[throwaway1997]

I guess you are lucky that you don't live here then. At the moment, just seeing the Telegram icon on the home screen will result in police scrutinising you more. Having something called "Riot" on your phone when people are currently being accused of Rioting for just being in the wrong place at the wrong time is just a liability. This is especially true with the new National Security Law which is being past imminently now.

[tweetle_beetle]

I completely understand your point. I just can't imagine a scenario where some state authority takes the time to look at your phone and then:

- gives you a bad time if they see the word Riot.im on your phone

- or, lets you go about your business if they don't, or sees [generic chat app name]

If someone is intent on abusing their authority, then they will abuse it. There's no reason [generic chat app name] won't become the new "evidence" for tomorrow's abusers, even if it does accurately describe the app's function.

I appreciate the argument about not giving them cause to abuse their authority. But, as you say, if simply standing in the wrong place at the wrong time is enough cause, then it is completely impossible to stay safe by keeping a low profile. The system has been designed to give citizens little control and blur the lines of criminality.

edit I want to clarify that I don't want anyone to suffer, especially over something as mundane as an app name. The realist in me is happy for any measures to prevent abuse to happen. The idealist in me finds it disheartening that the motivations of abusive regimes and cynical legal systems even have to be given a moment's thought.

[fauigerzigerk]

Protests are always a battle for the hearts and minds of the general public. Accusing protesters of violence, painting them as criminals as opposed to citizens exercising their rights, is absolutely key to justifying any crackdown.

Symbolism matters. The tongue in cheeck nature of a name such as Riot can easily get lost or deliberately mischaracterised in a heated propaganda battle.

When authorities decide whether or not to ban an app, it matters what the main purpose of the app is, and it matters what the broader public belives its purpose is.

Using an app called Riot is simply unhelpful if you're constantly defending yourself against accusations of rioting.

[jacobr1]

You are presuming everyone is acting in good faith. In interpersonal communication presume good intent and best efforts. But with media, war and politics, presume bad-faith and self-interest.

[Quiark]

We're talking about a city where a woman was convicted for attacking police officer with her breast.

[Biep]

> I just can't imagine a scenario where some state authority takes the time to look at your phone and then:

> - gives you a bad time if they see the word Riot.im on your phone

> - or, lets you go about your business if they don't, or sees [generic chat app name]

In my Beijing experience, the police are not out to abuse authority, just to cover their behinds. Not reporting having seen the word "Riot" on your 'phone could get them into trouble, so they will report it - which means pulling you through the mill first.

[throwaway1997]

Yes but life isn't all or nothing. One can choose to reduce their risk and one of the ways to do this is not use an app called "Riot".

[6510]

vict.im ?

[Biep]

Patriot? And then make sure in the Chinese App stores it is given a very communist-patriotic version of that name.