this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2026
1364 points (99.6% liked)
Technology
79763 readers
3342 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What is wrong with you? Are you even a person? Did you actually read what I said? Because this is boiler plate bot shit "why you defend China" (when I was fucking talking about the PRC's support of the Cambodian Genocide?) is getting very tiresome.
Get some new material or go home. Fucking pathetic. It's worse than talking to MAGA Nazis.
Did YOU read what you said?
Your entire spiel from before was literally nothing more than a collection of fallacies. You used a false equivalence by comparing worst case domestic repression (death squads) to foreign data misuse, which are fundamentally different types of risk and not logically comparable. It engages in whataboutism by deflecting concerns about China’s data access with references to American authoritarian threats, which doesn’t actually refute the original concern. The argument also builds a straw man by reducing all China related security worries to racist “Yellow Peril” panic, ignoring more nuanced, non racial critiques about state power and influence. Finally, it also leans on appeals to extreme outcomes and fear, invoking Nazis and executions to shut down debate rather than assess proportional, evidence based risks. Together, these fallacies prove two things: 1) You're engaging in bad faith and 2) your points were inherently flawed and logically unsound.
Like what even is the thesis supposed to be, that the concerns about China aren't real or serious because propaganda exists or because other threats exist? It's such a nonsensical take. People aren't concerned about China because of propaganda, they're concerned because China's actions, intentions, and track record raise a lot of red flags that are concerning. It doesn't take a genius to see that something nefarious is going on with these Chinese apps. Like for example...
These are are valid concerns that you're trying to conveniently dismiss because you're either ignorant of them or you're being dishonest. Like do you not find any of these things even slightly concerning? Trying to chalk up these legitimate concerns as nothing more than product of fearmongering and propaganda is the most intellectually lazy way to dismiss them because you can't be bothered to parse through the implications and consequences.
If you don't care about things like privacy, tyranny, freedom, ownership, safety, and the like then that's your problem. However, just because you don't care that doesn't mean others don't or that their concerns are product of propaganda. If anything that's a more of a reflection of you and how your own beliefs came to be. Your stance, even if we ignore all the fallacies, isn't even a principled one. At least what I'm saying is consistent and principled. You on the other hand? You're acting smug over a disingenuous, fallacious, and inconsistent stance, it's, as you would say, fucking pathetic.