Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo Confirms Beijing Blocking Flickr
slashthedot writes "In another instance of censorship against websites about anything anti-establishment in China, Flickr, popular among a growing class of digital photo enthusiasts in the world's second-largest Internet market, has not shown photos to users in mainland China since last week, amid rumors Beijing took action after images of the Tiananmen massacre in early June 1989 were posted. "It is our understanding that Flickr users in China are not able to see images on Flickr, and we have confirmed that this is not a technical issue on our end," a spokeswoman for Yahoo Hong Kong said in an email in response to a Reuters inquiry."
Nothing like a country terrified of its own citizens, or the companies out of the supposed Free World who won't pull the plug to prevent their technologies from being used by these kinds of pathetic cowards. It's alright, though. Investors are making money, so fuck liberty.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
But I have never used Flickr...is it owned or partially owned by Yahoo?
Only reason I ask is why would Yahoo be saying it isn't something technicaly on their end unless they own/run it...
Living With a Nerd
http://news.com.com/2100-1038_3-5627640.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flickr#History
I keep hearing to many Pro's Con's about China. On one side you have the people bashing the government for it's internet filter system. Then on the other side I hear about how China is the new super power, with the greatest economy growth and potential. Even where I live (semi-major city) the news is ridden with (Businesses start deals with China, China Buying out more than Japan during hte 80's, China best business partner, Outsource to China, China Could Save local economy, etc, etc). Even the local college have signs "China #1 growth market, succeed in the future take Chinese 1 this semester" So is China Evil or Not?
will people post the pictures all over in a rebellion, a la AACS? or will all the image providers cave a la google.cn, where an image search for tiananmen massacre returns pictures of puppies and gerbils...?
Who are we to say that our way of life is better? Don't we have rising illiteracy, crime-ridden cities, corrupt politicians, rapacious corporations and wars we don't believe in killing bucketloads of civilians?
Let's be tolerant of other points of view, please! (There may be a large cynical but friendly emoticon attached to this message. YMMV, but TMTOWTDI.)
technical writing / development
For some time now, China has been blocking sites like BBC News, CBS News, Wikipedia, WordPress, LiveJournal, U.S. Department of State, etc. I am surprised Slashdot is not on the list, bunch of freedom-loving Linux-huggers that we are.
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
I'm dismayed that everything for us in the US (and the western world) has to always be boiled down a simple question of either good or evil. These sorts of simplifications then become the basis of policy for a broader audience even though they neglect to see the subtleties in an entity as massive as a country. So to answer your question... China is no more or less evil than the United States is evil. We just tend to be evil in different ways. How you weigh those differences is based upon your nationality, race, gender, religion, education, socioeconomic status, etc. I'm not one to rant on Slashdot but these simplifications are what have gotten us into the foreign policy mess we find ourselves in today. Unfortunately, Christian societies have always focused on having an enemy and this post won't change the 2,000 years ofsocial development.
There are many other countries outside of China where traditional Chinese is widely used. China uses simplified Chinese.
Yahoo has often said it's better to provide the Chinese partial content rather than none at all. Therefore, shouldn't they be perfectly happy that Chinese users are at least seeing the big white webpage with some text scattered around a broken-JPEG icon, rather than no Flickr at all?
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
the companies out of the supposed Free World who won't pull the plug to prevent their technologies from being used by these kinds of pathetic cowards
Filtering IP addresses is hardly the cutting edge of technology. Which companies are you referring to?
There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
Criticising Google and Yahoo for capitulating to the Chinese govt. seems to be "the thing" to do on Slashdot these days. But let's see if it is indeed clear what the "right" thing is here.
1. Can we really blame Google and Yahoo for following the law of the land ? What gives an American (or any foreign) company the right to decide which laws are fair in China ? Even democratic countries have different opinions on what exactly freedom of speech is. Should google decide whether it agrees with German holocaust-denial laws, or Indian laws against whipping up religious hate ? Also, isn't it a bit arrogant to assume that American laws are the moral optimum ? Shouldn't Google also refuse to honour DMCA take down requests ?
I recently read an article in the IHT, speaking about how a Chinese official once justified their censorship / torture system by saying that these laws were necessary given China's economic and social conditions (and you can't deny that China has indeed seen phenomenal progress under these laws). The article goes on to then discuss the west's moral dilemma in criticizing China given the recent happenings since 9/11 - basically, when America felt threatened it almost instantly decided that torture was ok for the greater good. I'm not trying to troll with this paragraph. I'd choose liberty with poverty over affluent slavery any day. But who are we to dictate what kind of laws China should have in terms of protection of dissenters and minorities ? Why do we assume that a majority of the Chinese population isn't ok with this tradeoff between liberty and stability - given that half of the US is probably OK with torturing terrorists and holding them without trial ?
2. There's also the dilemma of turning over information that'll help identify a dissenter. Now, does Google get to decide that its more competent and fair than the Chinese judicial system ? Didn't ISPs in the US hand over private customer data, all in the name of "homeland security" ? I'm not suggesting that even with recent happenings the American human rights / judicial system is even a tenth as bad as that of China. But at the end of the day, I think all systems of govt. are imperfect (some a lot more than others) and it is not for private foreign companies to be the vehicles of political change.
3. If Google and Yahoo do not follow these laws, they'll be kicked out out of China(just like they'll be sued to oblivion if they don't honour DMCA takedowns). The Chinese govt. will not be brought to its knees and forced to reverse its policies because of pressure from a freakin' foreign search engine company ! So who will this help ? The Chinese people who will now have no access to google at all ? Is it ok for us (google/yahoo/slashdot reader) to decide for the Chinese people that no access to information is better than tainted access ?
Just my 2 cents.
you should NOT have done it.
people will be seeing what crap you "people's" republic have pulled on people despite your muzzling attempts. get over with it, "party".
Read radical news here
Flickr itself is hardly free from censorship problems either...
9 96259/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/theunholytrinity/543
There was no massacre in the square. That is just a theory like evolution. Many say it was a rave by drunk students. They don't know what happened to their friends because they were drunk. Pay no attention to the lies! Especially since now HD-DVD players that cost $20 will come soon due to the efficiencies of Chinese labor! You want this, and to help your ailing relatives, a new crop of prisoners are eager to repent for their crimes by offering their organs to you and yours at very low cost.
"The last capitalist we hang shall be the one who sold us the rope." - Karl Marx
And in the US when the government did that there was sound objection from within the government and many many political protest about it. Next time someone is run over with a tank for protesting the Bush administration you wont have to wear your captain hyperbole decoder ring to post such a message.
I wonder if it is...since it posts articles like this?
They don't know any better. They don't know that their wages are horribly below what they should be getting in a global market. They don't know that their government treats them like pawns. They don't know that American capitalist companies are giving them table scraps for jobs simply because they're so cheap and expendable. They don't know ANYTHING other than propaganda and lies and what the state tells them. Younger people don't even know anything happened in Tienanmen Square on June 4 of 1989. They simply DON'T KNOW. Three reporters were recently let go from a paper for letting an advertisement go from some group, something like the Mothers of 64 (64 = June 4). One of the people let go didn't even know what the significance of that was because she didn't know of the Tienanmen Square massacre. No wonder they're trying to censor their people! If I had the wool pulled out from my eyes and was made to see that I was being abused like the Chinese people, I'd revolt, too! Any company based out of America that supports these autocracies by sending jobs to them or bending to their will show where their true loyalties lie. And they should be punished in any way possible for their transgressions.
Let's stop dilly-dallying and just change "-1: Overrated" to "-1: Disagree" or "-1: Doesn't Subscribe to Groupthink".
I was in Beijing on Saturday. Flickr was in fact inaccessible. Right now, China is undergoing Olympics Madness. Particularly in Beijing, they have stores dedicated to Olympics schwag with T-shirts, toys, pencils, bags, you name it. There are posters, TV advertisements and billboards plastering the entire country. China is racing to get ready for the impending event. The week before I arrived, they installed small ratings boxes at immigration, with four lit buttons showing faces ranging from smiling to frowning that you can choose from after the official stamps your passport to rate your experience. We already know the Chinese government takes a rather narrow view on freedom of speech, and in the middle of what might be their biggest P.R. effort in history, they're going to spare no effort to clamp down on negative press--especially when it touches on the heart of Beijing.
As always, I'm happier when the Chinese are blocking things than when the companies self censor....
~ a low user id is no indication I have a clue what I'm talking about.
I'm probably going to get modded into oblivion for this, but here goes. I just found what you had to say very interesting and wanted to post what I thought.
After thinking about it, I really believe that a company like Yahoo or even MS could, as another poster put it, say "Enough is Enough" and draw a line in the sand regarding their involvement in with China's censorship. Make a huge deal of their announcement to stand up for human rights. Issue press releases and hold news conferences. Get Errol Morris to direct a whole series of commercials that air during primetime which specifically calls out google and any other search company as helping to further the oppression of people under the communist system in China. Yahoo could use U.S. national patriotism, pride and the overall desire of the average American to believe they are good and righteous, to completely obliterate Google in the domestic search market. Yahoo could come straight out with a campaign that bluntly says people using google for search or any of their other services, supports the oppression of people living in communist China.
I guarantee that such a move by Yahoo would decimate googles usage by Americans. Google would no longer be cool and people would rally behind Yahoo because to do so would make the average Yahoo user feel better about themselves.
Seriously, its a bold move but I think it would work.
Even if google came out and proclaimed they would no longer do business in China, the damage would be done to their image within days. You can not underestimate the power that such a move would have to resonate with middle america. It would be the PR move to own all other PR moves.
I think that instead of being so concerned with the China market, Yahoo should look at their failing position in the U.S. market and think of some interesting ways to knock google off its pedestal. And what a fall it would be.
Filtering IP addresses is hardly the cutting edge of technology. Which companies are you referring to?
He's probably referring to Cisco and such. What, do you think the Chinese gov't designed and built their network and censor infrastructure themselves? Of course not, they had US companies who value dollars over human rights (specifically Article 19) to build it for them.
many of them have no idea it ever happened
That's a bit simplistic, don't you think?
I've had work meetings/visits to Beijing and other parts of China. Not only have I not met anyone who has not heard of it, I've met coworkers who openly tell me that they were at the protests themselves when they were at university.
People there just don't care because they're too busy making money.
There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
Sorry to be a downer... but quantum mechanics doesn't work that way. On the other hand, the ability of quantum mechanics to enable provably secure communications is quite significant. If quantum encryption became the norm, then censorship would be considerably more difficult. When all transmission are encrypted, spying or censoring becomes rather impractical.
The effect is instantaneous, but no information is transmitted.
Correlation means that the outcome of the wavefunction collapse on the two entangled particles are strongly related to one another. So when you "compare notes" later you'll find a high degree of correlation between what states entangled particles wound up in.
However the hidden assumption in your train-of-logic is that you can *control* wavefunction collapse and pick out whatever state you want (and then the entangled particle will have the corresponding state). It doesn't work like that, unfortunately. Wavefunction collapse is effectively random. It's so random that it's the basis of the most faithful random-number generators (e.g. data from radioactive decay).
I agree that at first glance when you read a description of quantum entanglement experiments, it seems like it should be trivial to force a particle into a given state, thereby forcing the entangled co-particle into a corresponding state. Alas, this cannot be done. If a particle is in a true superposition of states (say it is mixed being being 'spin up' and 'spin down'), you have absolutely no control over which state it collapses into. You don't get to pick.
You may try to pick its state by, for example, measuring it's state and then altering its state if necessary. However the entanglement has collapsed during that first measurement. After that, the particles are no longer entangled, and altering the state of your particle won't continue to affect the other one.
It's certainly not obvious that this is how it works, but experiments have confirmed this quite exhaustively.