We've (mostly) lost the idea of a content creator just creating content for the joy of sharing it, and transmitting it on their own through their own website using their own rules. So much content is now mediated through "platforms" that are beholden to a complex network of surveillance capitalism and its economic pressures.
It's actually refreshing to see someone doing their own thing, like, truly their own thing.
That said, the dude could use some CSS-skills.
Although I can totally imagine the reaction of someone like that to modern web frameworks. He might be inspired to roll-his-own... he did with EDA CAD as the creator of KISSCAD.
I assume that this is in preparation of the upcoming 30th anniversary of the Tiananen massacre, they always make changes to the censorship when a big event is comming up.
For instance for the 2008 olympics many blocked sites were opened up, and conversely they tighten everything up before every National People's Congress elections.
Scott Young is a publicist - his goal is to sell, sell, sell. Completing a world-renowned 4-year curriculum in 1 years time is impossible. (He also admitted to reading the solutions instead of doing the problem sets)
This is akin to saying that Math 55 is impossible and neglects that he didn’t claim to complete the requirements for an MIT degree but for a Computer Science Major. That’s two years of classes, not four, and if your aim is to pass the exams for them rather than learn everything to mastery doing it in one year seems possible if still incredibly hard.
I was bracing for you to reveal that Sadaghdar was right all along and that Dr.Lewin was wrong but.. in the end it's about whose youtube video like / dislike ratio is better?
Yes. And Sadaghdar was right all along, but turns around so was Dr. Lewin, it was an error in communication. Dr. Lewin defined Kirchhoff's Law in a particular way that Sadaghdar didn't agree with.
I'm sorry if that wasn't dramatic enough for you, but that's the only objective metric I have to show how either of their responses was received.
PS. Sadaghdar has 2.5 million subscribers, and Dr. Lewin has just under 400k, These are videos with thousands of like/dislike votes each.
Look guys I don't know what's going on with all these China news but as a european who's lived in china several years, a lot of it seems wrong. I was in south China for a year recently and many people had visible tattoos, just as many as west europeans. And nobody cared. At all.
Thanks. I’ve never been to China, but was rather surprised by the headline here. I can believe it with Japanese or Koreans, but my impression is that Chinese culture tends to be pretty chill about these sorts of things.
As the article says, "This shouldn't surprise anyone. For years, the US and the Five Eyes have had a monopoly on spying on the Internet around the globe. Other countries want in."
Yes, but now China can check to be sure that the data they have tunneled out of the Five Eyes stores are accurate... see that's getting real intelligence information :^)
The huge difference is the NSA collects to achieve political goals. China spies for political and economic benefit. Foreign businesses are frequently targeted with the singular goals of IP theft or gaining leverage in business negotiations.
Wow. I'm always astonished by the people who think economic espionage isn't a huge part of Western intelligence services. It is.
The Americans just hide it better and it's entirely within their mandate. China couldn't care less if the world finds out. France is absolutely running wild and has been for decades. Australia has been caught planting bugs in foreign leaders offices for the sole purpose of an oil companies business deal.
Depends on who you are. I am absolutely against this kind of surveillance. HOWEVER, as a US citizen I trust the US more with my data (or Germany or, etc.) then China.
As a US citizen living in the US, even if the Chinese were to have every bit of my private data, they wouldn't really pose any threat to me as I'm not in their jurisdiction. The US, on the other hand, has a very real ability to use my data against me.
With very few exceptions (e.g. you are being explicitly targeted by a hostile nation-state for high-profile activities), surveillance by foreign governments will always pose less risk than surveillance by your own government.
I agree with that, the US poses a much greater realistic threat with my data. However I'm also more confident in our government system to have at least some form of recourse.
However, I'll counter with the idea that while I as an individual am at minimal risk from direct legal action from China, the greater collection of data as a whole on say American's could be used maliciously. One example would be "Cambridge Analytica style" targeting of advertising, similar to the previous US election.
What I mean to say is that this data may pose a strategic advantage for China in ways other then targeting individuals. Yes the US can do this to me as well, but again I'm more confident in our system of checks/balances to at least minimize the damage.
Again, I do oppose all State surveillance, I just mean to voice my opinion the "lesser of the two evils"
That's a shortsighted view. If China is ever going to war with the US they sure as hell are going to use every bit of your data against your and other US citizens.
China has a limited overseas power projection. China does not have the power to get you. But the US can pretty much get anybody. Congrats on being a US citizen.
Is this a joke, ignorance or just being plain disingenuous?
The issue of Chinese money disrupting regulatory bodies and academia in Australia and New Zealand is quite severe. China has fantastic power projection with far less restraint than the US. The power projection of the US armed forces is overt in active conflict zones in the third world, but China's power projection via economic means in the first world is clearly apparent, and I think the age where this does not impact individuals directly is rapidly drawing to a close.
One solution, beside bashing China, is to vote for a liberal agenda that would give more funding to universities. Guggenheim and other art institutions took money from the Sacklers, who started the opioid crisis. Because they need money. And universities need money. They have to get money one way or another.
I hate the Chinese regime more than you do. The problem here is by exaggerating Chinese power, right-wing rhetoric in the West is singing a war song against China, which usually carries a racist undertone. And the dictator in China would stupidly believe China is indeed powerful. That's how the trade war between Xi and Trump started.
No. I'm not here to argue with anybody. I don't intend to change anyone's standing point. I realized long ago that online argument is more about sending pheromones so that the like-minded will come to you.
I apologize, I didn't mean to come off as snarky. What I mean is that it's my own country. If I was from say Sweden, I'd likely trust the Swedish government more as a Swedish Citizen.
