China Reinstates Wikipedia Ban

Rob T Firefly writes "The International Herald Tribute reports that the lifting of China's Wikipedia ban earlier this week was short-lived. Wikipedia is once again inaccessible from behind the Great Firewall, along with all other Wikimedia projects. Additionally, the URL of Chinese Wikipedia is once again a banned search term. No reason has yet been given for any of it." From the article: "It wasn't immediately clear if Wikipedia was inaccessible due to technical glitches or because government censors had blocked the site again. The Foreign Ministry and Ministry of Information Industry did not immediately respond when contacted for comment Friday. Beijing blocked access to the English and Chinese versions of Wikipedia in October last year, apparently out of concern about entries touching on the country's sensitive spots -- Tibet, Taiwan and other topics."

Comments

1324tr134f

[riff420]

China sucks! Hoytie in 2008!

Didn't see that coming at all.

[silentounce]

Nothing to see here.
Move along.

The Great Firewall?!?!

[Anonymous Coward]

I love puns!

You like flied lice?

[__aadzjv6747]

We fly likipedia! Good dear for you!

Re:You like flied lice?

[__aadzjv6747]

Troll? Eat me, assholes. It's called a joke.

Re:You like flied lice?

[Gregory Cox]

You're thinking of Japanese. Chinese has different 'l' and 'r' sounds, and a 'wi' sound too.

Re:You like flied lice?

[Gregory Cox]

Oops, I'm wrong about the 'wi' part. But there is a 'wei' sound.

Re:You like flied lice?

[__aadzjv6747]

It was a joke... and no, Chinese does not have different 'r' and 'l' sounds. Nor does it differentiate between 't' and 'd,' 'p' and 'b' or 'g' and 'k.'

Re:You like flied lice?

[The Anarchist Avenge]

Do you speak Chinese? Because I do, so I know that ri and li are two seperate and distinctly different sounding words.

Re:You like flied lice?

[Anonymous Coward]

-1, Racist & ignorant

Re:You like flied lice?

[Anonymous Coward]

Jokes are funny. That one wasn't.

Re:You like flied lice?

[Anonymous Coward]

Who speaks Chinese? Maybe you can speak Mandarin, Cantonese, or one of the other languages that are used to vocalize the Chinese written language, but you don't speak Chinese. Maybe you speak to Chinese (people). Maybe you speak of Chinese (people). You don't speak Chinese because that's not the right noun to use to specify the spoken language. OTOH if you do speak ALL of the Chinese languages, you're still wrong because they're not at all similar and I really doubt ri vs. li exists in all of them. I know what you are saying about ri vs. li in Mandarin.

Perhaps the way for people to think about this (in a kinda backwards way) is that you can transcribe spoken English into written American English, written Queen's English, or l33t, but they're definitely different. Or maybe EBCDIC vs. ASCII -- both can be used to record a work of Shakespeare, but yeah they're different.

Re:You like flied lice?

[Knuckles]

and no, Chinese does not have different ...

Says who? Standard High Chinese ("Mandarin") certainly has differences between r, l, t, d, p, b, g, and k. In detail (I assume you use Pinyin):

r: similar to English r, tip of the tongue rolled upwards, voiced
l: like in land or lung

t: like english t, tip of the tongue touches back side of upper front teeth, but strongly aspirated with audible breath following the sound
d: like t but not aspirated; short

p: like english p, but strongly aspirated with audible breath following the sound
b: like p, but not aspirated; short

g: similar to english g; not aspirated, not voiced
k: strongly aspirated with audible breath following the sound; speak nearly like kh

Re:You like flied lice?

[AK Marc]

Standard High Chinese ("Mandarin") [...]

Well, it might in the north, and it might not in the south. Even with one unifying language, there is still very little movement within the country, and people learning the provincial language as well as Mandarin. So in the South, the "l" and "n" are pronounced the same. This was pointed out to me while I was talking with someone from the south when a Beijing native was poking fun at him. They are unable to spell some things in Pinyin because of the ambiguity of the sounds. I'd write it down two or three ways, look up all of them in the dictionary and report the correct Pinyin spelling back. So, that you tell me they are distinct when multiple people born in China tell me otherwise when I'm sitting in China, I'm going to believe them over you. Don't take it personally.

Ask 10 English speakers across the globe about the "correct" spelling of color/colour or the pronunciation of patent (specifically whether the "a" is long or short), and you will come up with different answers in different regions. For people half a world away to debate the pronunciation of Chinese is an academic pursuit that will not yield meaningful results. North China has a hard "R". Taiwan does not. The "R" in Taiwan is more like a "J" Southern China has the "R" sounded more like the "L" sound that people make fun of. There are differences in accents and pronunciation around China, just like there are southern, Boston, and other US accents and the UK, within the UK, Australia, New Zealand, etc.

Re:You like flied lice?

[Knuckles]

Everything you say makes sense, but please note that I replied to phubar who had flatly stated that "Chinese does not have different 'r' and 'l' sounds. Nor does it differentiate between 't' and 'd,' 'p' and 'b' or 'g' and 'k.'".

Re:You like flied lice?

[AK Marc]

I was using the plural "you" for everyone reading, not trying to be accusatory. It was for the benefit of all reading. The person you were responding to was wrong, just as wrong as if he had said 'patent' and 'patient' have the same initial 'a' sound. It may be correct for some subset of those that speak English, but it is not a universal truth. You are correct in that the "official" pronunciation has a differentiation between all sounds. I was adding to your statements, reminding readers that what may be official is not necessarily what is spoken. I did not intend it to be critical of your post specifically.

Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[ackthpt]

In Beijing you have the conservatives and the hard-line conservatives duking it out for control. When policy changes it's because one side has momentarily gained the upper hand, or believed they had, and ordered the change.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[riff420]

I ORDERED ROBSTA CRAW

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Vellmont]

When policy changes it's because one side has momentarily gained the upper hand, or believed they had, and ordered the change.

I really have no understanding of how policy is set in China, but I might be able to believe that if Wikipedia was accessible for a month or two, but a major blocking policy like this changing over a few days seems a bit insane. Is there really no one in charge over there that makes decisions that last more than a few days? How the hell can you run a country like that?

Since the change from block->no-block->block was all so abrupt I'd say it's more likely that this was just either a technical glitch in the firewall, or a deliberate attempt at trying to perpetuate the belief inside China that there IS no official censorship and it's all just "trouble contacting some sites".

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Anonymous Coward]

Just wanted to help you out with this one so you'll know next time...China (where Beijing is) is a communist country. Communism is a liberal ideal; not a conservative ideal. Waaaaay on the other side of the political spectrum from conservatism is communism.

Carry on...

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Anonymous Coward]

You've obviously never heard the head of the MII talk. The dude's INSANE.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Anonymous Coward]

Communism is a liberal ideal; not a conservative ideal. Waaaaay on the other side of the political spectrum from conservatism is communism.

If someone is a conservative, they are working to CONSERVE the status quo. So in China, the Communists are conservatives. The liberals would be supporters of democracy.

The words are also used differently in Europe. And once upon a time in the USA, liberals were supporters of democracy and a free market... it's different now. The terms are not bound to any specific ideology.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Anonymous Coward]

I can not believe how incredibly stupid you are. Really, I'm baffled. I thought I had seen so many people be so stupid that I couldn't be shocked by stupidity anymore. You've proven me wrong. Wow.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Anonymous Coward]

I stand corrected. I simply used my Western idea of what conservatism and liberalism are and applied it to China.

I would like to thank you for the friendly correction. You could have said something childish like, "You dumbF* you don't know what you're talking about you f'in idiot!", and you would have been correct. :-) But you didn't and I appreciate that. You are obviously one of the few adults around here.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[anaesthetica]

I might be able to believe that if Wikipedia was accessible for a month or two, but a major blocking policy like this changing over a few days seems a bit insane.

This pattern of behavior was played out on a much larger scale early on in PRC history: the Hundred Flowers Campaign followed by the Anti-Rightist Movement. The pattern is: open up and seemingly liberalize communications for a brief period; then, once everyone who criticizes the government identifies themselves, you go clean them up. Pretty straightforward.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Anonymous Coward]

I can not believe how incredibly stupid you are. Really, I'm baffled. I thought I had seen so many people be so stupid that I couldn't be shocked by stupidity anymore. You've proven me wrong. Wow.

I don't know about anyone else, but that in-depth analysis sure convinced me.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Anonymous Coward]

"conservatives"

Incorrect terminology. The proper term is "hard-liners".

Silly lieberal, trix are for kids.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Anonymous Coward]

One day, son, when you grow up, you will realize that people make mistakes and that it is OK to do so. Adults, can admit when they are wrong. I admitted to the gentleman who corrected my mistake in a grown-up manner that I was indeed wrong. I did so in a self-depricating manner as well. (By basically calling myself an idiot in jest.) Adults tend to do that to hide the embarrassment that comes with putting one's foot in one's mouth. Adults tend to respond to self-depricating humour with laughter or some similar display of emotion that is something other than childish aggression. That is a handy way to diffuse many potentially tension-filled situations. I know, I know...this is all above your head right now but, some day, when you have lived long enough to have matured past the "na-na-na-boo-boo-stick-your-head-in-doo-doo" stage of life, you'll understand. When you finally reach that point in your life, and I'm sure you will because the fact that you are here shows that you at least have the mental capacity to read and comprehend, you will look back on moments like this and cringe with shame and embarrassment. I do so quite frequently.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Vellmont]

The pattern is: open up and seemingly liberalize communications for a brief period; then, once everyone who criticizes the government identifies themselves, you go clean them up


Hmm.. It's an interesting theory, but it doesn't sound very plausible. If your goal was to find anyone with conflicting views that wants to express them wouldn't you leave the doors open more than a couple days? What would be the purpose to close it down so quickly? Word of Wikipedia being open might not have even spread very widely, or the cautious people would still be avoiding revealing themselves. If it was a trap, I'd think they've sprung it waaay too early.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Anonymous Coward]

Right. I owe you an apology. No, I don't usually talk to people like this. I guess it's the fact that this is slashdot or that the "Carry on" made you sound really condescending but I replied in a way I would to a troll or an asshole. Your other posts made it clear that that wasn't what you deserve. I'm actually very surprised to find such a reply as yours on here.
Anyway, my apologies.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[ClamIAm]

In Beijing you have the conservatives and the hard-line conservatives duking it out for control.

Sounds a lot like Washington, D.C.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[jafac]

...once everyone who criticizes the government identifies themselves, you go clean them up. Pretty straightforward.. . .

. . . which is why Karl Rove didn't rig the 2006 mid-term elections. . .

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Squalish]

In the NPOV political spectrum (before people in the US started using certain places in the spectrum with the same vehemence that their counterparts used sexuality slurs twenty years ago or racial slurs forty years ago):

Regressives reach back to the history of a nation for ideas that have been thrown out, and try to bring them back - 'You modern panzies need to get used to coal - I worked the mines until I was 16, and I'm healthy as an ox. Isn't it a great symbol of our strength that we can decapitate a MOUNTAIN? We could get even more GREEN energy by damming up this river, if you're one of those hippy types.'

Conservatives are comfortable with the old ways, but are mostly cautiously optimistic about the way things are, and are opposed to major change. 'Really, oil and natural gas will probably last forever, and if they don't, we'll just shift to other things like coal, tar sands, oil shales, etc. we have plenty of stuff, why try to fix something that isn't broken? The market will handle it.'

Moderates acknowledge that some isolated changes to the current order are probably beneficial, but that the overall system is sound. 'I'd be happy putting solar panels on my roof if you subsidize it, but riding a bike? Come on, in this weather? Have you seen my new Prius? We'll pull through, you'll see.'

Liberals believe that major changes are needed for the nation to prosper, but accept the general framework of government they are presented with. 'We may need to plunge several trillion dollars into alternative energy to get something that doesn't contribute to global warming, and still allows the >50% of us that live in the car-enabled suburbs to survive. I can sacrifice a lot if it means my kids have it as good as I had it.'

Radicals believe that drastic change is needed at the most basic level, and often revolution is the only means to get that done. 'This drek cannot continue - we're raping Mother Earth, and she's not gonna let us do that much longer without fighting back. The smokestacks have to go down NOW - the development has to stop NOW. Corporations have no conscience whatsoever and if government won't force them into a better path of action, I will. Or rather, the explosive fertilizer I've skimmed off my organic farm will.'

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[stunt_penguin]

China is not a communist country in anything other than name, nor has it ever been. It was a brutal stalinist dictatorship, then just lurched into totalarian regime that deals with capitalists because it suits them.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Monsuco]

In Beijing you have the conservatives and the hard-line conservatives duking it out for control.

How in the heck is a communist party "conservative", China is still communal, they just are starting to realize how bad big government and income redistribution is.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[1u3hr]

How in the heck is a communist party "conservative"

Maintaining "traditional values" is conservative, and after being in power for about 60 years, the Communist Party is extremely traditionl. They're as revolutionary as twe Daughters of the American Revolution are.

China is still communal, they just are starting to realize how bad big government and income redistribution is.

China is very happy with big government. With 1.3 billion people you can hardly not have big government. And you'll be happy to know that income redistribution has been reversed, since the 80s, as capitalism runs rampant and the rich (oddly enough, those with good connections with the Communist Party) get richer and the poor work for a pittance making products to sell in Walmart.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[hasdikarlsam]

Mod parent up - that was the clearest explanation of the political spectrum that I've seen yet.

Though if you believe Stephen Hawking, it's already too late to stop the venusification of earth. I can only hope he's wrong; it's not his field, after all.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[icestone]

I hope the "one side" you mentioned is not refer to it's people, because it will never happen.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[Kattspya]

I wouldn't agree. That would put libertarians and the conservatives in the same category. The political compass is a much better way. As it places social and economic authoritarianism on different axis.

Re:Reflects the Politics in Beijing

[DrWho520]

wouldn't you leave the doors open more than a couple days? What would be the purpose to close it down so quickly?

If they let people criticize the government for too long, other people start to listen. That runs the risks of more people criticizing the goverment. Those freely spoken ideas begin to spread and suddenly you have a square full of student protesters. They you have to call in the tanks. But what goverment would ever do that to its youth?

Could be....

[otacon]

Could be a "technical" problem...

Re:Could be....

[silentounce]

And the people pounding on the doors of avid Chinese wiki users could be Avon ladies.

Re:Could be....

[BurningTyger]

Yes, it was a "technical" problem that the ban was lifted.
Now the problem has been resolved ^^.
Nothing to see here. Move along ~

Re:Could be....

[businessnerd]

Chinese Gov: What? You mean you can't access the site? Oh we're terribly sorry, there must be a technical problem. We have identified the problem and we are working on it. Expect to be back on Wikipedia in six to eight years.

Reinstate???

[Kainaw]

How can China reinstate a ban that wasn't ever lifted (according to Slashdot's coverage)? I tried to submit reports that China lifted the ban earlier in the week, but my attempts were rejected by the Slashdot editors. Now that the ban has been reinstated, Slashdot is all over reporting it. I feel that it is very one-sided to be so eager to report when the Chinese government does something wrong and ignore the news when they do something right.

Re:Reinstate???

[otacon]

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/15/151322 7

Re:Reinstate???

[Thraxen]

How would 'never lifting the ban' be doing 'something right'?

Re:Reinstate???

[3rd_Floo]

Actually, you should notice it was reported the ban was lifted two days ago. Although it was cleaverly disguised as a surge in Chinese Wiki-use.

Wikinews link

[Rob T Firefly]

Here is the Wikinews link I referred to in the submission. I hadn't found the AP article yet.

Never ascribe to malice...

[jginspace]

...that which can be explained by incompetence.

Whether the earlier opening up or this latest blocking is on purpose I don't think we'll know. According to the Chinese delegate to the conference in Greece two weeks ago no sites are blocked.

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[silentounce]

"According to the Chinese delegate to the conference in Greece two weeks ago no sites are blocked."

Wow, China is more liberal with the internet than my employer. Maybe I'll move there, I hear Tiananmen Square is lovely in June.

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[krell]

" According to the Chinese delegate to the conference in Greece two weeks ago no sites are blocked."

The same delegate would also be glad to tell you of China's wonderful human rights record, how much Chinese occupation has improved Tibet, and how China is democratic.

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[Anonymous Coward]

And how they've always been at war with Oceania.

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[krell]

"And how they've always been at war with Oceania."

Pretty hard to do without a navy.

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[DeltaQH]

Sabotage?

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[Anonymous Coward]

Their navy is *so* stealthy nobody even believes it exists.

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[thue]

"According to the Chinese delegate to the conference in Greece two weeks ago no sites are blocked."

Dishonesty like that just amaze. Who do they think they are fooling? To say something like that with a straight face you have to put no value on truth and honesty.

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[kabocox]

" According to the Chinese delegate to the conference in Greece two weeks ago no sites are blocked."
The same delegate would also be glad to tell you of China's wonderful human rights record, how much Chinese occupation has improved Tibet, and how China is democratic.

Hey, maybe when the delegate gets back and finds out that his sites are blocked, then they'll become unblocked. I'm sorry, but such a big thing is made of one event of the Chinese government of course they'll want to sweep it under the rug, and they've been very successful at that domestically. I bet you if it you went over to China and asked 10-20 random Chinese people about your selected Chinese government actions that you don't like, they'll either shrug it off, say it's foreign media trying to discredit the Chinese government, or come up with a list of things that your government has done that you might not agree with. The US government doesn't yet have the power to block wikipedia. Wait awhile. It might get that power though or use selective filtering rather than blocking the entire sites. I think that your average citizen around the globe wouldn't be surprised by what their government does that isn't in their citizens best interests.

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[Kesh]

The Chinese have a navy. It's just very quiet.

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[orkysoft]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/16/flying_air craft_carrier/

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[idonthack]

(Score:4, Funny)

Because 3,000 dead is so amusing.

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[jamar0303]

Yes, because Tiananmen square some 18 years ago totally defines China in current times. Try living in Shanghai instead- it's easy to get around government controls on the internet if you ask the right people.

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[chickenandporn]

There might be something else to consider: the auto-blocker system that CHina uses might be blocking the foreign site, but that site might not be permanently on a block-list. Bear with a sec.

When anyone in China hit a "bad" page (something with amoral content, but probably anything that makes China's history look in a way it prefers to avoid) the filters send TCP_RSTs in both directions of the connection; that IP is also black-holed for 15 minutes, apparently -- enough for the user to lose interest and move on.

If that blocking system merely considers the word "wiki" to be bad, or "blog", then wikipedia is not permanently blocked per-se, but the Chinese public is mercifully protected from the profane words "wiki" and "blog". Isn't that a good thing?

So... someone eneds to ask these representatives whether "wiki" and/or "blog" are profanity, according to the filters, the same way it protects us from Falung... KJHHGH3J493O2K^ NO CARRIER

Re:Never ascribe to malice...

[silentounce]

18 years is nothing. You may want to read up a bit, Tiananmen Square has been around for a lot longer than 18 years.
 
In other news, during the 4000+ years of Chinese history there has never been a peaceful change of governmental regime.

Unplugged his tubes?

[dotancohen]

It wasn't immediately clear if Wikipedia was inaccessible due to technical glitches or because government censors had blocked the site again. The Foreign Ministry and Ministry of Information Industry did not immediately respond when contacted for comment Friday.

That's probably because somebody unplugged his internet, too. Tubes, right?
http://www.lyricslist.com/lyrics/artist_albums/108 /carey_mariah.php/

Re:Unplugged his tubes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Jesus christ, quit with the god damn fucking lyrics link spam already. I hope you shitbricks die in fires.

pool's over

[brunascle]

alright, you heard him, pool's over. who had 2 days?

Excellent tactic

[Akvum]

Let the ban lapse so all the free thinkers and government detractors can post on a popular site, then ban it one week later... sounds like they wanted an easy way to find out who to arrest next!

Re:Excellent tactic

[Anonymous Coward]

A small-scale replay of the Hundred Flowers Campaign that preceded the Cultural Revolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Flowers_Campa ign

Of course it won't seem so small-scale to the people tossed into the jail...

Re:Excellent tactic

[fa2k]

This reasoning assumes that the ultimate goal of the Chinese gov't is to arrest its citizens. People using Wikipedia are not necessarily free-thinking or critical off the government, so this would be almost random people (although not the poor farmers who don't have Internet access). I do think the Chinese regime is bad, and it is oppressive, but I don't think it is evil for the sake of being evil. Even if it was, there are thousands of other ways to prosecute random citizens. The un-banning of WP allowed many people to get lots of 'bad' information, probably making this whole venture a net loss for the Chinese government.

If it was trying to arrest people who use WP for finding info which conflicts with their views (i.e. being bad for keeping its perverse amounts of power), it should rather monitor the proxy connections and other work-arounds, for finding people who, for whatever reason, really need to get on the 'wiki.

In summary, as others also have concluded, this may be 1) a technical glitch, 2) a policy change which had unforseen consequences, and was reverted, 3) a political struggle between different factions in the government or 4) a plot to find out what people might like WP, log them, prosecute them, and maybe scare others from using 'open' websites carelessly. The fourth option seems unlikely to me.

Tick Tock

[Virtualtaco]

Good. With the economy growing the way it is in China, and the technology spreading, it's just a matter of time before that poor excuse for a government loses grip. The more they push, the faster it will happen. These guys can't even get a highway infrastructure for their country, or they don't want to so they can keep the people where they are. Regardless, the clock is ticking.

Re:Tick Tock

[megaditto]

You are wrong (I think).

Rich, well-fed people do not drive revolutions. On the other hand, if you are hungry, cannot get a job, live on the street, cannot cloth your kids... in short, if you have nothing to lose, then all the freedom and democracy in the world will not abate your unrest.

So the fact that China becomes prosperous is a very good news for the Dear Leaders. And very bad for our military.

Re:Tick Tock

[Vellmont]

Rich, well-fed people do not drive revolutions.

Huh. I could have sworn most of the founding fathers in the US were wealthy land owners. I suppose you could argue that they weren't the ones DRIVING the revolution, merely the ones leading it. But I've also never heard about the American revolution being started because the majority of people were hungry or un-employed. From what I've been told it was that people were pissed off that England was imposing draconian controls on trade, freedom of expression, etc.

Re:Tick Tock

[2short]

"Rich, well-fed people do not drive revolutions"

Sure they do! Certainly the American revolution was driven by the rich and well fed. More often when the non-desperate drive socail change it is by non-violent means, of course. Of the examples I can think of off the top of my head, it would seem social change movements intitated mostly by the not-entirely-desperate are the ones likely to produce lasting positive change. The desperate also drive revolutiuons, but their movements are more likely to get hijacked by strongmen who promise (and deliver) something differnet, but not necessarily better.

The starving do not fight for freedom, they fight for food. When people have some reasonable level of security, they can afford to be concerned about civil liberties and corruption.

So I predict increased prosperity will indeed be a problem for Chinas leaders. Whether they transition away from their repressive policies, or screw up the prosperity, or get messily overthrown remains to be seen.

Re:Tick Tock

[Cheeko]

That and taxes, they didn't like being taxed with no say in the matter. It always comes back to the all powerful dollar... Err pound in this case I guess.

Re:Tick Tock

[Virtualtaco]

Sorry, not being clear. You know how we have the idea of "The rich get richer while the poor get poorer" here? That's exponential for them. It's not free trade economic growth there. As China's economy picks up the differential between the rich and the poor grows, leading to the unrest. Also, the price tag of oppression in China is already set at a certain level of fear. The government can't all of the sudden act weak and benevolent, lifting the spirits of the poor, unless there is some mock coupe or something thereof. Although, if they keep their own military happy enough to kill their own people (Tiananmen square) then they can most definatly keep the fear alive. Wish there were an easy answer...

Re:Tick Tock

[DragonWriter]

Huh. I could have sworn most of the founding fathers in the US were wealthy land owners.

The "American Revolution" was a regional separatist movement, which has a bit of a different dynamic than other "revolutions". Still, there is a bit of a point there: both types of revolts are often driven by the at least moderately well-off who see themselves as positioned to be even more well-off if the revolution succeeds, but rely on the plight of the badly off who are easily driven to resent either the physically distant (in the case of regional separatist movements) or socially distant (in other revolutions) ruling class for foot soldiers, though in revolutions other than regional separatist movements, the plight of the poor versus the apparent position of the rich generally has to be very bad, because there is otherwise generally less of a distinct clash of identity between the people revolting and those they are revolting against (though clear differences race, religion, or similar identity between the ruled and the rulers can facilitate in creating a clash that can drive rebellion with less of a visible economic divide.)

Re:Tick Tock

[Vellmont]

Still, there is a bit of a point there: both types of revolts are often driven by the at least moderately well-off who see themselves as positioned to be even more well-off if the revolution succeeds

Hmm.. I sure haven't extensively studied the founding fathers of the US, but it's my understanding that they were quite driven to establish liberty, and not simply driven by greed or a lust for power. If you read what they wrote about (and argued amongst themselves) it becomes quite apparent they weren't just a bunch of greedy bastards looking to make themselves more rich and powerfull.

That's not to say these guys were all perfect and without self interest. Jefferson had frickin slaves. But to simplify the American Revolution down to a few people trying to give themselves more power is simply not true. You only need look at the Bill of Rights to understand they weren't just power-hungry dictators.

Re:Tick Tock

[Shihar]

Rich, well-fed people do not drive revolutions.

That actually is not true at all. Many, if no most successful revolutions at least have the backing of the middle class. The middle class wields incredible power both in terms of finding intellectual justification for rebellion as well as financial support. Money and education do a lot to drive a revolution forward.

If you want some close to home examples, Europe's slide out of monarchy all came at the hands of a well fed middle class. The American revolution was led by wealthy land owners. Hell, Mao, the leader of the Chinese communist revolution came from a well to do family and was formally educated.

Re:Tick Tock

[DragonWriter]

Hmm.. I sure haven't extensively studied the founding fathers of the US, but it's my understanding that they were quite driven to establish liberty, and not simply driven by greed or a lust for power.

I didn't say anything about the US founding fathers in particular, I said both types of revolt are often shaped by certain processes. OTOH, every revolutions leaders, now matter how self-interested their goals actually are, of course mouth propaganda that appeals to the masses with noble ideals. Often (even when they are serving their self-interest) they likely believe it, too, the human mind has a vast capacity for rationalizing self-interest in idealistic terms. And, of course, the leaders of many revolutions of any kind are going to be a diverse bunch, not a bunch of people whose motives, overt and deeper, are all identical.

In any case, I think arguing details of the specific motivations of the American revolution in response to a discussion of the relation of the Chinese situation with general trends it what motivates or produces rebellion is somewhat pointless if it isn't grounded in anything broader than the particular motivation of particular American leaders.

Re:Tick Tock

[Vellmont]

In any case, I think arguing details of the specific motivations of the American revolution in response to a discussion of the relation of the Chinese situation with general trends it what motivates or produces rebellion is somewhat pointless if it isn't grounded in anything broader than the particular motivation of particular American leaders.

I agree. My only point in bringing up the American revolution was to give an undeniable case where revolution wasn't sparked by hungy, unemployed people. I'm certainly not a historian, so I'm unqualified to discuss revolution in the more general case.

Re:Tick Tock

[SeePage87]

I agree completely and I think the grandparent is, more or less, correct on the state of things in China. Ignoring obvious exceptions, China's wealthy are businessmen who are efficiently using the country's extraordinary human capital to out compete the rest of the world; they aren't rent seekers supporting the current regime to maintain their privileged position. A government which, as you elegantly stated, "[imposes] draconian controls on trade" garner these "rich, well-fed" ill favor, and some of these corporations have many thousands of employees. In the modern world, I can think of no one more likely and able to start and support a revolution than these rich and well-fed. It may boil down to the all-mighty dollar, but money does tend to push in the direction of more freedom, so, in this case, I'm not complaining.

Re:Tick Tock

[bogjobber]

Hmm.. I sure haven't extensively studied the founding fathers of the US, but it's my understanding that they were quite driven to establish liberty, and not simply driven by greed or a lust for power.

It would be more accurate to say that they were driven to re-establish liberty. Americans at the time still saw themselves as British. They thought the way the British government was set up was actually quite good. They simply thought King George was a bad ruler. That is why after the revolution the American government was extremely similar to the British government of the time but with changes designed to balance the power of the monarch.

I do agree with your point, however it should be noted that almost every issue that they disagreed with the British government about was either tax or land related. In the beginning (before outright war started) it was almost entirely about money. It wasn't until the king started taking away basic rights (The Intolerable Acts) that the First Continental Congress was formed and outright revolution started. Even after that, it probably would've been able to reconcile the differences between the government and colonists if the acts were repealed and the colonists' complaints were addressed.

Re:Tick Tock

[RealGrouchy]

The US revolution was because the people at the top of the ladder were overseas. They had final say on the rules, and they collected taxes from the colonies.

Those on the next rung down (the domestic élite) didn't like that, and convinced everybody to revolt.

Post-revolution, the ladder was still the same, just one rung shorter. The people at the bottom were still at the bottom, just with slightly fewer people controlling them.

- RG>

Re:Tick Tock

[Sinbios]

I'm sure if I was trying to get the poor and oppressed to help me with my revolution, I'd be all about the liberty and freedom and whatnot, too. Of course, if I actually believed that I wouldn't have let the slave trade in my new country last for almost another hundred years.

Re:Tick Tock

[hunterx11]

Hmm.. I sure haven't extensively studied the founding fathers of the US, but it's my understanding that they were quite driven to establish liberty, and not simply driven by greed or a lust for power. If you read what they wrote about (and argued amongst themselves) it becomes quite apparent they weren't just a bunch of greedy bastards looking to make themselves more rich and powerfull.

I wouldn't necessarily call a desire for prosperity that was being inhibited by foreign rule "simply driven by greed", but the liberty of the Founding Fathers was not the liberty of today, not only because it excluded blacks and women, but the poor as well. Most states had property qualifications both for voting and for holding office, the paper money movement was seen as one of the greatest threats, and Hamilton even called Jefferson a traitor to his class for supporting public education. Many of the Framers stood to gain a great deal from the Constitution both in the assurance that debts would be repaid and that it would facilitate mercantile interests. There is nothing necessarily nefarious about it, and many of the things that benefitted the Founders and Framers directly were also for the good of the country: however, to recognize the economic interests underpinning the American genesis does not even require one to look at ulterior motives so much as what early influential Americans actually openly said about their motives. Although a bit dated now, Charles Beard's An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States of America is the seminal work that sought to historically describe the motivations behind the Constitution independently of conventional assumptions.

Re:Tick Tock

[mabhatter654]

true, most revolutions happen from the newly lesser rich, that find the glass ceiling in the law protecting the really rich/ landed. Right not there are not many of the newly minted rich over there just yet. Right now they're all feasting off the teat of freshly deregulated government controlled resources... they're getting the inside track on govt controlled real estate, and jobs ahead of everybody else. One day they'll wake up and realize the big bad communists thought the whole thing was a mistake and they'll start taking stuff back. And the newly minted rich Chinese will mount a rebellion the likes not seen before. Right now "capitalism" is in a happy, honeymoon period over there... on day the commies will pull the rug out... and all the newly rich real estate moguls and middle managers used to their taste of the west will get it all yanked away... the common people won't care, "new boss same as the old" and all, it won't be international students standing in front of tanks, it will be the people that own the tank making companies that rebel next time.

Too much vandalism

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like they were vandalizing it by replacing all of the text with ?'s anyways...

Re:Too much vandalism

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously, you are an ignorant Amerikkkan. The ? marks in question are quite obviously inserted as place holders for current gaps in Chinese collective knowledge. You should go back to your Amerikkkan skkkool and gain some kkknowledge for yourself before returning here to be enlightened by your betters. U.S.ian bottom feeders...

Blame canada

[denis-The-menace]

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=a f642b87-7d79-48ad-a55e-f687c1aad687&k=7039

The Canadian PM likes to nag china about human rights.
So China took one away to prove Canada's point.

Our fault?

[Anonymous Coward]

China's biggest trading partners are:

1) USA
2) Canada

Has anyone else wondered why are we are so hell bent on propelling a government that still shows so many signs being bullying, authoritarian regime into super-power status?

Re:Our fault?

[Anonymous Coward]

They own you. You have no choice.

Searching vs typing in URL?

[vertinox]

Its says you can't search for it anymore, but does that mean you can't go directly to the site?

I know many non-techie users can't wrap their heads around typing in URLs to go directly to the site without a Google or MSN search, but you'd think they'd block direct access rather than the search.

Re:Searching vs typing in URL?

[Rob T Firefly]

According to Wikinews, searching from within China on any non-Chinese search engine (including the English-language Google, Yahoo, and MSN you know and/or love) for the string "zh.wikipedia.org" will apparently get you banned from viewing that search engine for several minutes. I imagine this is to stop people finding references to the blocked site and discussions of its' blocking (like we are now) just as much as it is to discourage people using things like Google's cache to see the blocked material.

Re:Searching vs typing in URL?

[nihaopaul]

i'm in shanghai on china telecoms adsl line, wikipedia is blocked for me, and it was going so well :( i used it for creative research almost hourly..

back to tor i guess

Re:Searching vs typing in URL?

[samuraiz]

I'll be damned. I didn't think their censorship tech was that subtle; everything I've seen here in the past has just been blocking at the domain level. Shutting down all of Blogspot instead of just the odd Blogspot blog that they don't agree with, for example. I was wrong, though. I can personally confirm that searching for zh.wikipedia.org on English-language Google will break Google for at least a couple of minutes. That is... unfortunate.

Re:Searching vs typing in URL?

[jamar0303]

If you can, try getting a fiber line. My school also uses China Telecom for internet access, but they have a fiber line, and wikipedia worked even before the announcement that it was open for everyone. I've even heard of some people getting a leased line from off the mainland, though that may be too expensive.

Re:Searching vs typing in URL?

[nihaopaul]

fiber as in FTTB? i've heard bad news about it
i also have a server collocated in the newest china telecom datacenter in shanghai which cannot access wikipedia either. sucks but tor works :D

Re:Searching vs typing in URL?

[Anonymous Coward]

get that server connected to anonet then run vpn connections to office/homes, plenty of proxys on anonet to use, lot faster than tor also

Re:Searching vs typing in URL?

[jamar0303]

Sorry- I just remembered one detail. Apparently, the director of technology at my school had some "guanxi" (connections/contacts/knows the right people) at China Telecom which helped him get access to a less restricted line. I'm guessing that money had to be exchanged or something (it's a school- I know wikipedia is an unreliable source for information, but Google is sporadically blocked, and the school apparently couldn't stand for that).

Re:Searching vs typing in URL?

[nihaopaul]

i'm just going to setup a vpn, interesting reading about anonet though, thanks anonymous coward!, i wont pay china telecom any more money, its bad enough i have to pay them for what it is, isn't china supposed to have opened banking and telecommunications industry's under the WTO agreement by now?

Accordign to Google.....

[8127972]

They haven't blocked it:

http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid =57869 (posted at 2:18 PM EST)
http://www.toptechnews.com/news/China-Abandons-Wik ipedia-Censorship/story.xhtml?story_id=101009A5G2I Q (posted at 12:19 PM EST)

I don't know if I entirely believe it, but that's another story....

Re:Accordign to Google.....

[Rob T Firefly]

Those look like latecomers to the story of the original lifting of the block earlier this week, which this story is about the end of.

did anyone expect differently?

[Anonymous Coward]

it's a communist, repressive, control-freak 'north korea lite' regime!

i hope the chinese people overthrow this evil government someday...maybe america will actually support them this time instead of turning their back on them like tiannammen square...all for the sake of trade status and access to chinese markets!

Re:did anyone expect differently?

[Anonymous Coward]

What the hell is wrong with Asians?? They're generally very intelligent, so why are their governments so stupid??

Ascribing malice to Bush, lapping up Communist PR

[Anonymous Coward]

This is standard operating procedure here at Slashdot.

Give hardcore Communists the benefit of the doubt at all times. Never question their motives. Demand impossibly high levels of evidence before concluding that they are doing anything wrong.

And of course the flipside : America is evil, oppressive, tortureres.

Liberalism is a Mental Disorder ladies and gentlemen. Slashdot proves it every day.

Re:Ascribing malice to Bush, lapping up Communist

[Ghostalker474]

Forgive me for being someone who looks ahead, not behind. I welcome new ideas without rigid reactions, and care about the welfare of the people (health, school, jobs, rights and liberties). Since thats the definition of a liberal, I'm proud to be a liberal. Back in the day, Conservatives were called Tories.

Run TOR

[Mantus]

TOR helps people in oppressive countries freely access information and it needs to grow.
http://tor.eff.org/

Re:Run TOR

[Anonymous Coward]

you can't even post here using tor...and irc.freenode.net blocks tor also, as do others...what makes you think china can't 'manage' tor?

Re:Run TOR

[Anonymous Coward]

Your organization's Internet use policy restricts access to this web page at this time.

Reason:

The Websense category "Proxy Avoidance" is filtered.

URL:

http://tor.eff.org/

Re:Run TOR

[Dave2 Wickham]

irc.freenode.net blocks tor because there's a dedicated tor hidden service for freenode. freenode has been very accommodating towards tor.

Re:Run TOR

[samuraiz]

Yes! Everybody please run TOR.

I live and work in Beijing, and TOR is what makes the internet worth surfing.

It isn't just Wikipedia. Blogspot blogs are banned, here. The BBC news, even. Every day I run across a site that some bureaucrat has decided is too offensive for my virgin eyes. I expect that it's only a matter of time before Slashdot goes, too.

So thank you, noble TOR node operators, for shining a bit of light into one of the darker corners of the world.

Re:Run TOR

[icestone]

Thanks, you know they can not help themselves like you are.

Technical Glitches

[ProfessionalCookie]

It wasn't immediately clear if Wikipedia was inaccessible due to technical glitches

My guess is that it was accessible due to technical glitches.

Re:Ascribing malice to Bush, lapping up Communist

[Anonymous Coward]

"Forgive me for being someone who looks ahead, not behind. I welcome new ideas without rigid reactions, and care about the welfare of the people (health, school, jobs, rights and liberties). Since thats the definition of a liberal, I'm proud to be a liberal. Back in the day, Conservatives were called Tories."

You are forgiven my son.

What's happend if China

[justelite]

will make the rules in the world? (it is possible in the future ) They will ban all the Internet?

Re:What's happend if China

[Anonymous Coward]

1) Look down at sand
2) Reinsert head

Re:What's happend if China

[bkg_cjb]

Oh no, there will still be plenty of flashy congested sites about Chinese pop music stars, and buying gadgets and clothes, and Business English. Just not the corner Internet you know and love.

sh1Nt

[Anonymous Coward]

crisco or l0be. Thes3 early

What a pity

[DeltaQH]

What a pity. For a second I thought that something was really moving in China...

Such thought control system of government are a waste of the most valuable resource, the human mind. Not to speak of other wasted resources... They are puting themselves at a great disadvantage.

I China wants to become again The Middle Kingdom, the center of civilization, they are not going in the right direction IMHO.

Seems we have to wait another 300 years. They say the are a long thinking people, it seems to me they just think toooooooo long.

Re:Ascribing malice to Bush, lapping up Communist

[Anonymous Coward]

I ascribe malice to Bush because stupidity no longer adequately explains his actions. I mean, I have a problem believing that someone could be that stupid without it being intentional.

Re:Ascribing malice to Bush, lapping up Communist

[IflyRC]

Right, if John Kerry and John Edwards had have been elected, China would never have restricted Wikipedia in the first place.

Sigh... flamebait subject line

[grumpyman]

Editor, PLEASE: "China Reinstates Wikipedia Ban" "It wasn't immediately clear if Wikipedia was inaccessible due to technical glitches or because government censors had blocked the site again." So it is a ban or is it not?

Re:Sigh... flamebait subject line

[sponga]

Don't worry we are all waiting for the magic bold lettered Update: "Correction blah blah blah"

Re:Sigh... flamebait subject line

[jarl1976]

It is a ban. I have checked it with traceroute, and it stops on an IP address owned by Chinanet. (Chinanet=Great Firewall)

But they don't censor the Internet!

[Aqualung812]

Of course it wasn't a ban! China does not censor the Internet. I find your lack of faith disturbing...

Re:But they don't censor the Internet!

[grumpyman]

It's not that I don't have faith but I cannot take such 'reporting' as carved in stone facts when it's still speculation. News report is not a religion, news based on speculation is tabloid.

Yes they have a history of doing that but so did Iraq. And you believed in WMD in Iraq?

Re:But they don't censor the Internet!

[Anonymous Coward]

I find your lack of faith disturbing...

And i find your use of a star wars line as faggish.

STFU you little star wars fag. dick sucker.

A true reason why it blocked.

[imkow]

All major or minor gateways in china uses a gov-appointed security software installed (sometimes by answering to the gov's requirement), from provincial main cable to a local telcom station, from internet service provider to a router of an unit of a building. From up to down, layer by layer, the software can be everywhere, as a combination of firewall, anti-virus, anti-hacking, anti-porn, word-filtering, user access control and so forth. Many network administrators are quite ok with the software since it provides convinence and secrity to work on.

    The blockage of some websites could be a side effect using that software suit, some websites being blocked occasionaly might because some word trigger(such like some word might be used against The Party) was accidentially fired. Or else, some websites opening occasionally could because some trigger words are removed from the ban list of the software or from the page of the website , in which wikipedia can be the case.

So maybe the control to release a website from ban list isn't in hands of the gov, since that secrity software suit has already been installed in every level of the network and works independently. It's more like a polical-oriented but technical problem now.

Re:A true reason why it blocked.

[Malakusen]

So who in The Party do you work for? That's clearly a pro-Chinese Government piece, clearly written by someone with English as a second language, and appears to be raw propaganda.

My 2 cents

[sheepcentral]

Slashdot ran a story on how the Chinese Wikipedia because so popular so quickly, now maybe I'm stating what some people must believe to be obvious, but maybe the Chinese gov't saw it as a treat to their power. If you think about it something so community based and free (as in speech not beer) could if it took off in a big way might give the Chinese a taste for unrestricted information, then if the Chinese gov't chose to censor it again then there might be protests etcetera and generally it might reduce their dominative power.

Why Doesn't China....

[rm69990]

Why doesn't China scan Wikipedia for certain keywords and just block certain articles? Don't get me wrong, I think China should be banning no sites, period. However, if China's government insists on blocking Wikipedia due to concerns that articles that touch on their sensitive spots might pop-up, why don't they at least make the rest of Wikipedia available?

Re:Why Doesn't China....

[Trillan]

I agree that'd be nice, but -- why would they?

Re:Why Doesn't China....

[rm69990]

Because they do that with the rest of the internet anyways, so they could do the exact same thing with Wikipedia.

Re:Why Doesn't China....

[Trillan]

Whatever they're doing now is what takes the minimum amount of work to set up, since it is already in that state. In order for them to open up wikipedia, they'd have to expend some effort. That effort would have to be justified by assuming that wikipedia is in some way beneficial. If they don't share that evaluation -- again, why spend any effort on it?

Re:Why Doesn't China....

[icestone]

Oh, man... Block wikipedia vs block some sensitive part, which is simpler? You may know the gov's incompetence, but you may not know there are so many content to be controlled, they wouldn't bother to do that. Simply block everything they worry about, and it's people won't be able to say a word or no place to say a word.

Re:Ascribing malice to Bush, lapping up Communist

[Anonymous Coward]

>Forgive me for being someone who looks ahead, not behind. I welcome new ideas without rigid reactions, and care about the welfare of the people (health, school, jobs, rights and liberties). Since thats the definition of a liberal, I'm proud to be a liberal. Back in the day, Conservatives were called Tories.

That's the good side of the grits (back in the day that's what we called Liberals). The bad side of the grits the slide of morals and basic rights made in the name of serving those that don't deserve them. And I'm not talking about what you're thinking about, I'm talking about letting serious criminals that plan to kill out of jail (in the name of a "25 years maximum sentence" being fair and just to the offender), and stopping people from watching TV signals broadcast from outside the country (in the name of preserving "Canadian" TV).

What Canada (and most other countries with similar systems) needs is 5 years Tory, 10 years Grit, 5 years NDP, 10 years Grit, wash, rinse, repeat. This lets each government clean up the previous government's screwups, and lets the middle-men (Grits) make most of the decisions, while the other two wings shore up the slides the country makes while they're in power.

The Planetary Datalinks

[SMACX guy]

As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.

Re:The Planetary Datalinks

[CCFreak2K]

See: my sig.

Re:The Planetary Datalinks

[Atmchicago]

That is a quote from Commissioner Pravin Lal, "U.N. Declaration of Rights." See more about the Commissioner here:

http://www.firaxis.com/smac/lal.cfm

hah! simple!

[paniq]

in soviet russia, wikipedia bans you.

How about adding a million glitches

[Colin Smith]

Everyone run a proxy.

Re:How about adding a million glitches

[jamar0303]

Exactly- that's how I use Wikipedia, so I had no idea it had opened to non-proxy users since I had always been using a proxy.

Re:How about adding a million glitches

[chickenandporn]

TOR is really, really slow, and has lag that'll make elephants impatient. Otherwise, it's pretty cool...

Re:How about adding a million glitches

[Colin Smith]

No need for TOR, simply an open proxy like Squid on millions of machines.

Re:How about adding a million glitches

[chickenandporn]

Hmmm. And how would you find the next open proxy? Wardialing, or a listing service that the Great Firewall cannot also see? Also, any proxy outside China that passes "bad" things is automatically filtered as well. TOR has a listing or lookup, preserves anonymity, switches to a new channel every new connection, can be tuned to be "gentle" on the server-side, and it's easy to use. In fact, fragmentation is TOR's only problem:

suppose:
3000 people run TOR
2000 people run open Squid
4000 people do something else

TOR would still suck, and these other ways would never be found except for wardialing, so they wouldn't be used, and if they were used, the user would be wardialing for a new proxy every connection because he or another user saw "bad" content there. If we all chose the same solution -- ie 9000 people running TOR -- something like TOR would have the mass of servers to be acceptible.

I just thought of something

[ILuvRamen]

If Chinese ppl get service from a satellite based ISP with their own dish, can't they completely ignore the "great firewall" and access whatever they want cuz they're jumping straight from their house to an outside China connection? There's no way to guard against that cuz they CAN be indoors so I'd love to see a US company offer service over there, I'm sure it'd explode (and make China hate us but who cares)

The middle class *are* the revolutionaries

[Colin Smith]

Look at the US, France, the UK. It's the middle class who decide they want a bit of a say in how things are run. Marx and Lenin... Middle class intellectuals. Why do you think the middle class is usually the first attacked by the revolutionaries after the revolution?

The free market in China will build an independently wealthy middle class which will eventually demand a say in how their country is run. It means there's going to be political change. It might take 20 years, but it'll happen.

Oh, a propaganda or an education.

[imkow]

oh yes? one who doesn't sound like you is a part of propaganda. where is my freedom of speech in your ideology? we born in here, we does not want to overrun our gov't so hard as you do. sure, we just want these mandarins improving,or better evolving. but we dont want it collapses in the path you americans want. So when i see this website tracking china's cersorship in a fashion like following a popular cult, i feel it's ok to tell others some fact.
Please remember, China has already enabled internet. Dont you understand the fact that there is no way to block information exchange as long as there is an internet connection. Here in China there are more than 20 million blog users. we even have our own wiki-style enclopedias. How can a cersorship possibly block them all. Example can be shown in me, i can directly access this site, throwing my no-so-good english with you. sure, the censorship does hinder the access to some websites. but to a senior interenet user, it doesnt exist. besides we all have our life, not every body thinks to be able to read some western "truth" can turn things better, we just want internet for ourselves learning some stuff, playing games, doing business, making a date or such. Knowing those "truths" is pretty much same as reading newpaper on toilet.

My point is:
Firstly, the censorship is just inconvenient, but cannot be zip-up techonically or practically. commoners like me dont like it, but also it's not a monster that shows how evil its master is.
Secondly, i dont trust americans will do all our good by selling their merchandize of free.
Lastly, we are not all asking that "free" daily. at least it's not my daily pursue or necessity for living, through im not rich.

Re:Oh, a propaganda or an education.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ching chong chang ping pang / Mao Zedong has a big wang / Hu Jintao does, too

Re:Oh, a propaganda or an education.

[Kagura]

thats somewhat clever... :)

Re:Oh, a propaganda or an education.

[Stephane K.]

Hey stop the bullshit stupid man, The facts are there Wikipedia China grew like mad when it was not censored, which means, CHINESE people edited it, not any western person, it grew up to top ten wikipedia languages, so it means somewhat that your people want some free access to information (read and write), we are not talking about truth here, but perhaps "history" or even "science" or lots of other things that you can find in an encyclopaedia. So get lost with your west vs china dichotomy, we are talking about censorship here. If you like censorship, good for you, it looks like lots of Chinese litterate people don't like it and like Wikipedia. And learn some English.... Stéphane, French speaker from Belgium, Europe

Re:Oh, a propaganda or an education.

[Malakusen]

And I'm sure that if someone with one of those non-censored blogs criticized the Party, or brought up Falun Gong, benefits of democracy, the Dalai Lama and the movement to free Tibet, police brutality, political prisoners, or Tiananmen Square, you'd find out how far the freedom of those 20 million bloggers goes. Wikipedia is not some Western or American plot to collapse your government, while we may be interested in talking about the topic, I for one don't care what you do with your country. I don't like the Chinese government or the Party, but I'm not Chinese and I don't live there so I don't have to like or dislike it. Governments exist by the will of the people, and if the Chinese people didn't like their government and the censorship, they wouldn't have it. China's had revolutions before, even if they haven't accomplished anything more then replacing one aristocracy lording it over the peasantry with another aristocracy lording it over the peasantry.

Firstly, the censorship shouldn't exist in a free and modern society, there's no good reason for it.
Secondly, not sure what you're saying there, if you knew anything about Americans you'd know we're actually not big on free stuff, Wikipedia is more of an exception.
Third, it doesn't matter if you aren't asking for free, clearly from the explosion of content and activity on the Chinese Wikipedia many of your countrymen are.

At best, the Great Firewall of China is like the monitoring and blocking programs my parents used on my computer when I was a kid. Yes, I could find a way around them, but I would have preferred not to have them at all, and now that I'm an adult I don't have them. Your government is treating you like a child and making your decisions for you. If you want to be treated like a child, go right ahead.

Typically I self-censor when talking to obvious Party flaks (yes, I know full bloody well there's plenty of you floating around out there on the internet) to keep from getting you guys in trouble, but you don't seem too worried about that, so you're probably high up enough that you're loyalty won't be questioned. Yi lu pyang an (have a pleasant journey, assuming I got the pinyin right).

Re:Oh, a propaganda or an education.

[imkow]

Listen, child.
So-called censorship doesn't really bother me so much like your childish words are. we dont even notice something bad there not if we want to against anything. Remember this is a country with 1/6 of the world's population. people cant bear the concequence that anything slight goes a little wrong again. Neither Chaos or Revolution is an option. Only evolution could be acceptable. People here are progressing at the fastest speed they can , but they are very fragile to the social chaos. We all are busy with our own business, the least thing we want is to break the entire society order which is on the track of improvement. Yes, a broken china may be throught good in some narrow minds in the west. but we dont care how malicious or goodness you people's intentions are. Once most of our people all got a better and stronger life, we will be talking about democracy with you, in the style U.S. President Bush did everywhere or in some style else. At which time there will be a chinese sponsored wikipedia waiting for kids like you to fill craps in. Since it's all about knowledge, i dont mind if your gov decide to block it. Before that, people here want learning from you guys only selectively..
PS: it seems you know some speakings. i would like to give some words to you as return. that's "Zao3-Ri4 Gui1-Xi1", meaning (wish you)traveling to the pure land of the west as soon as you can.

Re:Oh, a propaganda or an education.

[Malakusen]

You might be interested to know that you're proving some of the theories I've had about why China remains so stable despite a government few westerners would tolerate. Chinese value stability over the western ideals of liberty and freedom, it's a cultural difference, and not any better or any worse. I wouldn't like it, but my ideals are Western and not Eastern. I think it would be great if you guys had Democracy (and not the idiot Bush version of "democracy" where democracy is whoever has the money), but China is going to have the government China wants.

What I don't see is how greater access to information, and an end to censorship, endangers a stable society. If the Chinese are overall intelligent and mature, a self-policing information-based website like Wikipedia wouldn't be any threat. If it's filled with crap from kids, the intelligent readers would realize that it's not worthwhile. The objection I have is to the decision being made not by the individual, but by the government. I object to a government telling its people what they can read, it is a decision that should be left to the individual, and I can't see a logical reason why it shouldn't be. When the government tells me I can't watch TV with bad language, I object to that. I should, as a 25 year old adult and veteran of the military, be able to decide for myself whether I want to watch TV with violence and foul language. You should, as an independent and intelligent Chinese person, be able to decide for yourself that a website is a waste of time, and not have the government make that decision for you. You have already decided that the website is not worth your time, which is your choice. However, your government has made the decision for all of your countrymen that the website is not worth anyone's time, and that is overstepping the authority that a government should have.

Of course, that's my Western liberterian (not Bushie Republican) opinion on censorship, and with the cultural differences, we may as well be speaking a foreign language to each other.

Honestly, I wish China the best of luck, you've got the U.S. in debt to you for billions of dollars, which is genius, and you lot have the best odds of establishing a credible space program that actually advances past what Nasa has. I'd guess that inside of the next hundred years, if somebody wants to go into space, they'll have to speak Chinese. In the next two hundred years, it'll be the global trade language. Which will suck, because Mandarin is a hard language to learn.

It was National Profiling week

[oobi]

They just wanted to log what everybody was so damned curious about..now that they know....

Re:Reflects Politics as a whole more like

[Ash Vince]

And the reason for the US invasion of Iraq or Afganistan was US citizens genuinely fearing for their lives?

Please be serious, every ruling class has their own agenda and they very rarely tell the people they rule.

A way to lure in new tech firms?

[ScottJamez]

"...or a deliberate attempt at trying to perpetuate the belief inside China that there IS no official censorship and it's all just "trouble contacting some sites".

Isn't that the official response to the outside world by China when asked about the 'Great Firewall'? This would probably make more sense than any other explanation. When the PRC lifted the ban, I would assume that they knew about the content of the site and where it comes from before lifting the ban in the first place. Just common sense.

I am having a heckuva time finding any other instances where information/Wiki sites have been banned, lifted, then banned again. Doing this could be nothing more than an attempt at getting large firms to set up base in the PRC.

OT: your sig

[Anonymous Coward]

The Chinese word for code, "luan ma," literally means "messy symbols" or "messy digits."

This translation is misleading. Code can mean many things in English, on Slashdot most people would interpret this to be program code, source code or similar.

Luanma is really the phenomenon of garbled display when you view text under a different encoding than intended, say a GBK webpage as UTF-8.

tunnels

[dfries]

Is an SSH tunnel a crime in China? Or maybe I should ask it this way. Is an SSH tunnel from within China to someplace outside of China a crime? If no, maybe us who are outside of China should start hosing some SSH tunneled proxys for the people in China.

Remind me to skip the 2008 Olympics.

Re:tunnels

[jack_csk]

As far as I can tell, there are some businesses in China using VPN or SSH to connect to servers somewhere else. I'm not sure if a business entity has to acquire a license or so to do this though.

Re:tunnels

[chrnb]

I am in china and have been trying to use this one: www.peacefire.org - seems to work similar to what you guys are talking about, with the SHH, tunnel etc.
My friend couldn't make it work though.

Re:tunnels

[Cheapy]

Skip the 2008 Olympics.

Re:tunnels

[Bertie]

As a protest, you mean?

Seen who's up next?

At the rate they're going, the UK should have become every bit as oppressive as China by the time London gets the games in 2012.

I wish I was joking about this.

Re:Our fault? Troll??

[Anonymous Coward]

How does this thread qualify as a troll? Are the moderators based in Beijing?

Good lord! China's built a battlestar!

[krell]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/16/flying_air craft_carrier/

get a bigger head.

[imkow]

get lost, you moron. Do you think wikipedia is the only source of obtaining knowledge?
i feel pity for you. maybe that's all education you can get.

Remember, people have many ways to get the information. and wikipedia or the entire english world is just one of sources. There are people not like you.

Re:get a bigger head.

[Synic]

Critical thinking is in very short supply in China. Everyone who knows how to do it has either emmigrated or been vanished.

Lazy Commie bastards

[patio11]

I had 18 hours but SOMEBODY had to have a long lunch... Lets have some more efficiency in our ruthless efficiency, people!

Hey. Asshole:

[alfs boner]

Ching chang ching cheng ching chang ching chong fuckface.

Re: no decision needed

[icestone]

The decision is preset, you can never see argument on this topic on mainstream press. It's unnecessary for the gov to show it's just a technical glitch. Somebody just take it granted it never exist. somebody knows the truth but they will never complain about it.

HALO droppable satcom units anyone?

[RobertLTux]

So how much work has been done on being able to send a combo of a satellite and wifi node out the door of a C130 and expect somebody to be able to (with the Chinglish manual) set this up?
this would use the satellite dish to get a connect and then repeat the signal on a Wifi connection. (and yes i am hoping that a more permanent power source would be found)

(or maybe it would be a case of what can brown do for you?)