- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 381 Hour
- Reading permission
WENGEWANG Post time: 2018-8-8 09:16
i dont think anyone is expecting cyber privacy in china. however, here is what no one is talking abo ...
here is what no one is talking about. when western leaders look at chinese surveilance, theyre most likely saying, "how can we do what the chinese are doing. how can we, as western leaders, ALSO keep tabs on western citizens". the west has been doing all the things that you mentioned
That only shows where you come from.
Majority of foreigners in west (and elsewhere) have zero interest in China, Chinese people, Chinese government, or Chinese surveillance. For them China is a word following "Made in" in their cheap goods, or term for cups in their cupboards.
And this extends to those who discuss issues of surveillance (cyber or other) in the west and western media. They may occassionally refer to China as an extreme example of that, but their main concern is what their own governments or corporations do (or don't do).
It is only on Chinese forums like this, that discussions circle around China - quite reasonably, since many of us are living in China or at least have some connection to the country. At the same time we originate from various different countries, rather than all being from USA, so we do not take "the west" as a single domain with exact same system.
You listed various examples of western governments and corporations collecting private information.
But you fail to acknowledge how most of it is meant to serve the public. Neutral facial expression in passport photos makes it easier and faster to queue in passport controls, or ID's required for airbnb (and others) is to increase safety of services provided under shared economy model.
Warrants may be easily given to police, but neverthless a warrent leaves documentation that it was done. It is that transparency that makes western surveillance often different from Chinese surveillance.
In context of China, what few mention is that beyond the state control for its own good, there are similar reasons to create better services to the public.
It should be important to disect that part of the equation. All countries practise some level of surveillance, how much of it is done to better services, and how much for other reasons, varies between countries. In my opinion it is only those "other reasons" that are worthy discussing.
For example, if somebody buys a SIM card in China, does the requirement for real name registration serve to provide better telecommunication services? For foreigners the experience is quite the contrary - most stores do not know how to process a foreign passport in the system, and refuse to sell phone cards to foreigners. The regulations therefore render the service completely inaccessible to them. Obviously service quality is not a factor behind this requirement.