China banned FB due to fear of organized uprising but USA knows what is posted online does not matter including what we post here

[Deng Qi Feng]

You can post profound wisdom on Facebook or here like Money is worthless and gold is only precious if money is still worth something...

Of course most people would find those statements false but try eating money or gold when you are alone and hungry

It’s pointless and hopeless this world of sheeple will stay asleep up until the day the shit hits the fan for them

People have to wait for their own personal day of crisis to wake up

What we post on Facebook or here does not matter sheeple will sheep as in $heep

Baa sheep are bad

[w***@yahoo.com.sg]

Lee Kuan Yew was paranoid about outsiders subverting his rule. Yet, he saw it as absolutely necessary that his country was plugged to the world.

It is to China's benefit to be plugged in, too.

Wakalukong

[ltlee1]

Post by Deng Qi Feng
You can post profound wisdom on Facebook or here like Money is worthless and gold is only precious if money is still worth something...
Of course most people would find those statements false but try eating money or gold when you are alone and hungry
It’s pointless and hopeless this world of sheeple will stay asleep up until the day the shit hits the fan for them
People have to wait for their own personal day of crisis to wake up
What we post on Facebook or here does not matter sheeple will sheep as in $heep
Baa sheep are bad

Actually, all countries should fear about social platform like Facebook because this is a powerful tool which could be abused readily. And the world has yet to develop effective rules and institutions to counter them. The following excerpted from "World Without Mind" provides one example:

"THE HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR Jonathan Zittrain has spun the following hypothetical scenario. There’s a down-to-the-wire election. Mark Zuckerberg has a strong opinion about the candidate he would like to prevail. As we have seen, Facebook claims that it can boost voter turnout, carefully placing reminders of civic duty in News Feeds on Election Day, generating social pressure to head to the polls. That this experiment worked isn’t just a public relations claim, but an established finding of social science. In the Zittrain scenario, Zuckerberg launches another get-out-the-vote effort. Only this time, the reminders are placed selectively. Facebook has a pretty good sense of your political affiliation, based on all the items you’ve liked. Facebook can also discern your voting precinct. So instead of urging all citizens to perform their civic duty, Facebook calibrates its call to action to target only the voters who will pull the lever for Zuckerberg’s candidate.

The idea that a tech company would favor a candidate is hardly novel. Google’s executive chairman, Eric Schmidt, threw himself behind Barack Obama in the 2012 election. He muddied himself in the arcane details of the campaign, not just writing checks, but recruiting talent and helping build its technological apparatus. His recruits scoured massive data sets to target voters with unprecedented precision. “On election night he was in our boiler room,” says Obama campaign guru David Plouffe. These efforts made a difference. “Obama campaign veterans say that applying this rigor to their half-billion-dollar media budget made it 15 percent more efficient, saving tens of millions of dollars,” Bloomberg reported after the campaign."

Do you think the US would allow Russian version of Facebook or Google to operate freely in the US? I don't think so. For companies like Facebook to be accepted by a knowledgeable government, it must be assured of its good will. Well, very small and weak countries are the exceptions. If, for example, the US does not like what these small weak countries do, they could just send a low level diplomat to talk sense into them. It does not need to use Facebook to do its job.

[somchai]

Their ban was necessary as their peoples are not matured enough yet to
handle the black and white between their lines of words and statements and
images.

Thailand had to control their internet network to control their imbalanced
people from using it.

So ,at some time in the future, this will open to them. This is when the
public in China is naturedly improved of their internal system stabled with
a maturely behavioral thoughts and actions.

This is also that the law system will by then able to supervise and control
them.



"Deng Qi Feng" wrote in message news:25edd4f8-4bd7-4194-9c5c-***@googlegroups.com...

You can post profound wisdom on Facebook or here like Money is worthless and
gold is only precious if money is still worth something...

Of course most people would find those statements false but try eating money
or gold when you are alone and hungry

It’s pointless and hopeless this world of sheeple will stay asleep up until
the day the shit hits the fan for them

People have to wait for their own personal day of crisis to wake up

What we post on Facebook or here does not matter sheeple will sheep as in
$heep

Baa sheep are bad

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[ltlee1]

I think the following article written by a Taiwanese provides good background on China's internet policy. Briefly, current policy safeguard cultural security and encourage innovation.

https://thediplomat.com/2017/10/chinese-internet-law-what-the-west-doesnt-see/

"The internet has a central position in today’s economy, and has played an active role in China’s economic transformation and engagement with the world. Consequently, the internet is seen as an enabler of economic development by the Chinese. On the other hand, throughout its 5,000 year history, China has experienced its share of unhappy exchanges with the world, particularly early occurrences of globalized trade. Considering the traumatic humiliation of China during the unequal treaties period at the turn of the 19th century, a certain uneasiness about unbound cross-border exchanges is understandable. Thus, since the early days of its Reform and Opening under Deng Xiaoping in the 1980s, China has maintained the principle that foreign investors are only welcome as long as their presence benefits the Chinese economy and large cohorts of Chinese society. The internet is not immune to this principle.

The essentially closed-off Chinese market has incubated a plethora of sustainable, highly innovative domestic Web 2.0/social media platforms. Yet at first, Facebook, Google, and Twitter were just as optimistic as the Western enterprises that arrived in China in the 1980s with the expectation of selling Coca Cola and IBM personal computers to the most populous market in the world. However, the Chinese government was not willing to allow China to merely become an import-reliant consumer market without long-term benefits for its citizens. The similarities to today’s internet industries in China are striking. As social media/Web 2.0 and the technologies and business models which evolved from them take on an ever-growing role in our lives, there is no benefit Chinese society in a developmental, intellectual, technical, and economic reliance on foreign platforms. The inability of the vast majority of developed world economies to counter “Silicon Valley hegemony” is a constant warning to China.

Following the concept of cultural security, “innovation security” (創新安全) refers to the “protection of an environment in which society is able to make the required intellectual efforts to achieve substantial innovation and in parallel a national economy that is able to sustain commercial applications of such innovation from erosion and destruction by internal and external hostile forces.” This concept finds its practical expression in the rise of Alibaba, Tencent (QQ, WeChat), Youku Tudou, and other successful Chinese platforms.

The implications of China’s innovation security for Silicon Valley and the Western world overall are far-reaching. Not long ago, the United States West Coast was the embodiment of innovation. Now, China is plowing ahead. Just this month, Alibaba has vowed to invest $15 billion into its R&D programs over the next three years.

Domestic Chinese platforms, enabled by innovation security, are no longer poor substitutes for U.S. market leaders. To name one example, Chinese third party mobile payment services Alipay and WeChat Pay are successfully entering overseas markets. In view of the large domestic user base and growing overseas adoption, the ramifications for established financial service industries in Western countries are immense. Thanks to China’s innovation security, defended by the Great Firewell, the government provides a protected environment for domestic innovators and start-ups."

Post by somchai
Their ban was necessary as their peoples are not matured enough yet to
handle the black and white between their lines of words and statements and
images.
Thailand had to control their internet network to control their imbalanced
people from using it.
So ,at some time in the future, this will open to them. This is when the
public in China is naturedly improved of their internal system stabled with
a maturely behavioral thoughts and actions.
This is also that the law system will by then able to supervise and control
them.
You can post profound wisdom on Facebook or here like Money is worthless and
gold is only precious if money is still worth something...
Of course most people would find those statements false but try eating money
or gold when you are alone and hungry
It’s pointless and hopeless this world of sheeple will stay asleep up until
the day the shit hits the fan for them
People have to wait for their own personal day of crisis to wake up
What we post on Facebook or here does not matter sheeple will sheep as in $heep
Baa sheep are bad
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com