Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> How do you even measure that?

How about on a per capita basis?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/06/tony-porter-su...

Or how about

1. In terms of quality and sophistication tech. US and Britain pioneered most of the surveillance tech.

2. Experience and age? We have decades head start on the chinese when it comes to tech surveillance.

3. We are more "connected" and a more urban society with surveillable data? Nearly 50% of china still lives in rural areas.



So "leading surveillance systems in the world" means:

1. Who "started it" 2. How long they've been doing it 3. Percentage of people affected by it (not number!)

In other words, you worked backwards to produce vague descriptions of metrics by which your point would be true. If it weren't for the fact that these vague metrics in no way support your assertion.


>1. Who "started it"

Not just who started. The quality and sophistication.

> 2. How long they've been doing it 3. Percentage of people affected by it (not number!)

Yes. What else would it be? What other metric would you use?


"Leading" implies, to me, sophistication, how widespread it is, and how many people it impacts.


I don’t have a dog in this fight other than to note “nearly 50% of China” is a massive number.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: