Ah yes, the Lost-likes.

Manifest, Fast Forward, Continuum, Revolution, Terra Nova… loved them all. All of them canceled.

When it comes to computing, technically everything is a binary choice.

China does have freedom of speech.

No they absolutely do not. Free speech isnt simply the claim that “we have free speech” but it is ensuring that the principles of free speech, especially the freedom to criticize, are available for all citizens.

I searched for actual Chinese law to cite for this part, let me know if i made any mistakes but this is what I found:

https://www.cecc.gov/international-agreements-and-domestic-legislation-affecting-freedom-of-expression#criminallaw

Article 4: Any printed materials or audio/visual materials with any of the following contents shall be prohibited from being brought into China:

1. Attacking any relevant regulations of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China; slandering any policies of the nation currently in effect; defaming any Party or national leaders; inciting the carrying out of subversion or destruction of the People’s Republic of China or creating division among ethnic groups; or advocating “two Chinas” or “Taiwan independence.”

4. Anything else that is harmful to the government, economy, culture, or morals of the People’s Republic of China.

Any book that reflects upon work or life situation of a current or former member of the Party Politburo Standing Committee, the National Chairman, Vice Chairman, Premier of the State Council, Chairman of the Central Military Commission, Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, or the Chairman of the Political Consultative Conference must be specifically reported and approved.

Article 3: Publishing businesses shall adhere to the path of serving the people and serving socialism, adhere to the guidance of Marxism, Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought and Deng Xiaoping Theory, and promulgate and accumulate scientific technology and cultural knowledge that is advantageous to economic development and social progress

Article 5: All levels of the People’s Government shall ensure that citizens are able to legally exercise their right to freedom of publication. When citizens exercise their right to freedom of publication they shall abide by the Constitution and laws, shall not oppose the basic principles confirmed in the Constitution, and shall not harm the interests of the country, the society or the collective or the legal freedoms and rights of other citizens.

Article 105(2): Use of rumor mongering or defamation or other means to incite subversion of the national regime or the overthrow of the socialist system shall be punished by a sentence of five years or less of imprisonment, criminal detention, supervision or deprivation of political rights

Satellite television channels shall strictly observe propaganda requirements, and firmly observe correct guidance of public opinion. With respect to reports on important events, breaking stories and other sensitive issues, they must obey the integrated dispositions of the local party committee Propaganda Departments, and strictly abide by Party discipline.

I don’t want to be close minded to new info, but when you throw out “western media” the way you are it makes me feel like you’re trying to gaslight me.

China is a state. No state power is a flawless perfect angel.

The West has a lot of flaws, but one idea it had that is a good one is the idea of limiting the power of the state, and having a strong bill of rights/Constitution which guarantees rights.

This doesn’t prevent it from being authoritarian, we can point to clear violations of civil liberties like the students being kidnapped off the streets and disappeared to an El Salvadoran death camp.

If I was unable to recognize that as authoritarian I think you’d rightfully decide this conversation is a non starter and I’m just too far gone.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/01/asia/china-students-peking-university-intl

So am I propagandized to? Was this story (and many more like it I could find and bring up) completely made up?

Or can we both agree stuff like this isn’t great and work towards a future where we prevent the abduction of students in both spheres of the world.

Again, the reason China is labeled “authoritarian” by the Western Media

Forget the Western Media. I am telling you they are authoritarian. I don’t do business with them, I am instead using objective standards of what actions an individual should be able to freely choose without fear of reprisal from their government.

The average citizen is in danger of being arrested over posting speech to social media (yes the UK and Australia are authoritarian for doing the same thing, that’s how objective standards should work).

They’re in danger of being arrested for protesting their government, or for organizing their labor. The only correct channel of protest is going through the local government with the abysmally poor approval rate you cited.

In conclusion, my source says exactly what I said it does. It’s reliable in that we can trust the positives admitted from someone overall hostile.

What? How does that make anything any more or less reliable?

You can’t just cherry pick positives out of a negative bias and assume it cancels out.

A study done by someone not hostile would be more reliable. That’s what I would have tried to link, but I guess the source you linked explains China’s strict censorship makes it difficult to do an objective opinion poll.

The Man from Earth

B4

Triangle

Time Lapse

Daybreakers

Evolution

Knowing

Countries like the PRC are labeled “authoritarian” not due to how the people themselves feel, but because Capital is limited by the government.

Countries like the PRC are labeled authoritarian because they do not provide basic human rights such as freedom of speech.

I will quote exclusively from your own source you have linked

“Gathering reliable, long-term opinion survey data from across the country is a real obstacle,” said Ash Center China Programs Director Edward Cunningham. “Rigorous and objective opinion polling is something that we take for granted in the U.S.”

You were accurate about the satisfaction rate towards Beijing.

in China there was very high satisfaction with the central government. In 2016, the last year the survey was conducted, 95.5 percent of respondents were either “relatively satisfied” or “highly satisfied” with Beijing.

Why do they suggest this rate is so high?

According to Saich, a few factors include the proximity of central government from rural citizens, as well as highly positive news proliferated throughout the country.

What about local government approval rates?

At the township level, the lowest level of government surveyed, only 11.3 percent of respondents reported that they were “very satisfied.”

This result supports the findings of more recent shorter-term surveys in China, and reinforces long-held patterns of citizens reporting local grievances to Beijing in hopes of central government action. “I think citizens often hear that the central government has introduced a raft of new policies, then get frustrated when they don’t always see the results of such policy proclamations, but they think it must be because of malfeasance or foot-dragging by the local government,” said Saich.

Saich contends that the lack of trust in local governments in China is due to the fact that they provide the vast majority of services to the Chinese people.

That was a very interesting read, thank you for linking it but I don’t think it says what you think it says.

Idk I feel like it could have ended a little earlier than that.

The fact that the transition takes a very long time isn’t proof that it isn’t transitioning.

Okay, what proof is there China has been making progress on the transition?

What even is this assumption that transitional periods must last less than a decade? Seriously, where the heck does that come from?

That’s approximately the time Xi has been president. Since 2012. I’m not going to place blame on him for regimes before him.

When Lenin attempted to implement this transition he eventually fell ill and was unable to prevent Stalin’s authoritarian takeover.

It seems as though there needs to be some time limit on having full state power consolidated in one place because every regime change risks the goals being changed.

If a leader gets in who realizes that having a board seat on powerful companies can benefit them personally, and they decide not to transition, what can be done at that point?

To answer your question, this transitional state is necessary as long as capitalism remains the overwhelmingly dominant mode of production on the planet because in a mainly capitalist world, transfer of technology and resources mostly happen between businesses doing business.

China was the second-largest supplier of the US in 2024, with goods valued at $462.62 billion.

Capitalism will remain the dominant mode of production as long as China continues to play a key role in funding of the American economy and continuing to loan them increasingly more money.

Private property and markets can’t just be abolished immediately after a revolution, it’s not magic. Young socialist systems have to go through a transitional phase during which private property and markets are still allowed under strict oversight of the state.

That makes sense

His does not make them capitalist as the proletariat still has control over this private sector via the socialist state, such as in China where all of the essential industry that is necessary for every other, known as the commanding heights, are fully state owned

Okay… but when will this “transitionary period” finish.

If a “transitionary period” takes more than a decade at what point do we say “they aren’t transitioning” and call it what it is, state owned capitalism.

You can get better at IQ tests by doing more of them and learning the patterns, right?

Yes. That is considered to “invalidate” an IQ test, but it’s not usually an issue since the tests are typically administered to children.

IQ tests are basically only used in the context of individualized education plans for young school children (or for MENSA membership).

So it’s basically measuring how au fair you are with logic puzzles rather than anything particularly intrinsic.

The fundamental issue of testing is that no test can objectively determine intrinsic properties.

But no, a full IQ test done by a psychologist tests a lot more than “puzzles”, including things like memory tests and even fine motor skills or hand eye coordination.

When I was tested they found I scored really high in the pattern recognition stuff and memory tests, but my writing was slow and sloppy and below average.

As part of my individualized education plan I was allowed extra time on tests as well as study aids such as text to speech tools because of this.

The ultimate purpose of the IQ tests is to get a general idea of the strengths and weaknesses in certain area.

Excellent memory, and quick intuitive problem solving, like in my case, can compensate and mask ADHD symptoms like trouble focusing. These tests helped reveal that at an early age.

I think a lot of people think of IQ tests like they’re “how objectively smart are you” when really they’re used to find out which areas you need help in with your education/life so we can provide kids with that support.

I don’t think you’d want to go into the future after the point time travel was invented because then other time travellers will have been messing with the timeline back and forth a million ways.

That’s fine, they can only have one instance of a friend at a time anyway.

There are 4 gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Mark was the earliest so it should be given fhe greatest historical significance over latter written Gospels

And while he was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he was reclining at table, a woman came with an alabaster flask of ointment of pure nard, very costly, and she broke the flask and poured it over his head. There were some who said to themselves indignantly, “Why was the ointment wasted like that?  For this ointment could have been sold for more than three hundred denarii and given to the poor.” And they scolded her. But Jesus said, “Leave her alone. Why do you trouble her? She has done a beautiful thing to me. For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you want, you can do good for them. But you will not always have me. She has done what she could; she has anointed my body beforehand for burial. And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her.”

Then Judas Iscariot, who was one of the twelve, went to the chief priests in order to betray him to them.  And when they heard it, they were glad and promised to give him money. And he sought an opportunity to betray him.

-Mark 14: 3-11

Mark seems to illustrate a clear cause and affect from the disagreements over the wasting of the oil/the anointing for a burual.

Aa common view at the time (for example among the zealots) was that the messiah would be a mitary figure who would overthrow Rome.

Hearing the oil was anointing for burial must have been difficult to hear.

Luke and John use Mark and what is believed to be an unknown Q source which has since been lost.

John is known as a gospel with very high Christology, and presents it as the work of Satan as OP already mentioned so I won’t source that.

Let’s compare the deaths of Judas in Mark and later Acts (same author as Luke) to get a sense of what they thought in between the earliest Mark and the later higher Christology John.

When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders. “I have sinned,” he said, “for I have betrayed innocent blood.”

“What is that to us?” they replied. “That’s your responsibility.”

So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.

The chief priests picked up the coins and said, “It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money.” So they decided to use the money to buy the potter’s field as a burial place for foreigners.  That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day. Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: “They took the thirty pieces of silver, the price set on him by the people of Israel, and they used them to buy the potter’s field, as the Lord commanded me.”

-Mark 27:3-10

Judas feels regret and hangs himself. Notice the part about the prophecy though, there’s clearly a preexisting reason they want this story to tell what it tells.

Versus the latter Acts

With the payment he received for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.

Acts 1:18

You can see here the prophecy of “field of blood” is now being interpreted way more literally than earlier Mark and they’re now in full improv mode yes anding each other into the idea that it was all predestined.

Each gospel implies something different about the story of Judas and each is interesting in its own right.