Miscellaneous News

Appix

Senior Member
Registered Member

US reportedly orders WhatsApp to track some Chinese users​

  • Forbes reports that Drug Enforcement Administration order involves seven users in China and Macau, authorised by law that allows such tracing without a full explanation
  • Case may be connected to an investigation into efforts by Chinese individuals and entities to ship opioids to the US, Forbes says
The US has been secretly tracking a group of Chinese users of the popular messaging service WhatsApp since November, possibly in an effort to halt illegal opioid sales, Forbes has reported.

The US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) ordered WhatsApp, which is owned by Facebook, to track seven users based in China and Macau, a move authorised by the Pen Register Act, which allows such tracing without an explanation of the reasons for the monitoring, according to the report, which was posted online on Monday.

Source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Non paywall

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Petrolicious88

Senior Member
Registered Member
But China as it continues to grow economically, scientifically etc..will have the breathing space to add more people that can and will produce China's innovators/disruptors. China already have the most number of millionaires in the world, the most women in the billion dollar club etc...

With respect, I don't think you have managed to present a credible argument to support your push for the kind of immigration you're advocating for China to make.
"The kind of immigration I'm pushing for" is to attract the best and brightest global talents to come work, live and contribute to the economy. The Thousand Talent Program or Overseas High - Level Talent Recruitment program was designed to do that. Clearly the government recognized the need to do that. This idea that we have the most engineers, scientists, and billionaires, and thus doesn't need outside talent doesn't make sense.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
Nope. Not interested. Doing so would fundamentally change the dynamics, culture, and demographic make up of the country that's been able to withstand many millenia.

China must copy elements in other parts of the world that works and discard things that clearly don't or destructive if applied in China.

The U.S. Canada, Australia and other artificially created modern countries could experiment with mass immigration not entirely done from moral reasons but purely on capitalism and outward expansion when it comes to the U.S. absorbing mostly European immigrants to subdue/genocide the beast a.k.a. Native Americans from their own lands. The same applied to Canada, New Zealand, Australia.

The immigration issue has been the fulcrum of conflict in Europe and why leaders of Hungary, Poland, Austria, Sweden, Denmark, Norway etc...are increasingly becoming anti-immigration because the makeup and culture of their countries are being changed from within. The make up of those countries in 100 years time would not look any more differently than their North American counterparts with their culture essentially being colonized, cannibalized by liberal humanists who are nothing more than nihilistic hedonists which is pretty much the ultimate goals and project by the Liberals.

They essentially want a future with no borders, no discerning culture and where collectivism is all but extinguished replaced by INDIVIDUALISTS who are free to pursue every hedonistic desires.
As PM Justin Trudeau pointed out in the glowing profile penned by the NYT in 2015 stated:

Trudeau’s most radical argument is that Canada is becoming a new kind of state, defined not by its European history but by the multiplicity of its identities from all over the world. His embrace of a pan-cultural heritage makes him an avatar of his father’s vision. ‘‘There is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada,’’ he claimed. ‘‘There are shared values — openness, respect, compassion, willingness to work hard, to be there for each other, to search for equality and justice. Those qualities are what make us the first postnational state.’’
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I don't mean to provide a long winded response to your point about China having an immigration policy that can attract peoples of different ethnic backgrounds that in my opinion laudable, humane, and noble but IMHO not suitable for China as of right now.

The history of immigration is less a history of people attracted by a beacon of progress, and more one of persecution (which may be caused in part or whole by some of these beacons) displacing people from their homelands. Or, through conquest of foreign lands in which the original inhabitants now find themselves regarded as foreign immigrants.

China offers more to the global south than mere immigration of a few elites can provide. China offers wholesale industrialization so that instead of just some fat elites getting everything and being able to escape to a foreign jurisdiction, Chinese methods directly help the poor lift themselves up.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
The point is you don't get to cherry pick the billionaire who gets to come to your country, because how can you really?

Chamath Palihapitiya wasn't already a billionaire in his native Sri Lanka then all of a sudden decided to settle in the US. His family emigrated to Canada as refugees. Nobody thought or expected kid Chamath would grow up to be a billionaire.

Same goes for Bill Gates or Steve Jobs or Elon Musk. These guys didn't become uber rich over night. They were all nobodies in their native host countries (Gates and Jobs are/were natural born Americans, Musk is Canadian-South African). The environment they grew up in presented them the opportunity to become who they are now just like the environment in China, past and present, allowed the rise of Jack Ma, Pony Ma, Robin Li and a whole host of super rich. So the West is certainly not unique in that respect.

The question I believe Bellum is trying to raise is how many immigrants must the US, Canada, Europe or in this case, China, take in until there's a kid amongst them who might later grow up to become the next Elon Musk whom society seems to place so much value on, when China's already 'producing' more billionaires and graduating more talents from within her own native pool of Chinese than the US anyway?
Bill Gates and Steve Jobs weren't nobodies. Bill Gates was the son of a lawyer and bank president. His family was rich. Steve Jobs had a home in Palo Alto, even back then it was one of the richest and whitest suburbs of San Jose. They had a massive garage and disposable income for privately owned machine tools. Try buying a house in Palo Alto with a garage large enough to host a private machine shop today?
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
"The kind of immigration I'm pushing for" is to attract the best and brightest global talents to come work, live and contribute to the economy. The Thousand Talent Program or Overseas High - Level Talent Recruitment program was designed to do that. Clearly the government recognized the need to do that. This idea that we have the most engineers, scientists, and billionaires, and thus doesn't need outside talent doesn't make sense.
Or rather this idea that China will always need outside talent because they "can't innovate due to lack of freedom" don't make sense either. Those so called talented immigrant will have to compete with the local talent in China. Even if they do succeed they will contribute little to the overall China's success. YES China is that big and has plenty of great STEM to go along with it's growing economy that only outsiders can dream about.
 

Helius

Senior Member
Registered Member
Bill Gates and Steve Jobs weren't nobodies. Bill Gates was the son of a lawyer and bank president. His family was rich. Steve Jobs had a home in Palo Alto, even back then it was one of the richest and whitest suburbs of San Jose. They had a massive garage and disposable income for privately owned machine tools. Try buying a house in Palo Alto with a garage large enough to host a private machine shop today?
I meant that as a generalisation. Neither Gates nor Jobs were born with silver spoons in their mouths. They were well-off, yes, but not more so than your typical American upper middle class.

Had Bill Gates not founded Microsoft and become successful, but instead finished his law degree in Harvard and followed his father's footsteps, would you have known who he is? Or Steve Jobs without Apple for that matter?
 

BlackWindMnt

Captain
Registered Member
I meant that as a generalisation. Neither Gates nor Jobs were born with silver spoons in their mouths. They were well-off, yes, but not more so than your typical American upper middle class.

Had Bill Gates not founded Microsoft and become successful, but instead finished his law degree in Harvard and followed his father's footsteps, would you have known who he is? Or Steve Jobs without Apple for that matter?
No but then somebody else from the Corpo elite class would have created a Microsoft or a Apple maybe a steve gates or bill jobs.
There was a vacuum that could be filled, and well connected people can gather the resources to bootstrap something to fill that vacuum.
 

Helius

Senior Member
Registered Member
No but then somebody else from the Corpo elite class would have created a Microsoft or a Apple maybe a steve gates or bill jobs.
There was a vacuum that could be filled, and well connected people can gather the resources to bootstrap something to fill that vacuum.
True what you say, but it feels like we're splitting hairs now.

The point is people are famous once they've become famous. You know of Bill Gates because of Microsoft, not the other way around. Until MS-DOS and Windows took off and put the company on the map, how many people knew who the guy behind the company actually was?

Had a certain gentleman from Hangzhou, China remained an English teacher instead of founding one of the biggest tech giants in the world, would you have known a man called Jack Ma ever existed?

No doubt they're all extraordinarily capable individuals, but until they actually did the extraordinary, they were all "nobodies", because how would you have known otherwise... is what I'm trying to get across.
 

gelgoog

Brigadier
Registered Member
I meant that as a generalisation. Neither Gates nor Jobs were born with silver spoons in their mouths. They were well-off, yes, but not more so than your typical American upper middle class.

Had Bill Gates not founded Microsoft and become successful, but instead finished his law degree in Harvard and followed his father's footsteps, would you have known who he is? Or Steve Jobs without Apple for that matter?

Bill Gates went to a private high school which had access to a mainframe so students could learn how to program. Then he went to Harvard. If that is not silver spoon I do not know what is. His parents were already rich. He met Paul Allen while he was in highschool.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
I meant that as a generalisation. Neither Gates nor Jobs were born with silver spoons in their mouths. They were well-off, yes, but not more so than your typical American upper middle class.

Had Bill Gates not founded Microsoft and become successful, but instead finished his law degree in Harvard and followed his father's footsteps, would you have known who he is? Or Steve Jobs without Apple for that matter?
I can accept that for Steve Jobs but to say Bill Gates wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth is ridiculous. Average middle class isn't a lawyer and bank president family in the 1950s lmao.
 
Top