rccrv

Why does astroturfing need to come from a large organization? A bunch of like-minded users could be enough depending on the volume of commenting or voting. They also don't need to be paid and even have centralized management.

I've seen a couple of userames popping on these threads all the time. And China related threads have an odd number of new accounts posting comments in them.

It can be people that have to live anonymously lest they have to deal with dictatorships or it can also be the same group of people posting the same opinions all over again.

As for names, there is two users in this thread that are posting in almost every China-related thread for at least a month or so. I won't particularly point to them, since I'm not sure it goes well with the guidelines

Though it didn't happen on HN, the unidan case on reddit is a good example. The guy basically manipulated voting in a large subreddit on his own by using a number of alternative accounts to upvote his own comments.

Anyway, if that is the direction HN is headed and this is regarded as acceptable, then I'm leaving.

I don't tolerate propaganda or people spreading it. This is on the guidelines: "Please don't use Hacker News primarily for political or ideological battle." A bunch of users forget about that and I won't be around a website that goes into it.

Oh great another attempt at the daily China thread on HN.

With both the whatabowtists and the anti-China hawks trying to outplay each other in the moral outrage game.

There are plenty of subreddits for those who like to astroturf about China ranging from anti-China hawks to pro-Beijing trolls.

Sorry for the cynicism, but I really dislike astroturfers.

This is a very common oversimplification of how Brazilian society works that's popular among many who didn't really spend too much time studying Brazilian or American history.

The justification goes like this: Brazilian society was based on exploration of large farms and American society was based on settlement by Puritans and other immigrants. Since that's the main difference in the two countries formation it must play the main role about their outcomes.

This common folk explanation is used in some circles and probably took hold after WWII when Brazilian upper classes began to use the USA as a role model (before that, Europe, and especially France, was used more as a model than the USA[1]).

It generally ignores every nuance of the history of both countries. For example, people that make this comment in Brazil largely ignore that the USA had to deal with something like the Spoils System. They also largely ignore that the Southern USA had something very close to what they describe as an "exploration colonization." It was what formed the base of the wealth of the local elites[2].

There are many more differences and similarities between Brazil and the USA during their formation years and after their independence that can't be ignored.

One similarity that is not acknowledged is that both countries had debates about having a stronger central government or a weaker one.

In the USA, Alexander Hamilton argued strongly for this. In Brazil, Emperor Dom Pedro I tried to install a unitary state in the new country, only to fail under the pressure of the local elites that wanted more autonomy for themselves. The Additional Act of 1834 turned provincial autonomy into the law of the land. When the monarchy was overthrown, the new constitution gave even more powers to the local elites.

I generally think the leeway given to the elites during colonization, after the passage of the act of 1834 and especially during the first Republican government was way more of a problem than what system of colonization was adopted. This generally allowed local strongmen to run their region as some sort of quasi-warlords. It's where the whole thing we call "Coronelismo" in Brazil came from and something like it still dictates how politics is done in Brazil to this today.

[1]: You can read more about this in the book "The Seduction of Brazil."

[1]: More about this in the book "The Grandees of Government."

They own the company that develops their software[1] as far as I know. It's a subsidiary.

[1]: This company: https://www.rdisoftware.com/

BMW, McLaren and friends probably simply buy all the carbon fiber they use from Toray. Just like Boeing do.

If McLaren has some production, it's probably not more than a pilot plant.

That is a good equivalent and it gives some idea of what happened for those familiar with the concept. Thanks for the clarification.

It wasn't Congress that decided that.

It is a single judge that gave an order to block the service for 48 hours.

It can be reversed if another judge decides the "liminar" (I don't know how to say this in English, it's a temporary decision) shouldn't been given.