A few words from the article that stick in my mind after reading this: “truncated”, “ceremonial”, “absolutist”.

Very appropriate adjectives for the article itself.

For emergency calling and contacting parents, yes.

8 min

It’s actually 40 minutes for minors under 8, not sure where the original person got 8 from.

Here’s the full draft in Chinese: http://www.cac.gov.cn/2023-08/02/c_1692541991073784.htm. It’s actual 40 minutes for “Under 8” and not 8 minutes. Here’s my own summary:

The proposed guidelines do not just affect smartphones, but all mobile smart devices for kids.

The proposed 5 age groups are:

• Under 3
• 3 to under 8
• 8 to under 12
• 12 to under 16
• 16 to under 18

Default time limits are (parents can exempt all time limits):

• under 8: 40 minutes
• 8 to under 16: 1 hour
• 16 to under 18: 2 hours
• Reminder to rest every 30 minutes
• No service to be provided to minors from 10PM to 6AM the next day

Apps not subject to time limits:

• emergency-related (safety, emergency calling etc.)
• approved educational apps
• tools suitable for minors (image processing, calculator, measurement etc.)
• User-defined by parents

Content providers are also required to provide age-based service under “minor mode”. You can find the recommendations for different age groups under the heading “五、移动互联网应用程序未成年人模式要求（一）基本要求”, it’s too long for me to translate.

There’s more information in the full draft, this proposed guidelines is basically a mix of parental controls and NSFM (NSFW but for minors, not safe for minors) requirements for content providers.

I remember this being brought up in the regular press conferences of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China for three days in a row, here are some Q&As related to cybersecurity:

2023-06-16

AFP: The US cybersecurity firm Mandiant on Thursday published a statement related to a cyberattack. It says that suspected hackers backed by China have broken into the networks of hundreds of public and private sector organizations globally. Are you aware of this report and is it accurate?

Wang Wenbin: The cybersecurity firm that you mentioned has repeatedly sold disinformation on so-called Chinese hacking attacks. The stories are far-fetched and unprofessional. The Chinese cybersecurity agency published in April the “Review of Cyberattacks from US Intelligence Agencies”, which disclosed that US intelligence agencies have been intruding on, dividing and suppressing foreign cybersecurity vendors through the Project CAMBERDADA. You might have noted that nowadays, global cybersecurity vendors rarely disclose cases of cyberattacks by the US government, but by making up reports about so-called foreign cyberattacks, US cybersecurity vendors have become accomplices in the US government’s smearing campaigns against other countries.

2023-07-12

Bloomberg: Last night or early this morning, Microsoft said it found a China-based group that was targeting government agencies in western Europe. Does China have any comment on this report and have you had any contact with governments in western Europe asking about this?

Wang Wenbin: We noted the reports saying that the spokesman for the White House National Security Council claimed that US officials found hackers linked to China took advantage of a security weakness in Microsoft’s cloud-computing to break into unclassified email accounts of the US, and the US has notified Microsoft about this. I would like to say that in the past, it was usually the world’s No.1 hacking group—the US National Security Agency, which also serves as the US Cyber Force Command, that released such kind of disinformation. This time, it was the US National Security Council that made a public statement. Whatever agency spoke, it does not change the fact that the US is the world’s biggest hacking empire and global cyber thief.

Since last year, cyber security institutions from China and elsewhere in the world have issued reports to reveal US government’s cyber attacks against China over the years, but the US has yet to make a response. It is high time that the US explained its cyber attack activities and stopped spreading disinformation to deflect public attention.

2023-07-13

AFP: I have a question on the report by Microsoft this week, which said a China-based hacking group was targeting Western government data. Does the Chinese foreign ministry have any further details on the origin of these hacks?

Wang Wenbin: I have answered relevant questions yesterday. The US needs to give an explanation for its own cyber attacks as soon as possible, instead of spreading disinformation and deflecting attention.

2023-07-14

CCTV: Yesterday, Director of the Office of the Central Commission for Foreign Affairs Wang Yi met with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken upon invitation in Jakarta, Indonesia. A US official said that the US side said at the meeting that the US government network was hacked and the US will hold the hackers accountable with proper measures. Do you have any comment?

Wang Wenbin: Director Wang Yi made clear China’s principled position on the issue of cyber security. The Chinese government agencies face numerous cyber attacks every day, most of which come from sources in the US. We’ve shared relevant facts with the international community on multiple occasions. China is the biggest victim of cyber attack. The US needs to stop slapping false labels on China.

2023-07-19

Bloomberg: A US energy executive has told lawmakers in the US that China represents an increasing threat to the US power grid. The executive also called China’s activities regarding cyber hacking quite alarming. How does the foreign ministry respond?

Mao Ning: China is a victim of cyber attacks. We firmly oppose any form of cyber attacks. The US has carried out indiscriminate, large-scale cyber attacks against other countries over the years. The US Cyber Force Command blatantly declared last year that the critical infrastructure of other countries is a legitimate target for US cyber attacks. Such moves have raised concern.

Cyber security is a global challenge and requires joint response from the international community. Some in the US must not smear other countries with groundless narratives to serve their political agenda. The US needs to stop cyber attacks against other countries.

2023-07-24

Dragon TV: According to reports, on July 20, CIA Director William Burns while attending the Aspen Security Forum said that progress has been made in rebuilding the US spy networks in China and they are working hard to build a very strong human intelligence capability to complement what they can acquire through other methods. What’s China’s comment?

Mao Ning: We’ve noted the reports. This is rather concerning. The US on the one hand keeps spreading disinformation on so-called “Chinese spying and cyber attacks”, and on the other hand tells the public about its large-scale intelligence activities targeting China. This in itself is quite revealing. China will take all measures necessary to safeguard national security.

2023-07-26

Global Times: Today, the Wuhan Municipal Emergency Management Bureau issued a public statement and the Wuhan Public Security Bureau put up a bulletin. According to them, the Wuhan Earthquake Monitoring Center suffered a cyberattack, which was detected by China’s National Computer Virus Emergency Response Center and Chinese company 360. Global Times reported that preliminary evidence indicates that the cyberattack had come from the US. What is your comment?

Mao Ning: According to the statements from relevant Chinese agencies, a hacker group with overseas government background launched a cyberattack on the Wuhan Earthquake Monitoring Center, which is a serious threat to China’s national security.

We condemn the irresponsible attack. China will do what is necessary to safeguard our cybersecurity.

China Daily: Lately, US officials, including National Security Advisor, Secretary of State, Secretary of Commerce and spokesperson for the White House National Security Council have commented on the so-called “Chinese cyberattacks against the US.” Officials from the US National Security Agency even said that espionage is what nation-states do. Are the statements released today by relevant Chinese agencies a response to US remarks?

Mao Ning: The statements from China are objective and professional. They simply stated a fact. This is inherently different from the accusation and smear against China from the US. The US government is engaged in malicious cyber operations against not just China but countries around the world, while blaming China for so-called “hacking attacks.” This is textbook double standards and political manipulation.

Cybersecurity is a common challenge. By politicizing and weaponizing cybersecurity issues, the US is disrupting the global effort of jointly addressing the challenge through dialogue and cooperation and hampering the mutual trust among countries. The US needs to immediately stop its wrongdoing and work with the rest of the world to make common rules through dialogue and cooperation and abide by these rules, and safeguard peace, security and stability in cyberspace with a constructive and pragmatic attitude.

There’s a famous book that goes into the details of this process, you may have even heard of it, Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell.

Haven’t heard that one, but here’s an example, on the left is BBC’s Chinese version, on the left is the English version:

Original article: BBC sparks uproar in China for ‘underworld filter’ on Wuhan video https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202102/1215710.shtml

There are plenty of liberal Chinese both within China and overseas who will use anything negative to paint China, CPC and socialism in a bad light, mostly non-politcal issues.

I’m not sure which videos have this, but when I see this I expect to see cynical content that may be used to defame China.

It’s like saying “I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but *says something disrespectful*”.

I updated my comment:

Some people don’t get it, it’s not meant to insult homosexuals, it’s meant to insult socialism and the CPC, because we call each other comrades!

Update:

You know what, I think it’s both an insult to socialists and homosexuals, because people who use it to insinuate that socialists are all homosexuals think that it would be insulting to call anyone homosexual.

By “democratic capitalism” they actually mean bourgeois democratic dictatorship, as opposed to people’s/proletariat democratic dictatorship.

We call it the “BBC/nether filter”, referring to how BBC turns all pictures and videos of China darker than original.

It’s common for people in China in the past to call strangers by the term comrade, whether they’re CPC members or not, though it’s not as common nowadays. However, official news have always used comrade when mentioning party members.

Even though “comrade” can also mean someone with the same ideals, it’s like saying “gay” also means happy. So when some people use it to refer to homosexuals, they’re not insulting homosexuals but the CPC.

The organization mentioned in the article was called “北京同志中心”, which they mean to be “Beijing LGBT Center”, but I would think it meant “Beijing Comrade Center” if I didn’t know it was LGBT-related. They renamed to “北同文化”(Beijing "同“ Culture) later probably to avoid this. “同” in Chinese means same, and can be short for “同性恋”(homosexual).

This article is dated May 16, the group’s notice was posted on May 15, so the website was probably shut down. You can try web.archive.org.

Not sure why either.

On an unrelated note, some people in China use the term for “comrade” (同志) to refer to homosexuals, you can see why this very insulting.

Some people don’t get it, it’s not meant to insult homosexuals, it’s meant to insult socialism and the CPC, because we call each other comrades!

Copied from my other reply:

The organization mentioned in the article was called “北京同志中心”, which they mean to be “Beijing LGBT Center”, but I would think it meant “Beijing Comrade Center” if I didn’t know it was LGBT-related. They renamed to “北同文化”(Beijing "同“ Culture) later probably to avoid this. “同” in Chinese means same, and can be short for “同性恋”(homosexual).

Another update:

You know what, I think it’s both an insult to socialists and homosexuals, because people who use it to insinuate that socialists are all homosexuals think that it would be insulting to call anyone homosexual.

First of all, I think it’s important to realize that people who have lived through the Mao-era, the pre-PRC era (before 1949), and even pre-CPC era (before 1921) are still living and breathing in China.

Here are some relevant population statistics from China’s Seventh National Population Census conducted in 2020 (71 years since the founding of the PRC in 1949, 99 years since the founding of the CPC in 1921):

• 70 to 74 years old: 15,504,914
• 75 to 79 years old: 9,606,840
• 80 to 84 years old: 6,800,356
• 85 to 89 years old: 3,687,435
• 90 to 94 years old: 1,252,811
• 95 to 99 years old: 279,430
• 100 years old or more: 40,382
• Total for the above age groups: 37,172,168.

I looked up the current population of different countries in the world, and Canada has around 38 milllion people, so the number of people over 70 years old in China in 2020 rivals that of Canada’s entire population.

Now back to the topic of “Maoism vs Dengism”. There are definitely self-proclaimed Maoists in China and within the CPC who genuinely hate Reform and Opening Up and rampant liberal/capitalist views shared by a sizable amount of people since then. But going further as to pit one leader against another is not something that people who support a united China would do.

Anyone who tries to pit one Chinese leader against another is trying to split the CPC into factions and create sectarian infighting, which would sow discord and create confusion both within the party and across the country. China will not replicate the downfall of the Soviet Union by allowing such damage to unity/cohesion to occur. It’s not just “Mao vs Deng”, any combination of “X vs Y” can be created as long as there is a need for such topics, but “Mao vs Deng” is definitely a hot favourite due to their profound impact on China.

If “Maoists” are worried that the top CPC leaders are actually capitalists who sneaked into the party pretending to be Marxists, I would ask how they can “prove” to anyone that they are “genuine Maoists”. Trying to “prove” anyone’s belief isn’t going to work by debate, nor is there any widely-available mind-reading technology yet. It all comes down to what someone says and does, but more emphasis should be given to what they’ve done, while also keeping in mind what they’ve said.

“Maoists” followed Mao when he was still living, there’s not much to complain about there other than possible lack of critical thinking. After Mao’s death and since Reform and Opening Up, it’s understandable that they worry about building up local capital and inviting foreign investment, so far so good. But it’s currently 2023, and “Maoists” who still question the integrity of the CPC today are actually helping western capitalists by questioning the strongest socialist competitor to capitalism that exists today.

Sorry for the late response, I didn’t get any notifications. “沙雕图” usually refers to funny gifs or images, “沙雕(帖/贴)” could mean stupid or funny posts. “梗” can be translated into memes, so “梗图” refers to meme images.

As for shitposts, I would say “水贴” comes pretty close to the meaning. “水” or water means “low quality” when used to describe something, like “水货” (low quality goods), “水贴” (low quality posts).

Regarding the usage of “wife”, some people like to call public figures that they follow by the term “wife/husband”, this includes video creators. It’s a part of fan/idol culture, the Japanese equivalent “waifu” is similar in this regard.

The first phrase, “sand sculpture” or 沙雕 is a homophone (similar pronunciation, different meaning) for 傻屌 (literally means stupid dick), but just like how “fuck” is censored/filtered, people use homophones to evade such censors. By the way, “沙雕” is interpreted as “sand eagle” (one might even say desert eagle) rather than “sand sculpture” when using it to call others stupid.

As for the other two, I’m not quite sure what you’re looking at.

Sad to hear that you’ve been around a few countries and still think American elections are better.

I hope you’re not visiting from America, because it sounds like typical US rhetoric when you say “letting a guy [rule] for 20+ years”, and comparing it to dogshit American elections.