Technology

59345 readers

5583 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

2019

submitted 1 year ago by Tazmanian@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

462 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Vulnerabilities in Sogou Keyboard encryption expose keypresses to network eavesdropping.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Syrc@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In 1948, the United Nations Genocide Convention defined genocide as any of five "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group." These five acts were: killing members of the group, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children out of the group.

The report details the second, third and fourth of those acts. It effectively qualifies as genocide.

[–] gnuhaut@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's plenty of evidence of China trying to improve the living conditions for Uyghurs in Xinjiang and in the rest of China (poverty alleviation, affirmative action programs for university students, the crackdown against hate speech on social media, ...). So imprisoning some people based on some vague "extremism score" and then seemingly releasing them after some months doesn't show intent to impose living conditions in order to destroy a group. It shows intent on crushing separatism.

Preventing births is true for everybody in China, how does that show an intent to destroy a particular group? It doesn't.

So we're left with "serious bodily or mental harm", which can be explained just as well by an intent to suppress separatism and religious extremism. Literally every war causes some nationality "serious bodily or mental harm" far worse than what China is doing, and we don't call every war a genocide, do we?

[–] Syrc@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Preventing births is true for everybody in China, how does that show an intent to destroy a particular group? It doesn’t.

Are you really comparing the one-child policy to forced sterilization? I’m trying to have this conversation in good faith but I really can’t believe you seriously think that.

[–] gnuhaut@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

My impression was that the forced sterilization claim was made up, or at least the evidence was not convincing.