Slashdot Mirror


China to Regulate Internet Map Publishing

hackingbear writes "After text, pictures, and videos, China starts regulating Internet map publishing (here is the google translation.) The government believes that Internet maps can represent the state's sovereignty and its political and diplomatic positions in the international community — and consequently, inaccurate maps could harm national interests and dignity, produce bad political influences, reveal national secrets and harm national security, in addition to harming consumer interests. So from now on, publishing maps would require approval and (yet another) license from the state survey bureau. That means Google, Yahoo, etc., need to remove China from the map; or maybe they just pay up some officials and their agents to acquire yet another license. And our newest 80Gbps DPI monsters need to be upgraded to identify maps together with porn."

279 comments

  1. ...national secrete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    priceless!

    1. Re:...national secrete... by aproposofwhat · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Alternatively, Google et al could highlight Tibet (imperial pink, perhaps?) and tell Hu Da Fuk and all his friends where to get off.

      Anyone who even slightly agrees with this measure is a pawn of the fascists, and would be better off sharing a forum with Gordon Brown and Georgie boy.

      --
      One swallow does not a fellatrix make
    2. Re:...national secrete... by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I know China is potentially representing a LOT of money. But, at some point, don't we just say "Fuck China"...and all the rules and regulations and monitoring they are wanting to impose on a system that has worked just fine without them for decades?

      If they want to wall off themselves from the world, then let them. If they don't want to use what a company from another country is doing, fine just block it if you want to (or can) but, quit bitching about everything we free people do outside your fucking borders.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    3. Re:...national secrete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only problem I see with that is that China is not a unified machine. The speaking heads are the dictators of people. Some people may agree with the gov't, but based on what knowledge? Understanding? Sure, it's easy to agree with the gov't suggesting that there is a need to impose regulations, when the same gov't is telling its people that they need to do so because all other western nations have problems because they allow this pesky thing called freedom.

      In the mean time, I wish my gov't would get off it's lazy ass and start speaking up about Burma. The only time major countries seem to be even semi-serious about another country's lack of freedom, is when that freedom has an ounce of benefit to the complaining party.

    4. Re:...national secrete... by gnick · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...quit bitching about everything we free people do outside your fucking borders. I don't remotely support the way China's oppressing their people, but criticizing this move as "outside your fucking borders" is off-base. They're restricting what comes into their country, just like almost every country in the world does. If you live somewhere with no copyright laws, start hosting movies that can be downloaded in the U.S. and see if it goes ignored. The only difference is that China is even more oppressive and aggressive than the MPAA and their goal is to enslave their citizens, not just suck them dry.
      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    5. Re:...national secrete... by postbigbang · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Chinese, like the Americans, have sovereignity over their borders. That Americans (I'm one) wait for the Google truck to moon it and don't care, they also present images that are sometimes not very pretty.

      US freedom and liberty gives the Google video truck the right to drive down any public byway and video what they see, 24/7. Other countries can alter what they want the truck to do, and what is public versus private versus secret information at their will.

      If mapping is good, then it won't take long before someone figures that out and allows it. But as nations are ostensibly the assertion of the will of their people (less so in some areas), China has the right. Openness is a desirable quality, as people wonder what you're hiding when you're closed, an attitude that is balanced with the need for privacy and the right to be left alone.

      The fulcum in the middle of that balance is respect.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    6. Re:...national secrete... by Gerald · · Score: 2, Funny

      My first thought wasn't priceless. It was "eeewwwww!" I have no idea what an entire nation might secrete, and I don't want to know.

    7. Re:...national secrete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "...we free people...

      sure most of the western world have more freedoms (for now, losing that slowly under 'war on terrorism'), but we are not *free*... 'political correctness', gun control, campaign finance, religion, etc. most aspects are controlled by the investment class either directly or indirectly through mass manipulation. only difference is that the people's republic of china is a little more clear about who's boss

    8. Re:...national secrete... by zappepcs · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Except, there is possibly different ways to say 'Fuck China':

      1) Publish and push data all the way into their living rooms until they cut off the Internet for their people completely.

      2) Publish in a flippant way: publish maps but when it comes to China put a graphic that says sensored by assholes in China.

      3) Publish a website that shows ALL the stuff that China does not want their citizens to see/read/hear so that the entire rest of the world can see/read/hear it and know what Chinese government types have censored from their own people.

      4) invite the Chinese government to come make the rest of the world sensor material for their benefit. I'm not saying war is good, but if you intend to tell them to fuck off they will either hide behind the wall or respond to that message.

      Personally, I believe that no one should be buying ANYTHING made in China. Yes, I know it's next to impossible but I would spend an extra 10% to support companies from my country that make competing products to Chinese products.

      The entire China issue is completely out of hand, and the best way IMO to stop it is to stop dealing with them. Stop buying from them. Stop selling to them. Do not go to the Olympics either. Don't watch the Olympics. In fact, I say we censor China altogether from the world's information, business dealings etc. Don't let them invest in anything anywhere else in the world. Lock up their assets that reside outside of China, close their Embassies... everything.

      Yes, that will eventually hurt their people but it is their people that must overthrow the government in charge at this point.

    9. Re:...national secrete... by DCGaymer · · Score: 1

      I agree China has sovereign power as to it's borders....but I'd have to draw the line at saying we can't look over the fence....Think ... if Mynamar/Burma had dones so would we know as much as we do about it's regressive Junta regime?

    10. Re:...national secrete... by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      We've known about the military government in Myanmar for decades. We've done nothing about it except to advocate a democracy. There's little political will to do much about things in SE Asia after the Viet Nam disaster.

      Looking over the fence gets you a few yards. It would be great if China, along with other countries with oligarchical regimes would open their borders. Nonetheless, France is also increasingly hostile for reasons of their own; perhaps secrecy, perhaps vanity, perhaps privacy. All can be valid, depending on the culture.

      We have cameras in the sky that can see *everything* and don't imagine we can't. There's software that looks at those images and parses them for identifiable objects; it's all quite simple.

      A ground-level video is superfluous. Mapping is important for many different reasons, but map control needs to have an authoritative basis. Yahoo and Google and GPS maps are plainly wrong and either accidently or purposefully misconstructed. I know, as I've been a 'victim' of these misconstructed, misleading maps in major places in the US and the EU. They were wrong, wrong, wrong.

      We have a compelling reason in social justice to understand what's going on in other countries, but other countries also have the rights to their own sovereign borders. We have no right to just roll in to a foreign locale and do what we please; the reverse is also true although we offer a different basis for freedom and liberty and freedom of movement.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    11. Re:...national secrete... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      They can no longer sit back and allow Democratic infiltration, Democratic indoctrination, Democratic subversion and the international Democratic conspiracy to sap and impurify all of their precious bodily fluids.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    12. Re:...national secrete... by popmaker · · Score: 1

      Yes indeed "fuck China". It seems they are just testing how far they can push. They already got google to censor some of it's content inside China (right?) and now they want more. In the end they won't be leaving many alternatives than for the rest of the world to tell them to suck it.

      Are they looking for a reason for war or something?

      Well, ok, no reason to get carried away. Still, this is too much to ask for.

    13. Re:...national secrete... by DM9290 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      their goal is to enslave their citizens, not just suck them dry. because citizens with no property still have rights in this society? Like what? The right to spend every waking hour searching for a new boss until they starve to death?

      Poverty and slavery are effectively the same thing, except the slave tends to be better off because he's valuable property and thus can't simply be left to die even if he becomes temporarily redundant. On the otherhand the temporarily redundant laborer in a society without slavery is for all free market purposes, worthless. He can't buy anything (since he has no job) and he can't be bought or traded for commodities since that would require him to be a slave.

      The only thing that makes this fact difficult to notice is all the social (humanist) programs we have that help the surplus labour pool (the unemployed) get by until the economy picks up.

      I'm not advocating slavery, I'm just saying true free market capitalism is no better.

      The point is that on the whole, the vast majority of people DO NOT WANT to suck anyone dry or enslave anyone. That is just a myth propagated by rationalist capitalists and communists to morally justify the fact that they themselves do.

      The Authorities in China want to enslave you in order to suck you dry. The Authorites in North America want to suck you dry in order to enslave you. Nothing changes.. Authority wants the same thing. Total and absolute control. The only thing that changes is how Authority goes about aquiring what it seeks and whether any does anything to resist it.

      --
      No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
    14. Re:...national secrete... by WNight · · Score: 0, Troll

      I agree China has sovereign power as to it's borders.... That's the thing. I don't. China isn't a country, it's a fucking slave pit. Moreover, it's a slave pit with pretty much the worst record world-wide of human rights. Not that the option comes up much, but I support and work for the total elimination of China. Not its defeat, but the removal of it from the map and utter destruction of anything the country as a whole stands for. Not the people, just the deadly religion that is China.

      If people think Saddam was insane and needs to be removed they need to read some Chinese history and look at their actions. Tibet, Taiwan, the rest of the world... China sees itself as having a divine right, a manifest destiny, and it brutally slaughters millions - of its own people and others - to achieve this destiny. If other countries invade one another they call it a war. China claims (and its people seem to believe) that its actions are of a peaceful nature, as they threaten to invade Taiwan (and historically, kill millions), invade Tibet (and kill millions), etc. China talks about going to war with Taiwan, to return their 'wayward brothers' to the fold. Very self-serving. "Criminals" (whose crime was saying something inconvenient while having the right blood-type.) are harvested for their organs, and students are shot for reading the "wrong" (read, right) books.

      So no. China has *no* "sovereign power". For that they'd have to be a legitimate nation. For that they'd have to rule with the mandate of the people - not by terrorizing the people. They do have a lot of guns, and have brainwashed and terrorized millions into supporting their wars, but that's no different than a common dictator. That was Saddam's claim to legitimacy.

      In other words, China has as much sovereign right as a violent step-dad... They've got the power and the motivation to use it brutally, but they don't rule with the mandate of the people and do everything possible to avoid doing so.

      We'd step in and take children away from a violent step-parent, why don't we step in and take Tibet away from a violent conqueror? All because of the stupid idea that slavery is just dandy as long as you practice it on people who look like you and any abuses are just family matters, not genocide, if you do them inside a line painted on a map.

      It's fucking revolting that we legitimize them at all with the trappings of a society when we might as well laud Jeffery Dahmer's population-management techniques. They're sociopathic murderers and need to be called that.

      The world is shocked that Austrian guy kept his daughter in a cage for twenty years, but that's nothing compared to what goes on in China and we just brush it off, calling it a sovereign matter. Why is murder/rape horrible when it happens to one person, but acceptable when it happens to millions as part of day-to-day running of a country?
    15. Re:...national secrete... by sigmabody · · Score: 1

      That was roughly my first thought: black out the area of mainland China, and superimpose "censored on request of this country". Of course, leave Taiwan on the map, and the disputed islands, and all international waters, and any other area which wants to declare itself independent. Basically, use their request to emphasize the exact opposite of their presumed intent. How funny would it be to have China blacked out and Taiwan shown normally, like a great big middle finger to China's censorship campaign?

    16. Re:...national secrete... by gnick · · Score: 1

      because citizens with no property still have rights in this society? Like what? Two quick examples:
      1) I can get on slashdot and say "Fuck the MPAA" without fear of being snatched away in the middle of the night.
      2) If the MPAA wants to mess with me, they have to go through due process of law. Sure, the laws & courts are imperfect and lean toward the rich, but it beats the hell out of what China's got.

      Suggesting that American big business is as oppressive as China's government is pretty fucking shallow...
      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    17. Re:...national secrete... by Alinabi · · Score: 1

      Apparently Dick Cheney agrees with this, as he had his residence pixelated on Google Maps

      --
      "You can't allow somebody to commit the crime before you detain them." [Condoleezza Rice]
    18. Re:...national secrete... by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      I'm not advocating slavery, I'm just saying true free market capitalism is no better.

      What are you talking about? Your social safety net programs are actually the guy without a jog making a slave of me. I'm forced (on penalty of losing my liberty by going to jail) to write a check that's used, in part, to feed him.

      Why does he have no job, and no prospect of getting one? Because he's been raised in a culture that tells him it's OK not to prepare for that possibility. You make it sound like the economy is a fixed-size pie, and that nobody creates jobs through investment, that nobody starts businesses, and that no companies grow. Why do you supposed there are tens of millions of illegal immigrants risking their lives to sneak into the US in order to work? Because there's work. The guy without a job is one bus ticket away from having one. It's not a nice, middle-class job. But it's also not him holding a gun to my head, saying, "Feed me. I never learned how to do anything else, and it's your responsibility to buy me food."

      he point is that on the whole, the vast majority of people DO NOT WANT to suck anyone dry or enslave anyone. That is just a myth propagated by rationalist capitalists and communists to morally justify the fact that they themselves do.

      Ah well, just so long as nobody is making broad, sweeping, baseless statements, then we should be fine.

      The Authorites in North America want to suck you dry in order to enslave you

      I see. And that would be by, what... raising your taxes while also creating a culture of dependency? Great. Then don't vote for socialists and left wingers. They're the ones that are sure they know better than you what to do with your income. And they're the ones that woo votes from the very people they're feeding with my money, rather than telling them that they need to raise their next generation of kids to have the same work ethic and entrepeneurial vision as the people that are fighting to get into the country.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    19. Re:...national secrete... by kellyb9 · · Score: 1

      I think the freedoms referred to are the ones covered in the first amendment, not those covered in the subsequent nine. China has been responsible for censoring material regarding democracy and free speech. I don't see the US or the EU spending a great deal of time censoring material on communism or monarchy or any other goofy form of government. Regarding your comment that our rights have been slowly melting away, it seems that you are in for a little history lesson. Several times in the history of the US there have been alien and sedition acts that have limited the scope of the first amendment- even early in our country's history. Second, you go through a list of items that seem to indicate we are not free - political correctness is a self-imposed restriction on speech. In fact, it isn't even really as restriction as much as an inhibitor. Gun control, I think we'd all agree, is a somewhat necessary restriction on our freedom. Campaign finance isn't actually mentioned in the constitution... and it has really little to do with freedom. Religion - again - i fail to see how this has anything to do with freedom at all. We are free to believe a giant spaghetti monster created the universe. To conclude, we know who the boss is because we voted that person into office which makes it our responsibility to be oversight for the conduct of that person - where in China is this type of oversight?

    20. Re:...national secrete... by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      Yes, that will eventually hurt their people but it is their people that must overthrow the government in charge at this point. I've said this before and I'll say it again: you have no right to demand the people of another country to give their lives for a cause that you believe in.

      And allow me to ask, what has China done to you that makes you so eager to "fuck" them? Besides having some policies that you don't agree with inside their own borders?
      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    21. Re:...national secrete... by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      quit bitching about everything we free people do outside your fucking borders. You obviously missed the irony of this one.

      Spelling it out spoils the fun though: A slashdotter, outside China, bitching about everything the Chinese people do inside their borders (and outside said slashdotter's borders).
      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    22. Re:...national secrete... by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      If they want to wall off themselves from the world, then let them.

      Right, isolationism worked out real well for Japan when Perry showed up with his ships...

    23. Re:...national secrete... by JrOldPhart · · Score: 1
      And you know all about China from?
      Are you basing all of your beliefs on what you read in western media?
      Your chances of having the MPAA attack you legally is probably greater than those of one of the several billion Chinese workers having the government hunt them down for any spoken slight.

      laws & courts are imperfect
      Using due process any corporation can afford to drag a case out in court until a slave, oops I mean a single party dies.

      I'll bet that some Chinese person is ranting about the suppressive regime in the US and how the government is taking all freedoms, right now. Yet the government in the US spins it to make the majority of the populace believe that it is for their own protection.
      --
      Nothing is foolproof, fools are too ingenious. - Murphy
    24. Re:...national secrete... by JcMorin · · Score: 1

      It's interesting that the same comment you said about China can also be apply to the US especially if dealing in the banking business. "I know US is potentially representing a LOT of money. But, at some point, don't we just say "Fuck US"...and all the rules and regulations"

    25. Re:...national secrete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason why the world is recognizing China and not your fairy tales, is just because.

      After all these years you still think that the USA was justified in invading Iraq to liberate the people from Saddam's oppressive rule... only to impose a government which is as bad if not worse, killing thousands (if not millions) in the process.

      If you look at Chinese history the only people slaughtered were Chinese by foreign invaders. And you're advocating this again. The only "violent crime" you could quote of China had in recent years was only "threatening Taiwan with war"... what about the dozens of countries who invaded Iraq (for no reason at that)? I guess they aren't sovereign too.

      If you actually talked to the Chinese people, most of them genuinely support the central government. Not all legitimacy claims need to be through elections (although that would be nice too). Can't say the same for GW Bush who probably has less than 50% approval rate. Is USA not a sovereign state now?

      China hasn't had any slavery for thousands of years. On the other hand, the USA was practicing slavery and actively defending their "right" to own slaves less than 200 years ago. Racial discrimination against the former slaves (African-Americans) is still prevalent. Where's the slave pit again?

      Man, sometimes I wonder what you're smoking to get so off base both factually and logically.

      (And to the "yes USA is bad but it doesn't mean China should get away with it" people, I'll retract my arguments when this guy retracts his argument that China is not a sovereign state because it's doing less bad things than sovereign states like the USA, or if he accepts that the USA isn't a sovereign state either)

    26. Re:...national secrete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so the chinese don't violently oppress protesters? that's fiction manufactured by the western media?
      being screwed over in a US court and dealing with the credit damage of a bankruptcy declaration is just as bad as a chinese jail or state sanctioned murder?
      the chinese/tibetans/taiwanese all love the chinese government and thank god that they don't have to live under the oppressive rule of the US?

      dumb ass

    27. Re:...national secrete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You exposed a huge amount of hatred toward China on the Internet. Regardless your opinions, you were biased, angry, discriminating, ignorant and kinda out of control. There are always good people and bad people everywhere, similarly, everything has its good side and bad side. It is not wise to critize a country without knowing enough about it. It is easier to come up with constructive opinions after viewing things on both Chinese side and American side. BTW, I strongely recommand you spend some time reading Asian/Chinese or maybe American history, do religious history as well if time available.

    28. Re:...national secrete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      keep reading below

    29. Re:...national secrete... by cyfer2000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except, there is possibly different ways to say 'Fuck China': 1) Publish and push data all the way into their living rooms until they cut off the Internet for their people completely.

      By spamming?

      2) Publish in a flippant way: publish maps but when it comes to China put a graphic that says sensored by assholes in China.

      Are you sure Chinese care about your content? Remember, you must publish it in Chinese.

      3) Publish a website that shows ALL the stuff that China does not want their citizens to see/read/hear so that the entire rest of the world can see/read/hear it and know what Chinese government types have censored from their own people.

      Are you sure Chinese care?

      4) invite the Chinese government to come make the rest of the world sensor material for their benefit. I'm not saying war is good, but if you intend to tell them to fuck off they will either hide behind the wall or respond to that message.

      Are you sure they care?

      Personally, I believe that no one should be buying ANYTHING made in China. Yes, I know it's next to impossible but I would spend an extra 10% to support companies from my country that make competing products to Chinese products.

      Go ahead.

      The entire China issue is completely out of hand, and the best way IMO to stop it is to stop dealing with them. Stop buying from them. Stop selling to them. Do not go to the Olympics either. Don't watch the Olympics. In fact, I say we censor China altogether from the world's information, business dealings etc. Don't let them invest in anything anywhere else in the world. Lock up their assets that reside outside of China, close their Embassies... everything.

      Wet dreams. This never worked on a country with more than 1 billion people. BTW, do you ever realize how much US assets in China?

      Yes, that will eventually hurt their people but it is their people that must overthrow the government in charge at this point.

      You are very smart at this point, but if their people rise up and overthrow your government...

      BTW, when you guys are discussing wet dreams, Chinese are fighting a fscking earth quake, I hope you realize what you care and what Chinese care, and what is the distance between them. And if you want to have Chinese listen to you, what you should do.

      You forget the sarcastic label, right?

      --
      There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
    30. Re:...national secrete... by postbigbang · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your xenophobia towards China seems to give your righteousness the same fervor of the people you condemn. You've tried them, found them guilty, and now you intend to vanquish them, all in one fell swoop. Step back for a moment.

      Revisit and understand history not only of China, but other nations including our own. This is not to justify actions that various Chinese governments have taken, rather to put them into perspective. I've been to China on several occasions, and while there is oppression, and lack of freedom, there's also a very fragile society that's coming out of dogmatic totalitarianism of the 1950's and 1960's. Before that time, China was a series of fiefdoms, not unlike Russia, or even Italy.... not to mention the Middle East.

      Your primitive contrasts will only fuel a futile exasperation at what happens in the world, rather than giving yourself an honest opportunity to change it for the better. Read, chill, act.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    31. Re:...national secrete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they want to wall off themselves from the world, then let them. If they don't want to use what a company from another country is doing, fine just block it if you want to (or can) but, quit bitching about everything we free people do outside your fucking borders.

      Er... a little history? China got fucked over hard by the people outside its borders. Eventually they got strong and organized enough to stop being everyone's bitch for a few decades. Now they're gotten strong enough to be a major international economy. Energy, Food, and Industry -- they are entwinded with the global marketplace and that means Cultural trade too. And they have had ZERO experience that trusting outsiders is a good idea except when China is a bad motherfucker with ultimate control.

      So they are going to dictate terms. That means you don't get simplistic comfort from your Disney ideas that they want to "wall off themselves", or what "free people" means, or that you can just stay "Fuck China". Dealing with China is awkward and dealing with China is a fact. Being ignorant about it only makes it harder.

      And Hot Holy Monkey On A Stick, just what were you taught in school about History to be so clueless? And what garbage have you been supplementing it with to say "I know China is potentially representing a LOT of money" in 2008? It's like you got some Duck&Cover "Communists are bad, m'kay?" simplicity that you've only expanded with a cheap World Economy Info-Pack from 1980.
    32. Re:...national secrete... by DM9290 · · Score: 1

      I'm not advocating slavery, I'm just saying true free market capitalism is no better.

      What are you talking about? Your social safety net programs are actually the guy without a jog making a slave of me. I'm forced (on penalty of losing my liberty by going to jail) to write a check that's used, in part, to feed him.

      Why does he have no job, and no prospect of getting one? Because he's been raised in a culture that tells him it's OK not to prepare for that possibility. You make it sound like the economy is a fixed-size pie, and that nobody creates jobs through investment, that nobody starts businesses, and that no companies grow. Why do you supposed there are tens of millions of illegal immigrants risking their lives to sneak into the US in order to work? Because there's work. The guy without a job is one bus ticket away from having one. It's not a nice, middle-class job. But it's also not him holding a gun to my head, saying, "Feed me. I never learned how to do anything else, and it's your responsibility to buy me food."

      he point is that on the whole, the vast majority of people DO NOT WANT to suck anyone dry or enslave anyone. That is just a myth propagated by rationalist capitalists and communists to morally justify the fact that they themselves do.

      Ah well, just so long as nobody is making broad, sweeping, baseless statements, then we should be fine.

      The Authorites in North America want to suck you dry in order to enslave you

      I see. And that would be by, what... raising your taxes while also creating a culture of dependency? Great. Then don't vote for socialists and left wingers. They're the ones that are sure they know better than you what to do with your income. And they're the ones that woo votes from the very people they're feeding with my money, rather than telling them that they need to raise their next generation of kids to have the same work ethic and entrepeneurial vision as the people that are fighting to get into the country.

      What are you talking about? Your social safety net programs are actually the guy without a jog making a slave of me. I'm forced (on penalty of losing my liberty by going to jail) to write a check that's used, in part, to feed him.

      If 3-6 % of the population was not merely unemployed, but unemployed and starving to death, your employer would easily find someone to do your job for much less pay than you.

      Crime would also shoot through the roof. As very few people would let their family starve to death if they could feed them via crime. Perhaps they would sell their children into prostitution in order to feed the family, or perhaps they would turn to robbery, extortion and assassination. People will not sit idly by and starve to death.

      Why does he have no job, and no prospect of getting one? Because he's been raised in a culture that tells him it's OK not to prepare for that possibility.

      Really? Please show me where in this "culture" it states that it is ok not to prepare for losing your job. Is that what your mom and dad told you?

      We live in a society that says it is ok to pay your employees as little as they are willing to work for. We call this "negotiating freely". And it is a hallmark of capitalism.

      If the alternative to welfare was starvation, you would work for a lot less money. In order to make up the lost wages you would need to work longer hours. Longer hours extracted from the same number of employees, means less demand for labour, which means more unemployed, (who go on to burn up their palty emergency funds while depsarately searching for any job whatsoever before they starve), and thus more competition for jobs and thus more free market pressure to cut wages and lengthen hours further. This cycle repeats until eventually people are working as long as humanly possible for as little as humanly possible.

      In a free market you don't get paid more than the bare minimum necessities for surviv

      --
      No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
    33. Re:...national secrete... by WNight · · Score: 1

      With a post like yours I'd remain anonymous too...

      I didn't say I supported the removal of Saddam, I said "If people think". As in, people obviously do think that - see the war - so they should also think this other thing.

      You're pretty much on the pro-China playbook. You've got the "But the USA is bad too" argument and the "But the Chinese support China - support in the USA is less than total".

      1) Yeah? So fucking what? The USA sucks balls. No decent accounting for your tax money, too many people in jail for non-crimes, thought crime legislation, useless wars, etc. I wouldn't support its actions for a second.

      But really, if you have to compare yourself to someone else to deflect criticism it's likely very accurate.

      If you can't think of reasons why your country sucks you don't care enough to wish to improve it.

      2) Yeah, and support was almost total in the USSR... Look at the last Iraqi election, Saddam by a landslide.

      Look at the sheep in 1984 - would a single one express any criticism of Big Brother?

      Just like in China. Dissent and be culled.

      On the other hands even in a moderately free country like the USA, which you are fond of using as a comparison, it would be ridiculous to expect that one candidate could be the favorite choice of any majority (and indeed elections are about the ratio of votes, not a strict majority).

      Similarly, it's good most people think Bush is fucking everything up. Because he is. Without realizations and comments like that we couldn't properly recognize the good presidents.

      The support of the ignorant oppressed isn't that impressive when you're the one keeping them ignorant. The support of the Chinese people would be far more impressive if it was educated (not just formally, but those who educate themselves) people who had heard the criticisms and the truth behind them, not a populace kept ignorant by censorship and death threats. When China finds the free-thinkers who question the system they drive over them in tanks.

      As for China's atrocities, I didn't think you'd need a list. Is your Wikipedia finger broken? Threatening Taiwan is just the most obvious. Whatever else you are, if you threaten to kill your neighbors unless they recognize your authority, people will think you're a warmonger.

      As for the sovereignty of the USA, I agree. It has no moral authority to rule. It claims to be a higher authority than the people, ruling in their name, yet without their mandate. While this is truer than some places (see China) it is a big fucking lie. Many people do not support the actions being taken in their name and do not consent to be ruled. A state using these people is a slave state. They have no choice but to work for a percentage of the year to feed the military and other governmental budgets. What else could you call that?

      The USA is on my list of countries I think we should send soldiers into to liberate the population. But it's far below Afghanistan, North Korea, China, and others. But it still is going to war, imprisoning recreational drug users, and torturing suspects. Not an entity I can truly support, despite its good actions.

      But again, is that the only way you can answer criticism? To deflect?

      So yes, I think I'm justified in calling China an abomination. A stain upon the land. A bad idea whose time is gone. It's a war-mongering state ever trying to increase its slave population via conquest.

      We need to defy the dangerous idea that China has sovereignty, or any rights at all. The Chinese people have those. The Taiwanese people have those. China itself is just a concept on a map, an obsolete one.

    34. Re:...national secrete... by WNight · · Score: 1

      Who have I tried? The Chinese people? I think not.

      I don't feel my politicians truly represent me and do not agree that they act in my name or with my authority. I certainly couldn't blame the Chinese citizens for the actions of their more oppressive government.

      I have condemned the rulers. Not with evidence of their supposed actions, but with their very actions themselves as evidence.

      China censors the internet - not to keep their information from foreign spies or anything, but to keep foreign information from their citizens who they feel are incapable of handling free thought.

      What more can I say? They lose in one move. It's like scoring on your own goal, for countries.

      If they really supported the people they'd need the full rational support of the people. That's not something you can ever censor into people.

    35. Re:...national secrete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The only difference is that China is even more oppressive and aggressive than the MPAA and their goal is to enslave their citizens,


      That's the most western-biased, culturally insensitive comment I've read in a LONG time. Where do you get off telling another culture what it's goals are, and how they should act? For all our talk of freedom, the west TORTUREs people, and lies about it. We have CORRUPTION, just like everywhere else, except that we HIDE it better than most.

      Sure, China has a bad human rights record. Sure, it has a record of censorship. It also has a record of trying to protect it's people from things that might be harmful to the fabric of its society and its individuals, like any parent is praised for doing.

      We, on the other hand, have so-called free speech, yet can get arrested and sent to guantanamo for the stupidest of reasons; if one of us happens to look like an arab, we might end up missing flights, questioned, if not arrested. We have KIDS SHOOTING EACH OTHER IN SCHOOLS where they're supposed to be learning to cope with the adult world.

      China is NOT right. But let's get one thing very straight: WE'RE NOT RIGHT EITHER. No one has all the answers, least of all insensitive, narrow minded people who assume that every other culture is wrong.
    36. Re:...national secrete... by postbigbang · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You share a commonality with every other American-- that our politicians don't fully represent our views. They can't as they're only 549 of them, and several hundred million of us.

      Yes, the Chinese censor the Internet. This is one of the smaller of their displeasing behaviors. Censorship is almost always a bad thing, except when the sensibilities of children are at stake.

      The slumbering dragon slowly awakes after many years of dark ages. Their rulers are inexperienced, and their political system isn't as evolved as others. There are worse, and many of them, just not as large as China. We're impatient to watch them grow up. I'd like to see a free Tibet..... press freedoms, and freedom of movement, and freedom from involuntary servitude, and better environmental management. These things will come, hopefully soon. Trying to eradicate China in toto is silly, however. Instead, consider befriending and allying democratic and sensible efforts towards a freer and open society. It takes one person at a time.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    37. Re:...national secrete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So now China's censorship and oppression are like a parent trying to raise healthy children?

      I hope they gave you some pretzels as a side dish when you drank that Kool-Aid...

    38. Re:...national secrete... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One minor problem.... China in fact, already owns a good chunk of US/Canada and the rest of the world.

      With the way things are all tied together, not buying/selling or otherwise dealing with China will cripple the rest of the world as badly as it would cripple China.

      And there is no will in the West to do something so drastic... we all like our cheap (and not so cheap) crap from China, and there will always be some rinky-dink country will to sell their resources to them.

    39. Re:...national secrete... by dwater · · Score: 1

      How funny would it be to have China blacked out and Taiwan shown normally./quote>

      Maybe you'll find that funny, but no one in China will know.

      It'll be yourself, like a little girl, giggling to yourself.
      --
      Max.
    40. Re:...national secrete... by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Censorship is almost always a bad thing, except when the sensibilities of children are at stake. It's a bad thing even then. People like to talk about various things (usually nudity) as being "harmful to children", but there's really no evidence that it is. Blocking minors' access to material that they choose to seek out is no better than blocking adults' access.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    41. Re:...national secrete... by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      You haven't seen the salient evidence. Children are impressionable, and things like graphic violence and pornography aren't good for them. There's a very good reason why adult bookstores are 18+.

      Children have no context to put such images in. I won't go into parental responsibilities to teach their children about the realities of life, but there are some images that children clearly should not be subjected to.

      In my opinion, which varies from the 'norm', nudity is fine at any age. But watching sex acts isn't a good idea, and watching violence without giving the context also is a bad idea. If you believe it's a good idea, or has no impression, then you're invited to research the topic as I have, and you'll see the research, see the conclusions, and see the evidence.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    42. Re:...national secrete... by iNaya · · Score: 1

      Well, given a choice between believing a government, or government controlled media, and free media, I think I'll go with free media.

      Have you ever noticed BBC/CNN attacking British/American governments? I have. Have you ever seen Xinhua attack the PRC government? I haven't.

      Do you know any editors of Chinese newspapers? I do. They get given a list of things they must talk about and a list of things they must not talk about.

      And you wonder why I choose to believe Western media over the Chinese Government / government controlled media?

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    43. Re:...national secrete... by iNaya · · Score: 1

      There's very little point in closing China out from the rest of the world. A great lot of good it's done for North Korea and Cuba...

      By pushing sanctions, all you do is give their government an enemy to point at. "Look at those evil Americans/Brits/whatever, refusing to sell or buy stuff to us!!".

      All sanctions have done is made the governments of NK and Cuba stronger. We are much better off building interdependent relationships with other countries. That way our cultures rub off on each other and we all become better.

      Of course I oppose censorship, but showing the middle finger to China isn't going to solve a damn thing.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    44. Re:...national secrete... by iNaya · · Score: 1

      Remember, you must publish it in Chinese.

      Chinese are not dumb, they can and do learn English. If the information is interesting, someone will probably translate it eventually. Of course, to reach the wider population, Chinese is needed.

      3) Publish a website that shows ALL the stuff that China does not want their citizens to see/read/hear so that the entire rest of the world can see/read/hear it and know what Chinese government types have censored from their own people.

      Are you sure Chinese care?

      Most don't even know they're being censored. I work in China, and trust me, the ones that do know, do care. Just teach them to use things like Tor, or other ways to bypass the censorship.

      Personally, I believe that no one should be buying ANYTHING made in China. Yes, I know it's next to impossible but I would spend an extra 10% to support companies from my country that make competing products to Chinese products.

      Go ahead.

      I'm going to keep buying stuff from China. But then I don't have much choice, I live here :-) But when I leave here, I'm sure I'll keep buying it. As long as it is a good price, and of good quality, why not? I'm not going to be petty...

      The entire China issue is completely out of hand, and the best way IMO to stop it is to stop dealing with them. Stop buying from them. Stop selling to them. Do not go to the Olympics either. Don't watch the Olympics. In fact, I say we censor China altogether from the world's information, business dealings etc. Don't let them invest in anything anywhere else in the world. Lock up their assets that reside outside of China, close their Embassies... everything.

      Wet dreams. This never worked on a country with more than 1 billion people. BTW, do you ever realize how much US assets in China?

      Didn't work for Cuba, didn't work for North Korea... There is a history of such things, it doesn't work, learn it. (To GP)

      Yes, that will eventually hurt their people but it is their people that must overthrow the government in charge at this point.

      You are very smart at this point, but if their people rise up and overthrow your government...

      BTW, when you guys are discussing wet dreams, Chinese are fighting a fscking earth quake, I hope you realize what you care and what Chinese care, and what is the distance between them. And if you want to have Chinese listen to you, what you should do.

      You forget the sarcastic label, right?

      There is no reason to hurt the people... Once again, the repressive regimes of NK and Burma hurt the people a lot, but I don't see anyone revolting. Besides, overall people in China have a lot of freedom, and most have good lives, food to eat, things to do. And the situation is improving rapidly.

      The Chinese government today cares a great deal about the well being of the people. Sure, they don't tolerate dissent... but remember, the West is so used to their freedoms, but they weren't acquired until people became wealthy. People care first and foremost about their well-being. Freedom comes a far second.

      The best way to ensure freedom in a country is to give wealth to the people. Eventually when they are comfortable they will demand change. When they are hungry they will only demand food.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    45. Re:...national secrete... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      I know China is potentially representing a LOT of money. But, at some point, don't we just say "Fuck China"...and all the rules and regulations and monitoring they are wanting to impose on a system that has worked just fine without them for decades?
      ... Then China calls in the debts that America has accumulated to it by buying goods in devaluing dollars, while starting to buy oil on the Iranian bourse in Euros. The resultant downwards spiral in the value of the dollar throws countries that are tied to the dollar into a 1930s-scale recession.

      When you see the Canadians moving to distance their economy from the American budget deficit, that's when you need to get your personal wealth out of dollars. Actually, that might be a bit to late.

      "War," the saying goes, "is diplomacy pursued by other means." By the same token, economics is war pursued by non-lethal and highly profitable means.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    46. Re:...national secrete... by JrOldPhart · · Score: 1

      Kent State.

      I simply am saying that Their government is not that much different. Neither is our media.

      --
      Nothing is foolproof, fools are too ingenious. - Murphy
    47. Re:...national secrete... by JrOldPhart · · Score: 1

      I did not praise Chinese media.
      I dissed western media and the belief that the media is unbiased.

      Critical thinking! There are agendas on both sides.

      --
      Nothing is foolproof, fools are too ingenious. - Murphy
    48. Re:...national secrete... by WNight · · Score: 1

      I understand that governments don't represent anyone properly. That's why the concept of government, especially a coercive one that feels it owns everyone inside a certain boundary and prevents their movement, is becoming obsolete. China is just making an ass of itself and drawing a lot of attention. (As is the USA.)

      You attitude about censorship is amusing. "It's always bad, except ...". Two things protect peoples' sensibilities, their eyelids! Controlling what information you can encounter is never a decision that is okay to take from someone. (Even a child. A parent's job is to help the child understand the world - or at least that some people are crazy and need not be emulated, not to distort that child's view of the world and prevent them from every being capable of ruling themselves.)

      In this way, China fails miserably. It's one of those parents who is jealous of its children's success. If Taiwan is part of what China sees as China, brag about its successes. "That's Taiwan - a small offshoot of what the real China is, and they kick ass." That's the British attitude towards Canada, for example. They might still prefer direct control but stepped gracefully from power so that their children could flourish and they have a great relationship as a result.

      Until China recognizes the people as sovereign, and for example, their right to uncensored information inviolate, it's not even in the running for a nation. It appears that keeping Tibet in China is more important than stopping human rights abuses. The sleeping dragon might just be put down before it awakes, and its captives freed.

    49. Re:...national secrete... by cyfer2000 · · Score: 1

      Remember, you must publish it in Chinese.

      Chinese are not dumb, they can and do learn English. If the information is interesting, someone will probably translate it eventually. Of course, to reach the wider population, Chinese is needed.

      I lived in China for 23 years, I know how much English common Chinese speak.

      3) Publish a website that shows ALL the stuff that China does not want their citizens to see/read/hear so that the entire rest of the world can see/read/hear it and know what Chinese government types have censored from their own people.

      Are you sure Chinese care?

      Most don't even know they're being censored. I work in China, and trust me, the ones that do know, do care. Just teach them to use things like Tor, or other ways to bypass the censorship.

      As far as I understand, they all know they have been censored, they all know they don't have the rights. But they have been living in even worse situation for several thousand years, they are getting better and better, even though slowly. So many of them are very happy about their current and future situation. Moreover, as what I have mentioned before, Chinese know they have been censored, and they are eager to know the other side of the story. And after they know enough, most of them hit a culture barrier and they turn back. The culture barrier between eastern and western culture. Then those who overcome the culture barrier, the elite, the people beyond cultures and countries, realize that other countries don't offered what they want either and they turn back. I do know a lot of people in person using TOR in China.

      Personally, I believe that no one should be buying ANYTHING made in China. Yes, I know it's next to impossible but I would spend an extra 10% to support companies from my country that make competing products to Chinese products.

      Go ahead.

      I'm going to keep buying stuff from China. But then I don't have much choice, I live here :-) But when I leave here, I'm sure I'll keep buying it. As long as it is a good price, and of good quality, why not? I'm not going to be petty...

      The entire China issue is completely out of hand, and the best way IMO to stop it is to stop dealing with them. Stop buying from them. Stop selling to them. Do not go to the Olympics either. Don't watch the Olympics. In fact, I say we censor China altogether from the world's information, business dealings etc. Don't let them invest in anything anywhere else in the world. Lock up their assets that reside outside of China, close their Embassies... everything.

      Wet dreams. This never worked on a country with more than 1 billion people. BTW, do you ever realize how much US assets in China?

      Didn't work for Cuba, didn't work for North Korea... There is a history of such things, it doesn't work, learn it. (To GP)

      Yes, that will eventually hurt their people but it is their people that must overthrow the government in charge at this point.

      You are very smart at this point, but if their people rise up and overthrow your government...

      BTW, when you guys are discussing wet dreams, Chinese are fighting a fscking earth quake, I hope you realize what you care and what Chinese care, and what is the distance between them. And if you want to have Chinese listen to you, what you should do.

      You forget the sarcastic label, right?

      There is no reason to hurt the people... Once again, the repressive regimes of NK and Burma hurt the people a lot, but I don't see anyone revolting. Besides, overall people in China have a lot of freedom, and most have good lives, food to eat, things to do. And the situation is improving rapidly.

      The

      --
      There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
    50. Re:...national secrete... by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      You haven't seen the salient evidence. All right, then, where is it? You say you've researched the topic and found this evidence, so I assume you wouldn't mind sharing it.

      Children are impressionable, and things like graphic violence and pornography aren't good for them. [...] Children have no context to put such images in. Er... what "context" do they have to put any other image in?

      Why would an image of a gunfight or a couple having sex need more context than an image of a castle, a giraffe, the Sistine Chapel, or anything else?
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    51. Re:...national secrete... by iNaya · · Score: 1

      Of course, every newspaper has it's own agenda. However, the agenda of most newspapers in the West is to make money, and of course each editor/reporter also has his/her own agenda. But at least they aren't forced, and often don't follow the government line.

      However, if you read a variety of Western newspapers (i.e. not just Murdoch) then you often get several different interpretations of events, allowing you to choose your own version to value over others.

      Of course everyone is biased, including you, and myself. However, with a great variety of opinions fed to us (unless we stupidly choose just one news source) as a whole, we all have different opinions. Whereas most Chinese tend to have the same opinion about events, be it protests against the torch, riots in Tibet, or tariffs in Europe. This is due to all newspapers saying the same thing.

      Take any significant news in the West, and even people in the same family will have different views.

      And the only reason you have critical thinking is because you grew up in a society where it is valued. Being different / rebellious (thinking critically) in China is not valued. As people they are perfectly capable of it, it just gets drummed out of them at school, where just questioning a teacher is looked upon as being wrong.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    52. Re:...national secrete... by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Start here: http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/online_artcls/pornography/prngrphy_ovrvw.html

      Then go to to the APA: http://www.apa.org/monitor/nov07/webporn.html

      Take the chip off your shoulder and go here: http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/BIB/DIAM/effects_pornography.htm

      None of these are right-wing, or faith-based or in other ways crazed observations. YMMV.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    53. Re:...national secrete... by Mr2001 · · Score: 1
      Perhaps you could clarify which parts you think support your argument. Your first link -- which is the same as your third link -- doesn't have much to say about the impact of pornography on minors specifically, but what it does say seems to undercut your argument. For example (emphasis added):

      The main concern [in Japan], however, was not against videos but against sexually explicit comic books available to children. Conservative groups and the media began to call for government action to stem the rising tide of pornography they saw occurring. [...] Most significantly, despite the wide increase in availability of pornography to children, not only was there a decrease in sex crimes with juveniles as victims but the number of juvenile offenders also decreased significantly.
      [...]
      I believe it part of natures' evolutionary heritage that sexually erotic scenes be part of any individual's development. Since until recent times, privacy has been a luxery only afforded to the very few and then to the very rich. Only in modern times are children expected to develop without witnessing their parents or others, and certainly animals, in sexual activities. And it concludes:

      The concern that countries allowing pornography and liberal anti-obscenity laws would show increased sex crime rates due to modeling or that children or adolescents in particular would be negatively vulnerable to and receptive to such models or that society would be otherwise adversely effected is not supported by evidence. Your second link is an article specifically about Internet porn's effect on minors. It notes a correlation between more frequent viewing and certain "sexual attitudes".

      But it would be a mistake to draw the conclusion you seem to be drawing. The main problem is that it doesn't show causality. Do people develop certain attitudes because of viewing porn, or do they view more porn because they already have those attitudes? The latter seems more likely to me, but this isn't evidence for either possibility.

      Another problem is that, well, if the worst they can point to is "attitudes", what's the big deal? It's a shame when people objectify the opposite sex, but that's hardly grounds for censorship. If you're going to accept censorship on the basis that it people from holding attitudes or opinions you wish they didn't hold, you're going to have to accept a lot more censorship than just this.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    54. Re:...national secrete... by JrOldPhart · · Score: 1

      But at least they aren't forced, and often don't follow the government line.
      But speaking ill of an advertiser or potential advertiser or advertiser partner, will get you called on the carpet, if not fired and black-balled. The dollar carries a much heavier hand, than government in the west. Oops that's right the Government is also controlled in the same manner.

      (thinking critically) in China is not valued
      Don't fall for that. They are just as capable of any western skill. They are just as intelligent as any of us. They have the same capabilities and they currently look to be happier than we are. (Counting the number of smiling faces while walking down the street in Dongguan).

      When manufacturing went overseas in the late 80's all of us Engineers thought "Sucks to be a slightly skilled worker, but THEY can't design these high tech pieces of equipment (HDD's)" Now most of the engineering is done "Over there", with the exception of the initial design. So now the survivors are saying "Sucks to be a production Engineer or any of the production support staff." Wonder what job those third world people will turn out to be good at next? The Engineers at SAE certainly were not sub-par on critical thinking.

      To me it appears that what Asia is not good at copying, yet, is the western demand for higher pay for less work.

      Whereas most Chinese tend to have the same opinion about events, be it protests against the torch, riots in Tibet, or tariffs in Europe.
      Funny, most Americans seem to have the same, opposed, opinion.
      Does the protest only count as freedom if it is against their government?

      With respect to which news services have more or less freedom to report a less yellow form of news, I can't say since I don't speak or read Chinese. In that which I can understand: I do see the twisting of events by first hand experience of an event, then watching or reading the news accounts after the fact. There are times where it is nearly impossible to reconcile the two. In fact most times it is hard to recognize the real events from the sensationalized version in the media. It is hard to sell; "Discarded Coke can found in local river" As opposed to; "Racial tensions flair as bio-toxic waste is dumped into historically suppressed South side water course".

      Question all of that which you do not see for yourself.
      That which you do see yourself, question your own perception. Ask any cop, eye witnesses suck.
      --
      Nothing is foolproof, fools are too ingenious. - Murphy
  2. Can they do this? by SimonGhent · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So from now on, publishing maps would require approval and (yet another) license from the state survey bureau


    Can a country do this? Why are on-line maps different from printed maps? Seems a bit unlikely to me.

    inaccurate maps could harm national interests and dignity


    As Google maps are satellite based, how inaccurate can they be?
    --
    simon
    1. Re:Can they do this? by Serapth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Can a country do this?

      Well, considering the Dick Cheney had his house obscured... I suppose the answer is yes. Actually with Google maps the US government has a number of areas blacked out for security reasons.

    2. Re:Can they do this? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Funny

      As Google maps are satellite based, how inaccurate can they be?
      That depends on whose satellite they got the data from. ;)
    3. Re:Can they do this? by Deadstick · · Score: 4, Insightful
      As Google maps are satellite based, how inaccurate can they be?

      The borders go onto the map after the satellite takes the picture. Like, say, the border between China and Tibet.

      rj

    4. Re:Can they do this? by querist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I do not believe the satellite based images are the main issue here.

      The Chinese government objects to maps that depict certain regions as being separate sovereign countries, such as Tibet and Taiwan, which the Chinese government holds are both part of China.

      This would be similar to a map being published that showed Alaska as a separate country, or as part of Canada, as opposed to it being part of the USA.

    5. Re:Can they do this? by junglee_iitk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, it was possible in US because Google is US based.

      China will be able to pull this off only because Google wants to do business there.

      Let this be a reason for those who talk about "do no evil" and "Google" in same sentence (except me :) ), as if it is some person and not a corporation whose only thing they are looking for is more money for their shareholders.

    6. Re:Can they do this? by gstoddart · · Score: 2, Informative

      As Google maps are satellite based, how inaccurate can they be?

      Oh, they show an accurate picture of the geography.

      But, political things like borders and sensitive areas are a different matter.

      I don't believe this is the first time a country has objected to the way an internet mapping service represents their country.

      This isn't about an accurate picture, so much as a politically driven interpretation or label. The US censors some Google data as well.

      Cheers
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    7. Re:Can they do this? by DrLang21 · · Score: 1

      They can only enforce this in their own country. In other words, if Google and Yahoo don't play by their rules, they will probably be filtered by the Great Firewall of China.

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    8. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      As Google maps are satellite based, how inaccurate can they be?

      Google maps also shows the boundaries between countries. Google probably wouldn't have any problems getting a license. The Chinese government probably is mostly concerned about maps that highlight different countries in different colors. Google maps shows countries in a uniform light gray. Thus, when Google maps labels the island of Taiwan, it is not clear whether Google is saying that Taiwan is a sovereign state or a region within China (i.e., like Hong Kong or Macau). If Google Maps were to highlight China in red and Taiwan in blue, then that would be inconsistent with China's position (it would also conflict with the rest of the world's position of maintaining the ambiguous status quo for as long as possible). Is licensing on-line map providers and possibly censoring unlicensed on-line map providers the best way for China to communicate its positions? Probably not outside of China. But the Chinese authorities are more interested in encouraging unity within the country on issues of what constitutes China than on pleasing the rest of the world.

    9. Re:Can they do this? by Spacepup · · Score: 1

      Except that there is no dispute over the sovereignty of Alaska. The state government and the US government agree that it is part of the US.

      Tibet and Taiwan both insist that they are separate countries from China with their own governments. Much of the rest of the world (at least the non-communist west) considers Tibet and Taiwan as separate from China.

      China's request is akin to your crazy neighbor telling Google that your house shouldn't be on the city map because he wants it too look like the entire neighborhood belongs to him.

    10. Re:Can they do this? by jandersen · · Score: 1

      Can a country do this? Of course they can. Basically, in order to produce any map, you have to somehow go and measure the area; if those who control the access the area don't permit you to enter or fly over it, you can't force yur way in; certainly not in the case of a sovereign country, but even on private land, in most cases. Of course, one could try one's luck with buying the information from whoever holds the pictures from America's spy sattelites, but I don't think the US government would like to seriously alienate China over this issue.

      As Google maps are satellite based, how inaccurate can they be? A map is not a picture, but an interpretation of what is in a picture. If you try to find your own neighborhood on Google Earth, you can see how difficult it is to spot even the things you know well. Roads look different from what you imagine, just for starters. It is quite difficult to make an accurate map, there are simply so many ways you could make a mistake. It also depends on the landscape - there are many places in rural China where roads are very poor and indistinguishable on a picture, and China is full of weird and wonderful geological formations that could be very challenging to interpret. On top of that, Google's mapmakers will in most cases not have access to the locals in many areas, and local knowledge is likely to be fairly crucial in many cases.

      But apart from that, I would love to have a good, detailed map of all of China - it is such an incredibly exciting country.
    11. Re:Can they do this? by sjaguar · · Score: 1

      As Google maps are satellite based, how inaccurate can they be? Maybe they show military installations that don't actually exist.
      --
      If at first you don't succeed, call it version 1.0.
    12. Re:Can they do this? by FireFury03 · · Score: 0

      Let this be a reason for those who talk about "do no evil" and "Google" in same sentence (except me :) ), as if it is some person and not a corporation whose only thing they are looking for is more money for their shareholders.

      I'm not quite sure how you can consider Google to be evil because they follow the law. Just because you disagree with the law doesn't mean you get to ignore it. Sure, they could decide to not do business in China at all, but how would that help anyone?

    13. Re:Can they do this? by querist · · Score: 1

      I will agree that, to the best of my understanding, there is no dispute over Alaska.

      I am not going to argue about either Tibet or Taiwan, as those are issues that are still under dispute. I will note, however, that neither of those regions have representation in the UN, and at least the USA does not officially recognize either as a sovereign nation.

      I am not aware of the official policies of other countries with regard to Tibet or Taiwan.

      Also, it was only an example. I could not come up with anything closer to reality at the moment. I'm sorry. I know people in the area that was hit by the earthquake in China and I'm a little bit distracted.

    14. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The borders go onto the map after the satellite takes the picture. Like, say, the border between China and Tibet.

      There is no border between China and Tibet. The international consensus is that Tibet is a part of China. Even the Dali Lama is not pushing for Tibet sovereignity---just cultural autonomy. The "Free Tibet" movement has done more harm than good because it has muddled the legitimate grievances of the Tibet people with the specter of secession of China's second-largest province. It hasn't helped that "Free Tibet" supporters literally attacked Olympic torch bearers (one who was in a wheelchair) to show their displeasure with China's efforts to control a riot. In part, it is because of this ill-conceived support for a position that not even the Dali Lama supports that neither the Chinese authorities nor the Chinese mainstream are willing to have a productive conversation about how to address the concerns of Tibet's people.

    15. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Much of the rest of the world (at least the non-communist west) considers Tibet and Taiwan as separate from China.
      The United States believes China and Taiwan are one nation.
    16. Re:Can they do this? by Alzheimers · · Score: 4, Funny

      considering the Dick Cheney had his house

      I think you either left out a word or a comma.

    17. Re:Can they do this? by tepples · · Score: 1

      The Chinese government probably is mostly concerned about maps that highlight different countries in different colors. Solution: If a country has a disputed border, use a different shade of the same color. For instance, red China could have pink Taiwan and pink Tibet.
    18. Re:Can they do this? by cyfer2000 · · Score: 1

      You can't figure out borders, like the Mason-Dixon Line, from a satellite picture.

      --
      There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
    19. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can a country do this?
      Certainly. I'm guessing you don't want them shooting down your satellite or plane. It's their airspace. Now, if you publish a map based on data you've already gathered before this, they may have no legal recourse except to deny you data when you ask for it or shoot down your plane or satellite when you go to gather more data.
    20. Re:Can they do this? by mark_hill97 · · Score: 1

      lies! everyone knows that if your flying over a border you can see a big black line there, even the names of the countries are all naturally occurring phenomenons.

    21. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will agree that, to the best of my understanding, there is no dispute over Alaska.
      Let me clear up your understanding. There is no dispute over Alaska.

      I am not going to argue about either Tibet or Taiwan, as those are issues that are still under dispute.
      You are right, there is no need to argue. You just conceded the point. There is a dispute over Taiwan and Tibet.

      I could not come up with anything closer to reality at the moment.
      Then maybe you should not comment on it. How about the situation in Bolivia where provinces are trying to declare autonomy by referendum. Not exactly the same, but much closer.

    22. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Tibet and Taiwan both insist that they are separate countries from China with their own governments. Much of the rest of the world (at least the non-communist west) considers Tibet and Taiwan as separate from China.

      That is not what the rest of the world holds. For example, the state department includes Tibet as part of China. See Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2005, which states that "The United States recognizes the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) and Tibetan autonomous prefectures and counties in other provinces to be a part of the People's Republic of China." What do the people of Tibet hold? It's not clear. The Dali Lama is not pushing for Tibet independence, just cultural autonomy. Many of the supporters of an independent Tibet left the region almost a generation ago or have no cultural ties to the region (e.g., most of the protesters who decided unilaterally that the Olympics were a symbol of Chinese oppression). The Mandarin Chinese who have built homes and businesses in Tibet certainly are not interested in having it become a separate country. Should their opinion count?

      Taiwan, on the other hand, is in a limbo state. Western leaders continue to support the status quo. That is, western leaders do not want China to forcibly reunify Taiwan, which would be very destabilizing, but do not want the Taiwanese to declare their independence from China either. Support for the status quo is one of the reasons why the United States does not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan. See The CIA World Factbook. The majority of Taiwanese people support the status quo too.

    23. Re:Can they do this? by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      There is, however, some dispute over the status of Hawaii and Puerto Rico.

      Very little of the world considers Tibet separate from China: not even the Dalai Lama thinks of them as separate, and accepts Chinese sovereignty. The issue is cultural autonomy and identity, which makes the issue more complicated. If it was felt that too many white people moving to Hawaii was diluting the cultural identity of that region and driving locals out of jobs and homes by economic pressure, would we feel comfortable with some legislation that set aside Hawaii for ethnic Hawaiians? Because that is much of what is at stake here, after all is said and done.

    24. Re:Can they do this? by gnick · · Score: 1

      The "Free Tibet" movement has done more harm than good because it has muddled the legitimate grievances of the Tibet people with the specter of secession of China's second-largest province. It seems to me that the movement is made mainly of people who see a bad situation and feel good about themselves when they burn energy on it - Whether it makes any sense or not. No rational person thinks that bumper stickers or torch assaults will return sovereignty to Tibet (even if they wanted it), but nobody's accusing those folks of being rational... I guess it does a little bit to spread awareness of a rough situation. But, as you pointed out, it's spreading a misaligned image of the situation and doing very little good (or harm) to the actual desires of the people that the protesters want to help.

      Now I'm depressed...
      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    25. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...at the same time as they (the US) make Google black out certain areas because of national security, they are discussing a new law to make it illegal for corporations to censor information on the request of other nations. I'm not really sure what to call this but laughable, hypocritical and populistic comes to mind.

    26. Re:Can they do this? by omeomi · · Score: 1

      Well, considering the Dick Cheney had his house obscured... I suppose the answer is yes.

      Unlike secret military bases and such, I don't think Dick Cheney's house was obscured because of any legal reasoning. My guess is that Google went along with obscuring it either out of an implied threat threat that they didn't want to bother wrestling with or just as a favor to the VP.

    27. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How'd you know my neighbor is crazy?

    28. Re:Can they do this? by MacDork · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sure, they could decide to not do business in China at all, but how would that help anyone?

      It would stop Google from burying information and propagating disinformation on behalf the Chinese government. The Chinese take your land, put a bullet in you head, and charge your child 50 yaun for the bullet. What do you think the official Google.cn story regarding that event looks like? Something is not always necessarily better than nothing. Google should leave China. Staying is most certainly "evil." Your argument is the same as saying that the Chinese people are better off with TVs even if every broadcast station is nothing but round the clock propaganda. Google is nothing but a tool for propaganda in the hands of a dictatorial government.

      Besides, hiding evidence of a murder and lying about it is itself a very serious criminal offense in the US.

    29. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that there is no dispute over the sovereignty of Alaska. The state government and the US government agree that it is part of the US.

      Some of the native Alaskans might disagree with you.

    30. Re:Can they do this? by scipiodog · · Score: 1

      The Chinese government objects to maps that depict certain regions as being separate sovereign countries, such as Tibet and Taiwan, which the Chinese government holds are both part of China. This would be similar to a map being published that showed Alaska as a separate country, or as part of Canada, as opposed to it being part of the USA.

      I don't think that's quite a fair parallel.

      I also don't think it's quite right to lump Tibet and Taiwan together in this argument. Tibet, whatever the rights and wrongs, has actually been occupied by the PRC since the '50s. Taiwan, since the end of the Chinese Civil War, has never been occupied by the PRC. Indeed, for many years it was considered "China" by much of the west.

      It's more like, say, American Samoa or Puerto Rico being shown as different countries.

      --
      http://clightnirish.wordpress.com/
    31. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As Google maps are satellite based, how inaccurate can they be? The images are technically correct, but you can't exactly see political borders from space.
    32. Re:Can they do this? by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      Which is why I'd like every country to paint a border around itself to be visible from space; bright fluorescent yellow lines---a mile wide or so.

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    33. Re:Can they do this? by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      It would stop Google from burying information and propagating disinformation on behalf the Chinese government.

      Google censors information in a lot of jurisdictions. For example, they censor certain violent and pornographic content in the EU (not sure about the US).

      I've yet to see Google intentionally propagating disinformation.

      What do you think the official Google.cn story regarding that event looks like?

      I have no idea and wouldn't like to make any assumptions. Maybe you should have linked to the google.cn story if you thought that supported your case.

      Your argument is the same as saying that the Chinese people are better off with TVs even if every broadcast station is nothing but round the clock propaganda.

      No, that's not what I'm saying at all. What I'm saying is that Google generally don't produce propaganda, and that complying with local censorship laws doesn't make them evil. If Google were to avoid doing business anywhere that has censorship laws, they wouldn't be doing business anywhere.

      Besides, hiding evidence of a murder and lying about it is itself a very serious criminal offense in the US.

      We're not talking about the US, we're talking about China. Also, I believe it is only a very serious offense in the US if you lie to the authorities. This is not what Google are doing - they are censoring public information in compliance with local laws.

      Don't get me wrong, I don't trust big corporations to do the right thing, but I can't see any evidence of Google being "evil" by censoring content in compliance with Chinese laws any more than they are "evil" because they censor kiddie porn in compliance with western laws.

    34. Re:Can they do this? by element-o.p. · · Score: 1

      Having just gotten lost on the way to the airport in Austin, Texas after printing out instructions from Google maps, let me tell you: they can be very, very, very wrong...

      --
      MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
    35. Re:Can they do this? by skuzzlebutt · · Score: 1

      how inaccurate can they be? Well, given that Google had "misplaced" Tibet and found a section of the Himilayas had moved several hundred miles, it depends on your definition of accuracy vs. the PRC's definition, I suppose.
      --
      My debut novel AMITY now available: http://jeremydbrooks.c
    36. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd rather Texas be a separate country than Alaska. How much does it cost to have Google do that change?

    37. Re:Can they do this? by Stormwatch · · Score: 0

      Indeed, for many years [Taiwan] was considered "China" by much of the west.
      Time for the obligatory Ayn Rand quote...

      There is no margin for error about a monstrosity that was created for the alleged purpose of preventing wars by uniting the world against any aggressor, but proceeded to unite it against any victim of aggression. The expulsion of a charter member, the Republic of China [Taiwan] -- an action forbidden by the U.N.'s own Charter -- was a 'moment of truth,' a naked display of the United Nations' soul. What was Red China's qualification for membership in the U.N.? The fact that her government seized power by force, and has maintained it for twenty-two years by terror. What disqualified Nationalist China [Taiwan]? The fact that she was a friend of the United States. It was against the United States that all those beneficiaries of our foreign aid were voting at the U.N. It was hatred of the United States and the pleasure of spitting in our face that they were celebrating, as well as their liberation from morality -- with savages, appropriately, doing jungle dances in the aisles.
    38. Re:Can they do this? by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      But would there be a red China at all if it wasn't for the pinks in the USA?

    39. Re:Can they do this? by lindoran · · Score: 1

      lies! everyone knows that if your flying over a border you can see a big black line there, even the names of the countries are all naturally occurring phenomenons. yeah haven't you ever watched temple of doom, raiders of the lost ark or the last crusade? You're just gonna sit there and tell me George Lucas got it wrong?
    40. Re:Can they do this? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      And if you live inside this mile-wide swath? What country are you part of, then?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    41. Re:Can they do this? by WaltBusterkeys · · Score: 1

      how inaccurate can they be? If China thinks that Tibet is part of China, I don't think the best satellite data in the world will make the map any more "accurate" in China's view.
    42. Re:Can they do this? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      The Chinese government objects to maps that depict certain regions as being separate sovereign countries, such as Tibet and Taiwan, which the Chinese government holds are both part of China.

      And even more sensitively, areas whose sovereignty is disputed with neighbouring countries. There are border disputes, small and large, with Vietnam, Nepal, Russia. Several island groups in the South China Sea (the Spratlys, eg) are claimed by China, and several other countries. Most are uninhabited but would allow a claim to large areas of "open" sea and any minerals or oil on the nearby seabed. China has been building concrete pilings on various almost submerged islands to enlarge their claims. China gets very stroppy about any maps available in China, which of course now includes via Internet, depicting these areas and insists they show they belong to China.

    43. Re:Can they do this? by sydneyfong · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As Google maps are satellite based, how inaccurate can they be? Probably too accurate? Another message I got from the announcement was that the maps could contain "sensitive state secrets". We all know that the Chinese government has a rather strange interpretation of what constitutes "state secrets", but I guess they are concerned with having a too accurate map of the terrain in China, which could lead to military intelligence problems, for instance.
      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    44. Re:Can they do this? by Toonol · · Score: 1

      Well, the U.S. Government has diplomatically adopted the stance that they don't wish to officially challenge China's claim. It's not that they actually believe it or support it. And the U.N. is in pretty much the same boat. I'm sure the government would love to exert as much behind the scenes pressure to preserve Taiwanese independence as possible.

    45. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your comparison of PRC (People's Republic of China) (China) vs ROC (Republic of China) (Taiwan) with that of Alaska and the USA is vastly wrong.

      Alaska was once Russian soil and it was transferred though a sale to the USA.

      Taiwan claims independence from the PRC because they believe that they're the rightful sovereigns of Greater China (it was a military conflict that chased the then leaders out of China and onto the island of Taiwan.)

      IF/when Alaska has its own currency and/or adopts Canada's, asserts that it should be independant, etc, then maybe this strawman will work. But to the best of my knowledge, none of this has happened.

      And until that does., comparing Alaska with Taiwain is not a very good argument.

    46. Re:Can they do this? by e_hu_man · · Score: 1

      shareholders are people too.

      well, i haven't actually seen horns and hooves grow from one yet. if i do, i'll let you know.

    47. Re:Can they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to move.

    48. Re:Can they do this? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Let this be a reason for those who talk about "do no evil" and "Google" in same sentence (except me :) ), as if it is some person and not a corporation whose only thing they are looking for is more money for their shareholders.

      Corporate executives have a legal duty to protect and promote the ineterests of their stockholders. By default this means their financial interests - which means they usually try to maximize profit within the limits of the law but not necessarily of morality.

      But some corporations are founded by, or owned by, people with other interests than making money, and may put other considerations (such as social responsibility or religious law) ahead of profit.

      Google was founded by people who claim to put "doing no evil" ahead of profit. And its stockholders (at least those among them who did their due diligence before buying) knew this. So it is reasonable to claim that its executives' duty to their stockholders includes a REQUIREMENT to put aside some profit opportunities if it must be done to avoid "doing evil".

      This means they aren't stuck doing immoral things to maximize shareholder value. But it does NOT mean that they can break the laws of the countries in which they operate.

      So they can decide to forgo profit and pull out of China if the laws force them to "do evil". And they can make this decision based on criteria like "Will more evil be done to the Chinese people by staying and censoring, or by leaving and letting others control even more of what they see?"

      On the other hand, that's a LOT of profit to forgo. And it's pretty clear that putting more of it in the hands of the stockholders usually promotes their interests. So this is likely to bias the decisions even if they are honestly attempting to put the motto above the bottom line.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    49. Re:Can they do this? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      And if you live inside this mile-wide swath? What country are you part of, then?

      Don't paint the color on the border but just inside it so that the actual border follows the outer edge of the color (think Civilization 4). This, of course, requires neighboring countries to have different colors; a total of 4 should be enough.

      For extra effect, have the color fade away at the inner edge of the mile-wide swath, rather than just end suddenly.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    50. Re:Can they do this? by ChakatSanddancer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Google maps aren't satellite based. They data from digital map providers, like Navteq, much the same as all other online mapping providers. The data itself usually comes from civil records and the like; relying on satellite and aerial photography would be way too inaccurate.

    51. Re:Can they do this? by readin · · Score: 1

      The Chinese government objects to maps that depict certain regions as being separate sovereign countries, such as Tibet and Taiwan, which the Chinese government holds are both part of China.

      This would be similar to a map being published that showed Alaska as a separate country, or as part of Canada, as opposed to it being part of the USA.


      Almost. For Tibet you have it right. For Taiwan it would be more like if Google were to publish a map showing Cuba to be an independent country rather than a part of the USA.

      --
      I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
    52. Re:Can they do this? by dwater · · Score: 1

      Google doesn't help (~) anyone here (in China) because (~) no one uses it. They (~) all use a Chinese equivalent (baidu).

      (~) Only foreigners use it, and, personally, I find myself using other search engines more and more because Google (or ISP, perhaps) cock it up and present us with Chinese results when we want English.

      --
      Max.
    53. Re:Can they do this? by dwater · · Score: 1

      ...or less 'accurate' for that matter.

      Your point is that it depends on the meta-data they lay on top of the satellite images that is at issue here, right?

      --
      Max.
    54. Re:Can they do this? by dwater · · Score: 1

      man, please, get a history book and start reading until you reach the current date. ....it's pathetic. seriously.

      --
      Max.
    55. Re:Can they do this? by Chief+Wongoller · · Score: 1

      As Google maps are satellite based, how inaccurate can they be?

      The borders go onto the map after the satellite takes the picture. Like, say, the border between China and Tibet.

      rj

      China disputes it's land borders with almost all of it's neighbours, and also disputes ownership of islands in the South China sea with Vietnam, Phillipines, and Malasia. Then of course there's the Taiwan issue.
    56. Re:Can they do this? by iNaya · · Score: 1

      When doing business in a country, you follow their rules, not someone else's rules. In China you censor what the Chinese govt. says to censor, in US, you censor what US govt. says to censor.

      The US has no right telling a Chinese company to censor something in China, and China has to right to tell a US company to censor something in the US. I fail to see the hypocrisy

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    57. Re:Can they do this? by iNaya · · Score: 1
      typo:

      ...and China has to right to tell a US company... should read

      ...and China has no right to tell a US company...
      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    58. Re:Can they do this? by junglee_iitk · · Score: 1

      It is not just about "do no evil". Do you want a map which does not show what your country (and hopefully you) thinks, but instead shows what China wants to show?

      Or is it something you can forgo because of a lot of monetary profit?

      The answer is clear.

    59. Re:Can they do this? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Do you want a map which does not show what your country (and hopefully you) thinks, but instead shows what China wants to show?

      I'm quite used to maps that show what the map company or some government wants them to show. (Maps of Germany, for instance, often showed a number of historic borders - keeping alive the idea that "this place really is part of Germany but we got kicked out of it in some war" for future generations. Map companies often distort roadmap geometry to make topological connections clearer. They also insert fictitious towns in remote places to catch competitors who copy their work rather than going to primary sources - something that can be life threatening for travelers in a remote region such as the US southwestern deserts, etc.)

      I'm sure that Google's management is capable of considering things like how big the Taiwan market is, what effect showing it as part of China would have on customer usage (and ad revenue) both there and in other places (such as the US market), how to feed different maps to different regions, and so on.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    60. Re:Can they do this? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      4 is not enough because of Alaska. 4 is only sufficient if all countries are contiguous.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    61. Re:Can they do this? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      4 is not enough because of Alaska. 4 is only sufficient if all countries are contiguous.

      That is only true if there's a requirement that discontiguous areas of a single country be painted the same color; if they can be different color, they are different countries as far as the algorithm goes. Since we simply want the border to be visible, this requirement can be discarded, so 4 is sufficient.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  3. What does this mean? by RandoX · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Does Google need to pay to use the map that China produced, or to even show the country on a map that anyone produced? Are they licensing the map itself, or the representation of China's IP of the shape and layout of the country itself? If it's the latter, that's just... ill.

    What happens if they just ignore their weirdo regulations and continue to publish the maps? How about just not in China?

    1. Re:What does this mean? by cyfer2000 · · Score: 1

      "So from now on, publishing maps would require approval and (yet another) license from the state survey bureau."

      I know we /.ers don't RTFA, but now it looks we don't read the teeny weeny summary too.

      BTW, it is not "from now on", it is from maybe 50 or 40 years ago. And the Google Chinese map is at http://ditu.google.cn/.

      --
      There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
    2. Re:What does this mean? by FreeUser · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What happens if they just ignore their weirdo regulations and continue to publish the maps? How about just not in China?

      Or Publish China-Politico Maps as a separate option from Free-Tibet Maps. This reminds me of Arab countries cutting Israel out of inflatable globes donated for education (which of course made the inflatable globe uninflatable), except stupider.

      Hopefully google will publish one map inside of China, and a more sensible, complete map for the rest of us.

      Oh yeah, and unobscure Cheney's house please. Me and a truck full of toilet paper have a data with the trees in his front yeard. (kidding of course, but I better say it lest those humour-free bozos actually label me a terrorist threat and have me "rendered" to Gitmo).

      --
      The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
    3. Re:What does this mean? by number17 · · Score: 1

      Refer to Microsoft maps about this. This has always been an issue. You will not get the same maps on http://maps.live.com/ as you will on http://ditu.live.com./ Satellite imagery has been a problem as well with Chinese map sites. Check out http://www.ditu.net/ to see how they got around that.

      Here is a brief explination: http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/12/live-maps-in-china-an-intervie.html
      Was the data allowed to leave China? What other restrictions were placed on the data and its use? [vt] The map data is not allowed to leave the border. Some other countries also have the same regulations (Korea for example). In China, maps can only be provided by the licensed map data providers. Also the on-line publishing maps need to go through a âencryptionâ(TM) process whereby map coordinates are transformed to an unknown coordinate system (not in Lat/Long). This is mainly for the national security reason as far as I know.

    4. Re:What does this mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This could be the natural extension of the way China does things. They have lots of government groups that provide oversight for everything.

    5. Re:What does this mean? by Pathwalker · · Score: 1

      Also the on-line publishing maps need to go through a âencryptionâ(TM) process whereby map coordinates are transformed to an unknown coordinate system (not in Lat/Long).
      So China has their own equivalent of the British National Grid?
    6. Re:What does this mean? by tprime · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, and unobscure Cheney's house please. Me and a truck full of toilet paper have a data with the trees in his front yeard. (kidding of course, but I better say it lest those humour-free bozos actually label me a terrorist threat and have me "rendered" to Gitmo).

      It's ironic that a slashdot poster would slip up and type 'data' instead of 'date'. Maybe more exposure to one than the other.

      --
      http://www.tomandemily.com
  4. nice typo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maps could "reveal national secrete"?

    One thing is for sure: Traffic James won't stand for this.

  5. How in the hell by esocid · · Score: 2, Funny

    Now how am I supposed to get from my house to Shanghai? I need those directions dammit.

    --
    Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
    1. Re:How in the hell by hey! · · Score: 1

      Well, the traditional method is to check into to a cheap boarding house near the wharves in a west coast port like San Francisco, Portland or Seattle. Then you drink yourself into a stupor, and when you wake up you're on you way to Shanghai.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:How in the hell by Digestromath · · Score: 1

      Start digging. Becuase if cartoons have taught me anything, it's that any substantially deep tunnel through the earth's crust will eventually exit out in China.

    3. Re:How in the hell by OldManAndTheC++ · · Score: 1

      Just hitchhike, if your name is Chan.

      --
      Soylent Green is peoplicious!
  6. The new spam by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 0

    Ch1n@ m@pz

  7. Ching Chong Wing Wong by boneclinkz · · Score: 0

    Map reveal ancient Chinee secret?

    1. Re:Ching Chong Wing Wong by qoncept · · Score: 1

      Just wanted to mention that the OP neglected to put "inaccurate maps" in quotes, or at least italicized.

      --
      Whale
    2. Re:Ching Chong Wing Wong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? Inaccurate maps can, indeed, harm national interests and so on. If you hope to imply with scare quotes that China's idea of inaccurate maps is not the same as others, then wouldn't it be simpler just to say that? And italics? WTF would that even mean?

  8. Toy Maps by gazita123 · · Score: 1

    This has been happening for a while, but in different forms.
    I would have to guess that they are talking about maps that are originating in China, and not maps served from outside of the country.
    In the past, maps manufactured for a product such as a toy globe would need to pass similar scrutiny. So, you couldn't get the good exported if the cultural board didn't agree with the map that you were using.

  9. They Just want money by Prysorra · · Score: 0

    Thanks to Mr Satellite, China cannot stop the world from mapping the Sino nation. It can, however, demand a lot of money and make the world think it can.

    1. Re:They Just want money by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Thanks to Mr Satellite, China cannot stop the world from mapping the Sino nation. It can, however, demand a lot of money and make the world think it can.

      Well, China can always shoot down your sattellite, but that might be construed as a hostile act.

      If Google has any actual people in China, those people could be subject to arrest or intimidation if they don't comply.

      Remember, in China (and, increasingly more places), the truth is what they tell you it is. Their view on how information is handed out is a little different than ours.

      Cheers
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:They Just want money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about? This is about homeland security! China has every right to defend itself from maps that aid and abet the terrorists. In this post-9/11 world everyone needs these extra protections. We should all to do our part in the War on Terror.

    3. Re:They Just want money by dwater · · Score: 1

      Remember, in China (and, increasingly more places), the truth is what they tell you it is. Isn't that the case *everywhere*?
      --
      Max.
  10. Fort Knox on U. S. maps by dpbsmith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wish I had tracked this a little more closely, but for a couple of decades ordinary maps of Kentucky in atlases like Rand McNally and Hammond did not indicate the existence of the city of Fort Knox, despite showing far smaller cities.

    It was actually a little bit exciting to see the map in Ian Fleming's novel Goldfinger, showing the United States Bullion Depository located at the intersection of Bullion Boulevard and Gold Vault Road. In those days before Wikipedia and Google Earth, this gave at least one reader frisson of forbidden information. I wondered whether Fleming would be the target of any mysterious reprisals for publishing it.

    1. Re:Fort Knox on U. S. maps by SimonGhent · · Score: 1

      at the intersection of Bullion Boulevard and Gold Vault Road


      What an excellent place to put your bullion reserve, who would ever look there?

      Reminds me of the brown sign (tourist information sign in the UK) to the "Secret Bunker"
      --
      simon
    2. Re:Fort Knox on U. S. maps by _Shad0w_ · · Score: 1

      BT Tower (formerly the Post Office Tower) was classified as an official secret until the mid-90s, which means it didn't appear on any maps.

      --

      Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.

    3. Re:Fort Knox on U. S. maps by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      Eh. ``...and coming up on your right... Nothing.'' ---the simpsons movie.

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    4. Re:Fort Knox on U. S. maps by Tired+and+Emotional · · Score: 1

      They also suppress the location of Frostbite Falls. All we know is its said to be in Minnesota. Guess they don't want anyone to know where two of their best agents live when they are not off making the world safe for punnery.

      --
      Squirrel!
    5. Re:Fort Knox on U. S. maps by _Shad0w_ · · Score: 1

      It was rather silly. It's a little hard to miss if you're in London - just do a Google Images search on "BT Tower" and you'll get plenty of photos of it in context.

      I think if you look at a map of London and look at the southern end of Vauxhall Bridge you'll see a white square on the map - there's actually a building there; it's the joint HQ of MI5 and MI6. Thing is, everyone knows what it is and where it is. Hell they even got permission to use it as the backdrop in one of the James Bond films.

      I think GCHQ is kind of marked on the map - in as much that there's a big white bit in the west of Chelthenham with a donut shape on it, which is the main building. GCHQ's homepage even has maps to show you where they are.

      --

      Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.

  11. Consumer Interests by totallyarb · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's nice to see that the Chinese Government have learned from their western counterparts that anything you do in the name of "protecting consumer interests" becomes allowable. Their next lesson: "think of the children".

    Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious, but it looks to me like the intention of this is to prevent Chinese citizens from seeing any map that recognises Taiwan or Tibet. Any one remember Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri? - Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.

    Sad, but unsurprising.

    --
    -- Note to Mods: There is a good reason there's no "-1 Disagree" option. --
  12. Maps have propaganda value by MikeRT · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If people get used to seeing "The Republic of Taiwan" instead of the "Shitty, Upstart Province of Formosa (or China's name for it) that Dares Act Independent," then that would give people the expectation that Taiwan is a sovereign country. If China goes to war, then it's not to reclaim a break-away province that has been acting like a renegade, but rather just another conquest like Iraq on Kuwait.

    Maps do have real political value behind them. There are a lot of people in Mexico that would love to see the reconquista of the Southwest, and the Mexican government has said in the past that expanding its territory back into the original territory is its goal. That's actually why the map that Absolut did in their advertising campaign was so controversial in the U.S.

    1. Re:Maps have propaganda value by e_hu_man · · Score: 2, Funny

      and judging by the population in the southwest, it appears mexico is winning.

    2. Re:Maps have propaganda value by hey! · · Score: 1

      You are 100% spot on.

      While there is some issue of protecting state secrets, this is not really where China goes off the deep end into paranoia. It's all about "harming ... national dignity, and ... bad political influence." It's about fighting the "splittists".

      The Chinese attitude towards this is arguably paranoid. This reminds me of the overreaction of the Chinese regime to the Olympic torch protests. In the West, protests happen all the time; they are completely normal and expected, and don't change anything unless somebody in power acts rashly. Arguably China's hypersensitive reaction to the protests did far more damage to Chinese national interests than the protests possibly could.

      This is another case. The Chinese people overwhelmingly support Chinese territorial claims to Tibet and Taiwan. True, this is due to propaganda. But why bother? It's hard to see what in hard economic or geopolitical terms these claims do for China, other than complicate its relationships with its economic and strategic partners.

      Imagine, for a moment, that the American Revolution was thoroughly discredited with the American people and the American government. Some would say that's already happened. What would the enduring legacy of the Revolution be? The only thing left would be American territorial sovereignty. And it's not exactly accidental that Southern politicians blocked US ratification of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide for thirty eight years. The South was the only territory of the United States ever to be occupied, albeit by other Americans.

      Now think about the Chinese Communist Party, which won the Chinese Civil War largely because the Nationalists were perceived as ineffective in resisting Japanese violations of Chinese sovereignty. In truth, the Communists weren't any more effective, but they got credit for waging a guerrilla war against the Japanese.

      The Chinese Communist party has turned its back on every single goal that the veterans of the Long March fought for, except one: Chinese territorial sovereignty. In reality, the Communist Party is ideologically indistinguishable from the Kuomintang they defeated in 1949. There's only one difference: foreigners have never meddled in China on their watch.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:Maps have propaganda value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realise don't you that Taiwan's name for itself is not the "Republic of Taiwan", but rather the "Republic of China"? The situation is nothing like Iraq and Kuwait. The China/Taiwan issue is a civil war that wasn't allowed to end, and with the losing side retreating to Taiwan under the protection of the US navy. For a long time after world war two, it was officials from the Taiwanese government who represented China at the United Nations, until people realised that was silly. Have a look at maps of the "Republic of China" (i.e. those produced by the Taiwanese Government) and you'll see they include all of mainland China (as well as Tibet). A majority of people in Taiwan also see themselves as Chinese - and would happily reunite with the mainland if it wasn't for the current Chinese government.

    4. Re:Maps have propaganda value by iNaya · · Score: 1

      Chinese have never exerted rule over Taiwan until the KMT conquered it after losing the civil war. Before then, it was inhabited by natives, who were not Chinese in any way. Of course, now, most people in Taiwan have Chinese blood. But before the KMT, no Chinese government could say they ruled over Taiwan.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
  13. Spot on by Deadstick · · Score: 3, Insightful
    That means Google, Yahoo, etc., need to remove China from the map

    A much better option than going along with what China wants them to publish. Sometimes the best course is to let jackasses make jackasses of themselves.

    rj

    1. Re:Spot on by blamanj · · Score: 1

      It's even simpler. Publish China's maps when the request comes from China, publish non-Chinese maps the rest of the time.

    2. Re:Spot on by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      So how does removing a region from a map work? Won't the area have an outline defined by the neighbouring nations and geographical formations identical to that which is covered by China? Tibet will still be there; it'll just have a big black blob designated "Rescinded" next to it, instead of a geographical representation of China. The blob will just so happen to cover China's area of influence, though.
       

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    3. Re:Spot on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but what shape would the whole be?

    4. Re:Spot on by iNaya · · Score: 1

      Just deform the rest of the world. Sure the places nearby China will look the wrong shape... but at least places on the other side of the world will be more or less accurate. Sure Japan will look like a left angle brace, but hey, it'd sure look cool.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
  14. national niggers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    even more priceless! oh, learn to spell "secret" ya moron.

    1. Re:national niggers by MrMarket · · Score: 1

      dude, what's with the N bomb? was that necessary?

  15. the psychosis of pride by circletimessquare · · Score: 0, Troll

    national sovereignty and religious superiority is an illusion. there is nothing unique about being russian, or chinese, or muslim, or christian, or american, or any nationality or religious identity. of course, blind nationalist pride and religious bigotry are founded on the bedrock concept of exclusivity, superiority

    and what they reap form that falsehood is violence, hated, and war

    this world is a long way from peace. to get there, billions more must die in the name of moronic tribal pride before people learn the price they pay simply for believing they are superior because of their nationality or religion

    so go china go: you are inculcating your rise on the world stage in the same way germany and japan did, the same way the usa and the uk did. your neighbors should pay attention, and batten the hatches. when, not if, china experiences an economic downturn, i fully expect a demagogue to rise to power and reap the "benefits" of the rabid nationalism china breeds on purpose to deflect criticism away from china

    mark these words: the sense of religious suepriority they breed in riyadh and the sense of nationalist superiority they breed in beijing does not fade away, and it demands a pound of flesh

    the psychosis of pride. it is blind, and leads to violence. and it is inevitable

    only bloodshed will come of chinese nationalism and arab religious bigotry

    i am 100% certainty on that. it does not fade away on its own. it is venom that once made, must claim lives

    until the nationalists and religious bigots lose their influence. and that only comes when the common chinese and the common arab see the price they pay for their blind pride in the damage they do to themselves and their neighbors for thinking themselves so superior

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:the psychosis of pride by rhakka · · Score: 1

      this starts off as the most insightful thing I've ever seen you post, focusing on humanity in general. what's with the end focusing, again, on chinese and arabs?

    2. Re:the psychosis of pride by tzjanii · · Score: 1

      I don't know who the hell modded you down as a troll, as your post is possibly the one most deserving of Insightful that I have ever seen.

      --
      Slashdot is a pretty cool guy eh posts dupes and doesn't afraid of anything.
  16. Real concern == Taiwan by surmak · · Score: 2, Informative
    When China is talking about sovereignty, and "national interests and national dignity" they are really talking about having Taiwan (and maybe Tibet as well) labeled as independent nations.

    Basically, they do not want any maps to be available on the Net to their own people (or anyone else, but that is impossible) which contain such counter-revolutionary ideas such as an independent Taiwan(even if only de facto).

    1. Re:Real concern == Taiwan by russotto · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Basically, they do not want any maps to be available on the Net to their own people (or anyone else, but that is impossible) which contain such counter-revolutionary ideas such as an independent Taiwan(even if only de facto).


      No problem. Just show all of China as one country... with the capital in Taipei.
    2. Re:Real concern == Taiwan by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      It amazes me how far some people are willing to go to smite China for their flaws, by doing something worse.

      Whether Taiwan is part of China is a political controversy, but having the "Chinese capital" in Taipei is an outright lie.

      I guess it makes you feel smart and satisfied though. I guess anything that makes you feel happy goes.

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    3. Re:Real concern == Taiwan by russotto · · Score: 1

      It amazes me how far some people are willing to go to smite China for their flaws, by doing something worse.

      Whether Taiwan is part of China is a political controversy, but having the "Chinese capital" in Taipei is an outright lie.


      Struck a nerve, did I? I thought there was no political controversy on whether Taiwan was part of China; both sides agree that it is, and then act as if it were not. Now, as to which government is the proper and legitimate sovereign of all of China -- that's where there's some controversy.
    4. Re:Real concern == Taiwan by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      No, actually the issues are a bit more complicated.

      The PRC's stance is that Taiwan is part of China, and of course the capital in Beijing.
      The Taiwan pro-independence people are saying Taiwan is not part of China, and is an independent country called "Taiwan".
      The KMT's current stance is basically, "look, can't we just get along?" Around 30 years ago their stance was that China's capital was in Taipei, I think that sort of dogma lasted a while after that, but it's not accepted by any mainstream groups. And even back then, Taipei was only the temporary capital and the idea was to recapture the mainland.

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
  17. Caitlin Upton by BobVila · · Score: 0

    OMG, Miss South Carolina was right. It wasn't an idiotic response, it was a prophecy.

  18. pay attention, you! by rodentia · · Score: 0, Troll

    We should pay attention. This bossy, little China is the model for the new Merka the Republicrats have in mind for us.

    All the joys of capitalism without the pain of real competetion. Recipe for disaster it is.

    --
    illegitimii non ingravare
  19. And google can move abroad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are, after all, an INTERNET COMPANY.

    But I guess that if they did this and moved to, say, sweden, then the US gov would just get one of the ministers in sweden to lean on their mate in the police force and raid their offices there.

    And thereby show that the US IS as bad as china and that, yes, other countries DO tell other companies what to do with online maps.

    1. Re:And google can move abroad by gnick · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...the US gov would just get one of the ministers in sweden to lean on their mate in the police force and raid their offices there.

      And thereby show that the US IS as bad as china and that, yes, other countries DO tell other companies what to do with online maps. The US government has problems, but can somebody explain to me why stories that have absolutely nothing to do with the US government still attract US gov flames? This story is about China's oppression and mentions the fact that it may have an impact on a couple of US businesses. How is the US government involved any more than Holland's or France's? Yes, most of Google's censored map areas are in the US, but other countries have made similar requests and had them granted. I'm sure China could too. But that's a whole different ball game than requiring licensing and approval for posting maps...

      Ugh - Maybe I should just filter out ACs...
      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    2. Re:And google can move abroad by enjahova · · Score: 1

      While I understand your sentiment, there was a Congressional hearing and at least one bill about this very situation of US businesses abiding by foreign laws. Specifically internet companies in China.

      An essential question here is how does national law work with internet companies who are global in reach. How do we deal with uplifting people in totalitarian regimes? Do we let them fend for themselves, or do we give them the same tools which have boosted our freedom? Even if they are crippled by local laws.

      --
      "how can they call it a MINE if everything here is THEIRS?!?!" -Straight Jacket
    3. Re:And google can move abroad by gnick · · Score: 1

      Yes there was. But, if we're talking about the same bill, the US was taking steps to penalize US companies for aiding these oppressive regimes. Looking at those kind of measures is exciting and should be applauded, not flamed.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    4. Re:And google can move abroad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder if they've really thought this through. If you go to Google and say "We need you to black out this area.", is that not the same as saying "We have something we want to hide, and you can find it right here." If I were an enemy, I think I would be then be using Google as a map telling me exactly where to concentrate my spying efforts.

    5. Re:And google can move abroad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The relevance is that us US'ians make a big stink about how opressive the Chinese are, while the US gov't is at least as opressive about other topics.

    6. Re:And google can move abroad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the US gov't is at least as opressive about other topics. Please cite any topic that the US kills people for when they yell about it in the streets.
    7. Re:And google can move abroad by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      The US government has problems, but can somebody explain to me why stories that have absolutely nothing to do with the US government still attract US gov flames? This story is about China's oppression and mentions the fact that it may have an impact on a couple of US businesses. How is the US government involved any more than Holland's or France's? Simple: Google is a US company for starters, so at the end of the day it is held to US laws, no matter where else it operates in the world.

      Secondly, no matter whether the world likes it or not, ANY international politics have to do with the US government. With great power comes great responsibility. Pair this up with the laws some politicians have been trying to pass in the US (the ones that make it illegal for US-based international corporations to break US law in other countries of operation), and it has everything to do with the US government.

      All of this was already conflated in the original topic; if it had just been about nameless companies needing a license to post maps of Chinese-held territories in order for them to operate in China, THEN this would have nothing (or not much) to do with the US government.
    8. Re:And google can move abroad by iNaya · · Score: 1

      Because it's easy, fun, and safe to point the finger at the U.S. A big fat ripe target that doesn't protest around the whole world when their feelings get hurt.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    9. Re:And google can move abroad by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

      How is the US government involved any more than Holland's or France's? By (in popular view) being more similar to the Chinese than the Dutch and French are (for some values of populus).
  20. Controlling the truth by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Remember, in China (and, increasingly more places), the truth is what they tell you it is. Their view on how information is handed out is a little different than ours... Actually, the trend is going the other way. Governments have always tried to control the truth. What is changing is our knowledge of their actions.
    They aren't doing it more, they're just being caught doing it more often.
  21. English language article from CCTV by GeorgeNorton · · Score: 3, Informative

    CCTV's English language service ran this article a couple of months back: http://www.cctv.com/english/20080410/101774.shtml

    1. Re:English language article from CCTV by IBBoard · · Score: 1

      Ah, but you can't trust that article. After all, didn't you read that CCTV doesn't work. That's why we had to wait for this article ;)

  22. They want it both ways by denis-The-menace · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They want to kinda wall themselves from the world but still be part of it.

    If we had governments representing people, then the UN would would have told China to where to go a long time ago and China would have become something Cuba could laugh at.

    But instead, we have governments representing corporations. (we elect them but the corps control them) To ignore china because of their fascist ways is not good for the corporate bottom line and the CEO's annual bonus. So the corps will bend and jump through hoops until they control China as well. When that happens, we will have become Star Trek's Ferengi race. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferengi)

    --
    Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
    1. Re:They want it both ways by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Oh it's all a large conspiracy. And by whom ? Let's see the jews, weapons merchants ... no ... capitalists, corporations AHA.

      Obviously the corporations remain nameless and there are no people involved, at all. Once I point out the people you will start decrying their evil intentions and your purity. Great. We'll get nowhere.

      How about instead of blaming "corporations"* (why not "the devil" ? I like the devil. I think we should mention him more often) we start looking at the reality.

      China has resources we need if we are to have the standard if living "we" want. (and by we I mean first and foremost you and myself)

      So here's the cost of "isolating" china : about 60% of your paycheck. If you also want to isolate the (much) worse middle eastern islamic dictatorships, we're talking 85-90% of your paycheck.

      So let's hear your argument. You don't need to blame "corporations", they can do nothing about price. There's a limited supply of goods, and nothing can extend that supply except free enterprise. Currently said free enterprise has allowed U.S. citizens to increase their paychecks about twentyfold of what they would otherwise be.

      So, let me ask you : why should I drop half my paycheck (isolating 1 government), or 19/20th of it (isolating all govts that deny human rights for islamic or other reasons).

      Would you yourself be prepared to do so ?

      The result of walling of China on the U.S. (or western) end would be massive inflation until your paycheck is worth about 60% of what it is now.

      Oh and please explain to a lot of people who live at less than 200% sustinence level (not so much in the US, but more than enough elsewhere), why they should die for your "right to be free" ? Are you even prepared to die for it yourself ? Are you, say, a reservist ?

      Actions, such as isolating China, have consequences. Clearly the best course of action, judged by the likely results, is *not* isolating china. Judging an action by it's likely consequences is a thorougly christian concept, which is also the only correct way to do it, you may or may not like this, but the real world doesn't care.

      China wouldn't collapse if left to it's own devices. More likely it would do what it did in the past under such circumstances : attack.

      * let's take the example of oil companies. Shell, Exxonmobil, ... the works. Together they made profits of about $80 billion on about 75 million bbl/day in 2007. This means that a 100% tax on those companies, precluding any investment and creating utter chaos in even the near term, could only "lower" the oil price by ... ... 2.9 dollars/barrel or 2% (you know the price hike of the last, what, 24 hours ?), which would buy us 2 days of extra oil supply ? I doubt even that. These companies are not to blame for oil problems.

    2. Re:They want it both ways by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "China has resources we need if we are to have the standard if living "we" want. (and by we I mean first and foremost you and myself)"

      Actually, they (along with India) are rapidly sucking up resources we need...mainly, oil.

      We are having to compete with them on this, and I think this will soon get nasty. China holds so much of our debt (US), that they will likely start using this as leverage against us in oil concerns.

      Frankly, I'd like to get off China's 'teet' with regard to the resources I think you're alluding to...cheap labor.

      I'm quite worried about not having any more manufacturing in the US any longer. That is a national security issues if I've ever heard one. It matters not if we have all the energy needs we need...if our suppliers of goods cut us off...we're toast.

      As another poster mentioned...I'd gladly start paying 10%-20% more for most of my goods if they were made/raised in the US. I'd much rather pay a bit of a premium to support the local manufacturer and local food grower. I'm lucky that I live in LA, where we get such an abundance of fresh seafood from the Gulf....but, when I travel the US, I'm shocked to see how muchh seafood and other animal protein foods are coming in from China, or other countries, rather than our own, where we often have higher quality, and regulations on anti-biotics, drugs and pesticides that can be used.

      But...that's a whole other rant....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    3. Re:They want it both ways by JrOldPhart · · Score: 1

      I'd gladly start paying 10%-20% more for most of my goods if they were made/raised in the US.
      The problem with that is that it would cost much more to make the same products in the US. Unless you are volunteering yourself and some others to work on a production line for only 10-20% more than a Chinese worker While you still pay that 10-20% more for finished goods.

      The general population still is not accepting that it is a global economy weather or not anyone likes it.
      --
      Nothing is foolproof, fools are too ingenious. - Murphy
    4. Re:They want it both ways by JrOldPhart · · Score: 1

      weather or not
      whether or not

      Dang clicker.
      --
      Nothing is foolproof, fools are too ingenious. - Murphy
    5. Re:They want it both ways by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "The problem with that is that it would cost much more to make the same products in the US. Unless you are volunteering yourself and some others to work on a production line for only 10-20% more than a Chinese worker While you still pay that 10-20% more for finished goods. "

      You know....we've got plenty of people that are already currently being subsidized by the govt. and not working...those on welfare. Let's take the able bodied amongst them...put them to work for lower wages in US manufacturing. If they won't work....cut off the welfare subsidy. It is a place to start....

      There are plenty of people that need manual work in the US...just gotta get them off their lazy asses and quit giving them handouts that require no work at all. There's part of the workforce you need right there.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    6. Re:They want it both ways by JrOldPhart · · Score: 1

      those on welfare. Let's take the able bodied amongst them...put them to work for lower wages
      Hmmm, I like that idea. Make them work for their welfare, 40 hours of work per week = normal welfare check.
      That is probably still above the average 600RMB (~$80) per month the Chinese get but it is a start.

      Then the Libs would insist that they are not getting minimum wage. (Which is what sent manufacturing off-shore in the first place).

      Eliminate minimum wage or make it equal to the lowest paid off-shore worker, force those on welfare to perform work for their support.
      But then that would take a revolution in the good ol' US of A.
      - Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Beat him with a fish he goes away and doesn't bother you again.
      --
      Nothing is foolproof, fools are too ingenious. - Murphy
    7. Re:They want it both ways by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you think it's bad in the US, then don't look at EU countries. It can be much worse.

      Minimum wage in EU is about 15$/hour I believe. Anything that is worth less than that does ... not get done.

    8. Re:They want it both ways by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Then the Libs would insist that they are not getting minimum wage. (Which is what sent manufacturing off-shore in the first place). False. Raising the minimum wage has generally not increased unemployment.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    9. Re:They want it both ways by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      You know....we've got plenty of people that are already currently being subsidized by the govt. and not working...those on welfare. [...] There are plenty of people that need manual work in the US...just gotta get them off their lazy asses and quit giving them handouts that require no work at all. Your comment shows a shocking ignorance of how welfare actually works in the US. You generally can't collect it without looking for a job, you generally have to have a family to support, and even when you can collect anything, it's only for a limited time.

      Reagan's "welfare queens" were a myth even when he was in office; there's no excuse for still believing in them today.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    10. Re:They want it both ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eliminate minimum wage or make it equal to the lowest paid off-shore worker, force those on welfare to perform work for their support.

      And what about the small practical detail that the lowest paid off-shore worker can survive at a basic level in their country, where the cost of living is cheap, but a US worker on the same wage cannot survive (basic accom, food, fuel being much more expensive)?

      Then the Libs would insist that they are not getting minimum wage. (Which is what sent manufacturing off-shore in the first place).

      Are you seriously saying that the 'lost' US manufacturing jobs only paid minimum wage? The same as working in a burger bar or waiting tables or something like that? You're seriously deluded.

    11. Re:They want it both ways by JrOldPhart · · Score: 1

      Wrong.
      I did not mention unemployment, you changed the subject. As I stated, Manufacturing has moved off-shore strictly to get competitive low labor rates.
      Even then, You are only half right. Now the unskilled work in the service sector. Like having a McJob.

      --
      Nothing is foolproof, fools are too ingenious. - Murphy
    12. Re:They want it both ways by JrOldPhart · · Score: 1

      Ya think that maybe the cost of living follows the minimum wage, rather than the other way around?

      I have heard the argument that you cant make it on minimum wage, Duuh, it is minimum get with it and make yourself more valuable. Those folks in Mexico or China are willing to. If a store owner is forced to pay the floor sweeper more, he has to charge more for his product. The floor sweeper will never be able to own a house, 55" TV, an F150, and a Blackberry... So do the tax payers have some responsibility to supply those desires? Write a law that says that someone else has to pay more. Why not simply write a law that says that everyone gets a minimum stipend of lets say $10/hr just for being an American? There is a real minimum wage. We can take that money from Taxes. Of course we will have to raise taxes.

      Manufacturing jobs ranged from minimum for unskilled labor. As the skill levels increased the pay also did. As it does in China today and Singapore and Malaysia in the 80's and 90's. Unions also helped to drive away jobs. But then unions are quite similar to legislated minimum wages.

      Deluded, only with the narrow definition you applied.

      --
      Nothing is foolproof, fools are too ingenious. - Murphy
    13. Re:They want it both ways by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Your comment shows a shocking ignorance of how welfare actually works in the US. You generally can't collect it without looking for a job, you generally have to have a family to support, and even when you can collect anything, it's only for a limited time."

      Then obviously you have not seen with your own eyes how the welfare system works. I have, in the slums of NOLA as only one example, but, a very eye opening one. Have to be looking for a job? Yeah, that takes a word of mouth answer weekend of "yes". No other proof required.

      You can look in the doors of the housing projects when driving by on cooler nights...and see them loaded with people doing nothing but watching tvs (some pretty big)....and they are hanging out in the projects all day....they are being subsidized for hanging out and watching tv, and not working.

      I've known people personally on the 'system'....and I've seen how they game it. If you know how to work the system...you can stay on the dole for a long, long time....one of the first things you do is....don't marry the father. Sure, he may still be around, live with and help support the family, but, officially she is a single female and gets funds for that.

      I know there were some rules put forth to reform things, and some of them worked, but, nothing like they are touted to be. If you believe they worked as you stated, then you have never seen how it really works first hand.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    14. Re:They want it both ways by denis-The-menace · · Score: 1

      You haven't seen "The corporation" and it shows

      --
      Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
    15. Re:They want it both ways by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      You can look in the doors of the housing projects when driving by on cooler nights...and see them loaded with people doing nothing but watching tvs (some pretty big)....and they are hanging out in the projects all day....they are being subsidized for hanging out and watching tv, and not working. And what do you think they would be doing otherwise?

      If someone is determined not to add any value to society, you can't force them. Put them out on the streets and they'll either die or they'll turn to violent crime to survive. Would you rather spend ten times as much to keep them locked up?
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    16. Re:They want it both ways by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      As I stated, Manufacturing has moved off-shore strictly to get competitive low labor rates. That's not because of the minimum wage, though: factory workers typically make more than minimum wage anyway.

      Even then, You are only half right. Now the unskilled work in the service sector. Like having a McJob. Yup. Those are the people who benefit from a higher minimum wage.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    17. Re:They want it both ways by JrOldPhart · · Score: 1

      Yup. Those are the people who benefit from a higher minimum wage.
      How do they benefit? Lets look at a simplified business model: If I owned a chain of burger joints (100). The sandwich makings and overhead cost me $0.20/sandwich, I average say 1000 per hour of sales(cost:$200). I have One cook and one window person at each store they each make $5.00/hr (cost:$1000/hr) for a total of $1200/hr or $1.20 per burger.

      Now the dear people decide to help the down-trodden and force me to pay my help $10/hr, So that they can have more money to spend.

      Now my labor went to $2000/hr or per 100 burgers making the cost of each burger jump to $2.20.

      At $5 per hour my employees were getting about 4.1 burgers per hour. At $10 they are getting 4.5 burgers per hour. BUT, That $0.20 raw material cost did not include the increase in cost due to the meat processing plant increase nor the increase in price from the bakery. (among all of the other increases due to a bump at the bottom)

      I'll bet that with real world numbers it is a net loss specially after you consider that if all of the "grunts" get a raise, the stock holders will want to see an increase in profits.

      Bottom line, Increase the minimum wage increases inflation and frustration in life and the number of dollars you have to pay for EVERYTHING.
      --
      Nothing is foolproof, fools are too ingenious. - Murphy
    18. Re:They want it both ways by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      I'll bet that with real world numbers it is a net loss specially after you consider that if all of the "grunts" get a raise, the stock holders will want to see an increase in profits. Well, all I can say is your speculation doesn't line up with what actually happens when the minimum wage is raised. This isn't some fantasy scenario: the minimum wage has been increased and has not been a net loss. Quality of life goes up, not down.

      One reason is that a surprising number of jobs already pay higher than minimum wage. Raising the minimum wage doesn't increase the cost of all labor, only the most unskilled labor.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    19. Re:They want it both ways by JrOldPhart · · Score: 1

      I said raising minimum wage increases the cost of all products (stuff) Not labor. When the government forces my boss to pay the bottom tier of labor more money, I do not get a raise. I effectively get a cut. My buying power goes down.

      In the mid 1960's I worked for McDonalds. I was paid the minimum of $1.35/hr. Since a burger at that time was $0.19 that comes out to about 7.1 burgers per hour. Today, if memory serves, minimum is $5.40 and a regular burger is about 0.99. That comes out to 5.4 purgers per hour. I admit I am not sure of the current price since I do not eat there more than once or twice a year.

      So my simplified scenario does line up with the reality of the last about 40 years. It simply does not fit into your desired world view.

      The hope of liberals as they force an increase is that the difference will be made up from the paychecks or bank accounts of the rich owners or top management. The reality is that the product pricess are increased to cover the increase in the costs. Thus the increase is paid by the consumer. Business does not pay for anything. Consumers pay for everything. A business that buys parts for their product does not consume, they are resellers.

      - TANSTAAFL : There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch -R.A.H.

      --
      Nothing is foolproof, fools are too ingenious. - Murphy
    20. Re:They want it both ways by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      In the mid 1960's I worked for McDonalds. I was paid the minimum of $1.35/hr. Since a burger at that time was $0.19 that comes out to about 7.1 burgers per hour. Today, if memory serves, minimum is $5.40 and a regular burger is about 0.99. That comes out to 5.4 purgers per hour. You're thinking of the federal minimum wage (which is $5.85, actually) - but most states have a higher minimum wage. For example, in Washington, the minimum wage buys more than 8 burgers per hour.

      In any case, the difference between the federal minimum wage then and now (in terms of burgers/hour) only illustrates that the federal minimum wage has failed to keep up with inflation. That's why so many states have passed higher minimum wage laws.

      The reality is that the product pricess are increased to cover the increase in the costs. Thus the increase is paid by the consumer. Right, but the set of consumers is not the same as the set of minimum-wage earners. The burger flippers' pay raise comes from the pockets of everyone who buys burgers. Obviously it's not a win for everyone, but it's not supposed to be.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  23. Re:Can they do this?--OH YEAH THEY CAN. by MarkvW · · Score: 1

    A country can even shoot people for making maps disapproved by the ruling regime (if they can obtain jurisdiction). That's sovereignty for you! How far will Google go in its quest for the almighty dollar (or yuan, or whatever)?

  24. remove them by wardk · · Score: 1

    remove them from all globes too, have them made in China

  25. It's just you can't publish in China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This doesn't stop an American map maker from including China on the map.

    What it does do, is to stop anyone publishing such a map in China.

  26. A better article by Tungbo · · Score: 4, Informative

    This link has more info: http://tech.sina.com.cn/i/2008-03-25/21362099485.shtml

    Google licensed PRC geographic data from Beijing United Map Technology Limited (just a guess translation) who has a electronic map service license from the National Survey Department (apparently the prime driver for the regulatory initiative). The reporter speculates that the regulatory initiave may be related to the competition between Beijing United Map Technology with its duopoly competitior, Beijing Map Advanced Technology.

    The official reasons given by the Deputy Director of the National Survey Department are:
    1. Inaccurate boundaries show parts of PRC as soil of other nations
    2. Omission of south sea islands (disputed islands with Japan)
    3. Omission of Taiwan or labeling of Taiwan as independent
    4. Inaccurate boundaries between administrative regions and dissemination of important geographical data
    5. Annotation of sensitive, nonpublic, or national security information on the map.
              (Think of Dick Cheney's house...)

    Part of Google's objection is that there are no clear laws pertaining to online maps in PRC. Thus the regulators are not acting on a solid foundation. There remains wide spread confuson on what exactly is required by these regulations.

    As for Google's choices, they are actively protesting this initiative. But unless they prevail or pull out of China they would be subjected to their laws and likely to adapt to publishing only authorized versions of PRC maps.

    1. Re:A better article by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 3, Funny

      Your summary, which explains how this is a dispute about the use of data which was provided by a Chinese source, is much too focused and accurate, and prevents people from the ceremonial outrage which constitute their 2 minute hate against China. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    2. Re:A better article by pla · · Score: 1

      But unless they prevail or pull out of China they would be subjected to their laws and likely to adapt to publishing only authorized versions of PRC maps.

      ...Which works well - Right up until Tibet, Taiwan, and Japan pass similar laws.

      IMO, if this decision came down to my personal call, I'd just erase any disputed territories from the map completely. Countries want to play games, they can play it over places no one can find on the map.

  27. Keep forbidding content, please by Thanshin · · Score: 2, Funny

    It will push the artificial intelligence field of image recognition to unthinkable heights.

    Blind people around the world should praise China for their invaluable help.

    If they can find China in any way of map representation it should surely be easy to discern among different types of porn.

    From a purely algorithmical point of view, of course.

  28. Why took them so long? by Corson · · Score: 1

    I am surprised it took them so long to make this decision and I expect other countries to do the same. Maps have historically been used by explorers and the military so why would any country accept that potential enemies gain access to that kind of information?

    1. Re:Why took them so long? by Machine9 · · Score: 1

      You misunderstand, we already have the information; China just doesn't want it to be available in china.

  29. I can see the bookmarks now... by rarity · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "On this spot in 1989, nothing happened".

  30. Argentinan case by chord.wav · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Argentina streets aren't in Google maps either. I've heard tons of versions regarding why practically every southamerican country but Argentina don't show up there. Including, and this one came from a Google employee, that the military/goverment didn't want to give "sensitive" information (Read: The bribe wasn't good enough). So they were looking for third party mapping companies to buy the data from (Read: Unhappy employee)

    MSN Live has streets but it seems they've used very old data as they show streets that don't exist so don't rely on them too much.

    Don't know about Yahoo.

  31. There is no border between China and Tibet. by wiredog · · Score: 2, Funny

    Tibet has always been part of China. Just as Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

    1. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      How ironic, given that there really is no border. Tibet is not an occupied country, it was conquered and annexed. Thus, no border. Anyone who insists there is a border is the one suffering from a 1984-like denial of reality.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    2. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by wilder_card · · Score: 1

      And I was all set to flame you. Nice post. In fact, the name "Tibet" is an invention of the capitalist imperialists.

    3. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      And Taiwan?

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    4. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Taiwan is obviously a de facto sovereign state. Beijing only exerts influence over Taiwain in the same way that they exert influence over any other country, i.e. by diplomacy, trade, and warfare. Thus the nutbars in the PRC government which insist that Taiwain is part of their country are just as deluded as anyone who claims that a border exists between Tibet and China.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    5. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Just checking :)

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    6. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      Very good. I do my best to actually see things as they are, rather than as I want them to be, no matter how annoying the world can be sometimes.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    7. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by dwater · · Score: 1

      Taiwan *is* part of China, of course. Just because the US stuck their noses in, YET AGAIN, where it wasn't wanted or needed and allowed the ROC to escape from the PRC doesn't suddenly change the ownership of the island ... or are you saying the US has the right to chop bits off one country in order to create another country?

      --
      Max.
    8. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      How it happened is completely irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that Taiwan does not fall under PRC jurisdiction in any way and is therefore a separate country.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    9. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by dwater · · Score: 1

      On the contrary.

      Just because Taiwan does not fall under PRC jurisdiction is irrelevant to whether or not Taiwan is part of China. IIRC, at least in a theoretical sense, the ROC still claim ownership of mainland China.

      Of course how it happened is relevant. That *defines* the disagreement. It is because the US allowed the ROC to maintain some control over some of China that this issue is even here.

      Perhaps it is best considered that China is still in civil war, albeit in a long-term "stand off". I doubt PRC will do anything (in a military way) to enforce its authority over all of China. More likely the PRC will become so economically powerful that the Taiwan residents will vote to re-establish significant links with the PRC - I hear indications of that from time to time. They are all Chinese after all, and a lot of them have parts of their families on the mainland.

      --
      Max.
    10. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      I still don't see why it matters how it happened.

      The patch of land we call "Taiwan" is ruled by one government. The patch of land we call "PRC" is ruled by a different government. Therefore, one is not part of the other. These are the facts and reality of the situation, and do not change just because you're upset at the US or whatever problems you have with it. You can say that Taiwan ought to be part of China, or it's historically been part of China, or that it's culturally part of China, but in a political sense they are two separate countries, simple fact.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    11. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by dwater · · Score: 1

      It's because China includes Taiwan, no matter who governs it. It's as simple as that.

      It may not have the practical implications you seem to yearn for, but there is plenty of reasons to consider it true and they are all based on history, and fairly recent history too.

      --
      Max.
    12. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by iNaya · · Score: 1

      Tell me one country who's borders have remained constant over the last 500 years. I don't give a flying f*ck who owns what. If people want to be independent, let them.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    13. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by kelnos · · Score: 1

      It's because China includes Taiwan, no matter who governs it. It's as simple as that. Sorry, but that makes no sense. The defining characteristic of sovereignty is that of government. China is China, and Taiwan is Taiwan, regardless of what the unificationists would like to believe. They have completely separate governments. Just because the PRC claims the ROC as its own (and, amusingly, the ROC also claims mainland China as its own), that doesn't change the facts.

      It may not have the practical implications you seem to yearn for, but there is plenty of reasons to consider it true and they are all based on history, and fairly recent history too. The practical implications are all that matter, and the history is irrelevant. The only salient point is that of governmental influence over a particular parcel of land. These days, that's what defines a "country."
      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
    14. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by dwater · · Score: 1

      It's because China includes Taiwan, no matter who governs it. It's as simple as that.

      Sorry, but that makes no sense. No need to apologise - it's not your fault. If you can't figure it out, then I'm not sure I can help you. Lets see.

      Actually, it's pretty common for westerners to not be able to figure out such things because such things don't have a definition in our language.

      It reminds me of how Chinese people are always Chinese, no matter where they are born. It's a matter of heritage. You also can't stop being Chinese, and whether you are born in China or not is irrelevant.

      The defining characteristic of sovereignty is that of government. Well, power, yes; but I'm not talking about sovereignty. That word is loaded with western values of "king and country" (or whatever) and doesn't really apply in this part of the world.

      The ROC may well have power in Taiwan, but it is not legitimate. It is stolen, and the dispute is still ongoing. You might consider it over and won, but an aweful lot of people don't. Seemingly including many governments in the world too (only 23 of 192 in the UN), who don't recognise Taiwan as a nation. Actually, it's difficult to even express what it is, since 'nation' is not so easily defined either, I think.

      China is China, and Taiwan is Taiwan, regardless of what the unificationists would like to believe. Well, you saying it doesn't make what you say true any more that them saying the opposite makes what they say true.

      People in mainland China - the vast majority, btw - still claim Taiwan as part of China. They consider it stolen property somewhat - just like all the treasure the ROC stole when they escaped to Taiwan.

      Are you suggesting that stolen property becomes the property of the thief? I think that is entirely up to the owner, personally.

      They have completely separate governments. Just because the PRC claims the ROC as its own (and, amusingly, the ROC also claims mainland China as its own), that doesn't change the facts.

      It may not have the practical implications you seem to yearn for, but there is plenty of reasons to consider it true and they are all based on history, and fairly recent history too. The practical implications are all that matter, and the history is irrelevant. The only salient point is that of governmental influence over a particular parcel of land. These days, that's what defines a "country." If all you are trying to define the present state, then we can agree - the ROC has power there at the moment.

      However, to state that history is irrelevant is astonishing. It is the past, it defines how things are today and it will undoubtedly foretell the state tomorrow too.

      How you define 'country'[1] is not relevant in this part of the world. How do you define Hong Kong, Macau, Tibet (up until recently)? It's westerner's trying to force their own European definitions onto this part of the world that is causing a lot of these problems (IMO).

      However, clearly I don't have the skill to convince you, if that's even possible; so I'm not going to continue with this discussion.

      [1] strangely enough, I have similar problems attempting to define my own 'country', England. Using wikipedia, England seems to be defined as a 'constituent country', which seems to be blurring the definition somewhat. That takes me to the page for 'country' itself, which blurs your comfortable definition even more.
      Following other threads of interest take me to other pages that seem to make your position even more tenuous, even using your own definitions, IMO...but I'm still reading.
      --
      Max.
    15. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by kelnos · · Score: 1
      It's become clear to me we're not talking about the same thing. I'll certainly acknowledge that, emotionally and politically, 'ownership' of Taiwan is far from clear-cut, and that mainland Chinese lay claim to Taiwan, and consider the Taiwan/ROC gov't to be illegitimate, just as many Taiwanese generally believe themselves to be independent of the mainland, or even still the sole legitimate gov't of both Taiwan and China.

      All of that sucks and makes for a sticky situation, but that's not really what I'm talking about. In *reality*, Taiwan has its own government, and conducts its affairs with almost zero interference from the mainland. Sure, they have to be careful when they talk about international relations (but who doesn't?), but the overall functioning of Taiwan is fully in the hands of Taipei.

      By that reasoning, I'd consider Taiwan a "country," regardless of whether or not that makes China happy. Taiwan's lack of recognisance with formal diplomatic relations by a large portion of the world is more a reflection of China's strong-arm tactics (and the West's desire to make China happy) than whether or not Taiwan is autonomous or not.

      Anyhow, that's really the only point I was trying to make initially. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

      Are you suggesting that stolen property becomes the property of the thief? I think that is entirely up to the owner, personally. It depends on how you define "stolen." One could make the argument that mainland China was "stolen" from the ROC's KMT when they fled to Taiwan. Also note that Taiwan had been a territory of Japan since 1895 (ceded to them by China), before the formation of the ROC in 1912, and *well* before the formation of the PRC. One could say that the ROC actually "stole" Taiwan from Japan, not China! Interestingly, after WWII, Japan released interest in Taiwan as a part of one of the post-surrender treaties, but didn't actually return it to China (instead returning Taiwan to the "people of Taiwan").

      Could you find problems with this reasoning? Sure. But you can also find problems with the reasoning that Taiwan was somehow "stolen" from mainland China. So-called "theft" is irrelevant here. You yourself claim that the situation is much more complicated than that, and then try to simplify it down to owner vs. thief. Which is it?

      How you define 'country'[1] is not relevant in this part of the world. How do you define Hong Kong, Macau, Tibet (up until recently)? It's westerner's trying to force their own European definitions onto this part of the world that is causing a lot of these problems (IMO). I don't think I buy that. I've spent time in both China (both city and rural) and Taipei. I have close friends who have either spent years in China or were born and raised in Taiwan. Sure, things are different there, culturally, economically, politically. People often have different attitudes and different ways of thinking of things. But to say the concept of a "country" (as we think of it) isn't relevant is just disingenuous. I imagine if, say, the US state of Texas decided to leave the US and be an independent nation, we'd see many of the same issues. Hell, if the US Civil War ended differently, I imagine there'd be much of the same resentment on both sides, with belief that the opposing government was illegitimate. (I occasionally wonder what things would be like if, instead of isolated on a small island, the Taiwanese gov't controlled half of the land of present-day China.)

      People just need to get over themselves and realise that one rule and one form of gov't doesn't fit everyone's needs. I realise that can be even more difficult for the Chinese with their manic devotion to the idea of maintaining "face" and allowing your adversary, assuming you're on equal footing and respect them enough, to maintain face as well. But, this whole "One China" crap is just that: crap. At heart, the Chinese gov't only fears that they'll look bad in front of their citizens and the world were Taiwan to gain formal, internationally publicly recognised independence.
      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
    16. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by dwater · · Score: 1
      While I continue to 'find fault' with your argument, as you say, it is pointless to continue.

      I just not that, as you say :

      just as many Taiwanese generally believe themselves...the sole legitimate gov't of both Taiwan and China. Both the PRC and ROC consider themselves (on some level at least) to be sole legitimate gov't of you:"Taiwan and China"/me:"all of China, including Taiwan". Since that is true, it seems everyone agrees that it is all "China", as I claimed.

      The governance and independence of Taiwan from the PRC is clear, and, IMO (and yours, it would seem) indisputable. If that was your only point, then we agree.

      My only point is that it is still "China" and it belongs to "the people" as a whiole. The only reason it is independent at all is because the people of China were prevented from taking their civil war to it's inevitable conclusion - ie the destruction (can't think of a better word) of the ROC; hence my history link. Of course, that is also an assumption - who knows what would have happened if the US hadn't stuck their "noses in".
      --
      Max.
    17. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      If that conclusion to the Chinese civil war were truly inevitable then it would have happened. That's what inevitable means. The fact that it did not happen means that by definition it was not inevitable.

      As for what would have happened if the US hadn't intervened, I'd guess that large portions of China would still be brutally ruled by the Empire of Japan.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    18. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by dwater · · Score: 1

      Post summary: two cheap shots, but nothing else of substance.

      By your second point, I assume you're talking about WW II, to which I would point out that the US didn't intervene since that would imply they made a choice. IINM, they were forced into it on both fronts.

      As for the definition of 'inevitable', clearly I mean inevitable had the US not intervened.

      --
      Max.
    19. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      US participation in the Second World War began with their embargo against Japan, trying to get them to stop wandering about in China murdering the inhabitants. This is definitely intervention, and of the pro-China flavor. Even after Pearl Harbor, the US had a lot of options, and certainly had no obligation to smash Japan flat and provide a whole bunch of aid to China in the process.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    20. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by dwater · · Score: 1

      ok, fair enough, but that isn't the intervention I'm talking about. The US sticking their noses in where it wasn't wanted is a common occurance and I'm not surprised you're confused as to which one I mean.

      IINM, I'm talking about this - note that it appears to be written by your own government, and is surprisingly frank (IMO).

      --
      Max.
    21. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      Merely a continuation of the same policies.

      In any case, I just think you ought to be consistent. If the US shouldn't have stuck their noses in where it wasn't wanted in the 50s, it shouldn't have done so in the 40s with Japan either. I'm sure the Japanese didn't want the US sticking their noses in China.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    22. Re:There is no border between China and Tibet. by dwater · · Score: 1

      While you might have some kind of a point there, in that it's difficult to know when to and when not to intervene, to counter your argument, I would say that, for a start Japan was invading other countries, and for a second, the US didn't stick their nose in, it was dragged in kicking and screaming...I could probably go on, but there's little point....I'll let you have the last word.

      --
      Max.
  32. It's long past time... by hyades1 · · Score: 1

    ...to give these fuckers a lesson in just how slippery and hard to control the truth can be.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  33. what's amazing is how tyranny is all over the map by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what the heck ever happened to freedom from oppression?

    the current policy is appeasement, plain and simple

  34. Openstreetmap.org already has some China coverage by ribuck · · Score: 1

    There's already some coverage of China in openstreetmap.org (which is like Wikipedia for maps). For example, here's Shanghai:

    http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=31.226&lon=121.5487&zoom=12&layers=B0FT

    The coverage is only going to improve. Already in other countries, many cities are nearing completion. You can't close the mapping door after the GPS trace has bolted.

  35. China needs a name change. by TrebleJunkie · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I'm renaming China to "VaChina." Because it really is a pussy coward of a country. It really needs to grow a pair and embrace freedom.

    --

    Ed R.Zahurak

    You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.

  36. My son has a Chinese map/jigsaw-puzzle that shows by shadowofwind · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The South China Sea all the way to Malaysia and Philippines as being a part of China. Needless to say, the map treats all other seas, gulfs, and bays on the globe as being international waters.

    Chinese culture seems to me to still be in the 19th century in many regards, and unable to engage in self-criticism. I've never met a Chinese person who could admit opposing points in relation to Tibet for example, notwithstanding that these people are all intelligent and decent in other regards.

    I'd be able to feel more sorry for Tibet if the exiled government wasn't stuck in the middle ages though.

  37. Remove China from the maps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If China is so determined to regulate what goes into the maps then just remove them. That way they can't complain about it. Just leave a blank area with a not available on picture day caption.

  38. but where in the world is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wouldn't care if China were not on the map. What gets me is that I can't find Garbage Island on Google Maps. You know, the one that's as big as Texas, in the middle of the Pacific.

  39. Why is anyone doing business with China, anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No morals? Money more important than human rights? Save us all!

  40. Sino-Indian war by Pragmatix · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I wonder if part of the reason China is so sensitive about maps is because of the McMahon Line http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMahon_Line


    It ended up in part, causing a war with India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino_indian_war


    A lot of China's posturing and paranoia seems to almost make sense if you look at the history of how they have been treated by other nations.

  41. Cunning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seeing as Sun Tzu said winning without war is best, it doesn't surprise me that instead of fighting a war with any of their neighbors and secessionists, they'll simply rewrite the story to show they've never left, or to annex new countries.

  42. encourage openness...by closing by enjahova · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So let me get this straight. Your idea of promoting an encouraging openness (which you and I agree is a good thing) is by completely shutting down China.

    That doesn't make much sense to me. I think if you spent even 20 minutes reading about Chinese history in the last century you would be far less ignorant of world affairs and specifically Chinese affairs. I am in no way defending totalitarianism or censorship. I just want to point out how rediculous your "solution" sounds.

    If you actually load up wikipedia and read for 20 minutes you might find out about the enormous amounts of strife China as a nation has endured over the last 150 years. Then you would see how it has only been 30 years since the end of the Cultural revolution, and just how much the nation has turned around in the blink of an eye.

    Now you advocate destroying 30 years of progress? You want 1.3 billion people to go back to living in abject poverty (even though hundreds of millions are still in abject poverty). All because they draw their maps a little differently from the way we do? You would rather force them into submission than help them grow?

    Fuck China? Fuck you.

    --
    "how can they call it a MINE if everything here is THEIRS?!?!" -Straight Jacket
    1. Re:encourage openness...by closing by zappepcs · · Score: 1

      The spirit of my post is not completely in disagreement with your feelings, however there is not much that can be said in reply to your post due to your lack of solutions that avoid the issues I tried to highlight.

      Basically, the two schools of thought there seem to be 'take it up the ass' to support the Chinese people or directly confront the Chinese government in some fashion. I'm going to stick my neck out and suggest that we not use the same diplomacy with China that the USA did with Iraq.

      So, for all your compassion, what are your suggestions for this situation?

    2. Re:encourage openness...by closing by enjahova · · Score: 1

      My suggestion is to increase communication. Just like in chemistry you speed up a reaction by increasing surface area. I think a solution is to not look at the world in black and white, to see the Chinese people are different from their government. I think the real way to further noble goals such as freedom is to educate people.
      When Google or anyone else censors, true they are hurting the world, Chinese and Americans alike. But this "evil" is a compromise which allows them to bring more and different knowledge to many more people.

      I will give a personal anecdote from my experiences traveling to China. When I visited Tiananmen square I did not mention the tanks, or the protests. I censored myself. However, throughout the rest of my stay I had many engaging conversations with many Chinese people about freedom, democracy, international politics, favorite movies, food etc. If I had taken the principled stance and just stayed home, sure I would not have censored myself, but I would also have deprived myself and the people I was in contact with of those enriching conversations.

      Thanks for the level response, hopefully this makes my point of view a bit clearer.

      --
      "how can they call it a MINE if everything here is THEIRS?!?!" -Straight Jacket
    3. Re:encourage openness...by closing by zappepcs · · Score: 1

      You and many in similar situations are well positioned to help the world understand how best we can continue to push information out there for the Chinese people and to help erode the bonds placed on them by their government. Perhaps you will find such information and blogg about it so that all of /. can read more?

    4. Re:encourage openness...by closing by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      I agree that communication should be encouraged, but I wouldn't self-censor. Thus, I run a freenet node. We should deal with china if we don't censor our stuff, if they want us to censor or leave we should leave.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    5. Re:encourage openness...by closing by LostInTaiwan · · Score: 1

      I know quite a bit about the Chinese history especially the humiliating fall from a world economic power house to a third world country divided, raped, and plundered by foreign nations. Though, ultimately the responsibility for the welfare of the Chinese people rests solely with the corrupt and ineffective Beijing government. Just because China was victim of foreign aggression does not justify it's own aggression against its own people or neighbors. Controlling the internet map publishing is just another attempt by an oppressive Beijing government to exercise total mind control over it's populace. With no dissenting voice in China, it's a nation without the ability for self reflection. If you think the Nazis were bad, wait till you have 1.3 billion Chinese screaming "Hail motherland" and out for revenge for all the perceived injustice they have suffered for the last two centuries. Without free press and free speech, the current Chinese antipathy toward the plight of the Tibetans is just the tip of the ice burg. Think cultural revolution and few tens of million screaming mad red guards waving their little red book out destroying everything and anything that Mao dislikes whether they are millennium old Chinese artifacts or little red guards' own parents. That was when China was only slightly evolved from the stone ages militarily speaking and closed off from the rest of the world happily living in their state of abject poverty. What do you think will happen when the next cultural revolution boils over.

    6. Re:encourage openness...by closing by iNaya · · Score: 1

      And a whole lot of good the diplomacy from the USA to Iraq has done for the Iraqi people, the economies of both countries, and stability.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
  43. Let me explain to you how this works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    You see, the corporations finance them, and then they goes out... and the corporations sit there in their... in their corporation buildings, and... and, and see, they're all corporation-y... and they make money.

  44. Earthquake by N1ck0 · · Score: 1

    Might this have something to do with the fact that China just had a large earthquake and in usual fashion they are trying to control the news of it. They essentially want to make such events seem very minor, and make it look to foreign eyes that they recover from such disasters in almost no time at all.

    And no it's probably not to just cover this one earthquake's damage, but really to cover news of future floods, quakes, fires, etc from outside eyes.

    1. Re:Earthquake by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      You're reading too much out of it.

      If you're going for a conspiracy-ish theory, this looks more likely to be a response to the Tibet independence movements last month.

      Even the Chinese aren't that efficient to draw up such a regulation/policy within a day.

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    2. Re:Earthquake by cyfer2000 · · Score: 1

      The map thing happened at least one week ago. The earth quake was yesterday. I failed to see how can you connect them together.

      --
      There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
  45. Here, thar be dragons! by KillerBob · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ahh... but if we remove China from the map, we can actually have an excuse to put "Here, thar be dragons" on the map!

    --
    If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
  46. Opportunity Knocking by OldFish · · Score: 1

    It seems to me that we should deliberately publish maps of China and its neighbors with the borders and names FUBARed in order to piss off the powers that be in China. Like Taiwan and Tibet especially. Also I think there are a few small islands in the Philippines that China is trying to bully onto their map. When China creates this opportunity to abuse their wishes take advantage.

    1. Re:Opportunity Knocking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, good luck with anyone taking your map seriously, Einstein.

  47. Declaration of the Independent Orient by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll have to work on my map of the IO's borders. Off the cuff, I think I'm going to chop what was formerly known as China in at least half...I might take Tibet under my wing, although I won't have any military to protect them.

    Granted, I can't enforce the borders of the IO, and as such will never be officially recognized by the UN, but I really don't care. I just want a world map widely published map with borders that cuts China down to size....if they want to sue me, come get me.

    You may call me "Your Anonymous Higness" until I come up with a better title.

  48. Next in China - Regulation of Respiration by unity100 · · Score: 1

    People who wanting to breathe in and out will need to take permits from Secretariat of Breathe-in and from Secretariat of Breathe-Out respectively.

    Plans for regulations on Bodily Biological Gas Emissions by the Ministry of Natural Gas Resources are told to be underway, and citizens are urged to get their butt sizes measured at the nearest municipal authority.

  49. so easy to china-bash by e_hu_man · · Score: 0

    i know this is slashdot and opinions voiced extremely are more likely to get modded up (or whatever dumb verb is equivalent to "digg"). but, really, how much china-bashing can one site tolerate and promote? how can people call for actively isolating a country of over a billion people and consider themselves nerds? where i grew up, nerds were among the few who stood a chance of seeing things rationally. these are clearly not the nerds of slashdot.

    yes, china's government has issues. but no government in the world can escape this. french policy led to race riots. saudi arabia prohibits women from being elected. canadian ships open up waterways for the sole purpose of clubbing baby seals to death. and so on and so forth.

    the world is an interconnected place. we have all contributed to all of these governments' actions, whether we like to think so or not. china's government did not appear out of a vacuum to suddenly take control of the country overnight. outside economic forces (cheap labor demand) contributed to how the chinese government behaves; and outside political forces (shift to capitalism please) did as well. forgetting your wallet and your vote in this (or selectively ignoring both) is irresponsible to the greatest degree.

    it is also absolute cowardice to hide behind the "evil corporations did it" argument. while there may exist some few who have existed without ever patronizing a corporation, they do not represent even a slim minority. corporations act for profit, which only their customers (which means you) can hand them. and when customers are uninformed when purchasing, then they (again, this means you) are part of the problem.

    if you've never been a customer, feel free to absolve yourself of this rant. otherwise, try to find a grown-up solution for grown-up problems. isolating china is not only a childish knee-jerk reaction, but it's completely ineffective. fidel's government was never overthrown and kim jong-il is still in power.

    1. Re:so easy to china-bash by iNaya · · Score: 1

      You're mostly correct there. However, there is no reason to not criticise China. You should notice that their is a hell of a lot of criticism on this site directed at the US as well (often by US citizens). So it's not really unfair discrimination.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    2. Re:so easy to china-bash by e_hu_man · · Score: 1

      you should notice the only things modded up to 4 or 5 are for china-bashing and proclaim the need to isolate them. honestly, should anything that says "fuck china" be modded up? ever?

      in other words, what gets promoted on this site is not measured criticism, but knee-jerk childishness.

      notice that my post got modded DOWN to 0.

    3. Re:so easy to china-bash by iNaya · · Score: 1

      Well, yes, there is no reason to say fuck [insert country here]. And as you said, every country has problems; it may seem unfortunate for you that currently people are focussed on China's problems, but they'll move on... Anyway, every country should accept criticism and try and learn from it, rather than denying it or fighting back.

      People don't hate China in particular, there's just been a lot of news about it recently, a lot of it due to the Olympics, and that's natural. People aren't going to read the 'Fuck China' posts and suddenly agree with it. In fact, I'd say more people know more about China than ever before, and of course you're going to have numb-nuts being idiots.

      Anyway, as a Christian, I get my fair share of bashing on Slashdot too. It's just something everyone has to get used to.

      I don't think this site has a particular anti-China bias, it's also anti-Christian, anti-corporation, anti-Microsoft, etc. As I said, the world's focus is currently on China, so there will be more news, and bad news is always more interesting than good news. For a good reason. By pointing out bad things, we all get an opportunity to make a start towards fixing it, one action at a time.

      Also, this story is about China, so you should expect things about China, and you can't expect people to go around saying lots of nice things about China, because that just isn't interesting.

      I'm sure smart people are aware of a lot of good things about China. E.g. quick to react to the disaster in Sichuan, putting money towards development projects in the Pacific, making sure that the population is being fed, working hard to create more jobs, and so on.

      But the point is there isn't much use in talking about good things, it's only the bad things that need to be fixed :-)

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    4. Re:so easy to china-bash by e_hu_man · · Score: 1

      you're trying equate being christian on slashdot to being a racial minority? really?

      it's apologist to lump the recent vitriol for china in with even the anti-microsoft hyperbole. the hatred voiced for china is far more irrational and that irrationality is far more rewarded than any of the examples you mention.

      imho, the two primary contributors to this are fear and media representation. everyone seems to be worried about jobs going to china. though manufacturing has been streaming there for years, more and more, you see "soft" jobs getting shipped there too. because of this fear, people lash out and china, forgetting their own laziness and education-slashing elected officials deserve some blame.

      media representation of chinese (and asians in general) is also troublesome. time after time, asians are neither dominant nor strong (unless you count the asian equivalent of blaxploitation, martial arts movies). the men are often portrayed as weaker than women of other races and the women adhere to the dragon lady/lotus flower dichotomy. just about every study of media representation of asians bears this pattern out. as a result, people feel it's okay to bully asians. there are countless examples of this before the recent spate of china-bashing, sarah silverman being the most notorious in recent memory.

      the point is there isn't much use in talking about generalities that apply weakly (christianity, corporations, etc), it's only the generalities that apply strongly (fear, representation, etc) that need to be fixed.

    5. Re:so easy to china-bash by iNaya · · Score: 1

      You're obviously blind. There is a lot of virulent language against Christianity on Slashdot. I don't go and sulk in a corner or get angry because my feelings got hurt. Be a man and bear it. Or do you think my feelings as a Christian matter less than your feelings as a Chinese?

      I am lead to deduce that the reason you think it is especially unfair when directed towards the Chinese government (as opposed to US/French etc.) is because you think of your race as being superior. Well get of your high horse. My Christian grouping as just as good in my opinion as your Chinese grouping. You are not a better or worse person than me, so don't think like that.

      It is no less fair to bash Chinese than it is to bash Christians, or Muslims, or French or whatever. Bashing any group is wrong, and it is wrong to think one group is less or more deserving than another.

      The real reason people bully any other group is because they fear that group rising above them. Take it as a compliment.

      You also seem to think that China is extra-special and alone being incorrectly portrayed in media. Obviously you've never seen a Disney film where Arabs are portrayed as rats (dirty and sly), whereas Americans are portrayed as ducks (cute and playful). Or have you noticed that in American films, the evil characters very often have British accents. Nor have you noticed the portrayal of Americans in British films as being loud, crude and a bit thick in the noggin. Nor have you noticed the portrayal in Chinese films of Japanese being cowards and bad at fighting. Nor the portrayal of Russians, in Anglo/US films, being extremely violent.

      If you are so ethnocentric that you think the injustices of the world are focussed on you, and that that is the most unfair thing, then maybe you should learn to start thinking about others.

      I assume that Chinese forums never say anything bad about the West, or Western media, or Western people? Oh wait!

      And to moot your point, most of the criticism on Slashdot is directed at the Chinese government, not the Chinese people. You should learn to make that distinction. People in the West often have a low regard for governments in general, so its no surprise they don't like the Chinese one either.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    6. Re:so easy to china-bash by e_hu_man · · Score: 1

      no christian bashing (at least on slashdot) has ever compared to the china bashing we're seeing now. you may feel differently because you are a christian. i am neither a citizen of china nor part of its government, so i will claim higher objectivity on this one.

      i've noticed everything you mention about portrayal, but you really are reaching if you think the mere existence of unfair portrayal of others means that it isn't more pronounced for asians. any media representation class or text book will back me up on this. and don't forget that "asians" (at least in my discussion) includes many arabs.

      my ethnicity has no bearing on this discussion any more than your religion.

      the distinction between a government and its people is an academic one. i'm explaining the deep-rooted feelings of one culture for another. the standard "the people must rise" makes no difference if the people agree with the government. by attacking the government, you are attacking the people who support it. maybe they have their reasons for supporting it.

      also, by saying that chinese forums never say anything bad about the west, you are conversely implicating slashdot as non-chinese. i disagree with that.

    7. Re:so easy to china-bash by iNaya · · Score: 1
      You're correct in that Asians have had more unfair portrayal in Western culture, but that still doesn't mean we shouldn't criticise things we think are wrong.

      also, by saying that chinese forums never say anything bad about the west, you are conversely implicating slashdot as non-chinese. i disagree with that.

      I was being sarcastic; there has been a lot of USA/France/CNN bashing on Chinese message boards lately, it's very much a two way street.

      As for my implication, I've never noticed people having discussions on Slashdot in Chinese. I'd say the vast majority of people here are from western countries. I'd call that non-Chinese. There are Chinese people on here, but they are a very small minority, and also from the elite that can read/write English very well, which to be honest is not a typical representation of a Chinese person. Would you call Slashdot Chinese?

      Anyway, I agreed with you that it's silly to start calling for boycotts/isolation etc. or to say that the people in said country are stupid. But I can't see anything wrong with having something against any particular government.

      It is mostly the rich and well educated people here that support the government. Out in the countryside, there are many many people who are displeased but can do nothing.

      the distinction between a government and its people is an academic one. i'm explaining the deep-rooted feelings of one culture for another. the standard "the people must rise" makes no difference if the people agree with the government. by attacking the government, you are attacking the people who support it. maybe they have their reasons for supporting it.

      So that brings about a paradox. If I attack my government (which I do on a constant basis), am I attacking myself, my friends and my family?

      So do you think people are wrong to bash the Chinese government at all? If you think that's the case then you'd be a hypocrite to criticise anything the American/British governments do. Say, for instance, installing way too many CCTVs, allowing people to be sued for thousands of dollars for downloading a few songs, etc. I maintain my right to criticise any government for anything it does.

      If people get offended by me attacking their government, then they are just grabbing the wrong end of the stick. And I'm not defending the people calling for embargoes, or isolation, or wars or whatever other unjustified invective; but I have a right to make statements like "The Chinese government is wrong to censor foreign news sources" or "I disagree that China has any right to claim land currently under the control of India". Where by "China" I mean the Chinese government.

      It would be a very dangerous world if people stopped criticising governmental wrongdoings just for the sake of appeasing people with an overdeveloped sense of nationalism.

      By extension, you're saying that if I criticise the Dear Leader for not feeding the people in North Korea, I am in turn criticising the people who are not being fed? So if I attack Kim Jeong Il in order to support the hungry, I am in turn attacking the hungry? That's absurd.

      The physical distinction between a government and it's subjects is very real. Tying the two together would be the purely academic exercise, which doesn't make it true. The government can do a lot of things that the 'people' can't do, i.e. arrest people, make laws, organise a war with another country, etc. Any love that one has for a government is artificial and silly.

      I'm not saying we shouldn't have governments, they are very necessary to keep order, and protect the people, the economy and so forth, but we are all better off if the government does it's job better, and we should all be allowed the right to criticise them in order to help attain improvements.

      People in China do not openly criticise the government, and those who do are harassed at varying degrees. Of the people who do wish to criticise, fear stops them doing it in public.

      I still can't understand why you would have me not criticise the Chinese government. Just because there are a lot of governments that are worse, the PRC government is not absolved of unjustified behaviour.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    8. Re:so easy to china-bash by e_hu_man · · Score: 1

      well, first off i want to thank you for coming back from personal attacks. it's not often on public message boards that things start down that path and come back from it.

      i agree with pretty much everything you say. there are a few subtle nuanced differences, which i outline below, but for the most part i think we agree.

      the distinction i was making with slashdot being chinese is simply that there often is a diverse set of chinese perspectives on slashdot (albeit not modded up to 4 or 5).

      it is expected and responsible that people criticise all governments, particularly their own. however, when the criticism ends up being all invective (to borrow your term) and that invective results in a mob mentality where there's essentially a free-for-all devoid of rational thought, something else is going on. it's hard to get that kind of reaction unless you've hit a nerve of some kind or another.

      my original post was intended to show that we've reached that point with china, both on slashdot and in the general media.

      my last two posts were just trying ferret out why. to analyze that, you have to look at cross-cultural attitudes and, unfortunately, stereotypes and ignorance. in this context, separating a people from their government becomes academic. if one can freely attack a people because of his/her attitude towards them and their culture, s/he will certainly attack their government even more freely. in other words, i think it's now open season on the chinese government because it's been open season on asian people (again, i include much of the middle east here) for some time.

      to clarify my point on media representation, i thought up the following exercise. if you make a 3d plot, you can quite clearly illustrate the biases. put on the x-axis a strength spectrum (-1 for weak, 1 for strong), on the y-axis a goodness spectrum (-1 for evil, 1 for good). if you prefer, the y-axis could be antagonist/protagonist instead of good/evil. on the z-axis, plot the frequency that you see characters with those traits in western (or perhaps more appropriately, northwestern, as south america and africa are rarely included in "western") entertainment. if you make that plot for non-asians, you'll find a reasonable frequency in the upper-right quadrant (strong, good). the plot for asians is, in comparison, quite small.

  50. Someone d/l the data and bittorrent it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since it seems we're still in the grey zone while people work out what to do, surely the thing to do is script up something to scan across google's maps of china, save all the raw data somewhere and create a bittorrent out of it all.

    So it might be several gigabytes in size...

    But it would keep the cat out of that bag.

    And besides, "national security"... does anyone really believe that those that China would want to hide things of "national security" from are not going to care at all what is published on the internet? Would any self respecting military use google for satellite images or their own contacts?

  51. it's ideological voting by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    because my post wasn't outwardly antiwestern, but instead criticized china and the islamic world, it got modded down

    even though i specifically mentioned the usa and the uk as falling for blind pride, and even though what i say is equally applicable to anything the west has done or is doing

    the take home lesson is that some people think that only statements that criticize the west are deserving of being modded up

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  52. Waco by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Please cite any topic that the US kills people for when they yell about it in the streets.

    So you have forgotten the FBI's liquidation of the Branch Davidians at Waco, have you? Typical American hypocrisy. The death toll in that conflict was worse, per capita, than Tienanmen.

    1. Re:Waco by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Worse per capita" is just another way of saying the individual lives of Chinese students marching for their freedom was worth less than brainwashed cultists because there are more Chinese than Americans. I guess the students had a cache of modified semiautomatic weapons as well. I also never heard they were holding people in their compound against their will. Thank you for illuminating me on the similarities of these two situations.

    2. Re:Waco by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      "Worse per capita" is just another way of saying the individual lives of Chinese students marching for their freedom was worth less than brainwashed cultists because there are more Chinese than Americans.

      No, it's a way of saying that the number of people killed at Waco were a higher percentage of their country's population than the number of people killed at T. Square.

      And since when does being "brainwashed" (i.e. believing something YOU don't) make someone's life less valuable? (But if it did I'm sure the Chinese government officials would have been happy to claim that the T. Square protesters had been brainwashed as well.)

      I guess the students had a cache of modified semiautomatic weapons as well.

      Given that:
        a) members of the church had a LICENSE to make such modifications,
        b) that the government didn't produce such a cache (though one of the things they DID produce and claim was a silencer turned out to be a spent incendiary teargas grenade of the type that they claimed they hadn't fired into the soon-to-burn building), and
        c) the church members had less than half the guns per capita than the average for Texans
      I fail to see your point.

      It was LEGAL for them to have what they had.
      It was MORAL, according to their religion, to have what they had and to use it to defend themselves against life-threatening attacks.

      I also never heard they were holding people in their compound against their will.

      I have never heard any evidence, or even serious allegations, that the Davidians were doing that, either. It appears that the only people holding anyone there against their will were the "jackbooted thugs" surrounding the community.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    3. Re:Waco by dwater · · Score: 1

      I guess the students had a cache of modified semiautomatic weapons as well. Supposedly, they had weapons taken when the army laid down theirs.

      This is my supposition based on talking (BJ residents) and listening (BBC) to people in BJ at the time. While I can't claim it's fact, it could be and it's at least plausible (IMO).

      I've seen (BBC) video footage of protesters burning soldiers alive.

      What isn't plausible to me is that the army opened fire on defenceless students.
      --
      Max.
  53. Given who and where he was... by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    It was actually a little bit exciting to see the map in Ian Fleming's novel Goldfinger, showing the United States Bullion Depository located at the intersection of Bullion Boulevard and Gold Vault Road. In those days before Wikipedia and Google Earth, this gave at least one reader frisson of forbidden information. I wondered whether Fleming would be the target of any mysterious reprisals for publishing it.

    Given that Fleming (along with Eric Frank Russel) was in the British Military Intelligence during WWII and loosely based his fiction on his experiences there, I doubt that the US spook community would take reprisals against such an honored member of their fraternity (and potentially create a major international incident) over such a minor issue as leaking an open secret in an adventure story.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  54. Here there be dragons. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    If China is so determined to regulate what goes into the maps then just remove them. That way they can't complain about it. Just leave a blank area with a not available on picture day caption.

    An old tradition for unmapped, hard to get to, areas was to label them with rumors, like "Here there be Dragons". Cartographer-speak for "This page intentionally left blank."

    Given China's traditions about dragons it seems appropriate.

    (Unfortunately, they might like it.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  55. Make a layer, defy the terrorists! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not to mention East Turkistan, Inner Mongolia and Manchuria.

    Red China never ruled Formosa. No way is it a break-away province. And the islands of the Philippines and Japan invaded by Red Guards terrorist organization troops do not belong to that terrorist organization, either.

    We just need a layer with SPOT data.