Slashdot Mirror


China Blocks YouTube Over Tibet Videos

Screaming Cactus writes "Internet users in China were blocked from seeing YouTube.com on Sunday after dozens of videos about protests in Tibet appeared on the site. 'Chinese leaders encourage Internet use for education and business but use online filters to block access to material considered subversive or pornographic. Foreign Web sites run by news organizations and human rights groups are regularly blocked if they carry sensitive information. Operators of China-based online bulletin boards are required to monitor their content and enforce censorship.' The blocking added to the communist government's efforts to control what the public saw and heard about protests that erupted Friday in the Tibetan capital, Lhasa, against Chinese rule."

343 comments

  1. How long... by Alexx+K · · Score: 2, Interesting

    before China blocks Slashdot?

    --
    Don't mind the extra X. Alex
    1. Re:How long... by mnemocynic · · Score: 2, Funny

      Right about n[NO CARRIER]

    2. Re:How long... by imkow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Soon after you can write chinese ....:D

      btw, a greeting from the Red China

      --
      China, in fact, is very fragile.
    3. Re:How long... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Considering that Slashdot still only supports a tiny subset of unicode (not including the Euro symbol) I think there's more chance of the grandparent learning to write Chinese than there is of Slashdot actually accepting it in posts...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:How long... by imkow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yeah, i have just tried to put some chinese characters in here. they didnt show up.. the slashdot site seem less open than the microsoft site.
      that should be not the way.

      --
      China, in fact, is very fragile.
    5. Re:How long... by fliptout · · Score: 1

      Hen gao xing ren shi ni, wo hao peng you.

      I'm curious about your nickname.. I read it, and I thought it looks like "I'm kow".. Which is like "wo kao"... Which is what I said when I stepped into something interesting in the streets of Beijing... :)

      --
      A witty saying proves you are wittier than the next guy.
    6. Re:How long... by kesuki · · Score: 1

      apparently you've never tried http://slashdot.jp/ I'm not sure if it's both japanese and chinese text support or not, since i don't read either... but yeah it might be more prudent to 'test' if it accepts chinese characters than 'slashdot.org'

    7. Re:How long... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      --

      ah words

    8. Re:How long... by imkow · · Score: 3, Informative

      thanks for the info. actually, there is a chinese version of slashdot, called http://solidot.org/ Solidot,or Qi-Ke(strange vistor) website..
      the news on it is not up-to-date like here..and commentors also are fewer than here. that's why it not well known to many of my folks.

      --
      China, in fact, is very fragile.
    9. Re:How long... by RobertinXinyang · · Score: 1

      You may have a very good point, Which I think is along the lines of, " the officials who make those decisions are just not aware of slashdot, or have bigger issues than a geek news site."

      I would add that, except for those students who listen to BBC, most of the students seem to be unaware of what is happening. I treat it as one of the things that I do not talk about (even though it is not on the list).

    10. Re:How long... by kesuki · · Score: 1

      It's not that slashcode blocks it, it's that slashdot.org is SET to use English, specifically US english. that's like going to slashdot.jp and complaining because you can't read Kanji... this article was on there several hours earlier and only got 4 comments... the main complaint is that they linked to us you tube instead of japanese you tube.

    11. Re:How long... by fbjon · · Score: 1

      /.jp is utf-8, so it supports any language.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    12. Re:How long... by dwater · · Score: 1

      /. has been blocked on occasion, though I would be tempted to attribute that to a mistake or other rather than directly targeting /.

      --
      Max.
    13. Re:How long... by Mix+Master+Nixon · · Score: 1

      Checking out Solidot via Google translation, I have to remark that Google's translation is not only superior, but actually shits all over Babelfish's gibberish version. The difference is night and day. Suggest a better translation indeed.

      --
      Oppressing an entire population is never cheap.
      --Jeckler (/. Beta IS GARBAGE!)
    14. Re:How long... by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 1

      not including the Euro symbol

      Considering that slashdot declares that the pages are iso-8859-1, there is no surprise that it doesn't support full unicode. However, the euro-sign can be displayed considering you're supposed to use HTML-Entities in the first place. So: € = €. Not, hard, is it?

    15. Re:How long... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Como? No comprendo las palabras que abran tu boca... Por que solamente [do you post] en una lingua? Que mejor [to post] en todos.

  2. Hiding something? by jo7hs2 · · Score: 0

    What are you hiding China?

    1. Re:Hiding something? by Eggplant62 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Millions of spambots, what else? If they want a Great Firewall of China, I'm happy to help!

      I'd encourage everyone to simply null route China's netblocks and enjoy the sudden decrease in criminal activity.

    2. Re:Hiding something? by DustoneGT · · Score: 1

      If Tibet and the other western provinces break away then so will Taiwan, parts of Manchuria and then maybe Macao and Hong Kong. They don't want their population to get into 'dangerous and subversive' ideas like independence, human rights or democratic government.

      "The more you tighten your grip, Mr. Hu, the more star systems, I mean provinces, will slip through your fingers."

    3. Re:Hiding something? by omegashenron · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are over simplifying things. Western provinces can't survive without the East, why do you think so many people from the West travel to the East for work. If they become separate and independent, say goodbye to an open border.

      As for Taiwan, they're just as bad as the PRC. Taiwan asserts ownership over all of mainland China (actually this view varies depending on which political party gets elected). Taiwan with its democracy is more corrupt than the CCP, just look at Chen Shui-bian. He would be under house arrest or in front of a firing squad if he pulled that shit in the PRC. The Western media didn't make a big deal out of his affairs because he is an ally.

      Giving in to Taiwan would be like having let the Southern States form their own country. Furthermore, if your into "human rights" look at how Taiwans native tribes were treated by the Taiwanese Hans who took over.

      If you have never lived in China, you don't know anything about the situation and should not comment.

      --
      Excuses Are Like Assholes - Everybody's Got One
    4. Re:Hiding something? by Angry+Toad · · Score: 1

      I'll comment as I damn well please. That's what an open society with free speech is about.

    5. Re:Hiding something? by omegashenron · · Score: 1

      Go to a bar (in the US) and talk about killing the Chinese president. See what happens when people overhear part of your conversation.

      --
      Excuses Are Like Assholes - Everybody's Got One
    6. Re:Hiding something? by empaler · · Score: 1
    7. Re:Hiding something? by empaler · · Score: 1

      Go to a bar (in the US) and talk about killing the American president. See what happens when people overhear part of your conversation.

      There, fixed that for you. (ie. I agree with you)
    8. Re:Hiding something? by Angry+Toad · · Score: 1

      So because America has a few ridiculous restrictions, that justifies the fully barbaric Chinese stance?

    9. Re:Hiding something? by trjonescp · · Score: 1

      If you have never lived in China, you don't know anything about the situation and should not comment.
      So, since the vast majority of Americans have never lived in China we should all just sit back and be politically disengaged from all Chinese news? That doesn't seem right.
      --
      Only speak when it improves the silence.
    10. Re:Hiding something? by empaler · · Score: 0

      What, the Chinese are the only barbarians in your question? I find China and the United States two of the most disheartening facts of life. Like all states, they're bullies, murderers and thieves. These are just the biggest bullies, murderers and thieves at the moment.

    11. Re:Hiding something? by 2short · · Score: 1

      I'm not clear what you imagine will happen.

      If I go to a bar in my (US) town and am overheard actively plotting murder by people who think I'm serious, maybe there would be trouble, but that seems appropriate.

      If I'm overheard saying "Hu JinTao sucks, I'd like to kill him", people would say, well, they'll say "Who's that?" If I say I want to kill George Bush, I'll get equal mweasures of "Hey, that's a bit overboard" and "Damn straight!". But nothing would "happen"; we'd just have a rowdy conversation about how much our government sucks. From what I hear from Chinese acquaintances, rowdy bar room conversations about how much Hu Jintao sucks are not something that happens in China.

    12. Re:Hiding something? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another spam militant... Do you guys ever get laid?

      Does anyone who uses the term "spam militant" ever get laid??

    13. Re:Hiding something? by Non-Newtonian+Fluid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > If you have never lived in China, you don't know anything about the situation and should not comment.

      I've lived in both China and Taiwan. I was also a Chinese major, speak, read and write Chinese, and have a fair amount of friends from mainland China (both peasants and city dwellers) and Taiwan. I also have a number of friends that are members of the CCP. Does this qualify me to comment?

      > As for Taiwan, they're just as bad as the PRC.

      Have you lived in Taiwan before?

      Taiwan is nothing like the PRC. In the PRC, corruption permeates to even the most petty of bureaucrats, who must be bribed for simple things like marriage licenses and being allowed to continue to farm your own meager plot of land. Seeing the money wasted by mid-level party officials at their 3 hour "liquid lunches" in Beijing (and hearing about it from my friends in the party) was stomach-turning, knowing what the families of my friends were going through as peasants. (My friend's younger sister -- 13 years old -- worked 15 hour days, 7 days a week in a windowless factory to help support her family, and made herself sick in the process.)

      Taiwan does not assert ownership over the mainland -- what sloppy thinking! The Nationalist Party asserts that it is the rightful ruling party of all of China, and so desires unification. Other parties' desires and opinions vary.

      When the Nationalists retreated to Taiwan, they massacred quite a large number of people they feared were leftists. This was probably Taiwan's greatest human-rights tragedy. But that has been acknowledged and apologized for, for what little it's worth. Don't expect that kind of acknowledgment in the PRC, though, where Tibet has always been a part of China, China never invaded Vietnam, the Korean war started when the US invaded North Korea, and serious human rights violations never happen.

    14. Re:Hiding something? by rabiddeity · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As for Taiwan, they're just as bad as the PRC. Taiwan asserts ownership over all of mainland China (actually this view varies depending on which political party gets elected). Taiwan with its democracy is more corrupt than the CCP, just look at Chen Shui-bian. He would be under house arrest or in front of a firing squad if he pulled that shit in the PRC. The Western media didn't make a big deal out of his affairs because he is an ally.


      Taiwan's policy of asserting ownership of all China is strictly for political reasons, and if you knew anything about the politics you'd understand that. China's policy is that if Taiwan declares independence, China goes to war with Taiwan (and would militarily steamroll it, because nobody else wants to intervene). While devastating to world opinion, it wouldn't stop China from doing it just to make a point. So instead of declaring independence, Taiwan makes the ridiculous claim that China should be unified... under the Taiwanese government. Amazingly, this non-confrontation policy has befuddled China's government for the past 50 years or so. China drew a clear line in the sand, and Taiwan has managed to keep its elected government without crossing it.

      Taiwan's democratically elected government may be corrupt, but there is still open debate and freedom of the press. Hell, they're having political rallies a few days before an election, right now! The PRC's bureaucracy may well be corrupt, but there's a good chance that only party officials would find out about it. And even if they did, it's up to the party to change things, which they will only do if it's in their best interest. In Taiwan, people can vote out corrupt officials. If you think that'll ever happen in the PRC as it is, I have some beachfront property in Xinjiang you might be interested in.
    15. Re:Hiding something? by jo7hs2 · · Score: 1

      "If you have never lived in China, you don't know anything about the situation and should not comment." Wow. Just wow. That is tantamount to saying that if you don't live in Kansas, you can't discuss the weather forecast for today for Topeka. The last three paragraphs of your post read like a Chinese propaganda poster, and even go so far as to SUPPRESS disagreement with your point of view. For shame.

    16. Re:Hiding something? by jo7hs2 · · Score: 1

      And THIS "If you have never lived in China, you don't know anything about the situation and should not comment." gets moded INSIGHTFUL?

    17. Re:Hiding something? by jo7hs2 · · Score: 1

      You've failed in making whatever point your were trying to make. People would look at you like you were insane, the same result as if you did the the same thing (only backwards) in a CHINESE bar.

    18. Re:Hiding something? by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 1

      Very interesting post. Well I have to assume that the Chinese people aren't dumb and this level of corruption must be obvious. I imagine it's simply tolerated as part of the system they grew up with like most people here can't seem to understand the concept of a third party or non majority vote counting. Although if the majority of work available requires so many hours out of your day you would probably be beyond caring or ability to achieve much of an education.

      Still when sites like Youtube, CNN, Wired News, etc all drop of the net all at once they must realize something interesting is going on. Is that correct?

    19. Re:Hiding something? by NekoYasha · · Score: 1

      At least China's polital system doesn't involve House Kung-fu.

    20. Re:Hiding something? by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      Giving into Communist CHINA was like letting South win.... the "legitimate" government really did go to Taiwan and secure that provence, the Communists were the usurpers and took foreign & royal property, much like Castro in Cuba, whom we STILL have an embargo on. We've made Russia give up many territories that were part of Russia BEFORE WW2, why do we not make China let Taiwan & Tibet go? It's the same thing.

    21. Re:Hiding something? by dwater · · Score: 1

      > *If* the majority of the population of the island of Taiwan freely choose to become independent, why stop them?

      I can see your point, but have you considered that they may actually *not* want to become independent. The way I heard it, and it sounds plausible, is that a lot of the population there actually do consider themselves Chinese and have strong links with families/etc on the mainland, and so *don't* want to become independent.

      I would assume something similar in Tibet. Unfortunately, the radicals shout loudest and get most attention from media, so those are the people we tend to notice -and it's natural to assume they represent the majority (or at least a significant proportion), when there's really no way to tell without a referendum; and even then you have to wonder.

      --
      Max.
    22. Re:Hiding something? by dwater · · Score: 1

      > Still when sites like Youtube, CNN, Wired News, etc all drop of the net all at once they must realize something interesting is going on. Is that correct?

      Well, in my experience, youtube was never "*on* the 'net". I don't know about the others since I've infrequently visited them - and if I don't care to visit them, you can be sure Chinese people won't be bothered.

      For all of those sites, I don't suppose many Chinese people visit them anyway. People here tend not to trust foreign media which is, at worst, biased and, at best, culturally/historically ignorant. Such sites are typically not in Chinese either, so people would have to be able to read something other than Chinese.

      I think you put too much importance on foreign web sites in China.

      For the record, CNN works just fine, but defaults to some US specific news. Clicking international gives some stories on it.
      Wired.com is also online.
      Heck, even foxnews.com is available....if you call that news. Ah, but the specific stories I click on seem to get '104'd, so I image they're blocked. Cnn ones seem to work though.

      --
      Max.
    23. Re:Hiding something? by Korveck · · Score: 1

      "Always has been" is not a very accurate term to use. Tibet was not part of China until last two hundred years or so. It enjoyed self-governance for majority of its history. Second, China in fact had invaded Vietnam, Korea, Mongolia, and other countries along its borders throughout its history. Its borderline had expanded and diminished many times. And Korean War was started by North Korea's surprise attack on South Korea, not by USA.

    24. Re:Hiding something? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's why they like receiving all the p3n1s enh@nc3m3nt emails.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    25. Re:Hiding something? by Calledor · · Score: 1

      Giving in to Taiwan would be like having let the Southern States form their own country. Furthermore, if your into "human rights" look at how Taiwans native tribes were treated by the Taiwanese Hans who took over.

      You're joking right? You have to be, no one asserts history in such a grandiose manner and then fails so utterly. The only way this could be referenced to South in the Civil war is if Abraham Lincoln had, on a whimb, promised to go to the south and kill every Democrat for the good of the Union. Then you can say "Giving in to Taiwan would be the same (as that)". Believe it or not, despite the incredibly treasonous acts of the South, they were not tried as such and shot/hanged at wars end.

      Also, you're full of it if embezzling a couple million dollars in Taiwan compares to corruption in China. China does not need to cheat to do the same thing, policy is pretty much whatever the party feels like, which makes such wonderously quaint ideas such as banking/currency adjustment moot over there. Sure if you are a no-name management fellow at factory where pesticides get into food or lead into toys you might be shot, but you also might be shot because you had nothing to do with it and the guy who did is higher up and gives the killing orders.

      Mind you I'm not saying Taiwan is perfect nor am I saying China is all that evil. Using a true historical perspective draconian leaderships have always been the most successful in Asia, not that I think they still need one, but you can't really find a populous country in the region that doesn't have a list of human rights/democracy issues a mile long. Pitting one against another in a test of morals is like arguing the merits of banality over boredom.
    26. Re:Hiding something? by LS · · Score: 1

      I find it interesting that many people who "know" about the situation in China tell those who "don't know" that they should not comment. If only people who knew everything about a situation were allowed to comment, then no one would talk about anything, including you. Dialog is part of the process education and finding truth, and you are acting as an oppressor when you tell people to shut up. No one knows everything about any situation.

      LS

      --
      There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
    27. Re:Hiding something? by DustoneGT · · Score: 1

      Taiwan is not just as bad as the PRC, and I'll use your own statements to prove it.

      First, you say that views vary in Taiwan depending on which party gets elected. At least there's multiple parties in Taiwan. Beijing has a one party system. It's either the commie way or the highway (read: death and sale of internal organs to wealthy westerners)

      Then you say they would have shot Chen for having an affair. Is this respect for human rights? Do you honestly think it's a good idea to violently kill infidels?

      Then you say they would be like the Confederate States of America to let Taiwan become independent. What were your comrades in Beijing doing during the 80's when Taiwan was reforming? (Hint: Tiananmen Square) Human rights violations by the KMT are history. The CCP is killing dissenters in Tibet today.

      And assuming I never lived in China...wow. If you're right and Taiwan is really the rightful property of China then I have probably lived there longer than you.

    28. Re:Hiding something? by DustoneGT · · Score: 1

      He was talking about what Chinese schools teach children, not what actually happened.

    29. Re:Hiding something? by kamapuaa · · Score: 1
      You are over simplifying things. Western provinces can't survive without the East, why do you think so many people from the West travel to the East for work. If they become separate and independent, say goodbye to an open border.

      This is in itself an over-simplification. Eastern provinces couldn't survive without the West, the factories and the construction boom are pretty much 100% based on a constant influx of rural poor from Western China.

      Anyway, there's already a system in place of people from the west not having a hukou/local citizenship, and essentially being foreign workers without rights. If they became separate and independent, the system would barely have to change.

      Chen Shui-bian was caught, forced out of office, and is facing criminal charges. I think that is a very suitable outcome, and I'm sure you know everyone involved in the PRC government is corrupt and taking bribes, from top to bottom, it's common knowledge - the fact that they generally don't get punished for it does not mean that the government is any less corrupt.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    30. Re:Hiding something? by john0312 · · Score: 1

      > Taiwan asserts ownership over all of mainland China (actually this view varies depending on which political party gets elected)

      That's 30 years outdated. There's two major political party in Taiwan, out of the two, DPP supports the independence of Taiwan ( but doesn't claim the ownership of mainland China ).

      Some politicians wanted Taiwan to be in UN, but almost everyone knows that it's impossible.

      > Taiwan with its democracy is more corrupt than the CCP, just look at Chen Shui-bian.
      In 2004, the day before the presidential election, Chen Shui-bian got shoot (it hit his ankle). Rumors says that it's his own arrangement to shoot himself, in order to win the election, and he did.

      Many in Taiwan agrees that he's corrupting the government, as the economy isn't going well since the year (2000) he's elected.

      > look at how Taiwans native tribes were treated by the Taiwanese Hans who took over.
      In national wide university admission examination ( something like SAT/ACT ), they get 30% extra bonus. Therefore, that's say that I need 450 points out of 500 in order to get into the best university in Taiwan ( National Taiwan University ), they only need 350 points out of 500 points. I would say they are quite well-treated nowadays.

    31. Re:Hiding something? by MSNfromCN · · Score: 1

      I can't agree with U more. The westerners regard themselves as fighters while in fact they're doing sth as crusaders having done:oblige others to accept their views which in fact is sth far from legitimacy.

    32. Re:Hiding something? by NoobHunter · · Score: 1

      I concur...I do not know what the situation is like. However, when a government you have no power to choose deems itself the Decider to what you can and cannot see, can and cannot listen and can and cannot think...I say that that's crossing a somewhat critical line.

      Imagine in the west, the US government censoring anti-Iraq war websites or anti-Bush websites just because they go against the govt's rule.

      Let's take it one step further here. In China, if you do not follow the government's decided religion as outlined in the Communist Party's Bulebook, you are an enemy of the state. Falun Gong, Baptism, and everything else under the sun that the PRC does not approve of...(which just happens to include Buddhism...)

      Do I live there? no. Do I pretend to understand the hardships that the people there live under? Absolutely not...Do I understand that their government may be one of the most oppresive entities known to the world? The only reason that China is not another target on the US's list of "Must Force Democracy down their throats' list is because China could spank them back to the Dark Age.

      We went after Germany because of what they did to the jews and observers of the Jewish faith...why can't we do the same for those poor monks with what China is doing?

      --
      So Jesus, Mohammed and Abraham walk into a Bar....
    33. Re:Hiding something? by MSNfromCN · · Score: 1

      U R quite right,but it's easier to say. EG:If U hear someone claiming visited your motherland "many times" tells others that it's a barbarian 's land for he saw people there eating with their hands What would you think?

    34. Re:Hiding something? by LS · · Score: 1

      I would tell him he was wrong and proceed to explain why his lack of perspective on the differences between culture caused him to have such a skewed view of the other country. Then I would proceed to compare and contrast the cultures, showing the positives and negatives of both, but I wouldn't tell him to shut up.

      By the way, I actually live in China, and this is not the first time I've seen a Chinese user tell others directly to not comment on something "they don't know anything about". This poster is obviously in support of the Chinese mainland, but the funny thing is the last poster who responded like this was actually against the mainland's policies. There you have it.

      LS

      --
      There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
    35. Re:Hiding something? by amplt1337 · · Score: 1

      That'd be complicated in the Tibetan situation, since a lot of those people who live in Tibet and don't want independence would be recent Han transplants. It'd be (to choose as non-offensive a comparison as I can make) sort of like holding a plebiscite in Kansas while that territory was applying for Statehood -- if you were to have done so and counted both the White votes and the Native American ones, you would have gotten very different results than if you counted only the Native American votes.

      --
      Freedom isn't free; its price is the well-being of others.
  3. psiphon by hey · · Score: 2, Informative

    Maybe you want to consider hosting psiphon server?
    http://psiphon.civisec.org/

  4. Is blocking even necessary? by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've traveled to China a few times, and encounter plenty of Chinese students at my university. All seem to be aware that their government is authoritarian and has done some terrible things, in spite of all the blocking. Nonetheless, without exception every Chinese person I've spoke with on the issue insists that a hard line is needed to keep the country together. Since the Chinese population, for cultural and historical reasons, seems okay with what's going on, is blocking the Internet even necessary?

    1. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point is that they know it and they *like* it that way.

    2. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by aleph42 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The effects of controling the medias are subtle and effective, and every succeful control will also convince the population it is itself necessary.

      Take the example of Russia: the elections were cheated (some small towns were 105% pro government...), but even perfectly fair elections would probably show that a majority (like 55%) think Putin was a good leader. But thinking that 95%, of the country agrees with the government will make you more prone to agree yourself, whereas at 55% you'll start beleiving that alternatives exist.

      I could also speak about Fox in the US, and the necessity for antiterrorist laws.

      --
      Don't take my posts literally; it's just code to control my botnet.
    3. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by milsoRgen · · Score: 0, Troll

      I view his statement as pro-communist propaganda.

      --
      I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask where they're goin' and hook up with 'em later.
    4. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      It depends on what you mean by 'necessary'.

      Is blocking necessary to satisfy human rights? No.
      Is blocking necessary to keep the country together? Maybe.
      Is blocking necessary to maintain a hard line? Yes.

    5. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by rucs_hack · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There you've hit an interesting point.

      China is barking huge, and its population is equally on the large side (Ha! Fear my accurate numerical statements...). They can't just be mostly sheep with a few wolves running things.

      I've known quite a few Chinese students, courtesy of the US making it harder for Chinese students to study there. This is great, it's brought vast, vast amounts of cash in from China to universities in the UK, thanks for that one guys..

      Anyhoo, these Chinese people, while here, have just the same net access as anyone else, and they are for the most part, belonging to the middle to upper classes in China. Just the sort of people you'd think they'd want to keep ignorant (middle class people have started all revolutions in modern times), and yet they make no effort to do so.

      Doesn't quite map, does it...

      It seems to me we have a large amount of 'we don't really understand what the fuck is going on in China', that frequently gets combined with a bunch of preconceptions which are probably quite inaccurate.

    6. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      Since the Chinese population, for cultural and historical reasons, seems okay with what's going on, is blocking the Internet even necessary?
      If the internet was not blocked, people would not be unanimously supporting their government, hence the blocking.
    7. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I view your statement as pro-moron propaganda.

    8. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So? Fascism was very popular when it was brought in.

    9. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by grassy_knoll · · Score: 2, Interesting
      There seem to be some in the business community who think democracy would dilute their control over the government and, perhaps, thereby their profits.

      This story from the International Herald Tribune, while specifically about Hong Kong, seems to illustrate the concept:

      Equally, many business leaders -primarily members of the tycoon class, as they are known - show little interest in any political arrangement that would dilute their long-established ability to influence government, regardless of how swiftly Hong Kong is changing.


    10. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by qbzzt · · Score: 1

      They're probably afraid that if the gov't wasn't authoritarian the country will fall apart. That happened in the USSR, Yugoslavia, etc. Arguably, it's happening in Iraq.

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    11. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by tabrnaker · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      Didn't you know that exportation of professionals is part of china's plan to dominate the world?

      First, make other countries feeble minded by poisoning their youth and feeding their vices. Next, emigrate professionals to increase the number of chinese in decision making power in other countries.

      It's a slow process, but Mao's dream is coming true. Anybody who has read and understood Mao, should be very scared as to how close to the plan the chinese are sticking, and the amazing results they are getting from sticking to their plan.

    12. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by microbox · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      It seems to me we have a large amount of 'we don't really understand what the fuck is going on in China', that frequently gets combined with a bunch of preconceptions which are probably quite inaccurate.

      Can it be argued that chinese actions in Tibet and their language with regards to Taiwan is a model of enlightened society? What a joke.

      China is powerful, and fear is futile ground for inaccurate and negative preconceptions. Most westerners would abhor living in such an authoritarian regime, yet it was only a few generations ago when westerners themselves were the purveyors of the most human rights abuses. Heck, the thought of genocide in a place like Australia today is absurd, yet it was practiced just a 100 years ago.

      It's impossible to say that things never change. That society will always be the same. That's not true. For the vast amount of our history, we've lived subsidence lifestyles. The invention of writing changed all of that, and very quickly. 6000 years later and society is still learning about itself. We've reduced violence with trail-by-jury, and enabled a political structure that strives for constant and peaceful transition of regime.

      I believe that anger is based watching a society the needlessly makes itself suffer. It's not just the Tibetans that are suffering... do you really think all of those soldiers in tibet are making themselves happy by beating people up? They are just sowing the seeds of more conflict in their own lives. If punching someone in the face is the way you deal with conflict, then you'll end up with a broken nose on day.

      There is a lot we don't understand about China - there is a vast cultural divide. Just because they are powerful does not mean they are right. Their actions against their own people are a disgrace to themselves.

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    13. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      China has had government based around total control of the population for thousands of years. It might be they just don't want things to change much.

    14. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by rucs_hack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Can it be argued that chinese actions in Tibet and their language with regards to Taiwan is a model of enlightened society? What a joke.

      Ok then, can it be argued that the way the US treats Cuba is in any way still appropriate? How much have the people of Cuba suffered because the US won't relax its embargo?

      I mean, yes, they fucked up... IN THE SIXTIES!!!111one.
      Seriously, shouldn't we be able to move on?

      If you ask me, that's what's kept Castro and his friends in power for so long.

      The point is, China isn't alone in acting stupidly towards other countries. It doesn't excuse them, but lets keep a sense of proportion about this.

    15. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by megaditto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fox News is just one of many TV networks in the US, and offers a unique -and different- perspective on things compared to the other 90% of media out there.

      You may consider it propaganda, but nobody is forcing you to watch it, and nobody goes around shutting down liberal stations, arresting liberal TV sponsors, or shooting liberal journalists. If anything, Fox is against the kind of socialist media controls and regulations that would allow the Russia-type abuses in America.

      How you think Fox News resembles anything in Russia is beyond me.

      --
      Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
    16. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Got a source for that?

    17. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Telvin_3d · · Score: 1

      Lots of Chinese students in Canada too. And one thing that I have learned is that anyone who is over here to study is not 'middle class'. That may be how we read them based on their money and possessions but from their point of view they are not. Any family who can afford to send their kids overseas is in the thick of Chinese industry and money. It is exactly the people LEAST likely to want a revolution.

    18. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by call-me-kenneth · · Score: 1

      As this BoingBoing story points out, whilst the average Chinese citizen may be broadly sympathetic with opposition to government restrictions on free speech, political opposition, and especially corruption and incompetence amongst officialdom, there's a lot of people thinking "those ungrateful minorities, we give them modern conveniences and look how they thank us... ". Hey, a blog linking to a blog linking to a blog...

    19. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by tabrnaker · · Score: 1
      Umm, Mao's writing?

      Considering i was talking about Mao's plan's in his writing, then, logically, that's the source.

      However, if that is the extent of your reading/comprehension skills, perhaps you should skip it, eh? :)

    20. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by jambox · · Score: 3, Funny

      My missus is Chinese (born there) and I've been there a couple of times, I've found the same thing.
      I think some of it is down the fact that you can get by pretty good in China these days, if you keep your head down. If you get involved in politics, you may end up facing retribution, sometimes exposing your family. Chinese politics is often frighteningly bloody, perhaps because the stakes are so high; governing 5x as many people as live in the USA must weigh heavily.
      The missus, well she displays total apathy about Chinese politics. She says that since she is British now, it's no longer her business!
      Oh yeah and FREE TIBET!

      --
      You thought you could break the laws of physics without paying the PRICE?
    21. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Fox News is just one of many TV networks in the US [...] You may consider it propaganda, but nobody is forcing you to watch it

      Really? That's good news. I'm now going to switch my TV to another channel ... done. OK, up to now there don't seem to be any reactions by government agenc@$%/&[NO CARRIER]
      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    22. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by jambox · · Score: 1

      I don't think this is specific to China, in fact I'm sure the same thing is true in the west. Remember Hilary Clinton sitting on the board of Wal Mart? Not to mention Condi...
      In any case Hong Kong still operates under an essentially British system, I believe.

      --
      You thought you could break the laws of physics without paying the PRICE?
    23. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by jambox · · Score: 1

      You've missed the point - Fox is a government mouthpiece (has been for 10 years or more). It has competition, yes, which you don't get in China or Russia, but that doesn't stop the propaganda. During the shameful build up to the Iraq war, they were pumping great big lies into the heads of the masses. See the connection?

      --
      You thought you could break the laws of physics without paying the PRICE?
    24. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Some news on this a little more recent than the poster above has. The guy is dead and every Chinese person I know is pretty happy about that.

    25. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by tabrnaker · · Score: 1
      A dead man does not a movement kill.

      Strong must be the might which turns the dragons advance.

    26. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by empaler · · Score: 3, Informative

      I would like to recommend to you the documentary Manufacturing Consent for a levelheaded insight into how we have gotten to the media picture we have today. Interesting, and if not agreeable, at least insightful.

    27. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by chrispalasz · · Score: 1

      I've traveled to China a few times, and encounter plenty of Chinese students at my university. All seem to be aware that their government is authoritarian and has done some terrible things, in spite of all the blocking.

      I tutored a group of adult Chinese foreign exchange students who came from various parts of China. At one point I asked them, "What do you think of your government?" At first they gave each other sideways glances. Of course they know their government is authoritarian, and I'm sure they're also aware of some things the government tries to keep secret... but still the big picture remains elusive. In short, the censorship works. I asked my students several questions about their views on the USA, North Korea, China, Taiwan, and Russia, and their opinions absolutely reflected what the Chinese government showed them (or DIDN'T show them), generally speaking.

      Their views on North Korea, in particular, were disturbingly uninformed.

    28. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by layer3switch · · Score: 1

      Seriously, shouldn't we be able to move on?
      Your assumption with Cuba is only true if you believe the cold war has ended. ... it certainly hasn't yet; KGB/FSB still very much active in US.

      If you ask me, that's what's kept Castro and his friends in power for so long.
      You mean, like Saddam and Kim Jong Il? You are giving US too much credit.

      --
      "Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
    29. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by hackingbear · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As I talked to people in China while I lived there 2003-06, most people know about democracy of the Western world; they do complain their country's lack of democracy, but at the same time, they believe it does not necessary make things better and it is only something good to have in the future when the country gets prosperous. Think about it, they do have a point. Which of the following democratic countries (at least more so than China) are much better off than China: India, Mexico, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, and many easter European countries? These countries are not doing better in terms of corruption, equality, development, environment protection, education, health care, etc.. How do they fare comparing to Singapore and Hong Kong, both of which have little democracy to speak of?

      Their belief is that democracy won't work unless the country has reached higher level of prosperity -- i.e. massive middle class, otherwise democracy could be damaging.

    30. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by jo7hs2 · · Score: 1

      I love how any statement criticizing a country by someone who sounds vaguely American engenders an automatic response listing various transgressions the United States has, or alledgedly has, or quite possibly has not committed. Proportion is exactly what you are missing. You are comparing a decision made due to a DIRECT threat by a currently standing government, with a willful veiling of the truth to hide from the world and its own people the evils a nation is committing. Your comparison and call for proportion is spurious, and represents nothing more than a cheap shot at an easy target.

    31. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by kir · · Score: 1

      OH!!! Give me a effen break from the moral relativism!

      So Cuba under the Castro regime was such a great place before the U.S. embargo? Have you read any history man? Your suggestion that Cuba's current problems stem from the United States and its embargo from either ignorance or a hatred of the U.S. I can't think of a third possibility.

      --
      3cx.org - A truly bad website.
    32. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you on crack? The reason Iraq is falling apart is because the place has been bombed back to the stone age and the military prance about killing people, while the puppet government is playing favourites with some parts of the population at the expense of other parts.

    33. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by tsa · · Score: 1

      That's a very good point. Add to it that America has shown a few times that forcing a country into changing itself to a democracy doesn't work. The change has to come from the people who live there. The only thing we can do against the way the Chinese gouvernment treats its people is telling Chine we disapprove very much the way they handled the 'crisis' in Tibet, and maybe boycot the Olympic games, although I'm not sure that will help in the long run.

      --

      -- Cheers!

    34. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      You mean, like Saddam and Kim Jong Il? You are giving US too much credit.

      Not really. First off, the US used to really like Saddam. That is, they preferred him to the leaders in Iran. Also, he was the head of a rich and influential country. For some reason he then irritated them somewhat.

      Kim Jong's government is propped up by China, mainly because they are rather worried as to what might happen if North Korea descends into anarchy. They've been stuck in this situation for a very long time.

      I'm just wondering how long Castro would have lasted if Cuba had been engaging in international commerce and diplomacy for the last several decades.

    35. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by adminstring · · Score: 1

      You might want to think harder about that third possibility... It's entirely possible to love the people, land, and culture of the United States yet disagree with the mistakes made by the leaders of the American plutocracy.

      Specifically, having read some history it's pretty hard to avoid the conclusion that Cuba under Castro was better than Cuba under the prior US-supported Batista regime. The US embargo has obviously not caused the removal of Castro (or his brother) from power, and has obviously had a negative impact on the Cuban economy and thereby has had a negative impact on the Cuban people.

      Looking at it objectively, though, the Chinese stance on Tibet and Taiwan is significantly worse than the US stance on Cuba - the US just wants Cuba to be another banana republic, whereas China wants complete authoritarian control over neighboring lands.

      If GP is suggesting that Americans can't criticize China because our own government has screwed up and continues to do so, my response is that the best policy is to criticize our own government when appropriate, and also to criticize the Chinese government when appropriate. I can find fault with both of them, on various issues and with varying levels of severity.

      Just because I can see that China is clearly worse than the United States doesn't mean that the United States is perfect and beyond criticism. The day we can't criticize our country is the day that our country will cease to improve, and this is one of the worst things about the Chinese government - it doesn't allow internal criticism.

      --
      My truck is like a series of tubes.
    36. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      You may consider it propaganda, but nobody is forcing you to watch it

      I'd say some people don't consider the existence of a choice when it comes to watching TV.

      I was round someone's house the other week, and while we were talking they were randomly channel hopping. I asked if they might turn off the television, and they got really annoyed, even though all they were doing was flicking between channels. Since this fixation on the television caused conversation to be stilted and boring, I don't think I'll bother going back.

    37. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Darkman,+Walkin+Dude · · Score: 1

      Their belief is that democracy won't work unless the country has reached higher level of prosperity -- i.e. massive middle class, otherwise democracy could be damaging.

      No, thats not accurate. Democracy is one of the few forms of government that are meritocracies, the best rise to the top, not held back by political beliefs or whatever. This is an essential prerequisite for the growth of wealth and hence a large middle class. Most of those countries you listed are not true democracies, there is still an ingrained upper class which is holding on to the reins of power. Thailand, for example, still has a king.

      The only place where semi autocratic rule provides an overall benefit would be places like Iraq, where domestic populations would tear each other apart in absentia, as they currently are doing, and even that isn't a good long term bet. China is going to find out the hard way that a strong middle class doesn't want taxation without representation.

    38. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'd say some people don't consider the existence of a choice when it comes to watching TV."

      I'd say you're a moron who should stop posting.

      Seriously, I'm not trolling.

    39. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by keineobachtubersie · · Score: 1

      "The point is, China isn't alone in acting stupidly towards other countries."

      I think the real point is that you aren't personally able to discuss world politics without resorting to a specious comparison to the US. I don't see anywhere in this discussion where China was denounced for being "alone in acting stupidly toward other countries" so your "point" really is off topic.

      "It doesn't excuse them, but lets keep a sense of proportion about this."

      Ok, compared to what China is doing in Tibet, the US embargo against Cuba is NOTHING. INSIGNIFICANT.

      There's your proportion, let's see how much you adhere to your own advice.

    40. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      This annoys me when I go to my parent's house too. I'm by no means one of those "I don't watch TV and will use every opportunity to scream it's evils!" type people, but I do consider it something that I like to watch SOMETIMES (I watch maybe 7-8 hours of television per week). My parents though, can't seem to sit in a room without the TV on (it literally is turned on every momentthat they're not sleeping - my mom even leaves it on while they're at work "so the dog won't be lonely"). Even while they're talking to someone else they want it on. It's as if they can't even think without it in the background making noise. It really bothers me because I'm the type that if there's nothing specific on that I want to watch, I don't want it there as a distraction. Yet still they look at me as if I'd suggested shooting the dog if I suggest that we just turn off the TV for a while.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    41. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1
      Since the Chinese population, for cultural and historical reasons, seems okay with what's going on, is blocking the Internet even necessary?

      I think the Chinese government is worried about people seeing the reality of it. It's one thing to approve of military action on an abstract level - it's another to see people actually killed and maimed - to see parents lose their children or children becoming orphans.

    42. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      No, thats not accurate. Democracy is one of the few forms of government that are meritocracies, the best rise to the top, not held back by political beliefs or whatever. This is an essential prerequisite for the growth of wealth and hence a large middle class. Most of those countries you listed are not true democracies, there is still an ingrained upper class which is holding on

      Democracy is an ideal, all current form of practices are far away from the ideal and will likely remain so forever. Election, even a true competitive ones, will not necessary overthrown the elite upper class as you point out. The best examples are India and Mexico (both have large number of names on the Forbes 500 for examples but the majority are as poor as the peasants in China.) USA may be a good example of failed democracy as well. They are not against democracy, they just say it will actually hinder the progress toward a prosperous and egalitarian society.

      Thailand, for example, still has a king.

      By your token, the United Kingdom, Japan, Sweden, etc. are not democracies either.

    43. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      Fox News is just one of many TV networks in the US

      The most important thing to remember is that Fox News offers opinion rather than news.

    44. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by Spasemunki · · Score: 1

      There's far more involvement by the royal family in Thai politics than is comperable in Japan or the UK. While it's very difficult to get accurate research on the Thai monarchy (because of Thailand's strict lese majesty laws), some scholars would point to the influence of the monarchy as one of the reasons why Thailand has gone through so many constitutions and non-democratic changes of government since its transition away from absolute monarchy. When democratic leaders become entrenched, or threaten the traditional privileges of the monarchy (as Thaksin did), they get swept out by military coups with the blessing of the crown. After a "transition period", political groups associated with the old regime are outlawed, and a new constitution and elections usher in a few more years of ostensible democracy.

      It's a prime example of how a monarchy can undermine a democratic government, despite being legally granted relatively little power. That being said, Thailand has done OK overall as a democracy, particularly compared to the rest of mainland SE Asia. They got a lot of aid and trade during the cold war to prevent them from going the way of Cambodia, Vietnam, and Laos because Western governments had an easier time justifying such measures to a friendly democracy, rather than a friendly despot. There was an article recently speculating that Bhutan is trying the same trick; few people in Bhutan are actually interested in pursuing a democratic government (the king had to order the creation of two political parties, because no one wanted to contest the elections), but they've realized that by being a democracy they will attract aid and support that they wouldn't get otherwise, particularly if the Marxist/Maoist guerrilla problem that has plagued Nepal starts to spread, or if India suddenly takes a notion to collect all three Himalayan Buddhist kingdoms (thereby qualifying to send away the proofs of purchase and get a special bonus prize).

    45. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by wormite · · Score: 1

      If the Chinese leave the multimedia wide open, people who doesn't even know what is best for their own good will start to be brain-washed by the international multimedia and those underground ones supported by other governments. I think those who can't even break through the government firewall should be left in peace from the multimedia messages going around the world. That's a line drawn there. Although it's not so reasonable.

    46. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by kevinyuan · · Score: 1

      I agree with you very much. I am a Chinese student. Although we cannot see the news about such "limited" events in China, we can read some on many websites by proxies. Lots of comments and news are not objective. They just believe what they see and that may be not the truth. Moreover, they do not know the national condition of China. I support my country and my government. They will never make same mistakes. If something has to be changed, I believe the government will make it better.

    47. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by aleph42 · · Score: 1

      First point: it's hard to be certain of what is needed or sufficient to lead to democracy, because the subject is so important (as in: used to justify invasions of middle east countries, etc)

      (That said, I *do* think that an educated enough middle class is the top factor to make a democratic revolution succesful. It is different from actually starting the revolution: for the french revolution food shortage made the whole population angry enough to act.)

      Second point: It's hard to judge China: the situation is very different from all countries and systems we are used to judge (the soviet union didn't focus on economic growth of citizens, and most of the others were not superpowers, or were ages ago). You need to define criterias before judging.

      Personaly, I always place freedom first, meaning the power of people to affect their lives (still not perfectly well defined). The links with poverty are:
          - in Africa, poverty can't be stoped without freedom, because foreign companies and governments support dictators to keep the trade inbalanced;
          - Without basic security, enough to eat and to send kids to school, people can't start to think clearly about politics, and will make short term decisions (see Iraq for security), so no freedom or democracy.

      Now, back to the topic:
      Personaly, I think that the way China acts IS the best way to provide material gain to their population, and that they have been stellarly good at it if you compare to any poor country.

      BUT, this does not necessarly means freedom will come for chinese citizens, because the government is far more organised and efficient at controlling it's population that other historical examples (where we had economic growth -> democracy).

      AND they are so big (superpower) that they impact the whole world, and escape some checks and balances historical example could have. A worst case scenario would be that they take the place of the US as biggest power, then apply their method of control to a great number of "sattelite states".

      So no, I wouldn't agree with those of the chinese residents to justify the action of their government.

      --
      Don't take my posts literally; it's just code to control my botnet.
    48. Re:Is blocking even necessary? by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      The bottom line is that somebody will try to doctor the "democratic process" somehow. It can be the king. It can be big corporations and mainstream media (the US?) It can be rich businessmen (Philippine? Thailand?) It can be the church (Iran?) It can the CIA (Kosvo? Ukraine?) It can be the ruling party (Russia?) It can be the competing parties using questionable means (Taiwan?) It can be the drug lords and mafia (Mexico?) It can be the poor people who just vote for anyone who can bring them fringe extremely short term benefits (India?) (I think people in china are worrying about the last one given the mass of poors there.)

      Also as seen in India and the US, open and highly competitive democratic elections do not guarantee the change of status quo either. Whereas in Singapore, though the election is not considered open or competitive, people still mostly satisfy with the resulting government (which is one of the cleanest and less corrupted in the world.)

  5. GooTube by TFer_Atvar · · Score: 1

    It'll be interesting to see how quickly GooTube caves and removes the videos. After all, they were willing to alter their search in order to gain access to Chinese markets. Let's see how far they're willing to bend over.

    1. Re:GooTube by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

      Er, they did what? Don't think that ever happened. While Youtube was still accessible in China they never blocked any of their search results from showing up. On the other hand, the government blocked any search results after the first page.

      --
      OSx86 FTW
    2. Re:GooTube by TFer_Atvar · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression that Google did alter their searches for users in China. If they're willing to do that, why wouldn't they be willing to take down a few You Tube videos?

    3. Re:GooTube by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

      Only if you used google.cn. It can't detect your region; if you use, say, google.com or .co.jp instead it won't alter search results.

      I suppose that they might be willing to take down some videos for content or something...

      --
      OSx86 FTW
  6. More proof of chinas real goals by Jrabbit05 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't see how we continue to support the olympics in such a country. It's not that they're communist. It's not that they're corrupt. It's that they're against the very fundamental freedoms that the olympics represents.

    1. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by CRCulver · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      If Spartan, a totalitarian society if there ever was one, could send representatives to pan-Hellenic events in ancient times, why not let China do the same today?

    2. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by Jrabbit05 · · Score: 0

      It's not that they can't send athletes to a world competition. The issue lies in the economic boost the modern olympics will have on them.

    3. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by dbcad7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to nitpick, but how are the Olympics representative of fundamental freedoms ?

      It's a sports competition between countries.. That you apply a sense of patriotism to it, and extrapolate your ideals to it, is nice.. but there are other countries participating that have different ideals... If you only want to compete with people with your own ideals, then you would just do your own competition in you own country.

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
    4. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by qbzzt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Since when have the Olympic games (Berlin in 1936, Moscow in 2000) been about freedom and democracy? They're about showing off to the world and bragging.

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    5. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by owlnation · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't see how we continue to support the olympics in such a country. It's not that they're communist. It's not that they're corrupt. It's that they're against the very fundamental freedoms that the olympics represents.
      This is true. However, short of having the Olympics in Scandinavia every time, it's really hard to see where better alternatives exist. The next Olympics are in London. The UK has more breaches of the right to privacy than any other country on Earth. Theoretically it has a free press -- but only theoretically -- the BBC is governement own and News Corp Internation owns in full or part almost everything else.

      It would be ironic if China were to boycott the UK for just that reason -- but in many ways they would have every right to do so.

      If everyone would just focus on fixing the corruption in their own governments, rather than name-calling other countries, the World would be a much better place. Forget Eastasia, lets focus on the real enemies within Oceania.
    6. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by Loke+the+Dog · · Score: 1

      Um... If there's any political goal of the olympics, I'd say its to allow countries to demonstrate their greatness by other means than war. It's about peace, not freedom(tm).

    7. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

      But China's actually hosting it...

      --
      OSx86 FTW
    8. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 2000 summer games were in Sydney, Australia. Moscow had the summer games in 1980. Your point still stands, of course.

    9. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by empaler · · Score: 1

      Speaking as a lifetime inhabitant of Scandinavia, no thank you. Please keep your stick-throwing and hostage crises away from us. We have enough madness, just having it on TV every now and then. Well, that and surprisingly "newsworthy" X-Factor.

    10. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by djeca · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How the fuck did this get modded insightful?

      Try reading the Olympic Charter - there are principles (idealistic perhaps) that everyone connected in any way to the Olympics has to agree to: "respect for universal fundamental ethical principles" ... "Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement."

      The Olympics might not always live up to the ethical standards it sets itself, but trying to reduce it to the level of a consumerist spectacle displays a breathtaking level of malicious ignorance.

    11. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by jesterzog · · Score: 1

      It's that they're against the very fundamental freedoms that the olympics represents.

      The Olympics claim to represent a lot of things, but so does any typical political candidate (just as an anecdotal comparison). The IOC will claim anything that's convenient about the Olympics because it's nothing more than empty marketing designed to generate billions of dollars for corrupt officials and corporations. The claims of the games aren't backed up by actions or by strong and powerful statements, and it hasn't been for a long time. Bidding for the games is dominated by corruption and back-door dealings, and the games themselves became a brag-fest and a political tool a long time ago.

      It's sad that the Olympic Games is given so much credibility and attention, but there's the modern media for you.

    12. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see how we continue to support the olympics in such a country. It's not that they're communist. It's not that they're corrupt. It's that they're against the very fundamental freedoms that the olympics represents. Since when have the Olympic games (Berlin in 1936, Moscow in 2000) been about freedom and democracy? They're about showing off to the world and bragging. Berlin won the bid to host the Olympics before the Nazis gained power in Germany. We (the boycotting nations) didn't support the Olympics in Moscow. However, as the GP noted, we wrongly continue to support the Olympics in Beijing.

      The Soviet invation of Afghanistan may or may not have been a good reason to boycott the Moscow Olympics. China's recent actions relating to Tibet and Darfur are better reasons to boycott.

    13. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by MSNfromCN · · Score: 1

      Moscow in 2000?

    14. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1

      I think it's going to be hard to find an organization that's as openly corrupt as the international olympic committee.

    15. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by dbcad7 · · Score: 1
      Your own quote from the charter makes the point with regard to politics...Which means (in case you have comprehension problems) that you respect other countries ideals (whether or not you believe in them).. search the whole document, it says nothing about principles of freedom.. or that the Olympics are meant to promote freedom.

      I said nothing about consumerism... I said that it is a sporting competition between countries, that's all. Yes there is patriotism for each country.. and I think you seem to apply your patriotism to the Olympics as a whole, so you see it as promoting "Freedom".. but a communist country has just as much right to compete and host the Olympics as any other.. That is the real ideal of the Olympics.. competition without politics...

      Thanks for playing.
      ignorant ass

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
    16. Re:More proof of chinas real goals by uniquename72 · · Score: 1

      The Olympics are about:
      1) the athletes, who are generally the best in the world
      2) the advertisers

      Any attempt to politicize them is wrong, and just because China will use them as a chance to spread more propaganda doesn't make it okay for the U.S. to boycott.

      Let the athletes decide individually whether they want to boycott or not -- after all, this is the chance of a lifetime for them, and it's fucked up for the government to decide whether or not they get to compete.

      (BTW - Moscow Olympics were in 1980.)

  7. This really doesn't bother me much. by Superballs · · Score: 0

    As far as I'm concerned, it's they're government and if they choose to limit what their population can see it's their business.

    If anything it helps me appreciate that I live in a country that allows me to see and search pretty well whatever I want, even if it's at my own risk. I really don't think anyone will die from not being allowed to see YouTube. Personally sometimes I wish my government would just block it lol just to keep me from losing IQ points from seeing some of the content posted. Just a joke if you're wondering, there are some great videos up there.

    --
    Howe due yoo keap uh gramur natsee bizzy four ours?
    1. Re:This really doesn't bother me much. by atomic+brainslide · · Score: 1

      As far as I'm concerned, it's they're government and if they choose to limit what their population can see it's their business.

      If anything it helps me appreciate that I live in a country that allows me to see and search pretty well whatever I want, even if it's at my own risk. I really don't think anyone will die from not being allowed to see YouTube. Personally sometimes I wish my government would just block it lol just to keep me from losing IQ points from seeing some of the content posted. Just a joke if you're wondering, there are some great videos up there. (emphasis added) looks like some of that magical IQ diminishing content has already penetrated your brain. ;)

      cheers
      --
      check out my comic: Essential Tremors
    2. Re:This really doesn't bother me much. by Superballs · · Score: 0

      Ha ha, nice catch on me. If I still had my mod points, I'd have even modded that up for ya if they'd let me.

      Yeah, Youtube and fatigue are a deadly interaction, good thing I stayed away from the rye that night. Now just to stay on topic....N'ah I'll just stop typing for now.

      --
      Howe due yoo keap uh gramur natsee bizzy four ours?
  8. At least it's competent blocking by miller60 · · Score: 1

    At least they managed to block the site without knocking YouTube completely off the Web.

    1. Re:At least it's competent blocking by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      China gets quality hardware and software from the USA.
      It's the server that China rejects that makes the Great Firewall the best.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  9. Va China by ndnspongebob · · Score: 1, Interesting

    China is becoming a bigger and bigger enemy by the day. First, its all the hacking into our government and then trying to control tibet. I mean they're going after the Dalai lama, the peoples religious leader, have some respect or decency at least. I don't see how China is fit to host the Olympics. Do the athletes know that people are dying in tibet just so China can run the Olympic torch through tibet? Its all messed up. They are not ready yet. All that without even touching on censorship. And so from now own, I will refer to China as Va China.

    1. Re:Va China by ElAurian · · Score: 1

      You ignorant eejit! China was a terrible fucking hell-nasty dictatorship way back in 1955, when it first invaded Tibet. It's gotten much better since then, but it's still authoritarian. Read some goddamn history. A lot of people in China are working, against the massive inertia of officialdom, to bring freedom to their country while maintaining some level of order. They do not need American bullshit right now. They need some sophisticated friends, not the people who treated Iraq like it was one big military base.

    2. Re:Va China by tabrnaker · · Score: 1
      What about all the hacking the US government has done into China?

      Only divisive people see enemies around them. As long as one part of humanity tries to chop of another part of humanity, humanity is doomed.

    3. Re:Va China by nbarriga · · Score: 1

      I mean they're going after the Dalai lama
      The Dalai Lama lives in India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalai_Lama#Residence/

      the Dalai lama, the peoples religious leader
      About 8% of the chinese population is an active buddhist(even though about 50%-60% are non practicing but follow the traditions), in fact, about 60% of the chinese indentify themselves as non-religious.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People's_Republic_of_China/

      I don't see how China is fit to host the Olympics. Do the athletes know that people are dying in tibet just so China can run the Olympic torch through tibet? Its all messed up. They are not ready yet. All that without even touching on censorship.
      And what about 1936 Berlin Olympics? I think you think too much of the Olympics.
    4. Re:Va China by dbcad7 · · Score: 1
      Do the athletes know that people are dying in tibet just so China can run the Olympic torch through tibet?

      Is that the reason ? .. pretty simplistic, incorrect and emotional summary... What has really happened, is that in Tibet, they had riots by Tibetan people who want independence from China who has controlled it since 1951 (although also controlled many times by China for centuries).. Now in these riots, cars were torched, and all the violence that goes with riots escalated, and people have been killed both sides... As in many places in the world, this is a place where you have a group of people who don't want to be part of the government that is ruling them.. depending upon which side your on, it's rebellion or terrorism when the freedom fighters riot and burn.

      I am not going all pro China on you here.. but the reality is, that Tibet is ruled by China right now.. and if there are riots, then they have to deal with it... If there are continued problems in Tibet, then it is up to the Chinese to decide if they want to give it up (yeah right), or continue to deal with the problems.. I don't think any country is going to help Tibet in any attempt at getting freedom.. just not going to realistically happen.

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
  10. urgh by clragon · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Before everyone presses the reply button and start typing "FREE TIBET!", could slashdotters please read this article first?
    Read all three parts of it, the author summarizes both sides of the issue in order for people to see that the Tibet issue is much more than just a communist regime bullying an occupied region, for example:

    Another aspect of the Chinese duty in Tibet is the sense that rapid modernization is needed, and should take precedence over cultural considerations. For Westerners, this is a difficult perspective to understand. Tibet is appealing to us precisely because it's not modern, and we have idealized its culture and anti-materialism to the point where it has become, as Orville Schell says, "a figurative place of spiritual enlightenment in the Western imagination -- where people don't make Buicks, they make good karma."

    But to the Chinese, for whom modernization is coming late, Buicks look awfully good. I noticed this during my first year as a teacher in China, when my writing class spent time considering the American West. We discussed western expansion, and I presented the students with a problem of the late nineteenth century: the Plains Indians, their culture in jeopardy, were being pressed by white settlers. I asked my class to imagine that they were American citizens proposing a solution, and nearly all responded much the way this student did: "The world is changing and developing. We should make the Indians suit our modern life. The Indians are used to living all over the plains and moving frequently, without a fixed home, but it is very impractical in our modern life.... We need our country to be a powerful country; we must make the Indians adapt to our modern life and keep pace with the society. Only in this way can we strengthen the country."

    I know I might be modded offtopic but the discussion of Chinese censorship of Tibet videos will no doubt lead to the discussion of Tibet vs China itself. I'm just asking everyone to please form their opinion after looking at both sides of the issue, and how each side feels about it. Try not to base your opinion solely on just what you hear news.
    1. Re:urgh by ndnspongebob · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ummmm......so China should take over Tibet for buicks? or some modern life? who gets to judge what is modern life? the Chinese or Tibetans? Every country has its own ways and its own problems, and they would rather have their own problems instead of some alien power coming and trying to solve those problems. People have already died, for modern life? wtf I would rather live with nothing and just be happy instead of having a modern life and dead. Thank you very much.

    2. Re:urgh by brainnolo · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I hope you aren't an American and/or a supporter of USA military actions otherwise the hypocrisy of your post would be stunning.

    3. Re:urgh by brainnolo · · Score: 1

      I don't know why you are modded -1, apparently US governments mods down UnAmerican comments
      </joke>

    4. Re:urgh by slashkitty · · Score: 2, Informative

      Even better is this article that describes the serf existance of most tibetans before the 1959 : http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

      --
      -- these are only opinions and they might not be mine.
    5. Re:urgh by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

      Possibly because there really is no place for a childish US-bashing response to someone pointing out the problems of China. It was off-topic at best, and basically flamebait.

    6. Re:urgh by stormguard2099 · · Score: 1

      and/or so you are saying that there is something about being an American that inherently makes you a supporter of foreign involvement? I would have thought that being an American who really really hates US foreign policy especially in regards to its wars would make you exempt from the hipocrisy.
      --
      http://greenobyl.com/ please.... think of the children!!
    7. Re:urgh by brainnolo · · Score: 1

      Apparently my and/or wasn't clear enough (right, it wasn't), I actually wanted to point that case out.

    8. Re:urgh by calcapt · · Score: 1

      Just because the poster might be American doesn't necessarily mean he bears some blame for the decimation of the Native American population in the US; how could you justify your comment (that you hope he isn't an American or US military supporter) if the poster is a 2nd generation descendant of an immigrant family?

      Regardless, there's a point that you missed. The US obviously made mistakes in the past, and China looks like it's going to follow in the US' footsteps. Its treatment of Tibetans could be viewed analogous to US treatment of Native Americans during US westward expansion. While it is China's sovereign right to make itself a strong nation, I would hope it does so in a manner where it looks at mistakes made by other nations and avoids those pitfalls. So far, it's been failing. Case in point, diethylene glycol tainted toothpaste. To me, this seems to be a mirror of the snake oil salesmen from industrializing America, prior to governmental regulation of goods; it prompts the question, "Someone's made these mistakes before; why are you so intent on following in their footsteps?"

    9. Re:urgh by brainnolo · · Score: 1

      Well actually the US continues to make mistakes in my eyes (see Iraq, see how they handle dealing with other countries, or at least Italy which is what I know about). Again, I actually meant "I hope you are not a supporter of US foreign policies". This is just my opinion and is stunning to see how any "un american" post gets modded as flamebait (it might have been offtopic, but I didn't want to flame) on slashdot.

    10. Re:urgh by brainnolo · · Score: 1

      Thats wasn't "childish US-bashing", it was just my opinion. In my opinion US handles foreign business the way China handles domestic (if you can consider Tiber domestic) business. I might be wrong, right or anything in between (which is most likely), but surely not an attempt to flame. I just felt to point that out because I am amazed to see how different things are viewed from the outside (I'm Italian, so I'm not living neither US nor China situation) and wanted to share that. If you see any comment about US as flamebait the problem is probably on your end ("lalala can't hear you" anyone?)

    11. Re:urgh by calcapt · · Score: 1

      Well, first off, nowhere did I say that the US is perfect and is now incapable of making mistakes; I'm pretty sure no national government is immune to missteps. I just wanted to point out that missteps that have been made really shouldn't be repeated.

      As to your complaint about the parent being modded down; he's been modded +1 interesting at this point. You should probably keep in mind that /. readers do the moderating here, and /. readers, like national governments, are not infallible. Next time, it might be a better idea to more clearly point out that there was no reason to mod the parent down, and, if anything, the parent should be moderated up for interesting points.

    12. Re:urgh by urbazewski · · Score: 2, Informative
      A rebuttal of Parenti's warmed-over Maoist fantasies about the "liberation" of Tibet: A Lie Repeated - The Far Left's Flawed History of Tibet

      The core problem with Parenti's position is that it is simply at odds with the statements, testimony, and shared history of the Tibetan people themselves - the people Parenti is supposedly defending. The view of Tibet that Parenti ascribes to has been commonly put forward by Chinese government officials - particularly the ones in the ministry of propaganda. Once upon a time it was a view embraced by a handful of British historians - most of them turn of the century explorers and colonists in their own right. But it has always been an outsider's view, completely divorced from the reality of how Tibetans of all walks of life view their own society and their own history. ...

      For the most part, Parenti and the handful of historians who have adopted the view of old Tibet as a despotic feudal theocracy have had little if no contact with actual Tibetans either in or outside Tibet. Therefore, they have no real way of gauging the sentiments of the Tibetan people....

      ...the true testament to the fact that Tibetans have been far from content under Chinese rule lie in the actions of the people themselves. Ever since the Chinese invasion and occupation there has been substantial popular resistance to Chinese rule in Tibet. This resistance has taken many forms over the years - leafleting, public demonstration, mass non-cooperation, economic boycott, and armed uprising are all forms of protest have been practiced by Tibetans inside Tibet, at the risk of their own lives.

      The Chinese government has faced phenomenal opposition from the Tibetan people, certainly far more opposition than the Lhasa government ever faced from its own population, which does not do much to further the argument that 'old Tibet' was a terribly repressive society. Nor does the fact that Tibetan refugees continue pour out of Tibet at a rate never seen prior to 1959. In a classic case of uninformed conjecture, Parenti supposes that Tibetan refugees never left prior to 1959 because the 'systems of control' were so deep and that Tibetans were 'afraid of amputation'. Any quick glance at a map of Tibet, with its vast, unpatrolable borders, or any basic knowledge of the structure of Tibetan society would quickly reveal that Tibetans - should they have wanted to escape their 'feudal masters' - would have had little problem doing so.

      --
      foldplay your photos won't know what hit them.
    13. Re:urgh by Spasemunki · · Score: 1

      The Chinese argument "We're doing it for the Tibetans" falls apart in the face of the simple fact that Tibetans don't seem to want them there, and never have. It further falls apart when you look at the fact that the Chinese presence there has offered much greater benefits to China than it has to Tibetans. The spoils of any economic development in Tibet have largely accrued to China. China has reaped strategic benefits by using Tibet as a way to secure its border with India.

      And of course, there's the politicized periods of Maoist rule- like the Great Leap Forward- where resources (like... food) were stolen from Tibetans and other marginalized ethnic groups to provide for people in mainland China, because of the disastrous consequences of the government's moronic experiments in communal rule and planned economy. Not a lot of reciprocal benefit there.

      Have there been some benefits to Tibetans? Sure. Education and literacy have improved. Infrastructure has been improved. Awesome. But couldn't those things have been achieved without suppressing Tibetan culture and their right to self-determination? Couldn't that have been achieved without murdering a lot of people, and driving many others into exile? I get this funny feeling like the Chinese could have helped Tibetan kids learn to read Chinese without bombing monasteries and using people as slave labor. Building roads in Tibet is great. But there's no reason that you need to forcibly sterilize Tibetan women or beat people for owning pictures of a guy in red robes and glasses in order to do it.

      Say that the Chinese had the purest intentions in the world. That all of the benefits that had accrued to China were a big accident. That all they wanted was to make life better for Tibetans. How can that be rationalized with how they've actually conducted themselves in Tibet? How can the brutality visited on the Tibetan people be somehow necessary for the modest economic and educational gains that have been made under Chinese rule?

  11. Store and forward peer to peer over bluetooth by Colin+Smith · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is where something like Usenet is still better than "The Web". It doesn't even require tcp/ip to function and therefore has no centralised control. With something like an NNTP server running on every phone, over bluetooth, it would be pretty much impossible to prevent the spread of information.

    Walk past someone in the street and your phone syncs it's "newsgroups" with the other phone. The smartphones around these days are coming with 2Gb of storage and 300MHz processors. More than 100,000 are being purchased per day in China.

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:Store and forward peer to peer over bluetooth by EdIII · · Score: 1

      This is where something like Usenet is still better than "The Web". It doesn't even require tcp/ip to function and therefore has no centralised control


      That sounds absolutely ludicrous, unless you read the title of your post again.

      In any case, what you are talking about is not without it's flaws. Although, I agree it would be impossible to prevent the spread of information, it is also impossible to prevent the poisoning of it as well. It would be very easy for the government to take its resources and push out false data (or worse) as fast as the "real" data was being disseminated by political dissidents.

      Perhaps what would better, and in keeping with your theme of a decentralized infrastructure, would be something like Freenet. Combine that with some mesh networking, and you have a pretty good communications medium resistant to tampering.
    2. Re:Store and forward peer to peer over bluetooth by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      How exactly would this work in remote locations..... like Tibet?

      If this were possible, the government would crack down on it immediately, barring the sale of such phones. If worst came to worst, they could also simply "poison" the NNTP servers by providing their own, and flooding the network with nonsense data. (It should be pretty easy to find some spammers who have quite a bit of experience in the area)

      Although the idealized technology-assisted civillian uprising is nice to imagine, the odds of it happening in China (if anywhere) are slim to none.

      Also, the ones able to purchase 300mhz smartphones are almost certainly not going to be the discontents.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    3. Re:Store and forward peer to peer over bluetooth by holistah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As a matter of fact, I read that as a result of the protests, chinese officials are blocking landline and cell phone access in tibet.

    4. Re:Store and forward peer to peer over bluetooth by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

      How exactly would this work in remote locations..... like Tibet? ... Exactly as it does here. With people walking, cycling, driving past one another. The beauty of usenet and similar protocols is that they are "flood fill", all it takes is a single instance of the information to escape, and it's more difficult to control 100,000 people than it is a phone / data network.

      If this were possible, the government would crack down on it immediately, barring the sale of such phones. If worst came to worst, they could also simply "poison" the NNTP servers by providing their own, and flooding the network with nonsense data. (It should be pretty easy to find some spammers who have quite a bit of experience in the area) Um. This is a peer to peer system with a range of 30 feet and latency of walking/driving speed, in order to "poison" the nntp servers they would have to swamp the radio spectrum. Certainly possible, but it requires infrastructure. It is> possible to do this, we have 30 years experience doing it. Spam is now trivially filterable, better than 99.8% accuracy filtering out crap from both usenet and email is simple.

      Also, the ones able to purchase 300mhz smartphones are almost certainly not going to be the discontents. You think so? The "discontents" are the middle classes. They are the ones who have the time, money, education and contacts to plan and execute political change. The first thing that revolutionaries do is get rid of the educated middle classes, because that is where trouble comes from. And a $500 smartphone today is a $15 bog standard phone tomorrow.
      --
      Deleted
    5. Re:Store and forward peer to peer over bluetooth by F34nor · · Score: 1

      How about a mesh network peer to peer mobile phone network. Oh wait we already talked abou this.

      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=07/09/11/1546258

  12. Unimpressed by Forrest+Kyle · · Score: 2, Informative

    I remain unimpressed with George W. Bush's magic plan to spread democracy by borrowing billions of dollars from China and doing business with them whenever possible. Articles like this only reinforce this feeling, as if it needed reinforcing.

    1. Re:Unimpressed by jambox · · Score: 1

      So what's the alternative? Sanctions or trade blocks just amount to punishing the ordinary people but not the leaders.
      Chinese demand for dollars has financed a hell of a lot in America.

      --
      You thought you could break the laws of physics without paying the PRICE?
    2. Re:Unimpressed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leaving the dollars inside the US in the first place (no need for repatriation or having chinese people "fund" anything) would have resulted in a robust well diversified economy-like we used to have, and I was enjoying- before the wall street looter pirates shipped manufacturing out for short term megaprofits. In one generation they have succeeded in two things: making themselves, well under 1% of the population, stinking rich, and borking the rest of the economy. The US is now the largest debtor nation, the currency is dropping like a rock, we are losing actual well paid middle class jobs by the droves, now across all sectors of the economy, they have to cook the books constantly and actually lie about inflation to make it look rosy when it isn't, we are staring at a lot of major banks about to go under without emergency infusions of hyper inflationary created out of nothing cash, and so on.

          The US economy is imploding right now in case you haven't noticed, cruise over to the financial headlines to see the fruits of the looters treason. And a big part of it is funding the Chinese corporate fascists. Birds of a feather.

    3. Re:Unimpressed by jambox · · Score: 1

      Oh so now it was the Chinese that forced all the credit wholesalers go balls-deep in junk mortgages?

      Come on, it's not rocket science - the US government is spending money it hasn't got. It can only do this because it can keep printing more dollars. It can only do this because they're being soaked up by China in exchange for cheap goods. If it weren't this way, you'd have to raise taxes or cut spending (given what you've been spending on though, that might not be such a bad thing).

      --
      You thought you could break the laws of physics without paying the PRICE?
  13. Well, at least they did not bring down the house.. by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

    Well, at least they did not bring down You-Tube like Pakistan clumsily did when they blocked it...

  14. thistimei have no sympathy for local mobs in Tibet by imkow · · Score: 0

    As a chinese, from what have happened I know in tibet, I do not think what those mobs were doing is right.
    those mobs burnt cars, banks, houses and shops owned by their folks. The pictures shown by both western and Chinese media look so familar with those taken from that freed Iraq. I'm also afraid if we let them have their way, they will turn people like me back to poverty. I just got my little sales bussines started days ago. So i just wish those freedom fighters could do their course in a more civil way..

    --
    China, in fact, is very fragile.
  15. craziness by Deanalator · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you want to see something crazy, check out the political spam in the comments of these videos. It is unbelievable the ratio of how many people are calling Tibetans liars and cheering on the Chinese. These are recent posts calling the Dalai Lama a terrorist ringleader. It confuses me that so many people outside the great firewall are posting this stuff.

    Anyone want to help me mod these comments down, and rate these videos up?

    1. Re:craziness by hlt32 · · Score: 0

      Not really.

      You have no idea what is going on.

      I would imagine the US government would censor videos if people protested the Bush regime and called for , say ... New York, to be released from US rule.

      The fact is, that you have no idea if the Dalai Lama is a terrorist or not.

      Even more relevently, the Tibetians are causing civil unrest, and these videos provoke ignorant people into supporting them..

      Don't buy into the hype, theres a lot here that we don't know about, have no right to judge or interfere in.

      --
      à_à
    2. Re:craziness by omegashenron · · Score: 0

      Well I live in Australia, and these people (protesters) have been loud, violent and disruptive at the Chinese consulates in Sydney and Melbourne. They have been damaging cars, climbing walls and resisting arrest. I live in an apartment 3 blocks away from the Chinese Consulate in Sydney. If they act this way in Australia, god only knows how they act in Tibet. I have no problem with them migrating to Australia, I do have a problem with them brining their 'battles' here.



      It is undisputed that they've been setting fire to and looting Chinese businesses and targeting people of Han ethnicity, how would you feel if people of Japan sick of the US military presence did the same to American's and American business?



      Give the Chinese a break

      --
      Excuses Are Like Assholes - Everybody's Got One
    3. Re:craziness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you are Chinese I doubt you know enough

      God forbid someone might be Tibetan.

    4. Re:craziness by TehDuffman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why do you assume that it is political spam? Unless you are Chinese I doubt you know enough to judge what is happening in there. People have their own opinion, although it may be based upon great misinformation you cannot just assume that to be the case. Also, unfortunately there is no such thing as "The Truth".
      That is like people saying they cannot comment on American government or policies if they aren't American. We know that doesn't happen. Plus the fact is Tibet is as far as many in the world are concerned Tibet isn't a part of China it has simply been occupied for 50+ years now.

      I can also definitely see the Chinese government or hardliners going on YouTube and other sites to mod these videos down so no one sees them not just their people.
    5. Re:craziness by Deanalator · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. Maybe the sample of people from the region is a bit skewed, since most of the people I know from the region are around my age (mid 20s), but I have only talked to one person out of the 40 or so people I have discussed this with who does not think that Tibet and Taiwan should have sovereignty. She happened to be an elderly woman from northern china, who had also only been in the US for 3 or so weeks. I also attended a fairly "liberal" university, and most of my friends are on the technical side, so that might further skew my sampling.

      Some of these videos that I have seen though, the posts are 12 to 1 in favor of the Chinese military. Those numbers surprise me.

    6. Re:craziness by jo7hs2 · · Score: 1

      There have always been American supporters out there on the lunatic fringe who feel the need to support any Communist country or cause they are presented with. Let us not forget all the people who worshipped the Soviet Union and who still worship (at least tacitly) the Cuban system of government. It only takes a handful of people shouting to overhwelm the softly speaking masses.

    7. Re:craziness by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      It doesn't help that the current incident was provoked by rioters in Tibet.

      Overreaction? Possibly. However, China doesn't have all that many options that would reflect favorably upon them.

      Small riots grow into big riots, and quenching a big riot will cause even more deaths.

      It's not pretty, but it is very predictable. Unless China is willing to give up Tibet, this is how dissidents will be dealt with.

      Do you think that the US would allow one of its states to secede?

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    8. Re:craziness by blind+biker · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can't believe it completely myself - to be exact, I can't believe the degree people allow to be brainwashed. I have a few chinese colleagues at the uni, and it's extremely interesting that otherwise intelligent people believe things that a few minutes of autonomous research could easily dispel.

      Anyway, did my modding there, now I have to wait.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    9. Re:craziness by TehDuffman · · Score: 1

      It is undisputed that they've been setting fire to and looting Chinese businesses and targeting people of Han ethnicity, how would you feel if people of Japan sick of the US military presence did the same to American's and American business?
      Apples to Oranges

      There is a difference between Japan and Tibet. Japan attacked America when we won WWII we were going to leave until North Korea invaded South Korea. We are there to protect them and SE Asia from NK and others. We don't run the government in Japan or even the island of Okinawa where most of our troops are stationed. So yes we would be upset if the Japanese were to attack the bases here because we have a legitimate agreements with the sovereign nation of Japan.
    10. Re:craziness by orzetto · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It is unbelievable the ratio of how many people are calling Tibetans liars and cheering on the Chinese. These are recent posts calling the Dalai Lama a terrorist ringleader.

      One of the reasons I am wary of this whole Tibet issue is that China happens to be the West's main economic rival, and now it is convenient for Western governments to support the Dalai Lama's cause. The Dalai Lama is not a democratically elected leader, and pre-1949 Tibet was not exactly the merry free independent country you see in Hollywood depictions. Most of the Tibetans were serfs and enslaved in all but name, serving the religious aristocracy of the Lamas.

      As long as China was an ally of the US against the Soviet Union, you did not hear much about Tibet or the Dalai Lama. Gone the Soviet Union, grown the Chinese economy, and hey presto! Here is a flurry of Hollywood movies designed to show just how ugly and mean the Estasians are, since Eurasia has always been our ally—right?

      See, one of the downsides of reading "Manufacturing consent" by Chomsky is that I start to see unsettling patterns like this one: a piece of news is convenient for the government, that piece is spun in the best possible way for the government by the same press that should be the government's watchdog. Of course it happens as well in China: I read some CCTV Web pages with the predictable pro-China spin.

      Now, where is the truth anyway? Well, obviously some Tibetans are quite angry. Some Tibetans have been assaulting Han Chinese (so much for the Buddhists who never raise a finger in violence), because of the rivalry between ethnic groups. So, as far as I can see, this is an issue of a group of people not liking another group of people, spun by every external party in their favour: the US say the Chinese are evil and the Tibetans are peaceful protesters, the Chinese say they are only criminals, and everyone else says whatever is most convenient for them.

      China has encouraged immigration of Han Chinese into Tibet for a long time, and the privileged Han are an obvious target for racial hatred for the underprivileged Tibetans. What the Chinese should have done is to follow the good old way to deal with separatism: throw money at the problem. Tibet has a ludicrously small population compared to China (not even three millions), and China could afford to subsidize separatism to death. That's what Italy did to fix the terrorism problem in South Tyrol, and, guess what, it worked just fine.

      --
      Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
    11. Re:craziness by radtea · · Score: 1

      Unless you are Chinese I doubt you know enough to judge what is happening in there.

      Sure, because coming from a country that routinely censors what people living there can know is the only way to have a truly informed opinion on any matter.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    12. Re:craziness by Deanalator · · Score: 1

      I am all for coverage of protesters murdering Han shopkeepers, as long as there is also coverage of Chinese police murdering monks. It's all a very fucked up state of affairs, but censoring one side of the violence is disgraceful manipulation. I am hopeful that some day soon, the Chinese government will realize this, and allow their people to come to conclusions on their own. They need to realize that 30% dissent (completely made up number) is not so bad, and allowing free expression only solidifies the patriotism of the remaining 70%. Of course, if dissent gets too high, it means they need to change how their country is structured. Maintaining a media lockout is just too expensive (financially, politically, and morally) in this age of information, and the sooner they realize that, the sooner they can integrate properly with the rest of the world.

    13. Re:craziness by EmperorKagato · · Score: 1

      You have my mouse.

      --
      ----- You know you have ego issues when you register a domain in your name.
    14. Re:craziness by Jesus+IS+the+Devil · · Score: 1

      The youtube incident and the subsequent outrage... you're suggesting it was a propaganda piece by the U.S. government?

      Not everything is goverment-planned.

      --

      eTrade SUCKS
    15. Re:craziness by kcelery · · Score: 1

      Sorry for my being skeptic, it is quite unconvincing that the central govt would crackdown on the Tibetans during the countdown of the Olympic games. On the other hand, the Tibetans marching from India, the riots in Tibet, Gangsu, ChingHai, and the well orchestrated protests in different western countries seem well planned.
      I am sure some Tibetans aren't happy with their lives up there, and wish they could find some way to get their message across by making the least collateral damage.

    16. Re:craziness by junglee_iitk · · Score: 1

      How would you feel if suddenly a lot of Chinese start living in Australia, so much so that native Australians become minority (to put it in context, you get no democracy)?

      It should not be that hard, since you did the same to Aboriginal People. Except that it was really a long time ago, and world has moved on.

      The act in China tells us that the world has actually not moved on - that or China is catching up :)

    17. Re:craziness by junglee_iitk · · Score: 1

      Ah! Thanks for being another one who was amazed!

      But you know what, may be they ARE Chinese... if there is one thing that I learned after leaving India, then it is that people stick to all the "theories" they have been taught in child-hood, and will defend it till they are shown they look like idiots, after which they will stop defending, but still believe.

    18. Re:craziness by junglee_iitk · · Score: 1

      Why shouldn't they? I live near Sarnath, India - a place full with Tibetans. They do peaceful marches in Delhi sometimes. They don't get reported in newspapers too...

      The reality is that they have listened to Dalai Lama for so long, and it has bought NOTHING to them. Until now there Chinese "neighbors" were also poor, but now Tibetans see that religion is not helping and they need to take materialism seriously. It is a revolution for them - something that will fail no doubt, because people in power, both western and Chinese, are basking in profit.

      And by the way, "Hollywood" is not "West". This sort of thinking is childish and nothing else. There is no mention of Taiwan in movies, but its existence in itself is proof of western interference.

      The simple reality is that Taiwan is manufacturing, while Tibet is just a mostly sparse barren plateau. While you want to paint it as rivalry, it is mostly something mentioned already here.

    19. Re:craziness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One day I am going to proof-read.

    20. Re:craziness by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1
      One of the reasons I am wary of this whole Tibet issue is that China happens to be the West's main economic rival, and now it is convenient for Western governments to support the Dalai Lama's cause.

      I don't actually think it would be convenient, but regardless - it clearly isn't happening. Where in the West is the support for Tibet? The thing is - China may be an economic rival, but it's also a market. Every western country would like to have access to this market. If you critizise China, but another western country doesn't - well then China will give preferential treatment to that country and not to yours. That's why our governments let the Chinese get away with everything.

    21. Re:craziness by Transcendz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      All of your explanation is made on the fact that the old system was bad, but then why didn't tibetan people asked for change ? Were they pleased when chinese army came through their borders to destroy their monasteries/culture and kill most of them without any diplomacy ? BTW, your comment about buddhisme is a great offense to people who have to deal with the occupation of their country for almost 50 years now. Most of the people who used violence were young people who are fed up with the Dalai Lama's "middle way" based on dialogue. Should we blame them ? Your last paragraph about throwing money to solve the problem is even more shocking : Do you mean that during WWII the germans would have won against french/english people just by throwing money at them ? Being free in your country has no price. And so much about Tibet which was always a part of China : China was once a part of Mongolia, should chinese give it back, then ?. History has a time line : when a country is independent from another, has a proper language, culture, rules, then you have no right to invade it if there was no threat.

      --
      --/ TZ /--
    22. Re:craziness by Spasemunki · · Score: 1

      One of the reasons I am wary of this whole Tibet issue is that China happens to be the West's main economic rival, and now it is convenient for Western governments to support the Dalai Lama's cause. The Dalai Lama is not a democratically elected leader, and pre-1949 Tibet was not exactly the merry free independent country you see in Hollywood depictions. Most of the Tibetans were serfs and enslaved in all but name, serving the religious aristocracy of the Lamas.


      "Western governments" supporting the Dalai Lama? The most that the West has ever done for the Dalai Lama and Tibet is make a half-assed attempt at training some Kham and Amdo guerrillas during the 1950's and early 60's. During later years, they did less, not more for Tibet, limiting themselves to minor expressions of irritation while engaging in multi-billion dollar trade deals. Western governments give no little or no official recognition to the Dalai Lama in order to avoid stirring up the Chinese. The economic ties between the West and China have resulted in less, not more, support for Tibet. Meanwhile, the Tibetan exile community's demands have gotten weaker and weaker every year. Most Tibetan exile groups are no longer asking for independence, or even autonomy. Instead, they're advocating for the preservation of Tibetan culture- for the right to teach the Tibetan language and use it in Tibetan-speaking areas, and for the right to free religious practice.

      The Dalai Lama himself is advocating not for his return to power; ideally, he's said that he wants Tibetan self-determination, but the priority is on preserving their national language and their own religion and culture. The governance of the Tibetan Government in Exile is performed by civilian elected officials, not the Dalai Lama. I don't know anyone who actually knows anything about Tibet who believes that it was a smiling utopia prior to the communist invasion, but that fact doesn't terminate the Tibetan people's right to self-determination.

      As long as China was an ally of the US against the Soviet Union, you did not hear much about Tibet or the Dalai Lama.


      First of all, when exactly were the US and China allies? Second of all, Tibet and the Dalai Lama have been in the media since the invasion of Tibet- the Dalai Lama's flight from Lhasa was on the front page of Time magazine. Yes, the internet and the indy film scene (with the exception of Kundun, which had limited screenings, and 7 Years in Tibet, recent films on Tibet have been almost exclusively small, independent productions) have given more exposure to Tibet; the Dalai Lama winning the Nobel Peace Prize didn't hurt either. Depicting this growth as a conscious effort by Western countries is goofy; the West is pointedly disinterested in discussing Tibet with the Chinese because real action on the issue threatens a valuable trade relationship. If the Western economic powers were manipulating public depictions of Tibet, you would see media depictions of Tibet converging on the Chinese, not Tibetan, consensus on the issue, because that's where the money is. I think the US government generally would be just as happy if the exile groups and Free Tibet crowd would shut up and disappear, so that they could focus on financing our massive deficit spending with Chinese cash and not have to (once in a blue moon) answer pointed questions about why we fell all over ourselves to liberate Quwait, but couldn't be bothered to defend a country with much better historical claims to cultural and political independence.

    23. Re:craziness by tapr00t · · Score: 1

      What the Chinese should have done is to follow the good old way to deal with separatism: throw money at the problem. Tibet has a ludicrously small population compared to China (not even three millions), and China could afford to subsidize separatism to death.

      it really bugs me to see someone who has actually taken the time to read 'Manufacturing Consent' only to reach the point where he can point out 'efficiency laking oppressive regime conduct' rather than make him more attentive to minorities rights. Maybe I'm having a hard time to relate just because forced cultural assimilations just don't give me the buzz they used to...

      I believe the true main theme of this issue tends to emerge under any [news source|gov] filter - Chinese cultural aggression, with a FUD topping - this time expressing itself in the pathetic form of YouTube censorship... Truly amazing is the extent to which they are willing to go to keep erect this digital 'Iron Curtain'... why is Tibet's right for self governance [at the cost of outsourcing their need for modernization to a more 'human rights' adhering super-power] so hard to support ? scratch that, why is it even being questioned ?

    24. Re:craziness by hopefullythisworks · · Score: 1

      I don't know about your colleagues. But, nowadays, it is trendy to disbelieve whatever the government says. If you know anything about the wild South China tiger incidence. Besides, there is extremely wide generation gap. 3 years is long enough for a new generation to emerge.

  16. any chinese comments? by Doviende · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It seems to me that there's a pretty big language barrier that prevents us from hearing much from most chinese internet users. The ones i met in china tended to stick to purely chinese sites, which i found quite hard to read with only my basic level of chinese.

    ("if we get some chinese comments, perhaps people here can translate them")

    --
    "The value of a man resides in what he gives,
    and not in what he is capable of receiving."
    --Albert Einstein
    1. Re:any chinese comments? by Doviende · · Score: 4, Interesting

      well shit, son. All the unicode chinese chars i wrote in that posting got nuked. i guess we won't be hearing from any chinese commenters any time soon.

      --
      "The value of a man resides in what he gives,
      and not in what he is capable of receiving."
      --Albert Einstein
    2. Re:any chinese comments? by imkow · · Score: 5, Interesting



      Being a chinese , the life is very tough.

      ,
      the fact i can still get on the internet is something gratefully granted by the gov. i wouldn't dare to raise a trouble.

      in china, any public voice that does not sound "harmonious" will be "harmonized". everything is for building a "harmonious society".

      ,
      many websites has been "harmonized", which have become a common practice..

      youtube,
      through some technical means the youtube site can still be reached, but that's only to geeks like me.

      --
      China, in fact, is very fragile.
    3. Re:any chinese comments? by Graftweed · · Score: 3, Informative

      if we get some chinese comments, perhaps people here can translate them

      Someone already did:

      For those living in the West who didn't realize that there's little sympathy for Tibet independence among ethnic Chinese in the PRC, this blog post on Global Voices will be a shocker. John Kennedy has translated chatter from Chinese blogs and chatrooms that generally runs along the lines of: those ungrateful minorities, we give them modern conveniences and look how they thank us... where have we heard this before? Reuters has a roundup on the Washington Post that begins: "a look at Chinese blogs reveals a vitriolic outpouring of anger and nationalism directed against Tibetans and the West." (...)

      "Davesgonechina" at the Tenement Palm blog has been translating the chatter coming from Chinese netizens on Fanfou and Jiwai - Chinese versions of Twitter. Click here, here, and here, specifically. Dave has done more than translate: he points out that this Tibet situation is a real challenge to all people who believe that the Internet can help foster free speech and bring about better global understanding. Here is his challenge to all of us...

      The above info, plus a great deal of other material well worth spending the time to read, was aggregated by boingboing's Xeni Jardin, who since this situation has erupted in Tibet has kept a close eye on the whole thing and provided some very good info like the above mentioned post.

    4. Re:any chinese comments? by jambox · · Score: 1

      I take it the Great Firewall is rather easily penetrated?

      Truth will out, sooner or later. I've been reading some Chinese political history recently and I'm quite impressed how much detailed information there is on the controversial stuff. The June 4th massacre is described very transparently in a number of sources, including all the bitter political power struggles and grim retributions.

      Is that sort of stuff available in China? Not so much, judging from what I'm told.

      --
      You thought you could break the laws of physics without paying the PRICE?
    5. Re:any chinese comments? by NekoYasha · · Score: 1

      The current goverment of China is advocating the concept of Harmonious Society recently. Which involves balancing the income between the high-incomed and the low-incomed, preferring fairness over effeciency, and such.

      But for whatever reason, it quickly became an (informal) euphemism for censorship, as in "my post just got harmonized." Other phrases that sound similar have also been used, like "river crabs" and its derivative, "seafood". Don't ask me.

    6. Re:any chinese comments? by ericbbk · · Score: 1

      You should come to US, then after 5 years, maybe you will have another opinion. --A Chinese in US

  17. Then think about it more by microbox · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just because you take it as propaganda doesn't mean that others don't have a more leveled response to this statement. For example, you could take it as saying: "what is going on with this type of morality?". If a person condones authoritarian rule, what is the need for censorship? Yet these people seem to do both? This statement is about the human condition, and not politics. Personally I think a lot of official chinese statements express an embarrassingly amorale attitude.

    --

    Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
  18. Re:thistimei have no sympathy for local mobs in Ti by ndnspongebob · · Score: 1

    yea people sorta go crazy when the government kills their relatives

  19. Why only Tibet? by jasonmanley · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm not trying to bait or anything but I am curious. Why does the internet community give so much energy to the liberation of Tibet but they don't do the same to the USA, South Africa, Australia etc that are overrun and controlled by accupying colonial powers. Yes they may be 'democracies' but if you go and speak to a native aborigony and ask them about it I think that their perspective would be different to that of some slashdotters. There are occupying forces all over the world and all throughout history - I just wonder why we choose to make a fuss over Tibet when there are injustices in our own backyard that we are choosing to ignore.

    --
    http://projectleader.wordpress.com
    1. Re:Why only Tibet? by crianp · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well all those countries you listed are Free which Tibet is not... simple as that, China has no historical claim over Tibet because as far as History goes, it was the Mongols who took Tibet and not the Chinese. The Dalai Lama is the designated leader and widely supported. The worst part about the whole Tibet situation is that the Chinese government have been moving in their supporters in the region so that Tibetans are now the minority.

    2. Re:Why only Tibet? by tabrnaker · · Score: 1
      umm, i think you answered your own question.

      It's much easier to blame other people for our faults(we are all human) than to blame ourselves. The current global situation is a failing of humanity in general, not individual countries. We are One in our division. Only by looking at a coin from different perspectives do we come up with the concept of heads and tails.

      For all our claims of Objectivity, we fail miserably in social contexts.

    3. Re:Why only Tibet? by TehDuffman · · Score: 1

      I'm not trying to bait or anything but I am curious. Why does the internet community give so much energy to the liberation of Tibet but they don't do the same to the USA, South Africa, Australia etc that are overrun and controlled by accupying colonial powers. Yes they may be 'democracies' but if you go and speak to a native aborigony and ask them about it I think that their perspective would be different to that of some slashdotters. There are occupying forces all over the world and all throughout history - I just wonder why we choose to make a fuss over Tibet when there are injustices in our own backyard that we are choosing to ignore.
      South Africa? I remember hearing alot of people during the late 80's pushing for the overthrow of the Apartheid white Government till it was overthrown.

      USA and Australia are not colonial powers they are their own nation and the abuses that happened to the native people happened 100+ years ago and have since been apologized for and they have been both given a degree of autonomy which is what the Dalia Lama wants.
    4. Re:Why only Tibet? by Bazar · · Score: 1

      I've honestly seen little about liberation of Tibet from the internet. Perhaps its just the sights you visit that are pro-Tibet
      Its a non-issue for me personally, and this article on Slashdot isn't pro-Tibet, its anti-censorship.

      A war over Tibet war is something of interest and thus, discussion on the internet, its something that's going to be talked about, and get more "energy" from people.

      The issues with Australian aborigines pales in comparison if you take into account the fact that the Australian government recently and officially apologized for their actions and progress is [b]probably[/b] being made. It doesn't make what they've done ok, but its a step towards peacefully resolving it.

      The issues with New Zealand and their semi-native Maori population is a thorny, but our government is listening and trying to rectify past grievances they have suffered. Again, this is a peaceful resolution. As for being democratic, they can either vote as a normal New Zealander, or they can vote using a Maori vote. They effectively get to choose which rule they will play with. So in a way, they have more political clout per vote non-Maori.

      The other countries i know too little about to comment on.

      Of the 3 issues i talked about, only one of them has the possibility of a war. The other two are simply civil matters and are being slowly resolved or improved.

      Hope that explains why Tibet is an interesting topic, and why little fuss is applied to the internal matters of some countries.

      --
      To avoid criticism; Say nothing, Do nothing, Be nothing.
    5. Re:Why only Tibet? by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

      I'm not trying to bait or anything but I am curious. Why does the internet community give so much energy to the liberation of Tibet but they don't do the same to the USA, South Africa, Australia etc that are overrun and controlled by accupying colonial powers. Well, I dunno about South Africa, or even Australia, but... free the US? And hand it over to whom? Some 99%* of the population is descended from those 'occupying' colonists. Was the settling of America a travesty? Maybe, maybe not - if you'd like, we can say that it is, sure, and as big a tragedy as you want - but would evicting everyone now living there make things better? You just can't up and move 300 million people, all the infrastructure they put down, all the homes they've built over the years, not if you're sane. Kicking people out of their homes and destroying their lives and livelihoods is half of the injustice that came up in the first place. It won't make the world better. And you can only give so much restitution to the dead.

      (* totally made up and almost assuredly incorrect figure and this post in general probably doesn't do enough to include and address matters related to the sizable Hispanic populations down in the southern states, but close enough to reality that the same point applies.)

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    6. Re:Why only Tibet? by jo7hs2 · · Score: 1

      Probably because Native Americans and Australian Aborigines don't still make up 50% of their nation's population. If they did, and had an impassioned, eloquent, and most importantly (mostly) unitary leader-in-exhile to speak for them, things might be different. At this point, at least with regards to Native Americans, there isn't all that much left to "liberate" anymore, so all that is left is to study what happened. I don't see your point about S. Africa, there was tons of activism in the US surrounding apartheid, it just happens to have pre-dated the widespread use of the internet.

    7. Re:Why only Tibet? by hey! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's really rather simple.

      The Tibetans have a charismatic, articulate and eloquent spokesman in the Dalai Lama. Here in the US he's probably the most venerated spiritual leader in the US outside of the Pope or the conservative protestant movement. He's almost the chief rabbi for large swath of American intellectuals who think of themselves as "spiritual" but not aligned with a conservative religious movement and who eschew formal theological dogma.

      So, in a way the Chinese leadership is right on the mark when they talk about a "Dalai Clique".

      The thing that makes him a tough opponent in this game is that he's so darned reasonable and mild mannered. He's not calling for armed uprising. He's not even insisting on national sovereignty. He refuses to act angry, or even wronged. He just insists that the Chinese leadership should talk, and listen with an open mind.

      The thing is, there's a lot about the old Tibetan system that is ugly and bad -- along with much that is admirable and good. The Chinese would love people to think about the abuses of the old monastic system when they think of Tibet. But can't oppose somebody like the Dalai Lama without being nakedly blunt about their own unreasonableness and brutality, which makes everything they do an international embarrassment to their country. And that makes this news.

      You're absolutely right, we should be concerned with other places where minorities are oppressed for their religious, cultural, racial or linguistic characteristics. But you can't focus on all the tyrants in the world at once. You focus on the ones that can be made representative of tyranny, in the hope that they some day they will become representative of the futility of tyranny.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    8. Re:Why only Tibet? by Deanalator · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Tribal sovereignty.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribal_sovereignty_in_the_United_States

      Native American tribes have their own land, and can make/enforce their own laws.

      I am not sure if other countries you mentioned have similar setups, and of course the deal is not as good as some of the Natives would like it to be, but there is nothing like this in Tibet. China denies that Tibetans even want to be free. Even now they are blocking CNN and Youtube, along with countless other news sources. The goal is not to hide the protests from the Chinese people. The goal seems to be to retain the ability to paint the Tibetans as rebel separatists bent on destroying the Chinese empire.

    9. Re:Why only Tibet? by HungWeiLo · · Score: 0, Troll

      I'm sure the Dalai Lama is a mild-mannered and nice man in general. However, the system that he represents is no better than the Chinese that he proposes to replace. History has shown that the system in place in Tibet before the Chinese occupation is a theocratic dictatorship, where hands are chopped off for failing to pay back taxes in a justice system similar to Islam's Sharia Law system.

      The thing that makes him a tough opponent in this game is that he's so darned reasonable and mild mannered. He's not calling for armed uprising. He's not even insisting on national sovereignty. He refuses to act angry, or even wronged. He just insists that the Chinese leadership should talk, and listen with an open mind.

      If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. - The Dalai Lama, 2001

      And interestingly, he apparently wants to kill off retarded children:

      Of course, abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing and is negative, generally speaking. But it depends on the circumstances. If the unborn child will be retarded or if the birth will create serious problems for the parent, these are cases where there can be an exception. I think abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each circumstance. - The Dalai Lama, to the New York Times.

      --
      There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
    10. Re:Why only Tibet? by ANCOVA · · Score: 1

      The native American tribes have their own land and can make their own laws, appropriately after 90% of their population having been wiped out and the rest of it squeezed into small packs of barren lands.There, fixed it for you. Talking about hypocrisy.

    11. Re:Why only Tibet? by MechaStreisand · · Score: 2, Informative

      "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. - The Dalai Lama, 2001"

      What is wrong with that? Are you saying it's not reasonable for someone to defend themselves?

      And interestingly, he apparently wants to kill off retarded children:

      Of course, abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing and is negative, generally speaking. But it depends on the circumstances. If the unborn child will be retarded or if the birth will create serious problems for the parent, these are cases where there can be an exception. I think abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each circumstance. - The Dalai Lama, to the New York Times.


      That's not killing off retarded children, that's potentially aborting fetuses that would grow up to be retarded. That's something that a lot of reasonable people would do. You are deliberately misrepresenting what he said.

      --
      Disclaimer: IANAL. This post is, however, legal advice, and creates an attorney-client relationship.
    12. Re:Why only Tibet? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      I'm not trying to bait or anything but I am curious. Why does the internet community give so much energy to the liberation of Tibet but they don't do the same to the USA, South Africa, Australia etc that are overrun and controlled by accupying colonial powers. Yes they may be 'democracies' but if you go and speak to a native aborigony and ask them about it I think that their perspective would be different to that of some slashdotters

      In Australia with a population of 20 million, perhaps 500,000 are Aboriginal (depends how you count mixed blood). So where do the 19.5 million people go whose ancestors arrived in the last 250 years? It's too late.

      China invaded Tibet in 1949, in living memory. They still have a (faint) chance to save their culture before they are relegated to being marginal slum dwellers in their own cities.

      In Tibet the native Tibetans are still in a majority. But Han Chinese are immigrating in at an increasing pace. In a few decades the Tibetans will be a minority, and their culture will be as doomed as the natives of Australia.

      You can't justify China's colonisation and genocide in Tibet by saying other countries did worse centuries ago. We are talking about NOW and what can be done NOW to save a living culture.

    13. Re:Why only Tibet? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      And interestingly, he apparently wants to kill off retarded children

      You lost any credibiity with that misrepresentation of a statement about abortion. And considering the Chinese policies that encourage infanticide of newly-born on a massive scale, blatant hypocrisy.

    14. Re:Why only Tibet? by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

      If I misrepresented the quote, then by all means correct me. He said he will "approve" an abortion if the circumstances are met - one of them being that if the child will be born retarded. Please identify the part of this interpretation that you have a problem with.

      The Chinese government never claimed to be the sacred guardians of human life and spirit, unlike religious leaders such as the Dalai Lama. I'm not a Buddhist myself, but I'm quite certain that the topic of abortion is a pretty clear-cut one in the tenets of Buddhism (except for the extreme cases where the mother's life is in danger). The act of abortion signifies not only the deliberate loss of human life but also the representation of greed and selfishness.

      Since I have no connection with China or support the policies of its government, how does this make me a hypocrite?

      --
      There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
    15. Re:Why only Tibet? by tresriogrande · · Score: 0, Troll

      Dalai Lama was both the Head of State and Archbishop of his religion. He started an armed rebellion, failed and still controls his government in-exile. Can you imagine any American Indian tribe chef do that? BTW, skin young girls live, use their skin for lamp shades, and brag which one is softer was their sport. He is very clever not to mention any of that when being called spiritual and moral leader.

    16. Re:Why only Tibet? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      If I misrepresented the quote, then by all means correct me.

      The part where you said he "wants to kill off retarded children".

      Since I have no connection with China...

      Excuse me, Mr Hung Wei Lo, if that is your name than you most certainly do have a connection to China.

      or support the policies of its government

      You are doing exactly that in these posts.

    17. Re:Why only Tibet? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      skin young girls live, use their skin for lamp shades, and brag which one is softer was their sport. He is very clever not to mention any of that when being called spiritual and moral leader.

      Yes, obviously he's very clever not to react to such absurd propaganda.

    18. Re:Why only Tibet? by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps because many of those countries have acknowledge their own history, whereas China as simply tried to make up some propaganda filled story? Those other countries also don't seem to mess around with religious affairs as much. From what I've read, the PRC has even gone as far as trying to install their own "Lama" into the Dalai Lama's linage, something to the equivalent of a foreign country trying to plant a non-Catholic in as The Pope.

      And why do you think that people who care about Tibet don't care about other issues? After all, this is the internet, where it's easy to talk about non-local issues. Perhaps it's because the meddling seems more obvious in Tibet. Either way, I don't think it's wise to assume people only care about Tibet just going by what you read on the internet.

    19. Re:Why only Tibet? by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      How is the Dalai Lama's view point on abortion any different to many people here?

      The Dalai Lama has admitted that Tibet hasn't been under perfect rule throughout history, but at least he admits it. And I have never seen anything to suggest he is against democracy -- just the opposite. You're taking about a country that is more than 50 years old, BTW. And even so, it is not acceptable to invade a country with arms, assume control, and meddle with their religious affairs by killing and torturing monks and any other people who question the situation.

      The Dalai Lama has said that independence isn't even his main goal. All he wants is autonomy so that he and other Tibetans can practice their religion.

      How about you read something about this issue that wasn't cooked up by the PRC?

    20. Re:Why only Tibet? by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      An armed rebellion against his own country, or of another country invading? As for that other crap, unless you have any proof, it is simply mindless, childish allegations created solely to discredit him. Time to put down the crack pipe perhaps?

    21. Re:Why only Tibet? by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that people should never bother to right wrongs, or something?

    22. Re:Why only Tibet? by SpacePunk · · Score: 1

      It's all romanticism. There are issues local to us all that deserve our attention more than Tibet does. The kids just need to forget about Tibet, and work on freeing their heads from their asses.

    23. Re:Why only Tibet? by hopefullythisworks · · Score: 1

      I agree that it's not practical to "free" any of those regions concerned. Tibetan and Chinese should try to get along with each other. It is illegal to burn others to death, just because you don't like them. Tibet can never be a independent country in any sense. Chinese government will never let that happen, and no country can truly handicap it. Even though, some crazy guys claim to nuke China. They'd remember, though China don't have that many nuke warhead, blowing the earth up once and ten times don't make much difference. Both parties should sit down have some realistic conversation.

  20. Youtube, if you're reading this by yamamushi · · Score: 1

    Don't back down to China on this one, it would be unethical to remove the videos so that the site could be seen in China. By letting the Chinese government pressure you into doing this, would mean letting their powers having a direct negative impact on us here in the West.

    --
    - Aetheral Research -
  21. Re:China = Muslim? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Not likely, religion is tightly controlled in China but it's kept on a tight leash so as not to become too big to threaten the authoritarian government. Even a group of a few hundred could be threatening to the 75 million member Chinese Communist Party.

  22. Re:thistimei have no sympathy for local mobs in Ti by jonfr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    China has installed a media blackout (Chinese public doesn't know what is going on), they don't want to get the same response as Burma did get when the protest where cursed there few months back. But not only that, China government has also closed down the border zone between China and Tibet. Preventing tourist and reporters to get inside the occupied country. They do this as they don't want a new 1989 for the world to see. Chinese news agents are spewing out propaganda at the moment, nothing that comes from them is accurate or true on what is happening.

    Let's not forget the fact that China did invade Tibet in 1950 and claimed Tibet as there own, while Tibet is in fact indepent country that is military occupied. While in fact that is not the case. U.N should have for long time protested the China occupation of Tibet long time ago. It is however sad fact that the business deals prevent that from happening.

    I expect information on the action of Chinese military forces to come to light soon. As I expect that the information is going to get out one way or an other. View of the Chinese public are based on what the government chooses to tell them, not necessary the facts of what is going on.

    We are going to see more bloodshed to happen in Tibet for some time now. However, it is as question how much of it reaches international media.

  23. FREE TIBET by weighn · · Score: 1, Redundant

    'cause it ain't China

    --
    Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
  24. Bumper stickers by iknownuttin · · Score: 1

    Why does the internet community give so much energy to the liberation of Tibet but they don't do the same to the USA, South Africa, Australia etc that are overrun and controlled by accupying colonial powers.

    Because "Free USA!" just doesn't have the ring of "Free Tibet!" and the bumper stickers wouldn't be as colorful as the Tibet ones: red, white and blue as apposed the rainbow of the Tibet one?

    Free Australia would just have all of us (me anyway) thinking Fosters is giving their beer away for free, and the Free South Africa was done by Nelson Mandela - a better man than I'll ever be.

    --
    I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
    1. Re:Bumper stickers by Siridar · · Score: 1

      No Australian drinks Fosters. We'd rather drink our own wee.

  25. Communism just don't work. by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 1

    I have a feeling that over time, as people increasingly leave the Communist party in favor of the booming economic opportunities that are exploding all over China, these sorts of government abuses will simply go away. Sure, the government will fight to maintain its position of power over everything, but there's only so long they can keep this going.

  26. Authoritarian Government, Meet the Info Revolution by Whuffo · · Score: 1
    One thing that the internet does very well is to provide access to far-flung data, routing around damage or blockage as necessary. Part of that is in the design of the basic system - and part of it is in the large number of people who won't allow anyone to "disappear" information.

    The information revolution is still in its early stages; there are still many institutions that depend upon hiding information to exist which haven't realized that their cloak of secrecy is blowing away in the breeze. China's government is the largest of these institutions - but they'll eventually discover that the harder you try to hide the information the more widely distributed it becomes.

    Those authoritarian leaders can block YouTube - and their team of spooks can try to discover all the proxy servers and block them too. But it's a lost cause; they may slow the spread, but they can't prevent their tales from being told to all who are interested.

    Will those leaders finally discover how to totally hide their misdeeds - or will they finally fall when their subjects discover what kind of leaders they have and vote them out / overthrow them?

    It's going to take a few years for all this stuff to sort itself out. But I think that in the end, there's going to be a lot more freedom in this world of ours.

  27. Why support them? by DAldredge · · Score: 1

    When you buy a product made in China you are indirectly supporting them. So why do it?

    1. Re:Why support them? by jonwil · · Score: 1

      3 reasons:
      1.It may not be possible to identify that a given product is made in china or contains chinese components
      2.There may be no other option (i.e. all the available choices contain chinese products somehow)
      and 3.Even if there is another choice, it may be significantly more expensive than the chinese product.

  28. Tibet is part of China by iknownuttin · · Score: 1

    As far as the Chinese people and her Government are concerned, Tibet is and has always been a part of China. That's their point of view and that's why you're not going to see anything negative about this from China and her people. And why they don't give a rat's ass about what we decedent, stupid, lazy, barbarian Westerners have to say about it.

    --
    I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
    1. Re:Tibet is part of China by gzipped_tar · · Score: 1

      That's because most of the Chinese people dare not make a different sound abouth the whole shebang.

      AFAIK many of the my fellow Chinese people don't think that Taiwan or Tibet is necessarily part of China in any sense. Some of them just don't care that much about who is ruling these places. However, it is quite natural that they remain relatively silent under the current situation.

      There's just a lot of information you can get even from within the Great Firewall. I can read news about the matter from agencies such as the International Herald Tribune at www.iht.com (although they are not quite neutral about everything). As the saying goes, seek, and you shall find. Yesterday I was walking in my campus in Beijing, and a student was selling used books by the roadside--- among a lot of technical references and textbooks there was one about the truth about the Tian'anmen Massacre, and nobody is preventing him from doing so. Remember there are some 1.3 billion people here, and it's impossible to keep everybody thinking the same.

      But it is really possible to keep most of them from speaking about their opinions. You know your Big Brother is operating your routers.

      --
      Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
  29. Here's an idea - an online protest by thewils · · Score: 1

    Given that amongst the /. readership there must be quite a few webmasters it should be possible to mirror some of the banned content on lots of webservers/sites around the world. If this was done, say, all on a single day and as such a day I would suggest day one of the games in August, then no way could China shut down access to all the sites at once. True, the average Chinese browser would have a job finding some sites, but if there were enough of them then the chances of someone stumbling upon the content would be pretty good. Also, links could be created to the content from other websites which have a higher profile. The web would be flooded with stuff the Chinese Govt doesn't want punters to see but they shouldn't be able to lop off large tracts of the web without annoying all the foreign journalists based there during the games.

    Just a thought...

    --
    Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
    1. Re:Here's an idea - an online protest by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      My understanding is that those in China who wish to find out about the stuff censored by the Great Firewall could do so, and those who don't simply don't care.

      My personal interpretation is that the *true purpose* of censoring is mostly symbolic. By having a censor you know what topics the government doesn't want you to know about, so unless you're willing to put up with some political persecution, shut up on those matters. You also have a feeling of "Big Brother is watching you".

      [ And maybe to prevent the mindless ones seeing the overhyped anti-PRC propaganda (there are entities and organizations that have a strongly vested interest in bringing down the Chinese Communist Party, and their claims are even more outrageous and ridiculous than the Chinese authorities' propaganda themselves) ]

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
  30. Re:China = Muslim? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah its all the Muslims fault. Good call. Observant.

  31. i have written something , but they became dots. by imkow · · Score: 5, Funny

    all chinese characters i have typed here became dot...
    i take it as a censorship

    --
    China, in fact, is very fragile.
  32. The monks moved too early by MLCT · · Score: 1

    They should have done this in August - more publicity and much harder for the Chinese authorities to deny it had happened.

  33. Alternatively... by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

    I find that Nico Nico Video is still accessible and fully usable. Yes, call me a weeaboo all you like for using a Japanese site but at least it works.

    --
    OSx86 FTW
  34. 'Preconcpetions' Shouldn't Obscure Moral Vision by reallocate · · Score: 1

    The fact remains, however, that Tibet is an independent nation forcibly conquered and annexed by China. It is also a fact that China is blocking net access to news about Tibet. The Tibetan people have a right to have their country back. The Chinese people have a right to real news, news that isn't filtered and tweaked by the government. No amount of "preconceptions" should obscure our moral vision about this.

    Sometimes you need to decide which side you're on.

    --
    -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
  35. Hmmm...So why we went to occupy Tibet after all? by justkeeper · · Score: 1

    Since it's uch a mountainous,unpopulated,economically undeveloped area?Oh,maybe because it's our "Manifest Destiny".

  36. Re:China = Muslim? by ccarson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think what the above poster meant was that their attempts to control their population is similar to many extremist muslim countries. I think it's safe to say, based on China's past, the Chinese government tends to try and control what the average Chinese citizen sees and hears. If their philosophy is correct, why wouldn't they let the chips fall where they may and let truth prevail? To me, their attempts to silence information is testament to their fear their ideals won't hold water.

    All I'm asking is why won't the Chinese government engage in intellectual debates instead of pretending differences don't exist?

  37. There's an easy way to solve the China problem by Centurix · · Score: 1

    Split it into even filegroups, china1 through china8

    --
    Task Mangler
  38. Hate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    America much?! (Really, think about it: why is your first reaction to a story about the Chinese government to claim that the US is just as bad in intent, if not in practice?)

    1. Re:Hate... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A surprising percentage of people that post stuff like this are American often born in Democrat stronghold like California. I would say a "blue state", but the phrase annoys me. I wish Americans would use standard terminology. Here is a quick primer

      Rest of the world.

      "Red" - Socialist or at least left of centre, after the colours of the Communist party. The UK Labour party often uses red themed logos, as do most left wing parties in Europe, Canada and Asia. The opposite of the "Blue block"
      "Blue" - Liberal.
      "Liberal" - a believer in free markets, free elections and minimal government. Margaret Thatcher called herself a liberal.

      Americans have a tiresome habit of using all of these not just incorrectly but meaning the exact opposite what they mean in the rest of the world.

      America

      "Red" - The Republicans. Originally economic liberals, they now believe that the US governments' remit extends to bringing democracy to the middle east. It's hard to see that Milton Friedman would have supported this. Fiscally grossly irresponsible and with a annoying tendency to preach on social issues, like the Labour party in the 1970's.
      "Blue" - The Democrats. Heavy support from the unions. Activists often rant on the Internet about how the Republicans are worse than Hitler which is just plain silly, but quite competent the last time they were in government.
      "Liberal" - quasi socialist policies allegedly favoured by the Democrats.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    2. Re:Hate... by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      Hate... America much?

      Nope, not even a little bit. Actually I'm a big fan.

      However I also am a person who is free to express their opinion on any subject without fear of persecution, and I do so. Doesn't matter if I'm right or wrong, I still can and will, it's this thing we like to call 'debate'.

      Besides, any government which cannot be criticized, is a government that will tip into tyranny.

    3. Re:Hate... by jo7hs2 · · Score: 1

      Well, Americans aren't exactly using Red and Blue incorrectly. We have consistantly labelled communists as "reds" just like in Europe. However, both American political parties have chosen to use colors from the American flag, and white just doesn't really work as well as red and blue. Words have different meanings in different places. We manage to figure it out, so deal with it.

  39. China needn't block all of YouTube. by rindeee · · Score: 1

    Google's made it easy for them to block only the videos that make them look bad with their new country blocking XML tabs. Just add a "[media :restriction type="country" relationship="deny">CN]" and voi la! If you're not familiar with Google's latest (Do no evil???) addition to YouTube, do a little Googling to see the write-up that YouTomb did on the matter. China can either request it of Google or do a little in-session HTML mangling with their "Great Firewall". Bah! China can suck an egg...

  40. Think Global, Act Locally by xenocide2 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Why not start with petitioning the US government to return Texas to Mexico?

    --
    I Browse at +4 Flamebait

    Open Source Sysadmin

  41. Absolute Moral Consistency Is Not A Prerequisite by reallocate · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because absolute moral consistency is not a prerequisite for doing the right thing.

    More to the point, no one is blocking Texan access to the net, or anything else for that matter. Texans, and Mexicans, are fully aware of their history. The Chinese people are not aware of Tibet's recent history because the government controls the media and their access to the net.

    Besides, Mexico acquired Texas by force from Spain, which had acquired it by force from any number of indigenous peoples, who, in turn, were often at each other's throats. How far back do you want to go? Few of us, if anyone, live on land that was not forcibly taken from someone else at some point in history.

    --
    -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
  42. Re:Tunneling under the Great Firewall of China by imkow · · Score: 1

    basically, the cenorship mainly affects the average interent user. it blocks the hottest topics through triggle words, nuked domain name. or black lists of websites. technically and usually, a working proxy can bypass most of these blockade. so reaching out is not really hard.. the main problem is the english language rather than the censorship.

    Reading unlawful information is seldom interested by the authority, as long as the reader does not redistribute the information..
    it's like to say. you can watch porn online.nobody cares, but if you build a website selling porn. the police will get you..
    also amount of data would not interest the police. sharing porn video via p2p is quite rampant in china. the law bans it, but young computer user still have their way..

    --
    China, in fact, is very fragile.
  43. Re:Absolute Moral Consistency Is Not A Prerequisit by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    "Few of us, if anyone, live on land that was not forcibly taken from someone else at some point in history."

    Without commenting on China/Tibet, i would like to say that this is a point that really needs to be repeated more often, as most of the population doesn't seem to be aware of it.

  44. you probably talked to Han Chinese by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Informative

    Especially in the western regions, Chinese authoritarianism is mainly directed at preserving Han-Chinese supremacy over separatism among other ethnic groups, such as the Tibetans (in Tibet) and Turkic groups (in Xinjiang). This involves both the sort of direct control and suppression we see here, and more subtly and long-term, a program of sending Han Chinese settlers into those regions to dilute the non-Han majority.

    As you might expect, you get different views on this issue if you talk to Han vs. non-Han Chinese citizens.

  45. In a perfect world China would be blocked by LM741N · · Score: 1

    Even though much of the world can't read Chinese anyway, it would be nice retaliation. Lets start by blocking all Chinese corporation web sites, then government sites. Let individuals, blogs, ordinary email get through. That would certainly reduce our trade deficit! Suddenly companies from countries with higher living wages would get a chance at the US market. Of course Walmart would go under, but who cares.

  46. Treason is the Right of all sentient beings. by DrystanKnight · · Score: 1

    Because Free countries have forgoten that they got that way be acts of treason. If Puerto R or Hawaii wanted freedom ...the blood would flow just like during the civil war. Some conveient excuse would be used then later glossed over with a better one. And don't be fooled. There is no difference between Liberal Democrat or Conservative Republican, end the end they are all just servants to the monster they have created. Sad as it is to say, I forsee a day in my life, or the life of my children or grandchildren where those who think for themselves may be deemed terrorists and have to stand against their own country. What will the world say about the US then? Will there be sympathy for the poor government putting down these angry ursurpers? Or will there be "Free the People" movements?

  47. hmmm let's see by ANCOVA · · Score: 1

    Perhaps the government of China doesn't want his citizens to see how their fellow Chinese were beaten up by the tibetian mob, in order to avoid further public uproars? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmqWRoZaFMk

  48. China is being consistant with their policy by layer3switch · · Score: 1

    Chinese leaders encourage Internet use for education and business but use online filters to block access to material considered subversive or pornographic"

    So China blocking Tibet protest video using online filters (aka Great FireWall of China) is in lieu with their current policy. I call what being done in Tibet by Chinese government is nothing less than perversive and subversive in the eyes of international people and governing body.

    On the other hand, I'm glad that this is not being blocked by the Great Firewall of China.... After all, this is very educational to Chinese.
    http://www.spirit-of-metal.com/album-groupe-Gutslasher-nom_album-Soaking_Pus-l-fr.html

    Tested From: Beijing, China
    Tested At: 2008-03-16
    21:31:45 (GMT -04:00)
    URL Tested: http://www.spirit-of-metal.com/album-groupe-Gutslasher-nom_album-Soaking_Pus-l-fr.html
    Resolved As: 84.16.82.44
    Status: OK
    Response Time: 4.715 sec
    DNS: 1.994 sec
    Connect: 0.431 sec
    Redirect: 0.000 sec
    First Byte: 0.487 sec
    Last Byte: 1.803 sec
    Size: 37061 bytes

    MTR test

    Host tested: www.spirit-of-metal.com/album-groupe-Gutslasher-nom_album-Soaking_Pus-l-fr.html
    Test performed from: Beijing, China
    Test performed at: 2008-03-16 21:34:07 (GMT -04:00)
    Hop Hostname (IP) Country Loss Sent Rcvd Min (ms) Avg (ms) Max (ms)
    1 203.142.12.193 CN 0 % 5 5 2.464 2.886 4.043
    2 152.104.130.2 HK 0 % 5 5 1.187 280.118 404.183
    3 219.142.0.125 CN 0 % 5 5 3.340 278.618 382.431
    4 219.141.130.125 CN 0 % 5 5 151.107 317.364 421.079
    5 202.97.53.10 CN 0 % 5 5 305.886 314.453 371.454
    6 202.97.57.213 CN 0 % 5 5 0.000 340.311 375.547
    7 202.97.51.66 CN 20 % 5 4 529.532 568.078 591.773
    8 213.46.190.205 NL 0 % 5 5 554.250 625.319 753.485
    9 213.46.190.9 NL 20 % 5 4 665.267 712.046 798.804
    10 213.46.160.105 NL 20 % 5 4 698.243 750.289 802.327
    11 213.46.160.26 NL 20 % 5 4 747.190 790.310 828.879

    --
    "Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
  49. The real reason by Viadd · · Score: 1

    Both Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao got rickrolled.

  50. Not accurate.... by gzipped_tar · · Score: 2, Informative

    In fact, YouTube had been banned even before Sunday in China. Since the Icelandic singer Björk's gave her live performance in Shanghai lastweek, singing a song "Declaring Independence" with the cry "Tibet! Tibe!", the trouble with YouTube began.

    I haven't checked the TFA from Wired though. It seemed to be banned also. (I'm here in China.)

    --
    Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
    1. Re:Not accurate.... by gzipped_tar · · Score: 1

      yup, the TFA. Like I often say "the http protocol". :-P

      --
      Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
    2. Re:Not accurate.... by slack_prad · · Score: 1
      --
      Sent from my desktop computer
  51. Two words come to mind... by w000t · · Score: 1

    "Hypocrisy" and "Cuba".

  52. Olympics by eagl · · Score: 2

    China and the olympic comittee have already managed to get the next Olympic athletes to sign agreements that they will not blog or post anything about their participation, so what is next to be blocked? Will there be a censorship policy in place for the Olympics too?

    1. Re:Olympics by Transcendz · · Score: 1

      You are right, everything is already prepared for trying to have perfect, harmonious Olympics... But since last week and all those events in Tibet, many athletes are starting to ask question whether they should boycott them or use this opportunity to express their opinion. I tend to be for the last, but it will be very dangerous for both sides (athletes and China).

      --
      --/ TZ /--
  53. Youtube also block China!! Haha by ericbbk · · Score: 1

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=x9QNKB34cJo The video has already been there for 15 hours, during the first 12-13 hours, the viewer counter reached 100,388. So I guess many people are watching this. However, the viewer counter is unchanged for 3-4 hours. So youtube also blocked Chinese video?

    1. Re:Youtube also block China!! Haha by huahaiy · · Score: 1

      YouTube block USA visitors from certain Videos too. Especially if it has something to do with Tibet. I've attempted to post this story here a few days ago (March 10), but it didn't go through. So I posted on digg at http://digg.com/political_opinion/Youtube_censors_BBC_s_documentary_in_US Or you can check the post on my blog http://yyhh.org/blog/2008/03/youtube-censors-bbcs-documentary-usa It appears that TouTube attempts to manipulate what information US people can see. This is disgusting.

  54. Re:youtube and censorship by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

    Congratulations- your post is the first -1 Insightful I have seen.

    --
    OSx86 FTW
  55. Subversive. . ? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    One of several thoughts which jumped out upon reading this story was, "How can news about reality be considered subversive?"


    Of course, I get it, but seeing the idea of subversiveness from the outside looking in as opposed to how I grew up with it, made me stop and think.

    When you break the word 'Subversive' down into its component words, Sub and Verse, it becomes plain; There is a song being sung, and in this case it is the Chinese national anthem. Those who live in China are compelled upon pain of something very painful to sing along. But the song is a lie, so those aware of this fact will sing off-key and drop in new words here and there, placing a sub-verse beneath the official line.


    -FL

  56. Re:youtube and censorship by slack_prad · · Score: 1

    None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.
    -Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

    --
    Sent from my desktop computer
  57. From China... by hengdi · · Score: 1

    I'm typing this from an internet bar in Harbin, north-east China, so this is the perfect time to do some testing.
    You can't get through to youtube (it gets redirected to Baidu), as TFA states. Let's just see how good this firewall is by trying 'Tibet protests' into google.cn:

    OK, you get enough pages to find out pretty much everything you need to know (although it does feel a little strange - I feel like the police are going to come and arrest me at any time).

    1. Re:From China... by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

      OK, you get enough pages to find out pretty much everything you need to know (although it does feel a little strange - I feel like the police are going to come and arrest me at any time).
      And that, I believe, is the primary reason behind China's Internet censorship. Not necessarily to prevent access to the forbidden information, but to make the populace afraid to access it, afraid to discuss it, and eventually, afraid to even think about it. And that is sad.
  58. the differences by hackingbear · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Taiwan is nothing like the PRC. In the PRC, corruption permeates to even the most petty of bureaucrats, who must be bribed for simple things like marriage licenses and being allowed to continue to farm your own meager plot of land. The difference is that: in China, corruption is wide spread but illegal and can carry stiff punishment; whereas in Taiwan *and* in the US, corruption is not wide spread but it is mostly legal and little punishment, because it has been renamed to political contribution etc.
  59. It is not true. by huahaiy · · Score: 1

    Americans seem to think they have access to all the information. Unfortunately, that is far from the truth. For example, YouTube is blocking your access to a BBC's documentary right now. See evidence here: http://yyhh.org/blog/2008/03/youtube-censors-bbcs-documentary-usa

    1. Re:It is not true. by tsa · · Score: 1

      That's because it's a BBC documentary and the BBC wants money for it from people from abroad. That's the way the BBC is financed and the reason why they can make all these amazing documentaries. I live in NL and I also can't see the video on YouTube.

      --

      -- Cheers!

    2. Re:It is not true. by reallocate · · Score: 1

      The Chinese government don't seem to be trying to justify its control of the media. Such control has been a hallmark of every totalitarian state, for obvious reasons.

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    3. Re:It is not true. by SpacePunk · · Score: 1

      The Chinese government is in control in China, and doesn't have to justify jack and shit.

  60. Re:China = Muslim? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

    Mao worship has many of the characteristics of an intolerant monotheistic religion. Many more ironically enough than some varieties of Buddhism which have the koan "The higher Buddha is not Buddha".

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  61. Censor this by Nocturrne · · Score: 1

    I have been living in China for almost 8 years and have never had a problem bypassing the great firewall. Tools such as tor, ssh, and usenet are widely known by most Chinese geeks, so such efforts just make the government look that much more incompetent. Everyone knows what is going on... The Chinese government is fighting a losing battle against the will of the people. At best, they can only act as a speed-bump in the path of democracy.

  62. My view is different by huahaiy · · Score: 1

    As a Han Chinese who have lived in US for the last 10 years, and as someone who have spent some of his most memorable childhood years in Tibetan region, and who have a cousin married a Tibetan man, I am saddened by the whole things. I am especially disappointed by the rampant ignorance, bigotry and hatred displayed by all sides towards one another on most of the media, forums, and blogs. I don't think people are making any positive contributions to the situation. For people whose daily lives are actually involved, you guys can feel all the moral righteousness you want, but it means nothing, and you are only making things worse. Many Tibetan people think US can solve all their problems, but that is just a completely false illusion. Please do not help perpetrate that illusion any more. Perhaps you guys do not even realize that it is just a illusion because you guys are the victim of your own media's propaganda? For example, I have repeatedly pointed out that YouTube is blocking your access to a video about Tibet, no one seems to care. As someone who is already calling this country home, I find it frightening that you guys just voluntarily filter out information that does not fit your preconception.

    1. Re:My view is different by crianp · · Score: 1

      Identifying yourself as Han Chinese has already shown how biased you are so no more needs to be said

    2. Re:My view is different by huahaiy · · Score: 1

      That's it. That is exactly the kind of attitude that is frightening about you people. You do not display a slight trace of open-mindedness. In fact, you are proud of your bigotry. That's wrong with you people?

    3. Re:My view is different by sdsucks · · Score: 1

      For someone who has "repeatedly" mentioned the video... Why didn't you pursue the issue to find out why?

      Here is a link to the bbc site video, which links to a reason why it is not available in the US.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/page/item/b00936pn.shtml

      If you find the US "frightening", China must scare you shitless.

    4. Re:My view is different by hopefullythisworks · · Score: 1

      I cannot have a better way to prove your prejudice and ignorance than your own statement. I don't want argue with irrational people, so please don't even try.

  63. Re:China = Muslim? by rtb61 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The Chinese government is an autocracy, is it not really a government of China, it is just a government of a few self serving control freaks who prosper while the majority suffer and serve. They obviously want to maintain total control over what the majority hear, say or do, lest the majority realise that the government should serve and protect the majority rather than empower and enrich the minority.

    So just like any sane person from a modern free democracy, there is no fear that the autocrats ideals 'won't hold water', there is an absolute certainty that the autocrats ideals 'don't hold water' and the only way they can hold back freedom and democracy is with carefully managed lies and the point of a bayonet.

    The current Chinese governments insists it has the right to use military aggression to maintain and obtain dominance over countries based upon the flimsiest of historical ties, so Tibet, Taiwan, and even Korea as well as some other regions suffer under oppression or the threat of future aggression.

    That the Olympics should be held in autocratic countries at all, points to that fact that Olympic sized profits and marketing deals take precedence over the ideals and values of amateur athletes from the past. Although it already appears that some athletes are bowing out rather than taking the risk of exposure to carcinogenic pollutants prevalent in the Beijing environment.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  64. Gaza Band ? by aepervius · · Score: 1

    /TROLLish comment

    One could argue that this is something which was done 50 years ago, just like with Israel and Palestine. So now we should either tell tibet to consider themselves part of China, or have the same negative reaction to new Israeli settlement in the gaza band.

    /END OF TROLL

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  65. The time is not now. by cavebison · · Score: 1

    Just a thought, but I think it will be quite some time, decades, before we see significant change in China in terms of the Party's dealings with corruption, their own people, and the outside world.

    This chance will only come about by pressure from within, not without, and it takes a few generations for this to happen. At the moment, most people in China are battling for their livelihood. Barring an actual civil uprising, people are too preoccupied to enact any change.

    Then there's the growing middle class, which - in its infancy, as we've seen in our own experience - begins to concentrate far too much on wealth creation to risk rocking their boats now filled with commodity items. It will be a couple of generations before the middle class becomes relaxed enough to think outside their boxes.

    Unfortunately, in general, as long as China is managed in such a heavy-handed way, people will be too scared - or too complicit - to demand anything change, not until the middle class becomes more powerful and - most importantly - more confident. I think that time is still quite far away. A boom time is no time for revolutions.

  66. I don't get your point. by remmelt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The "other side" somehow conveniently forgets that in the 1950 it invaded Tibet, a sovereign nation. Fencing with the opinion of a bunch of kids doesn't make it right. Tibet was invaded and now the Chinese want to modernise it; what exactly is the other side to that story?

    1. Re:I don't get your point. by hopefullythisworks · · Score: 1

      You just mess up China and Chinese regime. For Chinese, communist party running the country isn't much different from Bush running the office, in some sense. There are numbers of dynasties, but no matter what're the names, they are all China. That's why all Chinese claim China has 5000 years of history, Even though PRC has only existed for 50 plus years. So, most Chinese and non-Chinese are arguing about different things. For Chinese, Tibet has be within Chinese territory for about 800 years. Of course, for most of non-Chinese it may hard to understand, but it's closer to the truth. Anyway, Communist party has only run the country for 1% of Chinese history, whereby, Bush has run U.S for about 3.5% of U.S history.

  67. a short comment by remmelt · · Score: 1

    [citation needed]

    1. Re:a short comment by tresriogrande · · Score: 0

      Most the reference on Tibetan practices are not online nor in English. But you could start from here, and the article is full of names and reference where you could go further. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7355 People, I know you all have beliefs and it is hard to question your own belief were wrong. Most people know nothing about Tibet except what the media fed them.

  68. Good question by gr8scot · · Score: 1
    In communist China, Olympics boycott you.

    before China blocks Slashdot? A text description of whatever the YouTube videos depicted in Lhasa would do, I guess.
    --
    All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
  69. And if You're Chinese - not Tibetian Zip It by gadlaw · · Score: 1

    What a moronic point of view you have. "If you have never lived in China don't comment" is not an argument - just plain arrogance. I would be less inclined to read the comments and opinions of a Jingoist Chinese National on the subject of Tibet and take his or her opinions with low regard based on their having lived in China than the opinions of anyone else. My opinion is that China is still the Sick Man of Asia who bullies and intimidates occupied peoples and is so insecure that they feel they will collapse if they give Tibetians or others the dignity and independence they deserve. Not the sign of a strong country at all. The sign of a weak, morally bankrupt Government and nation. I was already personally going to boycott the Olympics and would suggest everyone do the same. China out of Tibet.

    --
    Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
  70. Re:i have written something , but they became dots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have asked them multiple times... let me see, how many characters do YOU see. Basic characters like Euro are not supported.

  71. Re:China = Muslim? by StudMuffin · · Score: 1

    THAT comment oughta guarantee slashdot being blocked. :D

    Nicely played, Sir. Nicely played.

    --
    Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals... except the weasel. -
  72. Talking about something you have no idea about? by bigtime007 · · Score: 1

    Well, I might be crazy to spend an hour to read through all comments during work time. I was amazed by the fact that 95% of the people who posted comments only knew China, Tibet, and their relations from your own propagandas. Here are a few questions you may want to ask yourself for answers, I suppose slashdotters are not as stupid as diggers: 1. Many westerners automatically picture a peace loving individuals when heard the word 'monk'. There are many types of monks, and the Yellow Hat monks are everything but peace loving. They OWN the entire Tibetan populations as their own property. They can kill a Tibetan just like you can break your Ikea table, nothing less, nothing more. Panchen Lama and Dalai Lama, the two 'living gods' of Tibet, were the world's biggest slave owners before Dalia fled Tibet and Panchen gave in 2. Even the international law experts who hold the most sympathy on Tibet have problems finding evidence that Tibet was ever an indepedent country. Since Ming dynastry, China started ruling of Tibet, and the establishment of Living Gods required approval of the central government. China did not intervene much of its internal administrations, but took over its defence and diplomat activities 3. When Muslims target their violence to civilians, you call those terrorists, when Tibetans kill Han civilians, you called that fight for freedom?

  73. watch CIA video here Re:a short comment by tresriogrande · · Score: 0

    Here is another reference. Here is a CIA video on Tibet. CIA supplied Dalai Lama's organization with arms, just like it did for Bin Laden. Today we call them Terrorists. To me, Dalai Lama is just like one of Cuban lobbyist trying to get back to his good old days

  74. SPIES! LIES! FRENCH FRIES! by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    First, its all the hacking into our government and

    Wait, you don't think that our government is trying to break into every military computer system in China? That the Chinese are engaging in spying on the US, and that we don't employ spies outselves? Interesting...

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  75. Easy to get around by glabama · · Score: 1

    Just use a vpn service like Surfbouncer and it zips right through. They can't block the vpn without blocking business transactions. They won't do that because at the end of the day money talks. http://www.surfbouncer.com/

  76. Re:China = Muslim? by gnick · · Score: 1

    All I'm asking is why won't the Chinese government engage in intellectual debates instead of pretending differences don't exist? When you don't have a leg to stand on, don't race.
    --
    He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  77. Tibet Youtube Videos Now blocked in Hong Kong by integra_antennas · · Score: 1

    We can still search youtube for Tibet videos, but when we try to view a youtube video, we get the following message: "This video is not available in your country." This means that it is youtube that is doing the blocking, not the Chinese government (we have access to all sorts of other "subversive" material including Tibet videos from other sources. This is a highly disturbing development of youtube blocking videos in a place with normally free press--and then blaming the Chinese government for filtering.

  78. Re:China = Muslim? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    another stereotype...
    you dont learn anything, do you ?
    50 years ago, any person doing wrong was called communist
    and now muslim. Good job, keep it up. You are no sicker than
    a muslim, if not more.