If you are a foreigner working for a domestic startup, you simply aren’t allowed to have equity. If the company is already listed or is a foreign company, then no problem, otherwise it simply isn’t allowed.
Any promise of an option through a proxy subsidiary, variable interest entity for a non listed company is not legal under the republic's law.
On other hand, a right-away stock transfer is fully legit.
If they sell a part of the stock to a listing aggregation vessel, you can have a part of this vessel's share.
Though, I keep myself a kilometer away from any financial scheme in China, and advise you do the same.
The idea that "any financial scheme" in China is worse than a "financial scheme" anywhere else doesn't make sense.
Do you want to be "entangled into opaque financial schemes" in the US as a native?
If something "goes wrong", do you want to rely on the legal system?
You should avoid bad investments everywhere.
In China, there is nothing but "bad investments", the stock market is insider trader heavy, the real estate market is bonkers, the shadow banking market...which your bank, even if it is ICBC, will actively try to sell you on, is really dodgy. Then there are crowd sourced micro finance platforms that are basically Ponzi schemes...heck, bitcoin looks like a great safe transparent investment in comparison.
Also, a western buddy of mine co-runs a VC fund. Many of the China based start-ups have western equity holders. Something is missing here.
This can't be true since you can have equity in a company. Start-up or not. An IPO may be a different thing because a regular foreigner can't hold A-Shares. If (big if) he holds a Chinese green card then even this is allowed.
I thought the whole point of the equity restriction is that you can’t hold A shares. What other kind of equity class is there besides outright ownership? And thats not even getting into the Huawei mess.
There you need to maintain good relations with the party, in the western world it is government officials (preferably those who are not voted into office and thus stick around).
Entering such a new, different playing field should tickle every entrepreneur's nerves.
Edit: How we fail, esp. in the fb- and now Google debate, that most of the tech we develop is dual-use and can be turned against us in an instant, escapes me.
'Doing research in China is the dream'
'I'll move back to China after I graduate; there's more opportinuty for startups there.'
if you want to have freedom of speech there somehow, you're out immediately, the great firewall is there for a reason.
Every day China is becoming even more of a nightmare dystopia, so of course YC will dive in headfirst.
If anyone has experience to share I’d be interested. I’m guessing this kind of ventures might be easy sales to universities like Tsing Hua.
I wonder why China was chosen over India.
Shenzhen is a new city and tech stuff are there because of the influence of Guangzhou as production hub and HK as facilitator for access to the west.
Beijing is more, let me say it, artistic. Is much more vibrant, culturally, than any other city in China. This kind of mix that you can find in New Work, Berlin or London also it brings innovation. So I don't think is meant to make the government "happy". Many Chinese tech company started in Beijing form many reasons: education, capital access, culture and so on. To give you an example: Mobike was founder by an ex journalist
Take traffic for example, it is much saner in SH and SZ because the police can actually enforce the rules, whereas in BJ you get a asense they have given up because they feel like everyone is an official or is connected to one. It is a weird city even by Chinese standards.
Yet I think my message didn't pass through since I got downvoted
Do you have a source on that?
SZ didn't seem to have any foreigners when I was there. The expat community of BJ is pretty crazy for having spent a year there.
Japan has twice as many foreigners as China does, with many of them concentrated in the Tokyo region.
Weird question but did you know TUN bar? Last time I was in BJ it was closed and I was really sad about it :(
Sure, I'll invest right away!
There are millions of potential Chinese entrepreneurs, idealistic and talented, who deserve to have their efforts catalyzed. That's the way forward. If you want a new generation of leaders and a more egalitarian culture, you are not alone, and I'm super happy to see YC decide to help build it.
And of course, that's all if you're actually "successful", unlikely given the CCP will prefer something more malleable than even the likes of Zuckerberg are willing to be. I foresee a rapid demise to this project, indeed, I pray for it, as the alternative, you guys actually succeeding, would be painful to watch given what it will involve.
And even if you are successful, you have to consider the ethics of what you're enabling - suppose you create a wildly successful and helpful service for Chinese people that involves users' geographic data, private messages between individuals, or financial transactions. You won't get a say in turning over that data to authorities for any and every reason that they have for wanting it. Are you willing to actively participate in corruption and the quashing of political dissent for money?
Keep in mind, YC took money from Yuri Milner in 2011 even though people knew at the time that there were connections to Russian oligarchs  and funded startups that promulgated junkware installers  among other things. On the "doing the right thing" vs "making more money" spectrum, YC is firmly on the side of "making more money", ethics be damned.
 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3143894 the PG comment and the first few responses contextualize this well.
 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5092711 a discussion about InstallMonetizer
I'd go even one step further, it is more like partnering with Germany, except in this version of the story Germany might be successful in its quest to take over the world, because make no mistake, China is coming for your market, it's only a matter of time.
It is encouraging that more and more people are finally starting to put the pieces of this puzzle together, shame it is far too little and far too late.
It's interesting though how people develop such warped perceptions of the world. It's exactly how the greatest disaster of the 21st century, the absolutely unprovoked and absolutely senseless American invasion of Iraq which killed a million people and directly led to the rise of Isis and even more extreme suffering, come to pass. And so what you have here is a bunch of silly people, few of which have likely even been to China let alone done any serious investigation of Chinese culture or politics, utterly trapped in a paranoid fantasy in which -- believe it or not -- China is the aggressor coming for their markets. Nevermind the US's military bases all over the world or the TPP, an initiative started by the US with the explicit goal of denying and containing Chinese expansion.
This sort of delusion is just breath taking. I guess all one can do is hope it doesn't lead to war but I strongly suspect it is. Americans will never face reality as this thread shows. They will gladly and firmly embrace the delusion and blame all their problems on somebody else even if it leads to absolute catastrophe. Absolutely nothing has changed since the Iraq War.
How so? Mao killed 70 million compared to Hitler's 20. And Germany doesn't hold their former leader in high regard anymore.
How many people were killed in the cultural revolution?
The real issue here isn't Chinese policy. Frankly, I doubt you're actually interested in Chinese policy or even the welfare of the Chinese people. The real issue here is the power of ignorance and fear. Reactions like above are a monument to it.
Typically someone will very quickly chime in and say these are "propaganda" and you should completely ignore them. If you ask these people if the facts stated in the video are true or false, they will not answer the question. Watch with a skeptical mind, compare to facts you read in other sources, and judge for yourself. A big difference between these YouTubers (well, China Uncensored is biased to be fair) and what you'll read in the mainstream media is, these people live there, they are reporting the truth far more accurately than you'll get from other sources (on the topics they cover - they don't really get into macroeconomics for example.)
I'm sure you'll forgive my skepticism.
It's amazing how you can deduce what I believe without me having said it. How long have you been able to read minds?
It is this hyper-anti-racism aspect of modern western culture that is enabling China to walk in and take over the world, and get the people from whom they're taking market share help them out in their endeavor.
This is the thing I don't understand. Ten years ago, you could make a case that simply by making stuff people want, the world would become more connected, all sorts of goodness will happen.
You can no longer make that case. People are not idiots. They see both the good and bad that tech has brought.
Technology companies are ethically responsible for what their tools end up doing. And if they can't be bothered to develop their own ethics, the rest of us are going to have to develop some for them.
I must be missing something. YC is a really smart bunch of guys. Certainly they know what the hell they're getting into.
Existentialist Comics https://twitter.com/existentialcoms/status/98887750761196748...
It's probably more accurate to say that silicon valley runs libertarian, especially those in the startup game, and especially YC and folks.
It seems so very much. From my impression, SV people in China are not to run a new business, rather than to secure connections. See, they did not pair with a university with a genuine tech cred, nor they hold this school anywhere close to a tech hub, but in Beijing, and a university that is second after the central committee party school. The list of invited people I've heard also suggest that.
I agree that parts of tsinghua are pretty chummy with the party, but trying to claim it has no tech cred seems a bit of a stretch. It's arguably in like the top 10 eng/comp sci unis in the entire world. Both QS and ARWU put it in top 10. (THE puts it in top 20)
No denial from me that that they do pump out high profile publications in amount enough to bruteforce themselves into ratings.
Think of them as a Moscow State Uni back in USSR times.
The few universities Chinese tech scene gives cred, are virtually unknown in the West, you will not find them on any rating list, but that does not preclude their students be "booked" years in advance by the industry.
I'm trying to remember others. I do remember that some well regarded ones are not even universities per se, but vocational colleges with 2 year diplomas.
I'll add Harbin Engineering Uni and Shenyang Uni for actual engineering studies. Heavy industry, aerospace, do shop here. Both have near nil prominence on research, but it is their undergraduate papers people are for.
It may be surprising that North-East of China other than Beijing gets engineering cred, but this is where the original Chinese industrial and arms manufacturing complex were. If you look up on the list of Chinese arms manufacturers, and in each city having a big plant, you have an accompanying "feeder" university.
Nanyang Tech has cred in mainland, but it seems that it only has a very small grad school detachment there.
South China University of Technology - simply because it is big, and is in the heart of the industrial agglomeration.
A general mid-tier option are central universities of peripheral provinces. Not they are prominent in a research domain, but companies shopping grads there look for people who genuinely got admission with good exam marks, but did not have money to go to top tier universities (read, they are cheap brain).
Fudan Uni Zhangjiang campus - probably the only uni in China that feeds domestic semiconductor industry with high-to-mid-tier cadres, well it was opened with this as its main mandate.
One last thing to note - China was and is scooping Eastern European and Indian grads by tonnes, being a foreigner from a Chinese uni does not give you much of a hand on a job market just for that alone.
So says Wu-Tang Clan and apparently YC.
The basic premise is money rules everything so if I want power/influence/success I have to either play the game or accept defeat.
“Method Man is not glorifying money and excess; rather, he’s saying that money holds power, and is a factor of major decisions made in the world he lives in. Those who have it, have power and those who don’t, won’t get up anywhere; sort of a way of saying “Money is the root of all evil”, if you will.”
I don’t think westerners in general realize how advanced China is becoming. Being from Europe, visiting China is like stepping into a sci-fI novel. Not a happy one, mind you, but it’s becoming impossible to ignore.
I don't have a lot of examples of successful western companies operating in China, they all seems to be blocked of at some point because of ""regulations"".
Don't forget the malware-ridden Chinese Skype client, LinkedIn's willingness to censor global content on China's behalf, or Yahoo's capitulation of dissident information that lead to executions.
HN will likely start suppressing any factual discussion on Taiwan or the nine dash line as "flamewar bait" while allowing increasingly nationalistic Chinese propaganda to pass unchecked. It won't be today or tomorrow but money and influence wear down almost any organization eventually.
This is a sad day, and it only marks the beginning what is to come.
I had begun writing up a tin-foil hat theory on why YC would open this Startup School there, until I realized Airbnb, one of YC's flagship investments is already there.
I guess hackers are no different from anyone else. Dangle money in front of people and they do tend to toss their morals out the window more often than not. I am not claiming that I am superior either. If someone offered me a shitload of money to do something I considered unethical, I can't say with 100% certainty that I'd never take it... to claim so would be the fallacy of self-exclusion. "I might be a coward I've just never been tested." - The Mighty Mighty Bosstones / The Impression That I Get
I've also anecdotally observed that people with high IQs are often autocrats. They're prone to imagining that there are straightforward solutions to all the worlds problems and that all these problems could be solved if only things were run by smart people like them. They haven't yet been humbled by attempting to solve a really brutal multi-objective optimization problem or tame a complex system full of paradoxical effects and feedback loops. Attempting to govern a complex society is both of these things.
But on the ground these laws are renewed without protest, whistle blowers are hounded and demonized with little to no push back and dissenters like Snowden and Assange continue to be stranded for years on end.
If no one seems to care enough about these issues in our own countries or our own dissenters how can concern for others countries be authentic. Don't use fabricated concerns to demonize others.
1. Walk down Pennsylvania Avenue with a sign that says "Trump is a pussy grabber who should be impeached".
2. Go to Tiananmen Square and hold up a poster-sized picture from the 1989 massacre.
See how equivalent the governments are then.
(As an aside... if I was employed by the Chinese government to spread propaganda in other countries, your comment is roughly what I'd write).
As much as I give Snowden credit for exposing what can be dangerous autocratic programs, I also must point out that Snowden was not just some random protester. Snowden violated a government secrecy oath that he signed, which is a crime and this fact is printed rather boldly on the contract. Nobody forces you to sign these oaths. You can always say "I'm sorry, I can't sign this, I quit" and walk out and get another job.
That's part of what "the rule of law" actually means. In a nation with the rule of law, the law applies objectively to everyone: crooks, politicians, and yes even do-gooders. If the law is wrong you can vote for representatives to change it, but until then what's written is the law. If the law says it's illegal to hop on a pogo stick, then anyone hopping on a pogo stick gets arrested even if they're on their way to feed starving orphans.
(Secret courts are another matter, and I think those are un-American and should be shut down. But they are used far less in America than in China, and when they are used and the fact becomes known there's generally quite an uproar.)
Also-- personally I find the NSA and CIA less alarming than Facebook and Google. Three-letter agencies operate with at least some democratic oversight and the intel they gather does tend to be used primarily for legitimate intelligence and national security purposes. Unfortunately we do not live on planet fluffy bunny hugs and we need an intelligence service and a military. Facebook and Google operate with zero oversight whatsoever and sell their surveillance services to the highest bidder. Private surveillance operations are completely lawless.
> Snowden violated a government secrecy oath that he signed, which is a crime and this fact is printed rather boldly on the contract.
He broke the contract, but you can make a case that the contract was in violation of constitution.
I agree that what Snowden did was generally positive and important, but I also agree that he broke the law as written. If I were Snowden's lawyer I would argue exactly what you've argued-- that he acted to expose programs contrary to the US constitution and that therefore his security contract was not valid since a contract to engage in illegal activity is not enforceable. It's likely that the case would make it to the Supreme Court.
No nation is perfect and no system is perfect. I was responding to claims of moral equivalency between the USA and China. In the USA Snowden-like cases are rare. In China you have private citizens who have not signed secrecy oaths being arrested all the time for mere political activism.
explain these to those killed in Vietnam or Iraq. Immoral? You mean paying your tax to fund those wars started purely based on a lie, e.g. WMD in Iraq? That is pretty immoral to me. oh, btw, last time when I checked, your tax is still being used to keep the Guantanamo Bay open, immoral or not?
Second, the whole "WMD is a lie" is largely a matter of semantics. Under federal law, any bomb is a WMD; any grenade is a WMD; any rocket with > 4oz propellant is a WMD; any missile with an explosive charge > 0.25oz is a WMD; any mine is a WMD; any large caliber firearm with a bore > 0.5" in diameter (except shotguns) is a WMD. Of course, chemical, pathogenic, and radioactive weapons are also considered WMDs. 18 U.S.C. §§ 2332a, 921(a)(4).
What evidence do you have that the Iraqi army under Saddam didn't possess grenades?
Certainly, a grenade isn't what most people thought President G. W. Bush meant. I won't dispute that there's a lot of spin involved.
But there's a big difference between spin and a lie.
You started by saying some entities are left unpunished. Then come to this conclusion.
Speaking of misbehavior Iraq, Libya and Syria have been destroyed, hundreds of thousands killed and the countries set back decades if not centuries on completely made up premises. This is not just misbehavior, these are crimes against humanity that are happening right now. Yet some seem more concerned about Tienanmen square.
GP is literally comparing EXACT same thing. Protest against the president at a popular location in each country. I fail to see how this is an unfair comparison.
>Go to Tiananmen Square and hold up a poster-sized picture from the 1989 massacre.
Though if you want to update my two examples to use a protest poster for/against her, I don't think the point changes.
Unless you mean that she faced legal consequences for her actions?
America's respect for individual liberty and the rule of law has eroded over the years, but it is still considerably stronger than what's found in China. You see some of the same corruption and autocratic tendencies on both sides of the Pacific but there is a substantial difference in degree and pervasiveness. We are not the best in the world (several EU countries are better) but claiming the USA is equivalent to the PRC just lowers the bar.
In China many of the kinds of open anti-state discussions that happen regularly here would get people arrested, not to mention criticism of leadership. Try talking openly about Xi Jinpeng the way lots of Americans talk about Donald Trump (or talked about Barack Obama). I was driving around Irvine, CA the other day and saw an anti-anti-immigration protest with signs comparing Trump to a chimpanzee and Hitler. Do that in China in an affluent section of Beijing. Dare you.
Edit: you can also buy Donald Trump Piñatas in Santa Ana, a heavily Hispanic area of LA/OC metro. Try selling a Xi Jinpeng piñata in Beijing.
individual liberty such as those mass shootings protected by the constitution?
if you do believe there is real democracy in your country, maybe you can talk to your democratically elected local representatives and make some _real changes_ in that aspect first? talk is cheap, show me your democracy.
China has 1.3 billion people to take care of. This is not a joke. Let them manage and make the transition their way without sanctimonious judgement from others.
The USA is effectively two party state with both parties propping up oligarchies and special interests with a media who have long ceased to function as a free and independent press and have reduced themselves to mouthpieces for entrenched interests.
The ability to stand on a street and criticize your leader is not the only sign of democracy, the ability to effect change and have a government responsive to peoples needs is. Studies have shown and people can see how the US political establishment are far more responsive to special interests and the rich than the general public. So what is democracy?
Perhaps things are not simplistic or black and white, and continuing to affect a moral high ground inspite of alarming deterioration betrays not only a lack of fundamental concern for any articulated values but also its abuse as a mere political tool to beat others with without any context of global history and world affairs.
There are quite a few in Hong Kong as well. https://medium.com/whub/hong-kong-accelerator-and-incubator-...
Even in the old lang sine, when China was (more) open to the West it was still hard. Think about getting serious stuff stolen, threatened by people with sticks etc. Then you sue someone and the judge simply decides in favor of the Chinese party, no matter what they did.
The only option I can see is if you have privately loads of money and then marry a strong business family in China. Then through your Chinese wife you can achieve something.
> Can't say much against it.
You could say it's a poor prediction and explain why. For example, it isn't exactly an inevitability, even though it seems fairly plausible.
Edit: Besides, regardless of connections, I think, the deal where YC provides easy U.S. market entry for Chinese startups for a share in the company is pretty attractive to both sides.
Also one needs to consider that culture is not just weird behavior. Through the back and forth of each appropriate reaction a Chinese person can achieve something with other Chinese people, despite him being also very frustrated with how the Chinese culture works. Because you don't know the intuitive right reaction you cannot get to that point where you can finally get some honest/valuable response. It can't be learned from a book. You need to grow up with this, because even the Chinese people don't really understand why it works.
OK, I think you assume there is no case of Chinese men and non-Chinese women marriage, or same-gender marriage.
That appears rather subtle but offensive bias.
> Even if you are a woman and married to a Chinese husband it might not be enough, because he won't listen to you in business related issues.
And yes, facts can be offensive. Doesn't make them less factual.
Offensive bias in China is rarely subtle. Job applications regularly list age, sex and height requirements.
The tightly controlled national media aired a propaganda clip about Chinese-African relations that included a Chinese woman in blackface with enormous fake buttocks and an African wearing a monkey suit... during the most watched night of television... just months ago... and then suppressed criticism of it.
Baidu Shows Off Its Instant Pocket Translator
I don't understand if this is something online or not, it mentions attending group office hours.
I hope YC will help Chinese startups become global. My biggest problem with Silicon Valley is its ideological uniformity and the increasing willingness to use their companies/products as vehicles to push their ideologies.
China would be in an excellent position to address the part of the Western market that is increasingly alienated by this push. They can build SV tech clones for the local market, and then expand to the global market by offering ideologically more neutral (from Western perspective) alternatives to SV tech.
Chinese startups will have their own flaws, but at least we will have a choice.
I hope YC will help Chinese startups become global.
This probably wasn't because China is inherently less censorious, but rather the set of controversial ideas in Beijing are different than the set of controversial ideas in San Francisco.
Thus Chinese companies can be biased in ways that are relevant to the Chinese market, but less likely to be biased in ways that are relevant to the Western market.
If SV companies are biased in a way that is relevant to the Western market, this can be an opportunity for the Chinese companies to provide a more neutral service.
Because this guy lives there > https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/Xi_Jinpi...
By the way, never fuck with anyone with money in Shanghai. There is always somebody with more money than you. Never fuck with anyone with power in Bejing....
Well, this has largely happened. And no, if you think that has happened 15 years ago, it isn't.
Outsourcing shops that do work for first tier dotcoms today are a head above anything you saw back 15 years ago with "will code for food" sweatshops.
What is happening is that these are not the "code for food" shops that are displacing Western workforce, but companies that genuinely do "real stuff" and pull high class projects better than their Western clients can even hope to do.
They get that not because they are cheaper, but because they are better than SV at large.
The reason why Western markets are not in firm grips of Asian IT giants yet, but in Facebook/Amazon/Google is not the influence of market forces. Otherwise, they would've been steamrolled long ago.
No. Because any country dominating the software industry will, almost by defintion, be “first world”.
In the days of the Cold War there was the “third world” as in “third party”, that is any country who wasn’t in either NATO or the Warsaw Pact. Later on people came to use “first world” to mean the West which would make the former Soviet countries the second world. And the third world is still... every other country.
Sure, I can get a student to throw together a React frontend here also for very little money. If I want highly specialized knowledge about camera drivers, network protocols or low level programming, the story is different.
Really? .. I thought they are supposed to do the work for us, yet allways stay below our level, because thats the way things are supposed to be.
Others have been violating the guidelines in this thread too, but at least the other subthreads haven't gone completely out to the generic political sea.
Your description of how we moderate HN isn't really accurate. When a story is nothing but partisan politics, we may kill the thread—though more often users flag it first—but those are just the easy cases. The difficult cases are when a story is both on topic for HN, like this one, but also has overlap into intensely political areas, like this one. Then our job becomes more fine-grained, trying to support thoughtful, specific discussion and dampen generic flamewars.
Yes, I imagine my comment might excite strong feelings more so than others - because such an atrocity does. For good reasons.
The discussion has clearly settled on the moral aspects of YC doing business in China. Which seems okay with you - as long as you don't call out the actual atrocities.
As is the fact that you're suppressing comments on these atrocities, which are far more extreme and less frequently discussed here than very tired US political wedge issues you disable flags on. This behaviour is a gross abuse of power.
You and your fellow VCs will make a fortune in the next few years. But blood will be on your hands, and it will harder to live with than you imagine. You already realize it on some level, albeit a deeply buried one.
I’m not a fan of China and I’m certainly weary of their government spying through their tech, but I’m not really a fan of the NSA being able to read my emails either.
Obviously America is the lesser evil, and it’s unfortunate that power is shifting to China, but maybe there will be some healthy lessons in American tech when you start to feel the abuse you’ve put your friends through. Probably not though.
This is how Americans justify destroying three countries (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan) and millions of lives.
My understanding is that you have to just check your free speech at the door. For example my immpression is that specifically you, auganov, even if this profile is under your real name, would be allowed into China without any issue. (Despite what you've just written.)
The standard I've heard said is that "you wouldn't be able to stand in Tiananman square with a 'Free Tibet' sign". To those of us in the free world, that's a ridiculously stifling standard. You can stand in Washington or Times Square with a sign reading whatever you want, 'it's a free country'. China, obviously, isn't. You can't use the standard "hey, it's a free country" because it's not.
But this does not extend to your speech outside of China. Trying to bring your free speech into China seems (to me), on a practical level, like trying to bring your heroin, cocaine, and guns in your carry-on to America. Can't do that (and there would be serious consequences.)
But that doesn't mean you can't have ever touched a gun, cocaine, or heroin in your life, it's not retroactive. To prove my case, let me say that Taiwan is an independent country, Tibet doesn't belong to China, and, hmmmm what else don't they like. Oh Xi is a dictator for wanting to be President for life.
I wouldn't ever say any of those things if I'm in China, even in English, even on an international forum, because I would have checked my free speech at the border. On a practical level state oppression is a huge private business. When you're in China you're not free, even in your mundane online speech, such as in private messages in wechat. People pay attention to watching what they say, on an everyday level.
But to return to my point, it doesn't mean you wouldn't be allowed in China if you expressed your thoughts previously in the free world.
EDIT: I forgot to mention, I've heard an exception for journalists, in the sense that their previous speech is examined more closely, but I don't know if they're refused entry or just watched more closely once there.
Be notable or persistent enough and it'll get you banned.
The Katy Perry article says there was no official reason given or confirmation but:
>But the Global Times, a state-run tabloid, chimed in, saying that if it was true "they had brought it on themselves".
It further references that Katy Perry wore a flower dress, an Anti-China symbol, while giving a concert in Taiwan, and that she "draped Taiwan's flag at the concert. It caused a backlash in China, with many accusing her of supporting Taiwanese independence."
This kind of counts as activist activity and most importantly it did not happen abroad, but in China or Taiwan.
The second article says:
>“I asked them, ‘What’s the reason?’,” Hugh said. “Their answer was pretty diplomatic, they said, ‘You should know’.”
and it says:
>Hugh is the head of the Australian Values Alliance, a loose coalition of Chinese-Australians who promote “democracy and freedom” and are critical of Beijing’s policies. Last week he was prominently involved in the Sydney book launch of Prof Clive Hamilton’s book Silent Invasion: China’s Influence in Australia, which details covert, state-sponsored or co-ordinated operations to exert Chinese Communist party influence in Australia.
You might have missed an edit I made to my reply to you within a couple of minutes of when I wrote it, in which I remembered that people engaged in public or journalistic type things are held to a different standard (more likely to be refused entry.)
So as far as I personally am concerned, I think if I did something with a lot of visibility I would have to watch what I say and do, especially if I was literally doing something that would be considered activism.
Do you think I should edit my original reply to you to remove the sentence "But that doesn't mean you can't have ever touched a gun, cocaine, or heroin in your life, it's not retroactive. To prove my case, let me say that Taiwan is an independent country, Tibet doesn't belong to China, and, hmmmm what else don't they like. Oh Xi is a dictator for wanting to be President for life."? Will this off-hand remark which has next to no audience, and made outside of China, cause me to be refused a visa in the future for no real reason?
I am talking about a practical level here. I've gotten feedback from a lot of people since obviously this is a different standard than I'm used to living in the free world.
I'd remove the part of my comment I just quoted if it'll get me banned from entering China. (I don't think it would.) What do you think?
I appreciate the response and opinion.
>Saturday, May 19, 2018 (5 月19 日，周六)
>Tsinghua University （清华大学)
Beijing, China （中国北京)
This is just... they could've just went for the central committee party school if they wanted to get high profile handshakes that much
"Since China is the fastest growing tech ecosystem in the world and a massive center of new innovations - we want to meet more founders from China!"
Likewise, isn't Hollywood the place with Harvey Weinstein? Must be purely evil.
No, China is big and intellectually diverse. Many young idealists who deserve to be catalyzed. Source: Lived there 2011-2016.