Allon

Talked with a few HK'ers where I work, here in America. They are still bitter about the protests and back them 100%. FOr the sake of the city, I hope there is some restraint.

One is an admin. That many people means I hope our own security measures are intact. I have wanted to publish this but there is a big move into social media, which probably would include us, to determine who is bad mouthing. I understand several people (one published about here) have been arrested when they were talked into going back for a visit. One I know was arrested and died not shortly after being put in prison. Their family was compensated for the loss. Just my opinion, we should be respectful anyway when we talk about the Chinese government, although we may disagree, as is our right here in America. My overall question is if there are a lot of Huawei people here, all in a short time, we are not being Great Walled, although they certainly may have VPNs. But I say welcome to them. I think we have always been friendly to China and I think with Randy here, especially, he gives accurate and unbiased advice and counsel. He also portrays China in a very positive light. HIs pictures and stories are excellent.

Why would Xi Jinping promote blockchain? The answer may lie in the quote above - "I worry that people have oversold blockchain to Xi as a magic cure-all" China already employs free electronic transactions without blockchain. Bitcoin hasn't made the inroads that were expected/hyped for it. It HAS survived as an investment reliant on the "free" computing power that people put into it. Somehow, I can't see China going along with this: Can we just disagree on this? Don't forget - China banned bitcoin. Not sure we are disagreeing on anything. It's a discussion. There are really two subjects with lower levels of each. There is the subject of blockchain technology only, regardless of Bitcoin or certificates, and blockchain with Bitcoin and certificates. Either way, blockchain is being used. I don't think I said I disagreed with the notion that China is right in that blockchain will not handle "bulk" or large transactions of similar nature, as Bitcoins would likely be. We have already seen decentralization handle large volume and very poorly. Load balancers just add to a performance issue. Centralized systems, like mainframes, handle it a little better but still have to have EDI/MQ technology to handle recovery in case of problems. And it does not work well when the data has no integrity -- unlike blockchain is supposed to have. (I am leary of the of the term "similar transaction type or nature.") I don't think it is a perfect science yet (what is?) and completely explains to me China's reticence to get it to 5th gear. And Bitcoin anyway to me is a pipe dream. It is already shows signs of volatility.

Don't know about anyone else but I was not really looking or listening very much to the tech stuff.

Liberty vs. Security. Will they tip the scale? Already some of my contacts in Hong Kong (company related) are now against the protesters. They want things to settle down. But they are afraid the PLA will come in. Difficult situation.....

No doubt it is going to help some large transaction based business. (I guess we call them "tokens" in the biz before, even tho I hate using that term. It means way too many things and in this case, not really a good fit for what block chain means.) But when the trans are bundled and shoved through in a block that avoids the middle man fees, some will get hurt. And bitcoin is just mode of currency. Digital certificates can also be a form of currency -- as long as they can be verified as well as bitcoins are.

It's actually a disadvantage if people do not embrace Bitcoin (although block chain can work without it) and it cuts out the middle man in the process -- Amazon, Uder, and other (Ali Baba) online retail merchants. Middle men will be eliminated in the process.

Good post, Greg. Wish we had more posts from books about the Chinese people. We have had some, but wish there were more.

Sorry. Right, though people did accuse Trump of discriminating against Muslims. Originally in his first submittals of his ban, he mentioned Muslims by name. It was only after he mentioned countries rather than religion (in that sense he did agree with Obama) did the SUpreme Court rule in his favor. But Obama did not "set up" the ban that Trump tried to pass. Obama held up one kind of visa (refugees don't use visas by the way) from one predominantly Muslim country: Iraq, and for one specific incident. NO other Muslim countries were affected and it in fact, when they were, was not a ban. Trump erroneously (other people have a different name for it) said Obama had done so for several Muslim countries. He did not. Immigration from those countries were not inhibited except to require a visa if you visited them (Iraq and Syria only.) Also, fact checker below: And,

Randy, When I click the second hypertext in your post, nothing happens. Bad link? Anyway, I thought this was interesting: So, worry. Edit: Allon's article is free (USAToday) - After eating raw rodent’s kidney for 'good health,' couple die of bubonic plague, spark quarantine

Reminds me of Tiananmen Square. The protestors pushed to the limit, and knew there would be casualties even deaths.I think they know this is the last hurrah if (when) the PLA steps in. It is part of the protestor protocol to push to the absolute limit. Now it looks like the CCP is going under the radar or camouflaged as college basketball players in order to disrupt the protestors and scatter and/or beat them up. Smart. That way they can claim even though it is quite obvious who they are, that "their own kind" turned against them. And it turns out that many in HK are going against the protest. They claim with some justification (from news reports, CNN, etc.) that HK gangs are involved who clearly don't want any authority in HK, much less the PLA. Just hope the number of casualties is not anywhere near T Square but that's optimistic.

One year for many Chinese people can make a difference. The American people can wait but despite the Chinese gift for saving money, they don't have the cash reserve to make it that long. It could be the equivalent of a nice 7.5 earthquake to make the current dynasty listen. Just observation. And the comment was meant to hope neither of us go on with this, whatever history is going to call it.

The wife and family who are in China discuss this topic worriedly. The price in China, at least Liaoning (Shenyang, Fushun, Dalian -- a northern province) is really so high most people cannot afford it anymore. We were shopping here and she was astonished at how cheap pork is -- almost 3 times less. And when the sale occurred, her eyes just dropped. She snapped a picture of the pork with the price and sent it back. Her niece in China, was almost in tears. They have said when the wife told them of gas prices here, it was cheaper than water there. I really do feel for the Chinese people. Our farmers and manufacturers are hurting too but China still has memories of famine. If they could just come to some agreement on intellectual property, something China has serious trouble enforcing, I think we could settle a lot of troubles.

Someone cheating at war, games. Shocking.

Although more crowded than what I have experienced (by 2 per room), it looks like they were having as much fun. The sap really flows in the Spring.

I don't think it was 155 years of democracy, I think it's been about 130-140 years since Hong Kong and then the New Territories were leased as a concession to the British. But, yes, a "different kind of civilization" for better or worse at times. Indeed, the Qing often granted concessions to far flung areas when they didn't have the means to govern them. They either collected tribute from a controlled area or from the leased area. By no means were the British as bad as the Japanese, whose plan to win a world war included enslaving northeastern China as a labor force. But, yep, everybody lumped in together as humiliators of China. The students protesting in 1919 in Tien' Anmen protested events of the times as well as weak, traditional political responses to external forces. I.e. they wanted a new form of social organization and government. So, if you just showed up and appeared to have some better ides of how to do things (like build a nation) you could later be accused of humiliating China if not also hurting their feelings. I did ask the question earlier "when are we going to hear from the 1%, the landowners?" Because you know they've made their deals with Beijing (or, they think they have). They don't want the pesky "people" messing it up. Otherwise, why would that guy (above) get the interview In the first place? Why him and not a random person on the street? Yeh, blame the British. How many lives were saved by HK not having to endure Mao's purges and famines? P.S. The problem, of course, is that they have TOO much national identity It's 155/6 depending on month of year to 1997, less the 4 years under Japanese rule. (HK was occupied in 1841 but became a colony in 1843 after haggling with Qing for 2 years, although the British still held it.) To qualify, however, the British were far more concerned about capitalism than democracy, especially in those colonial times. But comparing what democracy was there to the mainland, they were under democracy or at least principles of it, albeit a colonial version. There were other concessions made to the winners of the Opium War, Germany, France, and Russia but they were leased reparations and done later. So the remaining 92% of HK/Kowloon became a lease as well. Hong Island and Kowloon were ceded in perpetuity (despite rewritten history by the CCP) but the leased portions, necessary for ceded portion to be defensible and viably developed at the time since there was nothing there but scrub. 92% of the deal was leased and thus made the "perpetuity" notion untenable. So the British gave it back with guarantees until 2047. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Hong_Konghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Opium_War Interesting that the later Boxer rebellion reparation given to the US, were reduced by TDR and donated to the university in scholarships that eventually became the famous Tsinghua in Beijing.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Tsinghua_University

As I said, a "proclamation" aside (and that is a term in government that went out of official government terminology with Paul Revere), the regulations as written by the bureaucrats that assure policy directives by the "Executive (monkey)" are interpreted and carried out, sure do look like they are real clear and direct, right? And the term "consular officer" has been applied to practically any official of CIS, here or there. An examining official at the border has the right to turn away an immigrant (not without a hearing) for practically anything they wish. But let's be calm here. The regs clearly show "intent" at the time of the issuance in China. And the ACA is not by definition "subsidized." For lower and even middle income families, it can be subsidized. But the term "subsidized" does not apply otherwise. The ACA in such an instance was to supply lower cost health insurance through a wider pool of insured. In that sense, it is not "subsidized" so there is your crack in the law. Obviously, the reg was an attempt to avoid using ACA to fit the policy change, which is to get rid of immigrants and the ACA as well. Hang in there. Deal with it as it comes by preparing as best you can. There are lawyers even in China that can help you defend your "intention" to get health insurance. And I really don't think the attempt to get immigrants out of PPACA will hold up with prior precedent established. An Addendum: there is an exclusion written in the "Proclamation" that makes Medicaid an eclusion to entry. The courts have already upheld that Medicate and Medicaid are not exclusionary -- so Stephen Miller at the WH has his head up his ass again. Here are the highlights of the "Proclamation." (Note the difference between a Proclamation, a Declaration, an Executive Order, a Regulation, and a Resolution.) https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-proclamation-suspension-entry-immigrants-will-financially-burden-united-states-healthcare-system/

I agree with Randy. The entrance officer has wide leeway to make determinations but they must be grounded in regulatory mandates, albeit all are written by blindfolded monkeys. (Believe me, I had to work with them. Government "regulations" publications are so poorly written as to be useless.) It usually turns out that the officer makes his own determination. If it goes bad for you, I advise being ready with a lawyer. I had one and we almost sued. I seriously doubt those regulations will stand up in court by the time your son hits the border. Just be ready, as Randy says, to demonstrate how he will be insured.

Duh. And why do they have a lack of "national identity" after living under democracy for 155 years, regardless of the circumstances of the possession. The HK'ers have had a taste of freedom the mainland only salivates for but joins the government, while under the covers. But it is time for a strong man to emerge to bring some discussion to bear and end the violence. Now if the CP would just let off on the extradition requirement and other entanglements that act as a leash. The Chinese people, and the CP of course, need to recognize that, yes, they were colonized and treated as subjugated peasants for many years -- but due to the lack of a strong central government. Looking at the China map over time, it does not resemble a country that had its possessions form a boundary that was singular. For a period, China was just a set of dynasties, not even joined as the Articles of Confederation were in our history. And the Mongols shared much of the territory claimed by the Chinese, and unlike our native Indians, governed it as well. Taiwan does not even show up until 1912, and even then the central (Chi'ng) government was getting weaker to an eventual revolution that muddied the waters of Taiwan's ownership until the ROC/KMT took it over in 1945 -- before the fall of China to the CCP.. Hong Kong of course, is a different issue entirely, but you can't argue that with the Chinese. My wife for instance is still repeating the slogans of her Big Brother history. They still generalize all foreigners, not just British or German or American. And the CIA is behind the riots in Hong Kong, of course. https://www.artsmia.org/art-of-asia/history/chinese-dynasty-map.cfm

The problem in Hong Kong is being paid for by thousands of Chinese dissidents killed in Tiananmen Square, and that is the ugly part of why Carrie Lam is helpless. The HK people know that. Match those lives with the agreement that the Chinese government cannot bring in the PLA without serious consequences internationally, and at a time when there is economic conflict, and you have what Gomer Pyle would say was "a situation." With the PLA massing at the border and veteran troops with a strong combat history barracked right there in the region, get ready for some blood in the street. Xi Jinping just wants to do it right. But he recently repeated, "One country, two systems" -- words that are difficult to take back. I just hope the body count is not as high as T-Square.

I did mention that the cops felt the same way I did so they were there (late), but yes, as were the ambulance with the EMT's, who were very good. I got that abuse cases were handled with a bit more empathy and understanding than other violence cases. I noticed it too. I heard from the Tai Tai circle that she is still in the hospital and she asked about me. So she is pretty lucid about events. It's obvious she had a concussion. I did not ask about the other problems since that bunch is medically challenged. I really want to keep a distance. I don't really want to be a witness but I will if necessary. Many of these cases end up with the wife taking back the husband and then her ending up getting beaten again or killed. But the good news is that in Asian-white marriages the incidence is probably less, much less than the average population. I did find a study of marriages in general that compared race, ethnicity, and age and the chance of divorce. Violence in the marriage was not studied but the chance of divorce was, indicating a potential relationship. This study is one of the more comprehensive I have seen of interracial marriages. A lot of stuff here...."Endogamous" refers to marriages where both are the same race/culture. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00582.x So, the four "most-stable" combinations were, in order of most stable to least stable: Asian Male, Asian Female Asian Male, White Female White Male, Asian Female White Male, White Female If you keep going down the list, interracial combinations involving Hispanic and black spouses are less stable than White Male, White Female. Asian-white marriages are more stable even than white-white marriages. When immigration and nativity are considered that gap closes but asian-white couples remain more stable. Adding spouse abuse into the equation, does not justify the IMBRA act, but still does not justify saying anything other than a potential relationship exists regarding violent tendencies in the marriage. I would really like to see a study of that relationship. Many feel, as I do, that Asian women seem more vulnerable and weak to white male spouses, and therefore are the subject of abuse at a greater rate. I do agree with you, Greg, that trauma is handled differently by asians, especially asian females, in that they tend to avoid further conflict and just decide to let the fates decide their relationship. Then, they would just walk away. I know from personal experience when my wife was attacked by a guy who tried to rape her. She refused to talk to police worried that people would think she was raped. For me, right now, I posted because I am really tired of seeing abuse being heaped upon Asian women. The guy that beat up that woman was lucky he did not try to run. I think he was surprised though that the police handcuffed him when she said she would press charges. I told her dui. Yes, press charges. Otherwise, he would have gotten away with not going to jail, at least that night. But the cops I think had already seen the physical evidence of damage enough to make the arrest. He wouldn't even look at me as they hauled him off.

I want to bring up a topic that has come and gone here over the many years I have been here. While researching some of those threads, I came across one posted by a member who I admire greatly, especially after reading a post I missed somehow. https://candleforlove.com/forums/topic/27875-i-got-caught-up-with-my-emotions/?hl=abuse The topic is one we all hate to talk about but it is there, guys. It is life, good and bad. Sunday morning, as we prepared to pack my wife's things for a trip to see family in China, she got a call from one of her friends. (I like to call her friends by a name Amy Tan gave to a circle of women who gab all day while they play MaJong -- The TieTie Circle.) In just the first minutes, I knew something was wrong. My wife had been recently attacked by a man who wanted to rape her (she is an LMT -- one of the good ones) and she got cut in the process. She did get the owner next door to respond to her knocks on the wall, and the guy ran off taking her cell phone and iPad. (They will never find his body... ) The trip to China was a way for her to get some support from family. It was a near death experience and she is recovering nicely from PTSD. (I have it too. Parajumper, AF - CSAR, all over SEA.) Her face turned ghost white and tears started to form but never emerged from her eyes. She gave me the phone and I said, Hello. The woman's voice was familiar. She speaks excellent English and is a loyal member of the TaiTai Circle. She asked me to help one of the other members who had been injured. (I thought, well, finally time they recognized my medical background instead of all this TCM -- which I am not totally against.) The woman I know had been crying and her voice was shaking. Somehow, I knew what had happened. I said, just tell me where and I will go. But please call the police. She hesitated, but I said, I won't go unless you call the police. I will meet them there. I was surprised the police had not arrived yet when I got to their house. My wife went with me. As I entered, there were 3 Chinese women, the one I recognized and talked to on the phone, another I did not know, and one woman lying on the floor like a broken bag of bones. I went to her right away. The first woman helped translate. A man, short hair, thin, wiry, wearing a black tee shirt that said, Bust Me, in white letters was sitting on the couch, rocking his ankle on his other knee. I asked the woman on the floor if I could touch her. She nodded. She said she knew of me. Her name was Ting, the same as my daughter. She had a broken collar bone, a possible broken elbow, bleeding from the mouth, and I was sure had a concussion. Her eyes could not track my fingers or my face. They were a little crossed. Blood came from her right ear. I told the translator to call an ambulance right now. When she did, she handed the phone to me and I described the injuries. I looked at the man sitting on the sofa, and avoided the visions I had of where I was going to hit him just 3 times, and kill him, dead. No words of anger. Nothing. Just dead. He knew it too. I saw fear on his face and I was glad to see that fear. He knew he had done something really wrong. But he just nodded his head, as if to say, she deserved it. No woman, Deserves it. I know how especially a Chinese woman can be very hurtful, partly because of cultural ignorance of language and customs we have, but as anyone would feel herself, hurt and anger. (Charles, another salute to you. Keep your patience and understanding.) But they don't deserve to be hit or killed. My mind raced back to a very early post here about a Chinese woman in New Mexico who was hospitalized by a country boy who owned a lot of guns, and was free somewhere in the area. The police were apparently friends of his and were relaxed about finding him and putting him where the guy I was looking at right now, deserved to be -- in jail. The woman he beat up was in the hospital I recall for about a week, the CFL poster was a male nurse taking care of her, and protecting her from this beast. Others in CFL who lived nearby were helping. I was really proud to be in this forum. I still am. All the posters then, as they were in Dennis' post, were very supportive and wanted to help. I am only about 6 hours away and could be there. And here I am, now, looking at a guy who just could not hold his temper, who thinks Asian woman are weak and deserve punishment. And probably think they will get away with it. This guy did not. I watched every move he made until the cops got here. When they did, they caught me looking at him, and one told me, We feel the same way. I can't say enough about what I saw. But again, we are talking about the ugly side of what we are do -- marry Chinese women. There are men who feel they have a right to beat a woman senseless. I cannot abide that "right." The IMBRA Act caused us to have to go through legal hoops to get a K-1. Two women were murdered and Congress acted to try and stop it, although the incidents with Asian women is less than the normal population. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Marriage_Broker_Regulation_Act). Pass the word, guys. Watch your temper. Seek counseling if you cannot restrain your anger. Yes, they are pretty hard to get along with at times. Take a walk. Breath. But don't beat up a woman who cannot defend herself. Post here, and we can help. All I can say......end of rant. Erik

Sad story about a defector and her son. Died of starvation, police think. There are so many similar sad stories about South Korean women being sold to Chinese and N Korean farmers. The radio said a man nearby the two who died tried to help but the woman just did not understand how things worked in South Korea. He noticed the woman looked much older than her 40 years. She was sold when she was 15.

Well, depending on where your brain is......

Not sure headlines make the difference between autonomous cars and human driven cars. As the articles already posted point out, the record of human cars killing or even causing accidents is far more than what autonomous cars cause, even counting for miles driven. The diagrams in the Times article use boxes to represent places for the lidar to be watchful of is much larger than what its normal size would be. So the area of coverage is greater. Reaction times have also been proven to be faster than humans. My concern with autonomous crashes would exactly that: if the humans in the autonomous cars were not wearing a seat belt or if the belt was defective regardless of a warning to fasten the safety belt, we would see a lot of humans going through front windshields in a crash. Of course, that would be far more greater if count accidents where seat belts were not worn at all by humans, or even if they were worn and the human did the stopping -- the crash would have a higher impact since the human did not stop quicker than the machine. So there is a lot to be said about autonomous machines with regard to accidents. Assuming Uber works on its lidar detection system so it can see better in the dark, they might have a product for controlled usage.