Unfortunately the metric it uses is whether they were ever incarcerated for any reason. Someone hostile to those results would probably dismiss them as due to police racism.

One could try to use homicide and victim surveys as a mostly objective proxy for all violent crime (very difficult and impossible, respectively, for racist police practices to affect), compare that to the violent crime rate of each racial group, and use any disparity to estimate how racist the police and justice system are being.

But then one would risk getting a result one doesn't like.

Have you tried to confirm this hypothesis, by for example looking at studies that examine the crime rate by both socioeconomic status and race?

> It seems to be a very common theme in Western journalism to describe Asian countries as dystopias or dystopias in the making.

Whereas they would never describe their own countries this way. Just look at the praise heaped upon Britain:

The Guardian view on surveillance: Big Brother is not the only watcher now - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/13/the-gu...

Welcome to London, the city that never sleeps because it’s too busy watching you. - https://www.inverse.com/article/22198-london-surveillance-th...

'We are hurtling towards a surveillance state’: the rise of facial recognition technology - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/oct/05/facial-re...

London’s police department said on Friday that it would begin using facial recognition to spot criminal suspects with video cameras as they walk the streets, adopting a level of surveillance that is rare outside China. - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/24/business/london-police-fa...

Britain is at risk of becoming a surveillance state more intrusive than the Oceania of George Orwell’s 1984, a government watchdog has warned. - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/surveillance-state-becomi...

For several years now, the British media have been telling us that theirs is a surveillance society. "It could be the 4 million closed-circuit television cameras, or maybe the spy drones hovering overhead, but one way or another Britons know they are being watched. All the time. Everywhere," Luke Baker wrote in a representative Reuters article published in 2007, going on to note that "Britain is now the most intensely monitored country in the world, according to surveillance experts, with 4.2 million CCTV cameras installed, equivalent to one for every 14 people." - https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/08/londo...

Funny how the article is entirely lacking in plain demographics, focusing exclusively on the legacy sub-category. Lets fix that, shall we?

38% of Harvard's undergrads are white: https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/harvard-university/s...

And 10% of those are Jewish: https://www.hillel.org/college-guide/list/record/harvard-uni...

So Harvard is 28% non-Jewish white, compared to 59% of the US overall (And even that is too much, according to the Guardian. White people must be really dumb! Of course the Guardian didn't bother to include direct proof of this, such as, say, average SAT score of undergraduates by race). And 10% Jewish, compared to 2-2.4% of the US.

But the Guardian is more likely to report that until 43 years ago Harvard limited the number of Jewish students, rather than to honestly report on what the status is today:

How elite US schools give preference to wealthy and white 'legacy' applicants [..] Many institutions, including Harvard, used a discriminatory quota system to limit the number of Jewish students. - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/23/elite-school...

Key word "such". Prescribing which certificates I am obligated to trust is many many steps beyond e.g. banning DRM circumvention (which is itself a step too far IMO).

Can someone explain where this 'force' comes from? I wasn't aware the EU had such authority to decide how programs on a users private computer must behave. Would e.g. making a fork of Firefox that does not comply with this digital identity framework be illegal? Or is this just hyperbole from Mozilla, and the browser would be merely non-compliant?

Next step: Guaranteed skipping automated job application filters for CVs written using MS Word.

Immigrants needed to save west from crisis - Italy pays the price for a declining population, as the UN warns that worse is to come for developed world - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/mar/22/population.mic...

UK needs more immigrants to 'avoid Brexit catastrophe' - Ageing population, labour shortages and low productivity mean UK needs net inward migration of 200,000 a year, says thinktank - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/19/uk-needs-mor...

I imagine most people in the West would find sacrificing parenthood pointless. They have had sub-replacement fertility for about 50 years, yet their population somehow keeps growing. How can you then ask them to reduce their population even faster, and expect to be taken seriously?

"Do you think we should make things better or leave them the same?" - objective journalism from the paper of record.

Edit: Actually, I've just noticed this question shifts us from "it's not happening" to "it's happening but it doesn't matter". Is that your claim now, and you're conceding that it is happening? Or would "it's not happening but if it did it wouldn't matter" be closer to your opinion?

*'Genetic' to separate it from the culture and customs that are also passed down through ancestry.

You mean a conspiracy theory about why. Though the article does not dispute that demographic changes are taking place, or even that they are the result of deliberate changes of immigration policy, it does go to great lengths to avoid mentioning them. This is not by accident - there is a lively debate on its talk page about including (more) demographic statistics*, to which the editors are highly resistant.

For example, there is not a single graph found in the entire article similar to that at the beginning of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_France

Like refusing to mention JFK is dead on JFK assassination conspiracy articles.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Great_Replacement#Lack_of... among others

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29221776

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

People did exactly what you suggest. And the country they moved to was England, and the city, London, which now has 38% non-UK born residents:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populati...

No surprises here.

Or a personality/political profile could be built on a person from the shows they watch.

Or your social score could be reduced if you watch too many subversive shows. Oh but that's in China, and could never ever happen here, so no worries about building all the infrastructure to enable it. Except if you view terrorist content, then the UK feels justified in jailing you for 10-15 years [3]. But hey I don't think there's precedent yet for using smart TV fingerprinting for that, so why worry?

Lets give up our autonomy and privacy one tiny slice at a time. And when there is nothing left, you can point to each individual slice and explain to us how losing that one was totally insignificant and non-nefarious.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_video_fingerprinting

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/sep/16/geofence-war...

[3] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41479620.amp

Because every TV has all the ways it spies on you listed as prominently as the price? And there's a near identical model for sale next to it, without the spying-enabled discounts?

Framing this as consumer choice implies consumers were informed and given a choice, but they were neither.

How about driving without a license, or past curfew?

Any action contrary to the user's wishes is user hostile. You are welcome to give inanimate objects (and those who control them) power over you, but don't drag the rest of us into your utopia of begging our cars and appliances for permission.

Ah but I'm committing the slippery slope fallacy. I'm sure that unlike all the other surveillance state creep, this particular genie, once out of the bottle, won't spread.