Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo Defends Itself On China Allegations
Vitaly Friedman writes "Yahoo defends its policies in China as doing more good than harm, even as multiple dissidents have been jailed based on Yahoo Mail evidence. From the article: 'Yahoo continues to defend itself against charges that its Chinese operations have been responsible for the jailing of multiple dissidents. Multiple reports have surfaced which tie Yahoo Mail to various Chinese court cases that have ended in imprisonment for writers with politically unpopular opinions.'"
"Yahoo defends its policies in China as doing more good than harm, even as multiple dissidents have been jailed based on Yahoo Mail evidence."
Only a Yahoo would believe such a claim. In related news, has anyone read Gulliver's Travels? I take it the people who chose the name for the company didn't.
Uttering logically derived and empirically supported truths to the disciples of the orthodox establishment.
In other news, in Jailand, a nation with a rate of imprisonment of people who later turned out to be innocent which recently topped 45%, a police spokesman commented that as the rate was below 50%, the police force was still doing more harm than good.
I say let China do what China is going to do and lets concentrate on making things better in America first - then we can work on improving China's (online) rights.
Invexi - a Phoenix, AZ based web design and web development company.
Jeez - why do people expect these for-profit companies to be driven by the same idealistic, personal visions they have for the internet?
The internet is a technology - it's goal is not to undermine communism or authoritarian governments or to impose US ideals/values upon other countries. So why are so many people 'shocked' that companies like Yahoo! actually abide by the laws in the countries they do business in?
Look at wikipedia - just how successful do you think they'll be in China now that they're officially blocked??? Exact same thing would happen to Yahoo!
So clearly, Yahoo is also powerless to change there own business practices.
I mean, that totally makes sense, right?
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
This article is just fanning the flames trying to get into the tired arguement of evil China versus the wonderful and free internet. Been there, done that...
Give it a rest dudes. Please.
We are all just people.
This is just a reflection of the current US mindset. Yahoo, while harming a couple individuals, is spreading the "freedom" out to many. This is just like our own government monitors watching their own people and their daily activities. It may cause harm to many innocents while taking down a terrorist or two.
Though the nation was founded by those who think this is WRONG to harm innocents in the process of justice, those in charge don't mind. (the sheep do not matter....)
The government won't say boo about China. ~20% of the world's people live under a repressive regime and the leader dines with Bill Gates (a few weeks ago). Government doesn't give a rats ass so long as there's profit to be made. Just as good Ferengi should.
Trolling is a art,
Yahoo doesn't have to play by China's rules. Rather than profiteer off a regime that actually fears its own citizens so much that it needs to jail anyone who doesn't follow the officially sanctioned line, it could just simply get up and leave, and demonstrate that it isn't simply a money-grubbing whore.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The article's opening argument is specious. The choice is between Yahoo! or any other email provider, both of whom must follow the same local laws. So it is absolutely irrelevant whether it is Yahoo! or somebody else. The dissidents would have been jailed either way. Plus, it ignores the fact that Yahoo! is more than just email.
About the best you can say is, "Shame on you, Yahoo!, for letting it be you." But, if you're going to do that, you better shame all of us for buying Chinese products. We're just as complicit.
I agree with Yahoo!, Google, and the rest on this one. As long as the United States has a policy of trying to liberate China through the open market, Yahoo!, Google, and the rest are just doing their part. What's more, they're bringing in a greater amount of information into China, faster, in a way that's very easy to access. Sure, much of it will be censored, but the more information, the faster it comes in, and the easier it is to access, the more difficult censorship and control becomes. China's ability to censor is neither perfect nor infinite and the more often it is hit, the more often it will fail.
I honestly have trouble understanding how you could miss this point but here goes: Yahoo are not being held responsible for their inability to control Chinese policy, they are being held responsible for their own collaboration with that regime. Do you understand?
If you turn a political dissident over to the Chinese government then you are responsible for your actions. If I do it then I'm responsinble. If Yahoo do it then as a company they are responsible, and the individuals involved in making the decisions and carrying them out are also responsible. Appeals of "well but it helps me make money" are not any kind of moral justification.
The point is they didn't have to.
In the cases sited, Yahoo gave the Government information without due legal process. Yes, even in Hong Kong there is a separation of Judiciary and Legislature.
The point is that Yahoo did not do this because it had to, other HK and Western companies reguarly follow proper due process.
Yahoo clearly did this to suck up to a government which will be handing out contracts and concessions - essentially it grassed its customers for cash. They should be f*****g shot b***stards. Collaborators - Scum. Judases.
Yahoo made money. To them, that's all that matters. The taxes on their profits help fund your schools, your hospitals, your roads, your military.
The profit chain doesn't just stop with Yahoo. Ultimately, the suppression of the Chinese people benefits Americans, and most other western countries. Not just through Yahoo, but through the collusion of countless other multinational companies with the Chinese oligarchs.
Our societies profit from the oppression of other nations. They did it during the colonial era, and they are doing it right now. The method has changed, some might say it's less severe now, but the result is the same.
People lose their freedom, so we live in opulence. And for most people in the west, it's a price they are more than happy to accept. Compassion is a rare commodity in the face of profit.
May the Maths Be with you!