Slashdot Mirror
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."
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.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Could be a "technical" problem...
In a world of acronyms, the words are the real victims.
Here is the Wikinews link I referred to in the submission. I hadn't found the AP article yet.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
...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.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/15/151322 7
In a world of acronyms, the words are the real victims.
How would 'never lifting the ban' be doing 'something right'?
You're thinking of Japanese. Chinese has different 'l' and 'r' sounds, and a 'wi' sound too.
If you all Google Slashdot, will it Slashdot Google?
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.
Oops, I'm wrong about the 'wi' part. But there is a 'wei' sound.
If you all Google Slashdot, will it Slashdot Google?
alright, you heard him, pool's over. who had 2 days?
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!
Looks like they were vandalizing it by replacing all of the text with ?'s anyways...
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.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
They haven't blocked it:
d =57869 (posted at 2:18 PM EST)k ipedia-Censorship/story.xhtml?story_id=101009A5G2I Q (posted at 12:19 PM EST)
http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parenti
http://www.toptechnews.com/news/China-Abandons-Wi
I don't know if I entirely believe it, but that's another story....
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
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.
Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
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.
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.
AccountKiller
TOR helps people in oppressive countries freely access information and it needs to grow.
http://tor.eff.org/
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.
will make the rules in the world? (it is possible in the future ) They will ban all the Internet?
Serial Tech Killer
"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.
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.
Right, if John Kerry and John Edwards had have been elected, China would never have restricted Wikipedia in the first place.
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?
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.
AccountKiller
Of course it wasn't a ban! China does not censor the Internet. I find your lack of faith disturbing...
Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
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.
China, in fact, is very fragile.
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.
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.
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.
Michael-m.co.uk - Home of Michael Mulqueen
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
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
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.
AccountKiller
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.
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?
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.
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.
Learn to love Alaska
in soviet russia, wikipedia bans you.
Do not trust this signature.
Everyone run a proxy.
Deleted
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.'".
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
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.
Deleted
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.
China, in fact, is very fragile.
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.
They just wanted to log what everybody was so damned curious about..now that they know....
If Big Media is the Harvester of Eyes, does that make Apple an arms dealer?
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>
Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
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.
I dont read
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.
Anyone can "stand up for what they believe", but it takes a very brave individual to change what they believe. - Loundry
"...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.
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.
Learn to love Alaska
Remind me to skip the 2008 Olympics.
English is easier said than done.
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.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/16/flying_air craft_carrier/
Where were you when the voynix came?
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.
China, in fact, is very fragile.
I had 18 hours but SOMEBODY had to have a long lunch... Lets have some more efficiency in our ruthless efficiency, people!
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
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.
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?)
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge