😂😂😂👍👍

They are most prevalent in Asia.

lankybox hired them ig

@user-lb9zq3ee4k I can't help you if you don't understand. Your user name looks like a bot

@user-sy9fb7mg2d yes

These were made 3-5 years ago I can only imagine they got better overtime

It’s because man-hours are cheaper than technology. In the west, we’d rather have 1 person operate an advanced machine or computer. In China, they’d rather have 20 people do simple tasks.

Crazy how not many people see this

How come? If people wanna cheat let them cheat

It's crazy, that people want to pay for clicks, votes etc.

heh, not so horrible if you think about other stuff countries have historically done to control each other

​@@itzwilza7189because morality exists and there's consequences for shitty actions

You aren’t thinking ahead much, are ya?

How to set it up?

@@matt-san7 install a Californian democrat into the local elections?

Need to link up

Do you think if they’re able to write a simple script they wouldn’t do it? Android is owned by Google. A lot of services are owned by Google. Is it too far out of the imagination to say that there is no back door to android. You need a physical phone with a MAC address and a sim If it was possible to script they would. And then you can click farm a video to 7 billion views since it’s just software. It doesn’t happen so obviously it’s not possible. The simplest answer is often the correct one.

Do they use them on opinion polls too?

Don't.... bring politics into this.

So do Republicans duh

Even they use this for movie trailer views.

@@ryanraymond8299 Dude it's politicians who allow this...just saying

Why? It is convenient. They can also tell where you car port your car is parked, in case you forget it.

@@chiupolini Convenient to check your SCS Rating shèhuì xìnyòng tǐxì 一处失信、处处受限 www.whatsonweibo.com/10-state-media-cartoons-on-chinas-social-credit-implementation/ That said it is two sided I do think knowing where your car is can be beneficial :)

@@whatthepick I am not sure it is a bad thing to have implemented a citizen credit system in a country where the social resources are not as abundant as the US. Such system will help proper social behavours (something you learnt from school) which helps to save social costs caused by disruptive and dishonest behavouris. The US is "free" to do that because they can afford to squander, but not China with 1.4 million population. The only question is that the public should be allowed to participate in the setting of the standards. This is where the misunderstanding between the "developed" nations and the "developing" nations begin. The rich nations can do things which the developing nations cannot afford to do. And yet the "developed" nations would like to point fingers to those "developing" nations for not doing things the former could afford. I do not think the same system can, or should be applied to the "developed" nations. If one day China can reach the same level of development as the "developed" nations, I think the system may be dispensed with as well. But if that does happen, the competition for global resources may mean that every nation, developed or developing, will benefit by adopting the same system, like it or not. As for the "missing cars", yes, you are right. I benefited it once when I forgot where I parked my car in a huge shopping mall in Shenzhen. I just need to punch in my registration no, and they tell you where to go and find it.

@@chiupolini I'm in favor with legitimate usage of the governance system, even the West uses a lot of identity software my concern is the access to information being used in a malicious way for any purpose and a lack of accountability towards the end users the citizens with what the government will use the information towards. Another popular example of this is in insurance rate premiums between individuals who consent to be tracked and are monitored while driving and those that do not. It is a tradeoff that some are willing to take when it is made a mandatory system though it gets concerning. I agree in China trust can be difficult I read about an individual who used a premium airlines delay policy to go to a buffet offered to its premium customers 300 days in a row and never flew a flight very cunning but also very unfair to those who could not get a seat because the person essentially scammed the airline by taking advantage of free rebooking fees. China does have issues with trust and lending to others and social credit is a way to get everyone on board to agree to trust the scoring system. Even if they do not trust a stranger and fix the bad apple problem. The lack of transparency on how an individual's actions are scored and ways to improve the score are where I think work needs to be done as you said if your tested and not able to fix your results I find that non-ideal, while miscreant behavior and criticism can be severely punished I think some debate should be encouraged. My concern is when a criminal record mixes with a credit system, it makes it difficult to avoid recidivism as those with low credit will remain in poor condition and more likely to reoffend due to the difficulty involved in improving their situation without a mechanism in place to help them to improve and show themselves worthy of society. There are also examples of inappropriate treatment in a timely manner such as when Li Wenliang declared Coronavirus a problem to fellow doctors in China to be silenced as false comments and investigated by the police. Misuse of a citizen's credit with a small incident by a doctor sending a message to be careful dealing with a new virus can lead to a serious consequence by the party as it can delay a proper response to a real outbreak and result in unfair punishment to the family. Li Wenliang did not deserve that punishment of dying to the virus for trying to save others he tried to warn about. At the end of the day, it is a matter of trust. My concern is that we should not lose our humanity under the numbers of citizens credit.

@@whatthepick Let me say this, I agree with most of your comments. However I think some of the concerns you expressed was based on false information being fed on your side. The information I got was that Dr. Li Wenliang was a member of the Communist party, and as such, he is himself subject to party discipline on a voluntary basis. He did circulate a virus which he suspected as SARS on 29th Dec. 2019 among his social circle of doctors. Note that he was an optician, not virologist. Unknown to him, the day before, i.e. 28th Dec. 2019, another Doctor Leung had actually reported the discovery of a new virus to the CDC of Wuhan City. The matter was being investigated and on 30th Dec. 2019 Wu Han CDC had published 3 times the discovery of a "strange virus" on public notices. On around 3rd Jan the matter was reported to WTO. And on 8th January the genome of COVID-19 was worked out by the Chinese doctors and published to the global medical data base and based on this the relevant vaccines are now being developed the world over. The point about "suppression of the news about virus" is therefore utterly untrue. It simply not got reported in the Western media, but well-documented in China. Further, just look at the initial reaction of the European countries and the US. All governments are weary of making a mistake about making a mistaken report if a "killer virus" with its impact on social order and the economies. So the Wu Han City Government took extreme care to verify the yet-unknown-virus. Can you blame them? Admitted there were disputes among the medical circles in Wuhan city in early January whether the virus could be passed to man to man (which has a special medical definition different from ours). FYI, a Hong Kong doctor who was at Wuhan at the time also concluded that virus was not transmissible among human and this was reported in Hong Kong media. When clearer evidence of human transmission began to emerge, the Wu Han City government quite unwisely went on to host a ten thousand men party to celebrate the Chinese New Year. Finally in about 20th Jan 2020 the Central Government sent a team to Wuhan and the most authoritative virologist of China, Dr. Chung (who recently received the highest medal of honour, the POC badge), finally settled the dispute among the Wuhan medical circle and confirmed that the virus was transmissible from man to man (according to medical definition). Then, the Central Government of China did 2 things immediately. First, locked down the whole of Wu Han City. Secondly, sacked the mayor of Wu Han and the governor of Wu Bei province (where Wuhan was situated) for failing to take firm action promptly. Do you see that kind of political responsibility in any of the Western countries? Don lad Trump is still praising himself for concealing the virus. In any event the Central Government also issued a reprimand against the police officer who summonsed Dr. Li Wenliang an others to ask them to sign an undertaking not to air the news. And there was never any punishment - not even a fine. Unfortunate Dr. Li later died of contracting the COVID-19 in his place of work (he was not treating the patients as he was not qualified). And the Central Government awarded him the honor of People's Hero along with all those other medical personnel (of which there are several) who died of COVID-19 at Wuhan at the time. His family would be well taken care of by the government because of that. May be it is the difference in understanding between you and I over what the Chinese government did, and did not do, that affect our judgments of the credit monitoring system in China. Relatively speaking, I have more trust in the Central Government of China than people like you in the West because the information of facts we received are different.

It's from tik tok

​