Foreign-owned Hotels To Install Firewall In China

Frosty Piss writes "Foreign-owned hotels in China face the prospect of 'severe retaliation' if they refuse to install government software that can spy on Internet use by hotel guests coming to watch the summer Olympic games. Republican Senator Sam Brownback produced a translated version of a document from China's Public Security Bureau that requires hotels to use the monitoring equipment. The Public Security Bureau order threatens that failure to comply could result in financial penalties, suspending access to the Internet or the loss of a license to operate a hotel in China. The policy was designed to 'ensure the smooth opening' of the Olympics, as well as 'promote the healthy and orderly development of the Internet, safeguard state security, maintain social order and protect public interests,' the translation of the one of the documents read."

Comments

Shooting themselves in the foot

[pwnies]

I really don't understand China. They lock down the flow of information in their country so that they don't look bad, but in doing so generate a ton of negative media saying how they lock down their information. Could someone please explain what benefit this gives them?

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[SpeedyDX]

They generate a lot of negative media OUTSIDE of China. It probably doesn't matter much to the Chinese government that foreigners view the administration with disdain, as long as Chinese nationals view the administration with respect and trust. In that sense, the People's Republic of China is very successful, as the vast majority Chinese nationals respect their leaders and believe that their leaders are doing their best to protect and promote the interests of China and its citizens.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[Telvin_3d]

Because they do not care what you think. They do not care what your politicians think. As long as they can control the information that their own people have access to, any outside fallout is more than acceptable.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps because it's a dsytopian shithole and as bad as we might be inclined to imagine it, we fall well short of the reality? Think of all the energy, aka oil, a nice trans-oceanic trade war would save. On the down side socks might ultimately cost 5 times as much and last 20 times longer. Somehow I'll get by I'm sure.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't care what you think.

China, like much of the world, is very nationalistic, and it's hard for Americans to understand. Your nationality, ethnicity, language... all the same. They can't seperate a criticism of China the government from a criticism the people.

So the government have the Chinese people happily convinced that China is the greatest ever, there ever was, and all criticism from the outside is basically racism. Calling the government corrupt is as personally offensive to the average Chinese citizen as personally calling him a slant-eyed chink.

So, from the Chinese nationalists perspective, they're doing a good job blocking all that "racist propoganda". It's basically (to them) analagous to many western governments banning "hate speech".

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[Hatta]

Censorship doesn't look as bad as massacres.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[meburke]

It may be different than you think. I have a book called "The Asian Mind Game" by Chin-ning Chu that describes the different mindset that Chines (and Japanese and Koreans) start with when conducting their affairs. There is a distinct difference in cultural values, therefore there is a difference in cultural behavior. China's government is constantly in turmoil, and control is very important. Outside influences can undermine that control pretty quickly (and, in fact, has caused much change over the last 20 years).

Basically, the Chinese government doesn't care what we THINK about them as long as we ACT in ways that benefit their goals. The Chinese government is losing a long war against education; the populace is getting to smart and being exposed to too many new ideas. They have loosened up on the Command Economy, and are maintaining a fragile balance of control in other regards. So, IMO, the benefit to them is less turmoil from their own population.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[Hatta]

So, from the Chinese nationalists perspective, they're doing a good job blocking all that "racist propoganda". It's basically (to them) analagous to many western governments banning "hate speech".

It's not just analogous, it's the same thing. One man's political opinion is another man's hate speech.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[sdsucks]

Yep this is exactly it.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[iminplaya]

Man! They sound so...American. Our elections have shown that we have deep respect and trust for our administration too. I bet they even drive on the same side of the road we do. Copycats!

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

Not that much different than the Bush admin. He has put a clamp on info to the press. He has a gag order on Sibel Edmunds. His people try hard to stop the flow of info about the occupation as well as Global Warming, etc. You name it, and he worries about bad press to Americans esp. when it concerns republicans. All in all, America is becoming a lot like China.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[vajaradakini]

It probably doesn't matter much to the Chinese government that foreigners view the administration with disdain, as long as Chinese nationals view the administration with respect and trust.

Especially if they can pass off any negative foreign views of China as being an anti-Chinese bias.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[HanClinto]

Not that much different than the Bush admin

You're an idiot. The very fact that you can badmouth Bush or call him a chimpanzee and get away with it shows how far we really are from China. Stop fearmongering -- yes, there are issues. Yes, we should be vigilant. But that doesn't also mean we can't be thankful for the freedoms that we do have.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[marco.antonio.costa]

Cause it's a slave state. Slaves must be fed carefully filtered information, or they might turn on their masters.

It's in principle similar to FOX News and mainstream media in the US, except they spin most of the stuff, while over in China they just pretty much block stuff they don't want known out.

The results achieved are similar though. :)

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[TubeSteak]

Stop fearmongering -- yes, there are issues. Yes, we should be vigilant. But that doesn't also mean we can't be thankful for the freedoms that we do have.

And what has being vigilant gotten us?
A) The worst excesses of 1960's wiretapping & spying on citizens (Nixon & COINTELPRO)
B) Politicization of the Justice Department
C) Weakening of Federal regulatory Agencies & environmental protections
D) All of the above.

And those are just the first non-debatable items I could pull off the top of my head. Obviously the USA has free speech & China doesn't, but the USA is heading in China's direction as opposed to a transparent and open Democracy.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[pallmall1]

A) The worst excesses of 1960's wiretapping & spying on citizens (Nixon & COINTELPRO)
B) Politicization of the Justice Department
C) Weakening of Federal regulatory Agencies & environmental protections
D) All of the above.

Are you talking about the actions of the RIAA and MPAA?

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[Profane MuthaFucka]

With a firewall like that, they could snag a LOT of porn. I think that's why they do it.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

China, like much of the world, is very nationalistic, and it's hard for Americans to understand.

You cannot be serious. Pull the stars and stripes outta your arse and try saying that again.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

Tienamen Square freedom movement was an embarresment to China. Freedoms for their citizens have been libralized tremendously since the Red Guard era. However the Chinese Communist Party will never allow its citizens to question the governments authority to control information deemed anti-communistis/socialistic (which seems to be a very broad and constantly changing definition). Remember this government came to power by a "peoples revolution" and they do not want a second revolution.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[rtb61]

However in this case the monitoring has absolutely nothing to do with censorship, it is all about espionage.

The monitoring equipment is also going to include key loggers and based upon peoples laziness, using that same user name and password all over the internet will get Chinese government espionage agents into a whole lot of places they should get imprisoned for going to.

You really have to consider the kind of people who will be going to the Olympics as spectators, their income brackets and their positions of responsibility around the globe. Basically if you go to China and log in with your regular user name and password you are a bloody idiot and personally I would not take a notebook there, but buy one on location and then sell it when I was leaving, I would certainly not bring it back, bios back doors are really annoying.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[Lost Engineer]

The very internal dissent that China tries to suppress contradicts your idea of a populace satisfied with their government. Corruption is a factor in all governments that China does not deny. In fact, they actively combat it. Besides, I wouldn't call the government corrupt as a whole, just authoritarian and heavy handed.

Clearly the Chinese government does care what outsiders think. Much is revealed both by their attempts to clean up Beijing and to the attempts to keep foreign journalists in the dark about strife elsewhere.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[elronxenu]

So ... you'll buy hardware which might contain a keylogger and use it in China?

That's more likely to be compromised before you buy it than your own laptop (which I assume you can trust right now) is to be compromised after you use it in China.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[LowlyWorm]

China is a very closed society so they have developed a lot of cultural nuances we just don't understand. They they are currently building the Three Gorges Dam, in part to generate power but there has been much speculation this is to maintain political power. Traditionally, China often staged revolutions whenever the Yangtze river flooded. The move to capitalism Is bound to make lots of cultural changes. Their record of bans on the Internet is another symptom China clinging to its past. But I have my doubts they can maintain that past. It will certainly take time since China has remained relatively closed to outsiders for thousands of years.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[sam0737]

Not true.

I grew up in Hong Kong and have been working in Shanghai for a while.

The first thing the Chinese don't trust are the officials. The media that we all think shitty is CCTV and Xiahua. I can say most educated people (read: those live in city) know and aware that the officials are doing a shitty jobs.

We all think it's bullshit to holding up and postponing all surgeries that requires potential blood transfser, in order to keep the blood for the Olympics' potential incident.

We hate how they erect the great firewall, blocking Chinese Wikipedia, while almost everyone know how to find a backdoor/proxy or use Tor.

Why they are doing all these kinds of stuff? Erecting stupid policy? It's all for the official own personal interest. It's better to follow the rule and tradition, even if it's stupid, and crossing the finger that nothing will go seriously wrong.

Ya it's stupid, but if they stick to the rule, their manager won't complain, or at least, they could keep their job. Just as simple as that.

Losing face country-wide and international-wide? The Chairman might care, but probably not those district-level officials.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[thedullroar]

Cause it's a slave state.

[citation needed]

Slaves must be fed carefully filtered information, or they might turn on their masters.

Really? Slaves need to be told that their masters have done wrong by enslaving them? I wonder how the slaves in America found out. They were (with few exceptions) illiterate, broadcast radio didn't exist...singing telegram, perhaps?

It's in principle similar to FOX News and mainstream media in the US, except they spin most of the stuff, while over in China they just pretty much block stuff they don't want known out.

The results achieved are similar though. :)

Surely you're joking. The fact that people "know" that FOX does not deliver fair and balanced news is evidence that they (people, not FOX) are aware of the information not being presented by FOX.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[gauauu]

the vast majority Chinese nationals respect their leaders and believe that their leaders are doing their best to protect and promote the interests of China and its citizens.

Do you really think so? That doesn't match the people I knew from my experience after living in China for 2 years. Even the Communist party members that I was friends with had a quite cynical view of the government and its policies.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[marco.antonio.costa]

Cause it's a slave state.

[citation needed]

This is my opinion, not Wikipedia. :-)

Slaves must be fed carefully filtered information, or they might turn on their masters.

Really? Slaves need to be told that their masters have done wrong by enslaving them? I wonder how the slaves in America found out. They were (with few exceptions) illiterate, broadcast radio didn't exist...singing telegram, perhaps?

What I meant by slave state is a different kind of servitude than the institution of slavery. I meant it in the sense that the individual is ultimately exists as a tool for the central power, not that a certain subset of humanity is inferior, and therefore must submit to the 'superior' subset.

It's in principle similar to FOX News and mainstream media in the US, except they spin most of the stuff, while over in China they just pretty much block stuff they don't want known out.

The results achieved are similar though. :)

Surely you're joking. The fact that people "know" that FOX does not deliver fair and balanced news is evidence that they (people, not FOX) are aware of the information not being presented by FOX.

Do they? I know, you know. What the _people_ KNOW, most of the time, is what FOX News feeds them.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[retchdog]

I've never heard this theory about Three Gorges, and it's interesting to me. A casual google doesn't reveal any supporting information; do you have a link or other citation?

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[thedullroar]

What I meant by slave state is a different kind of servitude than the institution of slavery.

Ok. Choose better words next time.

Do they? I know, you know. What the _people_ KNOW, most of the time, is what FOX News feeds them.

Indeed, there is an important difference between "people" and "the people".

While FOX is the network everyone loves to hate, the rest of the media, who you also mentioned, is just as bad. None of them simply report the news, all of them have extensive commentary. I think that part of responsible journalism is keeping them separate. A person who watches a "news" channel and thinks critically about what they are seeing can separate the news from the commentary and make their own judgements about the effects of the day's events, but the average news consumer is passive. Many people latch on to the image of rednecks being brainwashed by FOX, but I'm sure the number of people passively accepting what is peddled by (generally less conservative) other networks is proportional. The people who watch [your least favorite news network here], are doing so by choice and people have an unfortunate tendency to watch things that affirm, rather than challenge their views.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[LowlyWorm]

I do not remember the source but I had to read about it in a comparative government class I had in college a few years ago. As I recall, the professor seemed to like the Christian Science Monitor. I am not sure that was the source (the information I read was much longer than a standard article) but you might start there.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[Anonymous Coward]

So the government have the Chinese people happily convinced that China is the greatest ever, there ever was

Sorry, are you talking about China or the US?

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[marco.antonio.costa]

Do they? I know, you know. What the _people_ KNOW, most of the time, is what FOX News feeds them.

Indeed, there is an important difference between "people" and "the people".

While FOX is the network everyone loves to hate, the rest of the media, who you also mentioned, is just as bad. None of them simply report the news, all of them have extensive commentary. I think that part of responsible journalism is keeping them separate. A person who watches a "news" channel and thinks critically about what they are seeing can separate the news from the commentary and make their own judgements about the effects of the day's events, but the average news consumer is passive. Many people latch on to the image of rednecks being brainwashed by FOX, but I'm sure the number of people passively accepting what is peddled by (generally less conservative) other networks is proportional. The people who watch [your least favorite news network here], are doing so by choice and people have an unfortunate tendency to watch things that affirm, rather than challenge their views.

Well, I'll agree with you that FOX isn't the sole brainwasher, I used them as an example of what in my opinion is the worst.

I shudder at the thought of 'responsible journalism'. There's free press and unfree press. Start to broadcast your own news program and see how long you're labeled 'pirate of the airwaves' and gets sent to prison.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot

[rtb61]

Of course and, not try to fool myself that it is secure. All passwords and usernames for the trip only, no private messages, no silly affairs basically everything upon the basis the all digital tramissions are completely public. So buy a cheap UMPC locally that you don't mind dumping rather than bring in a more expensive unit.

From Rambo 3

[atari2600]

Trautman: What do you say John?
Rambo: Fuck 'em.

Of course, the them==Russians but I am getting a bit tired of the BS regarding the Chinese government. Everyone knows money vs ethics = money wins. Of course it is not in the hotel's interests to get fined or have no internet. Bah I hate cliches.

Re:From Rambo 3

[Anonymous Coward]

I like it!

But how about,

money - ethics > 0

?

Capitalism

[Captain Splendid]

-Incompatible with liberalism
-Incompatible with conservatism
-Incompatible with human rights
-Incompatible with human nature.

Somebody please tell me why we're still fisting Adam Smith's very dry corpse?

Re:Capitalism

[bigstrat2003]

This post is so full of wrong-ness, I can hardly believe it. Where to begin?

Incompatible with liberalism

If by "liberalism" you mean the philosophy of letting people do their own thing (i.e., what libertarianism used to be called), you couldn't be more wrong. Capitalism is the ideal economic system for such a political philosophy.

Incompatible with conservatism

I guess that depends on how you define "conservatism". You may have a point, but don't be so vague.

Incompatible with human rights

The fact that the US has always been capitalistic, and done ok on human rights (not great, but not terrible either), contradicts this.

Incompatible with human nature.

Absolute horseshit. Capitalism aligns PERFECTLY with human nature. Human nature is to improve one's own lot in life as much as possible. Capitalism is to make as much profit for oneself as possible.

Somebody please tell me why we're still fisting Adam Smith's very dry corpse?

Maybe because it's worked out pretty damned well? It's not perfect, but nothing is. Maybe you live in a world where everything goes right all the time, but most of us sure don't.

Re:Capitalism

[I_Voter]

Captain Splendid wrote:
Somebody please tell me why we're still fisting Adam Smith's very dry corpse?
-----

I think your familiarity with Adam Smith is limited.

To found a great empire for the sole purpose of raising up a people of customers may at first sight appear a project fit only for a nation of shopkeepers. It is, however, a project altogether unfit for a nation of shopkeepers; but extremely fit for a nation whose government is influenced by shopkeepers.
....Snip...
But a company of merchants are, it seems, incapable of considering themselves as sovereigns . . . Their mercantile habits draw them in this manner, almost necessarily, though perhaps insensibly, to prefer upon all ordinary occasions the little and transitory profit of the monopolist to the great and permanent revenue of the sovereign . . . As sovereigns, their interest is exactly the same with that of the country which they govern. As merchants their interest is directly opposite to that interest.
(Book_Four*Chapt_VII*Of_Colonies)

I_Voter

Political Power in the U.S.- an under construction web site.
http://web.newsguy.com/politicaleconomy/

Re:Capitalism

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact that the US has always been capitalistic, and done ok on human rights (not great, but not terrible either), contradicts this.

Do you mean a hundred of years of slavery is "O.K.?"

Then I want to know what country does not o.k. in your book?

Incompatible with human nature.

Capitalism aligns PERFECTLY with human nature. Human nature is to improve one's own lot in life as much as possible. Capitalism is to make as much profit for oneself as possible.

This kind of egoism does only align with the worst in human nature. I question the humanity of a being that is only after his/her own interest. Not to say that self interest has its place. But without considering what it does to others or what would happen if everybody would act the same way is simply inhumane.

Because with this kind of limitless self interest I can justify slavery, destruction of the environment, sub prime mortgage debacles (it was certainly in the self interest of some people), even aggressive wars.

Re:Capitalism

[bigstrat2003]

Do you mean a hundred of years of slavery is "O.K.?" Then I want to know what country does not o.k. in your book?

a) Of couse not. But the US also worked to advance freedom by the formation of our system of government, for example. We have always done both good and bad... the good usually outweighing the bad.

b) Several countries don't do OK. Soviet Russia didn't, Nazi Germany didn't, China still doesn't, etc... it's not hard to pick out some examples if you look.

This kind of egoism does only align with the worst in human nature. I question the humanity of a being that is only after his/her own interest. Not to say that self interest has its place. But without considering what it does to others or what would happen if everybody would act the same way is simply inhumane. Because with this kind of limitless self interest I can justify slavery, destruction of the environment, sub prime mortgage debacles (it was certainly in the self interest of some people), even aggressive wars.

I didn't say it was good or bad, just in line with human nature. That's not a debateable point, imnsho. It's just plain fact.

Re:Capitalism

[Drasil]

Incompatible with human nature.

Absolute horseshit. Capitalism aligns PERFECTLY with human nature. Human nature is to improve one's own lot in life as much as possible. Capitalism is to make as much profit for oneself as possible.

Most of the points you raise are fair and while I do not agree with them all they are well made and relevent to the discussion. Your view of human nature frightens me. Self interest may well be the default nature of the human animal, but not of the human being. A world in which everyone is interested only in persuing his or her own desires would be hell on earth, although admittedly it is encouraged by the dominant western religion (consumerism).

As for Adam Smith, he was a Christian. He lived in a world in which the Christian ethos was still pretty much universal and probably assumed his ideas would exist within that moral framework. I suspect he would be appalled that his work has been used to justify some very unchristian ideas.

Re:Capitalism

[Drasil]

I didn't say it was good or bad, just in line with human nature. That's not a debateable point, imnsho. It's just plain fact.

It is very much a debatable point. Are you arguing that Jesus, Buddah, Mandela, Ghandi and countless others are not human? It is my belief that it is you that subscribes to an inhumane philosophy.

Re:Capitalism

[bigstrat2003]

Inhumane? Not at all. I do, however, take a very, very dim view of human nature, and I dare anyone to provide enough evidence to show that people are generally good-natured. My experience is that human nature is very self-centered, and those who are not self-centered are a) the exception, not the rule, and b) overcoming their natural desires, not in line with them.

Re:Capitalism

[marco.antonio.costa]

Do you mean a hundred of years of slavery is "O.K.?"

Then I want to know what country does not o.k. in your book?

Capitalism did not create slavery. It existed before it developed. But England - a very much pioneering capitalist nation - DID outlaw slavery and slave trade overseas much earlier than many countries dreamed to emancipate slaves.

This kind of egoism does only align with the worst in human nature. I question the humanity of a being that is only after his/her own interest. Not to say that self interest has its place. But without considering what it does to others or what would happen if everybody would act the same way is simply inhumane.

You say that the human desire of improving his condition aligns with the worst in human nature? How do you expect poor people to free themselves from poverty other than trying to make a better life for themselves? With welfare checks?

Because with this kind of limitless self interest I can justify slavery, destruction of the environment, sub prime mortgage debacles (it was certainly in the self interest of some people), even aggressive wars.

Oh could you? Interesting insight into your person.

Wait...

[casualsax3]

So Brownback is upset that the Chinese government is forcing companies to spy on innocent citizens? Hypocrite much?

Re:Wait...

[jdogalt]

yes, mod parent up

Re:Wait...

[aztektum]

Yeah I was thinking something similar. On the upside, at least in China you KNOW when the government is watching. They aren't that courteous in the U.S..

Re:Wait...

[aztektum]

You know this irked me enough that I actually sent Sen. Brownback's office an e-mail. Seeing as how I don't live in Kansas, I wrote one to my states senators (Oregon) and my rep. (Blumenauer). It won't do any good, I'm sure of that, however at least I feel a bit better.

I'm sure I'm on some watch list now. I haven't had many positive things to write them about.

Re:Wait...

[manifoldronin]

Yeah I was thinking something similar. On the upside, at least in China you KNOW when the government is watching. They aren't that courteous in the U.S..

I'm sorry, I tried a number of times to write a polite reply, but it still came down to this - WHAT THE FUCK!

Did you guys notice that TFA was talking about the hotels for foreigners? For an average Chinese, the government does not just monitor you, it simply BLOCKS you from seeing what it doesn't want you to see.

Did you guys know that in China everybody has to disclose their real life identity before they get online? Did you guys know that there have been people in China going to jail just for posting on the Internet to question government policies?

Now try and show me how much worse - or less courteous - it is in the US.

I mean, I'm upset with the warrantless eavesdropping issue as much as the next guy. I have gone so far as to rent my own dedicated server and ran all my traffic through thor. But on the other hand, I think that going as far as stating "they aren't that courteous in the US" only shows how ungrateful you are.

Re:Wait...

[hedronist]

> and ran all my traffic through thor.

Uh, that one stopped me for a moment.

Image having the Thunder God himself doing stateful packet inspection! Wow, talk about security!

Re:Wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't have to disclose their real-life identity just to get online. In every town there are many many internet bars full of computers where you can pay a couple rmb an hour to surf the internet. The people who run these establishments couldn't care less about who is on the computers.

Re:Wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

This got modded Funny, but this is not funny. It's the truth. Remember the Patriot Act and the Teleco Immunity bill? Same thing, different country.

Re:Wait...

[Stan Vassilev]

I mean, I'm upset with the warrantless eavesdropping issue as much as the next guy. I have gone so far as to rent my own dedicated server and ran all my traffic through thor.

Good job, you replaced the government eavesdropping you, with some random guy with possibly far more malicious intent, eavesdropping you (and if he's in US or Europe, a government still monitors you).

When you run thor, you've handed your ass to the exit node that thor has selected randomly for you: all emails, passwords, sites, everything you do, is available to the exit node in an unencrypted form. Exit nodes on thor are frequently rogue.

Only use thor to anonymize, and never pass sensitive information about yourself (such as logging to your bank site) through it.

Re:Wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

Grateful for what? Grateful that the government has only thrown out 50% of the Constitution that a LOT of people have died to defend?

I am NOT "Grateful" to the government, I'm pissed as hell- those are my RIGHTS. I'm grateful to the people that died so I can have them, but that's it.

The point being, that in China you know they're watching because they don't hide it. Over here they say they're not watching when they are. I'm not sure why you expect me to be grateful that the government is lying to me.

Re:Wait...

[Rui del-Negro]

Did you guys know that in China everybody has to disclose their real life identity before they get online?

You mean your ISP accepts false identities...? How do they know where to send the bills?

And don't say "disclose it to the government, not just to the ISP", because in the USA most ISPs will roll over and give government agencies whatever they ask for, without even asking for (let alone demanding) a warrant.

I'll take a country no elections over one with rigged elections any day. In the former there's at least the chance that the people will decide to fight for democracy. In the latter, they won't fight for it because they think they already have it. No one is disputing that China restricts its citizens' freedom more than the USA does. The question is whether the people are aware of those restrictions or whether they live under the illusion that they are completely free from (warrantless, secret, arbitrary) government surveillance.

Re:Wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry, I tried a number of times to write a polite reply, but it still came down to this - WHAT THE FUCK!

Calmies.

Have been here in Beijing for quite a while now and to be blunt, aside from the whole communist thing and the supposed evil government, in day to day terms it is a much less oppressive place to be than the US.

The only real fear is that the government suddenly change their mind on something and it all goes to shit but really other than on the news and people like you screaming about politics, they factor into your life so minimally it hardly matters.

On a day-to-day basis, here, I am:
    - Paid and appreciated far more (Sure, special case; locals are paid less, but the appreciation many get vs. US corporates...)
    - Taxed far less
    - Able to travel domestically with far less "security" and restriction
    - Able to enter and leave the country with far less general bullshit
    - FAR less likely to end up getting hit with a lawsuit by any number of ridiculous moronic entities
    - Able to conduct business with far less arbitrary restriction and bureaucracy.

Yes the government has some odd rules, but they're less wide-reaching and far easier to have organised or worked around.

Did you guys notice that TFA was talking about the hotels for foreigners? For an average Chinese, the government does not just monitor you, it simply BLOCKS you from seeing what it doesn't want you to see.

I think you'd find this will be the case anyway, I've yet to see a hotel with a connection that mysteriously avoided the GFW, this is likely just them asking for an additional level of monitoring from the hotels themselves.

Or possibly they are exempting select hotels from the GFW for the duration of the games and asking for alternative measures. Difficult to say.

Either way, there is no distinction between the measures employed on Chinese citizens or those of any other nation here, resident or otherwise.

Did you guys know that in China everybody has to disclose their real life identity before they get online? Did you guys know that there have been people in China going to jail just for posting on the Internet to question government policies?

In THEORY, yes, but hardly practiced strictly, rarely seen used for anything. I'd suggest the US is far more abusive in its use of your personal details connected to your internet usage. (Casually handing them out to corporates for file sharing lawsuits, anyone?)

I mean, I'm upset with the warrantless eavesdropping issue as much as the next guy. I have gone so far as to rent my own dedicated server and ran all my traffic through thor. But on the other hand, I think that going as far as stating "they aren't that courteous in the US" only shows how ungrateful you are.

Why should he be grateful?

I have no extraordinary love of China in particular, but... Your country is and, I'm sorry, I tried a number of times to put it politely, but it still came down to this - FUCKED IN THE HEAD.

Re:Wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

He's right in that in theory they're supposed to check IDs and keep records, but the point stands, it's very rarely enforced.

Re:Wait...

[raju1kabir]

I think that going as far as stating "they aren't that courteous in the US" only shows how ungrateful you are.

Nobody should have to be "grateful" for basic human rights, such as the right to privacy.

To the extent that any government denies these, it is a bad government that deserves criticism.

Re:Wait...

[raju1kabir]

You mean your ISP accepts false identities...? How do they know where to send the bills?

Here in Malaysia you can pay for your dialup using scratch cards available at 7-Eleven as well as zillions of smaller shops that don't have security cameras. They ask for your national identity card number when you first register online but if you say you're a foreigner they just ask for your passport number which they have no way of validating. I am sure there are similar arrangements in many other places.

Re:Wait...

[raju1kabir]

Able to conduct business with far less arbitrary restriction and bureaucracy.

I don't buy that for a minute.

I've done lots of business in both China and the US. The US is a piece of cake by comparison. In China you have to get permission from half a dozen bureaucracies just to scratch your ass. You may not be aware of it if your company has hired a local fixer who makes these problems disappear with well-placed payments, but corruption is not the same as efficiency.

Re:Wait...

[manifoldronin]

You mean your ISP accepts false identities...? How do they know where to send the bills?

Sigh, I wasn't talking about ISPs. Have you ever used an internet cafe? Did you _have_ to register with your id before getting online? Are the forums _required_by_law_ in this country to take and verify your true identity before allowing you to register?

I'll take a country no elections over one with rigged elections any day.

Fantastic. Please go ahead and renounce your US citizenship (or whichever country it is), apply to become a citizen of the People's Republic of China, go there and actually live there, and come back tell us you still want to make that bold statement up there. Oh wait, you probably won't, because you won't even be able to get back on /. from there!

Re:Wait...

[manifoldronin]

I think that going as far as stating "they aren't that courteous in the US" only shows how ungrateful you are.

Nobody should have to be "grateful" for basic human rights, such as the right to privacy.

To the extent that any government denies these, it is a bad government that deserves criticism.

Oh I absolutely agree. When I said "ungrateful", I didn't mean "we should be grateful for not having our rights denied by the government." I meant "we should be grateful for being able to live in this country."

Disclaimer: just because I am grateful doesn't mean that I'm OK with the bad things the government of _this_ country has been and is doing. I just still believe in the fundamental values of this country, and I think that at least in this country, the worse enemy is not any particular government, but the cynicism that a lot of people seem to hide behind and allow themselves to be paralyzed with.

Re:Wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

>Did you guys know that in China everybody has to disclose their real life identity before they get online?

Not true. Ever been to China? Internet cafes everywhere, no registration to use, just a few cents. Open wireless in coffee shops.

Just because you say so, doesn't make it true.

Re:Wait...

[Rui del-Negro]

Here in Malaysia you can pay for your dialup using scratch cards available at 7-Eleven

You connect through a phone line, right? That phone line is registered to you, right? How hard do you think it is to trace you...?

They ask for your national identity card number when you first register online but if you say you're a foreigner they just ask for your passport number which they have no way of validating.

You think the government and the criminal police are unable to contact another country's agency to verify your passport number, if they really want to? Dream on.

Re:Wait...

[Rui del-Negro]

Have you ever used an internet cafe? Did you _have_ to register with your id before getting online?

I have, and I did. The last thing an internet café wants is to be charged with downloading copyrighted material (or uploading child porn, or being the source of a DoS attack, etc.). Lots of internet cafes ask for ID, to cover their own asses. They won't go out of their way to verify that the ID is real, but they do ask for it. A lot of them also have security cameras, and keep a full log of what you do online, so it wouldn't be too hard to trace a client.

Although I've never been to China, a couple of relatives of mine lived there for several years (they speak Mandarin fluently). They came back with all their limbs and were never questioned by men in black (or maybe they erased their memories, OMG!). They actually lived pretty well there (they retired and came back to be with their grandchildren).

And why wouldn't I be able to get on Slashdot from China...?

You seem to be under the impression that China is a big concentration camp. It isn't.

Re:Wait...

[raju1kabir]

You connect through a phone line, right? That phone line is registered to you, right?

This is one of those countries where phone lines are often registered to the property and pass from person to person over the years. I have lived in places where nobody had any idea who the person named on the phone bill was.

Of course they can still work out the location, though they never seem to be able to find the place when I request repairs.

But okay, landlines can eventually be traced. Take wireless instead. Have a look at the registration form for the free metro wifi service in Kuala Lumpur. They ask for name, email, and mobile phone. Anyone can pick up a SIM card for cash over the counter, or could even use one from a different country. We all know how easy it is to get a throwaway email account. Tracing me in this case would require a lot of advanced equipment and know-how. I could be in a car, I could be in an apartment building 5km away using a directional antenna.

You think the government and the criminal police are unable to contact another country's agency to verify your passport number, if they really want to?

No, I just don't see how that's relevant.

1. I buy a scratch card.

2. I dial up and it asks me to create a new account, and asks me for my passport number.

3. I enter a random number and click "Ok" and it creates my account.

What does international police cooperation have to do with this scenario? Does my country have a database that predicts which random numbers I'm likely to invent?

Re:Wait...

[Rui del-Negro]

Of course they can still work out the location,

I rest my case. If they can make you pay the bill, they can trace your online activities.

As to using a cellphone, locating you while you are connected (by triangulation) is trivial for most operators, with modern equipment. The question is whether those operators will roll over and provide that data to the government / police / etc. or if they'll demand to see a court order first.

And, again, I'd rather be in a place where I know the rules (even if those rules are very strict, like "the government has access to every call that you make") than in a place where supposedly it takes a warrant to have access to my private data, but then it turns out the government does as it pleases, ignores the law, and promises retroactive immunity to the telecoms that play along in spying on their clients without any court supervision.

Re:Wait...

[raju1kabir]

I rest my case. If they can make you pay the bill, they can trace your online activities.

In many cases there's no need to pay in order to get online.

Also, other paid examples come to mind. Airzed is a paid service but they accept cash at convenience stores, and there's no effective requirement for identifying myself when I sign up.

And here's a company that sells wifi access via SMS. If they don't know at the time that I send the SMS that I plan to do something "bad" later, then they will not be able to trace my location.

All these are in a country which is somewhat paranoid about political activity and aggressively clamps down on press freedom. It's not as bad as China, but among the worst.

As to using a cellphone, locating you while you are connected (by triangulation) is trivial for most operators, with modern equipment.

But in this case they can only locate where I roughly was when I received the one confirmation message. If indeed I received one at all - if they didn't pass a token through one then there's no reason to use a valid phone number either.

Re:Wait...

[manifoldronin]

I have, and I did. The last thing an internet café wants is to be charged with downloading copyrighted material (or uploading child porn, or being the source of a DoS attack, etc.). Lots of internet cafes ask for ID, to cover their own asses. They won't go out of their way to verify that the ID is real, but they do ask for it. A lot of them also have security cameras, and keep a full log of what you do online, so it wouldn't be too hard to trace a client.

The question is: are they being legally mandated to do so, or are they doing so out of self-protection? I think that makes the difference as far as this discussion is concerned. Just like somebody else pointed out that most of the internet cafes in China actually aren't actually enforcing the law, but that doesn't mean the law isn't there or it's not evil.

Although I've never been to China, a couple of relatives of mine lived there for several years (they speak Mandarin fluently). They came back with all their limbs and were never questioned by men in black (or maybe they erased their memories, OMG!). They actually lived pretty well there (they retired and came back to be with their grandchildren).

So they are Americans? You know, like those who don't have black hair and brown eyes, and always carry their US passports and the US Embassy's phone number in their wallets? Yeah, I would be surprised if they even got a spank in their butt if they are "caught" reading CNN.

I have said this many times on /. to people who have merely "traveled" to China for days, weeks, months, or even "several years". And I'll say it again: no, you have not lived in China. Not as a Chinese you haven't.

How would I know? I was born in China, and lived there for 25 years before coming to the US. My parents and grandparents were all Party members. Trust me, I know.

And why wouldn't I be able to get on Slashdot from China...?

You seem to be under the impression that China is a big concentration camp. It isn't.

It's not a physical one, but certainly a digital and mental one. I mean, just RTFA.

Re:Wait...

[Rui del-Negro]

The question is: are they being legally mandated to do so, or are they doing so out of self-protection?

It's irrelevant considering that:

a) Most of them will simply turn over that information to the government, without asking for a court order.

b) The ones that do so are very likely to get magical retroactive immunity if anyone finds out and complains that what they did was illegal.

c) Failing that, the government can wiretap the communications directly, and give retroactive immunity to itself.

Like the OP said, at least in China they tell you what the rules are from the start; they don't pretend that you have rights and then do whatever they want. The rules might be too strict, and even "unfair", but you know what they are.

So they are Americans?

No, they're not. Believe it or not, americans are not God's chosen people. That's the jews.

I have said this many times on /. to people who have merely "traveled" to China for days, weeks, months, or even "several years". And I'll say it again: no, you have not lived in China.

I see. So they lived there for nearly 30 years, spoke the language fluently (two languages, in fact, IIRC), one of them actually worked for the public administration, but they never lived in China...?

I was born in China, and lived there for 25 years

What? Just 25 years? Then I guess by your own definition you never lived in China.

And you still haven't explained why you think people wouldn't be able to post on Slashdot from China. I'm particularly curious since Slashdot isn't mentioned anywhere as being blocked in China, and since I've seen several posts here made by people claiming to be in China. Maybe they are also mistaken and they never really lived there? Maybe no one has lived in China except you...?

Re:Wait...

[manifoldronin]

It's irrelevant considering that:

a) Most of them will simply turn over that information to the government, without asking for a court order.

b) The ones that do so are very likely to get magical retroactive immunity if anyone finds out and complains that what they did was illegal.

c) Failing that, the government can wiretap the communications directly, and give retroactive immunity to itself.

Like the OP said, at least in China they tell you what the rules are from the start; they don't pretend that you have rights and then do whatever they want. The rules might be too strict, and even "unfair", but you know what they are.

No, they're not. Believe it or not, americans are not God's chosen people. That's the jews.

The question really was "were they citizens of the PRC?" What makes the difference in this context is not whether you speak Mandarin (or however many more dialects fluently), but whether you are under the complete authority of the Chinese government.

I see. So they lived there for nearly 30 years, spoke the language fluently (two languages, in fact, IIRC), one of them actually worked for the public administration, but they never lived in China...?

You said "several years" in your previous post. My comment was based on that. Now it's suddenly 30?

What? Just 25 years? Then I guess by your own definition you never lived in China.

"My own definition"? When did I ever give a definition that draws the line at 30 years? Again you said "several years" earlier.

And you still haven't explained why you think people wouldn't be able to post on Slashdot from China. I'm particularly curious since Slashdot isn't mentioned anywhere as being blocked in China, and since I've seen several posts here made by people claiming to be in China. Maybe they are also mistaken and they never really lived there? Maybe no one has lived in China except you...?

Since you seem to use "several" in a very loose sense, I have to ask, by "several" did you mean "hundreds" or "thousands"? If you actually meant what most people would when they use the word "several", then have you wondered how come there are so few of those posters, compared to the general population of either China or slashdot?

Just because it's blocked doesn't mean "nobody gets out, ever". Is that too hard to comprehend or even imagine?

And you have never answered my challenge - why don't you put your money (or your life in this case) where your mouth is, renounce your current citizenship, and apply for a PRC one. I don't think it's asking for too much, since you think it's all irrelevant, and it's actually better in some cases in China. Your relatives "lived" there happily. I'm sure you'll thrive, too.

Oh and that goes to your relatives' grandchildren too. If they were so happily living in China, why did they keep their children and grandchildren in the US?

Mod parent up

[Captain Splendid]

casualsax3 wins the thread.

From our perspective, yes, but...

[ThousandStars]

James Fallows already did in The Great Firewall. The short version: China is worried chiefly about controlling its own people and setting bad internal precedents. It's not as worried about the rest of the world. In addition, the Chinese authorities are somewhat inept, as he explains here. Because neither can be excerpted effectively, you'll just have to follow the links.

Someone needs to...

[TheGeniusIsOut]

Someone needs to slip a satellite based internet uplink in with their media gear. Even an old school MoDem hooked to a sat-phone would be sufficient if enough are used in parallel, then share the internet connection through a distributed wireless network to anyone nearby. Let the Chinese people get a taste of the other 98% of the internet they are missing out on.

Re:Someone needs to...

[MightyMartian]

...Let the Chinese people get a taste of the other 98% of the internet they are missing out on.

Yeah, before the New York State Attorney General shuts most of that down too.

Re:Someone needs to...

[ewhenn]

Someone needs to slip a satellite based internet uplink in with their media gear. Even an old school MoDem hooked to a sat-phone would be sufficient if enough are used in parallel, then share the internet connection through a distributed wireless network to anyone nearby. Let the Chinese people get a taste of the other 98% of the internet they are missing out on.

Yeah, way to go Frito. great idea.

Re:Someone needs to...

[Redfeather]

The real question is NOT "do they have access," because I think recent history has shown, you can find workarounds for just about anything. The better question is "do they WANT access"?

Paranoid dystopia or not, protective xenophobia is nothing new, and I have a feeling we'd be looking at a lot more outcry from China if it actually existed. Sure, there's all the kerfuffle about Tibet, lead paint in the toys, human rights violations... I could go on for hours, but it comes down to what the Chinese people feel, say, want, do, think... And I don't think, with the wall up as it is, we have any accurate way to guage that en masse as proxy for them.

What we hear is the rowdy few. Of course they're going to say they're rowdy on everyone's behalf, but is everyone behind them after all? The Olympics, I hope, will provide a better barometer for Chinese public view; it's unavoidable NOT because of the internet, but because of the sheer influx of humans observing. Ticket holders, tourists, hangers-on, volunteers... The volume of eyes in Beijing will inflate this summer, and even if there's no email, people will come home with first-hand accounts of exactly what's going on there, good or bad.

Which if course will all get ruined by the first story we hear of some poor Westerner losing their laptop to customs on the way back and possibly going to jail because they didn't like the service at some government-approved web cafe.

Progress. Who needs it.

Do business in China, play by Chinese rules.

[vampire_baozi]

The other option is not get a cut of the market at all. Everyone wants in to China's market- if a company isn't willing to compromise and accept breaching the rights of Chinese citizens, another Western company (and more frequently, Chinese companies) will step up and happily take their place. And as long as the Chinese government keeps delivering economic growth like this, we'll keep scrambling to get a piece of the pie, and the Chinese citizenry will happily give up their civil liberties in return for stability and nice hotels to stay in. After all, compared with pre-reform China, hotels with any internet are a dream come true. With China, and its government, growth and stability go hand-in-hand. Both government and citizens are willing to sacrifice civil rights for it. Not the ideal bargain, but better than some countries ;) We're giving up our civil liberties in America, and not getting much in return.

Re:Do business in China, play by Chinese rules.

[EdIII]

We're giving up our civil liberties in America, and not getting much in return.

We're giving up our civil liberties in America, and not getting anything in return.

There, fixed that for you.

Re:Do business in China, play by Chinese rules.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think taxation without representation is bad, taxation with representation isn't much better...

How about a VPN

[russ1337]

Perhaps these foreign owned companies could install the Chinese firewall, then inside that install a dedicated VPN back to their HQ for their guests.

Hardly need anything that fancy.

[Lanoitarus]

China doesnt block VPNs. Game over.

Re:Hardly need anything that fancy.

[Bronster]

That's OK, they've broken the encryption scheme your pissy little VPN is using, so they can read your traffic just fine. Enjoy.

Re:Hardly need anything that fancy.

[Hyppy]

Citation? I'd like to seem them "break" a 2048-bit cipher without resorting to rubber-hose cryptanalysis.

YHBT

[Anonymous Coward]

YHL. HAND.

Re:YHBT

[Redfeather]

WTF? GTFO.

And apparently it works...

[Channard]

.. a hell of a lot of Chinese people seem to have no idea about the crap their government pulls. You can gripe all you want about the US government, but at least the country has some semblance of free speech.

Bravo.

[HanClinto]

Well said, sir. Well said.

The sad thing is...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's ironic to see our own government railing against it after they rubber-stamped Bush's warrantless spy program that spies on ALL of us (without bothering to hold hearings about what all Bush was up to).

But when the Chinese do it, they finally realize it's a bad thing.

Mind you, it *IS* a bad thing. A terrible thing! I just wish they'd realize that they're being hypocritical here and fight against BOTH spy programs instead of only the Chinese programs. Because, otherwise, if you discuss it with anyone Chinese, they'll just tell you that the US government does it too, so it must be okay!

Which is both ridiculous and sad, because there are MANY things the US government is doing (i.e. torture) which are definitely NOT okay in any way, shape or form.

Scandal

[Peter H.S.]

I think it is a scandal that China ever came to host the Olympics. From extreme censorship to massive doping and outright cheating; the Chinese proudly admitted how they told certain Chinese players to loose games so a more "correct" player could be chosen. Chinese doping is as organized as in the former East Germany and there is absolutely zero interest in combatting doping in China since the Olympic games are being used politically to show how superior the Chinese dictatorship is; doping means medals and medals means political strength.
If this is the norm for what IOC finds acceptable then IOC better change or face sanctions themselves. Democratic countries should seriously reconsider if they should continue to support sporting events that glorify dictatorships.

--
Regards

Re:Scandal

[dintech]

I think it is a scandal that China ever came to host the Olympics.

I hate Government oppression as anyone but I've got to call you out here. I think the Olympic Committee was hoping that the Chinese government would clean up it's act for it's people as a direct result of planning The Games.

In some respects this is true, there has been great infrastructure and environmental improvements in China recently. In terms of infrastructure, you might like to consult this interesting article, PART 1, PART 2 comparing the difference between credit crunch enlaboured American cities and shining new developments in China.

In terms of environmetal issues, Greenpeace have applauded many of the Chinese Governemnt's efforts. Efforts include a focus on reducing emmisions and river pollution, switching to renewable energy sources such as hydro and geo-thermal, expanding public transportation and air quality improvements. In America, the government is actively trying to prevent any improvements relating to global warming.

In terms of censorship, also recall that employees at the American Environment Protection Authority have been prevented from talking to journalists. How's that for "extreme censorship"? Also, don't forget about warrentless wire tapping and the subsequent bill to protect the government and telcos from any repercussions.

Chinese doping is as organized as in the former East Germany

Remember that testing for doping is overseen by the Olympic Committee, not the Chinese government. You should also be aware that America is involved with doping too and stripped of medals.

Admittedly, the improvements aren't as good as they could have been, but if you ask the average Chinese on the street, I'm sure he's very satisfied with the changes and his governments ability to effect them. I'm not trying to imply that America is worse than China or even close, just that it has it's problems too and they are pretty much the same ones. It's time to get off your high horse and realise that he who is without guilt should cast the first stone. Not you.

Re:Scandal

[Peter H.S.]

I hate Government oppression as anyone but I've got to call you out here. I think the Olympic Committee was hoping that the Chinese government would clean up it's act for it's people as a direct result of planning The Games.

Oh, so you really believe that the IOC choose China as host nation? Pretty naive considering the amount of corruption that usually decides it (google IOC and corruption). Anyway taken on face value it is very interesting that IOC choosed a host nation based on _political_ reasons, not neutral sports reasons.

In some respects this is true, there has been great infrastructure and environmental improvements in China recently. In terms of infrastructure, you might like to consult this interesting article, PART 1, PART 2 comparing the difference between credit crunch enlaboured American cities and shining new developments in China.

I don't care about Chinese propaganda, anyway, even if China improved their infrastructure because of the Olympics, what has that got to do with it being an extreme dictatorship.
The Autobahn in Germany can't excuse the Nazi dictatorship.

In terms of environmetal issues, Greenpeace have applauded many of the Chinese Governemnt's efforts. Efforts include a focus on reducing emmisions and river pollution, switching to renewable energy sources such as hydro and geo-thermal, expanding public transportation and air quality improvements. In America, the government is actively trying to prevent any improvements relating to global warming.

Bejing is so horribly polluted that it is beyond belief, even when stopping half the private car traffic and closing down some factories visibility can still get as low as one km. because of smog. In fact the ruling classes in China doesn't give a toss about pollution. Yeah, they might do some propaganda projects and they may talk about doing something, but everyday reality is that China is an ecological disaster and that environmentalist are seen as state enemies and persecuted and jailed. Greenpeace may applaud some Chinese initiatives but Greenpeace themself could never be allowed to work inside China. Unions are also strictly forbidden so that workers can't get organized and combat slave wages an deadly dangerous working enviroments.

In terms of censorship, also recall that employees at the American Environment Protection Authority have been prevented from talking to journalists. How's that for "extreme censorship"? Also, don't forget about warrentless wire tapping and the subsequent bill to protect the government and telcos from any repercussions.

Don't give me that crap. Yes there are incidents in the western world but they are exceptions, not the norm like in China. Your examples are also telling; Warrantless wiretapping can be politically discussed in the west, not so in China. As an US citizen you can openly criticise the US president and even replace him by a free election if you disagree with his actions. That is impossible in China. China is a ruthless dictatorship with an unknown amount of political prisoners, secret executions, torture, censorship and corruption. The Chinese cleptocrazy (ruling classes with the purpose of stealing from the majority) are exploiting the Chinese population to enrichen themselves.

Remember that testing for doping is overseen by the Olympic Committee, not the Chinese government. You should also be aware that America is involved with doping too and stripped of medals.

I can see you don't know a lot about doping, as I cycling fan I unfortunately do. So let me tell you that you are wrong; IOC only deals with doping control during the Olympics. But only the stupid get caught that way. "out-of-competition" controls the rest of the year is the important part since that is when the athletes dope, and that is performed by local federate organizations. Or in Chinas case, isn't. No I am not aware that America (if you by America means the US Government) is involved in organized doping, there isn't even any rum

Ministry of Truth

[jonfr]

China has Ministry of Truth in place. I think that is pretty obvious by now. Giving the media spotlight this is going to give China I can't say that they are playing there cards well. China, as a country might fall apart in the next 20 years because of how they handle the media today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Truth

Show you how it's less courteous?

[aztektum]

Yeah China is worse. But it's FUCKING CHINA. Like they have a wonderful track record. On top of it all, FOREIGNERS in another country are subject to local laws/customs. What did they think because they're hosting the Olympics all the sudden China isn't run by a bunch of shit heads?

Also, what are you saying? That thanks to Tor, you're OK with warrantless wiretaps now? Because you have the knowledge to cover your tracks, it's OK! I remember reading on /. that Tor is not exactly fool proof, maybe things are better now, I don't use it.

My comment was meant as a sarcastic swipe at hypocritical politicians decrying the snooping on FOREIGNERS in a host country (especially when that host country is China, WTF did they expect??). Meanwhile in the U.S. they're snooping on their own fucking citizens without so much as having to show any proof of wrong doing or letting you know about it. But apparently it's not such a big deal because you know you can rent your own fucking server and use Tor.

In this context this is utterly hypocritical for Sen. Brownback to be taking a swipe at a country with China's record (I continue to be in shock and awe that anyone expected different in the first place) when things have been moving down a parallel (perhaps not IDENTICAL) path.

Re:Show you how it's less courteous?

[manifoldronin]

Also, what are you saying? That thanks to Tor, you're OK with warrantless wiretaps now? Because you have the knowledge to cover your tracks, it's OK! I remember reading on /. that Tor is not exactly fool proof, maybe things are better now, I don't use it.

Did you miss the part right before that, you know, where I said "I am upset with the warrantless eavesdropping issue"? Never mind, let me just spell it out for you - no, I am still not OK with the issue.

My comment was meant as a sarcastic swipe at hypocritical politicians decrying the snooping on FOREIGNERS in a host country (especially when that host country is China, WTF did they expect??). Meanwhile in the U.S. they're snooping on their own fucking citizens without so much as having to show any proof of wrong doing or letting you know about it. But apparently it's not such a big deal because you know you can rent your own fucking server and use Tor.

In this context this is utterly hypocritical for Sen. Brownback to be taking a swipe at a country with China's record (I continue to be in shock and awe that anyone expected different in the first place) when things have been moving down a parallel (perhaps not IDENTICAL) path.

I never disagreed with your statement that it is hypocritical on Brownback's part. The problem I had with your post, if I didn't make it clear enough in my response, was the "they are not so courteous in the US" part.

Consistency

[Wildclaw]

Good. If you have laws in place they should be applied to everyone.

I don't like the chinese firewall laws, but I dislike laws that aren't applied fairly to everyone even more.

Liberal != Liberty

[Anonymous Coward]

>> Incompatible with liberalism

> If by "liberalism" you mean the philosophy of letting people do their own thing (i.e., what libertarianism used to be called), you couldn't be more wrong. Capitalism is the ideal economic system for such a political philosophy.

I'm not the AC who posted that, but that's NOT what liberalism means. It comes from liberal (not liberty). It has more to do with a generous and caring society, NOT one where you can do whatever the hell you want.

But I don't blame you for not knowing it. Chinese speakers of English use the word far more often than we do. But it is a real word.

Re:Liberal != Liberty

[Corbets]

Actually, it's both. Like pretty much every word in the English language, it has multiple meanings. If you look it up www.m-w.com. you'll find that the word has meanings associated with both generosity and personal autonomy, which is what the GP said ("letting people do their own thing").

Remember that communication has 3 components: how the message is delivered, how you interpreted it, and how the originator intended it. All too often, people ignore that last component.

Yeah, this is off topic, but it might be informative to some all the same. No, I don't feel the need to AC it, my karma stinks anyway. ;-)

Re:Liberal != Liberty

[marco.antonio.costa]

>> Incompatible with liberalism

> If by "liberalism" you mean the philosophy of letting people do their own thing (i.e., what libertarianism used to be called), you couldn't be more wrong. Capitalism is the ideal economic system for such a political philosophy.

I'm not the AC who posted that, but that's NOT what liberalism means. It comes from liberal (not liberty). It has more to do with a generous and caring society, NOT one where you can do whatever the hell you want.

But I don't blame you for not knowing it. Chinese speakers of English use the word far more often than we do. But it is a real word.

That is exactly what liberalism means. What you think it means is socialism, which is called by its proper name in Europe and South America, but in America they thought Liberal sounded better than Socialist. I wonder why? ;-) *cough* red scare *cough*

Hence Libertarians had to change their name to avoid confusion with the Liberals Homer hates so much...

"Grrrr... Liberals.... Grrr...."

Needs termination

[Craig Ringer]

For a VPN to be useful you need somewhere to terminate it. Public free or subscription VPN termination endpoints don't seem to be too common (unsurprisingly, given the potential for abuse and relatively limited utility).

There are places that offer virtual servers or simple shell accounts where you can set up your own VPN termination, though. Even an SSH tunnel is quite sufficient, really.

However, you also need to be sure that your termination point doesn't have a deal with the Chinese gov't to permit monitoring of traffic of Chinese origin. I would want to be pretty careful about this myself after Yahoo, Google, etc's recent dealings. I wouldn't be too worried about virtual server providers or shell services, but a dedicated VPN termination service might need to be checked out carefully.

Finally, blocking and content filtering are only half the problem. It's still easy to tell that you are using a VPN. This might not be a very good thing, especially if you somehow otherwise draw official attention.

Re:Needs termination

[petermgreen]

As a forieigner I would imagine the safest thing to do would be to VPN back to your employer. It wouldn't look suspicious because loads of people do that to access rescources on thier companies networks and it would keep all your traffic secure.

Re:Needs termination

[Hyppy]

Even safer, access your company through some remote windows or desktop virtualization, like Citrix. Then, you won't even have local records (history, cookies, etc.) of what you've accessed. Just "https://MyCompany.com/CitrixLogon"

article subject line =o_O=

[Anonymous Coward]

seriously. "foreign-owned hotels IN CHINA to install firewall" would have been better. actually, let's keep it simple: "hotels in china to install firewall." I'm sorry. Normally I wouldn't give a frack, but I keep seeing more and more people butcher english when writing for a public audience. considering this is a news site, home to budding journalists, this is really starting to become my pet peeve. I took a couple of english classes, and I found them highly enjoyable (more so than my CS classes). However, I'm not the one in journalism. ...but some1 kneeds 2 retake english class lolololollolol hahahayhah

censorship equals repression

[kimbatch]

The Internet should be a medium for the freedom of expression, not repression. Censorship helps Chinese authorities hide the true extent of human rights abuses - their use of the death penalty, torture and detention without trial and the persecution of human rights defenders. http://uncensor.com.au/uncensor/

Re:censorship equals repression

[thedullroar]

Can you provide citations with evidence of the various "bad" things you say China does? If you can, then you've either misjudged the goal of Chinese censorship, or you are providing evidence that they fail at their own game.

Re:censorship equals repression

[kimbatch]

Do you want evidence of the China's use of the death penalty, torture and detention without trial and the persecution of human rights defenders?

Check out the websites of human rights organisations such as Human Rights Watch, Human Rights in China and Amnesty International.

Censorship is displayed thro China's Government controls on what journalists write and who they interview, what schools publish in textbooks, what statistics citzens are allowed to know and what TV programs you can easily watch. When information is controlled, censored or blocked there is no transparency.

In relation to the death penalty: Chinese citizens, along with the entire world, don't know how many people are executed in China each year - the Government says the statistics are a state secret.
That seems like censorship to me.

What do you say the goal of Chinese censorship is?

Re:censorship equals repression

[thedullroar]

I don't claim to know the mind of the Chinese government, but they don't seem particularly concerned with what the rest of the world thinks. After all, they aren't changing their policies to placate people visiting for the Olympics. And if they can do things like win a bid for the Olympics even when they are suspected of HR violations, why would they care? So I would make an uneducated guess that their goal is internal, not about hiding their HR issues from us.

Proactol

[Anonymous Coward]

It also covers comparative analysis of different Proactol Packages and recommendation as to best package

Proactol
Cheap proactol
Proactol review
Proactol discount
Buy proactol

Believe or not

[lgxwyy]

The action is just for money (sell equipments),not for control. Because they already have the Golden Shield Firewall.

Jeebus almighty!

[Dobeln]

Oh noes! :( Politicized hiring at the justice department and weakened federal regulatory agencies! And the NSA listened in on some people calling abroad! The US is just like China!

And considering Bush is getting kicked out of office real soon, the US will have to become just like China any day now, or it will be too late! US am doomed! :( :( :(

---This message brought to you by HERPES - the Hyperbole Emergency Response Program Eastern Sweden.----

Re:Jeebus almighty!

[The Phantom Buffalo]

I just can't wait until Bush is out of office. Then the whining about him will stop, It will be refreshing to see a new name in the whine posts.

Re:Jeebus almighty!

[Anonymous Coward]

I also cannot wait for Bush to leave office.
But if you think his departure will be some magic panacea which will magically undo all the bad things his Administration has done, you're delusional.

Bush's legacy of domestic spying, weakened regulation, hyper partisanship, Iraq, etc etc etc are going to stay with this country years.

Re:China ~ USA

[Anonymous Coward]

Just for a new perspective. Replace in "China/Chinese" with "USA/American" and "Nationalistic" with "patriotic" and read this again. It sounds eerily like the US public debate.

As a foreigner living in the US, it amazes me how much the government officials and the press need to tout the virtues of America being the grates and the best in everything. Even if they are not.

If it is healthcare, education, banking, recycling, solar energy, hydrogen technology, cell phone technology, Internet access and technology, or infrastructure from bridges to roads to trains to airports, the US is far behind the leading nations in this world. And the vast majority of Americans have no idea that they are not leading, and that they are not even in second or third place.

Only a patriotic/nationalistic drumbeat prevents the democratic America from taking on their pressing issues and fire their leaders that have long failed to work in the interest of the American people. Don't get me wrong, most US politicians don't have the power to imprison citizens for opposing or simply provocative views. But they still try to sell the Americans a happy story that they know is not right. And the mass media in this country does the very same. I guess they don't care enough about the truth, but rather about keeping the audience entertained and paying.

You wouldn't use a Chinese laptop?

[professorguy]

If you won't use a chinese laptop because it might be compromised, may I please ask who made your current laptop? Because if you look in there you're going to see a lot of "Made in China" stickers.