Slashdot Mirror
China Shuts Down 17,000 Internet Bars
Astin writes: "According to this article, Chinese authorities have shut down more than 17,000 Internet bars for failing to block Web sites considered subversive or pornographic. Out of the 94,000 Internet bars in China, 17,488 have been shut down and another 28,000 were ordered to install monitoring software soon. Of the 27 million Internet users in China, about 4.5 million rely on these bars. Foreign news organizations fall under the category of 'subversive'."
What a shock, who'd have thought that China would have bad Human Rights Practices.
Why is anyone really surprise by this move by the Chinese government? It's not like they're known for being a bunch of liberals after all - just ask some of Falun Gong for instance how they treat ideas that they don't like. No, the Chinese government may like to talk about their progressive nature and "liberalising" (heh) their country, but the truth is they're as big a bunch of Reds as the Soviets ever were.
How is though that the US is prepared to kiss ass in order to trade with them when we spent close to fifty years fighting the Red menace before? Modern USia has quite simply lost any semblance of morality and ideology other than the dollar and a kind of rabid Christianity. Whatever happened to fighting the good fight against communism because it threatened the freedoms we fought so hard to win?
Are our principles now to be sacrificed because we want cheap Chinese products? Can this country sink any lower?
How long until we see "17,800 Internet Cafes in the United States were shut down last week due to the newly passed Eagle Act, which requires blocking all pro-terrorist sites."
?
http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?3357354385
People are complaining about the loss of civil liberties and privacy in the US with the wake of the 9-11 attacks. But be thankful that we still have freedom of speech and press and that we aren't getting government filtered content stuck down our throats. I am suprised that though a lot of china is so technologically advanced, their society is not...
-
aphex
I Steal Music!
As I recall, it didn't work out so well.
Curb CO2 emissions: Kill yourself today!
China is about as marxist as my left nipple. Its politico-economic situation is a weird, bastard stepchild between military-owned capitalism, nationalism, communism and nepotism. Marxism it is not.
From the article:
"Some youths will submerge themselves in Internet bars for long periods, playing unhealthy games and adversely affecting their development as normal students."
If porn and video games do not make for normal students, I dare say that there has never been a normal male child, ever. Sex and games occupied most of my time while I was a student.
And I'm plenty normal. Just ask my psychiatrist.
Talisman
"Study your math, kids. Key to the universe." -The Archangel Gabriel
Doesn't mean I should accept what they're doing to us because it's not as bad as what China's doing to their people. Wrong is wrong, no matter the extent thereof.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
If this happened in America all hell would break loose, but in China, most people probably don't care, if they even notice. Only 27 million of their 1.3 billion citizens access the internet. Thats about 2 percent. Of those 2 percent, only 4.5 million rely on the internet bars. So even if all of them were effected by the lose of these bars(which not all are) only .3 percent of the population that was effected. Unfortunately not enough to throw a coup or have a very effect revolt against an armed government willing to use force.
Yes, we do.
-- Will program for bandwidth
I wouldn't be so quick to say that. Now that the U.S. is "at war" i wouldn't be surprised to see more censorship popping up left and right. Now admittedly, we do have a long way to go before it gets that bad, but i doubt many americans could be bothered to kill (and conversely to die) for their freedom of speech and freedom of asociation, hell many can't even be bothered vote for those freedoms, some can't even be bothered to vote at all.
During World War II we locked people up for their ethnic background, and during the cold war we persecuted people based for allegedly belonging to subversive political organizations that supported things such as a living wage and racial equality.
What i'm saying is that we shouldn't be so smug, this sort of thing isn't as far fetched as one might think.
---
Play Six Pack Man. I
The most telling point in the article:
The government wants to encourage the Internet's growth as a commercial medium. But Beijing fears its other use as a forum for political dissent.
Now let's revisit the second sentence:
But Washington fears its other use as a forum for terrorist activity.
So, Beijing mandates NetNanny, and Washington mandates Carnivore.
Yep, sure am glad I live in a society completely unlike China.
Please donate your spare CPU cycles to help fight cancer and other diseases
I have to say the idea of people who frequent Internet Cafes in America making 'all hell break loose' or 'throwing a coup' makes me laugh, hard.
I would put it to you, sir, that if the American government shut down some internet cafes, the majority of Americans would not give a flying fuck. Now, if you were to shut down McDonalds or ban lame-ass sitcoms - that would be another thing...
The Chinese government did this, to a lesser degree, in July, shutting down 2000 internet cafes. They'll continue to do this, as public anonymous entrance points to the internet are much harder to track and discipline; the user is usually long gone by the time you examine the logs.
There's a great quote from this article:
a Web site published opinions expressed by Communist Party leaders that excoriated the effects of "online heroin" on its masses, particularly on its youth
If the Internet is "online heroin", slashdot is "an online jet-powered crackpipe burning a two ton ball of primo Detriot crack, laced with LSD, PCP, Ecstasy, and some weird shit we've never seen before".
If guns kill people, then CmdrTaco's keyboard misspells words.
Imagine that sort of banning of certain books, films or even thoughts happening in the USA? Never!
Yeah, except the government controls internet access at the source. They can pop up all they want, but not as "Internet" bars since there'll be no more Internet for them.
That is a very naive comment.
The last time the people of China "[grew] some balls" was at Tiananmen square. That sure worked out well for them. I think some people forget that not all of us live in a somewhat "free" society.
I think it's very ignorant to think that the people of China deserve a government that abuses their human rights. I think that it is even more ignorant to think that the people of China do not have any "balls" because they do not try to stand up for themselves more often.
When you stand up for your rights in China, you are eliminated, plain and simple.
It's one thing to say that if you were in their situation you'd stand up for your own rights; it's another to actually do it when you are there.
- crackdowns on religion
- harsh treatment of political dissent
- falun gong practitioners put in detention, sentenced to "reeducation-through-labor" camp, incarcerated in mental institutions or killed
- extrajudicial killings
- torture
- forced confessions
- arbitrary arrest and detention
- mistreatment of prisoners
- lengthy incommunicatdo detention
- denial of due process
- a judicial system that denies defendants basic legal safeguards
- restrictions on freedom of speech and the press
- restrictions on freedom assembyly and freedom of association
- restrictions on freedom of movement
- violence against women, including forced abortion and sterlization
- trafficking in women and children
- massive abuses in Tibey and Xinjiang
- a lack of worker rights
- forced labor in prison facilities
- child labor
The list goes on, and details are provided. Check out what goes on in the country that makes your shoes for such a good price.Actually, I can't say that it would be illegal in a "bar", but in a cybercafe environment, by law in MA at least, you're required to have internet filtering which blocks nudity and other "offensive" content. In a restricted, over 21 environment, perhaps this isn't such an issue, but in a mall or a place with any sort of store window, police complaints and actual orders to shut your business down can be handed out with very little discrimination. I know, I net-admined one for a year.
My friend and I recieved, on one occasion, a visit from the local police department, concerning that children had acceess to our machines and that our machines could be set to display objectionable content. The woman who had filed the complaint did not actually see objectionable content or had an experience where her child did, she merely voiced the possibility that it could happen.
Police seem to take this sort of stuff seriously. I'm not sure why it's any surprise that a government particularly against free speech would have a slightly more aggrevated reaction.
I think they've got the manpower.
"We're sorry, but the website you're trying to reach has been disconnected."
Actually, if this happened in America, it would quickly be followed by an announcement from the President and other political leaders that this was for the best, that they are only trying to "protect our children" and make our streets "safe for normal folks" by being "tough on crime".
That announcement would then be followed by an announcement by the CEO of AOL/Time Warner (who was just appointed as head of the newly created "Homeland Entertainment" department) that they would immediately merge with CBS, Fox, and every other media company you can think of, and that every home in America would immediately recieve free cable television and connection to the "New and Improved American Internet" for life. 85% of the sheep..er, people in this country immediately decide it's better to lie down and take it than risk missing the Friends season finally, and the rest of us are left wondering why the fuck we didn't move to Canada when we had the chance.
In The Lexus and the Olive Tree, Thomas Friedman writes about the globalization of information. Globalization is a two-edged sword: it enables you to compete more effectively, which improves your economy and standard of living. But it also makes it harder to keep up walls and isolationist policies.
China realizes that they have to have Internet connectivity for its economy to grow and compete with the rest of the global market for products and services. In the long run, it's chasing after windmills with these restrictions. Once a critical mass of Internet users is reached, there will be less support for any administration that tries to enforce such rules.
It's just a matter of time.
What about your right nipple?
And the reference to Marxism only shows how little you know about China.
Seriously, the most likely reason for this is that the bidnessmen running the cafes that were closed got too big for the level of government connections they have. Better-connected competitors may have happened to mention to officials that "gee, those guys let anything through." I would be surprised if you couldn't still get stuff from many of the 78,000 cafes still open.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
Taken from http://www.usembassy-china.org.cn/english/sandt/ne treg.htm :
Section Four -- No unit or individual may use the Internet to harm national security, disclose state secrets, harm the interests of the State, of society or of a group, the legal rights of citizens, or to take part in criminal activities.
Section Five -- No unit or individual may use the Internet to create, replicate, retrieve, or transmit the following kinds of information:
(1) Inciting to resist or breaking the Constitution or laws or the implementation of administrative regulations;
(2) Inciting to overthrow the government or the socialist system;
(3) Inciting division of the country, harming national unification;
(4) Inciting hatred or discrimination among nationalities or harming the unity of the nationalities;
(5) Making falsehoods or distorting the truth, spreading rumors, destroying the order of society;
(6) Promoting feudal superstitions, sexually suggestive material, gambling, violence, murder,
(7) Terrorism or inciting others to criminal activity; openly insulting other people or distorting the truth to slander people;
(8) Injuring the reputation of state organs;
(9) Other activities against the Constitution, laws or administrative regulations.
Section Six No unit or individual may engage in the following activities which harm the security of computer information networks:
(1) No-one may use computer networks or network resources without getting proper prior approval
(2) No-one may without prior permission may change network functions or to add or delete information
(3) No-one may without prior permission add to, delete, or alter
materials stored, processed or being transmitted through the network.
(4) No-one may deliberately create or transmit viruses.
(5) Other activities which harm the network are also prohibited.
Section Seven The freedom and privacy of network users is protected by law. No unit or individual may, in violation of these regulations, use the Internet to violate the freedom and privacy of network users.
No, it's the Chinese government's way of life. The people don't exactly have a choice.
The people may not have a choice, but be careful when you say that the Chinese people don't support what the government is doing. There are a billion Chinese people. Telling a Chinese girl that she's "one in a million" is like telling her that there are 1,000 girls that look just like her.
When half a million students go downtown and shout angry slogans and act up, that's one half of one percent of one percent of their population. That's an insignifigant little piece of dirt. And believe it or not, a good majority of that billion people, the truly "Silent Majority" in China, watched those kids get run over by tanks with the same satisfaction we reserve for watching the Klu Klux Klan get pegged with glass bottles on T.V.
China is extremely conservative. That's what happens when your survive the Chinese Cultural Revolution, when young people rose up, took control, killed all the skilled doctors, lawyers and artisans, and ran loose across the countryside committing mass murder. The Chinese people on the whole have had enough radical change for two lifetimes. They are a product of their history, just like us.
A lot of Chinese Americans I know roll their eyes when they hear about the "Concert(s) for Tibetan Freedom". Held in stadiums on the very land from which we marched millions of Native Americans across the Trail of Tears to their death, it seems to them to be at best hypocritical and at worst pure vanity on our part to assume that the Chinese government is so very different from our own.
Be careful throwing stones on behalf of the Chinese. They are a proud and strong culture, they outnumber us, they have seen wars so terrible that our country can only imagine. They have had tiny revolutions that lasted longer than our entire country has been in existence.
I'm not approving the action; I'm saying you should weigh your opinion and your ignorance together carefully first.
If guns kill people, then CmdrTaco's keyboard misspells words.
The funniest time was when I went with my wife to her hometown, in southern China. In a city of 100,000 people (which they call a village in China), I was the only non-Chinese person who had been there in over 2 years. People turned and stared at me wherever I went (my in-laws were joking that they should have charged admission to see me). Yet just down the street was a perfectly functional Internet cafe.
These things happen slowly, but they do happen. Don't think for a second that Chinese dissedents can't figure out how to use encrypted proxies or whatever, to get information in or out, just as easily as we western geeks do to get around stifling workplace rules...
:-)
This story illustrates a wider problem internationally, that of regimes which quell any sort of human rights and freedoms. US & Allies are currently engaged in a war in persuit of one man, accused of murder. The side affect of this (which is widely publicised in the Canadian press) is that Afghan citizens (especially women) are regaining many fundamental freedoms. However, liberating oppressed people was clearly not the intent of the war.
If one man is worth starting a war over, then isn't it also worthwhile to fight for people's freedom? Saudi-Arabia, China, Pakistan, and Indonesia are amongst the nations that the west does business with, and yet the oppress billions of people. Why can't we justify war with these countries, or even extreme trade embargoes, if only to ensure their people's freedom? How many barrels of oil or cheap shirts is a woman/man's freedom worth??
I'm not making an anti-US statement here. Canada, Britain, the EU, and australia, amongst others, are exactly the same.
-Michael Roy Some people are like Slinkies. Not really useful, but you can't help smiling when you see one tumble down
Maybe that will slow the flow of spam nailing my servers.
.cn I don't know what else to do. Anyone have any suggestions?
It seems like the Chinese can't (or don't want to) figure out how to secure a mail server.
Are there any Chinese readers here that can explain this? Anytime I have spam problems originating within the U.S. I have about a 99% chance of getting a cooperative ISP that fixes the problem within a few hours but because of the communication barrier I have no luck pursuing this overseas (generally China).
Short of blocking all traffic from
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
From this story:
"Out of the 94,000 Internet bars in China, 17,488 have been shut down and another 28,000 were ordered to install monitoring software soon. Of the 27 million Internet users in China, about 4.5 million rely on these bars."
From a previous Slashdot story:
"Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a longtime proponent of censorware, introduced the amendment...Essentially it says that any school or library which receives federal funds to build its network must install censorware. Since these funds are the chief way that poor and middle-income areas bring the internet into public institutions, effectively this means that only rich counties will have the option of an uncensored internet."
I'm so glad that I don't live in China, where the government attempts to censor public internet access.
How about Maoism?
J
Okay, so we're just supposed to look out for freedom on the home front, eh? "Screw the rest of the world, I'm looking out for ME!" It's called isolationist, and it's largely to blame for two World Wars last century. Go pick up a history book, you might learn something.
Was 9/11 horrific? Of course. But what should we do about it? Well, the Taliban is pretty much gone, so that's thing number one. But in the long run, America's security has a lot to do with the rest of the world. If we don't stand up for freedom everywhere, we risk being the only place on Earth where it's practiced (albeit imperfectly).
Now, I'm not going to say "get over it" because you've already been told that. I'm going to say "do something about it". You gripe and moan about people's priorities, but I don't hear any solutions coming from you, or even a point other than you don't like people getting on with their lives. It is possible to carry on a normal life and not forget about a horrific event. We did it for about 4 years during WWII, and we still haven't forgotten Pearl Harbor. Let people deal with things their own way, and stop trying to make people conform to your idea of mourning.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
It eloped with my third nipple.
Of those, what percentage do you think are operating without blocking software?
Probably around 0%, because China means business.
By the way, when you said that "it is their country," I think you needed to be more specific. I think you meant to say "it is their regimes country."
Either way, notice the possesive "their". Remember the Cultural Revolution? Well, probably not unless you're old, but these people chose this form of government. It is to be assumed that this is what they want, or at least that this is not undesirable enough to spawn another revolution a la USSR. I say let the Chinese government govern their people however they want. They are a major power, not an island dictatorship. They seem to be doing some things right, and they haven't fucked up Hong Kong yet. "Information wnats to be free" is more accurately "We wish information was free". Unfortunately (or not), it can't happen everywhere.
If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
I agree that it should concern every US citizen when the government plans to impinge on the rights of any US citizen, but my concerns can be allayed at times. Is a little more border control warranted? I think yes. Should student visa holders receive greater scrutiny than at present (currently zero)? Again, I'm okay with that. What China does is attempt to completely silence all contrary viewpoints, especially the free press. I'm much more concrened about that, than anything Ashcroft has dreamt up lately.
So long and thanks for all the fish . . . !!!
I'm an American, and you know, I never fail to be fascinated/frustrated at how vigorously other Americans attack China. Who said that our system is the best? And who are you to criticize another country for providing for its people in the best way they deem possible? It's not like the leaders are in it for the fun of it -- good god, they have to serve 1.2 billion people! Let me see you manage a country that large, by giving people all the same freedoms we enjoy here. We have enough trouble already, with only 1/5 the population... If you think about it, it's like people here have been programmed to hate China just because it's one of the few remaining "Communist" countries around. Do we really need another enemy? Why create one when China doesn't want to be an enemy? Never mind that their increasingly capitalist structure has given far more people over there opportunities than can be said about some of our population here. When you criticize China, are you doing so because you've really thought about the issues, or because that's all the media has told you to do here? Sometimes the freedom of thought is more quashed here than in less-priviliged, knowledge-embracing countries...
Nothing naive about it. People can stand up for themselves or not. Unfortunately, the Chinese culture is extremely authoritarian. I should have said "learn to question authority" instead of "grow some balls" as there are undoubtedly some very brave Chinese citizens.
If the majority of the people decided to revolt the Red Army would be powerless to stop them.
Why create one when China doesn't want to be an enemy?
I don't suppose you've read any of their national press, particularly after their fighter jet rammed a recon plane in international airspace. China has been regarding the US as THE ENEMY for quite sometime.
Never mind that their increasingly capitalist structure has given far more people over there opportunities than can be said about some of our population here.
Compare that to Taiwan, which started from worse circumstances and is ahead of the PRC about 10 to 1.
So long and thanks for all the fish . . . !!!
[wavy dream sequence effect]
Spam floods Chinese in-boxes: "A no-money-down real estate opportunity for YOU, comrade!" "Refinance your hut today!" and "OMG! ULL CUM! HOT PROLETARIAN AXXXION!"
American Internet porn companies begin to target this new market, making downloadable titles featuring the likeness of Chairman Mao Tse "Swollen" Tung.
Well, first of all China has nowhere near 3 billion people. Almost 1 billion is the current number.
Secondly, China is quite a plutocracy itself. It is certainly not communist - there are plenty of private corporations making a great deal of profit (including many in joint ventures with American, Taiwanese, and Japanese companies). If anything it's far worse than in the US - while in the US there's at least some separation between government and corporations, in China the only corporations allowed to exist are those run by Communist Party members and blessed by the government.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
If you're going to sites that are not in Chinese, use the Babelfish translater as an impromptu proxy.
Just tell it to translate the page you want to see from Chinese to English (or such), and it will ignore all the non-Chinese characters on the screen. So you'll get the website.
People have been using that to bypass filters at work for quite a while.
-k.
...but these people chose this form of government...
No, it is a clear case of a minority dictating to the majority. The nationalists just got their asses kicked. That's all.
Most in China will secretly tell you that their government sucks, but they are too afraid to do anything about it.
This is one of the funniest posts I've ever read. you must have rocks in your skull. Companies PRODUCE wealth? Out of what? Thin air? Do you even know what wealth is? It sure as hell isn't money. Wealth is relative, and inherently meaningless. It is an arbitrary value we as humans have set on things which we percieve to be desirable.
Companies don't produce wealth, or ideas, or innovations. They produce profit. That is their sole purpose of existance. Anytihng else that comes out of them is a side-benefit. But what if a society was not concerned with wealth? What if people were free to do as they pleased, not having to worry about collecting a paycheck. Where people who enjoyed fostering new ideas could do so, and people who enjoyed working with their hands could do so, to help bring these ideas into being. How much faster would innovation progress if everyone did what they did only because they found it enjoyable?
THIS is the communist ideal. It is not the twisted, sick idea as perpertrated by the Chinese and Soviet governments. The problem with the communist ideal is that it would require such a massive global shit in thinking, it is not workable. Communism is not workable on a contry only basis. Thats why these bastardisations exist. The creators MEANT well, but didn't alise their efforts were futile.
COmmunism itself is a utopian, and worthy goal. It's just not do-able. So, next time you want to go bashing "hippie communes", think about what you're saying, instead of looking like an idiot.
All you DMCA and privacy whiners, take note. It could be worse.
How would you feel if your country had constant surveillance flights right along the international boundaries (which you don't agree with, btw - you feel they're further out).
I think you'd be just a tad testy if the Taliban was flying recon off Seattle, or the Soviets had planes growling around off Miami, these barely visible specks in the sky reminding you day in and day out - they're watching you.
Both sides provoked that spyplane incident. Don't be fooled.
Smash the state! Hot Asian teens!
Then again, "Asian teens" probably isn't so interesting over there.
I never really considered Slashdot a news site, because it is more of an online topic discussion forum. The hosts of the site post stories and articles from OTHER news sits, and we comment on them.
Many of the comments are based on personal opinion, slanted to promote a specific viewpoint, contain outdated or incorrect facts, or are outright bold-faced lies. I wouldn't consider much of the content here to be newsworthy material, even if it gets a 4 or 5 score. I won't even bother to mention what I think of all the "first post!" attempts or troll postings. Thank goodness for moderation.
In short, Slashdot is a nice place to find out about new ideas and technology, but it hardly counts as a legit news site. The Chinese will probably ban it anyway, however, because some of the ideas discussed here about personal freedoms wouldn't be very popular with officals over there.
Don't be fooled by the same logic that you believe the parent poster is fooled by. True, many good things have come from our Capitalist society. However, your understanding of the system is not based on any facts. With the exception of Gates, Bezos, Perot, and a handful of others, people who "work hard, take risks, and take responsibility usually" don't make it to the top. These people are called employees. Most heads of corporation reek of old money. Their friends and families sit in Government and on the boards of PACs. Now that our government is bailing out the airline industry for its lousy (and deadly) business practices, the notion that corporate owners take risks is obsolete. The exception is small businesses.
Statements like "hippy commune" show your inability to construct a factual argument. What good does "finding another job" do when the game is already rigged by the winners?
There are an infinite number of economic systems waiting to be explored.
"What is the sound of one belly slapping?"
uh, just so you know. the chinese goverment uses that exact photo as propaganda.
It shows how "nice" the military is for not running over the chinese citizen. It shows self control.
its all a matter of perspective.
no
And they have the right to be OK with that.
Most in China will secretly tell you that their government sucks, but they are too afraid to do anything about it.
Also their choice. It isn't up to you or me or the UN to force a revolution against a government _we_ don't like. We can use political pressure and such to _urge_ them in a particular direction, but except for violations of "internationl law" and certain humanitarian issues we have no right to tell them how to run their country.
There is no inalienable right to live in a democracy.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
- Binding of feet
- Abandoning baby girls in the forest
- Eunuchs (sp?)
Ok, I'm trolling now. I hate when I do that. My point is, the argument that something has been around for thousands of years is not a very good argument.-- Will program for bandwidth
In Seattle, non-lethal weapons were used. Even in many third-world countries, protests are broken up with rubber bullets, not live ammunition. And if you complain that the students were radical, why not also point out that the gov't was hardline and refused to budge?
Now, I'm generally very defensive about China when Slashdotters rant about how evil it is without looking at the reality and practicality of the situation there, as it is making a lot of positive progress these days, but this is a case where the gov't could have done any number of things to avoid killing students, and it chose not to. Why? Not because it "had no choice", but because it too heavily weighs "stability of our nation" over individual lives. For that matter, even the "patience" may have been a bad thing, as a more controlled suppression of the protests earlier could have turned out a lot better.
Hear hear! You have espoused an idea that I thought was long past anyone grasping: power is not taken from the people, it is given by the people to the government.
Even the most totalitarian regime in history was outnumbered by the citizens of said regime. If a revolt happened on a national scale, any government could be toppled, even the U.S. All that's needed is citizens with courage -- Ghandi proved that to the mightiest empire in modern times (Britain), and he never fired a shot. It is not easy, it is hard. People die. But what is better? Living in oppression or fighting and perhaps dying for freedom? I would rather fight and take my chances than huddle at the government's whim. It's a pity that more people don't realize where power comes from, but then again they are educated from day one by government institutions that "the system" is unfightable.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Offer not valid in Cuba.
--
E_NOSIG
What do public libraries have to do with children?
Sure, public libraries are a place where there may be children present, but there may be children present in a courthouse, walking down the street, or in the corner convenience store. (Where, I'll note, the only thing between the kids and serious hard-core porn is the clear plastic wrapper on some of the magazines)
The idea that libraries are somehow fundamentally aimed at children, and specifically are more aimed at children than at adults is pernicious. It leads to a culture in which the adults become alliterate (that is, being able to read but not reading) and in which librarians are imagined to be glorified babysitters with books.
Nobody in the Communist party wanted the students slapped around, tortured and their leaders sent to jail for a few decades.... yeah right... it was all an accident.. it was the army's fault.. yeah.. thats it.. it's not our fault.. those damn radicals left us no choice.... we didn't mean it.. honest!
As for other countries tolerating a paralysis of important country infrastructures, you only need look as far as Europe. Anybody remember the farmer and trucker protests in France recently?
Trying to claim the Chinese government was an accidental party to the human rights atrocities of Tianamen Square is scandalous and a revision of history.
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
(8) Injuring the reputation of state organs;
So, is it legal to say that the organs that the State extracts from executed prisoners are the best organs money can buy?
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
If anarchy is so good, how come in the past 10,000 years of history it has never lasted nor succeeded? I'll tell you why: because a fractious society of individuals cannot stand against a more organized, united force of similar numbers. It is true, and cannot be denied.
Anarchy isn't the answer any more than Despotism is. Extreme forms of government DO NOT WORK, and it is childish to think they will just because you want it to be so. True longevity is derived from balance. Anarchy means no laws: if I can find a way to kill you, it's perfectly alright to do so, and vice versa. If I want to rape your wife and get away with it, I face no penalty if you cannot bring force to bear on me. Ditto for stealing your stuff. Despotism means no freedom: you live at the sufferance of the government, and you can be made to disappear without consequence if the government decides they don't like you anymore.
To date, the best possible form of government devised by man is the Representative Democracy. It is not perfect, and perfection is not possible anymore than it is possible to calculate infinity, but it has preserved more freedom longer than any other form of government in history. In the end, it will prevail regardless of national affiliate, because it is the only thing that balances personal freedoms with responsiblity for actions.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
I always find it interesting how subjectively the Slashdot community reads the news. I've lived in China for most of the last three years doing manufacturing management, which has taken me to many a middle of nowhere china and big city alike. And it constantly amazes me the kinds of myths that float around regarding Internet use in China.
First, Internet cafés are ubiquitous, and yes most of them are dimly lit holes with 12 computers sharing one ISDN line, or sometimes a 56k modem. Generally there are no bathrooms, the dimly lit room is filled with cigarette smoke and the whole place is grimy as the bathroom of your local pub. I.e. typical China, outside Beijing/ Shanghai/ Guangzhou. There are of course nice internet cafés in the big cities, like the one in shanghai that proudly displayed the chair President Clinton once sat it to surf the web, but those places are the exception.
Now just like any industry, there's licensing involved and in a Chinese Internet Café that means registering with the Chinese Bureau of Post and Telecommunications. Part of the Café license is the understanding that you'll filter all unsuitable content, which mostly consists of pornography (highly illegal in any form), actual dissident sites (yes they do exist, our government happily cracks down on the same sort of thing here) and yes BIG name foreign media. By big name I mean NY times, CNN, BBC, Washington Post etc. Anything that's local, or my mother wouldn't think of as a news source- i.e. Slashdot, Guerrilla News Network or the Economist, are not filtered at all.
Of course being a big place with a lot of people, regulation of this sort of thing isn't ubiquitous, which means that it's not that difficult to find Cafés that don't filter CNN and what not. They're just officially banned. And of course all bets are off when one uses any sort of proxy. Now the unofficial level of restriction raises and lowers depending on current circumstances. For example when we "accidentally" bombed the Chinese embassy a couple of years ago, the restriction was quite high. Chinese people were pissed at foreigners and the restriction level went up. On the flip side, after the Sept. 11th attack, they had an unofficial moratorium on the restriction of foreign news, which got extended all the way through the APEC conference.
When we hear that the Chinese government cracked down on internet Café's allowing subversive content through, what it generally means is the Cafés were letting in pornography. Most Chinese couldn't give a damn about foreign news, and of the few that do, the number that have the ability to read English is quite small. On the other hand the number of people who would be looking at pornography is quite large.
On average I would even venture to say that the aggregate level of information freedom of PR China is equal to or even greater than that of the United States when one takes into the account the development of intellectual property law. The Chinese didn't even have a concept of property when they opened up 20 years ago, so they sure as heck don't have a concept of IP, something that we're still struggling with, today. Hence buying pirated anything- software, music, movies- is many times easier than buying the officially licensed thing.
None of this is to say that the Chinese aren't being oppressed with regards to their online freedoms; it's just that the oppressors aren't nearly as strict as our own news tells us.
And I assume that we base this on _your_ standard of objectionable?
As human beings we have an obligation to strive for a better life for our fellows.
Again, we will use _your_ definition of a better life
That would include getting rid of corrupt governments.
and of course _your_ definition of corrupt as well.
Sorry, just because _you_ want them to live in a democracy doesn't mean that they would be better off, or eve happier. Believe it or not there is actually a large percentage of the 1.2 Billion people in China who are happy with their lives. Would you apprechiate it if they told you that you would be better off living under a communist/marxist/totalitarin regime?
Si vis pacem, para bellum
The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
Not me, but I will firmly claim that it is much better than China.
When you criticize China, are you doing so because you've really thought about the issues, or because that's all the media has told you to do here?
I criticize the Chinese government because they are fundamentally hostile to individual freedom, believe that the citizens exist to serve them, and have no reservations about abusing their people to maintain their power. Yes, I know you can list things the US government has done that are not good, but the magnitude of the abuses is not comparable. Even the fact that you can criticize the US in this forum is a testament to the freedom that you enjoy here that you would not in China.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
So they could be said to be disruptive for a morally correct reason.
You seem to be greatly afraid of "disruptions". No, don't tell me -- cultural revolution, right? Well here's a thought. The cultural revolution could not have occured on the scale it did if it wasnt for the (in)famous groupthink with which the Chinese are still struggling. By avoiding criticism, suppressing discussion, punishing "incorrect" reasoning, the Chinese strong men are supporting this tendency. They are promoting tribalism and so endangering their society.
Frequently, when speaking with ethnic Chinese, I hear such phrases as "We chinese do/say X..", instead of "I think". In a recent NYtimes report on AIDS, the author of a popular internet diary was interviewed about his recommendations for govt. AIDS policy. He felt the need to preface his remarks with "Well, I am only an individual, so I'm not qualified to judge.." My question is, who the hell _does_ judge policy, if not human beings? It is this fear of being the nail which sticks out, this sense of doing what your neighbor does, which has turned china into a giant gasoline pool, waiting for a spark. In an open society, individuals may go crazy, but the culture as a whole remains sound. Instead, the authorities whom you are defending have chosen to live in a closed society. They always fear the smallest flame.
In the US, we did have violent demonstrations in Seattle, they were publicized, debated, and no revolution, no mass bloodshed. In china it's forbidden to even mention Tiananmen square, secret police prevent people from assembling there on anniversary dates, professors fear for their jobs if they bring it up. The justification is fear of "disruptions", but few dare to ask why such a small spark can set fire to a whole nation.
Instead of ritually defending the CCP, or "we chinese" as a nation, those who truly care about the health of society should attempt to promote freedom of speech, of criticism, of protest. Strive towards open government and an open culture. This will provide channels to dredge the lake, and chinese human beings (as opposed to "The Chinese") will finally be able to speak for themselves without fear of commiting "incorrect" criticism.
When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.
but I am confident that it had little popular support or basis.
It certainly had enough to be called "The People's Republic". The Great Leap Foward (1957-1960) was a terrible failure, but required the work of millions in order to starve millions to death. No one's saying Mao and his revolution were all that great, but you can't deny the millions of Red Books in the hands of millions of Chinese.
Indeed, you might do a little probing and discover that 'revolution' was in fact perpetrated by the government itself.
Maybe I do need to probe some more, because everything I've found so far seems to point to a civil war in China which brought about the revolution. I don't think that was in the current government's best interests, considering that they were fighting off an invasion from the Japanese at the same time.
And I'm not sure that *I* would assume that the average Chinese wants to live under the current system. That seems like a big stretch...
Maybe to you, but considering the relative peace inside a nation of more than 1 billion, I don't think it's a stretch. You can't call it a regime when it has survived 80 years, and several changes in leadership.
If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
It appears you are assuming that I claim it is impossible to succeed. Actually, all I am stating is that it is easiest for the successful to succeed and they are presently cementing their control by any means necessary. At this point, their buddies (Congresscritters) are drafting and passing legislation that says we do not own what we have bought [see DMCA]. They are re-writing all laws to suit their interests.
You are obviously a can-do person. Your military training has enabled you to lead your department. You will no doubt enjoy increasing success. However, your chance of joining the upper class and owning a Congresscritter is about as great as Torvalds joining Microsoft.
No trolling here, just trying to bridge the gap between our arguments.
"What is the sound of one belly slapping?"
When are Chinese going to shut down their spammers! Crush them with tanks, or subject them to the death of a thousand cats!
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Are our principles now to be sacrificed because we want cheap Chinese products?
Actually, our principles are to be sacrificed because we want to sell stuff to the Chinese... There is an untapped market of >1 billion people who don't have enough Nike, Coke, or McDonalds. It's enough to make a marketdroid salivate like one of Pavlov's dogs...
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
I think this is the first time I've ever seen moral relativism used to defend obvious totalitarian regimes. Of course the Chinese all love their lives, and their country rocks! So tell me, how many people leave the "free" world to move to China, compared to how many people leave China to live in Europe or the US?
And yes, I agree with the other poster, we need a basic human rights charter and democratically elected governments in every nation on earth. In fact, I'd like to see a constitutional style global government evolve out of the UN-- again, where we get direct votes on our representatives and executive branch leaders.
Communism is more of an economic scheme than a political organization (and no more pure in China than the US has a true free market). You could easily have elected leaders operate state-owned, nationalized "businesses". In fact, that's not so different from the way capitalism works, what with its shareholders and stuff. It's just that under democratic communism, being born gives you a full share in the national business and a full vote, whereas under democratic capitalism, you get a full vote, but some people inherit a whole lot of shares from their parents.
I do not have a signature
Well, China has it's own distribution of Linux...
__
Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
Well, libertarianism is the hope that opposing greeds will cancel out.
__
Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
If "Revelations" says that's a problem, then tough. I don't believe that fairy tale anyway.
Oh no? Well, in my goverment, you have to. Now all I need to do is get the backing of the UN (AKA "White people"), and my government becomes your government. Neat, huh? The point is this: if you don't believe in the "fairy tale" that is the Bible, then what makes you believe anything is objectively right or wrong? The UN? Bullshit. The UN is less than 100 years old, and made up of people, just like you and me, except with nicer cars. To be honest, I don't know for sure that each and every Chinese person likes their government the way it is. Fortunately, I don't have to, or else I would never have time for laundry. The reason I don't is because that's not my job, nor is it the job of any or all Americans, or the UN. China has a rich history of great thinking. Let them decide what lives up to their local standards of decency, and save us all a whole lot of time, trouble and money. Not to mention the loss of life that occurs whenever Americans decide somebody needs our advice.
If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
There are a billion Chinese people. Telling a Chinese girl that she's "one in a million" is like telling her that there are 1,000 girls that look just like her.
Well, less then 500, actually, since women are less than 50% of the population in China.
__
Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
It's marketing crap. "Lose weight fast!", "Buy printer ink!", "Make a million dollars sitting on your butt being a worthless bum!"
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
It's almost impossible.
Is there any way to do a reverse trace against an 800 number?
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
The ideal believed in by the vast majority of Communists is the Soviet/Chinese type.
p tion. You dont have to obliterate the other systems... unless you are convinced they may take your silver spoon away. American Plutocracy is an extension of British Feudal society - Communism is a furtherance of the democratic principle to include the economy. It has to do with controlling the economy for the benefit of all.
No, most western commmunists will acknowledge that China/USSR had far to much oppression and not enough democratic-citizen involvment. Fascism != Communism. The "bad" things in China (cencorship/oppression/lack-of-justice) has nothing to do with Communism.
ot only that, but it would require severe oppression in order to enforce this uniform conformity of thinking.
Why is it necessary to have "conformity of thinking"? Maoists agree that it is necessary to have constant criticism and opposition to the government - it was an ideal that would facilitate 'continuous improvment' in making a better government. Who the fuck advocates 'Conformity of thinking"? Are you sure this isnt an invention of ignorant mccarthyism??
If it can't work in a small scale, it won't work anywhere. Can't you see the deception in the argument you make that "communism would be the best system only of other systems were obliterated"?
No, when OTHER countries are organized to allow non-democratic control, when OTHER countries are capable of using all their will to destroy something that challenges their supreme-position, a great deal of illogical and unhealthy decisions are made to further that goal. Evidence the absolute corruption of "american democracy", monopolistic economy, perversion of law and destruction of meaningfull democracy... lets not even mention the environment or mindless-propaganda(marketing)-driven-over-consum
Which creators meant well?
These ones.
How on earth can you defend what China is doing to Tibet??
Sure, you can try to change the subject, and say that other nations also committed genocide. Duh. In the US, we are not proud of what we have done to Indians. We teach our schoolchildren of the massacres committed by our armies and publish the bitter denouncements of Sitting Bull and Mark Twain. We remember the heroes who spoke out against the atrocities and did the best they could to fight against them.
I cannot even begin to understand your ethical system. Do you truly believe that the Han are right to invade Tibet, surpress the Tibetan religion, kill monks, and treat tibetans like shit?
Or are you just defending your "race" because you are afraid of criticism?
My God, this is slashdot and you can post anonymously. To defend the ongoing rape of Tibet here shows that you are a coward and an embarassment to humanity.
When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.
I'm totally against most things the US government considers "acceptable foreign policy", but I'm sorry - just because China "wants to be friends" doesn't mean we should overlook the fact that the current political system (which isn't even *close* to being "Communist") SUCKS! The leaders of _both_ the United States and the People's Republic of China are morally bankrupt, power hungry sleazebags who are perfectly happy to play at sword-waving politics one minute, and have trade talks the next. In both cases, the People are getting screwed, and in both cases the government claims to be acting for the People when in fact they are only working for themselves and the rest of a small, wealthy elite. So no, "China" shouldn't be our (ie. the citizens of the "democratic" West) enemy, but the current Chinese government sure ought to be.
Freedom: "I won't!"
Sure, we're in America, and we post news. Good enough for the Chinese to consider us a foreign news site. And I detect a bit of sarcasm in the end of your comment considering the reply you posted to your comment (Slashdot: Lame. Then again, you keep reading it!). Besides, with all the bitching we do about rights, we're as subversive to them as it gets.
SIG: HUP
What happens to an ISP in the US if it refuses to go along with Carnivore? Wouldn't it get shut down at some point?
Is it really so different?
Maybe the Chinese are using their monitoring software to find people non-violently opposed to the government, whereas the US is using the monitoring software to find people who are violently opposed to the government.
In any case it's not as different as people are making it sound.
There's a lot of middle ground here. First off, being an employee in the USA isn't that bad a deal. Minimum wage here = about the 99th percentile in most of the world. It is possible to be mostly capitalist, reasonably free, and much more egalitarian -- Sweden for instance -- but reducing the wealth of the highly successful doesn't seem to have enriched the rest of the Swedes. (True, there aren't any poor people in Sweden -- but there are hardly any poor people of Swedish descent in the USA either. A culture of clean living and hard work certainly helps both individual and national prosperity.)
It is definitely true that we've got an entrenched hereditary corporate head/political class in the USA. As for the corporations, even the "self-made" men like Gates generally started out richer than 90% of Americans. As for politics -- last year both party's presidential nominations apparently went by inheritance, because neither Dubya nor Bore had any other qualifications. And the winner was --- the guy whose father put the most "justices" on the Supreme Court. But if you think our castes rigid, try being a Chinese kid whose father is in disfavor... Under the Chinese system, Bush Sr would have stayed in office until ready to hand it off to Bush Jr. Clinton wouldn't have mounted a challenge, because instead of earning an Oxford scholarship, he would have been kicked out of high-school to become a farm laborer.
I would certainly like to see some reforms in American politics, and in the structure of corporations. And there's historical precedence for this. The "ruling class" became too arrogant and blatant about 1880. This spawned a great reform movement, which forced the elite to keep a rather low profile for almost a century. If you can get the sheeple to focus on a few facts about their national leaders now, it will happen again. For instance: (1) Neither the President nor Congress now really understands military affairs, because their parents used political influence and money to keep them out of Vietnam combat. (2) We've now got a President who, without considerable family influence, wouldn't have been considered for the lowest management positions in those corporations that paid his campaign expenses. (3 arrests. History of alcoholism. Won't talk about other drugs. Wasted his life until he was 40. Management? ROTFL. Janitor's assistant, maybe, if we're really desperate.)
My post was sarcastic, in case that wasn't sufficiently clear.
So does the Japanese, Korean, etc. Why aren't you critising them as well?
Uh..maybe because this topic is about censorship in China?
Also, you seem to have missed the point of my post. I advocated for the acceptance of criticism. You respond with
1. obscenities
2. pointing out the faults of the japanese/koreans
3. blaming me for not being critical of the japanese/koreans
4. repeat 2-3 for the US,
5. lots of shouting that you are pissed off
Obviously your blood is boiling at the slightest suggestion of criticism of China. I hope that you're not an official with some power, but even if you are not -- you are the problem. It's people like that which were waving their little red books in the sixities, ready to shout down anyone who was an enemy of the state. If you don't realize that, then you don't understand the first thing about McCarthyism. You're infected, buddy.
Now, about the personal attacks. I've posted almost 80 comments. All but the last few have been critical of the US and it's allies. Hell, I give money every month to z magazine which is a portal containing loads of articles which protest and criticize US govt. actions. That's my main job. Since I live in the US, my primary responsibility is to try to stir opposition to US abuses. Read my other posts if you don't believe me. I haven't "conveniently" neglected anything. The difference between me and you, is that when someone suggests that my govt is doing something wrong, I look for the facts, find out what the problem is (to the best of my abilities) and then thank them for letting me know. I put the stuff on the web, tell my friends, and organize to try to draw attention to the problem. I volunteer my time to maintain websites which protest US foreign policy. 90% of my interests have nothing to do with China or Japan.
On the other hand, when you hear criticism of China you 1. get defensive
2. blame the foreign news media
3. blame me for bringing it up.
3. don't investigate
4. draw attention to what other countries are doing.
You are like those people who shout "America love it or leave it." You don't want to live in an open society. You claim that my criticisms are somehow helping hard-liners, but your actions (1-4) above tell me that you are as much of a hard-liner as anyone else. You ask me how do I know that you are not working to promote freedom of speech and protest? Well, just look at your own post. If this is how you react when someone protests your govt.'s policy, then you are certainly not respecting their rights do so. Or perhaps only ethnic chinese are allowed to do that? If that's what you think, then you're pretty far down on the evolutionary ladder. And no, please don't generalize my comments to mean "all chinese" when I'm referring to you -- that sort of groupthink is why I posted in the first place.
You cannot take criticism. You are the problem.
When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.
Dude, you are paranoid, unable to take criticism of the "motherland," and have a very rosy view of the "development" -- as you call it --- which is being forced on the Tibetans.
There's plenty of info out there which might explain to you why the Tibetans are not grateful for this "yellow man's burden" which you are so nobly taking upon yourself. Too bad you are too prejudiced to even read it.
When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.
Although I suppose some Bible-thumper like yourself
I'm not a Bible-thumper. I was just pointing out one of the many works of fiction and non-fiction (you decide which one the Bible is yourself) in which World Government fortells the downfall of civilization. Your poli-sci professor would probably feel the same way. Note: I am not a professor-thumper, either. Unless she's hot.
Of course, check your religion at the Chinese border.
Although I am Christian (Catholic, in fact), just then was the first time that was mentioned. I will keep in mind that when I live in another country, I will have to obey their rules. Thanks.
As long as you don't try to make my choices for me (i.e. make your religion one of the rules for everyone), we'll get along.
See how nice that is? When no one interferes with your way of life, including the UN?
If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
Don't you feel just a tad hypocritical publicly spouting your opinion on such matters, while denying a billion and a half other fellow citizens of your country, mostly with dissenting views, the right to do the same?
Not even a little bit. For one, I'm American, so I do not share citizenry with the people f China, just like you. Unlike you, I don't feel like my way of life is so great that I would like to force it on a billion others.
If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Big words, coming from someone who does not even exist.
Your idea of "if they don't want it, they should make another revolution" is another one of the simpleton ideas that selfrighteous westerners come with from time to time.
Thanks for crediting me with that idea, genius. Unfortunately, it's been had already, by everyone from Ben Franklin to Karl Marx. Simpletons, those. It is ironically what made communism possible.
How would a population of civilians that cannot organise itself (controlled by police and secret police) fight against professional military with powerful weapons?
You mean like the American Revolution?
The Russian Revolution?
The French Revolution?
Read your history, holmes. It happens all the time. And when it does, the U.S. can feel free to back the revolutionaries.
And regarding it being called "the people's republic", all I can say is, if they need to put that in the name, it probably isn't.
I get it, like the United States of America. Er, wait.
If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy