It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
StingingVelvet: Liking China for privacy reasons? That's... interesting.
avatar
hedwards: The difference is that they don't bother lying about it like the US government does. The Chinese never had any concept of privacy previously, so they didn't lose any. But in the US we did have privacy and the government is constantly looking for ways around that without people knowing about it.
Just curious, though, my sense is that the PRC folks actually are somewhat ignorant of it all, it's only the educated and foreigners with who China is being "honest" about it. Am I wrong?
avatar
hedwards: The difference is that they don't bother lying about it like the US government does. The Chinese never had any concept of privacy previously, so they didn't lose any. But in the US we did have privacy and the government is constantly looking for ways around that without people knowing about it.
avatar
orcishgamer: Just curious, though, my sense is that the PRC folks actually are somewhat ignorant of it all, it's only the educated and foreigners with who China is being "honest" about it. Am I wrong?
I wouldn't know, I can't read. And my Chinese isn't really good enough to have conversations. Plus, talking about that could potentially be considered meddling in their internal affairs.

It doesn't really matter as the Chinese people are completely incapable of organizing anything which requires more than 2 people to show up at the same time. So, it's rather astonishing that they managed to have a revolution in the first place.
avatar
hedwards: It doesn't really matter as the Chinese people are completely incapable of organizing anything which requires more than 2 people to show up at the same time.
Well that's not true. It's just that when it happens, tanks are sent in.
Back to Yee, the story continues...

In the face of severe backlash for his comments, he has started backpedaling on Twitter:

"Gamers, I admittedly didnt use best words to SFchron. Meant video game industry has inherent conflict of interest in the gun violence debate"

Followed by:
"I have a lot of respect for many gamers - many are on my staff and in my family - but the industry has profited at the expense of children."

I am admittedly biased, but it sounds to me like a politician that got caught being honest with his opinions for once (as one of the Twitter comments says "You meant "conflict of interest" but accidentally said "lust for violence"? Woops!") and more than a little like a racist saying "I'm not racist, I have friends who are black".
Post edited January 29, 2013 by cogadh
avatar
cogadh: Back to Yee, the story continues...

In the face of severe backlash for his comments, he has started backpedaling on Twitter:

"Gamers, I admittedly didnt use best words to SFchron. Meant video game industry has inherent conflict of interest in the gun violence debate"

Followed by:
"I have a lot of respect for many gamers - many are on my staff and in my family - but the industry has profited at the expense of children."

I am admittedly biased, but it sounds to me like a politician that got caught being honest with his opinions for once (as one of the Twitter comments says "You meant "conflict of interest" but accidentally said "lust for violence"? Woops!") and more than a little like a racist saying "I'm not racist, I have friends who are black".
Yeah, but you could say that about many industries that involve children. Toys, candy, or perhaps children's TV.