Great Firewall Becomes Greater

Jay writes "This article on Yahoo! mentions China's new restrictions on websites as of September 1st. Apparently it's more advanced and doesn't censor the entire webpage, just portions. It also forwards requests for search engines, like google, to less effective search engines. They also mention that this might just be temporary during a Communist Party Congress. Anyone have a mirror?" A different AP article spins things slightly differently, emphasizing that Google is apparently no longer blocked in China and mentioning the selective blocking of web content only in passing.

Comments

And all thanks to American companies.

[fmaxwell]

This article is a sickening insight into how corporate greed in the U.S. made it possible for China to filter the network and even catch and arrest dissidents.

To force compliance with government objectives--to ensure that all pipes lead back to Rome--they needed the networking superpower, Cisco, to standardize the Chinese Internet and equip it with firewalls on a national scale. According to the Chinese engineer, Cisco came through, developing a router device, integrator, and firewall box specially designed for the government's telecom monopoly. At approximately $20,000 a box, China Telecom "bought many thousands" and IBM arranged for the "high-end" financing. Michael confirms: "Cisco made a killing. They are everywhere."

And Cisco is not the only U.S. company in Beijing's pocket. Let's not forget our friends at Yahoo!

Chinese xenophobia has led many other U.S. companies to play similar games, but Yahoo! was particularly eager to please. All Chinese chat rooms or discussion groups have a "big mama," a supervisor for a team of censors who wipe out politically incorrect comments in real time. Yahoo! handles things differently. If in the midst of a discussion you type, "We should have nationwide multiparty elections in China!!" no one else will react to your comment. How could they? It appears on your screen, but only you and Yahoo!'s big mama actually see your thought crime. After intercepting it and preventing its transmission, Mother Yahoo! then solicitously generates a friendly e-mail suggesting that you cool your rhetoric--censorship, but with a New Age nod to self-esteem.

This is a sad reminder of how large American companies have abandoned the idea of corporate ethics. The Chinese government is probably arresting, and maybe executing, pro-democracy advocates based on the work of companies like Cisco and Yahoo!. The U.S. government should prosecute the bastards at Cisco and Yahoo! responsible for providing these tools to the Chinese government.

Re:And all thanks to American companies.

[sielwolf]

The U.S. government should prosecute the bastards at Cisco and Yahoo! responsible for providing these tools to the Chinese government.

Jesus. I'm glad you would like to live in a world where you have to do what the government considers right in addition to not doing what it thinks is wrong.

So where is this government? The one that is purely good and righteous? And unfallable?

And how paranoid do you have to be? If you had supplied sandwiches to the vending companies that filled Enron's stomachs, should you too be arrested? Or should a housewife be arrested for enabling her husband's drinking? How far does the blame go? Those that you see as at fault?

In law the blame falls squarely on those who perpetrate the act. It is only rare laws that blame accessories and enablers. To institute a web of blame and guilt is foolish... unless you are trying to build some sort of fascist thought state.

Re:I want the "The Great SMTP Wall" of China...

[Yuan-Lung]

Maybe what you can do is sending a horde of politically sensitive e-mails to the source of these spam, maybe then the Chinese government will help making them disappear? =)

Re:you know what?

[Rich0]

Also to keep in mind is that in cases like the US and India the country being resisted was Great Britain. Generally speaking the British were reluctant to utilize wantonly barbaric tactics. The Chinese leadership have no qualm with such methods and so they put down rebellion far more effectively.

Back during the revolution a crowd of 1000 protestors would be dispersed by a bunch of police, who could do nothing but drive them off. With modern riot control gear it is now possible for a relatively small group of police to effectively detain entire crowds (use CS foam to block exit paths, push crowd into corner, pluck them out one by one). Also - it is common for the Chinese to photograph large demonstrations and use modern technology to form databases of suspected dissadents. Facial recognition has its shortcomings, but it probably works to identify a good chunk of those present at what otherwise would be an anonymous protest.

That isn't to say that the people of China need to fight for themselves. However, in reality most revolutions are led by a distinct set of leaders - and China is quite good at nipping anybody who could fulfill that role before anybody even hears about them.