[HN Gopher] India ruling party's IT cell used AI to show smile o...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       India ruling party's IT cell used AI to show smile on arrested
       protesters' faces
        
       Author : throwaway384629
       Score  : 697 points
       Date   : 2023-05-29 13:04 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.altnews.in)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.altnews.in)
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | mensetmanusman wrote:
       | Someone should make a movie on an alternate history of the civil
       | rights movement failing because of technology like this.
        
         | cookieperson wrote:
         | The problem with all civil rights movements is, any ground
         | gained can be easily removed later. Technology like this is
         | almost the perfect tool for doing so. Buckle up it's not going
         | to be pretty.
        
       | jeswin wrote:
       | This has devolved into a political discussion unfit for HN. The
       | OP's submission history[1] is almost entirely political, and
       | promoting a specific viewpoint.
       | 
       | While I believe it's ok to discuss politics on HN, my view is
       | that accounts that exist solely for political propaganda should
       | be discouraged.
       | 
       | 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=throwaway384629
        
         | archagon wrote:
         | If politics emergent from SV technology can't be discussed on
         | HN, then I'd call this community an abject failure.
        
           | jeswin wrote:
           | My point was that submitters who only submit political
           | articles (in line with their biases) are detrimental to the
           | site. Such articles attract more politically charged
           | engagement, and over time draw in people who care more about
           | politics than tech.
           | 
           | The article btw is of questionable newsworthiness; and is a
           | link to a propoganda blog. It's not really an accredited news
           | organization.
        
             | archagon wrote:
             | That may be true, but most of OP's posts did not get any
             | traction at all. This one did because it's relevant to the
             | community.
        
           | hotsauceror wrote:
           | Why? "This community" worked extremely hard to bring this
           | technology to fruition, and got handsomely rewarded for doing
           | so. The "success" already happened. At least Mr. Altman had
           | the decency to wait until his product had been released
           | before getting up on his moral high horse about the risks of
           | what he'd built, whereas poor Google did the hard work of
           | firing all their AI ethicists and making their priorities
           | clear a while ago, only for them to get scooped on their own
           | technology.
        
         | lost_tourist wrote:
         | In your opinion...
         | 
         | I think AI manipulation of public opinion is a great topic for
         | HN, IMNSHO
        
         | sanmon3186 wrote:
         | Also the post has been editorialised. Sure parties have IT
         | cells doing all kind of things to build narratives, but I am
         | not so sure if there are basis for the inference in this case.
         | 
         | Even if political, I personally expect better on HN.
        
         | viewtransform wrote:
         | I think this is relevant to HN because this is technology that
         | many of us are working on and having an real life example of
         | misuse should make us pause and think how to address the issue.
        
       | jtode wrote:
       | We're either going to improve our collective critical thinking,
       | or we are... not.
        
       | temp9807 wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | catchnear4321 wrote:
         | just wait until tomorrow!
        
       | ridiculous_leke wrote:
       | The title is wrong.
        
       | prhrb wrote:
       | Context: The day this happened was the inauguration of new
       | Parliament building of India.
        
         | lagolinguini wrote:
         | The inauguration of the new Parliament building where:
         | 
         | - None of the major opposition parties attended
         | 
         | - The President and other constitutional heads were not invited
         | 
         | - The protesting athletes were arrested
         | 
         | - One religion was in the spotlight, as opposed to the Indian
         | brand of secularism where ceremonies of all religions should
         | have been conducted
         | 
         | - On the day of Savarkar's (Hindu nationalist) birth
         | anniversary
         | 
         | - The PM treating it as a vanity project/personal PR photoshoot
        
           | kalam_throw wrote:
           | - Using a symbol of Monarchy as the center piece of this
           | inauguration.
        
           | ta_vf7xjd34cc wrote:
           | [flagged]
        
             | praveen9920 wrote:
             | Ever wondered why these "laws" were not repealed or even
             | questioned by the ruling party in the last 9 years, even
             | with an overwhelming majority in parliament?
        
               | ta_vf7xjd34cc wrote:
               | For the same reason that the Republicans continue
               | believing, in the face of overwhelming evidence, that
               | they have a chance with black voters.
               | 
               | No matter what the BJP tries, they will never get more
               | than 10-15% of the Muslim vote. Hindus accept laws
               | contrary to their interests. Muslims come out on the
               | streets and arm twist their political beneficiaries into
               | reversing judgements and acts that they perceive to be
               | against their interests.[1]
               | 
               | [1] Shah Bano case (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohd._A
               | hmed_Khan_v._Shah_Bano_...)
        
               | praveen9920 wrote:
               | There are ways of engaging with communities in democracy,
               | rather than creating laws which one group ( majority )
               | think is right. which is not a great suite of the current
               | ruling party, to be honest. Farmer laws, demonetization
               | etc are some of examples.
               | 
               | BTW, If a party cannot do what is required for the
               | country, they probably are not right for ruling the
               | country.
        
             | ffgjgf1 wrote:
             | > It is only in "secular" India that organized religious
             | conversions were allowed that led to Christians going from
             | less that 1% of the population 100 years ago to 90% today
             | in some states
             | 
             | But all that happened before India was even fully
             | independent so how is it relevant? Are you saying Christian
             | should be forcibly converted back to Hinduism?
        
               | Utkarsh_Mood wrote:
               | I'd partly disagree, there are reports of forced
               | conversions to Islam in Kashmir, and women being raped
               | and murdered on refusing to do so long after
               | independence, as recent as 2021.
        
             | Utkarsh_Mood wrote:
             | Thank you for raising this! it definitely isn't talked
             | about as much as it should, especially in western spheres
             | of dicussion like here on hn
        
             | ephemeralkey wrote:
             | > Secularism in modern India is a synonym for Hinduphobia
             | ...                 1. Secularism is a constitutional
             | principle enshrined in fundamental rights in the Indian
             | constitution. The fundamental *Right to Equality* in the
             | Indian constitution already implies this. Although, the
             | word *secular* was added explicitly to the constitution
             | through the 42nd Amendment (in 1976), it has been implictly
             | read in through various Supreme Court rulings. The
             | dishonest equivalence of secularism with Hinduphobia is by
             | those who want to attack the Right to Equality.
             | 2. The comment mentions polygamy permitted under Muslim
             | personal law. Marriages in India are governed by personal
             | laws. There was a time when inter-religion/inter-caste
             | marriages were illegal. Polygamy among Hindus was legal
             | until 1956 when the Hindu Marriage Act (a personal law) was
             | amended to outlaw polygamy. There is a landmark case
             | currently underway on the equality of marriage sought by
             | LGBTQ+ individuals to bring same-sex marriage the same
             | legal protections as marriage between a man and a woman.
             | This is an evolving legal area. The courts are quite
             | conscious of the fact that not everyone, including Hindus
             | want personal laws to be overturned (as it also impacts
             | succession, property rights etc.,). There will be broad
             | based support for overturning some anachronistic personal
             | laws due to intersectionality (eg: Hindu gay men wanting to
             | marry or Muslim women wanting triple-Talaq (divorce) law
             | overtuned).
             | 
             | > It is only in "secular" India that organized religious
             | conversions were _allowed_ (emphasis added) ...
             | 3. It is right there in the constitution. Article 25 (1)
             | states that: *Subject to public order, morality and health
             | and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are
             | equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right
             | freely to profess, practise and propagate religion*
             | 4. The word *propagate religion* includes religious
             | conversions. So, proselytizing is covered by the
             | constituion. The law also says *forcible conversions* are
             | illegal since it infringes on right to freely practice
             | one's religion. Of course, the fascists will equate all
             | proselytizing with forcible conversions.
        
               | ta_vf7xjd34cc wrote:
               | > Secularism is a constitutional principle
               | 
               | The constitution can say whatever it wants. The only
               | thing that matters is what actually happens on the
               | ground. Successive governments have adopted Hinduphobic
               | positions and laws while claiming to be secular. Why are
               | only Hindu temples under the control of various state
               | governments? Why don't governments take similar control
               | of cathedrals, churches and mosques?
               | 
               | There is example after example proving my position. All
               | you have is some words in a document that are belied by
               | the actions of those meant to observe it.
               | 
               | > Right to Equality
               | 
               | Religious minorities can run their own schools where they
               | can teach their children their way of life? Can Hindus do
               | this _qua_ Hindus? Again, words in a document that
               | contradict other words in the same document.
               | 
               | > Hindu Marriage Act (a personal law) was amended to
               | outlaw polygamy
               | 
               | Why were Muslims not given the same benefits or punished
               | in the same manner (whichever way you want to look at
               | it)? How can you be secular and equal if two men or two
               | women are treated differently before the law for the
               | exact same action? This is a joke masquerading as
               | justice.
               | 
               | > Of course, the fascists will equate all proselytizing
               | with forcible conversions.
               | 
               | You can believe that Christianity is so superior to local
               | religious practices that an entire state almost
               | completely adopted the religion voluntarily in 3-4
               | generations. Given the history of Christian missionaries
               | in India, South America and other parts of the world and
               | the tactics they adopted, this is a simplistic
               | argument/position.
               | 
               | There is literature available from Missionaries, in their
               | own words, as to their opinions about Indian religious
               | traditions and the people practicing them. Arun Shourie
               | has written a couple of books on the subject.[1][2]
               | 
               | An individual here or there converting to a different
               | faith is one thing. When religions conversions are used
               | to shift demography, this has national security
               | implications. Separatist movements grew in Kashmir and
               | Nagaland. The partition of India was done on Muslim vs.
               | non-Muslim lines where Muslim-majority provinces became
               | Pakistan. Onlygodists will always be in conflict with
               | Manygodists because their worldviews are fundamentally
               | different.
               | 
               | Organized conversions must be banned. If the constitution
               | has to be amended to do it, so be it.
               | 
               | [1] Missionaries in India: Continuities, Changes,
               | Dilemmas
               | 
               | [2] Harvesting Our Souls: Missionaries, Their Design,
               | Their Claims
        
               | ephemeralkey wrote:
               | > Why are only Hindu temples under the control of various
               | state governments?
               | 
               | That is because historically, a lot of the land (farm and
               | non-farm) came under the Hindu temples when the temples
               | were under the administration of kings. The British East
               | India Company took over the administration which then
               | transferred to the provinces (prior to independence) and
               | then the states post-independence. Different states then
               | passed laws. For eg: See
               | https://hrce.tn.gov.in/hrcehome/hrce_about.php for
               | Tamilnadu state's Hindu religious and charitable
               | endowments department.
               | 
               | > Religious minorities can run their own schools where
               | they can teach their children their way of life? Can
               | Hindus do this qua Hindus?
               | 
               | Ofcourse they do. I studied in a school ran by a Hindu
               | trust and we had students from all religions. There was
               | morning devotional prayers (Hindu hymns), friday bhajans
               | (singing religious hymns) etc., and everyone attended.
               | Stop spreading this hate about _us_ vs _them_.
               | 
               | > When religions conversions are used to shift
               | demography, this has national security implications
               | 
               | Ah, the national security bogeyman! Why don't you try
               | _shifting the demography_ of the armed forces to address
               | that? I think men and women in defence forces from all
               | religious backgrounds would have something to say about
               | that.
        
               | ta_vf7xjd34cc wrote:
               | > Different states then passed laws.
               | 
               | A "secular" state will treat all places of prayer and
               | worship the same. If it controls _only_ Hindu temples but
               | not churches and mosques, it is not  "secular."
               | 
               | > Ofcourse they do.
               | 
               | The constitution and the RTE act treat minority and non-
               | minority institutions differently. Everything from the
               | funding structure, to what can be taught, to how the
               | teachers are appointed, to whether religious education
               | can be imparted differs. Hindu institutions can do
               | certain things but under restrictions that are not
               | applicable to minorities. Again, this second-class
               | treatment is considered to be "secular."
               | 
               | > Stop spreading this hate about _us_ vs _them_.
               | 
               | I am not the Onlygodist here. It is Onlygodism that
               | creates _us_ vs _them_.
               | 
               | > national security bogeyman
               | 
               | So the insurgency in Kashmir and Nagaland does not have
               | religious characteristics and is purely secular in
               | nature? The partition of India was done on a purely
               | secular basis?
        
             | rtbathula wrote:
             | 1) First of all, state shouldn't involve in any type of
             | religious activities let alone giving priority to one
             | particular religion. It's written in the Constitution and
             | it's the base for any modern society(Especially US's First
             | Amendment). You should foresee the consequences of this.
             | What if a muslim PM get elected in the long future and he
             | invites all Islamic priests?
             | 
             | 2) Yes, you have mentioned some of the things that India
             | did on secular grounds. But that doesn't refute the present
             | context. Still wrong doings are happening. Instead of
             | focusing on those, should we remember all the past events
             | and be silent?
             | 
             | 3) Islam invades Hindus, then let's Hindus mob-lynch
             | Muslims. Always stuck in who slaughters who. No progress
             | towards right secular habits.
             | 
             | John Lock: https://www.amazon.com/Locke-Treatises-
             | Government-Cambridge-...
        
         | otikik wrote:
         | Why is that relevant? People should not get arrested for
         | protesting sexual harassment, even if others are inaugurating a
         | new Taj Mahal.
        
           | lagolinguini wrote:
           | It is relevant because the PM is touting the new parliament
           | building as ushering Indian into a new age of democracy,
           | calling the building a temple of democracy; while dissenting
           | voices outside are being stifled as the wrestlers are being
           | arrested.
        
             | throwaway384629 wrote:
             | PM Modi was literally giving a speech on "how we are the
             | coolest democracy in the world" few kilo-meters away from
             | where the protesters were arrested.
        
       | juujian wrote:
       | That is getting real freaking dystopian. Sure, we would have been
       | able to do this before, and the Soviet Union did a ton of photo
       | editing. But doing this particular edit must have been so easy.
       | No cost at all, no mental barrier. You would almost think 'why
       | bother'. And before anyone says 'yeah, but the truth came out'.
       | Well, we saw it, but how many of the particular audience of
       | whatever that outlet was will never see the original photo and
       | will never question the narrative they were sold?
        
         | SecretDreams wrote:
         | Nah, this is fine.
        
         | EscapeFromNY wrote:
         | > yeah, but the truth came out
         | 
         | The truth came out this time. To borrow from Ozark: this isn't
         | the only time they doctored photos, it's the only time they got
         | caught.
        
           | lagolinguini wrote:
           | The truth came out too late anyway. The fact that it's been
           | fact checked doesn't matter. People wo want to believe in a
           | certain agenda have already got the misinformation they need,
           | and it's not like they're seeking out other sources to fact
           | check their information. They're not even the target audience
           | of people who are fact checking this misinformation so the
           | damage is already done.
        
           | matsemann wrote:
           | And those having seen the doctored images wont know (or care)
           | that they were fake.
        
             | gtirloni wrote:
             | Exactly. Even when a major TV channels was busting fake
             | news in my country, people just switched to other govt-
             | sponsored (bribed?) channel to hear what they wanted to
             | hear. It became a common meme to say that major TV channel
             | has an agenda (and either silence or whataboustism ensues
             | once people are questioned about the actual fake news).
        
               | ryandrake wrote:
               | People will always switch to the brand of media that
               | shows the truth that validates their existing beliefs.
               | Today, there are a handful of "belief buckets" to choose
               | from. In the USA, you have conservative news channels and
               | mainstream news channels. You can pick your favorite
               | source of truth, but they come as a package deal. If you
               | strongly believe X is factual, you'll tune in to the
               | channel that presents X as factual. That channel will
               | also present Y and Z as factual, so you may slowly start
               | believing Y and Z, too.
               | 
               | The obvious end state of this all will be news channels
               | customized per-person. It's already starting with the
               | custom-tailored Facebook/Twitter feeds. If you personally
               | believe A, Y, and C, but not X, B, or Z, your news
               | reports will be customized to show A, Y, and C as factual
               | and ridicule X, B, and Z. Someone else will get presented
               | an entirely different set of facts. Once the algorithm
               | knows your beliefs, AI can produce an unlimited number of
               | articles confirming those beliefs, complete with photos,
               | videos, sources, fact checks, official reports and
               | references.
        
               | passion__desire wrote:
               | Just use the word "Filter Bubble". It's cleaner.
               | /Facebook meme
        
               | scarface_74 wrote:
               | I kind of knew that. But I didn't realize how bad it was
               | until the last few years.
               | 
               | The WSJ, Forbes and the National Review were what I
               | considered reliably conservative sites that I use to be
               | able to quote to conservative friends. Once they turned
               | against Trump, they became part of the untrusted
               | "mainstream media".
               | 
               | Then when FoxNews called the 2020 election fairly, then
               | they became sellouts and people started flocking to
               | NewsMax. Whatever I thought of FoxNews over the years, I
               | always thought their election night coverage was straight
               | down the line.
               | 
               | RedState kicked out all of their neverTrumpers because
               | they were losing readers.
               | 
               | Then conservatives started criticizing NewsMax when they
               | would slightly push back against the "election was
               | stolen" claims.
        
           | jsheard wrote:
           | Also the truth came out _here,_ but I wonder if the truth
           | will get out on Indian Twitter given that the Indian
           | government is one of the most prolific issuers of Twitter
           | takedowns, and the odds of them being approved has supposedly
           | spiked from about 50% under the old leadership to about 99%
           | since Elon took over. Previously governments had to expect
           | some pushback against over-reaching takedown requests, but
           | the new policy of rubber stamping nearly any request without
           | a second thought means it 's open season for them to censor
           | anything inconvenient.
           | 
           | https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2023/5/2/twitter-
           | fulfillin...
        
             | actionfromafar wrote:
             | Mm, can't wait to live on Mars with chairman Elon.
        
         | shaan7 wrote:
         | I am hoping that AI tooling like this becomes even more
         | widespread (Google Photos is doing that) that more people will
         | finally understand that they cannot trust everything they see
         | online. I hope.
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | That is not an improvement, because it turns "online" (which
           | is basically everything everywhere - all news media, TV,
           | newspapers) into a politically useless wasteland.
        
             | tdehnel wrote:
             | It could just as well be an improvement that makes people
             | smarter, because they will learn not to just believe what
             | they see/hear/read.
             | 
             | Instead, they will have to learn to identify good
             | explanations and rule out bad explanations.
        
             | lolinder wrote:
             | "Online" is already a useless, trustless wasteland and has
             | been since at least 2014. If this causes people to finally
             | _see it_ then maybe we can collectively build something
             | better.
        
           | ceejayoz wrote:
           | But the conclusion becomes "you can't trust _anything_ ". I
           | worry about a civilization that can't agree on even the most
           | basic of facts.
        
             | LightBug1 wrote:
             | Welcome ... to the desert of the real.
        
             | denton-scratch wrote:
             | It's not "you can't trust anything". It's "you can't trust
             | anything _you 're told_".
             | 
             | And that's nothing new. We have been lying since we figured
             | out how to talk.
             | 
             | The sky is _not_ falling.
        
         | jvanderbot wrote:
         | Just wait until POWs start denouncing their former armies, or
         | KIAs magically return home, or Ukrainian children in Russian
         | families start magically saying how much better it is, etc etc.
         | The demoralizing effect of watching a loved one do this would
         | be immense.
        
         | lolinder wrote:
         | This phase won't last long in the grand scheme of things. We've
         | had about 150 years in which people have been conditioned to
         | trust anything that they see in a photograph, but it's always
         | been possible to fake it and for the last 30 years it's been
         | getting dramatically easier. AI just brings us full circle back
         | to the era of woodcuts--just because you see a photorealistic
         | image or hear an audio recording does not mean it's real.
         | 
         | We're likely going to see a few cases like this that take off
         | while people are adapting, but this naivete won't last forever.
         | There will always be a few gullible people, but, just like with
         | Photoshop, we'll get to the point where most people understand
         | what's possible and adapt their reactions accordingly.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | Aerbil313 wrote:
           | Won't the same apply to public online conversations (social
           | media, forums)? Anyone can be a bot, and thus I think
           | something like conversing digitally with only those whom you
           | exchanged keys with their phone via bluetooth or NFC irl will
           | be more and more common? I know no solution besides web of
           | trust architecture + irl exchanged keys.
        
           | JumpCrisscross wrote:
           | > _We 've had about 150 years in which people have been
           | conditioned to trust anything that they see in a photograph_
           | 
           | This is also about as long as we've had popular democracy.
           | (Something like a fifth of Indians are functionally
           | illiterate [1][2].)
           | 
           | [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_India
           | 
           | [2] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363173220_LITERA
           | CY_....
        
           | api wrote:
           | The era of easy to reproduce but hard to fake media is
           | actually the historical outlier.
           | 
           | Before that media was written text and everyone knows anyone
           | can make up anything they want in that domain. Before that
           | most people were illiterate so it didn't matter much. Media
           | wasn't even much of a thing.
           | 
           | We are headed for the post-media era when any arbitrary piece
           | of media depicting anything can be created for little or no
           | money by anyone with a computer. Nothing can be believed
           | unless you were there or hear it from a known reliable source
           | that was there.
           | 
           | There's going to be an ugly transition period when we have
           | tons of people who haven't gotten this memo yet. These people
           | are going to be manipulated en masse with tremendous
           | effectiveness. The push to deplatform misinformation is
           | largely an attempt to stop this, but I think it's futile.
           | People just have to learn that media is dead and they can't
           | trust anything anymore.
           | 
           | Hunter Thompson was ahead of his time. The only journalism
           | worth doing in this future is individual gonzo journalism
           | where you go and experience and tell the tale directly to
           | your audience. That of course is vulnerable to spin by the
           | teller, but so are all tales. It's the best we have.
           | Hopefully honest tellers of first hand tales will exist and
           | get the reputation for honesty they deserve.
        
             | juujian wrote:
             | > Before that media was written text and everyone knows
             | anyone can make up anything they want in that domain.
             | 
             | From what I gather, Julius Caesar's _Commentarii de Bello
             | Gallico_ was pretty much fanfiction (had somebody write?)
             | about himself. This problem may be older than I thought.
        
               | pjc50 wrote:
               | Anyone doing history knows that all the sources are
               | biased. You have to corroborate evidence and adjust for
               | knowing the context in which the work was produced to
               | determine how reliable it is.
        
               | api wrote:
               | Sure. But there was an era that lasted around 100 years
               | when a photo alone was pretty reliable. Photos and
               | especially videos were at least hard to fake. That era is
               | over. Absolutely anything can be faked cheaply and
               | easily.
        
               | pjc50 wrote:
               | Really early photography was so poor compared to modern
               | HD images that obvious fakes fooled "serious" people
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cottingley_Fairies vs
               | Arthur Conan Doyle, for example. But yes, it required
               | more effort, and the effort reduction for fakes offered
               | by AI is extremely powerful.
               | 
               | (There is also the sad business of the 1932 Pulitzer
               | https://www.pulitzer.org/news/statement-walter-duranty )
        
               | lolinder wrote:
               | Photography has always been less reliable than many
               | people thought it was, even without considering photo
               | doctoring. Like statistics, the frame you choose in a
               | photo can completely alter the story it's telling. It
               | might be that entering an era where _complete_
               | fabrication is easy will make people more resistant to
               | the subtler tricks that have worked well hitherto.
               | 
               | Bill Watterson had a series of strips about this in
               | Calvin and Hobbes in 1992 [0].
               | 
               | > CALVIN: This is what I like about photography. People
               | think cameras always tell the truth.
               | 
               | > CALVIN: They think the camera is a dispassionate
               | machine that records only facts. But really, cameras lie
               | all the time! Select the facts and you manipulate the
               | truth!
               | 
               | > CALVIN: For example, I've cleared off this corner of my
               | bed. Take a picture of me here, but crop out all the mess
               | around me, so it looks like I keep my room tidy.
               | 
               | > HOBBES: Is this even legal?
               | 
               | > CALVIN: Wait, let me comb my hair and put on a tie.
               | 
               | [0] This is the one I quoted, but the one before and
               | after it are related:
               | https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1992/09/17
        
         | skinnymuch wrote:
         | [flagged]
        
           | hutzlibu wrote:
           | "Is there something dystopian about India or Soviet Union
           | that is unlike the Global North?"
           | 
           | Actually, I would place the soviet union in the global north
           | (you cannot go much further north, than russia is). And the
           | difference is the extent, what they did to rewrite history.
           | The famous removal of Trotzki out of revolution pictures,
           | after he was not with the main party anymore. Stuff like
           | this, did not happen in the west. Lots of other manipulation
           | and misinformation, sure, but not blatantly rewriting
           | history.
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | Geographic location isn't the only aspect of "Global
             | North/South". Australia is considered part of the North
             | grouping.
        
               | hutzlibu wrote:
               | Sure, same with west/east
               | 
               | https://xkcd.com/503/
               | 
               | But it still makes no sense to me, to exclude russia from
               | the global north.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | There's a pretty clear split between Russia and the
               | nations in the "Global North". Almost all of them have
               | Russia under severe sanctions right now.
        
               | hutzlibu wrote:
               | There also was never a clear political union between
               | geographical west and east. I think it just makes no
               | sense using these terminology.
        
               | skinnymuch wrote:
               | East and west is effectively deprecated with the current
               | world order. We use Global North/South sometimes now. The
               | reason we have this terminology is because of the
               | colonization, imperialism, elitism, and racism set forth
               | by the Global North. The point isn't to find the perfect
               | terminology. It's bigger with a ton of history and
               | material conditions attached to it.
        
             | skinnymuch wrote:
             | That's not why the term Global North exists. A historical
             | analysis of modern history shows why Slavs are not included
             | in the Global North.
             | 
             | Some one said the west cares about social rights and
             | freedom vs Soviets or Indian people. Both societies were
             | better with many forms of expression including gender and
             | sexuality.
             | 
             | This is a good example of history being rewritten for the
             | Global North as the vanguards of social justice and liberal
             | freedom. IE India has been better with trans people and
             | Soviets with gay people.
             | 
             | The Trotsky stuff is a big deal in the context of socialist
             | states. Not the Global North. I fail to see the difference
             | of the extent with some victims of COINTELPRO or the
             | rewritten history of figures like Ho Chi, Ernesto Guevara,
             | Cuba (Castros), Allende, Lumumba, Mao, Sankara, Kabil,
             | Bhutto, Tito, and so on.
        
             | juujian wrote:
             | Yup, it's not unique to the Soviet union, the Soviet union
             | is just a particularly salient example. I wouldn't have
             | anything like Trotsky being edited out at hand for the us.
        
               | skinnymuch wrote:
               | What is the closest example to Trotsky for the US that
               | you have at hand? Otherwise I don't understand the
               | differences between Fred Hampton, Allende, Lumumba,
               | Bhutto vs Trotsky.
               | 
               | What about stolen land. Along with the death, destruction
               | that ensues. Would stolen land that is "edited out" in
               | the US or caused because of the US come close?
        
         | pjc50 wrote:
         | That is what a lot of us think the real threat of "AI" is: not
         | that it will autonomously produce bad outcomes for humanity,
         | but because it's a tool that's indifferent to truth or
         | falsehood it allows any kind of truth or reality based politics
         | to be totally flooded out of the public sphere. Everyone ends
         | up fighting in the hall of mirrors.
        
           | AnimalMuppet wrote:
           | Yeah. The postmodernists (as I understand them) have been
           | talking about "post truth" and "claims of truth are just
           | assertions of power". And I've always thought that their
           | position was insane.
           | 
           | Now they look more like prophets. That world is increasingly
           | the world we live in. The question becomes, how can we stay
           | sane in that world? How can we find enough actual truth
           | (truth that is actually _true_ , true in the old sense of
           | corresponding to the reality of what is) in order to
           | function? To function as individuals, and to function as a
           | society? How do we deal with this?
        
             | deno wrote:
             | You suggest giving up. Instead, we just need better
             | security to combat the AI threat. Cameras and especially
             | smartphone cameras could easily be trusted and produce
             | signed images, that are verified to not have been edited.
             | We do this already to an extent for authentication purposes
             | (Windows Hello et al). Any postprocessing/photoshop work
             | would need to reference the original image hash to also be
             | considered authenticated. Same with CCTV footage, there's
             | no reason we can't have trusted cameras and NVRs.
             | Technology to do this exists already.
             | 
             | We don't give up on encryption when GPUs and ASICs and even
             | quantum computers present a challenge, why should AI be any
             | different.
        
               | AnimalMuppet wrote:
               | > You suggest giving up.
               | 
               | Not at all. I'm not sure what I said that makes you think
               | that.
               | 
               | What I say, though, is that we don't know (either
               | individually or as a society) how to operate in this new
               | environment. It's making it hard to stay sane as an
               | individual, and to stay functioning as a society.
        
               | JieJie wrote:
               | Maybe we don't know how do operate in this environment,
               | because we don't really know how to collectively operate
               | in _any_ environment?
               | 
               | Humanity is, after all, crawling out of at least the last
               | 3000 years of recorded history of rulers telling everyone
               | else how to live, like it or not.
               | 
               | We've only really been doing this democracy thing semi-
               | successfully for a handful of centuries.
               | 
               | In the overall scheme of things, we're still pretty new
               | at not being ordered around by people stronger than us.
               | It's a hard habit to break on both sides.
        
               | deno wrote:
               | I have read your comment as we just have to accept this
               | new environment and just 'cope' with it, whereas my
               | feeling is we don't have to accept it at all. I don't
               | want to cope with AI and question if what I see everyday
               | is in fact real. Instead, anything produced by AI should
               | have an asterisk next to it. But this is impossible to
               | enforce, so verifying what's real by default is the next
               | best thing.
        
               | pjc50 wrote:
               | Technical solution to a social problem. It's not that
               | it's impossible to tell the difference between real and
               | fake, it's that there's no consequences for posting
               | fakes.
               | 
               | (A "solution" which requires end users to authenticate
               | everything themselves is going to have the same level of
               | adoption as pgp, i.e. near zero)
        
               | deno wrote:
               | I like a green checkmark next to a photo better than
               | giving more power to whoever you think should be the one
               | determining and enforcing those consequences.
        
               | pjc50 wrote:
               | The consequences I mean are those of the public: proving
               | that the ruling party forged images isn't going to get
               | people to change their votes. You can build the green
               | checkmark, but you can't get people to care about it.
        
               | deno wrote:
               | I see this as completely different issues. Whether AI
               | exists or not this is and was a problem. I'm proposing
               | technical solution because AI fakes are a technical
               | problem. And yeah if people get used to green checkmark
               | you can't just pump fakes willy nilly, you actually have
               | to put some effort, as before AI. I guess the problem I
               | want to solve is having to live in a world where you have
               | to assume absolutely everything is 100% fake all the
               | time. Because this just puts everyone in their respective
               | truth bubbles even more. Any objectivity we can return to
               | the world is a good thing, IMO.
        
               | anigbrowl wrote:
               | First you have to solve the collect action problem of
               | getting everyone to care about the green checkmark, then
               | you have to solve the new technical problem of just
               | making photographs of high-quality altered images.
        
               | pmontra wrote:
               | I take an authentic image with a camera, crop out the
               | part of it that it's not aligned with my goals, put a
               | reference to the authentic image. How do you get the
               | authentic image to compare it with my edit?
               | 
               | And how do you solve the problem of a powerful entity
               | telling you that the cropped image is authentic, or there
               | will be consequences? People know what's going on, they
               | bend for fear of breaking. No technology is changing
               | that.
        
               | deno wrote:
               | You have to provide authentic image with your image for
               | it to validate, just as you have to supply any
               | intermediate certificates in TLS. If you want to crop to
               | hide information you have to do this while taking the
               | photo in the camera app.
               | 
               | Powerful entity can tell you to install their root
               | certificate just like it happens in China. This is a
               | different problem.
        
               | passion__desire wrote:
               | Just to provide some context : The reason people believe
               | this particular doctored (or AI enhanced) image "could be
               | true" is because this "toolkit approach" has been
               | employed by the Left Wing in India. The Right Wing in
               | India regularly points it out on Twitter. So if both
               | sides are slinging mud, its race to the bottom for the
               | getting lowest common denominator on their side. I
               | sometimes wish why can't we unbundle these left vs right
               | issues and decide stuff case by case. Hence I support
               | TruthGPT by Elon.
        
               | hnthrowaway8860 wrote:
               | > I sometimes wish why can't we unbundle these left vs
               | right issues and decide stuff case by case.
               | 
               | That's the opposite of what we should do. If you do case
               | by case then people will always find reasons why it's no
               | big deal if "their" side did it while it's really bad
               | when the other side did it.
               | 
               | No, we need to universally condemn this. No matter who
               | did it and when and how. This is lying and propaganda,
               | and it's bad even if I agree with the ends. But the means
               | are to be condemned by everybody.
               | 
               | Kind of the dual to "I disagree with what you are saying
               | but I'll fight for your right to say it." It's now "I
               | agree with what you are trying to achieve but I'll fight
               | against the way in which you are trying to achieve it."
        
               | politician wrote:
               | If browsers require authenticated images as suggested,
               | then CSS will probably grow the ability to apply a
               | masking layer to crop, filter, transform the image.
               | 
               | Advertisers are going to want to postprocess images and
               | have the green check.
        
               | deno wrote:
               | Well I don't think all images would have to be signed,
               | just photos for which you want to prove authenticity.
               | Probably social media and dating apps seem like a good
               | target. Maybe some advertising, sure. I bet McDonalds
               | wouldn't mind green checkmark since they go through all
               | that effort to fake food in real life.
               | 
               | You could of course fake green checkmark in CSS but this
               | is already an issue with faking other browser UI
               | elements, including address bar-it's a known problem.
               | 
               | One way to solve this is having a browser picker, that is
               | a button you click in trusted area of browser UI that
               | lets you inspect any image on the page. Similar thing is
               | possible with smartphone UI, you go to app
               | overview/carousel and long press on an image in app, this
               | launches photo inspection portal.
        
               | CountHackulus wrote:
               | What if I just reframe my picture instead of cropping?
               | Every photo is a choice. A choice of what to show and
               | what not to show.
        
               | deno wrote:
               | I think you're missing the point, this is not a
               | technology to create politically neutral photos. The way
               | you take a photo and even the way you edit it later will
               | all be your choice. It's also your choice what to take
               | photos of or not in the first place. All this does is it
               | proves the photo was created by
               | 
               | (1) a trusted application
               | 
               | (2) using a builtin device camera
               | 
               | (3) of a device running attested trusted operating system
               | 
               | (4) and any subsequent edits reference such photo's
               | original hash.
               | 
               | Hopefully stronger assertions could come in the future.
               | This is just to combat digital forgeries and
               | synthetically generated images. It also does nothing
               | against real-world forgeries like actors wearing costumes
               | or makeup.
        
               | stale2002 wrote:
               | > I take an authentic image with a camera, crop out the
               | part of it that it's not aligned with my goals
               | 
               | If it is cropped, then it would not be provably
               | authentic. So anyone seeing it, could see that it is
               | modified.
               | 
               | > how do you solve the problem of a powerful entity
               | telling you that the cropped image is authentic
               | 
               | Well, because you can check. You verify the image
               | yourself, see that it is not authenticated, and then you
               | know.
        
               | gray_-_wolf wrote:
               | How will this protect (the first "workaround" that popped
               | into my head) against modifying/AI generating an image,
               | printing it on high-quality printer and taking a photo of
               | that image in good (or maybe bad?) lighting?
        
               | deno wrote:
               | You can harden against it using stereo cameras (3D) and
               | different type of cameras, e.g. IR, verify with for
               | example LIDAR, since some new premium smartphones are
               | getting it already, this will tell you if you're looking
               | at a projection. Also see what smartphones are already
               | doing for face authentication tech. Now, that said, you
               | can never defend against it 100%. The most obvious is you
               | can always fallback to just hiring actors/makeup/etc. If
               | someone is determined enough (major actor) they can
               | probably still produce fake pictures and authenticate
               | them, but it would be significantly harder, and basically
               | impossible for majority of people.
        
               | algo646464 wrote:
               | Photos have authenticated timestamps.
               | 
               | Older photo is the real one.
        
               | flagrant_taco wrote:
               | Playing whack-a-mole with technologies that have
               | fundamental risks baked into the system itself seems like
               | a losing game. We're inventing new technologies simply
               | because we can, ignoring and papering over the social
               | impact, then chasing even more complex solutions to the
               | new problems created.
        
               | hnthrowaway8860 wrote:
               | Geez. Techies trying to come up with tech solutions to
               | fundamentally non-tech problems. The photogtapher can
               | just zoom in or get closer to the object to crop the
               | image before it's even taken.
               | 
               | Oh you now want a 360 degree shot to prove this didn't
               | happen? Well then they stand behind a tree or a car or
               | some other object to hide parts of the scene behind. etc.
               | etc. There is no technical solution to this problem.
        
               | deno wrote:
               | It makes the attack in article not possible and
               | eliminates common fakes in existence right now. Perfect
               | is the enemy of good.
        
               | hnthrowaway8860 wrote:
               | At huge cost and essentially nonexistent benefit I'd say
               | that crappy is also an enemy of good.
        
             | DiscourseFan wrote:
             | So I mean, postmodernism is a pretty "diverse" field, and
             | while there are some who would claim to be full
             | relativists, they aren't usually taken very seriously.
             | 
             | What someone like Herbert Marcuse would claim is that there
             | is something like a "definite negation," or Jacques Derrida
             | would call a "trace;" that is, there, sitting behind every
             | signifier (of de Saussure's structural linguistics) its
             | negation of _another_ signifier that defines its position
             | in an ordered chain or a symbolic network. They would not
             | argue that things are relative; rather, social life is
             | regulated by these vast signifying networks that one
             | becomes  "subjectivated" in (begins to understand oneself
             | as a subject), where one's "agency" also stands at the
             | limits of this intelligibility: as they say, everything you
             | "decide" is already pre-conscious; every notion of what is
             | "possible," is limited by what is already "intelligible,"
             | i.e. what operates in the social-symbolic function as it,
             | like an algorithm, constantly moves and exchanges its
             | various symbolic orderings in what we call the "economy."
             | To be a true agent means to do something which radically
             | restructures this network and radically redefines all its
             | terms: Foucault's "fearless speech," Badiou's "Event." The
             | latter thinker actually explicitly rejects relativism (and
             | is in some ways a platonist--actually many so-called
             | "postmodern" thinkers, Whitehead among them, are considered
             | platonists.)
             | 
             | The position you claim is from "post-modernism":
             | 
             | >"claims of truth are just assertions of power"
             | 
             | finds its origins in Nietzsche, who famously claimed that
             | truth, morality, beauty, etc. were invented by the weak
             | because they feared the powerful and they were jealous of
             | the fact that they couldn't kill their enemies, eat fully,
             | and have sex all the time (Master Morality, which was just
             | doing whatever you wanted). So they rose up, took over, and
             | invented these categories and systems of valuation in order
             | to justify a new regime of power where _nobody_ was able to
             | do what they wanted, and everything was regulated by vast
             | systems of control justified by these metaphysical notions
             | (he refers to this as  "Christian Morality.") He claims
             | that Christian morality, after centuries of struggle, has
             | finally won out in the Bourgeois revolutions of the 18th
             | and 19th centuries, but now "God" has been subordinated to
             | "Science" while retaining all the metaphysical baggage of
             | christianity "truth, beauty, morality," etc. This is from
             | Nietzsche's _Genealogy of Morals_ , the argument from which
             | was expanded in Foucault's _Discipline and Punishment_ (the
             | most widely read book from what most people would call
             | "postmodernism").
             | 
             | >truth that is actually true, true in the old sense of
             | corresponding to the reality of what is
             | 
             | The so-called "correspondence theory of truth" is
             | considered a fallacy of the layman in academic philosophy.
             | Truth has always been, in logic, a category: a value,
             | specifically a boolean value. One can make claims about the
             | structure and order of logic and the relation of that to
             | psychological, social-processes (as Frege, Husserl, and
             | many other "anti-psychologists" of the 19th and 20th
             | centuries did); but to claim that language, a signifying
             | act, somehow directly corresponds to the physical objects
             | that it categorizes, can't really be valid: as Shakespeare
             | said "a rose, by any other name, would smell as sweet."
             | There is no reason why the words we use have any
             | correspondence to experience--even if there is surely some
             | reason why words can evoke experiences, emotions, like when
             | one hears the name of a past-lover. But that can be
             | attributed to what the "postmodernists" claim: the name
             | evokes an entire symbolic structure and brings it to the
             | surface of consciousness.
        
               | ramblenode wrote:
               | > The so-called "correspondence theory of truth" is
               | considered a fallacy of the layman in academic
               | philosophy. Truth has always been, in logic, a category:
               | a value, specifically a boolean value.
               | 
               | Perenially underappreciated in online discussions.
               | 
               | Very nice summary.
        
               | xk_id wrote:
               | > The so-called "correspondence theory of truth" is
               | considered a fallacy of the layman in academic
               | philosophy.
               | 
               | So in your understanding of academic philosophy, how do
               | you account for the critical difference between the two
               | statements below?
               | 
               | "Earth is flat."
               | 
               | "Earth is a spheroid."
               | 
               | I don't see what is fallacious about accepting the second
               | statement as corresponding to facts and dismissing the
               | former for not corresponding. If it's merely a matter of
               | semantics regarding the words "correspondence" and
               | "truth", an alternative verbalisation of the critical
               | distinction between those two statements must nonetheless
               | be available; and it should be prioritised in discourse.
        
             | horeszko wrote:
             | I don't have any prescriptions for society as a whole but I
             | can tell you what has worked for me.
             | 
             | Basically I rely on my own observations and experiences:
             | don't trust and verify, to adapt the old saying.
             | 
             | Second I limit myself to trusted sources of information and
             | if I can't find one then I just don't get information on
             | that topic: no information is better than false
             | information.
             | 
             | In practice what this means is no algorithmic news feeds,
             | I'm still looking for a good news source for my local city
             | (haven't found one yet, I moved recently), I think a lot
             | about incentive structures and how that might bias an
             | information source, I (try) to apply skepticism to what I
             | read, I block as much noise as possible (for example I
             | don't pay attention to surface level political news because
             | its all noise and virtually no signal), I focus on long
             | term trends rather than "points" in the timeline.
             | 
             | This is far from perfect but its what has evolved as my
             | approach over time.
        
             | prox wrote:
             | Disconnect and build a network of trust.
        
               | flir wrote:
               | Or build walled gardens inside the connected world.
               | Dunbar's number, right?
        
               | prox wrote:
               | Interesting, what are your views on that?
        
               | flir wrote:
               | I've only thought about it superficially. I think web of
               | trust is a better model for how humans work, but whenever
               | someone tries to translate it to the digital world it
               | fails.
               | 
               | (Lets call this approach digital villages for the sake of
               | argument).
               | 
               | We have lots of examples of digital villages working -
               | forums, subreddits, chatrooms, MUDs, etc etc. Maybe it's
               | a case of worse is better? Or maybe everyone who
               | implements web of trust immediately tries to jam crypto
               | in there and turns off all the normal people? What do you
               | think?
        
               | prox wrote:
               | I tend to think the small scale worked better for more
               | _meaningful_ connections (high signal to noise, content
               | to interest, less counting likes and subs, less ads) My
               | best experiences online aren't Big Social : it's small
               | forums, IRC chatrooms with high engagement, high trust
               | scenarios like people being themselves immediately
               | without anonymity.
               | 
               | I tend to think lots of social spaces have been
               | engineered by engineers, not people. The tech has been
               | more important than the value it can bring in a human
               | context. (Exaggerating for emphasis here, it's not black
               | and white but functionally true)
               | 
               | Big fan of the Six Idea's (M.J. Adler) for meaningful
               | life that is fairly universal: Truth, Goodness, and
               | Beauty - the ideas we judge by; and Liberty, Equality and
               | Justice - the ideas we act on.
               | 
               | I feel a food online social space should strive for high
               | marks in these areas.
        
               | scarface_74 wrote:
               | Doesn't that just create echo chambers?
        
               | anigbrowl wrote:
               | Sure, what of it? There's no rule saying people can't
               | eblong to more than one echo chamber.
        
             | beezlebroxxxxxx wrote:
             | You can make a distinction between empirical truths and
             | things (often claims) that are right and wrong. The former
             | has no 'history'; while the latter is contextual and tied
             | up in the practice and expression of _reasons_ , which is
             | to say, it is essentially historical and cultural.
             | 
             | That's really all that postmodern thought says really.
             | Naturally, for a government to be right or wrong, requires
             | that citizens be critical of it, almost actively
             | antagonistic in their demands for reasons, evidence (be it
             | empirical or otherwise) and clarification. Postmodern
             | thought is a critical tool. So that's not that different
             | than what we have right now (most of HN for instance is
             | _hyper-critical_ of nearly all government truth claims),
             | only the demands on citizens are likely outpacing their
             | resources and abilities.
        
               | jfengel wrote:
               | Even empirical truth has a remarkable degree of social
               | construction. Consider the notion of "force", as
               | empirical as it gets. But then you look at relativity or
               | even just centrifugal force. Scientific revolutions
               | consist of reinterpreting objective facts.
               | 
               | It's not just "nothing is real", which is just
               | intellectual laziness. It's noting that we always
               | interpret the world; we can't avoid it. Ordinary
               | interactions usually arrive at similar interpretations,
               | but people have a remarkable way of being influenced in
               | that judgment. And sometimes that can lead to some really
               | bad outcomes. It's important to recognize that the
               | potential is always there even in things that seem
               | obvious.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | tsss wrote:
             | They have always been crooks. Just because lying has become
             | even easier doesn't mean that there is no truth.
        
             | AnthonyMouse wrote:
             | A lot of what enables this is centralized infrastructure.
             | If you have your messages and browsing history and files on
             | your own device, and you make end-to-end encrypted
             | connections to the people you talk to, it's a lot harder to
             | do this kind of thing. Because you have your own personal
             | copy of the thing from when it first happened and if you
             | remember it you can go back and verify it yourself. Then
             | you can point that out, and anyone else can go into their
             | own copy from however long ago and see that the fake
             | doesn't match the original.
             | 
             | Social media companies notoriously blocked users from
             | sending a story to each other _in DMs_ a couple of years
             | ago. It 's not a stretch to go from there to deleting past
             | messages in order to memory hole something. And the
             | companies may not even be doing it by choice if they're
             | being pressured by a government.
             | 
             | They can't do that if your data is yours and they can't
             | read it, instead of the only copy being on their servers.
        
               | scarface74 wrote:
               | And governments in Australia and the EU are trying to
               | pass laws that make e2e encryption without a back door
               | illegal...
        
               | hnthrowaway8860 wrote:
               | I don't think that Tucker Carlsen style BS machines have
               | anything to do with governments censoring your private
               | messages. You are talking about an entirely different
               | threat model here.
        
             | pjc50 wrote:
             | > That world is increasingly the world we live in
             | 
             | I think the point of the postmodernists was that was
             | _always_ the world we live in, it 's just that the Internet
             | has made it much more visible and we can see the fraying
             | and the contradictions. It's just that, for a fairly narrow
             | window of time and societies, there was enough of an honor
             | culture about being caught lying that the discourse-reality
             | matched fairly well the actual reality. But even in the
             | 20th century that required hiding a lot of perspectives, or
             | only slowly and begrudgingly acknowledging them.
             | 
             | There's a distinction of degree but not of kind between
             | "presenting the version of events most favourable to
             | yourself" vs "presenting an entirely fictional version". I
             | don't know how we get that back.
        
               | jonhohle wrote:
               | I think you capture it, but to make it clear, post-
               | modernism existed before the Internet.
               | 
               | I've never considered the post-truth perspective as
               | having anything to do with intentional misrepresentation,
               | but rather relativism (which is dangerous in other ways,
               | imho). Outright lying has been used by authoritarians,
               | but it really seems like we need a term to describe
               | societies controlled by blatant, obvious lies (which is
               | where I would consider the US at the moment). People like
               | to use fascism, Marxism, etc., but those used similar
               | techniques, for very different ends.
        
               | 13of40 wrote:
               | I wrote up a much longer reply to this, but I can't get
               | myself to submit it. tl;dr is there are some basic things
               | you cannot say in public today without getting cancelled.
               | And I'm not talking about kiddy porn or extreme
               | Trumpisms.
               | 
               | Edit: Literally took 5 minutes for the first downvote,
               | despite not mentioning a single "issue". What's that old
               | phrase? QED?
        
               | quesera wrote:
               | I suspect your comment is downvoted because it's ominous
               | and substance-free. Reasonably so, I think. Your comment
               | is in fact a negative drag on the quality of conversation
               | here.
               | 
               | Live a little. Go ahead and share your perspectives. The
               | maximum downvote damage is -5 points. You'll survive.
               | I'll upvote you even if I disagree. Unless they're just
               | the standard talking points from one side or another on
               | some contentious topic, which is too boring to upvote.
        
               | 13of40 wrote:
               | OK, here's an example: A couple of months ago they were
               | tossing around the idea of "retaking Crimea". I believe
               | that any effort to do that should be based on a best
               | effort assessment of the will of the people living there,
               | because those are the people who will be getting
               | artillery shells in their livingroom in exchange for it.
               | Based on my own experience with expats from there and
               | Donbas, who still have family in the area, those people
               | are happy being Russian again. Show me on CNN or NPR
               | where their voices and perspectives are being shared.
               | 
               | Again, this is just an example, not my personal agenda.
               | What I want to point out is that we've normalized that
               | there are a handful of forbidden topics that you will get
               | punched for if you approach them with anything but a pre-
               | formed opinion that matches the status quo.
               | 
               | Edit: And just as a turn of the screw, I'm going to say
               | that the COVID vaccines are pretty shit compared to ones
               | like smallpox, polio, and rabies vaccines, which actually
               | (and sometimes retroactively) prevent you from getting
               | the disease you were vaccinated against. Oh heck, I'm not
               | allowed to say that thing that we all know. I mean if you
               | take a high level view of it, they take the edge off the
               | problem, but they still kind of suck.
        
               | quesera wrote:
               | To your edit:
               | 
               | There's nothing controversial about saying that it'd be
               | better if the COVID vaccines were better!
               | 
               | The COVID vaccines we have are measurably better than not
               | having a COVID vaccine, and people had worse health
               | outcomes if they believed (acted) otherwise.
               | 
               | Some narratives allow nuance and some do not. Public
               | health communication is a very problematic place for
               | nuance, and the natural nuance of science was weaponized
               | to serve an agenda (which was sometimes blatantly
               | dishonest) -- so avoiding nuance became a pragmatic
               | approach to achieving better outcomes under existing
               | circumstances.
               | 
               | If you felt cancelled for holding out for the complicated
               | nuanced reality, I can sympathize with that feeling. I
               | can also sympathize with those who believed that
               | _focusing_ on the nuance would, broadly, harm people!
        
               | FabHK wrote:
               | > those people are happy being Russian again. Show me on
               | CNN or NPR where their voices and perspectives are being
               | shared.
               | 
               | Here we go, as requested:
               | 
               | https://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/16/world/europe/ukraine-
               | cris...
               | 
               | > One voter, Grigory Illarionovich, told CNN, "I'm for
               | restoring Crimea to Russia. Returning what Khrushchev
               | took away."
               | 
               | > Another voter in Perevalnoye, Viktor Savchenko, said he
               | would never vote for the government in Kiev. "I want us
               | to join Russia, and live like Russians, with all their
               | rights," he said.
               | 
               | > Victoria Khudyakova said she also had voted to join
               | Russia, which she sees as being "spiritually close" to
               | Crimea. "For me, Russia is an opportunity for our Crimea
               | to develop, to bloom. And I believe that it will be so,"
               | she said.
               | 
               | [...]
               | 
               | > CNN analyst and Russian journalist Vladimir Pozner
               | similarly stressed that Sunday's vote was in no way
               | staged. "When you look at the celebrations, you can't
               | doubt that these people really are very happy," he said.
               | 
               | https://www.npr.org/2018/03/06/591266939/how-people-in-
               | crime...
               | 
               | > DEMID KUPAYEV: (Through interpreter) I witnessed how
               | babushkas came up and said, thank God the time has come
               | for Crimea to return to its historic homeland.
               | 
               | > KIM: Kupayev says international sanctions have made
               | finding work in commercial shipping harder. But like many
               | Crimeans, he calls economic hardship the acceptable price
               | of joining Russia.
        
               | 13of40 wrote:
               | Yep, 2014 and 2018. Meanwhile, for the second one, if you
               | scroll down to the "More Stories from NPR" section:
               | 
               | - Two dead, 23 wounded in a Russian strike on a Ukrainian
               | medical clinic
               | 
               | - Ukraine secured military aid, including advanced
               | fighter jets, at the G-7 summit
               | 
               | - Zelenskyy arrives at G-7 summit in Japan as leaders
               | ramp up pressure on Russia
               | 
               | - Russia attacked the hometown of Ukraine's Eurovision
               | band just before its performance
               | 
               | Fair and balanced reporting, right there. The first and
               | last bullet points aren't at all the bald-faced examples
               | of atrocity propaganda that we've just accepted as part
               | of our daily feed.
               | 
               | Next, they're going to be raping nuns on tables[1] and
               | throwing babies out of their incubators[2].
               | 
               | [1] http://www.telelib.com/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/prose/C
               | omeingU...
               | 
               | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony#:~:te
               | xt=In%2....
        
               | quesera wrote:
               | OK, I think that's a valid consideration. I don't think
               | you'll get much pushback for prioritizing the will of the
               | people, and their disinterest in living in a war zone. I
               | have not read anything on NPR or CNN calling for the
               | expansion of war in the Baltics. But they run opinion
               | pieces too, just like most other media outlets.
               | 
               | I was expecting something controversial. :)
               | 
               | The counterargument of course is that the region was
               | annexed by aggression, which is dangerous to legitimize.
               | Letting the bullies win is a recipe for creating more and
               | bigger bullies.
               | 
               | But sometimes there are no good answers. I don't know any
               | trustworthy sources of information from that area (only
               | expats and news reporting which are all various degrees
               | of clueless and biased).
               | 
               | Avoiding inflicting war on a reluctant people sounds
               | humane. Restoring national sovereignty to a conquered
               | people sounds noble. Impeding the spread of territorial
               | aggression and natural resource theft sounds righteous.
               | 
               | Personal opinion, pragmatic I think: You can't retake
               | Crimea without obliterating Russia. You can't obliterate
               | Russia without horrifying consequences. Don't retake
               | Crimea, but draw a very clear and public line, and allow
               | no concessions regarding the next Crimea (Ukraine). This
               | turns out to be very close to the foreign policy of most
               | of the world.
        
               | actionfromafar wrote:
               | Ah, like the red lines drawn up for Assad in Syria.
               | 
               | And Crimea is strategic. Look at a map. Without it, the
               | Ukraine and its ports are always under threat from the
               | whims of Russia.
               | 
               | It's probably true that you can't crush Russia without
               | serious consequences. Unfortunately, you can't let it win
               | territory without _very_ serious consequences either.
               | 
               | This follows its own tragic logic now and you (we) can't
               | wish for a nice solution that has no consequences down
               | the line. Letting Russia off the hook is a terrible
               | precedent.
        
               | quesera wrote:
               | I agree completely.
               | 
               | We were asleep when Russia took Crimea, and unprepared to
               | react with anything more than stern words. We were not
               | ready for Putin. He obviously saw the opportunity, took
               | the risk, and he won.
               | 
               | It would be tragic to return to a world where aggressive
               | expansionism is the norm.
               | 
               | But fighting back through Crimea would be tragic also.
               | And it's not clear we would have the support of the
               | locals. That's courting disaster even before you
               | contemplate that the opposing leader is mercurial and
               | nuclear.
               | 
               | My opinion is that we have to take the L on Crimea, but
               | make it clear that the world is not sleeping any more,
               | and that Ukraine is not next on the menu.
               | 
               | Syria is an important example. US bluster doesn't carry
               | much weight in the world these days.
               | 
               | But the situation in Ukraine is very different. It
               | astonishes me that there's political disagreement on
               | Russia's aggression toward neighbors, but if we fail
               | Ukraine it will be squarely the fault of one group of
               | people, and it will be incredibly damaging to US
               | interests in the world.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | fweimer wrote:
               | This is a more recent article that offers a more nuanced
               | perspective, even down to the title:
               | 
               | https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/15/why-crimea-
               | is-...
               | 
               | (The Guardian is pretty much pro-Ukraine, pro-war in
               | general.)
        
               | anigbrowl wrote:
               | I haven't downvoted you but I was tempted. Either submit
               | it, submit anonymously, or don't. As it is your comment
               | asks for attention while providing only frustration in
               | return; it's just noise.
        
               | AnimalMuppet wrote:
               | I have a suggestion for the word to describe the current
               | situation in the US:
               | 
               | Agitprop.
               | 
               | It's not just blatant, obvious lies. It's lies *designed
               | to agitate people". I mean, the goal is "media
               | engagement" (and secondarily, "political engagement"),
               | but that comes downstream from getting everybody stirred
               | up.
        
               | NoRelToEmber wrote:
               | There are 330 million people in the US, and 1.4 billion
               | in India. You don't need lies for agitprop - such numbers
               | will furnish you with enough real incidents to drive
               | whatever narrative you wish, if you're in a position to
               | pick what gets publicity. Cherrypicking. I'm sure you can
               | think of a few recent examples.
        
               | actionfromafar wrote:
               | That's some kind of meta-lying, too. By cherrypicking,
               | you are implicitly saying, "these are the issues of our
               | times, why would I else present this important issue"
        
             | 666satanhimself wrote:
             | [dead]
        
             | tdehnel wrote:
             | There is nothing in principle which prevents us from
             | solving this problem. We cannot predict which new knowledge
             | will solve it. But we can say that if we don't solve it, it
             | will be our fault for not producing the required knowledge
             | fast enough.
        
               | flagrant_taco wrote:
               | Alternatively, it could be our fault for creating a world
               | in which that fast growth in knowledge is required. We
               | didn't have to pursue technologies that make the
               | centralization of power and control easier and easier.
        
               | salawat wrote:
               | _Centralization is technology._
               | 
               | There will always be people looking at any advancement
               | and figuring out how to leverage it to expand their
               | personal capability to project power. Nothing is immune
               | to it. Even primitives of decentralization can be
               | leveraged in a way that defacto centralization is the
               | inevitable outcome.
               | 
               | You don't research things that can't be centralized. You
               | just don't centralize. The cost there though. Is then you
               | have to accept certain things just ain't gonna happen.
        
               | JieJie wrote:
               | Watching Mastodon and the Fediverse expand is an
               | experiment we can watch in real time.
               | 
               | Newcomers to the technology clamoring for it to be more
               | centralized is a daily occurrence. It seems almost
               | entropic, the push towards centralization. It seems to
               | require constant effort to keep it decentralized.
        
               | flagrant_taco wrote:
               | I've always wondered if the push towards centralization
               | is a reaction to fear of the lack of control.
               | 
               | True decentralization and censorship resistance requires
               | taking the bad with the good. I'm the case of Mastodon,
               | if I can't be censored for sharing my views on
               | technology, politics, or sports then the person wishing
               | to sharing illegal photographs of threats that may be
               | illegal in some jurisdictions can't be censored either.
               | 
               | It raises the very interesting question of whether
               | freedom of speech is an all our nothing concept. Very few
               | people would support the idea of being able to say
               | literally whatever you want, but can you really have
               | freedom of speech at all if someone else gets to draw the
               | bounds with which your speech much stay?
        
               | tdehnel wrote:
               | Eventually, some thing that we cannot control (e.g. Giant
               | meteor, pandemic, etc) will come to destroy us.
               | 
               | If it does, it will be our fault for not progressing fast
               | enough in terms of knowledge.
               | 
               | There is no world in which we could, or would want to
               | limit our growth in terms of scientific knowledge. Not to
               | mention the fact that to do so would mean ceding full
               | totalitarian control.
        
               | flagrant_taco wrote:
               | Are you really arguing that we should have no boundries
               | on progress for fear of a rogue asteroid destroying us
               | all? Shouldn't we consider the risks of what we may
               | accidentally break or purposely misuse along the way?
               | Scientific knowledge comes with risks, both in how the
               | tools can be used as well as errogant or misguided belief
               | that we know enough to understand all meaningful
               | implications of wielding said knowledge.
               | 
               | Even the concept of progress as a goal seems misguided
               | and risky. We shouldn't assume something is better simply
               | because it isn't what we had before. "Not worse than what
               | we had before" is a great goal but one that requires
               | effort and focus, it isn't a given law of the universe
               | that all change is good simply because it's change.
        
             | jahewson wrote:
             | > Now they look more like prophets.
             | 
             | Not to me. They just look like another group claiming grand
             | and sweeping theories of truth.
        
               | notjulianjaynes wrote:
               | That's somewhat ironic since "postmodernism is an
               | intellectual stance or mode of discourse characterized by
               | skepticism toward the 'grand narratives' of
               | modernism."[1]
               | 
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism
        
               | tsss wrote:
               | Postmodernism is ironic exactly because it is such a
               | "grand narrative" that it is supposedly trying to avoid.
        
           | ChatGTP wrote:
           | It will probably do both of those things through autonomous
           | weapons systems and through disinformation.
           | 
           | Some doors were maybe better left unopened, we opened this
           | one. Let's see how it goes.
        
           | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
           | 100%. And the thing I've personally found quite shocking is
           | how the past 5-10 years or so have shown that even when the
           | truth _does_ come out, there are enough  "mirrors" as you put
           | it so that people can question anything and believe whatever
           | they want to believe, facts be damned.
           | 
           | A couple weeks ago when the Patriot Front had a white
           | supremacist rally and march in front of the Washington
           | Monument (now of the "red bike guy" fame), many prominent
           | right wing Twitter talking heads tweeted that it _must_ be a
           | left wing conspiracy to make conservatives look bad and that
           | the marchers were federal agents, despite 0 evidence of this,
           | and indeed despite plenty of evidence that they were just
           | actual Patriot Front members. It was difficult for me to tell
           | if they actually believed that fairy tale, or of they felt
           | that _it didn 't really matter_ because they knew if they
           | shouted "fake news" loud enough they could get enough like
           | minded people to upvote it.
        
             | anigbrowl wrote:
             | _It was difficult for me to tell if they actually believed
             | that fairy tale, or of they felt that it didn 't really
             | matter because they knew if they shouted "fake news" loud
             | enough they could get enough like minded people to upvote
             | it._
             | 
             | It's a tactic to call everything a false flag, even your
             | own ops. It requires virtually zero time, effort, or
             | education to get everyone on your side doing it. Liberals
             | fall for this trick frequently because they are obsessed
             | with being seen to have to correct answer, so they invest
             | for more effort in debunking than the liars did in making
             | their claim.
        
               | jeezfrk wrote:
               | haha. they don't get all this delishus Kool aid that is
               | to die for!
               | 
               | I know my good good friend Conservative Fearless Leader
               | will never let me go to jail or die of preventable
               | disease or banish my rites when I want defending.
               | 
               | oops... too late. at least I didn't need to be right.
        
               | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
               | > Liberals fall for this trick frequently because they
               | are obsessed with being seen to have to correct answer,
               | so they invest for more effort in debunking than the
               | liars did in making their claim.
               | 
               | Excuse me while my eyes roll into the back of my head.
               | 
               | Whether "liberal" or "conservative", some of us still
               | care that facts matter. And honestly I would never have
               | worried so much about calling out so much bullshit in the
               | past until I saw so many of my fellow (voting) citizens
               | actually believe this BS and take it to dangerous
               | extremes. For example, when QAnon first came out, I just
               | smiled a bit and laughed - "This doesn't even reach the
               | level of _bad_ fan fiction " I thought. Yet, lo and
               | behold, significant swaths of the US population believe
               | this, and I find that frightening.
        
               | anigbrowl wrote:
               | Sorry for not expressing my point more clearly. It's not
               | that nobody should ever engage in debunking, but that
               | deliberately bullshit statements are often introduced on
               | social media to steal the time of well-meaning debunkers.
               | 
               | I realized Qanon was going to be a problem from when it
               | first appeared, but that's because I've spent about 20
               | years paying close attention to mis- and disinformation
               | and political influence groups. What I'm pointing out
               | here is that the time costs of lying vs debunking favor
               | liars, especially when aggregated across communities.
        
               | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
               | Ah, gotcha, understood.
        
           | remote_phone wrote:
           | The Dallas shopping center shooting was the first time in my
           | life I couldn't tell the difference between online truth and
           | lies. I'm very good as finding out the truth vs lies but this
           | time I couldn't. Usually disinformation is easy to spot but
           | this time it came out so fast that I had no idea what was
           | real vs fake. It's a scary time to be living in when you have
           | no idea what is real anymore.
        
             | Roark66 wrote:
             | Personally after I was involved with some "news" that was
             | then reported completely wrong (not by malice, but pure
             | incompetence) I've stopped believing anything I read or
             | hear in the media. This was 25 years ago and the trend has
             | only increased. Yes, there is quite a bit of fakery, but
             | 99% of "bad news" is a result of the: 1. No expectation by
             | the public credible sources are quoted when news are
             | reported. 2. Reporters not knowing their arse from their
             | elbow. 2. Their editor/writers"trying to spice it up a
             | little". 3. The speakers making bloody mistake after
             | mistake when reading from a teleprompter in the most
             | important stuff. 4. Other media picking it up and adding
             | their own spin.
             | 
             | It's like "Chinese whisper". I can't count the number of
             | times my partner tells me when I come home "have you heard,
             | there is this horribly stupid law that is coming into
             | effect next month". Then I check, and it's not a law, but a
             | proposal, it hasn't been even accepted to be discussed yet
             | and the details are completely different too.
             | 
             | I understand, not many smart people these days go into
             | "traditional news reporting". It's a pity, because good
             | news reporting is a prerequisite of a well functioning
             | democratic society
             | 
             | It will only get worse, as revenue from traditional news
             | drops they'll be more and more dssperate to make money the
             | only way they can, by increasing the emotional load of the
             | stuff they report. Everything has to be extreme, outraging,
             | horrible etc.
        
               | quesera wrote:
               | > _I can 't count the number of times my partner tells me
               | when I come home "have you heard, there is this horribly
               | stupid law that is coming into effect next month". Then I
               | check, and it's not a law, but a proposal, it hasn't been
               | even accepted to be discussed yet and the details are
               | completely different too._
               | 
               | It's certainly not the only source of error, but I find
               | that the answer to my first question ("What, where did
               | you read about that?") is almost always "Facebook".
               | 
               | It's become a running joke in my household. It turns out
               | though that some people read news as entertainment, and
               | don't really care if it's particularly true. This is
               | probably fine, but it breaks down when the evoked
               | response is outrage instead of a laugh.
        
           | EGreg wrote:
           | [flagged]
        
             | iinnPP wrote:
             | Im glad you mentioned this because I thought I was going a
             | bit nuts.
             | 
             | It's like thinking beyond today is impossible and that
             | using logic to predict behavior is akin to being a
             | conspiracy theorist.
             | 
             | Some now popular conclusions around AI were flagged
             | comments ~3 months ago.
             | 
             | No wonder software is so terrible today.
        
               | EGreg wrote:
               | It's like that in general, with authority-based and
               | cargo-cult based thinking.
               | 
               | Look at how the "Wuhan lab leak theory" was flagged and
               | buried, how it took Jon Stewart to voice it and take a
               | lot of heat before anyone paid any attention, and now
               | it's mainstream and the Federal government is supposedly
               | officially investigating it.
               | https://nypost.com/2023/02/28/jon-stewart-recalls-
               | outrage-af...
               | 
               | Sometimes governments use it to gaslight everyone:
               | https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/how-jimmy-
               | carter-...
               | 
               | On HN, the orthodoxy was that you shall not talk about
               | everyday causes of depression or ADD. But then in 2022 we
               | had this meta analysis that found no evidence supporting
               | the serotonin theory and SSRIs: https://www.sciencedaily.
               | com/releases/2022/07/220720080145.h...
               | 
               | Now it's OK to talk about it, whereas before it was not.
               | So now we have a lot of taboos to talk about
               | overdiagnosis of ADHD and gender dysphoria, talking about
               | the DSM V criteria etc:
               | https://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/feb/04/adhd-
               | diet-fo...
               | 
               | So yes.. right now the thing is to hate on Web3 and to do
               | strawmen like "how will it fix AI". It won't fix AI, it's
               | just that Web3 may be roughly a zero-sum game for
               | society, or at least not nearly as negative-sum as AI.
        
               | smoldesu wrote:
               | From HN "Guidelines" page:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
               | 
               | > Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or
               | sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some
               | interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or
               | disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on
               | TV news, it's probably off-topic.
               | 
               | As much as you're entirely right that HN's readership
               | decides what succeeds or not, pretty much every example
               | you've furnished is defined clearly as "off topic"
               | submissions. The Wuhan lab leak theory, regardless of how
               | we view it in hindsight, was paraded as a sensational
               | event up and down party lines. It never had a chance on
               | this site, like Donald Trump drama or "Ask HN: What did
               | you think of _Kardashians_ last night? ". Maybe it _is_
               | relevant - but framing it sensationally is like toxic
               | waste to this site 's readers.
               | 
               | > the orthodoxy was that you shall not talk about
               | everyday causes of depression or ADD
               | 
               | > So now we have a lot of taboos to talk about
               | overdiagnosis of ADHD and gender dysphoria, talking about
               | the DSM V criteria
               | 
               | They're not taboo. They're just not appropriate
               | conversation topics for a hacking/finance website. The
               | few times that it _has_ become a big discussion topic has
               | been through the lens of engineering lifestyles and
               | personal experience. Even that is arguably too sappy for
               | a non-Reddit website.
               | 
               | > Now it's OK to talk about it
               | 
               | > So yes.. right now the thing is to hate on Web3
               | 
               | Very subtle foreshadowing - you almost make it sound like
               | Web3 has a second chance or something.
               | 
               | Truth is, like I said at the beginning - HN chooses what
               | they want to hear. Most websites that give their users
               | any degree of control over their experience let this
               | happen (see Twitter, where users block the verified
               | users). If you demand engagement on a topic nobody cares
               | about, it stands to reason that you'll feel repeatedly
               | disappointed by this website.
        
               | stale2002 wrote:
               | > Maybe it is relevant
               | 
               | I think it absolutely is relevant, given that the
               | conversation itself was about changing narratives, as a
               | meta point.
               | 
               | > you almost make it sound like Web3 has a second chance
               | or something.
               | 
               | This thread itself, is one of the rare ones where
               | bringing up web3 actually is relevant, yes. It is
               | reasonable for him to make that argument, because the
               | topic is literally about how to authenticate things when
               | you have an opposing central authority.
               | 
               | > If you demand engagement on a topic nobody cares about
               | 
               | His point wasn't about engagement. Instead his point was
               | about how unpopular opinions are being proved correct,
               | and that people were way to quick to dismiss ideas.
               | 
               | His point was that people should be able to look ahead,
               | into the future, instead of immediately dismissing things
               | out of hand, just because the thing isn't directly
               | effecting the world right now.
               | 
               | IE, if you were downvoting/disagreeing with opinions
               | about how AI is going to make it hard to authenticate
               | information online, then you were wrong and were way to
               | quick to dismiss an opinion out of hand.
        
               | smoldesu wrote:
               | > as a meta point.
               | 
               | I mean, it's a stretch. I could use that stretching
               | metaphor as an excuse to talk about taffy for 4
               | paragraphs, but it doesn't contribute anything meaningful
               | to the conversation. Scrounging up discussion about Web3
               | on an Indian government expose is off-topic, and readers
               | will flag it. It's equally substantial as those "this is
               | good for Bitcoin" posts that get flagged under every
               | article about a government treasury.
               | 
               | > the topic is literally about how to authenticate things
               | when you have an opposing central authority.
               | 
               | If so, his flagged post didn't reflect it. It was a vapid
               | comment that made no attempt to reconcile either topic.
               | 
               | > his point was about how unpopular opinions are being
               | proved correct
               | 
               | If you want to argue that the Blockchain could have
               | prevented this from happening, then by all means - write
               | that comment. But that's not what his flagged post was.
               | It detracted from the conversation and _quite literally_
               | read as flamebait.
               | 
               | > if you were downvoting/disagreeing with opinions about
               | how AI is going to make it hard to authenticate
               | information online, then you were wrong
               | 
               | Spoilers: it has been hard to authenticate information
               | online for as long as the internet has been around. In
               | fact, the most significant events are corroborated with
               | _real life occurrences_ that challenge these lies. These
               | women can attest that they did not do this in the photo.
               | If government officials insist that the version with them
               | smiling is the true master copy, then you 're the fool
               | for believing them.
               | 
               | I'm baffled that this is even being used as a platform to
               | discuss Web3, a collection of technologies mostly reputed
               | for... being manipulated and exploited by bad actors that
               | cannot be incentivized to stop.
        
               | EGreg wrote:
               | Somehow AI fans can't seem to understand how scale
               | changes things.
               | 
               | Bombs have been around for a long time. What if everyone
               | could have many, cheaply and easily? Why, since nothing
               | happens with N of them, then 20,000 x N is just a little
               | more of the same. And so what if the bots are now able to
               | hold conversations and pass the Turing test 24x7 at
               | scale? We have been able to hire humans to do that.
               | 
               | Except... no. That's not how it works and you know it.
               | Allowing _anyone_ to deploy swarms of bots with
               | superhuman memory, strategy, coordination, and now the
               | ability to do many tasks with acceptable or good results
               | at scale, is a game-changer and the question is whether
               | it will make society better off.
               | 
               | The same questions asked of Web3's _downsides_ should be
               | asked of AI. Not upsides, downsides. The fact that the
               | guy in charge of safety at OpenAI says he thinks there's
               | a 20% chance of human extinction and you choose to shrug
               | it off and focus on some other part -- is the issue.
               | 
               | This isn't just an academic discussion. It is like the
               | people who profit off of coal and other things,
               | regardless of their emissions or effect on people or
               | climate. It matters and should be regulated.
        
               | stale2002 wrote:
               | > Scrounging up discussion about Web3 on an Indian
               | government expose is off-topic
               | 
               | It really isn't. Because it is one of the normally very
               | rare use cases for web 3 stuff, and the topic is directly
               | about a case where such a thing would be needed.
               | 
               | > it has been hard to authenticate information online
               | 
               | That's nice and all. But the claim was that people were
               | previously dismissing opinions about AI that are now
               | mainstream.
               | 
               | So yes, you'd be wrong if you were outright dismissing
               | these opinions about AI before, which are now popular.
               | 
               | And it is useful and interesting to point out how
               | previous opinions that were dismissed out of hand, are
               | now mainstream, using this situation as an example.
        
               | smoldesu wrote:
               | > Because it is one of the normally very rare use cases
               | for web 3 stuff
               | 
               | > a case where such a thing would be needed.
               | 
               | So... suggest a solution. What is your magical Blockchain
               | panacea for this situation? To plug all digital cameras
               | into an online ledger and hash every image? I'd love to
               | hear a non-pipe-dream based idea for this.
               | 
               | > But the claim was that people were previously
               | dismissing opinions about AI that are now mainstream.
               | 
               | This could be said about just about everything. I still
               | dismiss the flying car, even though I was "proved wrong"
               | in the 60s and 70s when some coked up engineers built
               | one. I still dismiss cryptocurrency, even though many
               | coins will outlive me. There is no world in my lifetime
               | where cryptocurrency obsoletes the IMF. Betting against
               | the powers that be is like playing chicken against a
               | shotgun.
        
               | stale2002 wrote:
               | > So... suggest a solution.
               | 
               | I am not sure if you read the rest of the comments and
               | suggestions in this whole post, but multiple people did,
               | over multiple discussion threads.
               | 
               | Feel free to go back and read them.
               | 
               | Also, it is still interesting and useful to suggest part
               | of the solution, without writing dozens of pages on the
               | exact specific details of it. Even just recommending
               | crypto, is interesting enough, due to the fact that real
               | usecases for crypto are so rare.
               | 
               | > This could be said about just about everything.
               | 
               | Ok, well in this case, related to AI, lots of people were
               | wrong. And those people who were wrong, should figure out
               | what mistake they made, to be so wrong, and why they were
               | so quick to incorrectly dismiss these arguments.
        
             | pjc50 wrote:
             | I'm not sure what you're arguing here?
        
               | confoundcofound wrote:
               | I suspect they're referring to using blockchain as a
               | system of cryptographically-verified facts and shared
               | reality to counteract the AI risk you mention.
               | 
               | Why was GP flagged? They made a good point.
        
               | EGreg wrote:
               | It was flagged because it's a taboo on HN to say anything
               | good about Web3, or even that Web3 is not as bad as
               | something else, like AI that will destroy our trust in
               | anything digital.
               | 
               | The point was that Web3 was mildly zero-sum for society,
               | while AI is shaping up to be massively negative-sum, as
               | more people get access to it. It's like giving bombs to
               | everybody and hoping no one will use them in bad ways. At
               | least with nuclear bombs we knew who was enriching the
               | plutonium. Here, everyone has access to weapons, to be
               | used as they please.
               | 
               | The key to when things go bad is swarms. When HN is
               | overrun with swarms of bots a few years from now, you'll
               | remember reading this. Web3 by contrast is just an
               | immutable ledger, its worst applications are convincing
               | people to voluntarily put some money into a buggy smart
               | contract.
        
             | dagmx wrote:
             | How would the Web3 concept solve this?
        
               | EGreg wrote:
               | It wouldn't, that's not what is being claimed.
        
               | dagmx wrote:
               | I read your other post explaining what you meant after I
               | asked. I don't think the initial claim was clear but I
               | get where you're coming from.
        
         | yalogin wrote:
         | The truth comes out but the pro fascist people will have the
         | ammo to keep lying about and repeating the lie. A percentage of
         | the rest will believe it. They keep chipping away like that
        
         | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
         | IMO it doesn't even matter if the truth comes out, the truth
         | wasn't first.
        
         | Varqu wrote:
         | I think the primary issue is that, while internet users usually
         | question the authenticity of photos (as a normal practice),
         | they tend to subconsciously trust what they see in videos.
         | 
         | It will require a significant mental shift to now question
         | practically every single piece of audiovisual content.
        
           | flagrant_taco wrote:
           | I'd hope that people don't like in a world where they believe
           | they have to question the authenticity of everything they
           | see. Why would they keep using the internet at all? And what
           | psychological impact does that have when you view the world
           | assuming everything may be a lie?
        
           | CamperBob2 wrote:
           | I used to think this problem would solve itself, in that once
           | people were fooled a few times, they'd stop being so easy to
           | fool. The Trump era shut down that quaint idealistic notion.
           | Turns out a lot of people -- maybe all of us to some extent
           | -- actively enjoy being fooled. It makes for a communal
           | experience that we'd otherwise miss out on, or something.
        
             | Varqu wrote:
             | Yeah, the problem is that it's surprisingly easy to fall
             | for the fake if it re-affirms your world view.
        
           | gattilorenz wrote:
           | > internet users usually question the authenticity of photos
           | 
           | Maybe _you_ do that, but I would not generalize, and I would
           | not necessarily think I'm always capable of doing that myself
           | "by default"
        
       | tjr225 wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | wiseleo wrote:
       | AI-assisted media manipulation will have an interesting effect on
       | evidence becoming subject to reasonable doubt. Ten years ago,
       | showing a video in court was damning evidence. I expect it to
       | become less so.
        
         | dragonwriter wrote:
         | > Ten years ago, showing a video in court was damning evidence.
         | 
         | Courts have dealt with issues of manipulation of content and
         | falsification of provenance of video and photographic evidence
         | for a long time, actually.
        
       | capableweb wrote:
       | > Verified account @wokeflix_ tweeted the same image in a meme
       | 
       | > Verified account @randomsena tweeted the same image
       | 
       | > Another verified account, @RealAtulsay, tweeted the same image
       | 
       | Isn't "Verified" on Twitter just a subscription now, meaning it's
       | just that these people have given Twitter money? Why it matters
       | (in a journalistic sense) who has paid Twitter or not? And why
       | are only some of the verified accounts mentioned as verified
       | accounts, while others are verified but not mentioned as
       | verified?
       | 
       | Such a weird article overall.
        
         | lost_tourist wrote:
         | yeah verified only means you either gave your credit card
         | name/number to them or someone gave them a stolen one. It's
         | basically useless. However in this case I'm more apt to believe
         | the government is manipulating photos than randos on twitter
         | given the recent drive towards religious and ethnic minority
         | discrimination by the Indian government.
        
         | aziaziazi wrote:
         | Isn't Verified a feature to (supposedly) attest someone
         | identity instead of attesting the trueness of their tweets?
         | 
         | For my understanding the purpose was to help newcomers to
         | distinguish @realDonaldTrump with @veryRealTrump. It is
         | supposed to prevent impersonating, but that's just a shift of
         | trust from your own judgement to the Twitter chosen fraud
         | algorithm or whatever method they choose. Can't see how 10$ add
         | more credibility.
        
           | crooked-v wrote:
           | They got rid of the identity part. Now all it indicates is
           | that you pay Twitter.
        
         | comprev wrote:
         | I suspect there is considerable overlap in a Venn diagram of
         | those who never hear about the image being manipulated and
         | those who still think a blue tick is reserved for human-
         | verified accounts.
        
         | matsemann wrote:
         | I think that's their point. It's a way of subtly pointing out
         | that verification on Twitter is now useless, and shouldn't be
         | trusted any more than claims from any other user. Even less, I
         | guess, since it's not a equal distribution of people paying for
         | verification, they all skew pretty hard to one side.
        
           | tdehnel wrote:
           | Would be great if they just came out and said it, instead of
           | this passive aggressive nonsense.
        
           | ed25519FUUU wrote:
           | That's probably true for Twitter blue but there appears to be
           | multiple forms of verification, including a government one
           | and an organizations one.
        
         | grecy wrote:
         | Why do people care about Twitter at all?
         | 
         | It doesn't matter what people say on 4chan or fox "news", why
         | is twitter any different?
         | 
         | It's all just opinions, not worth anyone's time. Ignore it.
        
           | macintux wrote:
           | The media we ignore still can have a huge impact on society,
           | on elections, on basic human civility. Ignoring Fox News
           | hasn't made it any less damaging.
        
         | jeromegv wrote:
         | Well let's see what Twitter says about their new blue program
         | 
         | Your account must have no signs of being misleading or
         | deceptive
         | 
         | Your account must have no signs of engaging in platform
         | manipulation and spam
         | 
         | So Twitter is telling us that those accounts should not be
         | deceiving. Yet, they are.
         | 
         | https://help.twitter.com/en/managing-your-account/about-twit...
        
           | gpm wrote:
           | If you're running an article on how Elon is changing twitter
           | into a disinformation machine, the fact that they're
           | verifying deceptive accounts would be relevant.
           | 
           | If you're running an article on how the India ruling party
           | used AI to paint protestors in a false light, it isn't
           | relevant. Worse bringing attention to it like this could give
           | less-informed readers the false impression that "verified"
           | actually meant something like "verified by the government".
        
           | suddenclarity wrote:
           | Sounds more like regular ToS that gives Twitter the right to
           | cancel paid services, not a magic method to fix the issue. I
           | know a ton of verified politicians that lied weekly on
           | Twitter pre Musk. It's an unsolvable issue.
        
             | lost_tourist wrote:
             | TOS only get used if you're a fly in the ointment in most
             | cases.
        
           | DemocracyFTW2 wrote:
           | Pretty much the definition of "win-win situation" in Elmo's
           | Abridged Dictionary, right?
        
         | d3vmax wrote:
         | I have seen so many pro-Russian bot accounts with blue verified
         | symbol. These accounts also get priority on their replies,
         | which are positioned at the start of the tweet conversation
         | compared to non-blue / non paying twitter handles, giving them
         | a bigger amplification.
         | 
         | Whenever I see blue tick accounts now, I notice most of them
         | have <1000 followers and have no authority in the subject
         | matter and I ignore most of them. I have noticed a lot of
         | right-wing handles, all having the blue tick and getting
         | priority on spreading their misinformation as it was in this
         | case.
         | 
         | Elon has broken the verified system on purpose to fit his new
         | anti-government / anti-"woke" agenda.
        
           | whamlastxmas wrote:
           | This is wrong on most every level
        
             | Freedom2 wrote:
             | Agreed. There's a lot of claims that are unsubstantiated as
             | well as full of anecodes. It's hard to discern how this can
             | lead to 'curious' discussion.
        
         | throwaway384629 wrote:
         | Also, twitter shows the comments from "verified" handles on the
         | top of other comments. Government sponsored trolls have
         | unlimited flow of money to buy verified status and dominate the
         | general public accounts.
         | 
         | This is how BJP government uses public money to run troll
         | campaigns on social media against opposition leaders. [1]
         | 
         | Possibly hundreds or thousands of persons or "journalists" are
         | getting funds from government to abuse the opposition leaders.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/exclusive-silver-touch-
         | behin...
        
           | whamlastxmas wrote:
           | The problem isn't money, it's unique phone numbers and credit
           | card numbers. Over time there is much easier ways to detect
           | and mass ban platform manipulation accounts.
           | 
           | I'm sure the government of India can make as many numbers and
           | cards as they want, but the problem is still that Twitter can
           | know who issued both and a lot of information about them,
           | including if they're burner numbers. It still helps
           | tremendously
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | That's the promise. Whether they do anything with it is
             | questionable.
             | 
             | https://imgur.com/a/6blpTqF shows my recent advertiser
             | blocks from about 10 mins of browsing. Clearly inauthentic
             | accounts, some paying the $1k gold check fees.
        
           | pityJuke wrote:
           | > Also, twitter shows the comments from "verified" handles on
           | the top of other comments.
           | 
           | This is the exact main problem with paid Verification. Blue
           | tweets surface to the top, disproportionate to the attention
           | they actually receive, meaning you're more likely to see
           | them. You're effectively paying for attention.
        
         | codegeek wrote:
         | Yea. the moment Elon started charging for the blue tick, it
         | became useless and I wouldn't pay for it anymore unless I
         | really want to use the extra goodies that it provides which I
         | don't need personally.
        
         | stefan_ wrote:
         | Such a weird comment. Yes, what is wrong with emptying the
         | label of any meaning and letting any misinformation trash
         | account buy it for a few bucks? You might be terminally online
         | but then not everyone is.
        
         | pjc50 wrote:
         | "Verified" is now an anti-signal. It's more likely than not to
         | indicate that the poster is a crank who's paying money to have
         | their opinions disseminated.
        
           | wussboy wrote:
           | I would agree with this, except verified account posts still
           | get shown first.
        
             | rhaway84773 wrote:
             | So cranks and people trying to promote something.
        
           | concordDance wrote:
           | Not true of the organisation verification.
        
           | tdehnel wrote:
           | It was an anti-signal before.
        
             | ryder9 wrote:
             | [dead]
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | ed25519FUUU wrote:
           | It was never a signal for 99% of verified users. It as a
           | game.
        
       | cactusplant7374 wrote:
       | What software was used?
        
       | guenthert wrote:
       | Flashback to The Laughing Man of Ghost in the Shell. Guess, we're
       | getting there.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | ChatGTP wrote:
       | "Hey, we're just trying to democratize art.."
        
       | kloc wrote:
       | This account has been constantly submitting anti ruling party
       | articles to demean India. Nothing in the article or proof
       | otherwise which indicates that this was done by the rulling
       | party. A lot of other articles submitted by this "throwaway"
       | account are also questionable.
        
         | throwaway384629 wrote:
         | I have backed everything with sources in my posts? Can you
         | point out if anything is not correct? Or do you have a general
         | issue when something is said against ruling party?
         | 
         | If you really care about reputation of India, how about
         | advising someone in BJP to prevent this type of things from
         | happening at first place?
        
       | collsni wrote:
       | Just the beginning, what happens when it becomes impossible to
       | parse fact and fiction?
       | 
       | I mean rsa 2048 can be currently broken in 104 days, and we'll be
       | at quantum levels sooner than we realize.
       | 
       | How we validating anything after that? Biometric?
        
         | RobotToaster wrote:
         | I wonder if we'll see analogue methods as the only reliable
         | ones left.
        
         | lightedman wrote:
         | >I mean rsa 2048 can be currently broken in 104 days
         | 
         | With what hardware? I've been CONSTANTLY trying to break
         | Hermes2 ransomware (which uses RSA2048) for almost a solid
         | decade.
        
         | api wrote:
         | Need a source on RSA 2048 being breakable. QC like that is
         | still quite far off and it can't be conventionally breakable
         | unless there has been some kind of mathematical breakthrough.
        
           | collsni wrote:
           | https://www.fujitsu.com/global/about/resources/news/press-
           | re...
        
             | dmbche wrote:
             | We're good! It's a risk assessment - nothing has been
             | broken, but they propose that with a computer with these
             | specs it could be done.
             | 
             | I wouldn't worry too much about encryption being easily
             | broken soon.
        
               | shagie wrote:
               | For those who worry about it, it isn't that it's broken
               | _soon_ , but that it _will_ be broken within a timeframe
               | that the data is still useful.
               | 
               | Veritasium : How Quantum Computers Break The Internet...
               | Starting Now - https://youtu.be/-UrdExQW0cs
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvest_now,_decrypt_later
        
               | dmbche wrote:
               | I'm not sure what encrypted data produced today would be
               | relevant in 40 years time? Thinking about how some cases
               | can't be prosecuted since it's been too long since the
               | offence
        
         | garganzol wrote:
         | > I mean rsa 2048 can be currently broken in 104 days
         | 
         | Only if one has a sufficiently-large fault-tolerant quantum
         | computer with 10,000 qubits and 2.23 trillion quantum gates
         | [0]. Which is currently an unachivium.
         | 
         | [0] https://www.itnews.com.au/news/quantum-computers-wont-
         | break-...
        
           | collsni wrote:
           | With this whole AI push, there have been pretty serious
           | advancements in technology. I wouldn't doubt in 5 to 10 years
           | will have a vastly different threat landscape. Nation states
           | can afford supercomputers, so can some private corporations.
        
             | ffgjgf1 wrote:
             | How is AI related to this? Did LLMs figure how crack
             | encryptions?
        
               | bogwog wrote:
               | That doesn't seem too unbelievable. Maybe a sufficiently
               | large LLM will be able to find a flaw in the algorithms
               | or logic behind some encryption schemes which even our
               | greatest monkey brains overlooked.
        
               | carlitossway wrote:
               | No, they cannot. LLMs are LANGUAGE models, not KNOWLDEGE
               | models. They do not "know" what algorithms mean any more
               | than they know what everything else they "talk about"
               | mean.
               | 
               | What they are more than capable of is to produce really
               | convincing hype, which claims that LLMs can do anything
               | and everything.
        
         | tdehnel wrote:
         | Most people think information is transmitted from source to
         | receiver. This is actually wrong.
         | 
         | What happens is the information is creatively formed in the
         | mind of the receiver, by the receiver, in all cases.
         | 
         | In other words, people form an explanation for the observation
         | in their minds and judge it compared to other competing
         | explanations.
         | 
         | So instead of the post-truth, doom-and-gloom world that you
         | fear, another possible outcome is that people get better at
         | forming or identifying good explanatory knowledge. In other
         | words, the bar for what you call truth actually goes up and
         | people get smarter.
         | 
         | An example of this happening would be door-to-door sales
         | people. They basically no longer exist. Because people learned
         | not to answer the door when a random person knocks.
         | 
         | The old explanation "someone I want to talk to is here to see
         | me" got replaced with a new better explanation of "some time
         | wasting stranger is probably at the door."
        
           | beedeebeedee wrote:
           | That is an optimistic view, which I appreciate. The only
           | issue I have is that I think we will need to mobilize as a
           | culture to embrace it, in order for it to succeed.
           | 
           | I don't think it is as simple as replacing one explanation
           | with another (like your door-to-door salesman example)
           | because it is such an open-ended problem. I think it is more
           | like completing the Enlightenment as conceived by Kant and
           | others.
           | 
           | I think we could do it (i.e., philosophy classes beginning in
           | elementary school, etc), but it would be tough to convince
           | people to participate. It is hard, mind-bending, solitary
           | work that is inherently alienating, which most people avoid.
           | 
           | Additionally, there is also the inherent contradiction in
           | developing your own independent mind by order of the
           | government or teachers, as well as a host of other paradoxes.
           | 
           | Maybe the best route is to try to make philosophy popular?
           | Use social behavior for people to be attracted to it for the
           | wrong reasons, but hope that a sizeable part of the
           | population end up taking it seriously? And that sizeable
           | chunk is enough to influence the group?
           | 
           | I have no idea, but I like your comment and hope there is a
           | silver-lining that we become deeper and more thoughtful
           | people.
        
       | isanjay wrote:
       | BJP is proper Authoritarian.
       | 
       | This is coming from a right leaning person.
        
         | lagolinguini wrote:
         | The sad thing is they will probably win again in 2024. The
         | damage that 15 years of BJP has done to the social fabric of
         | India, and the undermining of the core founding principles of
         | the republic will last for generations. It's hard to imagine it
         | going away :(
        
           | throwaway384629 wrote:
           | Unfortunately BJP has compromised most of the pillars of
           | democracy. Almost all the mainstream "journalist" openly
           | support the BJP Government. You will find them insulting and
           | fighting with opposition leaders in TV debates everyday. They
           | will hold special TV shows to justify all the actions of
           | government. They will show BJP as winning in most of the
           | elections right till the last moment.
           | 
           | The judges of courts are getting post retirement posts from
           | the government. For example, Ranjan Gogoi, served as Chief
           | Justice of India and gave many decisions in favour of ruling
           | party and he got nominated to Rajaya Sabha by president after
           | his retirement. [1] He was also accused of sexual harassment,
           | and the lady was found to be a target of snooping by BJP
           | government through her mobile phone by using pegasus spyware.
           | [2]
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranjan_Gogoi
           | 
           | [2] https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/pegasus-
           | proje...
        
           | ridiculous_leke wrote:
           | We are used to a time when constitutional rights were
           | suspended and state governments were dismissed on the whim.
           | Regardless of what happens to BJP, India will continue to
           | move ahead.
        
             | throwaway384629 wrote:
             | We also used to a time in Germany in 1940s. We should not
             | let that happen again anywhere in the world.
        
           | kalam_throw wrote:
           | Most Indians were never secular. Before, they hadn't got a
           | voice or representation. BJP came into power by tapping into
           | the latent sentiment in majority of Indians.
           | 
           | It's much like how Trump was elected.
           | 
           | If you think that majority of Indians were ever secular, I
           | think that you never left the bubble of upper middle class,
           | city based society.
           | 
           | Hindus are, generally much more advanced than Muslim in terms
           | of education, finances, etc. and couldn't be bothered to
           | cause communal violence because they have much more to lose.
           | And the ones that are left behind, didn't have a uniting
           | force. BJP/RSS has accomplished that.
           | 
           | The people lynching Muslim for eating beef are very rural,
           | very uneducated Hindus with much less to lose. And the rest
           | of them openly support them.
           | 
           | I will say, 80-95% of Hindus were never ever secular. BJP is
           | _creating_ new zealots now, but they didn 't need to do so to
           | come to power.
        
             | forgetfulness wrote:
             | BJP is also hard at work at creating a single, homogeneous
             | Hindu and Indian identity, where something more of a
             | cultural sphere existed, to create fanatics to their cause.
             | They're re-engineering Indian society in a way that we've
             | seen end up in tears for everyone in the past, in other
             | places.
        
               | Utkarsh_Mood wrote:
               | >BJP is also hard at work at creating a single,
               | homogeneous Hindu and Indian identity
               | 
               | can you give particular examples of actions or
               | legislation you think they've taken that exemplifies
               | this?
        
               | throwaway384629 wrote:
               | BJP brought the Citizenship Act and the National Register
               | of Citizens to act against the minority.
               | 
               | >> "Will remove every single infiltrator, except
               | Buddhists, Hindus and Sikhs: Amit Shah" [1]
               | 
               | Archive.org snapshot of now deleted tweet from BJP
               | official account [2]
               | 
               | [1] https://indianexpress.com/elections/will-remove-
               | every-single...
               | 
               | [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20190520193044/https://tw
               | itter.c...
        
             | codersfocus wrote:
             | I'm not Indian, but I heard that there is also a rift
             | between south Indians (Tamil) and the northerners. Are
             | Tamils Hindu as well? Where do they play into this?
        
               | isanjay wrote:
               | Tamil Nadu is also a majority Hindu state.
               | 
               | Calling it rift is a bit of a stretch.
        
           | dagmx wrote:
           | I sadly don't see any true way to move past the BJP. They've
           | really captured the minds of the majority.
           | 
           | I don't think any other party has anywhere near the might to
           | stand up to the sheer might the BJP has created, not without
           | compromising their morals.
           | 
           | How do you compete with a government that will distort
           | reality like this, where the majority of people won't listen
           | to the actual truth?
        
             | isanjay wrote:
             | It's not like other parties have any morals in the first
             | place.
             | 
             | Well none of my state parties have morals and sure as hell
             | Congress doesn't have any morals
        
               | lagolinguini wrote:
               | > It's not like other parties have any morals in the
               | first place.
               | 
               | This is the line of thinking that has led to the BJPs
               | success. The fact that people have been convinced that
               | the opposition is not a viable alternative is a shame.
               | 
               | While it's true that the opposition has many faults, no
               | other party has undermined the core founding principles
               | of the republic the way the BJP has, except for perhaps
               | Indira Gandhi.
        
               | dagmx wrote:
               | While Congress and other parties have many faults,
               | they're still a damn sight better than the party that is
               | trying to degrade human rights for non-Hindus.
               | 
               | Sometimes you just need to hold your nose and vote for
               | the best option, even if they're flawed. The road to a
               | better tomorrow is paved with compromises that get us
               | there.
        
               | Utkarsh_Mood wrote:
               | >While Congress and other parties have many faults,
               | they're still a damn sight better
               | 
               | This is clearly an inflammatory opinion with no
               | substantial backing provided, I'd love to hear your
               | reasoning for coming to this conclusion. Indian politics
               | isn't as black and white as you're making it out to be.
        
               | lagolinguini wrote:
               | I'm sorry, but OPs comment is not an inflammatory
               | opinion. Congress does not stand opposed to the core
               | founding principles of the republic.
        
               | throwaway384629 wrote:
               | I think that any "Tom, Dick, and Harry" party is better
               | than the Nazi party.
        
       | khuss wrote:
       | India, under its current leadership of Modi's Hindutva government
       | is a near-term threat to its minorities, opposition and
       | dissenting voices. If it goes unchecked, it won't be long before
       | a global threat emerges. Modi himself is one of the propagators
       | of fake news and hate speech. He dog-whistles his social media
       | army to systematically spread communal division and consolidate
       | Hindu votes. Most of the mainstream media is already under his
       | cronies like Adani. The most recent one to fall is NDTV, which
       | used to be an independent voice. If there is one country to watch
       | out for the misuse of AI for political gains, it would be India
       | especially with elections happening in the next year.
        
       | joshspankit wrote:
       | How will we verify photos and videos without dissolving in to
       | endless speculation? I'm genuinely asking as this is something
       | I've been worried about for a while.
       | 
       | The only thing I can think of is storing a hash or "phash" with a
       | trusted third party that can then be used to later verify which
       | image is the original. For video, store the hash/phash of the
       | frames with timestamps. But would that even work? How do you
       | back-verify that something was captured at a specific time when
       | the device was offline during capture?
        
         | EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote:
         | No, that would not work. You can apply a filter and immediately
         | after compute a hash. For now, the fake pictures are rather
         | easy to spot to a trained eye.
        
           | joshspankit wrote:
           | > You can apply a filter and immediately after compute a
           | hash.
           | 
           | Can you expand on that? I'm not sure what wouldn't work
        
         | kevincox wrote:
         | You can't. All photos may be fake or manipulated. You can't
         | trust a photo. You need to decide if you trust those who are
         | vouching for a particular photo.
        
       | thisisit wrote:
       | I am amazed that the title is allowed to stand despite the
       | original title and the content.
       | 
       | The origin of the image is unclear. Sure, one can speculate that
       | "India ruling party's IT cell" is behind the morphed image. This
       | is what this comment section is for. But without hard proof the
       | title is as much of an propaganda as are the morphed image.
       | 
       | Are we going to tag everything a Democrat does as "US ruling
       | party's" doing?
        
         | seanmcdirmid wrote:
         | They just shared the pictures right? We aren't sure if they
         | actually created the pictures, or who they obtained the altered
         | pictures from.
        
         | Utkarsh_Mood wrote:
         | this, @dang please review the title
        
         | cscurmudgeon wrote:
         | Exactly. Only recently we had this fiasco (less than a year
         | ago):
         | 
         | https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/23/23419366/the-wire-meta-i...
         | 
         | HN was fooled multiple times during that episode. It looks like
         | HN likes being gullible when simple common sense would have
         | prevented that.
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=thewire.in
        
         | passion__desire wrote:
         | Do you think it is possible for one side to doctor images and
         | make it viral by planting it in the opposition's filter bubble
         | (possibly by your embedded twitter agents) only to be easily
         | outed like Alan Sokal did. We live in interesting times.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | borissk wrote:
       | India slowly joining China, Russia and Turkey as a
       | dictatorship...
        
         | squarefoot wrote:
         | Italy silently following. Quietly and slowly, so that frogs
         | won't notice the temperature difference.
         | 
         | https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/23/italy-governme...
         | 
         | The 1st step in turning a seemingly democratic country in a
         | dictatorship is to control the media. Not the 1st time it
         | happens, but this time it is way more serious. Of course the
         | new dictatorship needs to be soft enough to be palatable for
         | other EU members and NATO allies, therefore I don't expect
         | black shirt patrols with batons attacking people unfriendly to
         | the regime down the street or at their home, at least not in a
         | systematic way like a century ago, yet things are going to suck
         | badly over here if nobody stops those bastards in power ASAP.
        
         | miohtama wrote:
         | Here are two high quality The Economist pieces on India's state
         | of democracy
         | 
         | - https://www.economist.com/asia/2022/02/12/the-organs-of-
         | indi...
         | 
         | - https://www.economist.com/asia/2023/03/27/the-worlds-
         | biggest...
        
         | sremani wrote:
         | Hold your horses, this is false equivalence. India is no where
         | near China or Russia, Turkey may be closest thing but that is
         | also kind of false. State governments in India are powerful and
         | that complicates many things.
        
           | Utkarsh_Mood wrote:
           | Exactly this, The ruling party has literally lost elections
           | in Karnataka, they're very far from exerting unilateral
           | influence on the entire country, much less becoming a
           | dictatorship
        
             | throwaway384629 wrote:
             | 1. BJP still control most of the mainstream media.
             | 
             | 2. BJP has in past offered plum post retirement positions
             | to judges after they delivered some controversial decisions
             | in favour of BJP.
             | 
             | 3. BJP has full control on Election commission, and the
             | electronic voting machines. Despite multiple reposts of
             | voting machines found in cars of BJP candidates, or videos
             | of faulty machines showing votes in favour of BJP, and
             | despite calls for letting opposition parties inspect
             | machines, Election commission has never let them inspect
             | the machines.
             | 
             | 4. A large number of bigots are in various positions in
             | various administrative services and in recent years they
             | have started showing their hate in open.
        
           | lagolinguini wrote:
           | India is very much like Turkey, though perhaps no where as
           | close to China or Russia.
           | 
           | State governments in India are not powerful, and they never
           | have been! The constitution of India grants much more power
           | to the Central Government than it does to the State
           | Governments. The BJP government has pushed the boundary of
           | federalism again and again. Here are some concrete examples:
           | 
           | 1. Denial of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir.
           | 
           | 2. Using the Centre-appointed governor to take down the Govt.
           | of Maharashtra.
           | 
           | 3. Constant pushback on policies and appointments made by the
           | Govt. of Delhi.
        
       | dagmx wrote:
       | As an NRI, I continue to be disappointed by the country I called
       | home for most of my life.
       | 
       | Between the politics and the pollution in Delhi, I fear I can
       | never really return home.
       | 
       | The last time I was home, I was struggling every day to breathe
       | because Delhi has crazy air in the winter. While high school
       | friends were telling me about how they don't believe in equal
       | rights, justifying any means to achieving a Hindu country. This
       | is just one more nail in the coffin of a potentially great,
       | secular country that once dared to vote place a great scientist
       | as president. How far we've fallen since.
       | 
       | I'm just heartbroken over what my country has become.
       | 
       | Edit: for the countless fans of India that will show up to tell
       | me how to feel about the country, please don't. I really don't
       | care to hear the latest talking point on why Infrastructure is
       | worth human rights abuses or whatever lets you sleep at night. My
       | opinion is my own and you can please pound sand. You are part of
       | what makes me mourn my country.
        
         | kalam_throw wrote:
         | [flagged]
        
           | dagmx wrote:
           | While those criticisms are true, and I won't dispute it, he
           | was also a huge symbol for many to actually trust in science
           | and push the country forward.
           | 
           | Sometimes what the symbol represents is more important than
           | the contents itself
        
         | codegeek wrote:
         | For non Indians, NRI = Non Resident Indian i.e. an Indian who
         | lives outside India. In case someone wondered.
         | 
         | It is easy to shit on the party in office which is BJP right
         | now but show me a country that can have hundreds of languages,
         | all religions and still survive for centuries as one country.
         | Europe couldn't do it. They broke into EU (for better or
         | worse). There are flaws but India is a complex country of
         | various cultures and you have to understand the nuances.
         | 
         | Congress party ruled India for decades after Independence in
         | 1947 and all they could do was to keep India as a 3rd world
         | country while other similar countries progressed economically.
         | Fun fact: Until the early 1980s, India and China were same
         | econonically when COngress ruled India for decades. And talk
         | about authoritarianism ? Who was the one who declared emergency
         | in 1974 and suspended all "civil rights". That was Indira
         | Gandhi from Congress, the so called "secular" party.
         | 
         | My point is that there is no saint and people in india like BJP
         | because they are at least doing some work in various areas
         | including infrastructure, economy and areas that have been
         | neglected for decades. So yea, people wanted change and they
         | got change with Modi as a strong leader.
         | 
         | Source: Also an NRI who is a naturalized US Citizen and I see a
         | lot of positives among all the negatives that Media loves to
         | portray.
        
           | Chris2048 wrote:
           | > Europe couldn't do it
           | 
           | When was Europe one country?
        
           | dgellow wrote:
           | > It is easy to shit on the party in office which is BJP
           | right now but show me a country that can have hundreds of
           | languages, all religions and still survive for centuries as
           | one country. Europe couldn't do it. They broke into EU (for
           | better or worse).
           | 
           | I have no idea what you're referring to here. Europe has
           | never been one country, and will likely never be. Having
           | smaller countries isn't something bad, nobody would consider
           | multiple Europeans countries to be a failure, or the result
           | of a broken Europe. Even proponents of a United States of
           | Europe (I am one) don't see having multiple European
           | countries as a failure.
        
             | screye wrote:
             | The Balkans, Africa & the sub-continent are proven examples
             | of the kind of blood that's shed during partition,
             | secession and civil wars.
             | 
             | If you're a proponent of the balkanization of India, then
             | you're by default a proponent of of the biggest as-of-yet-
             | unrealized genocide of the 21st century.
        
               | webartisan wrote:
               | Who talked about the balkanisation of India? The OP is
               | pointing out an inaccurate fact -- Europe did not break
               | up on religion.
               | 
               | We could all use a little drama to support our points
               | here.
        
           | throwaway384629 wrote:
           | Is "Congress party also bad!" still a primary defence of Mr.
           | Modi who is in power for about 10 years now?
           | 
           | I think NRIs are praising Modi because he is helping with the
           | fall of Rupee as compared to other currencies so NRIs get
           | maximum return when they send home USD.
           | 
           | Will you be able to share some examples of "at least doing
           | some work in various areas"?
           | 
           | 1. I see BJP government as expert in data manipulator and
           | creating smoke screens through their network of social media
           | cell and mainstream TV channels. [1]
           | 
           | 2. As per Govt data, over 80 crore people in India currently
           | depend upon government for free food. [2]
           | 
           | 3. Modi government manipulated the GDP calculation method to
           | show higher GDP growth. [3]
           | 
           | 4. Modi government changed the calculation method to measure
           | the length of highways. Going by lane km, the total length of
           | highways constructed during 2017-18 fiscal comes to 34,378 km
           | as against 9829 km if counted linearly. [4]
           | 
           | [1] https://zeenews.india.com/india/get-maths-lessons-bjp-
           | faces-...
           | 
           | [2] https://www.livemint.com/news/india/over-80-crore-people-
           | to-...
           | 
           | [3] https://scroll.in/article/954986/the-daily-fix-is-modi-
           | gover...
           | 
           | [4] https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/now-new-
           | concept-to...
        
             | codegeek wrote:
             | Ok I will bite. I travel to India once or twice a year for
             | both pleasure and business. I can only tell you what I feel
             | and see. I see incredible infrastructure changes even
             | though India still has long way to go compared to other
             | developed or even developing nations. Tons of airports
             | being built and improved. Many highways being built and
             | even completed in last few years.
             | 
             | "changed the calculation method to measure the length of
             | highways."
             | 
             | Do I think Modi Govt doesn't manipulate some data ? Oh you
             | bet they do. But I see real progress regardless and you
             | cannot just throw some stats to change my mind. I see
             | progress and I commend it and welcome it. Most people who
             | live there don't care that Govt is manipulating how they
             | measure the length of highways. They see that highways are
             | being built. Congress didn't do shit for decades when my
             | parents grew up in real shit 3rd world infrastructure. We
             | are much better off in last decade or so.
             | 
             | I will agree with you that India has a long way to go but
             | change is happening no matter how slow.
        
               | throwaway384629 wrote:
               | As per govt, out of 140 crore Indians, 80 crore rely on
               | government for free food. That is 57% of Indians need
               | government help for free food. [1]
               | 
               | If You Earn Rs 25,000 (USD 300) Per Month, You're Among
               | India's Top 10% Income Earners [2]
               | 
               | >> I travel to India once or twice a year for both
               | pleasure and business. I can only tell you what I feel
               | and see.
               | 
               | You may be able to travel to India and got 1 USD
               | converted to INR 80, then may be its a win for you, but
               | not for other Indians. I am not sure, but you might have
               | been able to afford somewhat better way to
               | travel/stay/eat than most of the Indians can. So what you
               | feel and see might not be closer to reality for most of
               | Indians.
               | 
               | >> I see incredible infrastructure changes...
               | 
               | So if a few private companies own most of India's infra,
               | and building shopping malls, or if few politically
               | connected builders building high rise buildings, or if
               | roads/flyovers being built by private companies for which
               | public will pay toll through their noses for years to
               | come, then in my humble opinion, this is is not real
               | development that you should give credit to the
               | government. This is indeed the failure of the government.
               | 
               | >> Tons of airports being built and improved.
               | 
               | Government did sell a number of already built airports to
               | Adani. Now Adani may make it a shiny new airpot and start
               | charging fees for everything in airport but I don't see
               | it as an achievement of Government. [3]
               | 
               | [1] https://news.abplive.com/news/india/cabinet-
               | decision-80-cror...
               | 
               | [2] https://www.indiatimes.com/news/india/if-you-earn-
               | rs-25000-p...
               | 
               | [3] https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/transpo
               | rtation...
        
               | chakravyuh wrote:
               | The government changed the highway measuring methodology
               | in 2018 [1].
               | 
               | Under new methodology, highway stretch built = Number of
               | lanes * kilometer stretch.
               | 
               | This is actually the international standard. However,
               | when the current government compares itself with prior
               | government, it compares apples with oranges: new
               | methodology numbers versus old methodology numbers.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/now-new-
               | concept-to...
        
               | chakravyuh wrote:
               | Indian highway engineers still can't figure out how to
               | design exists and have consistent road markings/safety
               | signs. Let them come up with a standard or enforce the
               | already existing one first.
               | 
               | Very rare to see slip lanes even in normal roads of Tier
               | 1 cities.
               | 
               | Just laying down asphalt isn't building highways.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | dagmx wrote:
           | All I see is a lot of whataboutism to justify some truly
           | heinous actions that have been committed in the past several
           | years.
           | 
           | Yeah, Indira Gandhi wasn't great either. Congress has its
           | flaws.
           | 
           | None of that justifies the actions of today. Yes, the BJP has
           | done some good things, but that's true of many heinous
           | authoritarians in the past as well.
           | 
           | No number of good things simply wash their hands of the bad
           | stuff along the way.
        
             | sremani wrote:
             | The right word would be 'Abuse of power', if every center-
             | right politician is labeled Authoritarian -- it will become
             | a meaningless word.
        
         | neel8986 wrote:
         | We are looking at a ruling government who uses AI to demean
         | olympic winning athlete to protect a serial molester. Somehow
         | even after all this heinous acts I can see bunch of so called
         | educated techies defending that ruling class. Is the hate for
         | "other" religion so strong?
        
         | screye wrote:
         | It is a conundrum, because the same NRIs oppose bills that
         | would solve India's problems.
         | 
         | The ban on crop burning (main cause of Delhi's pollution) was
         | central to the farm bill. But protesting farmers (widely
         | supported in the west) opposed it, and the bill died despite
         | having democratic approval (both national opinion and
         | sufficient votes)
         | 
         | > dared to vote a great scientist to president
         | 
         | We do not vote for Presidents in India. The president was
         | selected by the ruling party (The same BJP as Modi) to be the
         | ceremonial president. The same one that has now elected a
         | tribal woman to President, to signify secular allegiances.
         | 
         | > believe in equal rights
         | 
         | If we are to use leaders as a yardstick to measure equality
         | opportunities and rights, then the incompetent ~6th generation
         | heir of the Nehru/Gandhi family leading the opposition is
         | hardly a good look.
         | 
         | > disappointed by the country I called home for most of my life
         | 
         | As a fellow NRI, this is counter to what I hear from my fellow
         | Indians. There is a ton of optimism around jobs, infrastructure
         | growth and economic policies that are finally opening up the
         | nation, as India embraces the US after decades spent close to
         | the Russia.
         | 
         | > potentially great, secular country
         | 
         | Even as a big supporter of liberal (as in valuing liberty, low
         | authoritarianism) democracies, the evidence for free-
         | democracies industrializing is exactly zero. Every big nation
         | that has successfully escaped poverty has done so through
         | suffocatingly authoritarian means (SK, Japan, Taiwan, Chile,
         | China, Thailand, Malaysia). Every single one of them only
         | transitioned to a proper liberal democracy (if at all) AFTER
         | industrialization had been achieved.
         | 
         | It is depressing. But, the numbers don't lie.
        
           | throwaway384629 wrote:
           | Wow! Most of what you mentioned is plain wrong. Not sure if
           | you are mistaken or lying knowingly.
           | 
           | >> The ban on crop burning (main cause of Delhi's pollution)
           | was central to the farm bill.
           | 
           | Crop burning is already outlawed in India and enforced with
           | fines. Why you need to make a new law for something which is
           | already illegal? Below was the actual central idea of the
           | farm bill:
           | 
           | "The laws would have deregulated a system of government-run
           | wholesale markets, allowing farmers to sell directly to food
           | processors, but farmers feared that this would result in the
           | end of government-guaranteed price floors, thereby reducing
           | the prices they would receive for their crops."[1]
           | 
           | >> We do not vote for Presidents in India.
           | 
           | Again, wrong. The 2022 Indian presidential election was held
           | on 18 July 2022 to elect the president of India. The election
           | was the 16th presidential election in India since the
           | Partition. [2]
           | 
           | >> incompetent ~6th generation heir of the Nehru/Gandhi
           | family
           | 
           | Source please?
           | 
           | >> There is a ton of optimism around jobs, infrastructure
           | growth and economic policies
           | 
           | Source please? You must be living in an alternate world.
           | 
           | >> Every single one of them only transitioned to a proper
           | liberal democracy
           | 
           | So, China is a "proper liberal democracy" as per you? Also
           | can you please share a source to support your claims?
           | 
           | [1]
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Indian_agriculture_acts
           | 
           | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Indian_presidential_el
           | ect...
        
             | sbmthakur wrote:
             | Stubble burning was long banned but it's still being
             | practiced and contributes to Delhi's pollution. In fact,
             | one of the demands of the farm protests was to release
             | those who were arrested for stubble burning[1].
             | 
             | > Again, wrong. The 2022 Indian presidential election was
             | held on 18 July 2022 to elect the president of India.
             | 
             | It's not a general election. Only MPs and MLAs get to vote
             | for the president.
             | 
             | > Source please? You must be living in an alternate world.
             | 
             | There are indeed concerns on job growth but infrastructure
             | growth and economic policies have caught pace in the last
             | decade. There's a reason why Meta, Google and Aramco want
             | to pour money into the country.
             | 
             | 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020%E2%80%932021_Indian_f
             | arme...
        
               | throwaway384629 wrote:
               | Looks like you are trying to respond to be without
               | understanding the topic first and your above comment does
               | not relate.
               | 
               | My reply was to this comment which said:
               | 
               | 1. "The ban on crop burning (main cause of Delhi's
               | pollution) was central to the farm bill"
               | 
               | 2. "We do not vote for Presidents in India. The president
               | was selected by the ruling party"
               | 
               | Can you please let me know how any of above 2 statements
               | are correct?
               | 
               | Also, to your other comment: >> There's a reason why
               | Meta, Google and Aramco want to pour money into the
               | country.
               | 
               | Companies like Meta, Google and Aramco invest and try to
               | invest in all the counties for their own growth. This is
               | also to target the huge population of India. These
               | companies also invested in China, that does not make
               | China any better. Can you please share a source for
               | "infrastructure growth and economic policies have caught
               | pace"?
        
               | lagolinguini wrote:
               | > "We do not vote for Presidents in India. The president
               | was selected by the ruling party"
               | 
               | The President of India is voted by electoral college. We
               | live in a representative democracy. Just because the
               | President is voted by electoral college doesn't mean they
               | are not elected. Keep in mind that the Prime Minister of
               | India is also not directly elected, they are chosen by
               | the Lok Sabha.
        
               | throwaway384629 wrote:
               | Exactly my point!
        
               | chakravyuh wrote:
               | Banning doesn't take care of the problem completely
               | unless there is a mechanism to take stubble away from the
               | farmers. If there is no mechanism, people will burn it to
               | get rid.
        
             | screye wrote:
             | Did you even read my post ?
             | 
             | > China is a "proper liberal democracy" as per you?
             | 
             | The exact line you quoted, literally ends with an "if at
             | all" in brackets right after.
             | 
             | > Source please?
             | 
             | That Rahul Gandhi is the 6th generation heir ?
             | 
             | Motilal -> Jawaharlal -> Indira -> Rajiv -> Sonia -> Rahul.
             | What's disputable here ?
             | 
             | That he is incompetent ? I mean, even the most ardent
             | congress fan won't deny that Rahul Gandhi is incompetent at
             | best and a BJP plant at worst. He oversaw the downfall of
             | the freest of wins in world politics anywhere.
        
               | throwaway384629 wrote:
               | >> He oversaw the downfall of the freest of wins in world
               | politics anywhere.
               | 
               | BJP under Modi-Shah lost 8 states, 218 by-elections in
               | last two years [1]
               | 
               | Karnataka and Himachal Pradesh are the two states where
               | the BJP has lost to Congress in the last six months. The
               | BJP lost deposits in 38.4% of the seats it contested in
               | Southern Karnataka. [2] [3]
               | 
               | Modi was the face of election campaign and spent whole
               | centre government money and machinery to campaign. Modi
               | speaks a script written by someone else by using a
               | teleprompter and has never given an open & live
               | unscripted press conference in last 8 years ([4] [5]
               | [6]). By your logic, are you trying to say Modi is also
               | incompetent?
               | 
               | >> The exact line you quoted, literally ends with an "if
               | at all" in brackets right after.
               | 
               | Got it. So you are hoping some day China will transition
               | to democracy AFTER industrialization had been achieved,
               | and you think India might need to convert to an
               | authoritarian state in order to successfully escaped
               | poverty? Is my understanding correct?
               | 
               | Also, you haven's still answered my 2 questions:
               | 
               | 1. How is "The ban on crop burning (main cause of Delhi's
               | pollution) was central to the farm bill."?
               | 
               | 2. What do you mean about this: "We do not vote for
               | Presidents in India. The president was selected by the
               | ruling party"?
               | 
               | [1] https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/india/bjp-under-
               | modi-sha...
               | 
               | [2] https://time.com/6280139/india-modi-bjp-congress-
               | karnataka-e...
               | 
               | [3] https://www.thehindu.com/data/data-how-significant-
               | is-bjps-d...
               | 
               | [4] https://www.reuters.com/article/india-election-
               | modi/at-his-f...
               | 
               | [5] https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/rti-pmo-pm-
               | narendra-mo...
               | 
               | [6] https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/opinion/why-
               | hasnt-pm-mod...
        
           | chakravyuh wrote:
           | > The ban on crop burning (main cause of Delhi's pollution)
           | was central to the farm bill. But protesting farmers (widely
           | supported in the west) opposed it, and the bill died despite
           | having democratic approval (both national opinion and
           | sufficient votes)
           | 
           | Then why is Delhi's air quality consistently poor, unhealthy,
           | severe and hazardous even when there is no crop burning?
           | https://www.aqi.in/us/dashboard/india/delhi/new-delhi
           | 
           | Of course we need to do something about crop burning, but is
           | it the "main" reason? Nope.
        
           | dagmx wrote:
           | I corrected the means by which the president is chosen (it's
           | a vote by the electoral college so it wasn't completely
           | incorrect to say vote though). Thanks for mentioning that.
           | 
           | I don't think I agree with your other points. But I do hope
           | your optimism pans out because right now things feel bleak.
        
             | shri_krishna wrote:
             | The reality on ground is different from what you read in
             | the press or even online. We see the work being done. When
             | work wasn't being done (recent example of Karnataka),
             | people voted BJP out. The alternative (Congress) came to
             | power promising loads of freebies. Now voters on the ground
             | are pissed off (plenty of videos where people are not
             | willing to pay electricity bills or public transport fares
             | because Congress said it'll make all of that free but never
             | did so till date). So this hyperbole on BJP being "evil" is
             | largely overblown and it is quite persistent in the Hacker
             | News circles. Ultimately the voter decides based on whether
             | the Party in power delivers or not. BJP has been doing
             | great work on the infrastructure/development front as well
             | as attracting investment. That is visible on the ground.
             | What BJP is lacking severely is in State level
             | leadership/politics which needs to be fixed. Congress on
             | the other hand has given up its National ambitions and
             | pursuing weaknesses it sees in BJP's state level politics.
             | This is vibrancy of democracy. Nothing to feel "bleak"
             | about unless you are drowning yourself in anti-India
             | Western media reports and thinking that is the truth. Maybe
             | you need to ask yourself if you are also part of a
             | misinformation bubble yourself without even realizing it?
        
               | dagmx wrote:
               | I absolutely hate the way fellow Indians will just try
               | and deflect negative stories about India as western
               | propaganda.
               | 
               | You do a disservice to your country by following that
               | tired playbook.
               | 
               | Did you ever stop to consider that I am actually well
               | informed and genuinely disappointed with my country.
               | 
               | Criticism of the country and party doesn't mean I'm
               | simply misinformed. I was critical of things when I lived
               | there, I consume my news directly from Indian news sites.
               | 
               | Maybe you need to ask yourself why you feel the need to
               | assume it's western propaganda?
        
               | shri_krishna wrote:
               | [flagged]
        
               | dagmx wrote:
               | The sheer amount of hubris in your post is astounding.
               | 
               | So any opinion other than your own is propaganda fed by
               | the west, but the only true reality is the one you agree
               | with that paints India in a flattering light.
               | 
               | Using "the world happiness index" as some kind of gotcha
               | propaganda is hilarious, when we're discussing actual
               | issues like arresting protestors. Just ridiculous.
               | 
               | I won't be replying again to you because I don't think
               | you are capable of accepting that other people disagree
               | with your world view. It's unhealthy and I really think
               | you need to leave your own bubble.
        
               | alephnerd wrote:
               | Not OP (and not a fan of his whataboutism plus you don't
               | deserve to be downvoted) but I think the issue is that
               | India is so large and diverse that commentators can be
               | right and wrong at the exact same time when painting a
               | brush with the term "India".
               | 
               | When social and political norms can vary within
               | individual states, let alone the entire country, it
               | causes people to feel reporting about very negative or
               | very positive news is propaganda one way or the other.
               | 
               | A lot of this is then further inflamed by IT Cells from
               | parties across the board, especially because most NRIs
               | are getting news about India via the internet plus social
               | media.
               | 
               | Add to that the fact that most Western media isn't biased
               | (I've worked with them), but might write articles using a
               | broad brush that pisses other NRIs off and then we all
               | devolve into regionalist or casteist bickering.
               | 
               | Eg. When the Unnao tragedy happened (which was horrible),
               | it was reported in some western media that it was in
               | India and broad brushed as an Indian issue. A number of
               | Tamil and Malayali friends too offense to that and began
               | saying "oh, it's actually Uttar Pradesh. Bhaiyyas are
               | always like that" and regionalist shit like that, which
               | obviously pissed off the UP+Bihari wale in my office.
               | 
               | On the side, you can see propagandists like Agnihotri
               | inflaming Hindu-Muslim tensions by bringing up the Kerala
               | Story as if every single Malayali Muslim is a future
               | Jihadi and inflaming Hindi-Southern tensions by making a
               | number of idiots assume Malayalis are a 5th column, which
               | is an extremely horrible broad brushed assertation
               | 
               | And finally, a lot of people say that BJP voters are
               | illiterate and illiteracy is pushing back India. As
               | someone with family from small town India who has known
               | illiterate people, they are smart as you and I. Just
               | because they didn't get the opportunity to learn to
               | read+write doesn't mean they can't think rationally and
               | logically. So for NRIs from lower middle and working
               | class (as a lot of NRIs increasingly are now), it feels
               | very classist and insulting.
               | 
               | Basically, what I'm getting at is that we use our prior
               | experiences and background to understand a country, but
               | when you are dealing with a country as large and diverse
               | as India it automatically falls apart.
        
               | shri_krishna wrote:
               | > Add to that the fact that most Western media isn't
               | biased (I've worked with them)
               | 
               | Have you forgotten the New York Times job ad for South
               | Asia Business Correspondent for India?
               | 
               | Since you say Western media isn't biased and that you
               | have worked with them, I would like to see at least one
               | huff piece published by Western media on Modi/BJP. Surely
               | there has to be at least one article to counter all the
               | anti-Modi/anti-BJP articles we keep seeing propping up in
               | the Western media. If you can't find even one piece that
               | can counter-balance the mainstream narrative about India
               | and its ruling political party then it isn't actually
               | "unbiased". The tilt towards one side of the political
               | spectrum is pretty obvious to all those who have been
               | seeing Western media play its game.
               | 
               | > so large and diverse that commentators can be right and
               | wrong at the exact same time when painting a brush with
               | the term "India"
               | 
               | Yeah and since when has Western media ever understood
               | this nuance? The bias is deep seated and pretty obvious
               | to observers like me who fall on the other side of the
               | political spectrum.
        
               | alephnerd wrote:
               | > Have you forgotten the New York Times job ad for South
               | Asia Business Correspondent for India?
               | 
               | The NYT is not the primary source of truth for
               | policymakers in the United States.
               | 
               | I agree there are a number of issues with the NYT's Delhi
               | office, and a lot of that stems from bad pay.
               | 
               | The media ecosystem in the US works the same way as how
               | the media works pin India. I haven't seen very nuanced
               | discussions about American institutions in the Dainik
               | Jagran, Hindustan Times, or WION either.
               | 
               | > Yeah and since when has Western media ever understood
               | this nuance?
               | 
               | In the Media that is actually consumed and read and used
               | by policymakers like when I was on the Hill, as well as
               | in the educational programs that bring future Americans
               | into the Foreign Service.
        
               | shri_krishna wrote:
               | > The NYT is not the primary source of truth for
               | policymakers in the United States.
               | 
               | I don't have any issue with most current policymakers in
               | US (for the past decade at the very least). Surprisingly
               | most US lawmakers have their own individual views on
               | India (unaffected/not influenced by Western media) and
               | have a good working relationship with the GoI (including
               | Modi and more specifically Jaishankar). This includes
               | policymakers from both sides of the political spectrum
               | (Republicans as well as the Democrats). Thank God for
               | that. Else if they actually believed half the articles
               | that came out of papers like NYT or Washington Post, they
               | would have a totally warped understanding of India. And a
               | really negative one at that. Policymakers pre-Bush era
               | got most things about India wrong (and paid a price for
               | it too with WTC bombings, 9/11 and finding Osama Bin
               | Laden hiding close to their Ally's military complex). US
               | Policymakers have changed their outlook and very few
               | actually hold on to the anti-India stance that they once
               | had. That's welcome.
               | 
               | My issue is with the common citizens getting a warped
               | view of India. That's all.
               | 
               | > In the Media that is actually consumed and read and
               | used by policymakers like when I was on the Hill, as well
               | as in the educational programs that bring future
               | Americans into the Foreign Service.
               | 
               | That's good to know. But Western Media still has a lot to
               | catch up vis-a-vis being unbiased. They still heavily
               | tilt towards parties that are non-BJP. That is fine if
               | that is their intended outlook. But at least let it not
               | pretend to be unbiased then.
               | 
               | > The media ecosystem in the US works the same way as how
               | the media works pin India. I haven't seen very nuanced
               | discussions about American institutions in the Dainik
               | Jagran, Hindustan Times, or WION either.
               | 
               | Yes I agree with you that Indian media is biased too.
               | Most of the media outlets are pro-Modi/pro-BJP. And in a
               | way it should also be seen as a counter to Western media
               | outlets and continuous disinformation/propaganda that
               | kept coming from there. Let us not forget that people who
               | work in Media organizations also have their own
               | individual biases and they typically hire people who
               | subscribe to their biases. It is not always necessarily a
               | money thing (where the ruling party pays a media
               | organization to speak in its favour). Many a times it is
               | purely for ideological reasons.
               | 
               | Much the same as NYT or WP. The only problem is when
               | NYT/WP is that it proclaims itself to be unbiased. That's
               | when I go "Come on man I know you aren't. Quit the
               | pretence".
               | 
               | Also Indian media typically is reactionary. We don't
               | particularly have nuanced discussions about the West
               | because first and foremost we don't have our own
               | statistics bureau that can create all sorts of indexes
               | that the West creates out of thin air. Some of the
               | Western Indexes are based on factual research but most of
               | them aren't. And we just typically counter them in a
               | reactionary manner. We do not invest efforts into
               | actually coming up with actual statistics or at least
               | indulge in counter-propaganda. That appetite simply does
               | not exist. Many of these Western statistics, stories and
               | news articles go unrebutted.
               | 
               | Like I gave an example of World Happiness Index. Let us
               | take World Press Freedom Index. India ranks below
               | Afghanistan in World Press Freedom Index. 11 spots behind
               | Afghanistan. This is a total joke. Is the West actually
               | trying to say that Taliban, which is ruling Afghanistan
               | now, has more Press Freedom than India? You see how these
               | nonsensical statistics go unchallenged? Because what
               | would you even counter these with? It is that ridiculous!
               | Surely if everything was so bad in India we wouldn't be a
               | thriving and one of the fastest growing economies in the
               | World today. We would all be on the streets rioting (like
               | what happened in Sri Lanka) and storming Modi's
               | residence. Most of it is hyperbole.
        
               | shri_krishna wrote:
               | > The sheer amount of hubris in your post is astounding.
               | 
               | Good to know you consider the World Happiness Index 2023
               | as hubris. We can finally agree on something.
               | 
               | > I won't be replying again to you because I don't think
               | you are capable of accepting that other people disagree
               | with your world view
               | 
               | Funny how you believe "I don't think you are capable of
               | accepting that other people disagree with your world
               | view" and in the text rejected my valid argument which
               | you had absolutely zero counter for.
               | 
               | Either accept that the World Happiness Index is a
               | fabrication of the West or rebut with facts as to why
               | India ranks below Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Myanmar. You
               | got stumped with just this easiest piece of fact that you
               | couldn't even counter. Tells me everything I need to
               | know.
               | 
               | > when we're discussing actual issues like arresting
               | protestors
               | 
               | Cry me a river. The West is so pristine it doesn't arrest
               | protesters at all. Nor do Government agencies kill people
               | randomly. Nor does it indulge in assassinations both
               | within its own soil or in countries that it has no
               | jurisdiction over. Nor does the West bomb other nations
               | to bits. Nor does it arrest farmers and confiscate their
               | properties and bank accounts. The West is epitome of
               | truth, fairness and justice. While puny Indians back
               | home, which you incidentally rejected because of the deep
               | seated hatred, are the horrible ones who do not have
               | capacity to discern truth from fiction and do not
               | understand how a Democracy functions.
               | 
               | Give me a break!
        
               | throwaway384629 wrote:
               | >> The West is so pristine it doesn't arrest protesters
               | at all. Nor do Government agencies kill people randomly.
               | Nor does it indulge in assassinations...
               | 
               | Classic Example of whataboutery.
        
               | webartisan wrote:
               | Mate, you do realise that Whataboutery is simply another
               | way to have a faux conversation with yourself?
        
               | shri_krishna wrote:
               | Yeah and what is wrong with whataboutery? I have no
               | issues with sprinkling some whataboutery to expose the
               | West for the ridiculous expectations it has from a
               | developing country like India while at the same time
               | indulging in worse acts itself. I mean at least don't
               | effing preach if you can't show yourself to be a good
               | example/role model. That's the least you can do.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | throwaway384629 wrote:
               | >> Take the World Happiness Index 2023 which ranked India
               | lower than Pakistan ...
               | 
               | May be World Happiness Index 2023 data is bit flawed. But
               | I don't think that means whole world is sharing
               | propaganda against India.
               | 
               | >> Heck we get 100Mbps-1Gbps unlimited internet
               | connectivity anywhere in India at the lowest rates
               | possible in the entire World.
               | 
               | How is it an achievement of Government while this was
               | done by private companies like Reliance at the cost of
               | public owned BSNL? Government actually let the loss of
               | public tax payers money by giving favourable treatment to
               | private companies.
               | 
               | Modi and his fans always talk about low prices of
               | internet in India, while its a failure of government to
               | control Reliance where Reliance is using money raised
               | from state bank to give dirt cheap internet connection to
               | public and killing the competition. They have already
               | started raising the prices now that several competitors
               | are gone. [1]
               | 
               | Reliance raises money from public banks, Reliance uses
               | that money to get tower network of public owned BSNL,
               | Reliance gets priority over BSNL to launch 4G, Reliance
               | is in profit while BSNL is in loss, Government employee
               | phone connections are transferred from BSNL to private
               | entity Reliance. [2] [3] [4]
               | 
               | >> I don't need some stupid organization in the West to
               | tell me I am more unhappy than these countries.
               | 
               | Why care about other stupid organizations while you have
               | "Whatsapp university" to keep us informed. [5]
               | 
               | [1] https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/your-
               | phone-b...
               | 
               | [2] https://www.livemint.com/industry/telecom/reliance-
               | jio-emerg...
               | 
               | [3]
               | https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/state-
               | polic...
               | 
               | [4] https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/forge
               | t-5g-bs...
               | 
               | [5] https://www.outlookindia.com/national/the-age-of-
               | whatsapp-un...
        
               | shri_krishna wrote:
               | > How is it an achievement of Government while this was
               | done by private companies like Reliance at the cost of
               | public owned BSNL? Government actually let the loss of
               | public tax payers money by giving favourable treatment to
               | private companies.
               | 
               | What nonsense. It is exact opposite of what you are
               | saying. BSNL was always a loss making company that never
               | innovated and was kept stagnant for decades. We all saw
               | how shabby the 2G rollout was. And who subsidized BSNL?
               | It was us, the tax payers. They never turned a profit
               | even once. Even now they are "expected" to turn a profit
               | in 2026-27.
               | 
               | What you are advocating for is maximum Government. That
               | almost always ends in disaster. What you should be aiming
               | for is minimum Government. We, the People, have granted
               | Government powers through the Constitution. The reason we
               | did that is because somethings are best managed by the
               | Government than either free markets or people themselves:
               | building infrastructure, security, law and order,
               | healthcare, protecting borders. Anything beyond this is
               | not mandate of the Government. Government has no business
               | being in business. The more private players are
               | encouraged the better for growth of an country/economy.
               | The less Government intervention the better.
               | 
               | Reliance bought the licenses for 4G through an auction.
               | And it was bought in 2010 (during Congress ruled UPA
               | era). So your ridiculous accusation of "giving favourable
               | treatment to private companies" applies to Congress more
               | than anyone else. Either ways, I don't find anything
               | wrong in it as it was a fair auction that did not go the
               | ways of 2G scam. The auction happened during the Congress
               | regime. Reliance won. But Congress failed to setup the
               | infrastructure needed for Reliance to build the network.
               | This is where the Government is needed to intervene and
               | help out by building infrastructure. PPP partnerships are
               | forged for this reason only. Government builds basic
               | infrastructure (like connecting roads, electricity lines,
               | plumbing etc), Private Companies build plants, machinery
               | and in this case installing antennas and laying of fibre
               | optic cables. It takes two to tango. Congress was missing
               | in the picture as it was busy with corruption. It is only
               | when BJP came to power that this project was fast
               | tracked.
               | 
               | > where Reliance is using money raised from state bank to
               | give dirt cheap internet connection to public and killing
               | the competition
               | 
               | Lol you are talking as if Reliance had underdogs as
               | competitors. Airtel, Vodafone, Idea etc are all billion
               | dollar companies. They could have easily taken on
               | Reliance. In fact they were quite content with their
               | dominence in the sector and refused to innovate. It is
               | not Reliance's fault if the competition was caught
               | sleeping at the wheels.
               | 
               | > They have already started raising the prices now that
               | several competitors are gone.
               | 
               | Welcome to Capitalism 101. This is how it works
               | everywhere. Not just in India.
               | 
               | > How is it an achievement of Government while this was
               | done by private companies like Reliance
               | 
               | Did I say it is achievement of the Government anywhere? I
               | talked about positive changes that are happening in India
               | and the infrastructure developmental projects that are
               | shaping such outcomes. For Reliance to lay their antennas
               | and fibre optic cables it requires Government to support
               | through infrastructure development. By making connecting
               | roads/highways and digging necessary lines for fibre
               | optic cables to be laid. This is the work of the
               | Government: infrastructure. The Government did not setup
               | the network. I never said that anywhere.
               | 
               | > Reliance raises money from public banks, Reliance uses
               | that money to get tower network of public owned BSNL,
               | Reliance gets priority over BSNL to launch 4G, Reliance
               | is in profit while BSNL is in loss, Government employee
               | phone connections are transferred from BSNL to private
               | entity Reliance.
               | 
               | Dude how different is it from the West? Even in the West
               | you have Verizon, AT&T etc. Does the US have something
               | equivalent to BSNL? Nope it doesn't. In fact I want Modi
               | to shut down BSNL. It is a big drain on tax payer money.
               | Just like US doesn't have any state owned telecom
               | companies, India shouldn't have one either. Especially
               | one which is stagnant and unable to innovate. We can use
               | the tax payer money for other better causes.
               | 
               | > Why care about other stupid organizations while you
               | have "Whatsapp university" to keep us informed. [5]
               | 
               | When you have no proper rebuttal this is the crap you
               | come up with. This is why Opposition can never win the
               | General Election in India. You guys suck at this. Most of
               | your information is hollow at best. No proper study. Just
               | a bunch of links from media stories. If you had known
               | that Reliance won the 4G auction during UPA regime you
               | wouldn't have even made this point.
        
               | shri_krishna wrote:
               | I haven't even included UPI in this which has been an
               | absolute game changer. Anyone with 2 brain cells to rub
               | together would know how transformational UPI has been to
               | India and growth of India in the past few years. But yeah
               | we should neglect all that because the West said so. Sure
               | there are problems in India just like there are problems
               | in every other country in the World. But when it comes to
               | India, the problems are amplified to an unwarranted
               | degree in the West. Maybe because we don't toe the
               | Western line when it comes to many things (like staying
               | non-aligned or not signing the non-proliferation treaty)
               | and the West just doesn't like it. Has been holding a
               | grudge since the 90s when India conducted reciprocal
               | nuclear tests (after China conducted its own nuclear
               | tests). Bill Clinton saw it fit to sanction Democratic
               | India but not Authoritarian CCP. It is not something new.
               | And pre-90s was even worse with the West supporting
               | Dictatorial Islamic Republic of Pakistan against
               | Democratic India.
        
               | throwaway384629 wrote:
               | >> I haven't even included UPI in this which has been an
               | absolute game changer.
               | 
               | Wasn't the work on UPI started in 2009 and the vision
               | statement was prepared in 2012, 2 years before Modi/BJP
               | came to power?
               | 
               | >> In April 2009, National Payment Corporation of India
               | (NPCI) was formed to integrate all the payment mechanisms
               | in India and make them uniform for all retail payments.
               | RBI in 2012 released a vision statement for a period of
               | four years that indicated commitment towards building a
               | safe, efficient, accessible, inclusive, interoperable and
               | authorized payment and settlement system in India. UPI
               | was officially launched in 2016 for public use. [1]
               | 
               | [1]
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Payments_Interface
        
               | shri_krishna wrote:
               | There were plenty of projects that were announced before
               | BJP came to power and was never implemented. Congress was
               | elected twice to implement these very things. Instead
               | they spent all their time indulging in communal nonsense
               | and high ticket corruption. To just put it into
               | perspective: The Finance Minister P Chidambaram (during
               | UPA era) castigated Modi for launching Digital India when
               | he said it makes no sense considering India is not
               | connected with Internet to the last village [1]. And that
               | it will be a failure. The entire Opposition made fun of
               | it in 2017.
               | 
               | So no matter if you have great ideas, if you do not even
               | believe in those ideas let alone execute on them it is as
               | good as dead ideas.
               | 
               | We would have progressed rapidly had UPA not indulged in
               | corruption and working tirelessly to convict Modi in the
               | Gujarat riots cases and instead focused its efforts on
               | doing some actual developmental work, many of those ideas
               | rightfully was thought of in its time (which i'll give
               | credit for). But they lacked big time on execution. Modi
               | had a proven track record in Gujarat which helped him
               | beat Congress in 2014 elections. He just has brought most
               | of Congress's plans to fruition which Congress doesn't
               | like for obvious reasons.
               | 
               | UPA losing power is its own doing more than BJP's coming
               | to power. Heck even Modi keeps taunting Congress in the
               | Parliament saying that most of the policies that Congress
               | opposes today was all their own plans that they never
               | brought to life. That's the reason the Opposition is
               | unable to counter BJP. BJP is just doing exactly what the
               | Opposition promised in its manifesto when it came to
               | development but never delivered.
               | 
               | [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/IndiaSpeaks/comments/qlky5t
               | /mps_who...
        
               | ta_vf7xjd34cc wrote:
               | > Wasn't the work on UPI started in 2009 and the vision
               | statement was prepared in 2012
               | 
               | Is this[1] or is this not P. Chidambaram, Indian Finance
               | Minister during the Congress-led UPA regime, criticizing
               | the government's digital payment plans? You think such a
               | pessimistic guy or his government would have done
               | anything to make UPI a success except in a half-hearted
               | fashion?
               | 
               | There is a saying: success has many fathers while failure
               | is an orphan. No wonder when UPI has turned out to be a
               | resounding success, people either turn up to claim credit
               | or to run down the success of the current government.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCnv8gwN0ug
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _rabid amount of hate will get you nowhere in life and
               | will always keep you in a negative mood and disappointed_
               | 
               | Wat.
               | 
               | Honestly, this attitude--equating moderate criticism with
               | "rabid hate"-- causes me to pause every time I get
               | excited about India. There are democratic trade-offs in
               | development. India has made them decently historically,
               | and well recently. But the way you tank that balance is
               | with blind jingoism.
        
               | shri_krishna wrote:
               | > Honestly, this attitude--equating moderate criticism
               | with "rabid hate"
               | 
               | I was responding to this comment: "I absolutely hate the
               | way fellow Indians will just try and deflect negative
               | stories about India as western propaganda."
               | 
               | Nice try trying to change the tone of his sentence (which
               | was "I absolutely hate") to "moderate criticism". There
               | is nothing "moderate" about "absolutely hating"
               | something/someone. I was just responding to that
               | "extreme" emotion he was projecting. Such extreme
               | emotions might win you the mob but it won't change facts.
               | 
               | > causes me to pause every time I get excited about India
               | 
               | Okay. And? What difference would it make to India's
               | growth trajectory if you lose your excitement? Is it
               | going to make any dent?
               | 
               | > But the way you tank that balance is with blind
               | jingoism.
               | 
               | Lol. As an Indian the only content I get to consume
               | majority of the times, from Western media/press, is how
               | shitty India is. And this has nothing to do with BJP/Modi
               | but has to do with how India has always been projected in
               | the Western media. Take literally any media clip of India
               | showcased on Western news channels and you will have at
               | least 1 clip of Mumbai slum (which is the smallest
               | portion of Mumbai, a part of Maharashtra state in India)
               | projected as India itself. It is like Indian channels
               | showing Skid Row as USA. So if you feel some sort of
               | "jingoism" coming from me it is purely a response to the
               | nonsense I always see on Western media whenever India is
               | talked about. As it almost always projects and enhances
               | stereotypes already existing about India and Indians. And
               | lets not forget the most common tropes: poverty,
               | illiteracy, drinking water, sanitation, slums, education,
               | electricity etc. No matter how much India improves and
               | solves these issues (many of which are close to 100%) it
               | still wouldn't satisfy West's craving for denigrating
               | India just for kicks.
               | 
               | So if I feel defensive about it, don't construe it as
               | jingoism for the sake of it. I actually feel the
               | difference in standard of living after being born here
               | and lived for 34 years. I presume I have more experience
               | about how much India has changed compared to Westerners
               | or even NRIs who abandoned India for greener pastures and
               | sit in the West and pontificate. Sorry if I sound
               | jingoistic but I don't really care. Especially when the
               | West doesn't really care about how India is denigrated
               | repeatedly in their Media.
               | 
               | And if anyone has even a mild amount of criticism of the
               | West, they get banned/cancelled in the West or worse
               | bombed out of existence (Iraq/Syria/Libya). So much for
               | tolerance to free speech and human rights.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _nothing "moderate" about "absolutely hating"
               | something/someone_
               | 
               | Fair enough. "I hate" in American English is a
               | complaining--not raging--tone, though I grant it's
               | ambiguous and concede it shouldn't be used.
               | 
               | > _What difference would it make to India 's growth
               | trajectory if you lose your excitement?_
               | 
               | Not much. Generally speaking, "fuck you, I'm beautiful"
               | cultures that turn insecurity into a national sport have
               | a common path.
               | 
               | India's elites are savvy enough to build trade and
               | diplomatic relationships, learn from others' successes
               | and failures and show outward strength. But I've seen
               | this dismissive attitude towards criticism of any kind in
               | my own family, and it's paused at least my investing in
               | India. (The only other places I see this, ironically, is
               | in the U.K., Russia and rural American south.)
               | 
               | > _I presume I have more experience about how much India
               | has changed compared to Westerners or even NRIs who
               | abandoned India for greener pastures and sit in the West
               | and pontificate_
               | 
               | Right. This attitude. It's limiting in its rejection of
               | unexpected sources of information. Again, it's not
               | common. Particularly among the elite and worldly. But as
               | in America, when this attitude spreads, it diminishes
               | prospects.
        
               | lagolinguini wrote:
               | Sadly this is the line that the BJP and their followers
               | have taken. Any criticism from outside India is "western
               | propaganda". Any criticism from within India is "anti-
               | nationalism", "pakistani" or "tukde-tukde gang".
        
             | lagolinguini wrote:
             | I'm sorry, I don't understand why the other commenter
             | thinks they are write and you are wrong? We live in a
             | representative democracy. The Prime Minister is elected by
             | proving a majority in the Lok Sabha, and the President is
             | elected by electoral college, that doesn't mean that the
             | President isn't elected? You are absolutely right to say
             | that the President is elected.
        
           | lagolinguini wrote:
           | > We do not vote for Presidents in India.
           | 
           | The fact that they are elected by electoral college does not
           | make them non-democratic or non-elected. We live in a
           | representative democracy.
           | 
           | > As a fellow NRI, this is counter to what I hear from my
           | fellow Indians. There is a ton of optimism around jobs,
           | infrastructure growth and economic policies that are finally
           | opening up the nation
           | 
           | One wouldn't rely on anecdotal evidence to justify policy.
           | For example my own experience is the opposite of yours. I
           | hear complains about unemployment, lack of safety for women,
           | cost of living crisis, lack of safety of Muslims.
           | 
           | > Every big nation that has successfully escaped poverty has
           | done so through suffocatingly authoritarian means
           | 
           | Just because others failed doesn't mean we should too. Keep
           | in Mind that the Republic of India has survived until now,
           | and people at it's inception said it wouldn't.
        
           | codegeek wrote:
           | Funny you are being downvoted because you are speaking the
           | truth. I have already said in another comment that people
           | like the current party because they actually get shit done in
           | various areas like infrastructure etc which was hugely
           | neglected for decades. We all know that but some people
           | wouldn't want to accept.
        
             | throwaway384629 wrote:
             | May be you are on same page with the parent poster. But I
             | answered to the parent comment mentioning most of the
             | claims are wrong.
             | 
             | Btw, selling government assets to private companies, or
             | getting the new roads constructed and charging tolls on
             | them does not exactly considered as a government
             | achievement.
        
             | chakravyuh wrote:
             | The methodology for measuring highways built was changed in
             | 2018 [1]. Read about it yourself.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/now-new-
             | concept-to...
        
         | pkphilip wrote:
         | I agree. And unfortunately, I think we have reached an
         | inflection point in India from which we cannot go back to the
         | way things were just about 12-15 years ago.
        
         | primitivesuave wrote:
         | I'm an NRI/US citizen, have worked/traveled in the country
         | extensively, and have shared my thoughts on HN many times
         | regarding my country of origin. There is a prevalent "Indian
         | apologist" mentality both inside and outside the country, which
         | applauds anyone spinning the "happy people living with less" or
         | "beautiful ancient culture" montage and shouting down anyone
         | trying to put the preponderance of societal problems into
         | perspective.
        
       | aluksi wrote:
       | what tool was used for this ?
       | https://twitter.com/vijaygajera/status/1662850993086943232?s...
        
       | EchoReflection wrote:
       | I saw this a few weeks ago and I keep coming back to it when I
       | hear about news like this: https://youtu.be/zdlBFOp-jxE
        
       | villgax wrote:
       | Now you'll see how the unabashed right supporters will contort
       | how they got caught as well...
        
       | cornflake23 wrote:
       | The intriguing part of such stuff is how the impact of these
       | things is both short and long, such asymmetry of the individual
       | vs the state. At the (population) scale of India, this is
       | particularly heinous.
       | 
       | In the near term, it is designed to mislead the public
       | perception. In the long term, it both creates a chilling effect
       | of what consequences protesting may have... and will anyone
       | remember that these pictures were manipulated "for effect"
       | decades from now? Will they fuel other echo chambers?
       | 
       | I very much doubt the public understands the precipice (and
       | precedents) that these malicious actions lead us all down.
        
       | kebman wrote:
       | You will be happy. :)
        
         | throwaway384629 wrote:
         | Why would anyone be happy with atrocities being committed at
         | people by the government? Do you like such stuff?
        
       | throwaway384629 wrote:
       | Delhi Police arrested the protesting Indian women wrestlers.
       | 
       | Various social media handles of IT cell of ruling party shared
       | morphed picture of protesters to show that they were smiling in
       | the police van.
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/SakshiMalik/status/1662729269532065792
        
         | dmix wrote:
         | Is that an all female police squad?
        
           | kalam_throw wrote:
           | There is a law (maybe a Supreme Court judgement) that only
           | lady officers can arrest women.
           | 
           | And in these cases, a high powered officer, like the SP/DSP
           | calls out for every lady police officers in all local police
           | station to be present.
           | 
           | It doesn't need to be a "all female squad".
        
           | capableweb wrote:
           | > Is that an all female police squad?
           | 
           | Not to assume anyone's gender here, but does it look like a
           | all female police squad? https://i.imgur.com/OSnyrFH.jpg
        
             | dmix wrote:
             | A squad can exist within a larger group of officers.
             | 
             | I didn't ask if "there only female law enforcement at this
             | event".
        
             | ta1243 wrote:
             | Unless some AI has doctored the images
        
               | flangola7 wrote:
               | shit on a stick we really can't trust anything
        
               | ta1243 wrote:
               | Journalism will have to go back to trusting individual
               | creators. If Joe Bloggs signs an image then at least I
               | know Joe Bloggs asserts that image was correct. If that's
               | a trustworthy person (someone I find trustworthy), that's
               | one way.
               | 
               | Of course how well that scales is another matter, but if
               | Joe Bloggs loses my trust then I remove him from my
               | "trusted sources" list.
               | 
               | The chain of integrity will be there, defined by more
               | than just a byline. I may trust say Steve Rosenburg to
               | tell me the truth if he posts a picture of something in
               | Moscow, but if he misleads me then he loses that trust.
               | 
               | Ultimately it's of no difference to trusting what someone
               | writes or says. I might trust a story with a byline on
               | www.cnn.com, that's one thing. I won't however trust a
               | screen capture of something implying it was shown on CNN.
               | 
               | Of course the main stream view for the last 15 years is
               | to believe that journalists are always lying to you and
               | always wrong, which is fine, you just have to accept that
               | if you want to "do your own research" on say what's
               | happening in Turkey with the election, you need to go to
               | Turkey, spend a few years there getting to know and trust
               | many different sources with many different world views.
        
         | aluksi wrote:
         | what about this ?
         | https://twitter.com/vijaygajera/status/1662850993086943232?s...
        
           | chakravyuh wrote:
           | She is sarcastically saying, "Congratulations for this new
           | country (India)."
        
       | pimlottc wrote:
       | I'm wondering if someone can comment on the cultural aspect here.
       | It seems like adding the smiles was intended to discredit the
       | protesters, by somehow suggesting the protest was insincere. But
       | I feel like you could interpret this the other way too: even in
       | the face of brutal treatment, they maintain a positive and
       | peaceful attitude and don't let their opponents break their
       | spirits.
       | 
       | "Turn the other cheek" and "love your enemy" are very old
       | philosophies, after all. So is there something different about
       | this situation or about Indian politics in general that makes
       | this a damaging attack?
        
         | qazpot wrote:
         | > I'm wondering if someone can comment on the cultural aspect
         | here. It seems like adding the smiles was intended to discredit
         | the protesters, by somehow suggesting the protest was
         | insincere.
         | 
         | This was to paint them as insincere and implying that
         | protestors are on the payroll of <insert boogeyman here>.
        
         | renewiltord wrote:
         | It's just "they're laughing at you". This is actually
         | interesting to me: possibly the thing that is most annoying to
         | most people, though not all, in most societies is to be
         | suckered. Maybe the next highest is hypocrisy.
         | 
         | I wonder if these are universal or if different societies have
         | different "greatest sin". Like, does Japan, unbeknownst to me,
         | have shamelessness as its?
        
         | hiatus wrote:
         | Think to yourself, would a captor modify the images of the
         | imprisoned for a benevolent purpose?
        
           | pimlottc wrote:
           | Obviously not, that's not what I'm trying to suggest. Only
           | that it seemed to me -- as a non-Indian western observer -
           | like an odd way to discredit them.
        
       | blackoil wrote:
       | India is a fine specimen for anyone wanting to observe 1930s-40s
       | first hand.
       | 
       | A far right party with a popular/charismatic leader is using
       | religion as a basis to all the problems India faces. We have
       | extra-legal forces acting as vigilantes against people of a
       | community. They have a very strong support in the majority. Media
       | is in totality controlled by ruling party and social media is
       | saturated with noise and false discourse. No other nation will
       | speak against them because of geo-politics and honestly same
       | religion is hated almost everywhere. Though lot more pragmatic
       | and not a globe-capturing maniac, but rest of the world is
       | complimenting for that.
       | 
       | I believe we are on a strong path to revisit that event in late
       | 30s though hopeful against it as now 6 million and 2 nukes are
       | rookie numbers.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | ridiculous_leke wrote:
         | The world has gotten well along with dictatorships like China,
         | Saudi Arabia, and Russia (till they directly threatened the
         | West). I am sure they can work with an authoritarian India.
        
           | lagolinguini wrote:
           | Some of us are Indian and aren't too happy about the
           | authoritarianism...
        
       | h2odragon wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | harryvederci wrote:
         | So only the most dystopian news is newsworthy?
        
           | h2odragon wrote:
           | Alternately: The West can do no wrong?
        
             | praveen9920 wrote:
             | "They are doing wrong, We will do wrong too" is probably
             | not a great defence.
        
       | throwaway384629 wrote:
       | I would also like to share examples on how Modi Government Jails
       | every honest opposition leader who does development work for
       | general public and gets popular.
       | 
       | 2 leaders of Aam Aadmi Party (a primary opponent to PM Modi) are
       | lodged in Jail for months without trial. Same judge appointment
       | by Modi government somehow gets all the cases related to Aam
       | Aadmi Party and orders to extend the judicial custody month after
       | month.
       | 
       | Satyendra Jain, the man behind world famous Delhi Mohalla Clinic
       | (Neighbourhood Clinic) is in jail awaiting trial since May 2022
       | on allegations of money laundering. [1] [2] [3]
       | 
       | Manish Sisodia, the man behind public education revolution in New
       | Delhi is in jail awaiting trial since Feb 2023 on allegations of
       | corruption in creating Delhi Excise Policy. [4] [5] [6]
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satyendra_Kumar_Jain
       | 
       | [2] https://www.indiatimes.com/news/india/former-un-chief-ban-
       | ki...
       | 
       | [3] https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/even-kasab-got-a-fair-
       | trial-...
       | 
       | [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manish_Sisodia
       | 
       | [5] https://www.timesnownews.com/delhi/nyt-report-lauds-delhi-
       | go...
       | 
       | [6]
       | https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/delhi/2023/mar/21/if...
        
         | rajeshp1986 wrote:
         | All the leaders you mentioned have accumulated and hoarded cash
         | which was disclosed in IT raids. There is an ongoing
         | investigation on how they sold liquor licenses for cash. They
         | are jailed as per court orders after investigation.
         | 
         | [1] - https://www.businesstoday.in/latest/policy/story/liquor-
         | scam...
        
           | throwaway384629 wrote:
           | Pardon my language. But this is utter bull**t. Have you even
           | read the link that you shared? It says:
           | 
           | >> "Special CBI court allows ED to question Delhi Health
           | Minister Satyendar Jain"
           | 
           | >> "The ED is now probing the money-laundering angle"
           | 
           | >> "Jain is currently in Delhi's Tihar jail in connection
           | with a money-laundering case, which is also being probed by
           | the ED."
           | 
           | Do you know the difference between "jailed after
           | investigation." and "jailed while being probed"?
           | 
           | If tomorrow CBI arrests you on allegation of money laundering
           | and then keeps you in jail for one year while investigating,
           | are you fine with that?
           | 
           | Can you please point me to a single news article which says
           | they recovered any cash? And how much was it?
           | 
           | Can you please also point me to a single BJP leader in whole
           | country who has been jailed while being investigated?
           | 
           | The SA accused BJP leader against whom women wrestlers are
           | protesting was a BJP guest in yesterdays parliament event.
           | 
           | I am just amazed at the analytical abilities of some of
           | today's "engineers" and "entrepreneurs". :(
        
       | ilrwbwrkhv wrote:
       | What's with India and the shift towards the right? I thought it
       | had too many religions and different cultures to pull this off.
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | > _What 's with India and the shift towards the right?_
         | 
         | Successful republics appear to waver between stable liberalism
         | and dynamic authoritarianism. We were relatively authoritarian
         | in the Pinkerton and New Deal eras. Modi is delivering on a
         | proven enthnonationalism liberal-economic playbook. It's hard
         | to argue against fattening pocketbooks and rising living
         | standards.
        
           | throwaway384629 wrote:
           | >> It's hard to argue against fattening pocketbooks and
           | rising living standards.
           | 
           | You mean Adani's? [1]
           | 
           | [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/billionaires/profiles/gautam-s-
           | ada...
        
         | SturgeonsLaw wrote:
         | Religion is a force that pulls people in a conservative
         | direction, particularly when there has been a history of inter-
         | religion conflict like in India
        
         | candiddevmike wrote:
         | I think it's similar to the US. There's some kind of global
         | push towards a flavor of fascism occurring in most democratic
         | countries.
         | 
         | https://fpif.org/fascisms-global-spread-is-real-as-real-as-t...
        
         | pjc50 wrote:
         | Ever since Partition (and indeed before) the Hindu vs Muslim
         | conflict has been a powerful driver of both local violence and
         | national politics.
        
         | throwaway384629 wrote:
         | BJP in India does not fight elections based on any development
         | agendas like education/healthcare or social security.
         | 
         | They pretends to the majority Hindu public that "Hindus are in
         | danger from Muslims" and only BJP can protect them. They also
         | project themselves as true nationalists and anyone having anti-
         | government views is declared a "Pakistani" or anti-national.
         | 
         | https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/4/7/spike-in-anti-muslim...
        
           | Superblazer wrote:
           | As terrible as the government is, i want the foreigners here
           | to understand that op also has his own agenda, this above
           | reply shows their intentions. All indian political parties
           | are low quality trash in their own ways.
        
             | throwaway384629 wrote:
             | I am playing a role that any well functioning journalist
             | should play. Question the government and point out any
             | wrong doings. Isn't is a core aspect of democracy? Do you
             | see anything wrong in that?
             | 
             | >> All indian political parties are low quality trash in
             | their own ways. Agree. But the one having power currently
             | is the focus. Be it any party.
        
           | throwaway2305ax wrote:
           | Ok, this is not entirely true.
           | 
           | - India is the fastest growing large economy in the world
           | 
           | - inflation is under control
           | 
           | - The infrastructure spend is the largest ever. There's
           | construction everywhere.
           | 
           | - life expectancy is significantly up
           | 
           | Of course there are issues, but it's a mixed bag. Not all
           | religion.
        
             | throwaway384629 wrote:
             | >> India is the fastest growing large economy in the world
             | 
             | Source please?
             | 
             | >> inflation is under control
             | 
             | Cooking Gas cylinder price: [1] June 2017: 552.50 May 2023:
             | 1103.00
             | 
             | Petrol price (Even when India is importing dirt cheap crude
             | oil from Russia): [2] Dec 2015: 60.00/litre May 2023:
             | 100.00/litre
             | 
             | >> - The infrastructure spend is the largest ever. There's
             | construction everywhere.
             | 
             | If certain companies and politically linked builders are
             | building then that does not mean country is progressing.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.bankbazaar.com/gas-connection/lpg-price-
             | delhi.ht...
             | 
             | [2] https://www.mypetrolprice.com/petrol-price-chart.aspx
        
           | dartharva wrote:
           | Which political party in India primarily fights elections
           | "based on any development agendas like education/healthcare
           | or social security"?
           | 
           | If there was one, how much "development" has that party
           | achieved when in power?
        
             | throwaway384629 wrote:
             | Aam Aadmi Party is one such party. Here is their 70 points
             | action plan that they promised in 2015:
             | 
             | https://aamaadmiparty.org/delhi-government-2/aap-
             | manifesto-2...
             | 
             | And here is the public status check of each promise:
             | 
             | https://www.indiatoday.in/diu/story/aap-s-5-year-report-
             | card...
             | 
             | Despite giving free electricity up to 200 Units/month, free
             | water up to 20KL/month, free bus travel for women, the
             | state budget is still surplus.
             | 
             | The 2 leaders who made it possible are currently put in
             | Jail by Modi Government. [1]
             | 
             | [1] https://www.outlookindia.com/national/sisodia-jain-
             | arrested-...
        
         | tdehnel wrote:
         | Why would diversity necessarily be associated with leftism?
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | People are bad with labels; diversity is associated with
           | _liberalism_ , which often gets conflated with a whole
           | spectrum of other positions from social-democrat to actual
           | Marxists (who tend not to be all that pro-diversity,
           | depending on how "tankie" they are)
        
           | Drakim wrote:
           | There is no "necessarily" about it, but it's obviously how
           | history ended up unfolding. The big cultural-media-pop
           | conflict in the west this very moment is centered around
           | acceptance of diversity regarding gay and trans folks.
        
         | eunos wrote:
         | these days lots of Indian twitter accounts that shown on my
         | feed are itching for Hindutva.
         | 
         | P.S Not an Indian so Idk how they appeared on my feed.
        
           | Utkarsh_Mood wrote:
           | Here's the definition of Hindutva according to the Supreme
           | Court, if anyone's curious
           | 
           | "Hindutva is understood as a way of life of state of mind and
           | is not to be equated with or understood as religious Hindu
           | fundamentalism...it is a fallacy and error of law to proceed
           | on the assumption...that the use of words Hindutva or
           | Hinduism per se depicts an attitude hostile to all persons
           | practicing any religion other than the Hindu religion."
        
             | JumpCrisscross wrote:
             | > _the definition of Hindutva according to the Supreme
             | Court_
             | 
             | Legal definitions aren't relevant to Twitter accounts. What
             | matters is what's animating the author.
        
               | Utkarsh_Mood wrote:
               | All the same, imo it's imperative people know what the
               | actual definition is rather than misconstruing it for
               | something else
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _it 's imperative people know what the actual
               | definition_
               | 
               | This reminds me of the hacker/cracker and crypto qua
               | -currency/-tography debates. Or, more pointedly, the
               | Daughters of the Confederacy.
               | 
               | Legal definitions aren't "actual definitions." Nobody
               | likes a term they've adopted to be coopted. But it
               | happens, and it's happened with _hindutva_ in English.
        
         | renewiltord wrote:
         | It has lots of religions and cultures, yeah. But there is a
         | dominant one. And like the US is a Christian nation de-facto,
         | India is a Hindu nation de-facto.
         | 
         | The bigger driving thing is that the party in power has two
         | massive things in their favour: widespread economic growth and
         | prosperity.
         | 
         | While India mostly runs through coalition politics, there are
         | two broad bands: the nationalist religious-fundamentalist
         | market-economics band and the high-regulation nominally-secular
         | band.
         | 
         | It's quite nuanced, but ultimately, India has raised 400
         | million out of poverty in the last 20 years, electrified
         | vastly, and built rail and road infrastructure at a crucial
         | moment in their demographic transition.
         | 
         | The resulting goodwill is of the "it's about the economy,
         | stupid" sense but also a national feeling that perhaps the
         | "others" were, after all, "holding us back" because the current
         | opposition presided over a period of administration over many
         | decades where setting up businesses required paying off the
         | right guy, etc.
         | 
         | To make it worse, the opposition coalition head is a dynastic
         | scion who is not very smart.
         | 
         | So, the shift to the right is natural because the right is the
         | only one giving them anything.
        
         | dagmx wrote:
         | India's promise of secularism has always been fragile.
         | 
         | The current party, the BJP, has strong roots in Hindu
         | nationalism. It's basically taken over a decade but they've
         | successfully distorted the promise enshrined in our national
         | anthem of an India for all.
        
         | adrr wrote:
         | World has moved towards authoritarian governments. Haven't seen
         | a good reason why this push but there seems to be correlated to
         | the amount information people have access to(eg: social
         | networks, digital media etc).
        
       | throwaway2305ax wrote:
       | The news is accurate, but not particularly newsworthy. This was
       | posted by an unofficial, loosely defined group of accounts called
       | the "IT cell" - not very different from MAGA folks or far-left
       | account clusters. The linked news source (alt news) is an
       | opposition news source/blog.
        
         | throwaway384629 wrote:
         | Mohammed Zubair and Pratik Sinha are Indian journalists and the
         | co-founders of Alt News, an Indian non-profit fact-checking
         | website. They were nominated for the 2022 Nobel Peace Prize.
         | They have fact checked the claims from all political parties.
         | [1]
         | 
         | >> Zubair was arrested and incarcerated by the Delhi Police for
         | a month. His detention raised further concerns about the state
         | of India's press freedom under Narendra Modi's premiership and
         | was widely criticized by journalistic bodies, human rights
         | organizations and the political opposition who allege that the
         | arrest was an act of revenge against his role in Alt News' work
         | of combating disinformation.[1]
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Zubair_(journalist)
        
         | kalam_throw wrote:
         | Alt news also reported on the propaganda and falsehoods of
         | Congress and AAP.
        
       | YetAnotherNick wrote:
       | This is not the first time they used AI. In
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbrpkxIfb0M they made their Delhi
       | president speak a language he doesn't know.
        
       | anonytrary wrote:
       | Deep fakes were always a huge concern for me in AI. That's just
       | one way AI can be weaponized, and this example is very clear on
       | the damage caused. Thankfully Twitter quickly corrects the issue,
       | but sadly only because it became viral. Sadly, Twitter won't be
       | able to correct all of the little cases of AI misuse that don't
       | go viral.
        
       | thatsillyqaguy wrote:
       | There was video too, could that be edited as well? What can
       | current AI do?
        
       | jonnycomputer wrote:
       | How do we know that the non-smiling images are not the fakes?
       | part of an operation to foment discontent with the ruling party
       | by making a false accusation of dystopian manipulation of
       | photographic evidence?
       | 
       | No, I don't think it likely. It's just we live in a world where
       | this kind of stuff is _just_ so _easy_ to do now.
        
         | jwond wrote:
         | The article includes a video showing they were able to use
         | FaceApp on the non-smiling photo to reproduce the smiling photo
         | exactly.
         | 
         | They also include analysis comparing the smiling photo to other
         | existing photos of those people smiling and note that in the
         | smiling photo some people are depicted with dimples that the
         | person doesn't actually have.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | yalogin wrote:
       | We really need counter research to the commercial AI. Ability to
       | identify or protect against AI modifications is a must have
       | today, or well even yesterday.
        
       | givemeethekeys wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | Are you asserting the smiling photo is the real one?
        
           | givemeethekeys wrote:
           | No.
        
         | Nowado wrote:
         | Pointing out the population size of India to suggest it's the
         | measure to use when judging quality of a democracy has yet to
         | be used in context of India behaving like a democracy.
        
       | sxhunga wrote:
       | If we consider this to be true, then this is a reprehensible act.
       | To prevent this, it is necessary to have a completed legislation
       | for AI (Artificial Intelligence)
        
       | neel8986 wrote:
       | To give more context to outsiders these are olympic medal winning
       | athletes protesting against a serial molester who happens to be
       | part of ruling government. To discredit these athletes ruling
       | government's "IT Cell" is using AI to show they are not sincere
       | enough even after police brutally stopped their protest. No media
       | entity reported on this gross in justice as all of them have
       | already sold their soul.
       | 
       | Every time I think Modi's RW government can't go any lower they
       | prove me wrong. World should be worried that soon to be third
       | largest economy is going to ruled by a political force who are
       | inspired by Nazi. These are some of the quotes from Golwalkar who
       | was the brain behind the current militia Golwalkar
       | https://twitter.com/jaskaransandhu_/status/10569508194997534...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-05-29 23:02 UTC)