Slashdot Mirror
Google Targeted By Anti-Censorship Movement
wormnet.org writes "An article has been posted on The Observer reporting that Google has been targeted by the group "Students For A Free Tibet" because of the internet company's relationship with the Chinese government. The article states: "... more than 50,000 letters have been sent to Google bosses in recent days protesting at the company's decision to censor searches on its google.cn website in line with Beijing's wishes. Protesters have also staged public 'break-ups' with Google at demonstrations outside many of its offices around the world.""
And I thought *I* was the poor analogizer.
How exactly does someone "break up" with a search engine? Is that like some sort of declaration of boycott?
they just think it's easier to harrass google then to take on the chineese government
Letter sent to Google bosses? They'll probably be thoroughly filtered and censored for their reading pleasure.
Uncensored Google results requested and delivered by email
"I don't know, Google...it's just not working out. I mean, you're cute and all, but that insider stock selling is just going too far. You play with lego bricks and then screw shareholders out of billions. Now these oddball positions. You're not warm anymore, goog, you're all steely-eyed and Evil(TM)(C)(R)(K). Sorry googie, you're out..."
Do not downmod posts "overrated" simply because you disagree with them.
Don't blame Google, blame China.
Without the restrictions Google can not do business in China.
Intresting to note are the "small" diffrencens on the two Google sites google.com and google.cn.
Tiananmen with tanks:
http://images.google.com/images?q=tiananmen
Tiananmen with happy people:
http://images.google.cn/images?q=tiananmen
Ones again, blame China.
Why don't they target the other search engines too? Like yahoo, who already helped send two chinese political activists to jail.
Even if google is agreeing to censor information, at least they don't help jail you by giving your information to the government. Like here in the US where the government is still trying sue in order to get google search records.
Also, stopping American/European search engines from doing business in China is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. By having non-chinese engines in China, you're placing your country's ideology there, even though it'll be censored. You are exposing chinese citizens to western influence, and that is what's important.
Will they also be sending letters to the US govt about the attempted suppression of Iraqi POW abuse images?
I agree. Better not to have Google get whichever minuscle market share it can grab in China than to have it offer only part of the information they provide. Or something like that.
I'm sorry, but I seem to be missing the point here. Google isn't torturing its clients, staging hostile take-overs of competitors under vague premises with the sole intent of firing their employees, or keeping their programmers locked up in offshore sites where US employee protection rights don't apply. They're not doing anything that will make anyone's life worse, and they're not skipping an opportunity to protest in an environment where such a protest would be meaningful (honestly, do you believe that "Google decides not to offer their services in China due to Censorship" would make headlines in China and cause people to protest against their government's censorship policies?).
Seriously, what's the point?
-- Christoph
I've noticed in a lot of these items that it's Google that is singled out for the headline treatment, whilst Microsoft, Yahoo et al only get small mentions in the text, usually with a desultory "Microsoft & Yahoo also filter searches" type single sentence... and usually buried well down in any article as to be practically invisible
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Will they also be sending letters to the US Government over the attempted suppression of the Iraqi prisoner of war abuse images?
Looks like their website (studentsforafreetibet.org) still comes up 4th in a search for "free tibet" on Google China...:here
--- You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad- Neal (not Cowboy) Boortz
Who are these "Students for a Free Tibet"? They care enough about another nation to join a protest group... but only while they're students? Well, I guess that explains why they're rallying against Google instead of the Chinese government.
"Hey, Tibet sucks ass. Let's help them out. But only for four years, then fuck 'em."
"True that. Hey, I heard they have terrible government mandated censorship in China. Let's picket an American company."
"You are a genius!"
Damn kids.
Whoo, signature!
DesireCampbell.com
Google is censoring as per the Chinese Gov. But so is MSN and Yahoo. The difference is that Google will tell the person that an item was censored, whereas MSN and Yahoo will not be doing that. As a user, I would hate the censoring. But I would hate much more NOT being informed exactly when I was being censored. This guys should either be going after all search engines or should push the others to be more like Google.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
FTA:
At a rate of about 100MB every couple minutes
I'd be willing to bet its exactly 100MB every few minutes... Howzabout some confidence in your approximations-in-lieu-of-background-research, eh?
E = m * c^(Hammer)
Tibet's Free? I'll take two!
From the FAQ:
Q: What about Yahoo! and Microsoft etc., they're already doing this?
A:We deplore Yahoo and Microsoft's actions as well but as the industry leader, Google's impact is enormous. Google's decision to create its product to the Chinese authorities' specifications sets a very dangerous precedent of bringing the most advanced technology to the most closed and repressive government under the guise of effecting change. More importantly, the launch of Google.cn is a reversal of Google's policy of non-cooperation with China's internet censorship program.
If this isn't a sign of bias, I don't know what is. I've also noticed that when you search for Microsoft, 8 out of 11 times they are comparing Microsoft to Google, and Microsoft's equally abysmal record is always glossed over and not gone into detail like they do with Google. This smells like media manipulation to me. Yahoo and Microsoft must be both loving this.
A lot of people talk about how google brings net services in, and that eventually that will do a lot more good than staying away would. That's not a dumb argument, or one that can be dismissed out of hand.
But I think that when people from outside of the country take a stand, and tell the truth about what's right and what's not, it makes a difference. There are people in China who are fighting, and when companies or foreign governments stand by what's right, those people know that they're not alone, and that they're not crazy, and what they're fighting for is real.
I take some comfort when the UN critizes US behavior in Guantanamo for that reason. I know the UN isn't going to be able to bring about a change in policy, but it's nice to know there's a world beyond talk radio and cable news coverage.
In google's defense, it is a lot of money. And I guess if they can believe their giant jetliner is good for the world, because they can fly people other rich people to africa to see what poverty is really like, then they can believe that what they're doing in china is good for the world too. I guess when you're that successful, everything you do is good for the world.
We really should be protesting censorship world wide. And not just in China.
Companies don't have to do business with all countries. In particular, they don't have to do business with a country with political practises they don't agree with. Now, in Google's case, they decided they wanted to do business with China and are ok with their reqstrictions on free speech. Fair enough, however that may, and apparantly has, make people in other countries where Google does business angry. Those people are free to tell Google that if they want their business, they need to stop doing business with China.
It's perfectly ok for Americans to demand that, if Google wants their business, they can't filter results for China. Google then has to choose between the business of those people, and the business in China.
The Students for a Free Tibet created a Greasemonkey script (http://www.userscripts.org/scripts/show/3056) that replaces the Google logo with a slighty funnier version. I have it installed on my Fx, just because I think it's a nifty bit of satire, and because, well, I liked it.
On a related note, is China really such a big monster, like we always hear it is? With the one-child-per-family rule, and the abortions of baby girls, they have to have like a hundred million less girls than they'd normally have. Can a such a large and unwieldy military power itself with such a bad demographic outlook, birth rate/death rate-wise?
Translation: On down the road, it's gonna be awfully hard for guys to get dates in China.
Google has worked hard to create this image of "the good company", successfully, I might add. They have most people, the media included, sold on their "we're the good guys" image. Well, thus it's a story when they don't really act it. This company that's supposed to be all about free information and such is censoring? OMGWTFBBQ! Scandal!
MS on the other hand is the company people love to hate. They actually aren't really that bad when you get down to it, they aren't the most scary monopoly (you want scary? look up Sysco) and for that matter there's questions to if they really are a monopoly. However they have the public image as the 800lb gorilla, that's kind of an asshole. Thus to hear that they screw with search results isn't really supprising.
There's also the fact that MS and Yahoo traditonally haven't had unbiased search engines. They have biased results, deliberatly, for a number of reasons. Google was really the first major search engine that not only didn't sell any spots or anything, but actively fought against tricks to try and bias your results higher. MS has been fighting a battle to try and really give good and relivant results, but won't let go of the want to mess with them artifically.
I don't really feel a lot of sympathy for Google as they brought this on themselves. They created the "Don't be evil" motto, they worked the PR to spin themselves as a good company, but then they chose to do something that seems to fly in the face of that. No supprise they wind up with egg on their face. The more perfect you project yourself as and the more you claim to have the moral high ground, the less people are willing to forgive of you.
Why blame Google for China's censorship? That is the most rediculously tactic I've seen. Google is an American company, and these students think it's Googles job to protest the Chinese government? Why don't these same students protest the Chinese government themselves?
I understand that censorship is bad, but this tactic actually makes Google look like the good guy when its being made into politics. If they don't like Googles censorship, they can use Yahoo, or Microsofts search engine, or even better they can use the Chinese governments search engine.
If I were a chinese person, I'd rather have some Google than none.
Other than deny China their services completely, what else can Google do?
Environmentalism is the new Victorianism. Everyone ties on a green corset and pretends we're virtuous.
Fortunately for everyone, boycotting is just as effective as censorship.
Because anyone with common sense can see that Google is being scapegoated here. Sure if you don't like Google, you can boycott Google, but why pick Google out, from all of the American companies in China who work with the Chinese government, including Yahoo, Microsoft, and others? This looks so much like politics that if Google were to actually go on CNN or worse, go to the liberal media, this situation could be blown up into something which in my opinion is not in anyones best interest.
If censorship is a problem, the solution is for Google to develop anti censorship technology, and make all searches completely annonymous for everyone. Otherwise, I don't see the point. Even with better technology there is nothing Google can do to fight censorship. The fact that Google is offering access to all the current information they offer access to is actually fighting censorship in a way, but if the government says to Google that they must either censor something or go to jail there is not much they can do in any country.
From Metafilter
Not for American Consumption? We've heard the stories of Google censoring results in China, but is America being "protected" from a few pieces of undesirable content? They've bowed to pressure before, could they be doing such things again? (Link results below differ for American visitors)
In case you don't "get it", Google IS CENSORING web pages right here in the (formerly) good 'ol USA!
But... if you want to see WHAT Google IS censoring from us, then look here at the * now uncensored * link.
Apparently, they can't have us looking at REAL explosions, rather than ALL the FAKE ones on TV & in the MOVIES!
student protest china
OMG, don't you know that you're not supposed to search for that!!11i9jhA4uNO CARRIER
No, I imagine they won't be sending a letter to the US government. There is a big difference between being pissed off that the images got out and saying some nasty words, yet having the imagines remain...
http://images.google.com/images?q=Iraqi+prisoner+
Or taking images like this...
http://images.google.com/images?q=tiananmen
...and using the force of law to pull a China.
http://images.google.cn/images?q=tiananmen
Do you understand the difference a little better now?
Do you really think that a letter to foreign companies, or an occassional rally, is going to change the policies of the Chinese government? I don't think ANYTHING will change the policies of the Chinese governments. There is no democracy at all in China, it is not a Republic like America where at least we have a constitution, China as far as I know has no constitution. There is nothing at all that a Chinese worker can do in China to influence policy except work hard, get rich, move to America, and pressure China from within Google. If these people want to influence Googles policies, or free China, they'd be better off working with Google from within Googles offices than trying to send a letter to Google. They would be better off building the next freenet, or doing something useful and constructive with their time than sending a letter to business owners.
Seriously, this is silly. If someone wants to fight Global warming do you think the best way to do it would be to send a letter to the tabacco and oil companies? Do you really think that Phillip Morris or any of these company execs will even read such a letter? Do you actually think Google will even care about this? This actually gives Google ammo, because now Google can use this letter to frame the debate, and use their high powered lawyers and scientists to pick it apart.
Do you really think that a letter to foreign companies, or an occassional rally, is going to change the policies of the Chinese government?
Not by itself, no. It's one of many, many things that will eventually bring an end to the Red Dynasty. For now, it povides comfort to the Chinese who want to be free, to know that they're not alone.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
They're stopping one American business from pumping money into an evil regime, while giving everyone else a more or less free pass. Where's the protests calling for people to stop supporting Cisco, whose involvement in the continuation of the great firewall of china goes back as far as at least 1998? Oh... there aren't any? The worst they're getting is occasional frowny faces on the Students for a Free Tibet blog? Hmm.
It's kind of just dumb. Google is basically being made into the collective conscience of America. We're expecting them to reject complicity in the Chinese regime, so that the rest of us don't have to. Except in doing this we're targeting one of the few companies who's actually potentially capable of making a positive effect in China if they do business there. The chinese-language Google page hosted outside China is still full and uncut; the Google inside china tells you when pages are censored and may be able to do more than that with time.
If these people get their way and Google pulls out of China, do you know what will happen? MSN Search will just step in and happily become the dominant and official search engine there. You'll have gained nothing, except now the western partner in censoring search within china will be someone who does it cheerfully and enthusiastically, instead of one who at least understands the gravity and inherent ethical problems of what they're doing.
Ive been so sick of hearing about this 'group', so Im only going to say it one more time...
Where were all these people when the Church of Scientology used the US copyright laws to remove links from a search engine? This was done with US laws, and used to CENSOR the internet.
For your own viewing pleasure, the google search of "Xenu", the extra-galactic alien who is a central figure in the church's teaching, follows;
Xenu Scroll down to the bottom of the page to see the 'details'
and her famous "just say no" to drugs catchphrase from the 1980s?
she was ridiculed for that, and rightly so, as "just say no" to drugs is a blatant simpleton's oversimplification of a complex problem
well guess what? "don't be evil" is the same sort of hilarious oversimplification, and i'm kind of surprised at the slashdot crowd for not rolling in the aisles laughing at google for this phrase
i'm really just waiting for the residual effects of being smitten with google in the early 2000s to wear off on the slashdot crowd, when google was a hugely popular upstart, and rightly so... back then
i'm waiting for the slashdot crowd to finally wake up to the fact that, whatever google was, it is now just another huge multinational, as much to be reviled or loved as oracle or microsoft
i sorely missing the usual amount of healthy criticism i get from the slashdot crowd when it comes to the subject of google. everyone here handles them with kid gloves, and i don't think it is appropriate anymore
slashdot crowd: wake up, google is not your cute litle revolutionary upstart search engine from the early 2000s. it is an entirely different beast now, and you need to update your state of rapture with them, and start looking at them a lot more critically
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Apparently there are no naked ladies in China...
l r=&cr=countryCN&q=naked+lady&btnG=??
= &q=naked+lady&btnG=Search
Only one result and it's a cartoon where you can't even see the boobies.
CHINA:
http://images.google.cn/images?svnum=10&hl=zh-CN&
US:
http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr
Sure, censorship could be considered evil, but lets be sane here.
Google is being evil because they do business in China? Lots of businesses do the same thing, name one search engine in China that is not doing this. I'm not saying its right, but I'm not saying Google is declared evil overnight over this.
I think this is a political issue, I think this is about politics. Google is not a political organization, they are a corporation. Google of course is going to put profits before politics, what company doesnt do this? Napster? Kazaa? Do you actually think Google is powerful enough to go up against the Chinese government? I think it's a bit insane to expect that.
I think this political debate is also way too early, in 10, or 15 years when Google actually is powerful enough to take on the Chinese government, thats when you should have this debate. When we are using wifi Google internet access for free, and Google is literally everywhere, that is when Google can take on the Chinese government, and even then they'd do so with limited success.
Ultimately, if the Chinese people, or in specific the Chinese government, does not want Google to do certain things, and makes it illegal, there is nothing Google can do about it, just like Google cannot decide to let people share copyrighted mp3s, or put up their digital library in America. There are a lot of censorship issues, and Google is making plenty of enemies here in America, so if Google decides not to make enemies in China, I think the shareholders can understand.
If you were CEO of Google, and you already have just about every publisher, media exec, Bill Gates, and all these people in America pissed off at you, would you seriously go and piss off China so your competition can take advantage? As I see it, as a business decision, Google is doing what is in Googles best interest. I don't think we can debate that it was a wise business move, politics aside.
I have the feeling that Google might respond to these folks, givne their moral suasion.
If they really wanted to get attention though, they'd hit Google in the pocketbook. That would wake them up faster.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
The people of Germany elected the nazis to power. Hitler was a populist and the people elected him, and apparently by a pretty good margin. The people got what they wanted and deserved and it is not our right to decide for them what sort of government they should choose... just as it is not our right to decide for china how to run their nation... not that that has ever stopped us before.
By simply hiring Chinese workers. Google can help Africa by hiring African workers. Just creating jobs helps people, and if Google pays workers high paying salaries, that alone is good. This takes time however, Google cannot be expected to change the world overnight.
Because it sounds to me that in the same way that people always mention McDonalds when mentioning junk food (and KFC and Burger King get nothing) that Google have become the evil censoring organisation.
Are you talking about capitalism 2.0? Sure, it might be the job of corporations to protect human rights, the constitutions, and to defend the world from global warming, but seriously do we expect every corporation to follow this agenda? Most corporations right now just want to make a buck. So while I agree that corporations SHOULD be responsible, it does not mean they are required to.
Stand up to the Internets.
//family guy lol ///wrong site
Seriously - I am puzzled, people are happy spouting shit about google, why the fuck don't they kick their governments in the bollocks.
Students in my day knew what rubber bullets and tear gas felt like, now they just write angsty emails to google - yeah whine enough and google will send in 500 super-google-ultra-fighting-soldiers to help you.
meh, go stand in front of a tank.
^ ^
_._
cowboyneal passed his stool: brutally
please type the word in this image: brutally
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
please type the word in this image: random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
Why is Google the bad guy again? As I understand it:
1) Google's results are being censored by the government, typically by simply not allowing their traffic through, making it appear to be a technical malfunction.
2) There's no way for Google to avoid the censorship.
3) Google comes up with a way to disclose the censorship.
4) Alternatively, Google could walk, leaving Chinese search engines to filter results without any disclosure.
So if Google made the wrong decision, which one was better? Walking and leaving the Chinese with no awareness of the situation? Ignoring the situation and sticking with the status quo? Filtering results without disclosure? How would these steps help Tibet?
This is like boycotting Zhang Yimou's films because they attack the Chinese government through metaphor, rather than railing against it overtly and getting him imprisoned or killed.
The Chinese government is the problem, attacking Google is a huge waste of resources; how about a letter writing campaign to Beijing?
Why is it that people only care about morality on the Google China issue? We have this policy of corporations only acting out of profits, ok fine, EXCEPT in China?
Why is China the exception to the rule? Morality does not matter unless it's China? Human rights do not matter unless its China? It's as if we spend more time worrying about the human rights of the Chinese than our own. Please explain to me why the human rights issue in China is so important to us?
...that Google is using subterfuge? Doesn't anyone remember what happened when Google got hit with a DMCA by the Church of Scientology? Remember the outcry over Google removing certain search results? Do you also remember the ultimate solution? Google posted a copy of the actual DMCA request...which happened to contain the exact offending URLs...oh and just because of the way parser works, those URLs were hotlinks. Add to that the press involved and I think that the reality is at the end of the day, more people read that content than had ever thought to google it before.
Who here doesn't understand that this kind of behavior is way to both "be legal" and "don't be evil"? That a company that has a history of doing these kinds of end-runs around crummy laws is just as likely to do it in the future? Consider this:
Google.cn censors certain pages based on, most likely, a know list of offending sites and perhaps certain keywords. What happens on Google.cn if someone googles for freed0m? or fr33dom? or c1v1l rights or anything else? You can bet that until that variation pops up on the government radar, there will be a lot of traffic on those pages from Chinese users. It's not beyond the realm of possibility for Google's engine to even play some kind of silent "did you mean freedom?" game and show the best results regardless of misspelling.
One thing is for sure, I wouldn't put it past them. What incentive do Chinese search engines like Baidu have to do the right thing? First of all, to their culture, it's not even the right thing. It's quite possible that the management of Chinese search engines look upon it as their patriotic duty to censor, and zealously go beyond what is even required. Google is an American company...with a new Chinese arm. But the heart and the technology are still American and it is unlikely that Google could ever be as close to the government as other homegrown engines. Quite frankly, I'm shocked the Chinese government would even allow Google in to China. What do they have to gain? It's not like Google is bringing millions of manufacturing dollars. At best, a couple floors of technicians?
You can't stop information, and you can be pretty sure that Google knows that. That's why they are in the business of providing information. Sooner or later, the bar and the slippery slope will begin and either the Chinese government will realize they've been hoodwinked and kick Google out...or move to an entirely whitelist-based Internet...or people will master the tricks and the knowledge will spread as quickly as the latest viral video.
-JoeShmoe
.
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
why dont they boycott every other company that does business in china too?
is it ok to 'do evil' if you didnt say you wouldnt?
Web Design
I mean, go to http://www.google.com/intl/zh-CN/, search for "tiananmen square". You will get pictures of tanks and all the censored stuff.
www.Google.cn exists in addition to this. Is it realyl censorship if they provide more information?
(not seriously, but in a proportional view of the way actions would escalate) they should be DoSing the shit out of Yahoo, and planning to make assasination raids on Gates's and Ballmer's penthouse offices...
I know this is hard to understand, since it takes a little more thought than the usual knee-jerk "censorship is bad, mmkay?" response, but try to stay with me...
Google's presence or absence in China does not affect the level of censorship present on the Chinese internet.
When a user in China does a search on google.com (now or in the past) and the search returns results which the Chinese government feels must be censored, the Chinese "great firewall" simply resets the connection and blocks the user from accessing Google for some period of time. The user sees nothing, and is now unable to use Google at all. The user has no idea that this was the result of censorship, and will probably assume that Google's service just sucks.
Now, with google.cn, when the user does the same query, they simply get censored results, along with a notice that the results have been censored. They do not lose access to Google. They are told that censorship occured, so they have no less information than they would have had before. To the Chinese user, the service of google.cn is strictly superior to that of google.com.
Now, I know the argument a lot of people like to make here: "Google should take a moral stand by refusing to have any part in this!" To that I say, how dare you declare that the Chinese people should be deprived of service on moral grounds? Let the people you claim to be supporting decide what Google should do. I think you will find it hard to find a single Chinese resident who is against Google's action.
Don't get me wrong. Censorship sucks, and I think the Chinese government is despicable. But, Google's actions are only improving the lives of the Chinese people while doing nothing to increase the government's control over them. Google has done nothing wrong.
... my bad ...
E = m * c^(Hammer)
Any compromise Google makes with a "Free Tibet" organization will effectively kill Google in P.R.China.
Would you do something 'immoral' to survive? What if you were in a war and the opposing army did something unscrupulous and the only way to survive is to fight fire with fire? Killing is immoral, wouldn't you kill someone to save yourself if it was your only option to survive?
What if you were CEO of a company and your competitors were appealing to a repressive government to bank on a country with 1.3 billion people? Would you let your company burn? In this case, what if the only difference from not partaking is that your company does not get to do business with Wal-Mart's sweatshop (that's a reference to china incase you missed it), and that the citizens are still censored from the same material?
I do not know what I would do. I am guessing that China generates a lot of revenue for google, and either choice google makes, the people of China will still be censored from content. I am slightly disappointed with GOOG's decision.
>> screw shareholders out of billions
No, dude. It's shareholders who screw THEMSELVES out of billions by buying Google stock at astronomical prices. No one forces them. In case of Google, no one even promises them a gold mine. Google's position is neutral here. You want to buy our stock at $450? Be our guest, we'd be stupid to discourage you. Don't expect us to ever reach a sane P/E ratio, though, because we've never promised you that we will. Brin and Page realize themselves Google is ridiculously overpriced. They both sell their stock as fast as they can.
You want the market, you censorship the contents;
You want the money, you do some evil;
You want to play the game, you obey the rules...
Well, it's good to provide something rather than nothing....
twitter.com/xuyihua
Yahoo is another company that comes under quite a bit of fire too from Tibetan activists and many others. There are plenty of other companies that receive this kind of attention as well.
Just because Google gets all the attention on Slashdot (where are the complaints when people lavish praise on Google in a disproportionate manner?) doesn't mean it reflects the real world situation.
Freedom of will .. freedom of speech .. freedom of action .. the protection of the public good and Censorship ..
..
.. free speech and the freedom of the press .. are really most often about opposites of issues ..
.. can only mean .. that anyone and everyone is free to say what they please .. apart .. from the freedom to and of acting on ones thoughts or words .. especially where and when the physical sovereignty of persons is involved ..
.. can only means everyone and anyone has free and equal access to the media ..
.. there is indeed no freedom of the press ..
.. freedom of the press has nothing to do with .. someone or anyone .. via mass limited access media being able to continually and repeatedly expressing a limited position and opinion .. without equal amounts of time for varied other and opposing points of view ..
.. if one is truly seeking public order .. with restricting thoughts and ideas that encourage separation .. segregation and acts of aggression .. or acts of violence against other persons ..
.. when threatened with or experiencing harm form others ..
.. believes or morals .. but posses no direct threat to persons and does not promote or encourage such actions .. is indeed censorship of free speech ..
.. LAWS .. that try to make it criminal to express anger and hate towards others .. with just cause for violation of persons .. are just ideals go astray .. and a denial of human fear and emotion when confronted with threats and acts of violence towards persons..
..
.. to say as it pleases .. under the guise of free speech is untrue .. unwise and a lie .. and will in time most certainly fail ..
.. if i have freedom of speech but no freedom of action .. it is really nothing but hot air ..
.. it is nothing but mass brain washing and propaganda ..
.. just true good and wise governance ..
.. if you intention is for the freedom and well being of the greater majority of the people ..
.. for the benefit of a few .. and the control of the many .. by a few ..
.. argue that it is a censorship of their free speech ..
are in fact really about the same issue
were as
true free speech
a true free press
for if only those who can pay have access to the press
moreover
at the same time there is nothing wrong
as the sovereignty of being is the only real right and true desire of almost all beings
preventing others from expressing there opinion because it offends your sensibilities
at the same time
and destined to fail being able to resolve grievances of violation amongst humankind
but defending the freedom of the press
as well
and unless everyone has equal and direct access to the media
restricting the transmission of thoughts and ideas that are threatening and destabalizing to the the well being of the majority is
that is
as opposed to
then some can and probably will
everyone should have the opportunity to publicly express their opinion
You're right. It's a characteristic response for activists: go for the biggest. It helps them get the media exposure they need to 'raise the public's awareness'. And it can be quite effective for their process:
It's unfortunate most folks get lost between steps 3 and 4 (I suspect there's some ??? and Profit! going on), but a few changes do come about occasionally.
McDonalds, Nike, Starbucks, Walmart, and now Google will continue take the heat from concerned student groups.
Who's your user, program?
Among them being the shortage of women.
I live in Beijing, and let's just say I could have a different Chinese girlfriend for each day of the week.
I'm not going to devote my life to correcting peoples' lack of perspective, because there are so many opportunities for people who are willing to look past the nonsense. The average Chinese has equally comical views about the West.
A witty saying proves you are wittier than the next guy.
All these complaints against Google (especially from the US government) seem rather hypocritical, given that Google has already been censored with the DMCA.
Ok, the censored sites are viewable by reading the takedown notice, but why is it perfectly ok for Google to be censored by US laws and not Chinese laws? Chinese laws may be much worse at the moment but the principal is still the same.
Digg is going to need a new community entirely before it's any use to anyone with any form of intelligence. Although the commenting system at Digg is horrible and does need a major upgrade, the biggest problem is that the community is full of complete idiots. However, I guess it's a good site if your target audience is complete retards and young high school kids.
This is not a scaleable moral argument. You yourself, as a matter of practical necessity, do absolutely nothing about *most* of the moral issues you are aware of (slavery in Sudan, anyone?). That doesn't make you guilty of those things. In most aspects of life we have to choose our battles.
You need to say why Google should have chosen this issue as their line in the sand. The argument has been put forward that it is better for them to do what they can within the law, such as it is, in China, rather than leave the Chinese audience to Chinese search engines which by being local can fall much more squarely under Party control. Even a partial Google is better than none at all, and still moves the country toward freedom of information (albiet more slowly).
Or that's what they argue, anyway. Why not deal with the argument, rather than handing out moral-high-horse generalisations whose end effect might well be worse for those who have much more to lose? This kind of action / inaction / pseudo-action can also constitute an abdication of responsibility.
Google's "censorship" is only for the correct spellings of the banned words. Just like the DMCA filtering. Google links to a site that has the links they can't show you.
Would you rather have google there, offering their search but blocking a small amount of stuff, or no Google and no access to anything?
There should be no evil, but when there is, take the lesser of two.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
Various people consider human rights important (or not) for various personal reasons.
So I could just flag the whole debate as "overrated".
"The more prohibitions there are, The poorer the people will be" -- Lao Tse
everyone follows that rule in technical situations making the best with whats there , no offense if we said oh it must be morally perfect or not at all for everything. well we'd be no where, and remember the chinese goverment only has the power they do because americans buy their cheap stuff. else they'd be just another north korea or iraq pre-war. so unless you dont buy stuff from china at all (this is possible though hard) your part of the problem.
china's power to censor and control is directly reliant on its economic power. they had to pay cisco yes? and i bet a pretty penny. which you and i helped fund.
Can anybody tell me something...?
You can access Google.com free and uncensored from china; in fact there is even a link to it from Google.cn!!! Why is this even an issue???
If you can tell me, thanks.
Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
More than mere navel gazing.
That Britain link should have been this, sorry.
More than mere navel gazing.
China as far as I know has no constitution.
You need to shut up. You need to get some education. You need to know what you are talking about before you mouth off.
Otherwise you just make an ass of yourself.
China does indeed have aconstitution. In theory it has a very good constitution. Unfortunately most of the core clauses on freedoms and rights are terminated with the subclause : "...except where this would disturb the peace/breach social order/endanger the harmony of the state".
Next time first learn, then speak. Unless it's a question.
kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
You seem to be missing the cause of the boycott. I don't think anyone would be boycotting Google for selling burgers in beiging or for manufacturing cheap panda pr0n. Show us other companies (yahoo and microsoft are good examples) that work with the Chinese government to opress the people, and I'm sure most here would not hesitate to break up with them, too.
Play Command HQ online
Being myself in China (Canadian working in Shanghai) I know a bit more on the story. At first I must say that I was really shocked with the news of Google following the footsteps of Yahoo and Microsoft with censoring their search results. So I went deeper and did some tests. Here is what I found out:
First of all, and many of you know this already, the only censored search is google.CN and NOT google.COM. Yes, If I do a search with google.CN the results will be filtered, but nobody stops me from using google.COM which is still not censored at all, even for people using it in China. I thought they might use some IP detection of some sort and filter people that are located in China, but no, they don't. So Chinese people can still use the normal english Google if they are not happy.
Secondly, and most important: My Chinese girlfriend showed me that when you search for something that should be filtered ("tiananmen", for example), it displays a very clear message in Chinese, repeated several times in the page, saying something like "Some results have been removed due to local laws". Now how does that make Google better? Well, think about it: they could have done just like Microsoft and Yahoo and simply hide the controversial entries. Nobody would even know they did as it is completely invisible. But their approach is interesting when you think about it. It means that Chinese people (who so far pretty much ignored that they are being lied to on a daily basis) will now notice that A LOT of what they search online is being censored! That will completely change their view of the government and break the general ignorance in the population right now. Who knows, maybe Chinese people will start to protest and perhaps things will eventually change? All I'm saying is that if you look at it that way it has indeed a positive effect. That's what everybody seems to completely fail to understand right now when they criticize Google. I think they (Google) know damn well what they are doing, they just hoped that us clever people would get it but it seems like most of us obviously don't!!
So anyway, look at it that way: Microsoft tells Chinese people what to write in their blogs (when my gf writes on her MSN spaces, she gets a message saying that she uses "inappropriate language" if she tries to write "freedom" or "democracy"), Yahoo sends people to jail for writing their opinion in an e-mail, and... Google INFORMS Chinese people that they are being lied to... So, who's really the big evil one here??
Just my 2 cents...
David
This is patently untrue based on my understanding of the current situation. I cannot test it (not being located in China) but I believe that going to google.com from mainland china will now redirect you to google.cn, in the same way that going to google.com in the UK will take you to google.co.uk.
Perhaps there is some way to still get around this, I'm not sure, but people who were used to getting the regular google.com page are now getting the censored version, almost certainly.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
The great firewall of China is not news. Everyone has known about it. Everyone knows that Cisco pretty much built it. How is it that Cisco didn't get this kind of protesting? Lots of American IT vendors have been involved with Chinese censorship from the beginning. Billions have already changed hands.
What's special about Google?
Can it be that this darling business up and comer is just a little too new to the world of big business, and doesn't have the contacts and the lobbyists to protect these sorts of activities yet? Can it be that other more established members of big business are working furiously to hand Google their balls over this thing by engineering a PR disaster?
I've always thought it was a bad thing for American companies to be involved in something like Chinese censorship. I am glad to see this being questioned now. I'm just wondering why suddenly now? Google did not do something new in China. The trail had already been blazed by Cisco and Microsoft and other big dogs.
We all know that there has been a full bore astroturf campaign to get people to distrust Google, particularly here on Slashdot. We know that Microsoft in particular is interested in manipulating the Slashdot community through astroturfing. I admit, a patent lawsuit from some tiny holding company would be more their MO these days, but could all of this be coming from Redmond?
Chinese dissidents have long noted that when the US has highlighted oppressive policies of the Chinese government and made our opposition to them import to our own policies, that the dissidents' lot has improved, that the oppression lessons, that freedoms increase. When we reverse, that trend also reverses.
Play Command HQ online
For now, it povides comfort to the Chinese who want to be free, to know that they're not alone.
Which is probably on par with the comfort the Hungarians felt in 1956 and the Czechoslovakians experienced in 1968, when the West sympathized so loudly with their plight. And probably about as effective.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
China does indeed have aconstitution. In theory it has a very good constitution. Unfortunately most of the core clauses on freedoms and rights are terminated with the subclause : "...except where this would disturb the peace/breach social order/endanger the harmony of the state".
And it does put all those little "exception" antiterror/antiracism-laws into an interesting light even..
What exactly is it that they are censoring... cause googling google.cn for disgusting pornographic material turns up even more than a US google server...
Ok, here you go.
When you are logged into a google account (like GMAIL) and if you open Google News (same/different tab/window), you are shown 'Customized News'.
For me it is very annoying. I dont want Google to 'Customize News' based on my previous browsing history or whatever algorithms have thrown up. Google or for that matter any organization should not dictate what I should read. And I dont like Google keeping track of news/stories/websites I read and connect that to my Google Account.
There is an option to switch to Standardised News, but that means another hit on the server.
Tat Tvam Asi
*Free Tibet only with purchase of Tibet of equal or lesser value.
Shameless plug for my photos on Flickr
Has it occurred to any of these "people"* that:
1. When the Chinese search for "Tiananmen" they're probably looking for a laundromat, a restaurant or hotel and might actually be pissed that they can't find one because "Tiananmen" is followed by "Massacre" in the 1st 1000 hits of a search engine. Did you ever think of that? Maybe they have to live over there.
2. Some information is better than no information. Give the Chinese some credit - they're smart enough to read between the lines.
3. Google moved there to give the Chinese faster service - maybe, just maybe it will prove fast enough to outrun the censors.
4. BTW, did these protestors ever think to ask the Chinese people what they thought about Google, or are they using the GWB method of democracy where the results are only valid so long as they follow your own agenda?
5. The US used boycotts in Iraq and while Saddam and friends were never missed a meal it was the people that suffered. Did you not notice that?
6. At the end of the day, my thoughts are summed up as mostly against the insidious nature of US politics and culture. Seems like every hour produces another opportunity to say, "WTF is wrong with these politicians" and, "when are the people going to get off of their dead asses and do something about it all." This whole Google ordeal is not one of those instances. In fact, it's quite the opposite. Oh, and thanks for blemishing what would otherwise be an admirable move by the US.
*Just gotta love the stupidity of mob mentality.
The Peoples Republic of China, DOES have a constitution, just not like the U.S. or most westernized countries. As you can see here they do have a constitution: http://www.usconstitution.net/china.html
It is just written in a way where there are less guarantees of freedom, and more government controls. But then, this is all a technicality.
You want the market, you censorship the contents;
or roughly:
1) If your principal motivation is money, you would censor.
2) Google censors.
3) Therefore Google's principal motivation is money.
4) Therefore Google is evil.
Here are your goofs: 3 doesn't follow from 1 and 2.
For extra credit, note that 4 doesn't follow from 3.
Why villify Google when all americans have personnaly contributed to devaluated human rights over the last few years through our passivity?
I mean, seriously folks, our fearless (Brainless?) leader has really kicked the US over the edge and down the slippery slope to "1984"/Dictatorial style government over the last 8 years and we haven't even so much as flinched while it was happening!!!
And these are the same fools that are horribly concerned with Google's operation in China? As John Stossel would say, "Give me a Break!"
Did the US government not grant China 'Favored Nation' status? Google is doing the best it can and operating in a completely LEGAL manner. They are operating in China b/c the US allows them to.
Stupid & Ultimately Failed Middle East Policies (US sanctioned assinations, coup's, arming fundamentalists, Supporting Isreal's opression of the palestinians, etc...)
Rise of Terrorism (Gee whiz, I wonder why they are so upset?)
Unification of 'Private' Media Conglomerates
'Special' Interest Groups (I equate 'special', in this case, with retarded - groups usually concerned with protectionism tactics - unconcerned or ingnorant of the consequences)
Gulf Wars, I & II (Both Cases built upon 'faulty intelligence' and/or outright lies)
Patriot Act (Holding people without charges, indefinitely; Kangaroo courts)
State Sanctioned Torture... 'nuf said
NSA spying without Court Approval (Further errosion of US 'Checks and Balances')
China? CHINA?
Jesus people! Why don't you worry about the train wreck happening in your back yard before imposing your high moral standard on the neighbors.
This is more evidence that the state control/bias of the 2-3 major US media outlets is continueing to pay them huge dividends!
Sorry for the interuption, you may now go back to sleep...
instead of "tianamen square" try with "falun gong". the difference is nothing short of impressive.
You need to shut up.
Practising for a job in the Chinese government, are you?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
To the protestors: Don't go running off to tell other countries / businesses that they're doing something wrong, when you can't even make a phone call without knowing if Big Brother is watching. You'd think that people who value freedom of speech would also value privacy.
You won't be doing any business with roughly 90% of the country of earth because most governement around this "old dirty ball" are anti democratic, repressive, like to censor , or do not respect all/some of the basic human right. So, now that you have decided that Firm cannot do business with country with immoral policies, and the mondial economy collapse, What did you win ? What did the local operessed people win ? I ain't saying to leave China and other repressive country doing their bad stuff without protesting, but stopping doing business with them will NOT help.
Furthermore why this buff against China ? There are other repressive govt with policy as bad or maybe worst as China. This remind me of the Buff that the various US govt had in the past against Cuba. This is probably a left over from Cold war and Mccarthism "boo to those red commie of cuba and china!".
Especially that frankly the USA is not the "human right's shiny knight in armor on the white horse" that you seem to think it is. I won't say it is as bad as CHina, but things like thise nice cuban prison make one think...
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2053731645 001034711
I'm in the USA and what I'm seeing on this page is: This video is not playable in your country.
So for all the people saying "blame China, not Google," now do we blame Google or the USA?
rooooar
There are tanks on the fifth page of results.
I just had an idea. If a boycot has any effect or can be made by the acccountants who file things like SEC fileings then a company is required to note that in their quarterly earnings reports.
.cn offer an exemption to the cenorship rules because it effects their bottem lines?
Does China have the same kind of rule? What happens when google isn't able to put something like that in their chinese reports because the name of the organization mentiones Free Tibet?
Will Chinese investores demand that the
This could be fun.
Ascii artist &
Unfortunately the letters never made it to the executives, as they were mysteriously 'lost' in the Google mail receiving facility.
Google would have to either cooperate with the government's demand or shut down their Chinese operations. Financially, it would probably be much harder for them to pull out of China at that point than it would have been to never do business there to begin with. They'd have to either obey the Chinese government or take a huge hit to their profits, which shareholders probably wouldn't allow. So, Google would wind up being no different in this respect from Yahoo! or MSN.
Thanks for the insights David. These Google critics seem to be a bunch of self-righteous grandstanders making a knee-jerk reaction to something that, although troubling, is innocuous compared to the dealings of other firms. It's ridiculous to hold Google to some higher standard than we do Yah00 and M$(or all other companies that do business with China). Their choice was to provide NO Google capabilities, or to provide "censored" Google capabilities. Providing the latter isn't "doing evil". They've actually scaled the moral high ground by getting permission to fully inform the users that certain content has been censored! I knew about the Yah00 info that had been used to incarcerate Chinese dissidents, but the inapproproate language filter (freedom, etc.) on the M$ blogs is a new one. Notice that Google also stands up to a U.S. government that tries to grab their data while Yah00 and M$ roll over on their users with hardly a protest. Go ahead and write your letters, send your e-mails and run your self-righteous mouths in criticism of Google. Maybe you'll get more attention that way, even though you're way off target. Make sure you don't have any Chinese components in your computer . . . or any Chinese products in your house for that matter.
This page at Google Video seems to suggest it is.
Currently people in New Zealand and Singapore can view the video just fine.
I wish people would stop couching this in absolute terms so much. There is not absolute right here.
As I quote from this page,
"In the end, critics attack the censorship, but they fail to offer any insight as to how that censorship can be dealt with. There is nothing that these companies can do that can change the political reality in China, and when an absolute "non-evil" is not possible, then one has to accept the lesser of evils. Understandably, people are not comfortable with that notion, but perhaps this analogy would help. Normally, shooting your pet would be an immoral and "evil" thing to do. What if your pet is ill and will die soon? Ideally, you would take it to a vet, but what if that was not possible? Is shooting it to put it out of its misery still immoral? This is what I mean by choosing the lesser of two evils. It may very well be that because search engine technologies have matured and are converging that the contrast between the two evils is not so well amplified, but this principle is still applicable."
Why does slashdot so readily leap to google's defense?
They are a company. Companies want to make money.
In this case, google is helping keep information away
from the Chinese public. They are not as bad as microsoft
or yahoo yet (who have they turned over?). However.
Since their standard is complying with Chinese law,
how long until they do?
Why are they standing up to our government, but not the Chinese
government? Could it be because here they have stakes as citizens,
as well as businessmen?
Limited Time Offer, Limit One Per Customer. Not Redeemable For Cash.
You've got to love these stupid hippies... even if they've got something worth saying (which I'm not sure they do in this case)... they can't seem to do it in a way that doesn't make them look like dumb asses.
If anyone bothered to read the full documentation (of which obviously the chinese government hasn't, and no one in the /. community replying to this...)
It is my understanding of the google hacks, that you can actually bypass any such limitations they have supposedly implanted on the chinese google search...and provide
proper search queries if you know the google hacks to get them.
The chinese government needs to think that google is on their side, so google implements a visual search restriction which is purely cosmetic, as any true google hacker would know...
I for one think the point is moot, anyone that really wants to get information can,...they just need to know where and how to look....including chinese censored citizens.
Until the sky is falling, make mine 24!
From the recent Time magazine cover story:
"Google's P/E ratio (stock price divided by earnings per share, a measure of expected profits) is a whopping 76. Compared with the average of about 20 for S&P 500 tech stocks"
You need to check your facts.
I didn't say it was sane. To the contrary, I said Google is overpriced. And whoever gambles with an overpriced stock deserves to be punished. Which is what we're observing. Also, Google never releases any projections, so "expected profits" in their case are pulled out of some analyst's ass.
Rediculous is ridiculous.
And by the by, pretty much all that Students for a Free Tibet does is protest against China. That is kind of their thing.
I'm not defending the present Chinese regime, but it's important to attack it for the right reasons and defend the good things that the Maoists did when they were in power. ie before Daddy Bush brought Deng Xiao Ping into power
Here is a great article which rips to shreds this misplaced concern for the Dalai Lama and Tibetan culture and lays bare that the Tibetan system was based on one of the most evil forms of serfdom and oppression of women the world has known.
http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html
Here's an excerpt:
Shangri-La (for Lords and Lamas)
Religions have had a close relationship not only with violence but with economic exploitation. Indeed, it is often the economic exploitation that necessitates the violence. Such was the case with the Tibetan theocracy. Until 1959, when the Dalai Lama last presided over Tibet, most of the arable land was still organized into manorial estates worked by serfs. Even a writer sympathetic to the old order allows that "a great deal of real estate belonged to the monasteries, and most of them amassed great riches. . . . In addition, individual monks and lamas were able to accumulate great wealth through active participation in trade, commerce, and money lending."6 Drepung monastery was one of the biggest landowners in the world, with its 185 manors, 25,000 serfs, 300 great pastures, and 16,000 herdsmen. The wealth of the monasteries went mostly to the higher-ranking lamas, many of them scions of aristocratic families.
Secular leaders also did well. A notable example was the commander-in-chief of the Tibetan army, who owned 4,000 square kilometers of land and 3,500 serfs. He also was a member of the Dalai Lama's lay Cabinet.7 Old Tibet has been misrepresented by some of its Western admirers as "a nation that required no police force because its people voluntarily observed the laws of karma."8 In fact. it had a professional army, albeit a small one, that served as a gendarmerie for the landlords to keep order and hunt down runaway serfs.
Young Tibetan boys were regularly taken from their families and brought into the monasteries to be trained as monks. Once there, they became bonded for life. Tashì-Tsering, a monk, reports that it was common for peasant children to be sexually mistreated in the monasteries. He himself was a victim of repeated rape, beginning at age nine.9 The monastic estates also conscripted impoverished peasant children for lifelong servitude as domestics, dance performers, and soldiers.
In Old Tibet there were small numbers of farmers who subsisted as a kind of free peasantry, and perhaps an additional 10,000 people who composed the "middle-class" families of merchants, shopkeepers, and small traders. Thousands of others were beggars. A small minority were slaves, usually domestic servants, who owned nothing. Their offspring were born into slavery.10 The greater part of the rural population---some 700,000 of an estimated total of 1,250,000---were serfs. Serfs and other peasants generally were little better than slaves. They went without schooling or medical care. They spent most of their time laboring for high-ranking lamas or for the secular landed aristocracy. Their masters told them what crops to grow and what animals to raise. They could not get married without the consent of their lord or lama. And they might easily be separated from their families should their owners send them to work in a distant location.11
One 22-year old woman, herself a runaway serf, reports: "Pretty serf girls were usually taken by the owner as house servants and used as he wished." They "were just slaves without rights."12 Serfs needed permission to go anywhere. Landowners had legal authority to capture those who tried to flee. One 24-year old runaway welcomed the Chinese intervention as a "liberation." He claimed that under serfdom he was subjected to incessant toil, hunger, and cold. After his third failed escape, he was merciless beaten by the landlord's men un
As someone who uses engines, this is interesting to me. I am so glad it is on Slahdot. I will see that it is to there but I can not tell if it is true. Do you see it?
Practising for a job in the Chinese government, are you?
Ooh, how witty. What a clever person you must be. But you forgot to mention my mother...
Actually I just have a low tolerance for deliberate ignorance. The twit I corrected stated blatant falsehoods, probably through ignorance. He/She could have taken 30 seconds to research the claims. Hell, a simple googling would have sufficed. But no. The possibility that his/her preconceived biased opinion could be wrong never crossed his/her mind. (I'm going with the generic pronoun henceforth). So he just posted, making an ass of himself in public, and got called on it. Unfortunately the ass also got modded up as plenty (thankfully not all) mods shared the same biases.
kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
Practising for a job in the Chinese government, are you?
Actually I just have a low tolerance for deliberate ignorance. The twit I corrected stated blatant falsehoods, probably through ignorance. He/She could have taken 30 seconds to research the claims. Hell, a simple googling would have sufficed. But no. The possibility that his/her preconceived biased opinion could be wrong never crossed his/her mind. (I'm going with the generic pronoun henceforth). So he just posted, making an ass of himself in public, and got called on it.
Oh, wait, that researchless twit was _You_! Qu'elle surprise!
kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
For irony on slashdot. Hitler could not have done what he did without the popular support of the people. His popularity is a matter of historical record, so I would likewise suggest you try overcoming a bit of that ignorance of your own... you might try, oh, I dunno... using google with the words "hitler popularity." ...whether to help people under repressive governments and in what way. If you were under such regime, would you like others to help you or at minimum show some sympathy?
Well, gee, let's think.. would I want some other country invading my own while claiming to be 'freeing" me? Barring outright invasion, would I want them helping the people of the US overcome the current "reich" running this asylum? Depends on what you mean by "help." I know that if a Russian company wants to offer information or knowledge that is banned in the US, they do not "help us" by removing that content from the internet. If they offer a "tainted" version of their content that constrains itself to our laws and regulations, that will help their message attain popularity. On the contrary, removing themselves from a western presence completely only serves to marginalize any message they might offer, which means they do nothing at all to help us by being idealists.
Google is no demon. The largest search engine in china is a public corporation that made huge gains in worth after western (US) investors gobbled up stock, but Congress has had nothing at all to say about all those American investors supporting this "evil." The largest retailer in the fucking world is an Arkansas company that sustains its fortune selling barbie dolls and sneakers made by people who can fairly be described as endentured servants of the state and yet congress has been notably silent on that one as well... gee, wonder why?
Oh, wait, that researchless twit was _You_!
I was not the one who said that China doesn't have a constitution, you pompous windbag.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Actually it is a little bit more complicated than people assume.
Google has a vast array of forces arrayed against it at the moment.
Few outsiders realize it, but the anti PRC groups comprise a huge force in American politics, They include most churches (because of China's imprisonment and suppression of practicing Christians,) most unions (because of job losses and protectionism) and most military (because of China's immense buildup of military forces.) Add that in to the fact that most of these organizations also do massive amounts of charitable work and you have a group that can effectively decide most American elections. They are not someone you pick a fight with unless you are really serious about "going to the mattresses".
Now add in the investors. Google has performed admirably well, but it is very high priced, and it is not an index stock. (Index stock in this case means stocks that are part of an index like S&P), That means Google's investors are not the big index funds, (which only trade index stocks) and a lot of Google investors are getting very nervous about being caught up in irrational exuberance without a index fund cushioning price changes.
Googles involvement in China is especially worrisome to investors. Baidu (the Chinese Google) is rapidly increasing in market share, and the Chinese are not known for playing oarticularly nice when it comes to foreign investors versus locals.
There are plenty of other worrisome things as well, but the essential point is that anyone following Google is getting consideably worried that the company is somehow becoming the "Gettysburg" of the Chinese American economic war, when China isn't even one of their major profit centers.
In all fairness, Google management has always been concerned with the long term (an admirable trait in todays economy) and sees China as it major growth area in the future.
Whether or not that is an irrational expectation, of course, is another thing. It certainly isn't a sure bet.More importantly, is management being distracted from more significant short terms goals like profit?
And most importantly, will this issue "sop up" most of managements attention for the foreseeable future, thus limiting Googles ability to respond to other events of more immediate concern?
Other American search firms decided that this wasn't a fight they could afford, even though one of them is 8 times the size of Google. Will those other search firms take advantage of Googles preoccupation to regain market share? Certainly Yahoo is turning in an impressive effort in the technology arena recently and if Microsoft ever loosens up their "Windows only" focus, they could easily cause significant shifts in the enterprise software niche with their advanced technology and and highly effective HCI engineering.
I have chosen my battle and uninstalled squidguard!
There they are a conga line of suck holes. On the conservative side of Australian politics. - Mark Latham
If this guys really want to make their voices heard, then what they should do first is aim well at the people (government in this case)whose decision is banning google search results via "local laws", as google states at the very end of all their searches (oppossite to what Yahoo and Microsoft do). Aiming at google may create some argument between literate people but it is not really affecting the decision of the people who have the real power to "uncensor" the search results. Its that easy: aim your complaints at the GOVERNMENT, not GOOGLE.
Well, that does take the fun out of it all somewhat, doesn't it?
I do apologise good sir for this frightful case of mistaken identity. I do also, however, stand by my comments prior to this shocking error.
kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
any Chineese can bypass the censorship anyway, so why even bother making this an issue. i think google made a mistake by censoring, but on the other hand i don't think it will matter in the long run anyway. The chineese government is not even communist anymore, give it another decade and it will be completely unrecognizable from it's current form. like it or not, change is happening in china, and no amount of censorship is going to make that change stop.
Fool me once...shame on you, fool me twice...won't be fooled again (our president)