• @absquatulate
    link
    English
    664 months ago

    Yeah, privacy. That’s definitely what it’s for

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    264 months ago

    I kinda regret being defederated from Lemmy tankies, I’m curious how are they going to defend this.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      234 months ago

      *something something google exist so it’s basically the same something west propaganda something fuck Ukraine

      There, I saved you from having to interact with that scum

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Red fash defend fascism by appealing to some corny authority. If daddy Xi says it’s cool, then it’s cool! Because “communism”…

    • @rottingleaf
      link
      English
      34 months ago

      They don’t need to defend this, tankies’ values don’t include privacy from the state.

      But western governments with compliant companies have the same or bigger amount of information on their citizens’ activities as China is trying to get.

      So here’s your whataboutism if you want to discard it, as if someone ever really needed a reason to retreat from argument.

      If you don’t, I’ll add that in my opinion future sucks.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    224 months ago

    Yea we will protect your privacy. Give us your social security and unique identifier. We won’t target you specifically /s

  • ivanafterall ☑️
    link
    English
    164 months ago

    I’m going to need you all to send me your bank account details so that I can protect your finances.

  • @Raptor_007
    link
    English
    94 months ago

    “Could?” No. “Absolutely would.”

  • @aleq
    link
    English
    74 months ago

    They already have something kinda like this. All public wifis require that you sign in with phone number and SMS-verification. It might not be as air-tight as whatever the article is about (like a chad I only read headlines), but in practice it seems pretty darn tight IMO.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I read the article because I was quite sure China already had internet identifiers. This article is just about China wanting to make the government the sole proprieter of internet identities. Propaganda line or not that does make the privacy line make sense as less organizations are tracking your identifiers, and it’s not as if the CPC wouldn’t have the access to information the non government companies have. My sense is you’re not really hiding from them simply by using private companies whenever you can. It’s a tighter grip for sure, but it’s not going to change much on its own.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    So this is different from Korean iPIN because Chinese people can only get it from the government in the new proposal? It looks like they both already tie online presence to traceable identifiers, just Korea allows you to get it from government or private company and China wants to take that ability away from private companies.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    34 months ago

    Lmao, do you mean CTH will be extra double-banned from mainland China?! How terrible lmao.