slowenough

They have more ways than that to create social cohesion. You'd probably see it if you weren't blinded by the China bad hate narratives. But that's for you to work out. You've got to open your mind on your own. It's not my responsibility to do that for you nor even help you do that. Good luck seeing China accurately tho, I hope you achieve that! :)

No way, that compression algorithm is amazing. But I also would like to understand how it works by someone explaining it really simply.

I mean it's doing significantly better than LZ. Anyone want to provide simple intuition on these algorithms and where they come from?

> I’m not threatened by your opinion, because your opinion is an incoherent mess built on a foundation of lies. What I am threatened by is the geopolitical power of the liars, torturers, rapists, and mass murderers you are defending.

That's a great line, and I know it looks like I'm defending liars, torturers, rapists and mass murderers. But in fact you're pretending to be against liars, torturers, rapists and mass murderers but you're actually defending the terrorists who do this and criticizing the law enforcement who is saving people from it.

You're pathetically projecting, because your opinion is the incoherent mess and the foundation of lies is all yours, pal. Which I think you know. My opinion is so much clearer than yours, I'm Pro China, Pro US and Pro Law. What are you for, again? Pro Terrorism? Pro Rape? Or was it Pro Disinfo? Your lack of belief in these issues shows, I can tell you're conflicted, but you have to keep pressing the message regardless. You really ought to get outta the business of lying for a living. Go back to trying to be a writer. Because you're literally not morally equipped to be trotting out this claptrap.

And, what's more, son, you're lying.

You falsely claim Xinjiang has no terrorism problem. At least you've exposed yourself as not just hysterical and shrill but also misinformed. Literally the first 3 results on Google: http://archive.is/TYTow http://archive.is/jCdNS and https://www.theglobalist.com/china-xinjiang-uighurs-extremis...

So it does seem you're suffering from a major case of confirmation bias complicated by shrill moralizing. This is particularly nasty to get rid of as you'll have to surrender your sense of superiority you get from vehemently pretending China is so wrong. It helps you cope with the anxiety about your own culture's stagnation and decay. I get it, but don't worry you can get professional help. Start by opening your eyes to learn from China about doing things that work to build a positive national identity and an inspiring pace of progress.

Main point is, so what does your moral outrage matter?

It looks like you got triggerd by seeing something positive about China, so you tried so hard to paint the page with everything negative. It's as if you're saying, "No one is allowed to like China because China bad", and then you invent reasons to pretend China is bad. What's convincing is you have a serious case of China envy and China hate. What's not convincing is your claim that "China bad". I still don't believe you, pal, you'll have to work harder to be convincing because you still haven't proved this is actually true. Points for effort, tho. I mean, you made a lot of effort. Shame it didn't pay off, huh, pal?

Are you sure it's not just your hysteria? Have you been duped by the Western media?

You're against China implementing and enforcing their law, that makes you a dissident and anti rule of law. You're also apologizing for terrorism while denying terrorism exists. This is just pathetic. I would have expected an American to be more against terrorists. What happened to make you soft on terror? Are you secretly a supporter?

Further, and this part will really blow your mind (trigger, mind blown warning ~~ make sure you're ready for it) I think you've fallen under the Communist Party's masterful disinformation spell like so many other useful foreign idiots. The CCP knows that foreigners love to hate on China, and love to preach and moralize. So the CCP uses this vulnerability (in fact the Haaretz interview was 1 ex detainee told to fabricate mistreatment claims and 1 undercover security operative handler also posing as a detainee, and the "Cables" is another disinfo product from Chinese information agents), deliberately spinning some disinfo. It plays you like a cat drawn by a laser. It plays you by getting you to look.

Of course, you're too abhorrently dull to understand why the CCP would want to pretend it's doing bad stuff ( just like you won't immediately understand why the CCP wants the unrest in HK, and even wants HK to become more democratic (pro tip: it's not for the sake of democracy)). But I'll explain it to ya, dun worry.

30% of the reason is distraction. Controlled opposition. 65% of the reason is because playing from a self-created straw man position gives them "out of thin air" leverage.

So China gets to make the narrative all about human rights (which is easy, because they know Westerners love to hate on China about 'human rights', so they just play into this Western vulnerability/bias) but actually it's not violating any human rights, and so by creating this public outrage (even if Western officials know it's disinfo) Western officials are forced to act (punished for cultivating their population's China hatred) as the populace goes rabid trying to outdo each other to condemn the "evil Chinese". Just as you, son, have done. Great work!

Now when the world thinks China is abusing human rights but it's not, China can magically provide the fix. When deal terms hinge on leverage, China can provide "generous concessions" and promise to "do better". Or it can cultivate domestic fire against the West by pointing out how much the Western media is fake news against China. Or it can use it to make Western politicians dance to its tune, and at the same time break their credibility. (Personally, I don't want to see conflict between the West and China, but I see China is masterful at defending itself, and I admire its skill, and ability to use the Western "moral supremacism" complex against itself).

Seriously, can you not see what's happening? I like both places, so I blush to see China pulling the USA's strings so readily here, but China had a huge win in terms of disinfo and narrative control recently: they convinced 427 senators to vote in their favor, and they've got the whole world, include Secretary of State, talking about human rights abuses in China. And most people are convinced this is absolutely what China does not want. They're wrong. This is China's game, and you've all fallen for it. But by doing so, you're helping China. So I thank you, because I think China ought to be helped and supported. But I'm also kind of embarrassed they duped you all so easily. I mean, WTF? I guess after years of being bashed this way and that by your own news media into a constant state of conflict and confusion, none of yall can't just think straight, huh?

Just like after Tiananmen, China scored a massive coup of WTO entry only 11 years later. Shouldn't the world have ostracised them for such an "atrocity"? Sorry, it doesn't work like that pal. They can control the narrative and use it to say, "look, we've reformed, we adopt your values now, so you have to let us in".

Seriously, I'm not just advocating supporting China because I believe in the China experiment (as a good balance to the US experiment). I'm advocating supporting China because I like the West, and China will fuck the West up if the West keeps fucking with it. Just like it is already doing, but you're all too dumb to see it. Stop fighting them, and work to create a better world together. They're using your desire for conflict and competition against you, and it looks to me like you're gonna wake up to that fact too late. Learn from them, stop hanging onto past glory, don't be like the Brits, ok?

The trigger for controversy on HN is quite fine.

You're most likely mistaken. Clickbait is not just about attracting attention, it also needs to be misleading. So while your complaint passes 1 test for clickbait it fails the other. Please be more thoughtful before posting unfounded meta comments, the HN rules explicitly discourage low-value content that doesn't contribute substantially to the discussion.

That is really, really funny. Make sure you click the "I don't get it, explain differently button".

Probably just a jewelry box and some old letters.

Hypothesis: In a liberal democracy, when leaders adopts a persona of master morality, the slaves are threatened. If leaders instead project a slave morality, the slaves are peaceable and content. But behind the scenes, it seems like a state needs to rule with master morality, but for peaceableness, promote the adoption of slave morality among the slaves.

Controversial view: Christianity is a perfect ruling tool because it incentivizes slave morality which keeps people peaceful.

Caveat: I'm not saying Christ wasn't real nor an amazing person. Just noting how the religion could be co-opted for ruling purpose.

VVVVVVV---- Hello fren below! No i'm not. I mean it. And I think the humour is appropriate to the issue: trivial, and obvious.

*asshole, that would be grammatically incorrect if you spoke English

Is it so preposterous? Let the rich dude have his slice of private beach.

It's not very caring to the rich guy. It's not like there's no other substitutes people could use to get their beach fill. But for him, it's right there. Come on, where's your empathy for the guy?

You misspelled admirable.

Hypothesis: In a liberal democracy, when leaders adopts a persona of master morality, the slaves are threatened. If leaders instead project a slave morality, the slaves are peaceable and content.

But behind the scenes, it seems like a state needs to rule with master morality, but for peaceableness, promote the adoption of slave morality among the slaves.

Controversial view: Christianity is a perfect ruling tool because it incentivizes slave morality which keeps people peaceful.

Caveat: I'm not saying Christ wasn't real nor an amazing person. Just noting how the religion could be co-opted for ruling purpose.

Is it so preposterous? Let the rich dude have his slice of private beach.

Well, I guess you got what you wanted? And why would you want me to discredit myself? Are you threatened by my opinion? If you are then how are you going to learn to think differently, and if you can't think differently how can we trust your conclusion? You're just confirming your biases, pal, but pretending you're "morally righteous". So boorish, so tired, and so....Pathetic.

But can you "deny" something if it's not true? Isn't that confirming the untruth?

But was I denying it?

I'm saying the Western propaganda is overblown but it looks like there's there's suppression going on. I just don't think it's an "atrocity", I think terrorism is the atrocity, and I think what China is doing is the correct path. But I guess you're an apologist for Xinjiang terrorists, huh, pal?

It looks like the only one who's discredited is you for shamelessly misrepresenting me here. If you misrepresent me here, what do you do with any news article; just twist it to fit your agenda? Why should anyone listen to such a shameless misrepresenter?

Anyway, if you claim the Western media is telling the truth, and it's not just your belief, prove it to me. Or don't you have the conviction? Thanks, pal. XD

But we all get to pick our side, right? So pick yours. Apologist for China cracking down on terrorists, or apologist for "Islamic" terrorism. I know where I stand. Do you? Hahah. This is too easy, pal. Whatugot?

Quick, you better invoke another persona. Looks like that one's gonna run outta steam.

Probably just a jewelry box and some old letters.

This is really funny, I like this. This is so cool.

TL;DR - It's not perfectly fine if I don't want it. Capiche?

Masterful persona work there. But for your reference, to respond to some of the attitudes of your account, I just don't believe the Western media narrative about Xinjiang.

Here's what I think:

There is some torture and physical beatings of residents, but a very small percentage of "worst offenders" go through that process. The vast majority of stuff that happens in the campuses is designed around getting people to be constructive members of society.

If you compare the level of violence there, with violence against detainees at various black sites, extrajudicial prisons, or even just the regular prison system in the West, I think you're just splitting hairs. So what are you so concerned about this for?

Of course, if you really care so much about Xinjiang, just go there and "die as a martyr" if that's what you really believe happens. I'm joking.

Xinjiang is a problem, because the rise of terrorist ideology using Islam as a delivery vector could easily spread through the region and cause unrest. I think what the government did by pre-emptively controlling the area was very masterful and a good thing. They prevented unrest and contagious unrest by taking decisive steps, and now that area is going to be saved, instead of damaged by the virus of terrorism.

The other problem is just cultural. Those steppe people are stubborn, they think they can do whatever they like, since for thousands of years their culture is independent. But they have to adjust to the contemporary world where everything is under the purview of one state or another. That is a cultural adjustment against the DNA of those people to be stubborn and independent. So China has to shape them into a more compatible form, so they don't deal with issues in future. It's sad about the old ways having to die out and change, but at the same time, these people would cause problems anywhere, since no place in the world is compatible with that. If you look throughout history these people of the steppe caused recurring problems again and again at the fringes of all empires.

Eventually, this type of culture has to be assimilated into a larger more stable culture and preserved that way, or it won't be able to exist.

At least it's not an out and out slaughter like of the Native Americans. The solution the Chinese are doing, is actually more humane that just starting a war in the region, or killing everyone. China doesn't want to have to deal with the problem, but it's their problem because it's under their state, so they have to deal with it.

Also, people think that China wants "homogeneity". That is rubbish. They don't care about everybody looking the same, acting the same, or whatever. There are so many regions in China with different dress, food, language, custom. More variety than in the West. But that's whitewashed by the Western "journalists". They even don't want everyone to think the same. They do want to promote common purpose and collective identity, because that makes the country strong.

Also, in the West, the media is used to inflame divisions and further divide people, and create a milieu of confusion and conflict. Half the reason China censors the media and online is to prevent the abuse of it leading to this kind of Chaos. Because China is not a democracy it gets no utility from inflaming people's passions and dividing them against each other. So it can afford to promote their own collective harmony, and individual peace and happiness.

Not when harmony and unity is a heresy in the West. Isn't that obvious to you?

Maybe you're just jealous then. So go to China, don't blame me.

He he. Well, at least the heresies were actual heresies. They were so effective that a whole subthread starting with a guy who asked me to say what I think is good about China, had to be detached because it descended into trolling and China bashing. Surprise, surprised. I think we've identified a pretty good heresy.

The problem is heresies stop people seeing beyond them. So they don't see the useful new ideas, because they are blinded by the "2 minutes hate" the heresy triggers.

> Which is perfectly fine

This makes it sound like you don't care about my feelings.

I replied your other account because you said you were not asking from the standpoint of saying I was wrong.

I don't want to get criticism from people who aren't listening. I'm not here to take the heat from people protecting their cherished mistaken assumptions. That's why I said, no, I wouldn't share unless you were ready to learn. You think it's perfectly fine to try to give someone what they said they don't want. Can't you accept a "no"?

Further,

"Ming dynasty ships could have sailed to America if their skippers had wanted to. A replica of the Zheng-era junk in fact managed the China-CA trip in 1955 (though it could not get back again)...If they could do it, why couldn't Zheng? The most popular answer is that things happened the way they did because in the 15 C Chinese emperors lost interest in sending ships overseas, while European kings (some, anyway) became very interested in it. When Yongle died in 1424 his successor's first act was to ban long-distance voyages...In 1436 the court refused repeated requests from the shipyards in Nanjing for more craftsmen, and over the next decade or two the great fleet rotted. By 1500 no emperor could have repeated Yongle's voyages even if he had wanted to.

...

By Yongle's standards the Portuguese expeditions were laughably small (involving dozens of men, not dozens of thousands) and undignified (involving rabbits, sugar, and slaves, not gifts from great princes), but with the benefit of hindsight it is tempting to see the 1430s as a - perhaps the - decisive moment in world history, the point when Western rule became possible. At just the moment that maritime technology began to turn the oceans into highways linking the whole planet, Prince Henry grasped the possibilities and Emperor Zhengtong rejected them.

...

As breathtaking as Zhengtong's error now seems, we should bear in mind that when he "decided" not to send shipwrights to Nanjing in 1436 he was only nine years old. His advisers made this choice for him, and their successors repeated it through the 15 C. According to one story, when courtiers revived the idea of Treasure Fleets in 1477, a cabal of civil servants destroyed the records of Zheng's voyages. The ringleader, Liu Daxia, we are told, explained to the minister of war,

  The voyages of Zheng to the Western Ocean wasted millions in money and grain, 
  and moreover the people who met their deaths may be counted in the tens of thousands... 
  This was merely an action of bad government of which ministers should severely disapprove. 
  Even if the old archives were still preserved they should be destroyed.

Grasping the point -- that Liu had deliberately "lost" the documents -- the minster rose from his chair. "Your hidden virtue, sir, " he exclaimed, "is not small. Surely this seat will soon be yours!"

People did say Zheng He was a 7 foot tall Muslim eunuch from southwest China, with a sixty inch belly. That's not all:

"The seven Treasure Fleets dispatched between 1405 and 1433 were the grandest projections of state power the world had seen. They did have to fight three times to secure the Straits of Malacca, then as now the world's busiest waterway...Chinese sailors walked the streets of Mogadishu, which did not seem to impress them ("if one's eyes wander one meets only sighs and sulky glances", one of Zheng's officers wrote)...and Mecca, which did.

The Treasure Fleets had sailed south and west a good 9000 miles, but some researchers think this was just the beginning. With their compasses and charts, tankers full of drinking water, and huge stores of food, Zheng's ships could have gone anywhere they wanted; and that, the former submarine captain Gavin Menzies claims in this bestselling book 1421: The Year China Discovered America, is exactly what they did.

...

Historians, however, remain unmoved. Menzies, they conceded is quite right that Zheng's logbooks are lost; but why, the historians ask, does the enormous mass of surviving Ming dynasty literature...never mention any of these discoveries?"

- from, Why The West Rules For Now

Sounds like so-called "concentration camps" are preventing you seeing anything else you could learn. How useful is that for you?

Or, if you need some help to get beyond that, let me flip it around for you. Do you disagree with an effective law-enforcement and counter-narrative strategy for countering radical extremism?

I know it's really hard to be a foreign-born Chinese in China, because the expectations you feel are very great. I get that, and it's not an easy path, so if you've done that, you definitely went through something very difficult.

At the same time, when you say, "not work out", sorry I disagree with that. Which "few" of my points here? I only mention "harmony" in 2 out of 9, and even then it's not like they "do not work out" because of "harmony". Anyway....

What level of acceptance do you expect? As a Chinese you'll have more expectations, sure, but no more than locals, just different. As a foreigner I have different expectations. I have to work to carve out my space here, too. It's not just you who goes through difficulties. Everyone does. Is it really easier for Chinese to "integrate" into a Westner community than vice versa? I don't think so.

But anyway, this is diverging from the points I'm making. At a civilizational level, harmony has utility. It's a good thing for people. I'm not comparing different levels of acceptance / racism towards individuals. I deliberately omitted any comparisons about that in my list because it seems to me there aren't significant differences, and this list is about "What does China do really well that the West can learn from"

But to say the rest of my view on the point you raised, whether you're accepted or not I believe depends on how well you understand the culture and work to adopt it, and adapt yourself. It's not accidental or based on your skin color or where you're born, you have to be deliberate about it. But really, it's not different than a Chinese from one city, going to another city in China with a very different culture. The locals will view them differently, and to get "accepted" they'll have to work at it, just like you do. Why resist that? Don't expect something for nothing.

Alright, I'll take you at your word and I'll risk it, let's see what happens.

China:

- is good at doing things. Projects in the West are smaller and take longer.

- can take the long view. Western governments think of the next election.

- promotes harmony and unity among its citizens. Western electorates must be divided by emotional issues.

- has a domestic security apparatus that's more transparent and obvious than corresponding forces in the West.

- has 1.4 billion people. EU has 512 million. US has 330 million.

- learn what works from others and make it their own. Less Western students go to China, than vice versa.

- people emigrate everywhere, mix with everyone but still maintain their own culture. Less Westerners migrate to China than vice versa.

- is very safe from violent crime and terrorism. The West could emulate China's effective law enforcement strategies.

- has an admirable, inspiring and clear goal of striving for national rejuvenation, a harmonious and moderately prosperous country. What admirable, inspiring and clear goal for the future to work toward does any Western country have?

That's some of what I think.

But I don't think it's important to you what I think. I think what's important for you is you being open to see what's already there in front of you. When you are open to learn, you will find your own things about China that you admire and wish the West would emulate.

Sure I could but then you'd just point out exactly why that looks wrong to you, since that seems to be what you'd like to do, so what would be the point?

It only works when you're actually ready to listen. That's not my problem. You get ready to learn on your own time. If you're resisting there's no point trying to put it in front of you so you see, since you'll just pretend you don't see. Cherished mistaken assumptions protection and all. Okay?

From Why the West Rules for Now,

"Some people think Chinese sailors even reached the Americas in the 15th C, but, as I will try to show in Chp 8, these claims are probably fanciful. The closest thing to evidence for these imaginary voyages is a map of the world exhibited in Beijing and London in 2006, purporting to be a 1763 copy of a Chinese original drawn in 1418. The map is not only wildly different from all genuine 15th C Chinese maps but is also strikingly like 18 C French world maps, down to details like showing CA as an island. Most likely an 18 C Chinese cartographer combined 15 C maps with newly available French maps. The mapmaker probably had no intention of deceiving anyone, but 21 C collectors, eager for sensational discoveries, have happily deceived themselves."