they both suck, dude.

Why though? What makes you think that other than "in bad country it is bad" ?

What actual things do you know about this country that drives you to have such an emotional reaction? Do you have this reaction about any south american countries or african countries? Many of them are capitalist countries that are significantly worse off for their people. Why is your emotional reaction significantly different for this one in particular?

The answer is propaganda. Your assessment is not a levelheaded on based on any real educated understanding of the data in comparison with other countries. Your assessment is based on feels acquired through the popular beliefs. Guess where those popular beliefs come from? The same place yours have come from, with the same level of understanding that you have. It's ignorant feels all the way down. Created by the strongest media propaganda machine ever devised in history.

Is any of this to say that it's all fucking rosey over there? Fuck no. Most of us are not juche and believe in a mixed market approach like what is being undertaken in Cuba, Vietnam, or China. We mostly have large criticisms of the isolated approach. But does that mean we buy into all the bullshit spread in the west and perpetuate it uncritically? Also no. That's what you're seeing here. People countering the utterly ignorant western bullshit liberals spew isn't an explicit endorsement of the country, but an attempt to get people to calm the fuck down about it and look at it in a more measured way.

A failed state that has a starving population

This is not correct. Food security in the country has drastically improved and continues to improve - FAO data - Unicef data - both support this position.

By choice.

No? The reason it's ostracised is a UN vote that was successfully passed that has never been challenged since because the DPRK is not in or allowed to join the UN, any attempt to would be immediately veto'd by the west. This is called 1718.

---

Wild to me how many replies you're getting that defend North Korea

You see, this here is a problem. You consider simply stating factually true things that people are generally unaware of to be "defending north korea". You live in ignorance and seek to maintain that ignorance in other people rather than view the situation in a more balanced and academic way.

South Korea is on its FIFTH version of the country because the US continually coups it whenever the existing people aren't doing exactly what they want. It's called the Fifth Republic for a fucking reason. It is an occupied vassal state entirely subservient to the USA and has been ever since the US genocided one fifth of the population of Korea (all of Korea). Keep in mind that being on your FIFTH republic is remarkable when the southern dictatorship was only first formed in 1948.

The US military has also literally run korean children over with tanks, which is very funny given that this is fake propaganda levelled at another enemy of the US, but in the case of america it's actually fucking true.

Define authority. All governments utilise authority.

It's only hilarious if you're highly propagandised and have never examined any of the absolutely ridiculous propaganda that has led you to feel the way you do about them such as:

Using anti aircraft guns for executions ("according to south korean media" lmao)

They have to push the trains

They all have to get the same haircut

Or that they're aggressive or something? Like what? How many wars has Korea been in since the US killed 1 fifth of its entire population in the biggest post-holocaust genocide the world has ever seen?

The shit you believe is ridiculous, why do you believe this shit? Why have you never actually said "that sounds fucking stupid"? You don't examine anything critically at all. You just go with the flow because you've seen everyone else be hyper negative about it and never really actually stopped and thought about any of these utterly ridiculous things.

In the meantime, the US is responsible for starting 205 out of 248 conflicts between ww2 and 2010. And yet the DPRK is supposedly a bad rogue state? You're out of your mind, you do not apply the same principles to one of these countries vs the other, you are guided by FEELS based on whatever propaganda has successfully taken hold in the population. You aren't really guided by facts or real accessible information we have via the worldbank data and the UN.

Unlike you I actually have 2 degrees. If you engaged with this topic in this way in a university the history professor would fail you.

You don't give a fuck about sources, evidence, or anything. You are utterly closed to new information. You are one of the most deeply propagandised people on the planet, from the most deeply propagandised population on the planet.

See this is just a complete refusal to engage with the topic or learn anything. Have you grown as a human being at all in the last 10 years or did you just decide one day that you have achieved political nirvana and there is never anything else you need to understand or expand your knowledge of? Your refusal to actually learn anything is a deep character flaw and a huge personal failure.

I'm going to repost something from @Alaskaball@hexbear.net, maybe you'll read some of it.

The Chinese description of the events leading up to and the day of the protests are very probably the closest thing to accurate that exists.

---

---

CBS NEWS: “We saw no bodies, injured people, ambulances or medical personnel — in short, nothing to even suggest, let alone prove, that a “massacre” had occurred in [Tiananmen Square]”

BBC NEWS: “I was one of the foreign journalists who witnessed the events that night. There was no massacre on Tiananmen Square”

NY TIMES: In June 13, 1989, NY Times reporter Nicholas Kristof – who was in Beijing at that time – wrote, “State television has even shown film of students marching peacefully away from the [Tiananmen] square shortly after dawn as proof that they [protesters] were not slaughtered.” In that article, he also debunked an unidentified student protester who had claimed in a sensational article that Chinese soldiers with machine guns simply mowed down peaceful protesters in Tiananmen Square.

REUTERS: Graham Earnshaw was in the Tiananmen Square on the night of June 3. He didn’t leave the square until the morning of June 4th. He wrote in his memoir that the military came, negotiated with the students and made everyone (including himself) leave peacefully; and that nobody died in the square.

200-300 people died in clashes in various parts of Beijing, around June 4 — and about half of those who died were soldiers and cops..

A Wikileaks cable from the US Embassy in Beijing (sent in July 1989) also reveals the eyewitness accounts of a Latin American diplomat and his wife: “They were able to enter and leave the [Tiananmen] square several times and were not harassed by troops. Remaining with students … until the final withdrawal, the diplomat said there were no mass shootings in the square or the monument.”

Numerous military buses, trucks, armored vehicles, and tanks being burned by the “peaceful” protesters. Sometimes the soldiers were allowed to escape, and sometimes they were brutally killed by the protesters. Numerous protesters were armed with Molotov cocktails and even guns.

Wall Street Journal: In an article from June 5, 1989, the Wall Street Journal described some of this violence: “Dozens of soldiers were pulled from trucks, severely beaten and left for dead. At an intersection west of the square, the body of a young soldier, who had been beaten to death, was stripped naked and hung from the side of a bus.”

The official report of the Chinese government from 1989 (translated here) shows that more than 1000 military and police vehicles were burned by rioters. And 200+ soldiers and policemen were murdered. Just imagine how much restraint the military and the police had shown.

Wait, how could the protesters kill so many soldiers? Because, until the very end, Chinese soldiers were unarmed. Most of the times, they didn’t even have helmets or batons.

What exactly happened in Beijing in 1989 that lead to this bloody affair?

The answer lies with two key figures: General Secretary Hu Yaobang, and Ambassador James Lilley.

Hu Yaobang was a member of the communist party of China and was one of the three major rightist-reformers that set China on the path its on today, the other two being Zhao Ziyang, and Deng Xiaoping respectively. Hu Yaobang as a reformer was also a spokesman for the intelligentsia and by the end of his life was well-beloved by the youth of China (we're talking below 30 here, folks) therefore when he passed away the youth of China organized public grieving events with the largest occurring in Beijing. This is to say if Hu didn't die from old age that year, none of this would've happened that year. This is to also say this event had nothing to do with "freedom" or "democracy" or whatever pigshit your favorite rush limburger propagandist spoon feeds you, it was a funeral service that was hijacked to unseat the Chinese government - which so coincidentally is a speciality of the agency the second person we're talking about.

Ambassador James Lilley, the son of an american expat oil executive for Standard Oil, was a CIA agent operating in east Asia from 1951 to 1981 with little officially known about him (I know for a fact he's fucked around Korea and Laos, so it's not a stretch to say he's likely been involved with every conflict that occured during his official career). In his "post" CIA career he's acted as a diplomatic liason to the provice of Taiwan, a teacher to future state department ghouls, and "helped" South Korea end its military dicatorship by helping the military win the election "democratically", and abruptly five days after the death of General Secretary Hu Yaobang James Lilley was appointed as the US Ambassador to China by also former CIA ghoul and president of the United States George H. W. Bush. What an astounding coincidence.

In an article from Vancouver Sun (17 Sep 1992) described the role of the CIA: “The Central Intelligence Agency had sources among [Tiananmen Square] protesters” … and “For months before [the protests], the CIA had been helping student activists form the anti-government movement.”

I'll ignore the fact that you're lying about what got you banned for this response.

Even the western far right media has moved on from the original Tiananmen narrative, which it acknowledges was false. The actual events played out more accurately to exactly what China has always said they were.

The only people still pushing the original shit are anticommunists and racists because it's more convenient to their goals to perpetuate it.

Try actually listening and learning the actual facts from people in the left and then you won't run into this problem. You're getting banned and ridiculed by actual leftists because you're further right and less educated on this topic than the fucking media of far right conservative tories ffs.

This is what happens when you get your political education from fucking reddit.

Learn properly: https://archive.ph/24zzF

On hexbear? I don't think so, lemmygrad has one though: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/216267?scrollToComments=true

I also strongly recommend https://www.qiaocollective.com/education/xinjiang as another option.

There were also a number of extremely large google docs projects but I don't have links to them, others might.

Now that you’ve done something you’re able to be held liable for the effects of what you’ve done and for knowing there was a problem.

Nah. Hard disagree. The idea that a court will hold you liable for imperfect implementation of better protection within your resources over NO protection is still absolute nonsense.

It would at least save the mod from dealing with the material directly.

There is nothing that will save the sites from having a human that needs to deal with the material directly, and anyone advocating for that is going to get sites in legal trouble. The main benefit here is preventing it from posting until a human of the original instance has verified it, which protects federated sites from being sent it and ensures that if it is let through everyone can defederate from the instance that allows CSAM. I am absolutely not advocating for the complete removal of human beings and see that itself as a legal threat. The reduction in humans having to see this material will come from the fact that having such a system will reduce people even bothering to attempt to post this material because it raises the difficulty of attacking the platform beyond any worthwhile risk.

trying their best to explain that this particular tool has serious legal repercussions within the framework we all live under.

No they're not. They're making up bullshit. The legal framework that social media sites where user generated content exists are expected to follow is "take reasonable measures within the resources of your organisation to prevent it" in almost every single country in the world. That's certainly the tl;dr of how it works for the US and EU anyhow.

This is above and beyond what other major platforms are doing. If you went to imgur right now and slyly uploaded CSAM absolutely fuck all would happen until someone reports it. There is NO proactive approach to countering it at the point of upload. Not on youtube, not on imgur, not on facebook, not fucking anywhere. They all don't do it because they all don't have to do it, they all argue that what they're doing is reasonable, and will cite some absurd percentage of user uploaded content to CSAM reports as their reasoning for it.

If we're better than that on services without any source of profit-based income we're absurdly above any level of "reasonable" that exists.

The mistake here is people acting like online social media organisations (which each of these lemmy instances absolutely is as an entity) are regulated in the same way as a random shmuck individual. They're not. If they were then 4chan would have been shut down 20 years ago and Moot would've been imprisoned for life.

Nah fuck off is he. Imperfect protection is an improvement over no protection, you are literally doing what the utopian socialists do, demanding perfect and rejecting anything that is an extremely obvious improvement over what existed before simply because it's not perfect.

It's an incredibly easy calculus to perform.

Drop the ad hominem attacks and argue the point

Just say "insult" ffs. Speak like a normal human being. This isn't a debate and you win absolutely nothing by using debatebro reddit language.

Nobody has to argue with your stupid ass making absurd demands on an account with 10 whole comments in its entire history. It's incredibly obvious wrecker behaviour.

Cool. After some testing Hexbear should run it. Not that the problem has ever been serious for Hex but still worthwhile and work that should absolutely be supported.

For abuse detection, you need to use a service that has been vetted by an actual lawyer.

Lmao because every tech company out there is toooootallly doing that lmao. Come onnnnn give me a break, you're on the programming.dev instance and you're saying this shit? Have you ever shipped anything ever? You're calling for something above and beyond anything that actually happens in reality.

The weirdest part of what you're demanding is that your demand makes fediverse LESS protected. Imperfectly implemented protection is better than NO protection and yet you think people are safer legally by implementing nothing at all? You're out of your fucking mind.

The arguments being made here are the same ones that were used for f*ggot, tr*p, nword, g*psy, r*dskins, etc etc etc.

It's the same damn thing every single time, a bunch of reactionaries will piss and whine and piss and whine and piss and whine because they have to make the most minimal amount of effort to adopt a new word in their vocabulary instead of the problem one. They will piss and whine forever until eventually accepting it, like all the others historically.

They join a long long line of pissy whiney losers for making the same tired old arguments we've seen for so many things before.

A few weeks?

Mate please check my profile. I have been here for 3 fucking years. Lemmy did not magically appear in a few weeks that is incredibly offensive to the sheer amount of work my comrades have put in to make it.

And calling their work "the invisible hand of the market" is also nonsensical. Because the forces driving its creation, and the rest of us communists that support it, are the destruction of the markets. There is not one single jot of profit motive involved in Lemmy. You seem to recognise some of the problems of capitalism but consistently come to incorrect conclusions about everything because you have spent no time whatsoever getting a real political education and understanding the forces at work.

And you fail to ask yourself what happens to your "market forces" alternative to reddit. In any scenario where the market is responsible for replacing reddit the market will also bring it back to exactly the same point of self-destruction through pursuit of capital. You will hurt yourself all over again.

You left reddit because of capitalism. What is an IPO? It is the launch of a business onto the public capital markets to release equity and to enrich its existing owners. What do all businesses on the markets operate on? Short term growth for the next financial quarter optimised to enrich their investors (shareholders) in the shortest amount of time possible.

Capitalism consistently destroys everything you enjoy and yet you defend it relentlessly while asking for long term thinking, which is not a feature of capitalism. When you wake up to this reality you might actually start to question "maybe the socialists are right about a few things" and spend some time with us learning what we actually believe.