majia

In low end manufacturing sector it's really hard to know your end customers. The products are highly standardized and can go though multiple middlemen. Also the sheer volume, most of which are legitimate, makes it very difficult for governments to track.

Roads, bridges, forests, power grids, water pipelines, solar farms, as well as indoctrination camps and mass surveillance network.

What if Moray says something to support Palestine freedom and human rights? Would NBA support Moray or Israel?

What seized were not fentanyl, but some chemicals could be used in the fentanyl manufacturing process, as well as many other legitimate use.

If you want to stop fentanyl, the best thing to do is to figure out what chemicals are used exclusively in fentayl production and build an international coalition to ban those. Unfortunately many people just don't appreciate this kind of sophistication and prefer an easier blame game.

> Wouldn't be surprised if they were overstated, so as to keep citizens in check.

This is a little stretching. Most Chinese audience can’t or won’t watch BBC.

Gov is more likely to be schemed than VC because those who make investment decision don’t get as much reward/punishment. However, for the same reason, gov can also invest in projects with long term benefits. So gov is not intrinsically good or bad; it’s really about good governance.

What you said about Huawei is more applicable to Boeing, which sells weapon systems instead of telecom gears. You may want to look at how US companies are involved in arm sales to Saudi.

It’s fair that US wants to contain China’s leverage in Africa and maintain its own, but this is a national security priority for US , not “everyone”.

I know we all have an impulse to take the easy path. But please think about what if you happen to be wrong, how a person would feel if he’s labeled a liar/paid troll for having an account that looks suspicious to some, and what meaningful discussion we can have if we just call each other liars?

If you think OP is smearing, you can refute his argument with facts and flag his comment. It’s a human bias to think someone whom we disagree with has a malicious agenda. Democracy can survive the worst oppression, but will perish if we fail to conduct civilized discussion and start accusing and labeling each other when we disagree.

It is Trump who called it a riot.

We have to assume good faith precisely because it's impossible to tell the difference you mentioned. If a real propagandist tells a lie, we can refute it with facts and flag the comment. But if a honest user is labelled as 'paid troll', it's almost impossible for the honest user to prove himself. And that severely poisons the discussion.

Being substantive means replying to the actual argument instead of questioning the credibility of the person who makes an argument.

Please follow HN guidelines and refrain from personal attack. Assume good faith and be substantive.

SCMP still publishes a lot of anti CCP articles and is banned in China.

It's more likely that the protest causes huge damage to HK economy, and HK people start to get tired of it. At some point people may decide to take economic incentives from Beijing and become another city in China with some superficial autonomy status.