's why it took off. We all own the madness. Nowadays we can see that it was wrong.
I think there is nothing wrong with the normal people owning mistakes. I think it is rather crucial, in order to learn and move forward.
> As an American the very idea that someone from the government would get on my case for speech is preposterous.
I see what you mean. China still isn't quite on that level. But don't know whether it ever will be.
But at the same time, I don't think it's fair to judge China by that standard. China has a very different history and condition. If you judge it by western standards, China will forever disappoint you, for nothing else but "it's not like the west".
Here's what I think is a better perspective to judge China by:
The country literally had 150 years of war, revolution and poverty. Starting 40 years ago or so, that is finally over. China was quite low on the Maslow pyramid of needs, so it's no wonder they prioritize food, safety, money, prosperity.
And they succeeded in that. Everyone can eat, which was not at all a given. 200 million people lifted out of poverty -- the biggest contribution in the world. Universal Healthcare. Millions of Chinese travel to foreign countries every year, and pretty much all of them voluntarily go back. For the most part, Chinese people nowadays live a normal live.
Economic freedom, the right to survival, the right to health, are human rights too. The CCP prioritizes those over freedom of speech. As a developing country, it is impossible to prioritize everything, so you have to make choices.
It's also not just a case of "China is still behind the west, but they are working on it, give them a break". On some dimensions, they are ahead, or at least different. For example:
Chinese cities are very safe. You can go out at night, into dark alleys, without getting mugged. The police don't carry guns, there's no need to.
China managed to restore huge parts of deserts into green land.
China as a state also faces threats. The censorship, which I don't like, is meant to protect against that. It's not so much criticism that they don't like (in fact there are official channels for submitting complaints), it's threats against the state. As an American that may sound weird, but recall that mainlanders are tired of 150 years of revolution. Now they want stability, unity, prosperity. And requires a stable state.
The threats are not theoretical, as I've found out recently. A big threat comes from... The US. The US regularly stages coups against governments they don't like. Even democratic governments. Democratic Iran in the 60s. And just now, Venezuela. Part of the reason why the CCP top leadership is so secretive, and why they are making society more controlling, is to protect against US lead coups.
> The threats are not theoretical, as I've found out recently. A big threat comes from... The US. The US regularly stages coups against governmentd they don't like. Even democratic governments. Democratic Iran in the 60s. And just now, Venezuela. Part of the reason why the CCP top leadership is so secretive, and why they are msking society more controlling, to to protect against US lead coups.
Yeah if you wonder why the Chinese are putting Uyghurs in camps it's because the US and Saudi Arabia sent Uyghurs to fight their proxy war in Syria. You can imagine what the Chinese government thinks of that.
> Furthermore, 'Liking China but opposing CCP' is, in actuality, a statement that doesn't make much sense once you understand how the CCP - Chinese people relationship actually works: https://twitter.com/Bkerrychina/status/1253635970236375040
> So let me be clear: when I said "Chinese people" I'm referring to mainlanders.
You claim that all mainlanders like the CCP, which is a spurious claim given not only how impossible it is to generalize over such a huge group (including people the CCP is actively persecuting, such as Uyghurs!) but also because the CCP actively punishes people who speak against it.
Even aside from that, your conflation of "Chinese" and "mainlanders" and further conflation of "Chinese" and "mainlanders who like the CCP" is precisely what I'm talking about. It's improper, it's politically biased, and it destroys the conversation we're supposedly trying to have here.
Meanwhile, anti-anti-China people are ... often well meaning but a bit daft.
One managed to mishear "Uighur Muslims" (yes, there are anti-anti-China people who don't know who they are, and yes, they misheard "Uighur" as a word starting with "N") and it took me quite some annoyance to get that straightened out and everybody on the "Chinese people pretty cool, Xi really not so much" page.
> it took me quite some annoyance to get that straightened out and everybody on the "Chinese people pretty cool, Xi really not so much" page.
This shouldn't be hard to get across, except the CCP is very interested in ensuring people don't distinguish between the government of the People's Republic of China and Chinese people as a whole. Which leads to criticism of the CCP/PRC being seen as racist, which adds lots of heat to the discussion but absolutely no light. Precisely what the CCP would want, were it to attempt to influence online discussions. But I'm sure the CCP doesn't try to influence online discussions.... right?
Oh man, you really overestimate the CCP's media competence. Take a look at the state media and propaganda in China. It's all very traditional, very straightforward, mostly fact based (even if cherry-picked). Even the infamous 50 cents army is pretty stupid, and not what you think it is: https://www.quora.com/Does-the-50-cent-army-really-exist-and...
CCP influencing online discussions in the west? Hahahaha! As someone who's neutral (not even supportive) about the CCP, I can only hope that they become that competent within a decade. Those idiots still have no idea how sophisticated communication with western audiences needs to be. In the mean time, western media walks all over them, even with stories that are easily debunked.
I am not surprised that you think that. A lot of western discourse has gone so far off to the anti China direction that anything neutral people say can come over as pro CCP.
I am not. I have plenty of critique against them. But the sentiment in HN is already so anti China that there is no need for me to voice that critique.
I am not even saying "CCP good". I am saying "CCP not as bad as you think" and "there are alternative perspectives that are just as valid".
As for my hope that they become competent in media: it is to counter all the obvious lies. I mean... Wuhan lab virus? Really? And people willingly believe these stories all over the world?
You just keep saying "everyone is anti-China" over and over without clarifying what you actually mean.
Your insistence on not making a distinction between the CCP and the Chinese people makes it hard to engage in any discussion, as criticism of one is taken as criticism of the other. I have a strong feeling the CCP is depending on this mentality from it's people, playing up ethnonationalism and xenophobia to distract from any criticism towards them.
You said clearly you wish the CCP had better propaganda and communication, why? That would make them stronger, yet you claim to not be in favor of them. Do you care to clarify?
You raise an interesting point when you ask me to explain why I think HN is anti-China. It was so self-evident to me, but apparently you don't experience it as such. Maybe the HN crowd is not so much anti-China, but rather just misinformed, by virtue of living in the western media bubble which paints a one-sided picture of China.
I gave the Wuhan lab virus theory as an example. Actually the entire COVID-19 reporting is a big example, and is what triggered me to speak up in the first place. I was in China in January, I personally witnessed the news, lockdown progression, etc. And yet when I look at western reporting, there is so much misinformation, so much unjustified blame for things that are obviously not true.
For example, I see so many comments on HN saying China covered up for months (they didn't -- downplayed jan 1 to jan 20 at most), saying that China deliberately allowed international flights from Wuhan after the lockdown in order to infect the world (they didn't), and more. I see so many extreme, obviously untrue information, that I see this as anti-China.
And Chinese media is very weak against such unsubstantiated attacks. How can I sit back, see all the lies and bullying, and not hope that Chinese media gets their act together? This has got nothing to do with whether I support the CCP in the end -- just because CCP has problems, and that there are legit criticisms against CCP, doesn't mean we should accept lies against CCP, nor does it mean that they shouldn't be able to defend themselves against lies.
> You raise an interesting point when you ask me to explain why I think HN is anti-China. It was so self-evident to me, but apparently you don't experience it as such. Maybe the HN crowd is not so much anti-China, but rather just misinformed, by virtue of living in the western media bubble which paints a one-sided picture of China.
Again, you're not actually saying anything here, these are just your perceptions.
> I see so many extreme, obviously untrue information, that I see this as anti-China.
Right as I said it seems that you view all criticism of the Chinese Communist Party as criticism of China and Chinese people. This makes you a (ethno)nationalist, which is ironically another western stereotype. That Chinese see all criticism of China as criticism of them personally.
> And Chinese media is very weak against such unsubstantiated attacks. How can I sit back, see all the lies and bullying, and not hope that Chinese media gets their act together?
It's hard to make any conclusion other than you see the CCP as fighting for your image as well as their own. I'm wondering if you are willing to concede this is the case, and if so how do you suggest someone like me to attempt any sort of dialogue? Seems self-defeating.
And if in your opinion I got something wrong, what is it? Thanks for your response ahead of time, I come in good faith to better understand you and your perspective.
Okay, I am glad you are willing to discuss in good faith. Thank you for elaborating your point of view.
I will admit that I have an emotional bond with China, by virtue of being born there. If you define nationalist as anyone who feels as having a personal stake at the reputation of a country, then I guess I am. I wish for the country to develop, to be prosperous, to be recognized as an equal (more on this later) and to be treated fairly.
I do not personally agree with that definition, because I see a nationalist as someone who accepts their country unquestionably, and someone who thinks their country is better than others. I conform to neither of those properties. China does have many problems, it’s lagging behind the west in many aspects. If you want me to list some (besides the obvious freedom of speech things): support for disabled people is not very good, hygiene of public toilets is poor, social safety net is not as good as e.g. Netherlands, the tendency of local governments to cover up bad news thanks to structural problems with incentives. I also don’t think China is better than others, I merely wish for it to be able to stand as an equal (in value, not in likeness) among western countries. Respect other countries, and be respected in return.
In this sense, you can also say I am a Dutch nationalist. Having lived in the Netherlands for longer than in China, I have absorbed many western ideas and ideals, some of which I think China should embrace better. I also wish for the Dutch to be well, and despite the high taxes and rigid rules here I am pretty glad at how well-managed the country is.
You suspect that CCP is deliberately instilling nationalism in order to make Chinese people unwilling to accept criticism against CCP. Here are my thoughts:
- For myself, it is not true. I lived in China until early primary school. I did learn a vague sense of being proud of being Chinese, but that isn’t very different from how e.g. Americans learn to be proud of their country. I didn’t learn much history yet, nor how the state works or how other foreign countries worked. Everything after age 8 was Dutch education. But I have always felt a disconnect between what here in the west I am told about China, vs my own experience and what family tell me. Only recently have I started to do my own research to learn where this disconnect comes from, and how Chinese history was like.
- This presupposes that the CCP can be neatly separated from the mainland people. And that if we cannot, then criticism is impossible. I agree with neither: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23124883
- The more I learn about Chinese history, the more I think you’ve got it backwards. The CCP derives legitimacy from preexisting nationalism. It was already there before the PRC founding, the CCP didn’t create it. The CCP top leadership are actually moderates: they try to suppress nationalism rather than making it bigger. For example: there is a saying that if the mainland Chinese were allowed to vote, they would’ve already launched an invasion against Taiwan already; while the CCP is happy with the status quo without openly saying it.
- I don’t know how much it applies to HN, but in the wider world, I see the statement ‘I am against CCP, not Chinese people’ being used merely as lip service. For example: Trump invoking the Hong Kong Freedom bill, and many people cheering on it, but the only thing the bill does is hurting HK economy and thus the livelihood of ordinary Hong Kong citizen. I suspect many people are sincere about the abstract idea of that statement, but they haven’t given any thought about what it means in more practical, realistic terms. And at the same time, many other people are not being sincere at all, and merely use the statement as a cover for racism.
- I do think criticism against CCP is okay, but I am not seeing a lot of fair criticism. I see a lot of double standards, where CCP is criticized for something while other parties are not. I see a lot of criticism that’s based on either false info, or info with dubious evidence. Such dubious evidence is often accepted without question, even though when it comes to other countries people would’ve probably done a better job scrutinizing.
Imagine that everybody thinks Netherlands is a country of drug addicts and prostitutes, and that that is what people talk about all the time. I wouldn’t be happy about that either.
- A lot of criticism isn’t per se wrong, but does assume that western values are universally correct. The more I learn about history, the more I cast doubt on this. Western values arose under very specific circumstances. Mainland China has a very different history, so the values there are different. The insistence on criticizing the CCP from the viewpoint of western values, comes over to me as imposing one’s values on others. Some mainland Chinese values arose specifically because of western imperialism, so this imposition even comes over as hypocritical or tone-deaf at times.
- So much emphasis on criticism, but I think what we need is more emphasis on solutions. I mean: many problems in China aren't going to be solved by overthrowing the CCP (if that is at all possible). This isn't as simple as kicking out the bad guys and things will be better. For better or worse, and for all its faults, the CCP is still the only government that truly advances mainland Chinese people's interests; no other government will do it for them, and any post-CCP government will not necessarily be better than CCP. Rather than focusing on criticism, I think we need to focus on mutual understanding and finding ways to cooperate. The CCP will not feel inclined to accept western values as long as they believe that they are being treated as inferior instead of as equals, and that those values are a thinly veiled excuse for overthrowing them and for ignoring the west's own problems.
I hope this clears things up. If you have more questions or thoughts, I would be happy to engage.
PRC = China for conversations regarding government policy and potential privacy violations and undue pressure on development.
The same concerns could be had for software developed in the U.S. US Gov = U.S. for all intents and purposes with regard to this topic. Now you're just splitting hairs.
> China is an authoritarian one-party state. There might be a difference, but it's pretty slim.
China is a culture with a very long history, like all cultures, and a diasporic population, not to mention all of the Chinese people under the rule of the Republic of China on Taiwan.
Confusing the PRC with the entirety of Chinese people, Chinese culture, and China as a whole is rather similar to refusing to distinguish between Nazis and Germans, and only serves to either make criticism of the PRC impossible, since one can always accuse the critic of racism, or make defense of the Chinese people and culture impossible, since it will be taken as burnishing the PRC.
So if you say "I am against CCP, not the Chinese people", then that statement only makes sense if you exclude "many many mainlanders" from the definition of "Chinese people". Which makes the statement rather weak, or even nonsensical.
You say that if we accept this intertwine, it makes criticism impossible. Not so. You can still criticize the CCP, but you need to be more nuanced with your criticism, do more due diligence instead of merely rehashing western narratives, and realize that you're criticizing the CCP and the people at the same time (which could be entirely legit).
I therefore argue that recognizing the CCP - mainland people intertwine is a good thing, as it makes criticism more honest, more accurate, and possibly more helpful/constructive. No longer can you put all the blame on "just the bad guys" -- all of us mainlanders are complicit in some sense. We all own the problem, so we can't stop at just blaming, and have to actually find a solution.
> Keybase felt like WireGuard for its use case, just dead simple and also secure.
WireGuard, however, is "decentralized" because you can run it yourself whereas Keybase was always a centralized service where you always had to trust someone else instead of yourself or a public blockchain!
That being said, congratulations to the keybase team! :-)
It is not important Zoom is a Chinese company or not. The problem is, Zoom can't be trusted at all because of their behavior.
They showed us they don't think security seriously at all through their actions. For example, they opened up lots of holes(local HTTP server to bypass app open dialogue, local privilege escalation via their webcam/mic hack) on the user's system to provide "better" UX. They just cannot be trusted.
Yes, and to the couple of my clients who are governments of AMERICAN cities, that answer is clear. (And that was my original premise).
I am no cheerleader for NSA surveillance. People who know me in real life are probably tired of hearing me talk about it (and privacy/security in general).
Edits and updates I made within minutes. The replies to my comment ultimately forced me to be more thoughtful in my words, resulting in me being able to better lay out my thoughts.
I specifically left my original comments in there because I don't want to pretend that I said anything perfectly right from the beginning, without the help of others.
>PGP is dead on arrival, since it's an overcomplicated mess.
Er what? The complaint about PGP is that it is too simple. Users have to know too much about how public key cryptography works. The suggested alternatives are much more complex.
But I want to get ahead of the concern that Keybase is now owned by a Chinese company, which instantly compromises it.
PGP is dead on arrival, since it's an overcomplicated mess.
Keybase felt like WireGuard for its use case, just dead simple and also secure.
Update: I just want to clarify that I am happy for the Keybase team. This is clearly an Aquihire meant to bolster Zoom's security talent. And as a Zoom user, I'm generally happy about this development. But there will definitely be a concern about them being acquired by a Chinese company.
Update #2: I thought about FooBarWidget and others' comments, and I'm going to alter my wording. Zoom isn't a Chinese company, but their development team has been entirely based in China all this time and there have been concerns about that (which are entirely legitimate for certain groups like governments, in my opinion), especially given their communications aren't e2e encrypted.