Inkstone editor and OP here. This IS China's social credit system. Lists of discredited people, often published by Chinese courts, are the primary mechanism by which punishment is meted out.
They are only the same in the broad sense of a social credit system, but the two credits are not the same.
The social credit score system is an actual scoring system based on your overall social activities, including both financial and non-financial (e.g. the rightfully dreaded political/religious activity). No nobody knows exactly how it works and no one I know in China actually knows their score or anything even qualitative about their score.
The discredited list is just a yes or no list based on court judgement for your financial debt, nothing more and nothing less. It is a public list and there is a clear way to end up on it.
There is no nationwide social credit score system, and there's certainly no large-scale effort to score people based on their political and religious activity as part of China's social credit system. For more informed and nuanced understanding of what China's "social credit" is, I invite you to read Inkstone's earlier story: https://www.inkstonenews.com/society/chinas-social-credit-sy...
Also I have stumbled on this talk video from a conference is seems some time ago: https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9904-the_social_credit_system and speaker also says that there is no one system but rather a large amount of smaller local systems with different sets of rules being trialed in different areas. So it seems more like trial and error and the best picks live on.
what mentioned in your article has nothing to do with the social credit system. as already mentioned in your own article, it is all about the "laolai" list maintained by courts. This system has been there for over a decade or longer, way earlier the title-bait so called "social credit system".
To give you a few examples - [1][2] are news articles discussing the exact same "laolai" list almost 10 years ago.
Debt-related blacklists have been around before China's cabinet announced its intention to set up a nation-wide social credit system by 2020, but they ARE part of the social credit system. They're not exclusionary.
Just a remark from someone who doesn't have a dog in this fight: I found your dogmatic refutations above using all caps IS & ARE not particularly confidence inspiring nor terribly professional.
Would not have made this remark about an ordinary commenter but I would expect better from an editor.
Thanks for the feedback. I had intended the styling for emphasis, but I can imagine how it might not communicate well with some people.
My refutations are based on clearly worded, non-ambiguous official documents characterizing court ordered blacklists as part of China's social credit system.
Here's the Chinese Supreme People's Court's website. http://shixin.court.gov.cn/index.html The statement front and center explains that the blacklists are promulgated "to promote the building of a social credit system."
15 out of the most recent 30 submissions from your account are China related news, 94% of them are negative. Citing such publicly available stats that can be easily verified by the public is now considered as personal attack? Keep arguing whether 94% or 100% of your submissions are negative doesn't really change anything.
Maybe inkstonenews.com only publish negative China related news articles or you intentionally only submit those negative ones from inkstonenews.com to NH? What is the story here?
No, I didn’t refer to your citing of my previous submissions as a personal attack. I referred to a different part of your comment, since deleted. Anyway, this exchange doesn’t add any value to the discussion. Have a nice and peaceful day.
60% of your submissions are news about China, 94% of them are negative ones. You then mention the word "peaceful", dear god, that is something you need to seek very hard.
I am asking something very simple here - how submitting all negative news adding value to the NH? Are you suggesting that only negative news related to China are considered as newsworthy by you and your site? Or maybe all news come out of China are negative?
The Chinese government advertises that system as one based on all kinds of activity. Political/religious are just examples since those are usually the focal points in matters like these.
The system is claimed to be backed by big data, and sure you can say there is no numerical score but come on.
Again, there is no one "system". The system discussed here, 失信人名单, has nothing to do with social networks, it's operated by the courts.
The video discussed below goes into this in detail, discussing what does exist, what experiments there are, and where the researcher thinks China is heading.
Thanks for this. Alarmist reports of a Black Mirror style social credit system in China have really distorted many people's understanding of the reality of the system, which, to begin with, isn't just one thing.
