There are typically minority and majority powers which have to be recognized. This typically is correlated with the prevalence of a particular ethnic group acting in its own interests by numerical representation, but it does not always exist this way. In some places it is easy to see how current minority groups becoming majority groups would still not inherit power accumulated via generational wealth, or would not have a realistic means of gaining consensus on changing socioeconomic circumstances in their favor.
A more collaborative approach to different groups in a system would be necessary, instead of fearing demographic changes.
It's not just for home use. China is also exporting their surveillance and social credit technology to Venezuela, Cuba, NK, and even Australia. Those white crowd control vehicles used by Maduro forces to run over dozens of protestors a few weeks ago? Another tailor-made export.
It's not just for home use. China is also exporting their surveillance and social credit technology to Venezuela, Cuba, NK, and even Australia.
On the home front, we have AI recognizers and pattern matching being applied to YouTube videos and comments to prohibit certain words or certain messages because they're "wrongthink." We also let political opponents/activists report on certain words, certain messages, and the use of certain kinds of language. How is that any different from what China is doing, in principle? It's not. It just covers a smaller fraction of the population and culture, for now.
Granted, some of the people targeted by these activities are unpleasant and bad people. Not all of them are, however. The organizations and people who do this targeting (through AI recognizers and pattern matching and through taking reports from social media) are problematic for the US in that, 1) no one elected them to do this, 2) the people who control the mechanisms and rules overwhelmingly belong to one political party, and 3) for all that there is little concern demonstrated by those who have the power, over how such power can be abused. Yet, it's already openly acknowledged that the use of and control over such media does have significant political ramifications.
Many in China recognize that the power over social media is one-sided, but they don't mind because they consider Uyghur terrorist organizations and people like Falun Gong to be shady troublemakers at best or evil at worst. We in the US and the rest of the west recognize that such unchecked power results in abuses. It's easier to criticize the flaws and quirks of another society, but much harder to recognize when the same exists in our own.
Being forced to buy inferior Chinese made crowd control vehicles has got to be one of the more terrible aspects of these sanctions. If the guy's still around in 2 years most his subpar fleet won't be.
> “The digitalization of police work has achieved leap-like growth in Xinjiang,” Zhang Ping, a counterterrorism officer from Jiujiang, a city in southeastern China
Sounds ironic. Xinjiang is now the only province in China to register a recession after eighties
I'd be interested in that, too. I was under the impression that even the central government can't get reliable economic data on its provinces, because the numbers are fudged at every level, so they have to estimate them indirectly e.g. using electricity consumption. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Keqiang_index
Why is this topic so popular on HN? I'm just curious because there are so many social problems and actual politics news in the world but somehow this is always up here.
But it is strange that there is a lot of discussion about the slippery slope of what happens when this tech falls into the wrong hands. Meanwhile there is relatively little discussion about things that get us closer to the government actually being the "wrong hands".
But it is strange that there is a lot of discussion about the slippery slope of what happens when this tech falls into the wrong hands.
Not strange at all. One can already see a lot of abuses of such technological power in the US through the exploitation of political affiliations or connections. We've already slipped down the slope, and we've already seen the fingerprints of those hands.
Meanwhile there is relatively little discussion about things that get us closer to the government actually being the "wrong hands".
The government has checks and balances. Though those are imperfect, they can be used as tools to check the overstepping of power. There are also laws against the government censoring speech. The popular refrain among technologists is that it only pertains to Free Speech if the government is doing it, and it's just private businesses doing their justified activities when tech giants do it.
What's wrong in principle is still wrong, even if laws and societal wisdom are lagging technology. Large swathes of the populace feel their voice is being stifled against their wishes, and many can't even spend their money to support who they wish to without overcoming barriers put in place by powerful corporate actors. That's not people losing/winning in a free marketplace of ideas. That's willful manipulation of the free marketplace of ideas.
Because this is the sort of thing that actually matters. The latest police brutality incident or Trump tweet don't really matter. Technology like this will determine the contours of civilization for centuries to come, if we're lucky enough to survive that long. Exactly how and by whom these technologies are deployed are the most important decisions being made right now (aside, perhaps, from climate-change related policies).
It doesn't matter to the long run view of civilization, as I already clarified. The premise of your criticism is also pretty silly - China's high tech surveillance platform matters substantially less to me personally than whatever it is that Trump is up to.
If you were in a minority group would you rather face the risk of police brutality or the risk of being sent off to a job center? China has more "minorities", and what could you possibly mean by out of sight, out of mind, since I doubt you are based in China, or else this might be a greater concern. You're literally not concerned about this because you're not part of the civilian population that is being subjected to this surveillance.
Posting flamewar comments like you did in this thread is not allowed here. We ban accounts that keep doing that, so would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stop doing it? We've already had to ask you this in the past.
> If you were in a minority group would you rather face the risk of police brutality or the risk of being sent off to a job center?
"Be shot" vs "Sent to a re-education camp". Tough choice, but I believe most would opt to suffer but be alive.
> what could you possibly mean by out of sight, out of mind
I'm not the parent, but I do get a similar vibe a lot of the time. Focusing on China because it's far away, provides deflection from the trouble on the home front.
So you don't want to hear about this at all? Because my news feed still features plenty of news about other things. One mention about this every week or so is too much for you?
And there aren't a lot of other countries that currently have a million members of an ethnic minority in concentration camps. And tech/AI is an integral part of this oppression. How is this not news?
It's a social problem that both liberals and libertarians care about (both decent sized populations here in my experience) and is also related to technology. It would be weird if it wasn't popular here.
It would be equally weird if China didn't have a few sympathetic people expressing pro-China sentiment in online discussions linked to anti-China articles.
It's a feelgood topic. People here are programmers, technologists, investors, etc and they feel responsible for this. So they come here, condemn it, and leave.
Most Deep Learning papers related to tracking human pose, identifying abnormal behavior, detecting crime from video feeds etc. have Chinese authors. Literally bleeding-edge stuff used to subdue people. Can't wait to see some western politicians to hop on the same train once this tech is cheap after China beta-tests it and irons out all the quirks.
There are also plenty of less dystopian uses for pose tracking, including games, cashless convenience stores, VR/AR applications, and driverless cars predicting pedestrian behavior.
There are. I am using them myself which is why I had to read many recent papers about them. Though if you look specifically at activity detection, identifying abnormal movements associated with crime or social disturbance, Chinese authors dominate there. They probably receive many grants from their government on these specific topics.
The key is that said "less dystopian" uses commoditize the technology that the governments can use to spy on its citizens without even spending any major amount of r&d investment. Hell, Alexa in a TV and you have a 1984 system - willingly installed by consumers, no less. A 1984 system that for all intents and purposes can be converted into a surveillance system per secret court order.
The recent crackdowns on TOR darknet services are also frightening. While I'm not shedding tears for child porn distributors, the inevitable message that comes across with the monthly takedown press releases is "we can even get those with the best experience in using cryptography and hiding tools, how do you expect to organize resistance in case government goes the China way?"
Maybe parts of the US could provide resistance given that many people have enough private firearms to make sure any kind of government intrusion will result in unbelievable bloodshed, but disarmed populations like many European countries? They will have no way to voice any opposing thought anymore. We already see this in Hungary where Orban's friends have all but eliminated free independent press or in Turkey where tens of thousands get arrested for "terrorism" charges.
I've always heard that the US stands out from other Western countries due to the number of guns in its civilian populations. Is the ability to stand up to mass surveillance states something that people who want to take away guns take into account? In my time in the US I've only heard the argument of the US becoming a bad actor towards its civilian populations be dismissed. I also wonder if civilian populations have access to weapons in areas like Caracas. It'd certainly be terrifying to fight the military there, but the military is already mowing down protesters that are wielding sticks and stones.
That line of logic towards gun ownership made sense when the constitution was written, and the musket you owned was not far off from the musket a soldier was issued. What is your ar15 going to do to an unmanned drone six miles in the air? Or a missile launched from a battleship hundreds of miles off the coast? We’ve long passed the point of the second amendment. The only reason guns arent’t totally banned now is because how entrenched the arms industry is in american politics.
I was wondering that too, so I researched and the counterargument appears to be:
- Vietnam won a war with primitive weapons against highly equipped American military
- while the government can mass murder people with tanks and rockets, it is unlikely to do so. If in 2019 there was an armed uprising against let's say Trump, it could succeed.
The western politicians already subdue minorities via the Justice and financial systems. Just look at our incarceration rate, and differential outcomes for the same crimes. No need to buy flashy new tech for it.
This reminds me of a scene in the book To Kill a Mockingbird where some old white ladies are talking about the poor people in Africa while they treat their own Black servants poorly.
Muslims in re-education camps sounds a lot like systematic high-rate incarceration of minorities to me.
Look at something as mundane as cash bail in our justice system. It's something that systematically knocks poor and minority people into a tailspin of financial and life woes. Rich people systematically walk free, poor people who can't pay, wait in jail, sometimes years for their trial date. Compared to China, I would agree that the US crucially does have more political freedom to change things like this - but the actual state of things means we need to exercise those freedoms while we still can.
"Muslims in re-education camps sounds a lot like systematic high-rate incarceration of minorities to me."
This is a beyond troubling bit of moral relativism.
The difference between 'arbitrary incarceration based on ethnicity' - and 'detention based on reasonable likelihood of committing violent crime' is a mile wide.
You're literally comparing the rounding up of an ethnic minority and placement in internment camps, to the fact that there's a higher crime rate in some areas in the US.
FYI nothing in your reference indicates necessarily that there is injustice in the bail system, rather there could be changes to create better outcomes.
The US incarceration rate is by most estimates four times higher than in China. You can try to dismiss the criticism qualitatively, but quantitatively it's very troubling in the US.
Even including estimates for political inceration in China, it seems to go from 118/100k, w/ political prisoners up to 165/100k, whereas the US is 655/100k just outright. Which we try to claim is some form of justice, but is far outside the norms of all other nations (even politically regressive ones).
Compared to South Africa the US "imprisons a larger percentage of its black population than South Africa did at the height of apartheid"
Few care to admit it, but we basically have race based imprisonment in the US.
That there is a lot of crime in the US is a problem, but it's another thing to argue that such incarceration is not entirely warranted.
The US has cultural issues that don't remotely exist in the rest of the civilized world.
There are a few dozen 'violence zones' i.e. S. Chicago, Baltimore, New Orleans that are extremely violent, to the point that such violence is unknown in the rest of the civilized world. Only S. America and Africa have spots that compare.
There are problems, but the fact that "95% of our criminals plead guilty, without trial" provides no evidence of it. Consider these possible explanations:
a. We only arrest the guilty. Of those, 95% are remorseful and willing to admit that they did wrong. Just 5% stubbornly try to evade justice.
b. We only arrest the innocent. The 95% who plead guilty are taking plea deals, but would have been found not guilty.
c. We only arrest the innocent. The 95% who plead guilty are taking plea deals, saving themselves from losing at trial.
d. Of the people charged with crime, 95% are guilty. They accept it. The remaining 5% are innocent.
e. Of the people charged with crime, 99% are guilty. The innocent people, and some of the guilty people, choose to fight.
...
Ideally there would not be such a percentage, because there would be no crime and no trials. Failing that, the next best thing would be perfect arrests and 100% guilty pleas. This puts all the criminals in prison without putting anybody else in prison. The next best after that would involve trials with a 100% conviction rate. This also puts all the criminals in prison without putting anybody else in prison.
It's a bad solution to a legitimate problem, one very easily abused.
A few years ago in the northwest xinjiang province there was an uprising by the muslim population randomly stabbing chinese, injecting them with needles, containing God knows what, pulling people out of cars and beating them to death, etc. The people were so scared no one went out to do anything and full commerce everything stopped entirely (I know because my wife have sisters and direct relatives living there). So one result was a general crackdown on everyone. In xingjian now restaurants, grocery stores, etc all have xray machines and metal detectors at all entrances. It seems subways, trains, airports, all over now require xray and metal detectors just to enter. Just as in western europe the islamic population in many cases is a menace.
That sounds an awful lot like propaganda. Vague needle attacks, lack of sources, "beating people to death" while commerce comes to a halt.
> Just as in western europe the islamic population in many cases is a menace
Except that's just not true. There's no secret Islamic uprising, muslims aren't running around torching arsenal fans or forcing Germans to stop eating pork.
Don't get sucked into the propaganda. Question everything.
This apparatus of surveillance is functionally identical to what has been commercially deployed in the U.S., except that we are considerably ahead of China in areas like in-car monitoring and always-on home microphones.
There is nothing in this article that the U.S. hasn't been doing via technology exported out of the Acela corridor _forever_. Both are bad, but it will likely take China another 50 years to match what our MIC has done. Just this morning I was reading about how the notorious Azov Battalion of Ukraine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azov_Battalion) got much of its military training and weapons from the U.S. amongst others.
Subdue? Not sure of that. But this is ironic on a number of levels. First, China's crackdown on Xinjiang followed a prolonged (multi-decade) period of low intensity guerilla resistance to their occupation that essentially garnered no international reporting. Second, everywhere else in China has suffered deep and substantial cultural losses in the rush through socialism to modernity as well, with religion, festivals and local languages and dialects front and center. Third, China only really stepped up its efforts in Xinjiang right after the US made "terrorism/national security" the catch-all political excuse de riguer in the noughties, post 911. Fourth, the Islamic presence in Xinjiang literally corresponds to a complete cultural genocide against a range of multicultural (but predominantly Buddhist) kingdoms so effective that we are still piecing together how to read their (significant) literature today. Fifth, a $290M CCTV contract is nothing versus daily US military-industrial spending. Sixth, modern China's main push against peoples in this region began as early as the 1940s based on a joint China-Russia opposition to nomadic tribes in the region, documented in the book Kazak Exodus. http://pratyeka.org/books/kazak-exodus/
>Three years ago China’s leading maker of military electronics, CETC, came to Xinjiang with a vision: bring the tech of battlefield management to control and surveil all aspects of the lives of Uighurs. This is our attempt to walk through how it works.
…
>That shows how important the power of the Chinese state is in creating such a totalizing surveillance system. But it also shows how powerful readily available commercial technology has become and how easily it can be made into the basic ingredients of a police state.
72 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 118 ms ] threadNot exclusively
There are typically minority and majority powers which have to be recognized. This typically is correlated with the prevalence of a particular ethnic group acting in its own interests by numerical representation, but it does not always exist this way. In some places it is easy to see how current minority groups becoming majority groups would still not inherit power accumulated via generational wealth, or would not have a realistic means of gaining consensus on changing socioeconomic circumstances in their favor.
A more collaborative approach to different groups in a system would be necessary, instead of fearing demographic changes.
https://nypost.com/2019/05/18/chinas-new-social-credit-syste...
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics/venezu...
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/FA/FA07/20170913/106398/HHRG...
2) Running over of protestors (NSFW):
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas...
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-base-v...
It's barely more than a thinly-veiled book ad, though. If you want to learn more about the topic, you're probably better off reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System
On the home front, we have AI recognizers and pattern matching being applied to YouTube videos and comments to prohibit certain words or certain messages because they're "wrongthink." We also let political opponents/activists report on certain words, certain messages, and the use of certain kinds of language. How is that any different from what China is doing, in principle? It's not. It just covers a smaller fraction of the population and culture, for now.
Granted, some of the people targeted by these activities are unpleasant and bad people. Not all of them are, however. The organizations and people who do this targeting (through AI recognizers and pattern matching and through taking reports from social media) are problematic for the US in that, 1) no one elected them to do this, 2) the people who control the mechanisms and rules overwhelmingly belong to one political party, and 3) for all that there is little concern demonstrated by those who have the power, over how such power can be abused. Yet, it's already openly acknowledged that the use of and control over such media does have significant political ramifications.
Many in China recognize that the power over social media is one-sided, but they don't mind because they consider Uyghur terrorist organizations and people like Falun Gong to be shady troublemakers at best or evil at worst. We in the US and the rest of the west recognize that such unchecked power results in abuses. It's easier to criticize the flaws and quirks of another society, but much harder to recognize when the same exists in our own.
Sounds ironic. Xinjiang is now the only province in China to register a recession after eighties
This is very related to the topic of HN - we're witnessing the (worry-inducing) birth of an oppressive technology-fueled dystopian society.
Not strange at all. One can already see a lot of abuses of such technological power in the US through the exploitation of political affiliations or connections. We've already slipped down the slope, and we've already seen the fingerprints of those hands.
Meanwhile there is relatively little discussion about things that get us closer to the government actually being the "wrong hands".
The government has checks and balances. Though those are imperfect, they can be used as tools to check the overstepping of power. There are also laws against the government censoring speech. The popular refrain among technologists is that it only pertains to Free Speech if the government is doing it, and it's just private businesses doing their justified activities when tech giants do it.
What's wrong in principle is still wrong, even if laws and societal wisdom are lagging technology. Large swathes of the populace feel their voice is being stifled against their wishes, and many can't even spend their money to support who they wish to without overcoming barriers put in place by powerful corporate actors. That's not people losing/winning in a free marketplace of ideas. That's willful manipulation of the free marketplace of ideas.
You mean it doesn't fucking matter to YOU and people like YOU!
It sure as fuck matters to the people on the receiving end.
Hardly, it's the sentiment echoed by your statement that is prevalent throughout tech circles. Out of sight, out of mind.
Do you believe my statement is false? Or are you simply arguing with an imagined statement that I didn't make?
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
"Be shot" vs "Sent to a re-education camp". Tough choice, but I believe most would opt to suffer but be alive.
> what could you possibly mean by out of sight, out of mind
I'm not the parent, but I do get a similar vibe a lot of the time. Focusing on China because it's far away, provides deflection from the trouble on the home front.
And there aren't a lot of other countries that currently have a million members of an ethnic minority in concentration camps. And tech/AI is an integral part of this oppression. How is this not news?
The recent crackdowns on TOR darknet services are also frightening. While I'm not shedding tears for child porn distributors, the inevitable message that comes across with the monthly takedown press releases is "we can even get those with the best experience in using cryptography and hiding tools, how do you expect to organize resistance in case government goes the China way?"
Maybe parts of the US could provide resistance given that many people have enough private firearms to make sure any kind of government intrusion will result in unbelievable bloodshed, but disarmed populations like many European countries? They will have no way to voice any opposing thought anymore. We already see this in Hungary where Orban's friends have all but eliminated free independent press or in Turkey where tens of thousands get arrested for "terrorism" charges.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-29308509
- Vietnam won a war with primitive weapons against highly equipped American military
- while the government can mass murder people with tanks and rockets, it is unlikely to do so. If in 2019 there was an armed uprising against let's say Trump, it could succeed.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=J5wuB_p63YM
Look at something as mundane as cash bail in our justice system. It's something that systematically knocks poor and minority people into a tailspin of financial and life woes. Rich people systematically walk free, poor people who can't pay, wait in jail, sometimes years for their trial date. Compared to China, I would agree that the US crucially does have more political freedom to change things like this - but the actual state of things means we need to exercise those freedoms while we still can.
https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/sta...
This is a beyond troubling bit of moral relativism.
The difference between 'arbitrary incarceration based on ethnicity' - and 'detention based on reasonable likelihood of committing violent crime' is a mile wide.
You're literally comparing the rounding up of an ethnic minority and placement in internment camps, to the fact that there's a higher crime rate in some areas in the US.
FYI nothing in your reference indicates necessarily that there is injustice in the bail system, rather there could be changes to create better outcomes.
Even including estimates for political inceration in China, it seems to go from 118/100k, w/ political prisoners up to 165/100k, whereas the US is 655/100k just outright. Which we try to claim is some form of justice, but is far outside the norms of all other nations (even politically regressive ones).
Compared to South Africa the US "imprisons a larger percentage of its black population than South Africa did at the height of apartheid"
Few care to admit it, but we basically have race based imprisonment in the US.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_United_States_in...
The US has cultural issues that don't remotely exist in the rest of the civilized world.
There are a few dozen 'violence zones' i.e. S. Chicago, Baltimore, New Orleans that are extremely violent, to the point that such violence is unknown in the rest of the civilized world. Only S. America and Africa have spots that compare.
https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Total-...
It is, indeed, apples to oranges, but we've got no shortage of problems in our justice system.
a. We only arrest the guilty. Of those, 95% are remorseful and willing to admit that they did wrong. Just 5% stubbornly try to evade justice.
b. We only arrest the innocent. The 95% who plead guilty are taking plea deals, but would have been found not guilty.
c. We only arrest the innocent. The 95% who plead guilty are taking plea deals, saving themselves from losing at trial.
d. Of the people charged with crime, 95% are guilty. They accept it. The remaining 5% are innocent.
e. Of the people charged with crime, 99% are guilty. The innocent people, and some of the guilty people, choose to fight.
...
Ideally there would not be such a percentage, because there would be no crime and no trials. Failing that, the next best thing would be perfect arrests and 100% guilty pleas. This puts all the criminals in prison without putting anybody else in prison. The next best after that would involve trials with a 100% conviction rate. This also puts all the criminals in prison without putting anybody else in prison.
A few years ago in the northwest xinjiang province there was an uprising by the muslim population randomly stabbing chinese, injecting them with needles, containing God knows what, pulling people out of cars and beating them to death, etc. The people were so scared no one went out to do anything and full commerce everything stopped entirely (I know because my wife have sisters and direct relatives living there). So one result was a general crackdown on everyone. In xingjian now restaurants, grocery stores, etc all have xray machines and metal detectors at all entrances. It seems subways, trains, airports, all over now require xray and metal detectors just to enter. Just as in western europe the islamic population in many cases is a menace.
> Just as in western europe the islamic population in many cases is a menace
Except that's just not true. There's no secret Islamic uprising, muslims aren't running around torching arsenal fans or forcing Germans to stop eating pork.
Don't get sucked into the propaganda. Question everything.
>Three years ago China’s leading maker of military electronics, CETC, came to Xinjiang with a vision: bring the tech of battlefield management to control and surveil all aspects of the lives of Uighurs. This is our attempt to walk through how it works.
…
>That shows how important the power of the Chinese state is in creating such a totalizing surveillance system. But it also shows how powerful readily available commercial technology has become and how easily it can be made into the basic ingredients of a police state.
https://twitter.com/paulmozur/status/1131360852429266945