Slashdot Mirror
China Hits Internet With Secrecy Rules
MetalHead writes "Anyone running a Web site in China may be interested in this story." You should check this out even if you don't run a Chinese site; it's yet another case of a government cracking down on news media.
Actually, logic doesn't dictate that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. That's a *premise* you have, or perhaps isomorphic to a premise you have.
;-)
Logic only tells you that, if B follows from A, and A, then B. It doesn't tell you that B necessarily follows whether or not A.
Sorry, pet peeve.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth. - George Washington
This, coming from a guy with no teeth.
This is certainly an interesting point. It's hard to determine how "right" we are because we know we were raised with certain values. Personally, I (and most /. readers) lean more to the left than the average American and we try to allow for more open source/free speech/anti-Kansas opportunities than most. So, I think that even if we were born in China, we'd be the kind of people that were at Tinnamen square.
:)
And for those that aren't quite sure if we are brainwashed, do yourselves a favor and try to learn things our schools didn't want to teach us. Edison did not invent the light bulb. Fulton did not invent the steamboat. Columbus was not the first European to see the New World... etc.
This is best seen when foriegners come to the U.S. My friends often have exchange students come over and after a few days will ask: "So, where are all the KKK houses? We heard they were all over." or "I can't believe I've been in the U.S. for a week and haven't seen anyone get shot." These are actual thoughts from European students, who already live in a free world. Imagine what kind of statistics the Chinese are learning! It shouldn't be hard to see that there are probably a lot of Chinese who
1. Love Communism and
2. Are glad they don't live in the crime-ridden U.S.
...but I still think we're right
Rick
...but then it would no longer look much like the internet the we all know/love/hate/whatever today.
To use the open-source analogy, the Internet is like a free, open bazzar, but it is possible for a colusion of large international companys, the protect-our-children crowd, and big government to
build walls around the bazzar and regulate trafic and turn it into a fake, controled, "safe" 24-hour shopping mall.
It would probably destroy most of the good things about the internet, but I think that many of the above-mentioned Big Three would not mind a mindless shopping mall of "Good, Wholesome Capitalistic Americal Values"
Why would Microsoft, Jerry Falwell, or the Chinese government need free-speach??
It's true that parts of the U.S. government have acted in such a manner in the past, and probably will try to do so again. The difference is that U.S. citizens have recourse to the protections provided by the U.S. Constitution and enforced through the judicial system. Granted, this doesn't always work (just ask the Cherokee Indians, or any of the Americans who were interned on the west coast during WWII), but there is the clear understanding that U.S. citizens have certain rights and have an expectation of legal recourse when those rights are violated. In the People's Republic of China, you have no rights except what the Party determines that you have.
In short, in the U.S. we have the rule of law, which may not always be enforced evenly. In China there is rule by fiat of the Party, which guarantees uneven standing under the law. Yes, the U.S. is far from perfect, but I don't think you can compare the full history of both countries (remember, the U.S. has about four times as much) without deciding that China has a much more oppressive government.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Does it not happen here?
I never said it didn't. I just said it doesn't always, and it doesn't because the media is afraid to, but that they choose to.
Well, from my perspective most reporting is extremely biased in favour of the status quo.
You won't get any disagreement from me on that point, however, the part of it that matters is the word "most". That is significantly different than all. You may have to work to find it, but there are media outlets in the US that offer distinctly nonconforming viewpoints. In a country like China, publishers of such content are brutally suppressed. Occasionally rogue government groups will harrass people like that here in the US, but it isn't an official policy, and generally when they get caught, something is done about it. Not usually as much as should be, but usually something at least.
Take the Seattle coverage, how much of the media focussed on the insignificant and unrepresentative trouble caused by a surprisingly small minority of the crowds?
I would agree that a lot of the press did a poor job of covering that story, but the difference was they did it because they wanted to cover it that way, not because the government made them. Unfortunately, a lot of their behavior in that case was due to their desire for sensationalism.
How much did it focus on the brutality of using tear-gas?
Enough that you know about it. In a truly oppressive society, anyone reporting that kind of detail would probably be jailed.
I really have to disagree with such a rosy assessment.
Don't mistake my statement as 'rosy'. I am no big defender of the US government when they are going over the edge, but I just don't see a lot of evidence that the US government is doing a lot to try to stifle the press. Instead, I would be critical of the press for not always taking advantage of the freedom they have to try to present a balanced, unbiased view of the whole news. Their biggest sin is usually the sin of omission, and of placement (they just neglect to cover things that don't match their biases, or they cover them on a back page, etc).
Better countries? Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland.
By what criteria though? I have nothing in particular against any of those countries (I'm 1/4 Norwegian by descent), but I personally don't want to live in a country with high taxation, oppressive gun control or socialized medicine either. I can't say for sure that all of those countries suffer from those ills, but I know that at least a couple of them suffer from one or more of those problems.
Man, the Chinese Government is acting like a bunch of fucking Communists!
Only communist countries will try to silence Internet users!
:)
:)
And totalitarian states (like Singapore sometimes appears to be)
And clueless, brain dead, wanna-be totalitarian governments (like the ones we have here in Australia).
Oh, and a stack of religions/cults
Hmmmm..... Face it, anyone who has a vested interest in protecting their power situation will do almost anything to protect it. Slowly removing the ability to bitch/moan/coerce/educate freely is one of the best ways of doing it.
Hell, if I were evil overlord with slaves, harem and so on, I'd be doing all I could to protect my situation. I've read The Rules
I left my body to science, but I'm afraid they've turned it down...
So, no, logic isn't universal. People (especially in totalitarian regimes like China and Cuba) don't always have complete information, and even if they do, prejudices often get in the way. Like the US in this case.
BTW, most Australians who know anything about the issues agree that our censorship policies have been infiltrated by the religious right and Something Should Be Done(TM). Unfortunately, the only thing that can be done is vote out the present Federal Government and that won't happen for another 18 months or so :(
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
I find it interesting that they're requiring source code for products which have crypto functionality. That's actually a good thing.
You're absolutely on the right track. They can't have it both ways. The soviet union collapsed under similar pressure. The soviet union fell far behind technologically starting roughly in the 60's. The "information revolution" has been going since about this time, which includes print media, television, etc. Free flow of information is necessary to keep up in today's economy, and the USSR's paranoia controls simply prevented this from happening. I once read that an average worker had to obtain 3 signatures just to make one photocopy.
They tried to apply some capialistic features to their economy in the early 80's but it wasn't enough, you know the rest. Of course the whole situation is much more complex, for a good analysis try reading "End of Millenium" by Manuel Castells, most online booksellers have it. His style is very "academic" but I thought it was very interesting since I'm interested in the interplay between government, society, and technology.
So China has survived the first 30 years or so of the information revolution while allowing a capitalist development model (I really don't know how extensive) but they still lack a lot economically, much of their population is in poverty. They also rely on a lot of "technology transfer" (stealing from the US mostly. much of what you hear on this is US media/gov't propeganda, but it does happen.) The Soviet Union did a lot of this as well, especially in the computer industry, with a lot of reverse engineering. Unfortunatly, after a while they just fell too far behind and couldn't recreate western technology. So China might be in trouble.
However, what is the threat really? That Chinese will find out "the truth" by looking at American websites? I think a form of that already happened at tiennaman square 11 years ago. No matter how bad the situtation is for the majority of the population, if the government can indoctrinate the population well enough, they most likely won't rebel. Even our government practices this, with a few layers of plausable deniability. Infromation control is the key here, and they ARE playing with fire if they really want to use the internet for eceonomic gain. Capitalism and thus materialism is an powerful apathy producing drug (just look at it in our society) and the chinese seem to be applying it as well. The poor are probably the best hope for some type of revolution.
The chinese government's ruthless nature can prevent change as well, they have shown that they are very much willing to kill their citizens who disagree with them, on a level far beyond what the US practices.
It's unfortunate, if they developed a government similar to ours (which is corrupt as well but it's still better than communism) they could easily be the economic powerhouse of this century.
The difference here is that in the US, the press is free to put coverage of such events on the front page of the newspaper and on the 6pm news. In China, the government controls what their state run newspapers and television stations broadcast. Protests that are suppressed in China aren't reported to the people or are at least reported with the best possible spin for the governmnent.
I am not always happy with some things that happen here in the US. I don't believe that the US is perfect. However, it could be a lot worse than it is, and comparitively, I can't think of many examples of countries that are better.
> want nothing more than to tear down the
> freedom that we have online Maybe you could be a little bit more ridiculous next time, hmm?
Communist governments (which China, no matter how loudly it claims otherwise, is NOT) have no fear of releasing information to the public, because they know that the public, as good Communists, will not in turn release that information to the world. At the same time, until a worldwide revolution is in place, then Communist governments must keep their cards close to their vests, because they're well aware that not everyone is a good Communist.
You might go so far as to compare the free software movement to a burgeoning Communistic revolution. We, the people who use free software, are encouraged (possibly expected) to contribute to the spread of this mode of software distribution, whether it be by enhancing the kernel, creating new software, integrating old software, porting software from other platforms, running informational websites, evangelizing, and so on and so forth. All the tools and information we need are provided freely to us, so long as we pass these tools and data on to others, also for free, and incorporating any modifications we make. In this way, we spread the revolution across the world, and the Internet is what makes it all possible. We have no fear of our source code falling into capitalist hands (e.g. Microsoft) because we know that it already has and it is powerless to stop our advance - we come with a better way of life, and let capitalism tremble at our footsteps!
You see, we who participate in this glorious software revolution are, after a fashion, Communists. Everything we do is for the enhancement of our community - our State.
Your mistake, my anonymous friend, is in thinking that governments such as the old Soviet Union and China and the Eastern Bloc were Communist. They were not. They were, in fact, Socialist governments, which are sort of a blend of Communism and ordinary, garden-variety totalitarianism. They are a middle point, a semi-secure position to take after the revolution has begun, the communization of the country is in progress - they are a bulwark against the rest of the world while the State waits for the worldwide revolution that Marx, Engels, and Lenin stated *must* come for Communism to succeed.
Sorry 'bout the rant there, but I really dislike having people make such foolish statements about my political beliefs. Oh, that's right, I forgot to tell you - you see, I am a Communist, and proud to be one. We're not about suppression of freedom, not by any stretch of the imagination. We're about the idea that a unified state can best take care of its people if their production is guided and utilized by the state itself, and then returned to them in the form of the things they require to live and thrive. And the Internet, to us, is the best way we've yet seen to encourage the rest of the world to join us in making life better for ALL citizens of the world - not just the wealthy.
Chris Tembreull
Web Developer, NEC Systems, Inc.
My opinions are my own, and nobody else's.
Chris Tembreull
"My karma just ran over your dogma."
HUH??! Communism (theoretically speaking, i.e. Marxism) is absolutely and utterly at odds with totalitarianism. In fact, democracy was supposed to evolve into communism (through a few steps), and culminate in the dissolution of government. Government by the people, for the people. The problem with communism is that it assumes that if people are equal and happy, avarice, greed, and powerlust will die out. Never going to happen.
I really have to question your equation of communism with Marxism! Communism is nothing more nor less than the principle that there are no indvidual property rights. All goods are common property and the use of them should be determined by the community.
This is separate from Marxism which admits this principle and builds a very specific structure on it that could fairly be construed as authoritarian and totalitarian. This was one of the main differences in the 1st Working Men's International which split at the Hague Congress 1972 over issues of authority. The Libertarian Communists/Anarchists such as Bakunin were expelled. They believed in autonomous federations. Marx believed in dictatorship of the proletariat. Definitely totalitariansim.
Regards, Crush
Protests that are suppressed in China aren't reported to the people or are at least reported with the best possible spin for the governmnent.
Yes, this happens in China, yes it's bad. Does it not happen here? Well, from my perspective most reporting is extremely biased in favour of the status quo. Take the Seattle coverage, how much of the media focussed on the insignificant and unrepresentative trouble caused by a surprisingly small minority of the crowds? How much did it focus on the brutality of using tear-gas? I really have to disagree with such a rosy assessment.
Better countries? Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland.
The schools I went to never had such brainwashing. Is the state of education in the US really so bad? Don't answer this, I probably already know the answer.
Well, that depends on what class you belong to here - rich people get a pretty good education, better than some Europeans! ;)
Open Your eyes, and see what your government does wrong, this is more important to you than what happens on the other side of the planet.
Well, that hasn't actually been true for a long time and it's becoming less true by the day. Yes, we should open our eyes to the problems of our own governments, but we can't ignore other nations! We are affected by them and by trans-national corporations, we should know as much about them as we can stomach! You can unfortunately no longer develop an isolated perfect society - if you ever could: remember all the socialist debate about one-nation socialism vs. global socialism?
Crush
You want high taxes, government rationed healthcare and oppressive gun control? Yea, I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that. If nothing else, it proves that one person's valhalla might be another person's hell.
The reality is that since NAFTA, the economies of countries like Mexico and Ecuador (keep your eye on the current beginnings of a revolution in Ecuador) have been devastated, despite the fact that a large amount of our factory work has moved there.
NAFTA is not exactly the equivalent of free trade. A free trade treaty doesn't require that level of detail.
The USSR proved that the welfare of people and the environment is ignored when power is put in the hands of the government, and it's my belief that the next 20 years are going to show that the welfare of people and the environment are non-existent when placed in the hands of multinational corporations and the capitalist class.
I agree with you there. Corporations don't have values. They exist to organize groups of people to produce products and services for a profit. Any care for our neighbors and environment is going to come from people. That is not to say that corporations can't participate, and they often do. Many companies will match charitable contributions of various sorts by their employees. But in the end, the choice of what causes to support and the support for them comes from individual people.
Personally, I am a bleeding heart libertarian. I want government out of the charity business, and I give generously to charities that I think are getting it right.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
Anyone reading that post should be aware that the poster's user ID is ARCHIE BUNKER! I think the URL is a somewhat distasteful joke.
I did not see any indication that stormfront.org was a Nazi site; there is a Nazi political party, and I saw no such affiliation. I did see plenty of indications of white supremacist beliefs.
I don't agree with the idea of eliminating anonymous moderation. The reason is that there would then be "political" pressure on people to make moderations that they secretly don't agree with. Anonymous peer review is fair and works well in other fields. But it would be good if there were a lower threshold for removal of moderators.
I certainly agree with removing the bonus +1 for those with high karma. Karma of a poster should be available as a clickable link so that those with an authoritarian mind-set can look to see what everyone else is saying before making their own minds up. I don't really like the expression "Fuck the Karma Whores" though - presumably they'd expect extra karma for that.
I'm going to use my +1 in an ironic and self-mocking sense now.
Per that article, the Chinese government has two overriding needs: to keep their tight control over China and to embrace the Internet for economic gain. IMHO, these goals are mutually exclusive.
We have no real evidence that a use of the internet for economic purposes *inherently* implies it's use for political purposes. It is up to us (non-Chinese) to make/keep those purposes mutually exclusive. This means we must help people in China who have somethingh nasty to say about their government to get their message out. This means anonymous remailers, anonymous web hosting, etc. It also means putting economic preasure on China to reform.
Also, adding StegFS in the default Linux kernel distribution would help a lot too, as it gives people plausable deniability for having it installed (the system it's self gives you plausible deniability for not giving up the key). Making crypto a standard part of the kernel would really help a lot of people in these situations.
Jeff
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
Hmm, what would you call the 60% of the budget that goes in defence spending then?
60%? Where did you come up with that figure? I don't think defense spending was ever anywhere near that high even under such strong-arm cold war presidents as Truman, Kennedy, Johnson or Reagan. Note that I leave out Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford and Carter because in general they didn't boost defense spending as much as the others I listed did).
And as someone should point out, without defense spending we would never have had a space program or many of the technological advances we enjoy (particularly in the computer field) today.
While I think the US government probably spends too much money on defense these days, and it is almost unquestionable there is still tons of waste in defense spending, I think it is a bit silly to think that it never benefitted the average person.
thank you sir, may I have another? (-1)
Did I miss something?
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
... if the pages are not hosted on a Chinese site? Most of what the article referred to was news sites, but what about personal pages? Suppose Mr Chinaman hates the Republic so finds him the "inside scoop", and gets himself a Geocities page..the pages will still be viewable by Chinese users and the Peoples Government. What's a Communist Totalitarian Governmant to do?
------------
------------
"...and the Universe," continued the waiter, determined not to be deflected on his home stretch,
...remember that the USA government (and governments of many other nations) has a long history of censoring indiscriminately things it doesn't agree with. The various religious groups and corporations who control government think nothing of squashing anything they find offensive or against their interests.
________________________________
How do you say "flamebait -1" in Chinese?
How do you say "troll -1" in Chinese?
How do you say "moderators on crack" in Chinese?
Only communist countries will try to silence Internet users!
A researcher has found some Echelon documents and made some conclusions that counter those put forth by the online community. Wired story here Please do not moderate down, this has relevance.
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
Come on folks. This is the same totalitarian regime that led the slaughter of peaceful protesters in Tiananmen(sp?) Square, then refused to let their media mention that anything happened. This is one-and-a-half steps away from the regime that led the Cultural Revolution. These are ruthless dictators, and they will NOT let free speech occur until the only 'free speech' is in their favour.
/. sort of article.
This is not news.[1] This is not a change of policy. This is entirely consistent with the Chinese government's way of doing things.
Something you might want to consider then next time your government talks about 'wonderful foreign trade opportunities with China.'
[1] Which isn't to say that I don't think it should have been posted--it's definitely a
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
I'm not really surpirsed at all by this... remember, we're talking about a country that's been fairly shut-off from the world for years, and the Internet is wide-open for people to share stories, ideas, secrets, opinions, etc. which might be anti-Communism and anti-government - and last I checked, this wasn't really looked upon very well in Communist contries ;)
While government regulation/limitation/control may be protested in the U.S., it's almost the norm for many other countries such as China and Cuba. At least in the U.S. we give slanderous and hateful idiots the first amendment to try to hide behind. =P
-k
--
I couldn't agree with you more..
Case in point: the recent DeCSS fiasco...
BigCorps: "Hey, we can't physically stop the average joe from copying stuff he's bought legally... let's make a law where making copying equipment is illegal.. oh, that reminds me, Harold, how is that proposal coming, you know, that one where it would be illegal to think about copying?"
You want high taxes, government rationed healthcare and oppressive gun control?
I'll just suggested a couple of things based on my experience of having lived for years in countries other than the U.S (nothing like experience for a different perspective) and having visited many others:
You can drink as much alcohol you like, as long as you don't drive until you've sobered up.
Henceforth, all moderators will be hired from the Peoples Republic of China. All current moderator points have been revoked. All new moderators will come from this pool of Chinese agents.
Moderation catagories will now be:
Dissenting -1
Dissenting -1
Dissenting -1
Dissenting -1
Stealing American Nuclear Secrets +1
Please return to your normal browsing.
Sometimes, you can walk a fine line between two opposing needs. There is a happy medium where each need is satisfied. I believe that there is an "unhappy medium" where neither need is satisfied, and the government is actually at risk of losing the Internet opportunity as well as their own control over their people.
The Internet is not about technology. It's been around since the sixties, and the Web could have been invented in the seventies. The Web is about community; the technology only gives us an opportunity to meet, and that's where the magic starts. Strict control over a portion of the Internet immediately renders that portion useless.
I think that the only chance for the Chinese government to survive in its present form (and, frankly, I'd rather it didn't) would be for it to close off the Internet entirely to its people, and to ignore it as an economic opportunity. I feel that anything less would destablize the Chinese government. The nation would not collapse, China would still exist, but it would have a new form of government.
If the Chinese government allows access but try to control it, they will destroy their own power structure and lose an economic opportunity simultaneously.
--The basis of all love is respect
Sorry, that's 60% of the discretionary budget, which is about 35% of the total Federal Budget.
35% sounds a lot more like the numbers I'd seen quoted.
This is in the context of a piece which talks about how Ben&Jerry's co-founder Cohen wants to divert some of that money towards education - a goal support by 79% of Americans in one poll.
While I'd in general say that education is a better way to spend the money than on defense, I'd prefer to put that kind of money towards paying down the national debt.
Is it that logical reasoning that can lead to this conclusion simply does not exist, and it is all a matter of perspective? Or is it that the citizens of those countries aren't able to get to the "enlightening" information?
I am not surprised at all by China's actions. The Chinese spent millions of dollars funneling campaign donations to the US Democratic Party for the sole purpose of acquiring US military technology. If I was dishing out big bucks to Bill Clinton for this material, the last thing I would want to happen is my citizens giving away those secrets to the world on the Internet for free.
So kudoos to the Chinese Government! Smart move. Bribe US Democratic Leaders for military secrets and then crack down on your own citizens so those secrets don't leak out for free to other 3rd world countries. You got to protect your investment.
Jackbooted thugs breaking into a certain Danish home probably indicate much bigger, more threatening players in the big-stakes game of Global Domination.
IMHO, the Chinese mandating secure web sites is probably a good thing. Certainly better than the US, Japan, et al. (Mind you, Japan's attitude to, ummm, certain historical events could be construed as baiting.)
Whilst I can't condone any organisation, be it a private company or a national government, imposing censorship and 1984-style mind control, at least there's some semblance of directness about what they're doing. The film industry seems to much prefer subterfugue, lies, intimidation, threats, and tactics remeniscent of 1940's Germany.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Yes, it was in place, but it was not perfect enough. They could prosecute only those, who already had their stuff posted. All media in China had are state controlled, except for the Internet. They are learning handle that. If everybody could tell the truth about their wonderful government, it would soon damage their bright communist futures.
There is another show of Chinese tight control on internet in cn-crypto.htm, where eevrybody within China has to give the government key to they encrypiton, even foreign companies.
Maybe we could use this to close up some of those open mail relays that spammers love so much. All we need to do is start sending "State Secrets" through the relay, and alert the gov't.
;)
I think a public execution would work wonders to get a few relays secured.
Ask me how the Heisenberg Principle may or may not have saved my life.
The South China Morning Post published an arti cle about another media crackdown in China where an editor was removed for publishing stories not approved by Party officials. "One recent edition explained to Internet users how to tap into mirror Web sites abroad, which could help them skirt government blocks on Internet sites that officials did not like." This quote is from the Internet version of a paper published in Hong Kong supposedly under the same rules. My, my, my how this Internet thing does seem to get out of control! .
"Shredded cabbage and mayo go good together." Cole's Law
This is very much in line with China's information policy...and we can be sure to expect to see a crop of hactivist websites publishing news from inside transmitted over SSL/ssh/etc.
I wonder what the Hong Kong Blondes are going to do...?
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
Meaning no disrespect, you might want to go over your polysci notes again.
"Communism goes hand in hand with Totalitarism" HUH??! Communism (theoretically speaking, i.e. Marxism) is absolutely and utterly at odds with totalitarianism. In fact, democracy was supposed to evolve into communism (through a few steps), and culminate in the dissolution of government. Government by the people, for the people. The problem with communism is that it assumes that if people are equal and happy, avarice, greed, and powerlust will die out. Never going to happen.
You'll notice that I never refered to China as a Communist country in my original post...
Moving on, "They [governments] are not evil, they just have a different method for creating a great country."
...and also...
"Again, I don't agree with their methods but I do know they aren't evil."
While it's true that governments may not be inherently evil, they're also not inherently good, and not necessarily interested in creating a good country. Take the Taliban in Afghanistan, for instance; I can't imagine that they have anything other than their own power/money, and the destruction of anyone they hate in mind. They did _not_ forcibly take control to create a happy, egalitarian society.
As a final point, I'd point out that "evil" is a vague term. Wiping out all hints of cultural impurity (a la the cultural revolution) may not have been an evil goal to those doing it, but to me it is, no matter what.
And regardless of all of this, we still have to look at China's record. No matter what comes out of their mouths, the blood on their hands won't wash off easily.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
No, the Chinese government is more worried about the Internet fostering activism. When each dissenter has to stand up to the government alone, it's easy to frighten everyone into submission. But let people get organized, let the dissenters know they are not alone, and before too long you can't frighten anyone into submission. That's what the Chinese government fears, and that's what it is trying to crack down on with these measures.
-r
Sadly, that's not a fair assumption. Their definition is something closer to, "anything we don't like, or that might cast the government in a bad light." Also, espionage in the US (and many other countries) is a legal charge which resultingly has to be put through due process.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
The Chinese government is FASCIST in structure, not Communist, which does not allow for any private enterprise. But of course, saying Fascist is not politically correct.
As long as you have a type of political philosophy you essentially have the government. That does not mean that the government does in principal exist. People very much believed that communism when Stalin and the boys were in control. Yes in theory he ran a different ship but try telling that to them or others who wanted to look at things in a more formal manner.
Tell me why fasciasm is politically incorrect and communism is more so? Is this to mean that we should all believe in communism if we are to be good citizens?
The policies of China make it in the style of governments of the 20th century who tried to call themselves communist in that they are attempting to censor material that disagrees with the state. In fact in almost every government calling the people in control fools is usually a really bad idea. Just look at the Sedition acts passed around WWI in the USA. Some poor shmuck called Eugene V. Debbs decided it was really cool to insult the government and big business and he got a few years in the pokey for it.
Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
1) Always remember that neither China nor the CCP are monolithic. The nature of Chinese/Confucian governance gives bureaucrats a lot more leeway in interpreting the various laws and regulations as they see fit than their counterparts in America or Europe would have. This wide-ranging discretion and power also leads to a fair ammount of corruption, but that's outside the scope of our article today.
2) This announcement is largely about internal politics. One or more members of the conservative wing of the CCP called in a favor, and so this little gem of an announcement appeared. In a few months, it may be forgotten again, or a more restrictive regulation may appear to supplant it. This arbitrary use of the law is very common.
3) In a lot of cases, Chinese law is not as hardcore as CNN or Richard Gere would make it out to be. In most cases, you receive several visits from various people explaining that there is a problem that needs to be addressed. Only if you insist as a matter of principle to continue to do whatever is irritating the government will they run their teeth through you. (this does not excuse the restrictions imposed on free speech in the PRC, but serves to explain a little about how it works).
What it means for website operators is very hard to say. Bearing in mind points #1 & 2, it probably means very little. If your organization enjoys a good relationship with your counterparts in the CCP, they are not likely to go out of their way to hassle you unless some impetus to do so is given from above. If they have it out for you, another tool has been added to their already ample box of Ways To Make Unruly Citizens Have a Lousy Day.
The proof will not be in the newspaper article or associated regulations, but in how things are handled afterwards. There's an expression in Chinese: san1 fen1 zhong1 re4 du4 literally: "Hot for three minutes", i.e. someone goes and does a crackdown to score political points, then life goes back to normal.
Take care!
Jeremy
Parts of the internet live in every country. Those governments can dictate what they will and will not host and let users access. It's quite different than requiring that routers route data based on not only destination but content as well...
(Cisco'd love that! Having to resell new routers to everyone... )
Just because it's distributed, don't think that it is anarchistic. I forgot the rest of my sentence - but basically, use your brains. Countries can dictate what they allow people to do within their own country.
Even if the chinese government restricts encryption, this should be one of the less important worries for the chinese peole. Check out Amnesty International's Annual Reports on China.
Assuming that the chinese definition of "state secrets" is not too different from ours (i.e. national defense) you couldn't do this in the US either. It's called espionage boys and girls.
-- Slashdot sucks.
"Authorities are anxious not to smother the Internet, keenly aware that new information technology is key to China's economic future. Yet they fear an information free-flow which could threaten communist control."
Long live the revolution, eh?
Why is it that a corrupt, foul government is overthrown by smart citizens... then the new one designed to smooth the flow of goods to everyone goes and decides that it will be the forever government, instead of a transitional one? So what does it do to cement its power? Why, the very things the original government was over thrown for!
I really with that the people had forced Mao and the rest on the hundred day march to properly get some sort of "we have rights" document signed, ala the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, or the US Constitution. Actions like this fly in the face of what Karl Marx wrote about. They also remind me of the actions of the MPAA and RIAA, so who am I to judge?
---
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
I'd pity them if their fear of losing control because of people learning a better way didn't lead to death (Tiannamen) and repression (of political rights and freedom of speech).
The crime of leaking state secrets has been used to jail journalists and is often invoked against opponents of the Communist Party.
Funnily enough we've seen exactly the same thing here, both in the past during the 30's - 50's when Communism was a little too popular for comfort (we can all afford to be tolerant about it now because it hasn't an ice-cube's chance in hell of making a revival anytime soon!) and more recently with the "nuclear secrets leak" where funnily enough a scientist who just happened to be from China (our big opponent supposedly) was accused of betraying state secrets.
Yes, that's a far cry from having to have /. monitored every day by a special FBI task force *hi guys!*, however, consider the fact that there are STILL twelve documents in the FBI files on the John Lennon investigation which they won't release. I wonder what would be the fate of any web-site that put them up if they got hold of them?
Also, while China is bad and all, We the people are still trading with the buggers, not mention Indonesia, Burma, anywhere else horrible you care to mention.