TimothyOilpants

You’ve already admitted you haven’t read the paper… Only an article covering it… Take your bullshit and indignation somewhere else.

We’re done here.

Less than 0.01% of human history has even been documented…

Just because you can’t imagine anything better than what you were raised in doesn’t mean it can’t exist…

This too shall pass.

Yes… And your alleged intentions have clearly been well understood by everyone here…

Get over yourself; from your vocabulary it’s clear you’re not employed in a STEM field. You’re just some armchair pundit who wants to manufacture doubt by suggesting ideological bias has been introduced in someone else’s work because you don’t like the results of their study.

Don’t expect any further replies from me; it’s clear exactly what you are, and you’re not worth engaging with.

… And you value truth and accuracy so much that you are making assumptions rather than seeking out the actual study…

You already know what you want to believe, so you’re framing your interpretation to fit your presupposition.

Kick rocks, racist; no one here wants to talk to you, or hear what you have to say.

Yes, if you’re the kind of person who is looking for ways to discredit victims and deny the existence of social problems, then any amount of ambiguity is easily manipulated.

Scientists should always define experimental protocols explicitly with ignorant apologists in mind…

The Capitalist bourgeoisie never wanted democracy; they just wanted to be monarchs themselves and the promise of democracy was the most practical way to manufacture consent among the working class.

You’re right, that’s waste of time. The topic here is a suspected Chinese espionage against Canada, we should not continue in this distraction.

See! Now THAT is how you write a response that reads like propaganda!

You see no irony in your “rebuttal” to my point being locked behind a Western paywall?

It seems clear that you’ll continue to avoid real discussion and dismiss my perspective with some conspiracy minded magical thinking regardless of how this “conversation” proceeds…

You’ve made no attempt to rationalize or justify your opposition. You’re using ad hominem attacks to imply the blanket superiority of your moral position without any logical connective tissue. “Someone has a different opinion to me? They must be a Chinese propagandist!”

If you don’t have an actual counter-argument to present, I’m not interested in indulging further.

As stated in the article, historically they are after “…data across academia, medicine, military, cybersecurity and foreign policy”.

I support it.

I also don’t care if they are compromising personal information.

I am far more comfortable with any speculative use China has for this information than I am with the known exploitative intentions that private, for-profit, western institutions have for it.

Again, centuries of history has made me significantly more confident in China’s ability to deploy this knowledge for the greater good and progress of humanity than ANY western nation.

China is the world’s largest producer of both total and high-impact scientific literature. Chinese research institutions publish more than 1,000,000 papers annually, which is double what the next most prolific nation publishes.

Looking at the last 20 years specifically, China accounts for a 27% share of the Top 1% most cited papers, with the US coming in 2nd with a ~25% share

When accounting for raw purchasing power, China spends >$1,300,000,000,000 annually on R&D compared to the US at $1,010,000,000,000.

China is home to 24 of the top 100 science and technology clusters, delivering >7,570,000 person-years of R&D manpower annually.

As for their espionage tactics; again I fully reject the position that information and knowledge are property, so I do not see accessing those without permission as theft.

Looking at the raw numbers, and the material outcomes we all benefit from, I have more faith in China’s ability to turn knowledge into meaningful human progress than any other nation on earth.

The concept of intellectual “property” is asinine.

Scientific knowledge should not be treated as a commodity, leverage, or a privilege.

Greater understanding benefits all of humankind, and it is morally indefensible to gatekeep progress to the benefit of any minority.

First off, your PC can 100% be bricked remotely, go read up on Stuxnet…

The problem is the assumption that there is nefarious intent behind this move.

Sony and Microsoft tried to give us digital entitlement resale AND friend loaning with Xbox One and PS4 and a whiny minority of “core gamers” kicked up such a fuss during E3 2013 that Microsofts stock tanked and both of them backpedalled… It was senseless then, and it’s even more senseless now.

A SIGNIFICANT portion of people who buy video games already have already abandoned physical media and don’t care…

Excluding Nintendo, ~5% of total video game sales are physical media.

THIS 100%

Modern game discs are literally just Mountain Dew Verification Cans™

Both Microsoft and Sony had this exact infrastructure built ready to go for Xbox One and PS4 prior to launch.

We were going to get full digital collections with a marketplace that would allow entitlement sales AND the ability to loan entitlements to friends for set periods of time.

When Microsoft announced the plans at E3 2013, a whiny minority of “core gamers” kicked up such a fuss that Microsofts stock tanked and they backpedalled… Sony hadn’t made any announcements yet and presented the EXACT opposite of Microsoft’s plan literally 8 hours later despite the fact that their existing hardware DevKits and system software functioned exactly as Microsoft had described. Sony got to look like the “hero” while both of them then scrambled to completely reengineer their hardware and system software prior to launch…

We lost a bright future that day.

The commitment to physical media has crossed the line from nostalgia into change resistance, driven by manufactured conspiracies. This transition is in the best interest of the majority of gamers; the vocal minority is just out of touch with how the broader community actually consumes that media.

For millennia, non-static art (song, theater, performance, and oral storytelling) existed purely in ephemeral mediums without physical storage. The concept of “owning” a physical piece of interactive software is a historical anomaly that has existed for barely forty years.

Economically and technologically, video games are the cheapest and most accessible they have ever been. Simultaneously, the depth, breadth, and quality of content are light-years ahead of what was imaginable in the 80s. We are living through the golden age of the medium, yet critics are lamenting the hypothetical loss of the 99% of games they were never going to replay in ten years anyway.

Like it or not, software IS fundamentally a service now. A modern video game is not a static painting or a collectible display piece like a Funko Pop to put on your shelf; it’s a dynamic, adaptive, and interactive ecosystem shaped by ongoing player data and developer iteration. Holding a plastic disc hostage provides no value when that disc only contains an unpatched, broken, Day 0 build of the game at its literal worst.

The romanticization of physical games is no different than audiophiles insisting that vinyl is the only “pure” way to experience music. It is an aesthetic preference masquerading as a consumer rights crusade.

The VAST majority of gamers don’t identify as “gamers”. They don’t read gaming media, they don’t engage in online discourse about video games, and they don’t give two shits about any of this sensationalist nothing burger fear mongering.

If YOU are a “concerned gamer”; physical media is dead. Acknowledge that you are an INFINITESIMALLY MINISCULE minority and get over it, or find a new hobby.

A couple thousand chronically online whiners don’t get to decide the future of the industry.

Homosexuality is not seditious.

Get your feelings under control.

…another reply with an emotional appeal and no cogent perspective.

Questions aren’t strawmen… the opposite actually. Challenging my integrity because you disagree with me IS an ad hominem attack though.

The intellectual exercise of challenging your upbringing, indoctrination, and convictions is too much for a lot of people.

Characterize me however you need to in order to avoid those uncomfortable questions about your own bias though…Have a good one.