Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   U.S. appeals court says we can still chat on WeChat   (reuters.com) divider line
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

698 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Oct 2020 at 10:46 PM (3 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



16 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-10-27 10:47:36 PM  
WhoChat?
 
2020-10-27 10:50:29 PM  
Illegitimate courts. I won't use wechat, deal with it SCROTUS
 
2020-10-27 10:57:19 PM  

Mycroft_Holmes_IV: WhoChat?


YesChat?
 
2020-10-27 11:00:46 PM  

Mycroft_Holmes_IV: WhoChat?


IsOnFirstBaseChat.
 
2020-10-27 11:00:49 PM  

codergirl42: Illegitimate courts. I won't use wechat, deal with it SCROTUS


I prefer SCOTGOP. It's unpleasant and harsh to say out loud... just like the real thing.
 
2020-10-27 11:09:20 PM  

Alaskan Yoda: Mycroft_Holmes_IV: WhoChat?

YesChat?


HeChat?
 
2020-10-27 11:15:47 PM  
Because everyone should trust their utmost personal secret stuff to blind code they download off an app store
 
2020-10-27 11:18:31 PM  

codergirl42: Illegitimate courts. I won't use wechat, deal with it SCROTUS


Fark user imageView Full Size


Sounds like a new member of GWAR.
 
2020-10-27 11:25:56 PM  
Good timing. China business is picking up - I think they can feel the end of insanity coming...
 
2020-10-28 12:27:01 AM  

Vlad_the_Inaner: Because everyone should trust their utmost personal secret stuff to blind code they download off an app store


Thay doesn't mean our government should be banning apps, especially when they're not trying to ban them for any sort of legitimate reason.
 
2020-10-28 12:34:25 AM  

austerity101: Vlad_the_Inaner: Because everyone should trust their utmost personal secret stuff to blind code they download off an app store

Thay doesn't mean our government should be banning apps, especially when they're not trying to ban them for any sort of legitimate reason.


The government trying to ban it, and failing, may even lend it an air of credibility that it may not deserve
 
2020-10-28 12:49:35 AM  
It's a good thing that that app isn't owned by a company which has to kowtow to Beijing, otherwise you wouldn't be able to say things like "Free Hong Kong" or "Coco did nothing wrong" or "May 35" without getting permabanned from that platform.
 
2020-10-28 1:22:17 AM  

codergirl42: Illegitimate courts. I won't use wechat, deal with it SCROTUS


Was someone twisting your arm about it, Blanche?
 
2020-10-28 3:43:18 AM  
At least until Americans start posting news about the Tian An Men Massacre or funny memes showing China's President Xi Jinping as Winnie The Pooh, then they will suddenly be mysteriously blocked.

So if anyone out there is considering leaving WeChat, DON'T just fade away- post something the Chinese Government really hates and go out in a blaze of glory!
 
2020-10-28 6:31:13 AM  
I don't think anybody posting to this thread even has a WeChat account. You have no experience with its feature-set that is a reverse-engineer of what Silicon Valley had sorted out in terms of intellectual property within the United States (and Canada, I believe), but were more excited to export to developing economies. Like India and China...and Russia.

Which is a complex topic. Within the United States, Google, Apple, FaceBook, Odeo (Jack Dorsey), and Microsoft (Skype) had legally staked out many and various user-interface conventions as they came to market, but there is no functioning World Court to address IP UI issues when it comes to the "killer" apps fueling the touch-screens of billions of "hand machines" (the Mandarin characters for "smart phone"). In fact, the term "killer app" has been replaced with "platform" in parallel with the surrendering of private information.

The West's advantage to have pioneered use cases and user interface conventions? It has a natural disadvantage on a global market-- the best ideas will be adopted and improved without "permission".

WeChat is a Swiss Army knife that does not emphasize public facing promotions with a race-to-the-bottom "market place" of influencers and followers. Within China, WeChat's servers do not "answer" to Beijing, they are instrumental to the Social Credit concept Beijing is authoring in cooperation with provinces, and the enterprise of it is not a static situation. They're experimenting, tweaking, setting limits...that's my experience, anyway.

All this connectivity is new and it evolves and scales up and makes millionaires and crashes and burns and involves meaningful uses...and as many meaningful abuses...and I prefer to cite academics on the topic rather than improvise explanation-- McLuhan addressed the technology around "screens" before they became hand-held, but if you read his works, much of what pause he took to describe what he did has application in the present proliferation of connectivity through hand-held devices.
Fark user imageView Full Size

 
2020-10-28 9:33:51 AM  

buravirgil: I don't think anybody posting to this thread even has a WeChat account. You have no experience with its feature-set that is a reverse-engineer of what Silicon Valley had sorted out in terms of intellectual property within the United States (and Canada, I believe), but were more excited to export to developing economies. Like India and China...and Russia.

Which is a complex topic. Within the United States, Google, Apple, FaceBook, Odeo (Jack Dorsey), and Microsoft (Skype) had legally staked out many and various user-interface conventions as they came to market, but there is no functioning World Court to address IP UI issues when it comes to the "killer" apps fueling the touch-screens of billions of "hand machines" (the Mandarin characters for "smart phone"). In fact, the term "killer app" has been replaced with "platform" in parallel with the surrendering of private information.

The West's advantage to have pioneered use cases and user interface conventions? It has a natural disadvantage on a global market-- the best ideas will be adopted and improved without "permission".

WeChat is a Swiss Army knife that does not emphasize public facing promotions with a race-to-the-bottom "market place" of influencers and followers. Within China, WeChat's servers do not "answer" to Beijing, they are instrumental to the Social Credit concept Beijing is authoring in cooperation with provinces, and the enterprise of it is not a static situation. They're experimenting, tweaking, setting limits...that's my experience, anyway.

All this connectivity is new and it evolves and scales up and makes millionaires and crashes and burns and involves meaningful uses...and as many meaningful abuses...and I prefer to cite academics on the topic rather than improvise explanation-- McLuhan addressed the technology around "screens" before they became hand-held, but if you read his works, much of what pause he took to describe what he did has application in the present proliferation of connectivity ...


You would be wrong. I use several nights a week (they are 12 hours ahead, so my 9PM is their 9AM) to communicate with customers in Shanghai, Zhanjiang, Suzhou, and Beijing. Some of us spent a great deal of time in China before the virus. If it weren't for travel restrictions, I'd be there now. The Chinese people use WeChat for literally everything. They have their bank accounts linked to WeChat and purchase everything by scanning a bar code. Very few use cash. Their entire existence in metropolitan areas rely on WeChat. If we ban WeChat, it doesn't affect the Chinese one bit. It just hurts people like me.
 
Displayed 16 of 16 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.