Yes, I have. Have you read beyond that point? The West distorts the scope and nature of the credit system to ludicrous degrees, nobody claims that there’s no such thing.
It’s besides the point how it is talked about. The Second screenshot literally says “Social credit. We don’t have this at all” and your link very much proves that they do. Therefore propaganda in my eyes.
They very much have a credit score that is not anywhere comparable to the Orwellian depiction in western media, and furthermore the credit system is largely for businesses, not individuals. The western depiction simply does not exist.
I can and will not argue this point since I lack the proper knowledge on the subject.
We all agree on the fact that a system exists.
From the post:
“Social credit. We don’t have this at all” is a lie. Again, I am not saying anything about how to system works or how it is preceived. I am saying that it exists and the post claimed it does not, nothing else.
That makes it propaganda to me.
TL;DR:
The post claims that something that exists does not. This is a fact.
I believe this to be propaganda in some form. This is an opinion.
It’s overwhelmingly clear that you need to do more legwork to prove that that user genuinely thinks there is no credit score, and is not directly responding to the Orwellian version. This is clearly taking a dogmatic reading of one sentence to come up with the absurd claim that Chinese citizens believe that publicly stated policy doesn’t actually exist.
It is overwhelmingly clear that you are not arguing in good faith. You are trying to argue points I explicitly said I am not arguing or discussing. But I will explain again. I will also use the word image instead of post to make it more clear what I mean, just in case that was confusing you.
Let us break this down.
It’s overwhelmingly clear that you need to do more legwork to prove that that user genuinely thinks there is no credit score
I have never tried to prove this. I said that the image claims that there is no system for social credit score. I do not equate the image to users in general. I even suspect that this image could be fake.
and is not directly responding to the Orwellian version.
Was I not clear enough? I am not discussing anything about any version of the system in question, only it’s existance. Image says it does not exist, we both agree that it does. Again, I am not saying anything about how it works or how it is perceived.
This is clearly taking a dogmatic reading of one sentence to come up with the absurd claim that Chinese citizens believe that publicly stated policy doesn’t actually exist.
You are right, it would be an absurd claim to make, one that I am not trying to make. I am trying to point out that the image claims something to be true. We both agree that this is not true, or are you going to say at the system does not exist now?
I also said that I believe this some form of propaganda, but that does not have mean that I endorse or refute any claim regarding the west part of the world’s view on this matter.
Please discuess my arguments. Please refrain from “attacking” points I explicitly said I was not making.
I read the whole article, as it went on to describe more of what has been reported as having a “social credit score”, and gave more details about how it’s administered.
Basically, the headline is “no, it’s not at all what you’ve heard”, and then the article goes on to describe exactly what has been reported in the US. I’m not sure your point about “there’s no credit score that is administered by the Chinese government with a mechanism for blacklisting you and restricting you everywhere” is well-supported by an article that describes a credit score that is administered by the Chinese government that operates blacklists that are enforced under the slogan “whoever violates the rules somewhere shall be restricted everywhere.”
If that’s not actually how it works, then you need to provide a credible source that proves that’s not how it works. Providing a source that reports that yes, that’s exactly how it works doesn’t serve your argument. And “well but the West is totally lying, maaan” isn’t proof; it’s an unverified claim by a random internet commenter.
Yes, I have. Have you read beyond that point? The West distorts the scope and nature of the credit system to ludicrous degrees, nobody claims that there’s no such thing.
It’s besides the point how it is talked about. The Second screenshot literally says “Social credit. We don’t have this at all” and your link very much proves that they do. Therefore propaganda in my eyes.
They very much have a credit score that is not anywhere comparable to the Orwellian depiction in western media, and furthermore the credit system is largely for businesses, not individuals. The western depiction simply does not exist.
I can and will not argue this point since I lack the proper knowledge on the subject.
We all agree on the fact that a system exists.
From the post:
“Social credit. We don’t have this at all” is a lie. Again, I am not saying anything about how to system works or how it is preceived. I am saying that it exists and the post claimed it does not, nothing else.
That makes it propaganda to me.
TL;DR:
It’s overwhelmingly clear that you need to do more legwork to prove that that user genuinely thinks there is no credit score, and is not directly responding to the Orwellian version. This is clearly taking a dogmatic reading of one sentence to come up with the absurd claim that Chinese citizens believe that publicly stated policy doesn’t actually exist.
It is overwhelmingly clear that you are not arguing in good faith. You are trying to argue points I explicitly said I am not arguing or discussing. But I will explain again. I will also use the word image instead of post to make it more clear what I mean, just in case that was confusing you.
Let us break this down.
I have never tried to prove this. I said that the image claims that there is no system for social credit score. I do not equate the image to users in general. I even suspect that this image could be fake.
Was I not clear enough? I am not discussing anything about any version of the system in question, only it’s existance. Image says it does not exist, we both agree that it does. Again, I am not saying anything about how it works or how it is perceived.
You are right, it would be an absurd claim to make, one that I am not trying to make. I am trying to point out that the image claims something to be true. We both agree that this is not true, or are you going to say at the system does not exist now?
I also said that I believe this some form of propaganda, but that does not have mean that I endorse or refute any claim regarding the west part of the world’s view on this matter.
Please discuess my arguments. Please refrain from “attacking” points I explicitly said I was not making.
I read the whole article, as it went on to describe more of what has been reported as having a “social credit score”, and gave more details about how it’s administered.
Basically, the headline is “no, it’s not at all what you’ve heard”, and then the article goes on to describe exactly what has been reported in the US. I’m not sure your point about “there’s no credit score that is administered by the Chinese government with a mechanism for blacklisting you and restricting you everywhere” is well-supported by an article that describes a credit score that is administered by the Chinese government that operates blacklists that are enforced under the slogan “whoever violates the rules somewhere shall be restricted everywhere.”
If that’s not actually how it works, then you need to provide a credible source that proves that’s not how it works. Providing a source that reports that yes, that’s exactly how it works doesn’t serve your argument. And “well but the West is totally lying, maaan” isn’t proof; it’s an unverified claim by a random internet commenter.
So why do you do what you’re trying to do? For what purpose?
No, it does not describe “exactly as what the western media depicted.” The west reported utterly nonsense and unfounded ideas of facial recognition and tracking, among other ludicrous ideas out of a necessity to sensationalize.