canada2020

By “retail trader”, do you mean you do this all by yourself?

I see. Given it’s so flexible, is this pretty much like a caching layer?

But when do you refresh the materialized views?

It’s almost like the intention is to divide the world and create more segregation rather than to benefit any one group.

And the brand sounds very pretentious. Maybe “the trust network” would’ve been better. It’s simply a group where we all trust each other. It’s not any “cleaner” tbh.

Twitter sits at the very top of a stack of technologies. Clearly the internet providers shouldn’t ban specific content, AWS should not either. Since Twitter is the most user facing, does that give it more responsibility to regulate the actual content on its platform? If not Twitter, who (if anyone) has the right to regulate content on the internet?

Better recommendation engine

Thanks! This is great. It appears that China's argument for Xinjiang are:

1. Anti-terrorism / Religious Extremist Activities 2. Poverty alleviation

We have certainly seen similar situations play out in the past (e.g. US & Middle East), with different approaches. China's approach is to eliminate "ethnic separatism" through these "re-education camps". Not ideal, for sure. But what would be a better solution?

If we had terrorism in the US -- in fact, an entire state of people subscribed to that mindset -- what's the best way to deal with that?

(This is, ofc, assuming China's terrorism claims are real)

For those of you who are downvoting this comment, it would be much more productive if you just reply and speak your mind here.

Right. In addition to Walmart, I think Shopify also has a chance at taking on Amazon, from a different angle. More broadly, all big retailers seem to target Amazon as a common enemy.

Yes, this is bad. I think we can all agree on that.

But does anyone have sources on _how_ China got into this situation? They wouldn't be detaining Uighurs at this scale for no reason. So what's the history behind this?

I left a separate comment here of someone else who commented on the article with a potential background reason (terrorism?). Although I'm not sure if can rely on just that one comment, and would love to hear what HN thought.

A part of a civil discussion requires that we understand and seek out the argument from all parties. As a society, we need to evolve from one-sided arguments.

Reposting the top comment on the article, was wondering what HN thought about this:

------------------------------------------------------

Godfree Roberts:

We created terrorists in Xinjiang, just as we did in Afghanistan. They murdered thousands of Chinese and, now that China has them under control, we make up stories about them.

US Ambassador Chas. H. Freeman, Director for Chinese Affairs at the U.S. Department of State from 1979-1981: "The CIA programs in Tibet, which were very effective in destabilizing it, did not succeed in Xinjiang. There were similar efforts made with the Uyghurs during the Cold War that never really got off the ground. In both cases you had religion waved as a banner in support of a desire for independence or autonomy which is, of course, is anathema to any state. I do believe that people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones applies here. I am part American Indian and those people are not here (in the US) in the numbers they once were because of severe genocidal policies on the part of the European majority”. 8/31/19