Your first false equivalence arises out of trivializing the qualitative differences in freedom between China and the USA/EU, implicitly framing the limitations in China as comparable to those in democratic societies.
This is misleading given the severe restrictions on human rights, freedom of speech, and rule of law in an authoritarian regime like China.
Your second false equivalence is in your equating of limited, private content moderation by a social network with systemic human rights abuses by government.
You have conspicuously avoided addressing the specific, systemic human rights abuses unique to China.
Instead, your post employs a series of rhetorical tactics aimed at stifling constructive dialogue:
First, you assert a false equivalency between China and the USA/EU by trivializing the qualitative difference in freedom levels, thereby attempting to normalize authoritarianism.
Second, you use a slippery slope argument about social media moderation to suggest that all limitations on freedom are essentially the same — equating limited, private content moderation with systemic human rights abuses by government.
Third, you engage in an ad hominem attack by accusing me of being influenced by propaganda without providing substantive counter-arguments.
Were I to adopt your approach, I could easily make similar sweeping ad hominem accusations based on your behavior here.
I don’t believe you’re engaging in good faith; you are employing tactics meant to stifle discourse:
1. False Equivalence: Suggesting that economic progress and freedom of speech are interchangeable or mutually exclusive is intentionally misleading.
2. Relativism: By stating there's "no objective way" to compare, you are deflecting any form of critical evaluation.
3. Unfalsifiability: Your assertion that any evaluation is "inherently biased" is an unfalsifiable claim meant to immunize your argument from critique.
Human rights and human prosperity aren’t mutually exclusive.
On top of which, they did such a terrible job of lifting people out of poverty, they unnecessarily killed tens of millions in the deadliest famine in human history:
> In May, a court in Hainan province sentenced former journalist Luo Changping to seven months in prison for a Weibo post that questioned China’s justification for its involvement in the Korean War.
For all the faults of western democracies, the Chinese Communist Party is far worse. That’s not anti-China propaganda.
You comment on this issue a surprising amount, and clearly feel strongly about the US’ views on China. I’d be curious as to exactly how you feel China is being judged unfairly.
It’s very rare that bicycle is going to mechanically fail and send you flying.
Short of the time I was hit by a car, I’ve never had a bicycling emergency — road or mountain — that I wasn’t able to walk away from through some combination of hoping obstacles and/or putting the bike down in a controlled side-skid.
The design, maintenance, and alteration of parachute equipment is regulated by the FAA; equipment must be approved under the FAA’s technical standards, and anyone packing a parachute must be an FAA-licensed rigger.
AFAIK there are no such standards (mandatory or voluntary) applied to Onewheel’s devices.
They could have voluntarily applied hardware and software standards from other safety fields (e.g. automotive engineering), but they apparently chose not to.
As the peer commenter said: move fast and break bones.
You’re right, I see that as embarrassingly trivial. This whole thread is inane — if using a simple API is “amazing engineering”, what do you call the actual amazing engineering you’re holding in your hand right now?
I have nothing against Flighty — this has nothing to do with Flighty. Background notifications are trivial and all apps can and should be using them to solve this type of problem. It’s detrimental to have folks mistakenly operating under the belief that this is complex, unusual, or difficult.
Sure, the payload size is limited, but it’s not impossibly small, and custom keys with arbitrary payload are explicitly and obviously documented as supported.
Overly-effusive praise doesn’t do anyone any favors.