Hacker News Reader

It’s a fairly common practice to have a localized geodetic datum defined for a country. WGS84 isn’t necessarily sufficiently accurate for all purposes, continental plates drift, the ellipsoid can be adjusted to local circumstances and so forth. When you want to compare very precise measurements over time, WGS84 is too imprecise.

Most of course avoid obfuscating their own maps, it seems like that is a result of 2002 legislation coming out of Beijing. There’s a long history of doing this, civilian Soviet maps often simply omitted a grid.

While mapping an adversary is comparatively trivial and cheap today, this sort of thinking wasn’t entirely unreasonable back during the cold war, when maps truly were hard to develop from afar (there’s a brilliant and beautiful book on this subject called “The Red Atlas”). There’s a saying that generals often fight the last war, maybe that’s why China chose to obfuscate their maps well into the satellite and GPS era.

> mapping an adversary is comparatively trivial and cheap today

Sorry what? Mapping is not anything close to trivial or cheap, even today. Apple took 4 years just to build a map of the SF Bay Area. Nor is it fixed or rapid, in an active war situation, presumably new targets would be built and moved quickly.

Old habits die hard I guess. Haha!

The standard has been reverse engineered before: https://github.com/googollee/eviltransform

I honestly don't know why companies simply don't implement it. It's not really "secret" -- or if it is, it's an "open secret".

Oh, I thought it was less like a Playstation DRM and more like something that would be harder to do. Tho I guess that makes sense. Probably companies don't want to run afoul of Chinese law which is fair.

> Tho reading some other comments, it seems it's not so hard to undo this...maybe this is not really about war or such attitude tho...but then why?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_geographic_dat...

> There is a licence fee associated with using this mandatory algorithm in China.

Tax dollars? And appeasing the bureaucracy?

Also, looking at the citation note, I get the impression that a Mr. Li Chengming probably got closer to his next promotion by putting his name on it.

It's really not that big a deal either, if you're an autocracy where controlling all access to accurate information is seen as the natural, normal, default thing to do. "Preparing for war", perhaps you could call it, but as much against their own people.

Attributing to intention that which can be adequately explained by dysfunction?

The problem is, such power structures tend to find their purpose eventually.

Dysfunction from another point of view could be seen as utlity haha! :)

> Wow, what it must be like to have that view that everyone else is against you

This is true. Anti-Chinese sentiment right now is high worldwide. And had been high since the 19th century. Look up Chinese Exclusion Act.

> This is true. Anti-Chinese sentiment right now is high worldwide. And had been high since the 19th century. Look up Chinese Exclusion Act.

I know the Act, and it's awful. But I don't think it's "true". At least we can agree that Chinese seem to have a sense that the world is "against" them.

I'm sure it seems it's true if you're Chinese, but for a country that literally describes anyone "non Chinese" as "outsider", and thinks that's entirely normal, I think it's more likely the sense of "othering" is self-created.

Perhaps the sense of "world against us" is balanced by, and created by, a Chinese sense that they are "against" others and need to be? Supported by a particularly Chinese sense of manifest destiny where "rejuvenation" means reestablishing what they see as their rightful place of "specialness" and "centralness" in the world? Accelerated recently by the central government's focus on "external spies" and preparing for "struggle"?

Like on a sidewalk, if you need to be "central" don't you also need to push "others" aside? :) I get you need to then play the fake victim and pretend others started it, but if you're starting with "othering", and "centralness" and "specialness", isn't it you who's responsible? But just not bold enough to own it yet, explicitly? So need to pretend, "Oh it's other people doing this, therefore we're doing it."

But what if it's actually self-generated, this desire for "centralness" and the concomitant "othering" of "non Chinese?" I think that's likely. Whether it's a historical reaction or a persistent characteristic, I'm not sure, but I don't think it matters. The fruits right now are the same. Although, I think it's likely that it is a persistent idea: remember that China was the predominant economy worldwide for at least 1000 years over a span that included the "Dark Ages" for the West. China not being the most developed is a recent thing. See Ian Morris' books for analysis if interested :) So it would make sense if Chinese now hold onto a forgotten dream of being more great than everyone else, and are starting to act like it. In fact, "feel it" to be their identity in the world, and the "rejuvenation" is sending them back to that? :) I think it's likely. What do you think?

It's culturally highly xenophobic and insular, despite being globally mercantile. I don't think it's likely that people are "against" Chinese as much as Chinese are against "outsiders" and the effects that then creates, both internally and on the world stage. Sad tho definitely! :)

  a country that literally describes anyone "non Chinese" as "outsider"

The US describes non US people as aliens. Both when they're from Mexico or from Mars

In official parlance it does occur, tho there's a move away from that in some quarters.

But in everyday parlance no, the US does not. But everyday Chinese describes "non Chinese" people as "outsiders". Hahaha! :) That's the point :)

Everyday Chinese describes foreigners as 外国人, literally "people from outside the country". Everything non-domestic is 外国 "outside the country". These seem to be pretty neutral terms to me.

This is the point! Hahaha :) It's not neutral at all. It literally means "outsiders":

so, if you're not Chinese, you will have Chinese people saying to your face "Oh, that outsider whatever whatever". Can you fucking believe that? That's not okay at all. But they've normalized this to be normal. To always use and normalize the use of an othering label. It's ridiculous.

It centralizes a kind of racist homogenity and monoculture. And anything outside of that? Outsider. Admittedly, I didn't see it at first. I thought, Oh okay whatever. But observe a lot and reflect a lot and you really see and feel what this does.

It's a normalization of othering encoded into the language, presented as okay.

I think if you don't see the problem with that, then you're either an "insider": a Chinese, for whom this is normalized, and like the water you grew up in, so you don't even see it, and you wouldn't see a problem because and you haven't experienced the other side of it. And verily this term and this othering creates this empathy gap.

Or if you have experienced this, maybe you haven't thought about it enough, or been around or living among Chinese people enough to really feel this. Idk, what's your story? :)

It's not so much what is said, but what it is or could be used for.

I know the Act, gut I don't think it's "true".

I believe this is due to communist forces being under siege since the beginning of the ideology.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_mentality

See how other nations dealt with the Russian revolution, and subsequently.

From CCP's perspective it has been surrounded by enemies from even before the founding of the PRC.

Remember violence begets violence.

Given e.g. the USA military buildup in the South China sea, perhaps the paranoia isn't entirely unfounded?

Are you just going to ignore the fact that China has been illegally building dozens if not hundreds of military bases there in international waters and is now trying to claim that it owns this territory?

That probably makes the paranoia even more founded? Especially when their (perceived) adversary has the habit of regularly starting illegal wars.

And let's not forget that the US recently stationed troops on a tiny Taiwanese island that's less than ten miles from the Chinese mainland. And at a time when the US is sabre-rattling over Taiwan, and is about to give Taiwan billions of dollars for "defence". And elsewhere in the world, the US almost seems to be trying to start WWIII.

In the current climate, being paranoid is the sensible option.

I think in geopolitics it's probably always sensible to be a little paranoid...or have some people whose job that is. But I think the Kinmen thing is less big than it seems. It's already a militarized Taiwan island, and Taiwan and China are officially "still at war", so arguably the more provocative move is Taiwanese military presence there.

A handful of US troops is not a significant deployment, and I think there's many ways that US and Chinese militaries actually collaborate and communicate, and one of these is (most likely) through the plausibly deniable route of Taiwan.

You misunderstand the job of these troops.

Forward deployment like this are not there to threaten China. They are there, to tie down USA politicians.

Suppose China makes a move on Taiwan, now they have to play around US troops or fear bringing USA into the war. US politicians now have troops stuck in a war zone, they can no longer just was their hands of the situation - that would be politically unacceptable.

Imagine if Russia had even symbolical amount of troops stationed in Gaza, Israel would be in a difficult position, indiscriminate fire can kill them and start an incident

Okay, I don't think it's me that misunderstands that it's not a threat, I think it's me that's on your side.

Although your point is interesting and I hadn't considered it about the insurance policy aspect of the deployment.

What's your background? :) haha :)

> And elsewhere in the world, the US almost seems to be trying to start WWIII.

What? Where? Can you give some examples?

> is about to give Taiwan billions of dollars for "defence"

Why quote defence? You think they give it for offence?

I suppose you're a citizen of the West; then US hegemony is certainly in your best interest.

> I suppose you're a citizen of the West; then US hegemony is certainly in your best interest

I am guessing you are from US, and you guys do not notice that quite often, domestic US politics shifts and you have a schism and throw one of your ‘allies’ under the bus.

Mr. Macron he just made a speech about how Europe can no longer rely on US.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-04-25/macron-sa...

My friend in Civ 5 had a fun habit of deploying a citadel right on his boarder with you, because citadels had an extra effect of taking every tile that surrounds them, literally stealing your territory.

He called these "Defensive citadels"

When you start claiming international waters as your own, it is not "well founded paranoia" when others start viewing that as hostile, it is simply being a jackass.

Yeah, I get that. Tho back then when this was originated China and the US were closer. The coolness came later. China definitely feels encircled militarily and with policy, and watching how NATO has pushed up against Russia's territory provocatively probably does not help assuage those sentiments. Hahahaha! :)