[flagged]
Please don't post flamebait or instigate generic tangents on HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
It isn’t a controversial idea anywhere else in the world to suggest that foreign nationals should not have access to critical infrastructure, and that is central to the whole discussion that is being had here.
> The entire purpose of HN is to cultivate higher quality discussions than this
It will be hard to fulfill that purpose if the discussions get shut down before they even occur.
Your initial comment didn’t mention “critical infrastructure”, and even if it did, it was posted in an inflammatory style, whereas one of the first rules of HN is to converse curiously.
Generic denunciations of immigration are almost guaranteed to lead to the lowest quality discussions anywhere in the world you bring them up. If you have anything new or interesting to say about immigration that can lead to curious conversation, you’re welcome to share it, but so far you haven’t tried.
Please stop acting like a jerk, both in this subthread and more generally on HN. Your comments are among the lowest quality we’re seeing on the site lately. Please try harder to contribute positively, or go somewhere else.
Now China is the grown-up in the room while the US is running around like a maniac in Venezuela, Iran, and wherever else
No, China is no more a grownup than the US.
> India and China share a disputed 3,440km (2,100-mile) boundary known as the Line of Actual Control (LAC). This de facto border runs through remote and inaccessible natural paths along the Himalayas, passing through rivers, remote mountains and forest cover. It is ill-defined and its demarcations have remained a source of contention between two neighbours who fought a major war in 1962, in which India suffered a humiliating defeat.
I'm aware.
> the Tibetan takeover was in the 50's
Yes, so we're reaching back to the 50s to get to the same numbers as the US has racked up in the past year. What we if we compared the numbers since 1950?
> Article 8 is the relevant one
And has there been an invasion or a toppling of any leaders? No, so again this shows there's a grown up way of recognising there's differences without going all in on war at the drop of a hat.
Further, I was not equivocating the US and China, hence my qualifier of "historically" in my other post; it was said that way to point out that China has in fact invaded other countries in the past. If your bar for "no, its ok" is "hasn't invaded a country in the past 12 months", then by that bar, the vast majority of countries on Earth are just dandy. I think that line of thinking is naive, though.
Regarding article 8; for a law to say what is essentially "we will invade you", and your response is "well... haven't happened yet! It's fine!", that again shows either a bad faith engagement or just naivity.
This is what I was responding to. I'm trying to figure out how it is nonsense because India has a large population.
India already makes up like 70% of H1Bs.
The US as a whole is accessible to a ton of foreign nationals because there was a push in like the 70s-early 2000s to offshore as much as possible to developing nations and exploit the arbitrage of wage labor back home. That was coupled with a foreign policy that was essentially trying to assimilate the cultures through that trade relation. Obviously China didn't reciprocate that, and many other places didn't either. But the America side of that open door policy (sentiment really) hasn't really gone away, even with the more recent immigration stuff.
I was responding to the claim that "China" or "Chinese as a whole" have higher IQs, that's not really what's happening. Which is why I brought up India, because it's a similar situation, lots and lots of people, plenty of those people are really smart. But it's a measure of a distribution, not really meaningful when talking about the people as whole themselves. Which itself is reductionist.
Speak for yourself. The CCP have been showing me images of nice clean high-speed rail stations in China for the last 2 years.
China ranks 178 out of 180 in press freedom. How are you then getting plenty of information that is accurate?
There's ~20 years of record that those believing western MSM reporting becuz muh free press on PRC are basically mouth breathing rubes at this point. There's are literally 10s of millions of PRC diaspora whose banal wisdom of crowd gossip has been more reliable signal than western reporting. Pick the most rabid PRC nationalist twitter account vs Economist and compare notes, and statistically the brain damaged nationalist would prove to be more accurate/predicative. Free press =/= accurate. There's a reason free press stans are some of the dumbest motherfuckers on PRC.
Like it's 2026, 5th estate for propaganda has been thoroughly gamed system by now. Why does PRC develop so many spies / use their diaspora for information... because they know US / western free press is compromised to make useful idiots "feel" that 5th estate reports the truth because they theoretically could (even when they don't). Not that they even could, reminder PRC gave most US reporter the reciprocal boot, no press freedom doesn't magically only hobble PRC 5th estate, though that never stopped western libtard reporters and rightoid thinktankers from making shit up - its just there's no pretense that they aren't anymore, all the while US gov allocates 100s of millions for information warfare.
Would you want to spend your time in a nation looking for 2 of their smart people out of 1000 or make national ties so you can get hundreds of smart people out of their billion?
Also internal distributions will not be even, those smart people are far more likely to be clustered.