Coming to America? China Introduces ‘Credit Score’ For Obedient Citizens
GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Coming to America? China Introduces ‘Credit Score’ For Obedient Citizens
And this is the end game, this is where it's all headed. All the spying and tracking, all of the algos and profiling, all of the silencing of any form of dissent, all of the media manipulation, all of the PC crap, all of the educational "reforms", all of the doublethink / newspeak Orwellian crap, here is the head of the zit that has been festering for decades:
Coming soon to a town near you! I give it about 15 years, at the outside, before systems like this are implemented world wide. It is estimated that by 2030 technology will be cheap enough and ubiquitous enough as to make real time tracking of everyone in a metropolitan area practical.
the video is funny but the message is sad. The good idea is to tend use your savings to buy new car, tv, etc. More autonomy this way like just going in bank saying "hey i want a credit"
Dunno ... I detect a little bit of "Dewey Defeats Truman" here.
That now-famous debacle happened because they used a telephone poll at a time when most Americans didn't yet have telephones. So, unwittingly, they biased their sample in favor of people who were wealthy enough to have phones, and who favored Dewey.
Likewise, any sort of "credit score" ... and I candidly admit that this sounds to me very much like a hoax ... would only be dealing with the segment of the (Chinese) population that is obsessed with gaming, with being on-line and so forth. One of the reasons why I smell a hoax here is that I don't think that the vast majority of the Chinese population is actually like that. Even "the vast majority of the population of the United States" is not "like that," and China is many times larger and many, many times older.
Dunno ... I detect a little bit of "Dewey Defeats Truman" here.
That now-famous debacle happened because they used a telephone poll at a time when most Americans didn't yet have telephones. So, unwittingly, they biased their sample in favor of people who were wealthy enough to have phones, and who favored Dewey.
Likewise, any sort of "credit score" ... and I candidly admit that this sounds to me very much like a hoax ... would only be dealing with the segment of the (Chinese) population that is obsessed with gaming, with being on-line and so forth. One of the reasons why I smell a hoax here is that I don't think that the vast majority of the Chinese population is actually like that. Even "the vast majority of the population of the United States" is not "like that," and China is many times larger and many, many times older.
It's not a hoax. It's a real system. It will be mandatory by 2020.
Ground work is being established in America and other "western cultures" that would create the tools needed to implement the Chinese style system here at a future date.
Hmmm. This reminds me of some members asking for censoring posts and threads here.
A lot of the open desert around my ranch in Hudspeth county has Chinese names on the county property tax map in the City Hall Tax office. Imagine that. Chinese land owners in West Texas.
I guess they better watch their P's and Q's before coming over and walking around on what they bought.
Well, I leave it up to each individual to determine for themselves, through the filter of their own belief system as to whether or not any of this has any larger meaning.
But, whether you view it from a purely secular POV, or whatever POV you chose to view the world through I challenge anybody to tell me that the trend line on any of this is anything but bad.
And if you agree that the trend line is bad then I encourage you to do something about it whatever way you can.
We are the people who build and maintain this stuff. If you're in a position to decide what goes in the code or the systems don't give these jack wagons the tools and capabilities they want.
2020 is a long way away, in terms of world politics.
Furthermore, there are 1.3 billion people in China, and they're not all young people with cell-phones in their hands. It's a computer geeks "mys-topia" to imagine that the Chinese government could "train its citizens to be docile" by means of a computer game. (For that matter, it's pretty much a myth that the government wants to "train its citizens to be docile.")
There are over a billion more people there, in a country with roughly the land-mass of the United States but with extraordinarily challenging topography ... and ancient history.
- - - - -
As far as "Chinese names on the property-tax rolls," China has for many years been looking for American investments with which to turn its vast supply of "American Dollars," obtained by lopsided trade, into something tangible. Real estate is an excellent investment for such purposes. But you can expect this to change now that the Chinese Yuan is going to be another world reserve currency. China will no longer have to "accumulate Dollars with no way to get rid of them."
- - - - -
As far as "Facebook banking" is concerned, let the record show that there are people out there who do not use Facebook at all, and who have never done so. (Namely, "me.")
We live in a time right now where "social networking," and in fact "the Internet in general" has a vastly over-inflated opinion of itself, and of its own (self-)importance. (To a certain extent, that's simply the marketing strategy that these companies have chosen to use.) To them, the world is the Internet, and the Internet is the world. But this is not the case. They can't perceive anything to be standing in their way, especially not law and regulation. Theirs is a Utopian world, and "why do you need to regulate Utopia?" Well ...
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 12-23-2015 at 06:39 PM.
2020 is a long way away, in terms of world politics.
Furthermore, there are 1.3 billion people in China, and they're not all young people with cell-phones in their hands. It's a computer geeks "mys-topia" to imagine that the Chinese government could "train its citizens to be docile" by means of a computer game. (For that matter, it's pretty much a myth that the government wants to "train its citizens to be docile.")
There are over a billion more people there, in a country with roughly the land-mass of the United States but with extraordinarily challenging topography ... and ancient history.
- - - - -
As far as "Chinese names on the property-tax rolls," China has for many years been looking for American investments with which to turn its vast supply of "American Dollars," obtained by lopsided trade, into something tangible. Real estate is an excellent investment for such purposes. But you can expect this to change now that the Chinese Yuan is going to be another world reserve currency. China will no longer have to "accumulate Dollars with no way to get rid of them."
If I travelled back in time and told George Washington about how the state runs all over us today, watches everything we do and constantly sticks its nose in our business w/o a warrant he'd probably cry BS too. When this country was founded the state had to get a warrant to even search my curtilage!!!
At the rate things are going now it won't long before some retarded algorithm that couldn't tell the difference between a good guy and a bad guy with both hands a flash light will be legally authorized to deny me the right to purchase a firearm w/ absolutely no due process what-so-ever!
Meh ... the only firearms that I have "'round here" are those which are used (to very good effect, if I may say ...) to shoot the 'possums and 'coons who would endanger my animals.
To me, "guns are 'a tool.'" Nothing more, nothing less. I learned how to use 'em, store 'em, clean 'em, etc., at age ten. (And I took to the Scout-camp rifle range like a duck to water. Yeah, "I shoot quite well, thankye.")
Alas for those who would make gun-ownership or gun-purchases "a major political point," those guns were purchased more than forty years ago ... and they still work just fine in the purpose for which I periodically apply them: I shoot the varmints, I hit 'em (always achieving a clean, merciful kill ...), and next mornin' I bag 'em up and throw 'em in the trash.
(And no, you do not 'hear banjo music!')
When I periodically visit local pawn-shops in search of bargain musical instruments, I can certainly appreciate the business importance of selling what seem to me to be "mostly symbolic" (i.e. "completely impractical ...") firearms for four(!)-figure prices. But I would never bother to buy one. I am very-simply not a part of their market segment: I have no need, and no interest, in such things. If Bad Guys show up at my domicile, I'm gonna call the Police.
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 12-23-2015 at 09:58 PM.
...If Bad Guys show up at my domicile, I'm gonna call the Police.
I was milpo LE / gov sec for 15 years. When seconds count we were minutes away. I've seen the bodies left behind while folks were waiting for me to get there to save them.
I was a cop. I am *very* pro catch the bad guy / bust the bad guy / keeps guns away from the bad guy. The bad guys have tried to kill me.
And as a former cop/sec I am telling you that this fascist, police state, watch everybody, profile everybody, have AI algos monitor everybody's speech crap has gone too far.
... and I am waiting, quite impatiently now, for serious opposition to materialize against it.
But, not just opposition, but guidance. The Internet is a wonderful thing that has actually spread around the world. Yet it is something the likes of which have never before existed. (Much the same can be said of our "unbelievably microscopic and fast electronics," in general.)
We cannot "stamp it out," nor blindly say, "I'm again' it." Nor would we want to. But this is not a "Mobius Coin" that has only one side.
What are the dangers in this thing? How must computers and programming and the Internet etc. be regulated to attenuate these dangers? How are the regulations and laws to be enforced? What recourse and powers should citizens have? And so on.
I do not hear any such discussion being made. A warmed-over vanilla stew of early 20th Century political ideals and Cold War era thinking (insanely lucrative though it might be to a few ...) is not what is going to allow us to protect ourselves from the dangers of this technology while at the same time continuing to exploit its benefits.
This manner of thinking is also going to come back to bite us when, not if, "the Internet is manifested as a weapon of war, and not as George Orwell predicted."
If we, within this our industry, do not lead these conversations ... no one else will.
In the Chinese proposal, I detect the presence of a decidedly-capitalist Communist who dreams of selling 1.3 billion computers and the infrastructure to wire it all up. In Facebook, a company that simply wants to make itself more powerful yet, as it taps into (and records and analyzes) still more tidbits of Everyman's personal life. (The Internet-enabled toilet bowl cannot be far away.) I hear no "practicality" here, nor any thought of "what is 'too far', and why?"
If we, within this our industry, do not lead these conversations ... no one else will. But we will be among those who will pay the steepest price for our silence.
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 12-24-2015 at 07:48 AM.
... and I am waiting, quite impatiently now, for serious opposition to materialize against it.
But, not just opposition, but guidance. The Internet is a wonderful thing that has actually spread around the world. Yet it is something the likes of which have never before existed. (Much the same can be said of our "unbelievably microscopic and fast electronics," in general.)
We cannot "stamp it out," nor blindly say, "I'm again' it." Nor would we want to. But this is not a "Mobius Coin" that has only one side.
What are the dangers in this thing? How must computers and programming and the Internet etc. be regulated to attenuate these dangers? How are the regulations and laws to be enforced? What recourse and powers should citizens have? And so on.
I do not hear any such discussion being made. A warmed-over vanilla stew of early 20th Century political ideals and Cold War era thinking (insanely lucrative though it might be to a few ...) is not what is going to allow us to protect ourselves from the dangers of this technology while at the same time continuing to exploit its benefits.
This manner of thinking is also going to come back to bite us when, not if, "the Internet is manifested as a weapon of war, and not as George Orwell predicted."
If we, within this our industry, do not lead these conversations ... no one else will.
In the Chinese proposal, I detect the presence of a decidedly-capitalist Communist who dreams of selling 1.3 billion computers and the infrastructure to wire it all up. In Facebook, a company that simply wants to make itself more powerful yet, as it taps into (and records and analyzes) still more tidbits of Everyman's personal life. (The Internet-enabled toilet bowl cannot be far away.) I hear no "practicality" here, nor any thought of "what is 'too far', and why?"
If we, within this our industry, do not lead these conversations ... no one else will. But we will be among those who will pay the steepest price for our silence.
Finally, some common ground.
I try to start conversations and people's eyes glaze over. They'd much rather play candy crush, tweet, facebook and look at cat videos.
Like I said above DO SOMETHING. Get involved. Participate. Make yourself heard.
The right computers can fold trillions of proteins an hour, helping us cut decades off of cancer research.
That does not mean that we have to let fascist jack wagons use that tech to rule our lives.
A lot of this will only be addressed through the legislative process.
But that will never happen if all of us don't get up off our collectively lazy behinds and do something about it.
(And don't even get me started on the weaponization of the net. I can go on for days on that one too. Almost as bright as weaponizing the atom and a lot more dangerous b/c the buttheads in charge are a lot more likely to think they could actually win a hacking war as opposed to a nuclear war.)
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
In Facebook, a company that simply wants to make itself more powerful yet, as it taps into (and records and analyzes) still more tidbits of Everyman's personal life. (The Internet-enabled toilet bowl cannot be far away.) I hear no "practicality" here, nor any thought of "what is 'too far', and why?"
