Slashdot Mirror
Congressman Quizzes Net Companies on Shame
mjdroner writes "Cnet has a transcript of the House of Representatives hearing on net censorship with Google, Microsoft, Cisco, and Yahoo reps. At one point, Rep. Tom Lantos asks if Microsoft is ashamed of their actions in China. Microsoft: 'We comply with legally binding orders whether it's here in the U.S. or China.' Lantos: 'Well, IBM complied with legal orders when they cooperated with Nazi Germany. Those were legal orders under the Nazi German system.'"
Does Google maintain the same history of keyword searches by IP and by "cookie" at google.cn? If so, what are they going to do when the Chinese government demands they provide that information?
It's not hard to imagine a situation where that information would put a Chinese Google user in danger.
I listened to some of this on the Today programme (Radio 4) in the UK and the Microsoft guy sounded *really* nervous when they bought up the IBM/Germany analogy. It sounded like the similarity really hadn't occurred to him before. Really cheered me up on a cold morning.
Of course they would have, if there was a profit in it. What Anne Frank was doing was illegal (Reich Criminal Code section 1775B: Breathing while Jewish), and if Yahoo wanted to do business in Germany at the time then they would certainly have had to comply with the demands of the lawfully appointed Gestapo. Not to do so would require them to forego the potential revenues to be had in Germany, which would clearly mean a failure to maximise shareholder value.
They're corporations. They're pure Lawful Evil by definition.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
The challenge of trying to have both power/profit and ethics is hardly a new one - it's been around probably as long as there have been people.
In the United States, where so many people are very committed to capitalism, it may rear its head more than in some other types of social or economic systems, but I see it everywhere I go.
"What pays best" and "What is best" simply aren't always the same thing, after all.
Personally, I've made choices on both sides of the divide, when there's been one. I got tired of picking things that paid well but made me feel dirty, after a while... but that's probably why I'm neither corporate nor congressional!
Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
The Nazi Regime and the "Red Dynasty" are totally different. Do you know how many changes have happened in China in the last 100 years? Do you know how many civil wars cost millions of lives? The Cultural revolution and the resulting death toll is NOT part of the same government that rules today. Have you heard of the capitalism going on in many parts of the country? How could that possibly be the same as the extreme communist rule of Chairman Mao? This oversimplifying of history gets in the way of pragmatic thinking. You want to throw around numbers of how many died, but it doesn't mean anything if you don't know the context.
The very fact that you call it the Red Dynasty shows an aversion to fact. I suggest you and the mods that modded you informative read wikipedia and find out WHY China has the government it has now, and why they see stability as more important than democracy. (Not that I see it that way, just why many Chinese people do)
"how can they call it a MINE if everything here is THEIRS?!?!" -Straight Jacket
Wow. How to reply to such anger. Bringing up Vietnam was a bad idea since it is known China was behind the uprising in both Vietnam and Korea. Lets not talk about what has been going on in Tibet either. I better not talk about Inner Mongolia too. Definitely should leave out what has happened to various people of different religions.
America is not perfect and most citizens know that. As for racism, that's a human condition. Should we talk about Japanese-Chinese relations. The movie Memoirs of a Geisha brought out alot of racist attitudes in China, demeaning Zhang Ziyi and calling Ken Watanabe and Japanese dog.
People's nationalism usually blinds them to the evils happening in their own country, American, Chinese, and everywhere alike.
I eat Karma for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. That's why I don't have any.
Really? I quote:
"A lawful evil character methodically takes what he wants within the limits of his code of conduct without regard for whom it hurts. He cares about tradition, loyalty, and order but not about freedom, dignity, or life. He plays by the rules but without mercy or compassion. He's comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but is willing to serve. He is loath to break promises, and is therefore very cautious about giving his word unless a bargain is clearly in his favour."
Sounds pretty much like a typical corporation to me.
It continues:
"Many lawful evil characters use society and its laws for selfish advantages, exploiting the letter of the law over its spirit whenever it best suits their interests."
Now, tell me that's not Microsoft all over.
(quotations from Wikipedia, although presumably originating in D&D sourcebooks - I recognise the text from NWN :-)
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
It would appear that you're trying to let google off the hook, just because another organization (the government) has also dealt with the criminal regime. Sorry, morality doesn't work that way. Having company doesn't excuse a crime.
No, but it sure means that Congress doesn't have any business conducting this.
I had a slight lull in my righteous outrage when I heard some of the Yahoo guy's testimony on NPR. He pointed out that by taking the moral high ground he would really be taking no risk himself -- he would be telling a Yahoo employee who is a Chinese citizen to defy his/her government. A contrast to when Pres Bush v1.0 encouraged the Kurds to fight Hussein during the 1st Gulf War -- then did nothing when Kurds who followed his advice were slaughtered.
My company is trying to succeed in China. I wonder what ethical compromises we may have to consider...
why doesn't Congress haul oil executives to the Capital Hill to question them about doing business in oppressive regimes like Saudi Arabia.
China's no threat. We've got thousands of businesses already over there. Why are they picking on technology companies? If Congress is so concerned about China and democracy, why do we allow trade with China, but not Cuba?
Typical Washington hypocrites.
I was hoping somebody else would kick this obvious irony straight in there and the tone of the replies was to be expected.
After the recent UN Human Rights condemnation of the Guantanamo prison camp, I was a bit shocked by the allusion to the 10 year prisoner when there are prisoners in Guantanamo for nearly 5 years without trial.
The problem that I have with this is in China the 10-year prisoner is incarcertated legally according to Chinese law (even if you don't agree with thoses laws), the terrorist suspects in Guantanamo are not there legally according to American law.
Fine, if they are terrorists, try them and lock them up or execute them, if that's what you want to do - but it is pure hypocrisy to complain about China acting under its own laws while having a blatant disregard for your own laws and the right to just and fair treatment under them.
It's do as I say, not as I do.
I can see where Tom Lantos is coming from with his background, and I like a good Microsoft roasting as much as the next man, but as a representive of the government of the United States, I wonder is he ashamed?
Genesis 1:32 And God typed
I should point out that if consumers cared more about Chinese activists, selling them out would have severe market repercussions for Microsoft and in that case the good thing wopuld also be the profitable thing.
It's not like you've got to mortgage your house to get a Linux install CD, after all...
Within that context, there's a role for US activists to educate people on why they *should* care about Chinese activists -- perhaps not the least such reason being that a company who will assist in oppressing the Chinese will also assist in oppressing the US.
Its important to note that many major religions consider evil merely to be the absence of good. This is why for some, ammorality = evil, whereas for others ammorality = neutral.
Using the AD&D Players' Handbook to define a personal code of mortality is kind of like using a Dvorak magazine article to define an global enterprise IT architecture...
John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
On the other hand, Lantos has standing to invoke Nazi Germany on account of his personal and family history.
"Terrorism!" "Security reasons!" "Other buzzword that makes it sound like you aren't a true red-blooded American if you don't comply!"
"Terrorism!" is the modern buzzword, but....
"Pinkoes!" - 1950s
"A Jap's a Jap!" - 1940s
"Over there!" - 1920s
"Rebels!" - 1860s
"Laissez-faire!" - mid-1800s
"Liberte! Egalite! Fraternite!" - 1790s
"For the Holy Land!" - 1200s
"Chivalry!" - 1000s
"Carthago delenda est!" - 100s BC
"The Mandate of Heaven!" - 900s BC
It isn't just the current administration of the United States. We've been abusing buzzwords to justify often-questionable actions, almost since the dawn of mankind.