Apple Censors Dalai Lama iPhone Apps In China

eldavojohn writes "Google and Yahoo! have relinquished any sort of ethical integrity with regards to free speech in China but Apple appears to be following suit by blocking Dalai Lama applications in the Chinese iPhone app store. An official Apple statement reads, 'We continue to comply with local laws. Not all apps are available in every country.' A small monetary price to pay for the economic boon that is the blooming Chinese cell phone market but a very large price to pay for that in principles."

Comments

Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

Good to know that Apple supports repressive regimes.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Runaway1956]

A fair question might be, "Which was more repressive - the feudal state that the Dalai represents, or the communist state that built hospitals and freed the peons from their feudal masters?"

I don't think censorship is the way to go. Past censorship seems only to have triggered the Streisand effect. Worse, it has turned the Dalai into something of an icon. But, the Dalai gets no sympathy from me. Nor would he get any sympathy from anyone who actually researched the state of affairs in Tibet when China took it over. FFS, they were living in the 10th century, and China brought them up to the 17th century in a single generation!! There is every hope that they'll reach the 20th century before the rest of the world finishes with the 21st now.

Under the Dalai's system of worship, they couldn't even compete with Kim il Yong's Korea!

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[shutdown -p now]

FFS, they were living in the 10th century, and China brought them up to the 17th century in a single generation!!

More like 20th. There were still bound serfs in 17th century, just as there were in Tibet before China took over.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[sopssa]

And you can apply the same kind of "censorship" in the US and elsewhere too. Apple wont let you release apps to the app store that break laws, just the same way they wouldn't let you release some app praising Hitler in Germany.

There are no principles involved - it's a company making money for its shareholders for gods sake. They wont fight the impossible-to-win fight against China government, instead they just do like any other company working in any country would do - play by the rules.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[mister_playboy]

instead they just do like any other company working in any country would do - play by the rules.

After all, very successful companies like Microsoft, Intel, and WalMart always play by the rules.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[beh]

Well, without having read to much about Tibetan history - but what gives one nation the right to 'force' another nation into the 21st century?

How well would it wash with the American public, if the US government tried to force electricity and the Internet down the Amish people's throats?

It's all nice and well for US companies to demand that other countries accept free markets, but at the same time, they do not grant those nations the 'right' to live however they want -- when did you last see an electronic billboard advertising Coke in an Amish town?

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

If I follow your logic, another fair question would be, did Africans not fair better under colonialist, white supremacist rule, as compared to contemporary dictatorships

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

Past censorship seems only to have triggered the Streisand effect. Worse, it has turned the Dalai into something of an icon.

Not really. What really turned Dalai into an icon was CIA involvement in the whole issue, particularly during the cold wars, so subvert the Chinese government. And second, the Nobel Peace Prize committee, who gave Dalai the "moral" high ground.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Runaway1956]

Fair question. And, a tough one to answer. I guess you have to look at the end results. Let me see - under colonialism, a native African was little more than property, to be disposed of as some white landowner wished. Under today's dictatorships and/or lawless regimes, most native Africans are little more than property, to be disposed of as any warlord, dictator, or religious zealot wishes.

Well, you've got me, really. It's hard to say which system I would rather live under. I guess it sucks to be African?

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Runaway1956]

"How well would it wash with the American public, if the US government tried to force electricity and the Internet down the Amish people's throats?"

http://coolthingsinrandomplaces.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/14440106_1fd3fd82f8.jpg

Maybe you should ask these guys? Dig those shades, huh?

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[bgarcia]

...what gives one nation the right to 'force' another nation into the 21st century?

How well would it wash with the American public, if the US government tried to force electricity and the Internet down the Amish people's throats?

The critical difference here is that Tibet had an oppressive form of government, while the Amish must choose the lifestyle - they are NOT forced into it. In fact, Amish teenagers are encouraged to sample "modern life" before deciding whether to remain Amish or not. They have complete freedom.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[TheRaven64]

Well, without having read to much about Tibetan history - but what gives one nation the right to 'force' another nation into the 21st century?

You mean like bringing democracy to Iraq or Afghanistan?

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[cyber-vandal]

Were they better off before the whites arrived? The jury's out as regards Africa but the Native Americans, Mayans, Aztecs, Australian Aborigines et al certainly were.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a certain theoretical possibility of future freedom, which exists in having a dictator of your own, and does not exist in being enslaved to a foreign nation.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Bert64]

Companies break the rules when it will benefit them...
Annoying the Chinese government will NOT benefit Apple, infact it would likely hurt them a lot because not only would they lose the ability to sell their products in china, but it's also likely the cost of goods that they have manufactured in china would increase or cease to be available to them.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Maybe you should ask these guys? Dig those shades, huh?

Maybe you should look up the word that is painted across the top of that picture.
Clueforyou: By definition Amish restrictions don't apply.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a false dichotomy. Do you seriously think slavery is a glorious and invaluable part of the Tibetan culture, akin to Buddhism?

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Runaway1956]

Wait - they are Amish until a certain age, then they're NOT Amish? How about Russians, Mexicans, or Filipinos? Does anyone else have anything like that?

I say, there are two Amish young men in that photo. Ask their opinions on these matters.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Runaway1956]

There is no false dichotomy. "Glorious" or not, the nobility and the clergy of Tibet worked together to enslave the rest of the population of Tibet. While healers were available for those chosen few among the wealthy, no healers were available for ANY peasant. As has been pointed out many times, by many people, religion was a weapon in the hands of the clergy with which to oppress the peasantry. As has been seen many times the world around, the "clergy" weren't really believers in what they preached. Instead, the preaching was a tool used to keep the population in line.

The Dahli Lama of today is only a single generation removed from an oppressive barbaric regime. The man has never made any sacrifice on behalf of his people - instead he still calls on his people to sacrifice for him.

My contempt for politicians in general is multiplied by an order of magnitude for "royalty" and "hereditary spiritual leaders".

In short, if the Dali were on fire, I wouldn't piss on him to save his life.

That has NOTHING to do with Buddhism. Nothing at all.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

What China did was use force of arms to overthrow the government of a country in order to impose their own political will there. If you're wondering how something like that would wash with the American public, you should turn on the news, because we're doing it in at least two countries that we know about, and probably a few more that we don't yet.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

Try again. Google is your friend. Fail post is fail.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[ElectricTurtle]

Yeah I hear that ripping the still-beating hearts out of hundreds of people a day to appease the gods was a rollicking fun time. Too bad all those crackers had to show up with their 'civilization' bullshit.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Wait - they are Amish until a certain age, then they're NOT Amish?

Yeah, that's basically it.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[donscarletti]

The law has very little to do with it. Right now, in this country, the Dalai Lama is about as popular and well loved as gonorrhea. If Apple becomes known as the "platform of choice for the Dalai Lama" it will suddenly be just as cool in China to buy an iPhone as it is to wear a shirt with a slogan insulting your own mother. Right now, there are a LOT of people buying iPhones which would stop in a heartbeat if it was in any way connected with that particular man. Censorship or not, Apple is making a seriously smart decision on this issue for their bottom line, the government is the least of their worries.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

if the Dali were on fire

Why do you hate Salvador so much? Surrealists ain't that bad :-)

I realize the Dalai Lama is the poster child for Tibetan independence, but it does not infer that you should be against Tibetan independence just because you despise him. The Tibetan people should have the freedom to make mistakes such as choosing him leader. The freedom to avoid being subjugated to Han Chinese settlers also comes to mind.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[cowboy76Spain]

Disclaimer: I have been in Tibet recently (November 2009), but I never have been in other parts of China proper to compare.

POINT 1: China is not in Tibet as a colonial power. The cost of building the infrastructure (roads, mobile coverage in places miles away from the neares town, etc.) and keeping the administration and army there must be orders of magnitude greater than anything you can take from it (a couple million habitants, no farmland, maybe a little mining but in need of infrastructure, etc.). You may agree or disagree with Chinese claims about its rights to Tibet, but they sure treat it as a part of its country. Also, keep in mind that the Tibet issue was played with by UK during the "Great Game" just as a part of an imperialist plan, what links it to isssues as sensitive to the Chinese as the Opium Wars

POINT 2: The power of the monasteries is freightning for a Western tourist, even now. The data our guide gave us was that there was about 1 monk for every 1.000-2.000 people. And they do not grow crops nor have cattle, they live out from the donations of peasants (and I am talking of nomad peasants, not rich farmers). And they show you many big statues and stupas made of gold, in a country so poor. I don't like the Christian Church displays of wealth, and I didn't like the Lama monasteries displays, neither.

POINT 3: Army presence was important, and very heavy in Lhasa. Our guide said it was specially since some riots in 2008. Either way, they were mainly for show; they stood in their positions without checking the people at all. Apart from the customs, the only time we had to identify ourselves was in an internal border, and it looked like more bureaucratic than oppressive (in a small cabin far from any city, they wrote our data in a big book, I remember wanting to ask the soldier if he thought that someone would ever use that data). Coupled with a massive show of strength, of course.

POINT 4: We saw no obstacles to religion, but there was a tight control. Pictures of the Lama that agree with the Chinese where available everywhere. No one was checking the people entering monasteries, but there was some discret presence (I remember seeing a lot of "fire inspectors" in a monastery). In some places, the suspected soldiers where indeed helping the monks, as I suppose they were there "just in case".

POINT 5: It is true that there was a sharp division between the main cities (with lots of Han people) and countryside with almost only tibetans. This has been document as a situtation favored by Beijing and may cause trouble for Tibetan people who want to use his traditions. In fact, in the cities you could see a sharp division between the two groups (even in the clothing). Many signs were bilingual.

Conclussion: First of all, as I stated above, I will not enter terms of legality. Also I am not claiming that China is a great place to live in; China has many human rights issues, but if we single out the Tibet cuestion my main concern/doubt would be knowing if the situation there is worse than in the rest of China (*1). Frankly, after being there my main objection would be to that of immigration and that it will cause "sinification" of tibetan culture (culture spreads from cities to countryside). For the rest of it, it looks like most of Tibet harm in the last 60 years are the same harms that China as a whole has suffered (Cultural Revolution, dictatorships, political repressions, human rights abuse)(*2). Also, in the other hands, let me tell you that Lama religion is not the spiritual kool-aid that we are told here in the West; a church is a church in Rome, in England and in Lhasa, and monks live well off his "sheeps". It looks, if anything, that political and religious issues where mixed in the Cultural Revolution and they didn't get to repare them(*3).

(*1)If someone can help me clarify this point I'd be grateful.

(*2)Perhaps a little more because realities there were different, so it wasn't understood from Beijing the shock that its politics meant. And also, religious resistance was mixed with political resistance.

(*3)Also, I have my doubts if some of our diplomacies aren't fueling the Dalai Lama position, as an useful card to play against China.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Jiro]

What does choosing him leader have to do with it? It's a homegrown dictator, the Dalai Lama, versus a non-homegrown dictator, China. There's no choosing leaders in either version. The Dalai Lama talks about democracy a lot, but wanting anything resembling the pre-China government under other Dalai Lamas is not wanting democracy.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Blue Stone]

>China brought them up to the 17th century in a single generation!!

So it's an improvement to go from being a 'free' people living in a less than perfect feudalist state to an occupied people suffering genocide and cultural decimation; an oppressed and hated minority in your own land?

I hope you one day are able to experience the kind of liberation the Tibetan people underwent, since you think it's so spiffing.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, that is if you consider Tibet a separate nation from China. I don't think even the Dalai Lama himself has gone that far.

If you agree with Dalai Lama on this, then Tibet is indeed part of China. If that is the case, then China has every rights to bring it to whichever century it sees fit, and as a citizen of a foreign nation you probably don't have the right to force your view on China either. You certainly have the right to voice your view points, but then if your government threats sanctions or other punitive measures on China because of this, it's only natural that Chinese would consider these threats unjust, along the same line of your argument.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

Oooohhhhh - you must be a RACIST to remind the world that those Azteca and Mayan people were fucking DEATH WORSHIPPERS!

Next time you see a fucking WETBACK wearing a shirt that says "Mexican, Not Latino, Not Latin American, Not yada yada yada", you'll know that you are looking at one of those death worshippers.

The conquistadors didn't do their job efficiently enough, or all the death worshippers would be dead now.

Ask the Apache how many centuries they battled the Azteca. THAT is the reason the Apache were the last, and the hardest of the Plains Indians to beat in the Indian wars.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

I've not been to China or Tibet, ever. But your - uhh - synopsis? - fits well with everything that I know, everything that I think I know, and everything that I've read about Tibet.

Anytime that an impoverished people supports priests living in unimaginable wealth and splendor, there is something SERIOUSLY wrong with the government, the religion, and the people who run the government as well as the religion.

And, the same goes for the Catholic church in days gone by, as well as some of those crazy Christian sects seen in the US today. I'll not pass judgement on Buddhism - I don't know enough about it to do so. I've heard mostly good about it. But, Tibet's religion ain't what I've heard of Buddhism, and the Dalai Lama ain't no Buddha.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Runaway1956]

Ask yourself:

Assuming that you are going to be someone's servant, vassal, serf, slave, or otherwise subjected to someone else's will, would you rather be hungry, or well fed? Would you rather have some limited indoctrination/education, or would you rather be forbidden to even learn to read? Would you rather your wife had a doctor and nurses in attendance when she goes into labor, or some ignorant tribal shaman who can't even read? Would you rather bury your parents when they are around 30 to 40 years old, and know that your turn is coming, or would you rather have a life expectancy of 50 to 70? When tax time comes, would you rather have beauracrats determining what you owe, based on some standard mathematical system, or would you prefer the local priests take everything that THEY want, to be followed by the local nobility, who take everything that THEY might possibly want?

I find myself defending a government that I really don't like. I still refer to it as "Red China". They were a factor in the Cold War, of which I am a veteran. There is little that I like about China's government - but so many people seem to be blissfully unaware that China's government is ABSOLUTELY NOT the worst thing that could happen to the Chinese or the Tibetan people.

Chinese rule over Tibet actually improved the average Tibetan's life unimaginably. Try studying some documented history, as opposed to the romanticized bullshit about how idyllic the temples were 100 or 200 years ago. Peasants were viewed as animals, and their homes were often times inferior to a pigsty.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Reservoir Penguin]

Well, Wikipedia states that the overwhelmingly vast majority return to the Amish lifestyle having tasted the modern Western culture.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Reservoir Penguin]

This is more about nationalism than demand for Western style freedom. Russian people rallied behind their home grown dictator to defeat a foreign dictator during WW2, and I think it was a wise choice.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[cyber-vandal]

Virtually wiping them out doesn't count as civilizing them. Plus the ones doing the massacring in South America were from Spain. Which at that time, as you'll know being an obvious student of history, had its own death cult masquerading as Christianity. The whites in North America were leaving England where at that time they were burning witches and heretics. It's easy to be disgusted at the Mayans and Aztecs but the Europeans of the time weren't much better.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Freak]

It's called "Apple avoids pissing off repressive regimes that happen to control all of their manufacturing plants."

It's one thing for a website that has zero physical presence in China to thumb their nose at the regime. At worst, Google gets blocked for a day or two; or a small web operator gets permanently banned.

It's completely separate for a company with a physical presence, and lots of money tied up on business there. Apple (even more than Google and Yahoo,) has to do business in China; they CAN'T not follow Chinese law. It would be business suicide.

It would be great if Apple moved their manufacturing back to the U.S.; and was willing to risk losing all their China-based sales, but they *ARE* a business. They are a publicly-traded business, even. If Apple threw away the Chinese market just to make a political statement, the board of directors would be thrown out in a New York Second by the stockholders.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not a matter of technology -- it is more related to social structure, it's more comparable to people in Utah having multiple wives, without women freely choosing to live that way. The govt "forcibly" stops such behavior, regardless of it being historically acceptable for the people who do it.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[macshit]

Fair question. And, a tough one to answer.

Well, you could ask the people thus "liberated", whether it was OK with them, and what they'd like. That's something China's generally not very good at though...

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Hal_Porter]

I find myself defending a government that I really don't like. I still refer to it as "Red China". They were a factor in the Cold War, of which I am a veteran. There is little that I like about China's government - but so many people seem to be blissfully unaware that China's government is ABSOLUTELY NOT the worst thing that could happen to the Chinese or the Tibetan people.

If you look at the huge death tolls in the Cultural Revolution, Great Leap Forward and so on and the fact that China is still poorer and much less free than Taiwan and run by people who still plot to take down the West in revenge for past humiliations, it's hard to imagine a much worse form of government than having the CCP in power.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[AmberBlackCat]

I think you should be comparing the colonialism situation to how the Africans were living before colonialism, not after. Otherwise, you're just comparing the effects of the same oppressive regime in two different regions.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Runaway1956]

Good point. Unfortunately, there's not a terribly huge body of evidence telling what Africans civilizations were like before colonialism. I know that there were multiple civilizations, and at least two of them were pretty highly advanced. They probably fell just short of Greek civilization.

Alas - they fell, and left little more evidence than the Incans or the Anasazi left behind. Did they even have a written language?

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Runaway1956]

Have you forgotten Imperial Japan?

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[ElectricTurtle]

While I'm not going to defend the persecution of 'heretics' by Christians as that of course was reprehensible, but that is a different matter as I can demonstrate. Even given the faultiness of the ethical premise of believing that 'subversion of Christian values' was a crime deserving torture and/or death, the idea that crime deserves punishment, even capital punishment, is cross-cultural, rational, human social norm. So Christians were getting the definition of crime wrong, a thing that has happened in virtually every culture/civilization at some time, but at least they were trying to work within a crime/punishment model, albeit a distorted and subverted one.

However, this does not make Christianity a death cult because while over-zealotry about the religion did cause some to kill, the religion itself does not command its followers to kill (even if there are a lot of vagueries about bad things happening to infidels). Whereas the Aztec religion did require without reservation or equivocation the constant and unceasing slaughter of whomever was convenient to appease the gods or else. Period, full stop. I'm sorry, but they just are not on the same ethical level.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Ihmhi]

Amish is a religious denomination. During Rumspringa, they leave the community for a short time to experience the outside world. They must then choose whether to stay within the Amish community or live in the modern world. During Rumspringa they can essentially get away with anything an average American of that age would get away with - premarital sex, drinking, drugs, partying, etc. They are supposed to get a taste of the way the majority of America lives and then make a choice about which is more important to them, and I don't believe that they are really harshly judged for their behavior during this time.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[shutdown -p now]

Russian people rallied behind their home grown dictator to defeat a foreign dictator during WW2, and I think it was a wise choice.

Some people still argue that, actually. But, in any case, there was a big difference between Hitler and Stalin, and not in favor of Hitler; and there was ample evidence for people in early stages of the war to make up their minds on that. Some historians argue that, if German Army and especially Waffen-SS didn't go all "untermensh" on Russians, there could have been a much more massive collaboration movement, perhaps even large enough to change the tide of the war.

In case of Tibet, the choice is between an authoritarian government that nonetheless permits quite a few personal, and a lot of economic, freedoms, and a theocratic dictator with real slavery, brutal corporal punishments for slight infractions, etc. It is a very different situation.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[shutdown -p now]

What China did was use force of arms to overthrow the government of a country in order to impose their own political will there.

Depending on how the government of invaded country compares to government of China in oppressiveness and provided quality of life, it may well be a good deal.

For example, I would applaud anyone who would use force of arms to overthrow the government of North Korea. Even if China would end up doing that, for all their authoritarianism, North Koreans will still be much better off.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Hal_Porter]

No, but if China liberalised it would not end up being ruled by Imperial Japan. Most likely it would end up with a government like that in Taiwan. Which would be a vast improvement.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

The Chinese communists killed far more Chinese citizens than the Japanese oppression ever could.
That said, yes, it is still better than Japanese oppression. Because this time they themselves choose to shoot themselves in the foot. Yes, there is a difference.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Sorry, but all this BS about what Tibet used to be like is irrelevant since the Dalai Lama has commented on this issue. Even if the Dalai Lama did get Tibet back, it probably wouldn't be under such an old, antiquated feudal state, as he himself admits. Not to mention that he doesn't even have a problem with Tibet being part of China, only with the lack of freedom to practice his religion.

But we wouldn't want to let the facts get in the way of this issue, would we?

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[Anonymous Coward]

Chinese rule over Tibet actually improved the average Tibetan's life unimaginably.

Unless you were a peaceful monk.

Re:Apple sucks that Chinese tit

[grouchomarxist]

When has the Dalai Lama called on Tibetian people to sacrifice for him?

In any case, this "liberation" by the Chinese was one not wanted by the majority of Tibetian people.

That has NOTHING to do with Buddhism. Nothing at all.

If you look at the activities of most Buddhist sects you'll find that they are quite independent of the original texts, because the original texts didn't prescribe such activities. This is true of most religions.

 

The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

They care about their rights to make money.

I mean seriously, do you REALLY think it would be easy to oppress 1.299 BILLION angry people with 1 million armed soldiers if the majority gave a shit? Yeah, me neither.

The Chinese don't give a shit about freedom of speech et al, so long as they're free to make money. Ask any of them about freedom of speech (outside of MAYBE a few really liberal by Chinese standards journalists), and they'll bluntly tell you they don't give a shit. They want to make MONEY, and that's it.

So long as the Chinese people don't give a shit about freedom of speech, there's no point in caring about it for them. As much as I'd like to help them, they're the only ones that can do anything about it. And they won't any time soon. Let's worry about our own freedoms instead, so that one day when they DO care we're available to help if they happen to need it.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

Why the fuck is this a troll?

I was in Beijing on a sporting trip in 1994 and I asked as many people as possible the question "Do people in China want more freedom or more money?" and I didn't find one who said they cared about freedom.

The answer from an early 20's university educated woman who I spent much of my free time with was "Chinese people are greedy, they just care about money."

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Runaway1956]

Sounds a lot like the West, really. Seat belt law? No one gives a damn - they comply with the government as long as it gets them to work. Smoking laws? Again - do what you want, it doesn't affect me. Tax laws? Greedy bastids want more money, fine - just give me a raise so it doesn't hurt my bottom line. Censorship? Think of the children, censor what you wish. In fact - the government can do anything it damned well wishes, as long as it doesn't involve the draft, and allows me to make money.

Every single year, we see more and more laws passed. Strip searches at the airport? Well - I don't want to take my dress off, officer, but if it will get me on the plane, I'll do it for you!

Unless, of course, the TSA employees decide to just take half a day off, like at Dallas Fort Worth. Then, no one gets to peek under the dresses.

But - we are SUPERIOR, LMAO

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

how about a free Detroit, Bedstuy, or East LA

I don't think the app would sell anyway. Most PRC Han Chinese think that the whole free tibet movement was started by US intelligence officers to undermine any far left western support of a the chinese government. Therefore they are not at all sympathetic and probably would not buy the app since they are the only group that could actually afford legit iphones.
what law? the law of popular opinion?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalai_Lama#Introduction_of_the_Dalai_Lama_i...
2nd paragraph

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[interval1066]

Yeah, getting 10 years without any real representation or legal recourse for saying anything the Gov. doesn't like is just like the seat belt law in the west. Well, I'm going to go watch Rage Against The Machine's video "Testify". Don't know that one? Oh, its a complete slam against W & Al Gore and the US Congress. I wonder why I can't find videos critical of Hu Jintao or the PRC Politburo?

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[sydneyfong]

It wasn't that long ago when China was really an underdeveloped country, with the majority of the population without sufficient daily necessities such as food and shelter. Talk to them about freedoms and of course that will on deaf ears.

Today a sizable part of China is prosperous almost on par with the first world. It wouldn't be long until these people demand more freedoms and rights.

What I think the Chinese government is really concerned though, is not about its citizens having more freedoms and rights. Rather, it is the eagerness of the west to "help" the "revolution".

Honestly, we've all seen what happens when the righteous Uncle Sam and the west "liberates" a country. Iraq? Afghanistan? If you read up Chinese 19-20th century history, you'll realize that a lot of invasions were under various "nice" pretexts, notably the "Greater Asia" slogan used by the Japanese to "rid Asia of colonial powers".

I'm sure you don't have these ulterior motives, but please face the fact: your "help" to other countries "for their own good", is much more likely to make it a hellhole than achieving something positive.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[timmarhy]

your an idiot, go live in china if you think it's more free then the USA. the USA may not be perfect, but it's still a hell of a lot more free then a communist state.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

This doesn't make much sense, though.

The fact is that people in China DON'T have freedom of speech (for instance). Given that, how can you expect them to truthfully answer questions about whether they'd WANT freedom of speech, when desiring freedom of speech is itself something that is prohibited under the current lack of free speech?

There's also the fact that you, of course, did not actually go to China and ask anyone.

What you're doing is essentially saying "group A is much larger than group B, therefore group B could not possibly control group A against its will", but such reasoning is fallacious. Of course there are examples in history where group A rose up against group B (the American revolution comes to mind), but if you look at history as a whole, I think you'll find that there's pretty much always been a (small) ruling class and a (large) class of serfs and servants who were kept oppressed, one way or another, to varying degrees.

Don't make the mistake of seeing humans in an overly romantic light. Most of them are cowards (although I don't intend a value judgement there), and there's always been people who have known how to exploit that. The iron law of oligarchy exists for a reason.

That said, you ARE right insofar as that the only ones that can do anything about the situation in China are the Chinese. Attempting to liberate other countries, no matter which way, is doomed to fail. You cannot lead someone into independence or freedom, for obvious reasons: if you lead them, they're not independent and free.

It makes about as much sense as dumping tons of food into Africa to erase poverty there. (Doing that may make sense under very narrow circumstances when people are literally starving to death, but other than that, it has the opposite of the intended effect, as we now know.)

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Bert64]

Of those 1.299 billion people, many will be physically unable to fight (too old, disabled, very young etc)...
Many more will simply be unwilling to, there is no way you can motivate an entire population like that... And since there would be a high risk of death, people would need to be very motivated to act.
And even if you tried, how would you get the word out to so many people, when the government controls all the mass communications systems?

In this modern age, it's simply impossible to motivate enough people to overthrow an entrenched government...

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[WindBourne]

Actually, they already are on level with the west. The problem is that CHina fixes their money against the dollar and has raised massive trade barriers. If they would free their money, then the wealth would rise overnight by 3-10x what it is today.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[tonycheese]

This is absolutely right on the money. A few decades ago, 99% of the population there could never eat their fill.

People do not demand luxuries unless they have basic food and shelter covered. If half your town was starving, who the fuck would care about freedom of speech? Feeding your children comes first; you can call it "greed" if you want, but they're still getting over the fact that most of them can actually eat as much as they want now.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[ElectricTurtle]

Statistically I'd say that US involvement is more likely to be positive than negative. Enumerated:

Mexican-American War: Substantially positive effects on acquired territory.
Spanish-American War: Substantially positive effects for Puerto Rico and Guam, less so but still positive for the Philippines... Cuba not so much, the degree of which depending on whether you want to blame the revolution on the US.
World War II: Positive effects for numerous occupied territories, Japan, Germany, former Japanese Pacific island mandates too numerous/small to list...
Korean War: Substantially positive effects on South Korea
Vietnam War: Negative effects, but to be fair, what happened in post-war Vietnam is what the Vietnamese did to themselves, we lost the war and had no further direct impact on Vietnam's development. (And if we hadn't been involved at all, the South just would have lost more quickly and the same things/conditions would have happened faster.)
Grenada: Positive effects
Panama: Probably barely net positive, but hard to say considering how little Panama has advanced and how much collateral damage was done.
Kuwait: Substantially positive effects
Somalia: The place was so messed up when we started there I don't think it was substantially more messed up when we left, and just like Vietnam the Somalis themselves must shoulder the responsibility for their condition after our withdrawal.
Balkans: Net positive effects
Afghanistan: Net positive effects, primarily because the country was practically starting from zero.
Iraq: Substantially positive effects in the north, substantially negative effects in the south. It's too bad Turkey is such a bitch about Kurds, otherwise it would make a lot of sense to just split Iraq and salvage what's working.

So there you are, even if we assume that what countries do to themselves after we leave is our fault, that's still round about an 80% rate of positive effects to places we have occupied.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[__aapspi39]

Obviously you're not aware that the British brutally controlled the whole of india for a long long time, and with less than 20,000 soldiers. that's a country of close to a billion people controlled by 20,000.

one question for you, do you think that by apple making money from helping to take away the human rights of people then they are strengthening "our own freedoms" as you put it, and thus, down the line giving us more of chance of helping them should they decide they do want to be free? how far would you go with this? just how flexible is your moral compass?

also, your point of view is pretty convenient for big business isn't it - would it surprise you to know that your belief is an echo of one put forward by Rupert Murdoch a few years back...? someone who clearly believes that the needs of big business are more far important than freedom or democracy.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

You've conveniently omitted all the South American countries where the CIA tipped over dozens of governments for being "too leftist", enabling the rise of vicious military dictators. Ditto for big chunks of Africa, and parts of the middle east (hint: the Shah, dumbass).

Your "analysis" of Vietnam also omits that we had the opportunity to solve that problem 30 years before the war, but didn't because Wilson was a racist bastard.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

And China is now supporting dictatorships/totalitarians around the world, as well as building up a military surrounding India. How soon before they invade them? They did it in 1962. Even now, China is getting ready to take water from India and Bangladesh.

While I will not defend America's invasion/occupation of Iraq, Afghanistan was supporting AQ, and had to be invaded. Even China supported that. Later, there was overwhelming evidence that China was offering covert aid to Al Qaeda. That is until recently, when Al Qaeda objected to China's action in Western China. Now, China simply executes a number of citizens in western China just for suspicion of being associated with Al Qaeda.

Dude, before throwing rocks at America, look at yourselves.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is, not so much that they are afraid to speak against the Chinese government, but that they are lead to believe, and honestly do believe, their government is right in doing what they do. This is thanks to the way information is controlled in China. It's not that much different to how Christian families control how their children are raised to make sure Christianity is all they believe in by controlling what they are allowed to believe.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Reservoir Penguin]

You don't have freedom, you have an illusion of freedom. I grew up in the late USSR, we also had an illusion of freedom, in fact we as children genuinely felt sorry for the poor American workers who didn't have socialism and freedom and even gathered food and warm clothing for the American homeless who slept in cardboard boxes and phone booths. Your entrenched two party system, where the parties are just two sides of the same coin, one ultra-conservative and the other moderately conservative ruling the country with unbounded sway, what choice and freedom do you really have?

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Hal_Porter]

You don't think that if you live in a country as repressive as China that might not have just been the safe answer?

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[ElectricTurtle]

You're being disingenuous to the scope of the argument. The GP specifically said 'when Uncle Sam [...] "liberates" a country' and 'invasions' i.e. he defined the scope of the argument as those times when the US has used direct military force. So don't act like I'm 'conveniently omitting' anything, I didn't define the scope.

Besides which, throughout the Cold War both sides did whatever they could to foment rebellions in the 3rd world against whatever government was in power that didn't support their views. It was a systemic problem, so don't act like the US was 'the bad guy' for toppling governments while the USSR was doing the exact same thing.

I'm really not sure what you're talking about with regard to Vietnam... the only thing 30 years before the war was a rather unsuccessful nationalist uprising, fully six years after Woodrow Wilson left office (or do you mean some other Wilson? I can't find any major figures relating to US SE Asia policy named Wilson during the 1930s, not to mention that was the height of US isolationism and no political move for military support of a uprising in SE Asia would be tolerated by the American public). Or are you referring to the deal made more than a dozen years later by Roosevelt/Truman to return Vietnam to the French? Ironically, US unilateral support (if such a thing were possible) of Ho Chi Minh after the August Revolution would not only have been the political doom of whomever suggested it so soon after WWII (with support for the 'downtrodden' French and their interests at a ludicrous high) but might have even increased tensions with the Russians since at that time they were on-board with the other powers of Europe to support the French. So... I really, really have no idea what you're trying to say about Vietnam.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[c6gunner]

Well done sir, that was the best troll I've ever seen.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[shutdown -p now]

Balkans: Net positive effects

Can you elaborate on what you mean here? In general, U.S. (and, generally, western) involvement in most Balkan conflicts was extremely one-sided. E.g. with Kosovo, it stopped the genocide and expulsion of Albanians by Serbs, but ignored the subsequent genocide and expulsion of Serbs by Albanians. It also glosses over the fact that independent Kosovo became a criminal hub (and, it seems, a terrorist boot camp in the making) of Europe.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[ElectricTurtle]

I was not trying to do any detailed analysis, but rather just rendering an opinion as to whether in each case the result of direct US military involvement made the situation in the region better or worse overall. My knowledge of that conflict is limited, so I'm going to ask general ethical questions: is stopping one of two genocides/expulsions better than stopping neither? Is it possible to link increased criminal activity in Kosovo to US involvement in a way that excludes the possibility that it would have happened anyway?

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

You missed the American invasion of Canada where the Americans burned many town, and subsequent retaliation by British forces which only ended with the burning of the White House.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

Not just the USA and USSR. China was also doing the same thing. China was big with the backing of MANY terrorists and totalitarian countries.

1. They backed (and still back) North Korea.
2. North VietNam.
3. They backed the Pol Pot and the Khmer Rogue's genocide (though fell out of favor with them later).
4. arms to Idi Amin (though they were the minor player here; USSR was far worse).
5. There has been evidence that shows that they did provide support to Al Qaeda, though that ended when China started crushing and murdering their muslim population.
6. Currently support Mugabe of Zimbabwe sending him loads of weapons and goods.
7. They are helping North Korea with installing a Nuclear Facility into Burma.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[ElectricTurtle]

US forces occupied only very small parts of Canada for very short periods of time. Consequently I didn't feel it met the criteria established by the original scope of the argument as outlined by the GP. Further the question was whether or not a nation was positively or negatively impacted by occupation overall. I doubt greatly that anybody can point to any systemic, lasting negative effects caused by occupation. Yes, some buildings (on both sides) were burned, that's war, but Canada as a whole I don't think was made better or worse off by the process.

Re:The Chinese don't care about freedom

[shutdown -p now]

I'm going to ask general ethical questions: is stopping one of two genocides/expulsions better than stopping neither?

I suppose I wasn't clear, then. Second genocide was the result of U.S. intervening to stop the first one. As usual, as soon as the oppressed have the upper hand, they take revenge on their oppressors (and everyone deemed to be associated with them) by exact same means that were used to oppress them.

Is it possible to link increased criminal activity in Kosovo to US involvement in a way that excludes the possibility that it would have happened anyway?

I don't think so, not unless one is into crystal ball business. However, the likelihood of Serbian-dominated Kosovo being such an enclave was much smaller than an independent Kosovo run by members of the Kosovo Liberation Army (an interesting historical sidenote: KLA was designated a terrorist group by US, UK, and many others, with everything that entails; immediately prior to the 1998 intervention, that designation was dropped with no explanation).

It's a somewhat similar case to Iraq, where Saddam's regime, while brutal, did a decent job at keeping law and order in a region that is inherently prone to inter-ethnic and inter-religious strife.

Principals?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are they taking principals as hostages?
I'm not following...

Re:Principals?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi Supernintendo Chalmers!

Re:Principals?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, no, Apple is clearly paying down their debt to China.

Re:Principals?

[Maxo-Texas]

They figured... they'd sacrificed their principles... why not sacrifice some principals as well.

Once you let go on a little evil, why not go ahead for the big evil and save time.

Re:Principals?

[russotto]

They figured... they'd sacrificed their principles... why not sacrifice some principals as well.

Once you let go on a little evil, why not go ahead for the big evil and save time.

It's Google which is known for "don't be evil" (and then knuckled under to China anyway rather than leave the market). Apple's unofficial motto is not "Don't be evil" but rather "Ooh, shiny!" :-).

Principals?

[Fnord666]

...Chinese cell phone market but a very large price to pay for that in principals.

Maybe they should pay in superintendents then, or did you mean principles?

Read as...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not profitable anyway as no one will buy this app.
Buying this app is like bying a ticket to jail...

A new low?

[erroneus]

China: You no make this app available or we no make no more cheap iPhone for you! You can make iPhone somewhere else!
Apple: Okay... I'll do whatever you ask.

Re:A new low?

[SpeedyDX]

Hilarious! What a great rendition of the broken English of all Chinese people! Especially those who often deal with foreign, mainly English-speaking businesses. Not a racist comment at all! Completely appropriate AND necessary for the point you're trying to make.

Oh, sorry, I must have forgotten that I'm Chinese for a moment.

Me love your post long time!

Re:A new low?

[Stormwatch]

Read this and stop overreacting.

Re:A new low?

[StikyPad]

How many times do we have to go through this nonsense?

Pick your battles. Isolationism, the result of failing to abide by foreign laws, is a losing strategy, so it would be foolish for US corporations not to compromise. In exchange for compliance with the law -- law that won't change as a result of failure to comply on the part of foreign corporations -- we have the presence of US companies, services, and products in China, which is beneficial both economically and (in the long run) socially and politically.

Or do you turn down a paycheck every time you feel a superior didn't respect your values enough?

That's what I thought...

Re:A new low?

[SpeedyDX]

Overreacting? I merely pointed out that his racial denigration of Chinese people was completely unnecessary for the point he was trying to make. For a relatively liberal, left-leaning community that embraces the concept of open contribution to society, /. seems generally pretty intolerant when racial minorities point out posts that are unnecessarily racist. We are labeled trolls or whiners or, as you say, someone who overreacts. However, is this not exactly the type of unfair treatment that a considerable section of the /. population professes against?

People who share music or exchange whatever form of information or entertainment they wish are labeled pirates, thieves, crooks in the media or by corporations. This is a malicious misrepresentation of a minority (a sizable minority, but a minority nonetheless) group of people. But when racial minorities complain of the same malicious misrepresentation, we are posting flamebait? We are being too sensitive? We should "man up", as it were?

Just because this "Chinglish" concept exists, and may indeed be prolific amongst lay Chinese who do not have access to quality education, it's okay to make fun of it? Would it be okay if I generalized all Blacks as gangsters or muggers since violence is relatively prevalent in Afro-American communities with low socio-economic standing?

I remember reading a post on /. that said that we are letting the corporations dictate the game when we allow them to label us as pirates. When we openly embrace such a derogatory label. So no. I will not let insensitive, racist clods dictate the game in /. conversation by allowing them to throw in racial insults willy-nilly.

Besides, I was under the impression that /. is a place where people should feel comfortable reading, commenting, and otherwise participating in the community. Allowing such casual racial insults and then categorizing people who are genuinely offended by this type of behaviour as somehow weak or, more vulgarly, as pussies does no service to that end. I am not some bleeding heart liberal who is attacking certain types of speech for the sake of whatever conception of racism is out there. I am a Chinese person, offended by a Chinese slur. Just because I can take it doesn't mean I should stay silent and allow such hostile behaviour to proliferate in a supposedly open and welcoming community.

Re:A new low?

[SpeedyDX]

I hate to double post, but I would just like to illustrate my point more vividly.

There's a difference between an acknowledgement of sociological fact and racism. For example, I can say that there is a higher rate of reported offences and convictions amongst the Black population without being racist. That does not entail that I can say that many Afro-Americans are gangsters and should be locked up.

Likewise, you can criticize the policies and practices of the Chinese government. But that does not entail that you can start throwing around Chinglish as a cheap laugh against Chinese people.

He could easily have made his point without using Chinglish, but he chose to throw that insult against Chinese people, whether intentionally or unintentionally. In my opinion, it's even worse if he did it unintentionally - if racist insults are trivialized to the point where a cheap laugh at the expense of an entire race is considered insightful and someone who raises a voice in protest against such a racial insults is considered a troll, then we have reached a point where racial minorities are oppressed on /. in a way that is socially harmful for the community as a whole.

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm Chinese too and I found that hilarious. Yes, it's a stereotype, but one that has a strong base in reality.

Remember that scene from the latest Star Trek movie where Chekov speaks with a thick Russian accent? I laughed my ass off.

Every race or group of people in the world have their fair share of quirks that are the butt of jokes.

Have a sensor of humor, my fellow country man, especially the ability to laugh at yourself. It's a sign of maturity and a lack of insecurity.

Re:A new low?

[Runaway1956]

More people should grow up in multicultural neighborhoods. You learn ALL the denigrating slur, realize they are funny, then you begin to realize that none of them apply all the time, but they all apply equally to all ethnic groups.

Got a good Polish joke? Go ahead, pick your favorite. Tell it to 100 people - but for each person, substitute the ethnic term. First, use "Redneck", then "Hillbilly", then "Russian", "English", "French", "Catholic", "Chinese" - etc ad nauseum. Almost all of the people you tell the very same joke to will think it was just as funny as it was when it was a Polish joke.

You may also note that the people who actually take offense at the joke recognize that there is an uncomfortable truth in there. For instance, almost all Americans CAN recognize a first generation immigrant by speech alone. They talk funny. 2nd generation? Maybe. 3rd generation? Not likely.

Could it be that you're just embarrassed by your family's failure to completely blend in after a generation or two? Don't worry - your kids will blend in just fine.

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

You realize that one idiot is no all of Slashdot?

Also, this is the internet, if you feel insulted, that's _your_ fault. You should _expect_ racist comments and bigotry.

Stay behind the chinese firewall if you don't want to be offended by american views of chinese views of america.

Re:A new low?

[l3ert]

The use of "voices" to denote cultural/ethnic background is common and apparently accepted (at least in North-America). Some examples include stuff like "camarade, da, ..." for Russian, "eh" for Canadian, cowboy lingo for Texans, etc... It's prevalent on TV, specially in sitcoms and animated shows. If you find that offensive, fine. If you feel the need to point it, fine. But don't call people racist or accuse them of using racist slurs when they probably didn't intended like that.

Re:A new low?

[sydneyfong]

Calm down brother. I guess you live in a place where you're an ethnic minority, so I can't claim to totally understand how you feel. I'm Chinese too, and I didn't feel too much offended by the OP's post. It definitely wasn't pleasant, but not to the extent I'd be ranting on racism and stuff.

There is a time to tolerate cheap jokes and jabs, particularly when they don't really mean much beyond the verbal assault. Did you react to the "In Soviet Russia" jokes that used to be so common around here? Or the short lived "in Korea only old people..." meme?

Of course, as I've mentioned I don't live in a place where Chinese is an ethnic minority, so I'm less prone to being agitated by these kind of cheap jokes. But sometimes overreaction (in the eyes of onlookers) has negative effects. Choose your fights wisely.

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

But that does not entail that you can start throwing around Chinglish as a cheap laugh against Chinese people.

Calm down. Representing stereotypical incorrect English speech by a particular ethnic group (especially when it's clearly exaggerated for comical effect) is not racist. I'm Russian, and I do not mind similar representation of Russian accent and manner of speech in English either (especially so as vast majority of Russians do in fact have a strong accent; and so do most Chinese!).

The only racism that exists here is the one in your head. You're like the psycho from the joke who saw rape in every abstract picture that doctor gave him, and then complained since doctor is a psycho because "why else would he have all those horrible pics?".

By the way, jokes about Jews are funny, too. No, really, they are. So are jokes about Africans, Irish, Poles, Russians, Americans, French, Inuit...

Finally, here's another doze of racial hatred, just to annoy the pricks a little bit more. A post-WW2-rebuilding-period Soviet joke:

Soviet troops liberate a village in Ukraine from Germans, and see the gallows on the central square with several bodies hanging from them. They ask who those people are and why they were hanged, and the locals explain that these are all the Jews that were in the village. The soldiers are furious: "This is atrocious! We'll have to get revenge on those fucking German Nazi assholes when we get to Berlin! How about we hang all their Jews, too!".

(by the way, the above would probably get the teller 5+ years in the camps if told immediately after the war; some people in the West today apparently like that idea)

Re:A new low?

[shutdown -p now]

Remember that scene from the latest Star Trek movie where Chekov speaks with a thick Russian accent? I laughed my ass off.

As a Russian, I can second that - it was even more funny as it mirrors my real-life experience with other Russians overseas. I know some people who have been living in Canada for 20 years now, and they still speak like Chekov in the movie.

Another thing that was appreciated is that it was a genuine Russian accent, not a half-assed (and generally incorrect) attempt to mimic one performed by a native English speaker in many American movies.

Re:A new low?

[SpeedyDX]

I grew up in Toronto, one of the most multicultural cities in the world. We have reached a point where over 50% of the population is comprised of visible minorities. So yeah, I might know a thing or two about growing up in a multicultural environment.

Are those really your arguments for allowing such racially charged comments? That I should suck it up, or that I can't blend in to society? That I'm immature or insecure or embarassed if I can't find such insults funny? Ad hominems abound, but not a single good argument for allowing such racial insults. Let me give you an(other) argument against racial insults that doesn't rely on blatantly precarious logic. Allow me to provide a first-hand account of a minority reader on /..

I am not a frequent contributer to /. discussions, and there are plenty of reasons why that is so. The first is that my primary expertise lies in philosophy and somewhat less so in other disciplines of the humanities, but not particularly in technology. As such, I tend to take a back seat and reap the collective wisdom of the more tech-savvy masses on /.. However, where my expertise does come into play (rarely as it may), my input does tend to stimulate conversation or serve to inform others on relevant issues. I have a background in Philosophy which allows me to contribute to discussions like think-typing (where I link to ideas of Embedded Cognition and Enactivism that are highly relevant in AI research and other "do with just thinking" technologies), the possible problem of over-reductionism in the disciplines generally termed "hard sciences", and whether it is ethical to summarize research in certain areas of study in a biased manner. My background in Criminology allows me to comment on certain legal issues like whether a warrant system is necessary or effective.

At any rate, I feel like I can and do contribute meaningful content to /. discussions. However, there are many more times where I feel I can contribute, but the ambience in those particular discussions are too stifling for me to contribute. This current thread is a prime example of a stifling social environment. There cannot be free and open social discourse in an oppressive environment. This is clear when the state acts as the oppressor (a completely valid criticism against the Chinese government, I might add). This is, however, less clear when society acts as the oppressor.

If the state says that I am free to practice Islam, for example, but whenever I go and pray in a public space (inevitable since there are specific times that prayer is required in Islam), I receive bouts of verbal harassments, can it truly be said that I am free to practice Islam? If I fear that whenever I practice my religious practices, I will be the subject of verbal abuses, am I really free to do so? This is not fear of prosecution - for I will not be prosecuted by the state - but it is a fear of social ostracization. If everywhere there are people hurling insults at Muslims for a cheap laugh, does that not contribute to the social oppression of a Muslim? If I need to, as you say, blend in, presumably by somehow altering my religious practices, could I still be said to be free to practice my religion? The answer that the state allows free religious practice completely misses the point. Whether it is the state doing the oppressing or society doing the oppressing, SOMEONE is being oppressed.

In the case of this story, we have one person who openly generalizes the Chinese people via the actions of their government (would it be fair to say that all Americans were war-hungry when Bush and Cheney were in power?). We have other people who mock the Chinese, and we have still others who tell the person who has a problem with that mocking that they are somehow a weaker human being (in that they are lacking a sense of security or maturity or a sense of humour). When I stand up for myself and m

Re:A new low?

[SpeedyDX]

You're right, of course, when you say that there are times we just have to roll our eyes and let it pass by. But when we start to do so too early and too often, we are led down a dangerous road. It is precisely when comments with such racial overtones become acceptable and even applauded that we should be worried.

In any event, I felt I had to at least say my part. I tend to write a lot, as a philosophy major. As a wise person once said, "Someone is WRONG on the internet."

Re:A new low?

[Runaway1956]

One correction. I made no mention of "cultural homogeneity". That term is not synonymous with "blending in". Mormons, Baptists, Catholics, and any number of other Christian faiths "blend in" flawlessly in America. Moslems tend to stand out right now, thanks to the actions of some of their overseas brethren, along with a few domestic misfits. Wiccans, Native Americans, and others blend in to the mix, without being homogenous with the more mainstream Christian faiths.

My whole point was similar to another post, made by a member who says that he is also Chinese. Lighten up, and laugh at yourself. Psychology isn't THAT serious a course of study. Hell, LIFE isn't all that serious. It's just temporary after all. You might as well laugh at yourself - and when you get over it, you can then laugh at all the other assholes who aren't all that different.

The original post was good for a mild chuckle. The fact that 33% of the (self identified) Chinese people who post on slashdot took offense at the post doesn't detract from the little bit of humor. Keep in mind that 75% of females would take offense at locker room humor - but 90% of all men still laugh at it. The fact that my wife doesn't think a joke is funny doesn't dictate whether I think it's funny.

Oppressed, are you? Not at all. You voiced an opinion, some people opined back at you, you furthered your opinion - and I've not seen one person's post defining you as some kind of subhuman, yellow skinned, whatever. And, if someone DOES put you down as subhuman, then you can just shake your head, and write them off as an ignorant barbarian or whatever blows your skirt up.

Meanwhile - why don't YOU post about what Joe Sixpack and his family in China find humorous about our Western culture. Americans especially probably mangle your language all to hell and back, if and when they bother to learn it at all. Go for it - tell us how stupid WE sound! You won't hear me whining. In fact, you might learn something from the responses that are posted.

Re:A new low?

[erroneus]

I'm guessing Southpark really pisses you off too.

Do we really have to live in a world where we can't acknowledge funny things as funny? No one needs to lecture me on linguistics. No one needs to lecture me on sensitivity. I work with an extremely diverse group of people daily, am married to a person of foreign origin and am raising a child in a multilingual environment. To me, mistakes are very often funny -- hence the name I use. One can either accept funny things as funny, or one can burn one's self up inside with hatred and conflict. Matsumoto Musashi bested most of his opponents simply by showing up late and pissing them off. Your sensitivity is a weakness. Your anger is a weakness. (Learned that lesson from my own studies in Asian cultures.)

And have you ever been in a multi-linguistic environment so thick that in order to be understood, you have to speak broken English? I do that almost daily. It doesn't mean anything resembling a lack of respect as you seem to think it does. And when I hear people attempt to mock a Texas drawl, I sure as hell don't get defensive -- though I might attempt to correct their attempt at mimicry from time to time.

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude... chill OUT.

I agree with your basic point, but really, you're making a mountain out of a molehill.

Re:A new low?

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

Likewise, you can criticize the policies and practices of the Chinese government. But that does not entail that you can start throwing around Chinglish as a cheap laugh against Chinese people.

The GPs use of broken English of many Chinese businessmen is not some kind of racist insult. If anything it's an insightful observation of the relationship between western businesses and China. The trading partnership between the US and China is unparalleled in scope though all of history, yet the cultural and social distance between most Chinese and Americans remains enormous. Each side can only rattle out enough broken language in the others tongue in order to close the (often shady) deal and beyond that ne'er the two sides shall meet.

Most foreign business in China could be conducted by a computer, or by mime using grunts and pointing; that's how little exchanging of ideas is going on. So much for the power of commerce.

Re:A new low?

[drinkypoo]

Just because this "Chinglish" concept exists, and may indeed be prolific amongst lay Chinese who do not have access to quality education, it's okay to make fun of it?

In the course of gaining her formal education, my lady was forced to study "ENGRISH AS SECOND RANGRUAGE" by "DOCTOR KAH". I can't do it justice, but she is an excellent mimic (her father called her little parrot) and the best part is what happened when you really needed to know what the instructor was sharing. "Okay, this very important... are you listen? This be on test... rglhwe lh weklgh wkle;gh klwgh" — i.e., MUMBLE MUMBLE MUMBLE. Every student in the class looking at each other like, "what the fuck?" No student got better than a C in the class, and so the grades were adjusted to give C students an A. Keep in mind, this is a class on teaching English as a second language, as she was enrolled in the education for education program.

Recently, we bought a bird cage from China. I mean, we bought it from a Chinese guy living in the USA who was obviously importing them direct from the manufacturer. While advertised as being 100% safe powdercoat and such, it arrived in an inadequately packed box (a shelf box, with no shipping box) and stinking to high heaven of the binder in the paint, which was flooded in an area and had zero chance to cure in a normal bake. When we began to attempt the return (the paint was clearly unsafe for birds in ANY case; the fumes were making me ill, they would almost certainly have killed my conure) and explained that we didn't want "cheap chinese crap" the seller gave us enormous resistance and shared some great Chinglish gems about how not everything made in china was toxic, and how everything was made in China. No apologies for Fraud. But the hilarity, once again, was the chinglish.

So, let us come back to the simple fact that Chinglish is funny. If you disagree, sometime ask a [native] Chinese what they think of what it sounds like when Americans (or Brits) laugh. They think we sound like donkeys, and I mean this almost universally. They feel free to find us amusing, perhaps because unlike you, they have a working sense of humor. I guess that's not genetic, though, if you're missing one.

Besides, I was under the impression that /. is a place where people should feel comfortable reading, commenting, and otherwise participating in the community.

Slashdot is taco's blog, and he's never gone out of his way to make it comfortable for anyone but him. That was made abundantly clear when they took the verbiage OUT of the FAQ about reporting abuses of moderation — they don't care, they just want ad impressions. This is NOT a safe haven. You were sadly mistaken.

I am not some bleeding heart liberal who is attacking certain types of speech for the sake of whatever conception of racism is out there. I am a Chinese person, offended by a Chinese slur.

So just to be clear, you are not offended by expressions of racism, unless they target the Chinese, and this is a purely knee-jerk reaction.

Just because I can take it doesn't mean I should stay silent and allow such hostile behaviour to proliferate in a supposedly open and welcoming community.

Well, I feel hostile towards you now...

Re:A new low?

[QuantumRiff]

Me love your post long time!

Why are you dragging the Vietnamese into this conversation? :)

that's a play on a quote from Full Metal Jacket, a Movie (some would say 2 movies in one) about the Vietnam War..

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

Riney chink

Re:A new low?

[betterunixthanunix]

"we have the presence of US companies, services, and products in China, which is beneficial both economically and (in the long run) socially and politically."

Beneficial socially and politically? Funny, the presence of US corporations has not done much for the citizens of Saudi Arabia, who continue to be persecuted by their government. What reason is there to think that the Chinese will magically see better lives just because US corporations happen to operate in China? Particularly since those corporations are doing absolutely nothing to buck the censorship or monitoring efforts.

Sure, the Chinese economy has grown very rapidly in recent years, but do not confuse "high GDP" or "more corporations" with "better lives for the people."

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're an asstard. It's called theater. It's a creative work. He painted a word picture. You also painted a word picture, of a rod shoved up your ass so far that you can't smile. I think we all have talked to chinese folks who speak English with their native sentence structure. You know what? I do the same thing, except in Spanish when I'm drunk. However, my friends, not being asshats, laugh at me and make fun of me, and I laugh too, because guess what ... it is funny.

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hilarious! What a great rendition of the broken English of all Chinese people! Especially those who often deal with foreign, mainly English-speaking businesses. Not a racist comment at all! Completely appropriate AND necessary for the point you're trying to make.

Oh, sorry, I must have forgotten that I'm Chinese for a moment.

Me love your post long time!

I love it when Americans who know only one language make fun of people who know more foreign languages than themselves.

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Chinese aren't a race. They're a nationality. Of course, you would rather call it racism so you can get the knee-jerk, "I'm-not-a-racist" response instead of being honest.

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

They know one language...?

Would you call their rudimentary understanding of English knowing?

Personally, I think not.

Next to Afrikaans, 'American English' is surely as unpleasant a concoction as you could hope to find.

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

Being Chinese, I don't feel slightest insulted by the mocking. S/he probably wish s/he can speak/write Chinese as well as I speak/write English, but who am I to tell?

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

The funny thing is, that most ppl in the world only know one language. It is not just Americans. The big difference is that America has a common language, but many different cultures. Far more than any other place. In fact, it is fair to say that America is far more mixed racially than any other nation. NOWHERE in Asia, do you see such a mix. In Africa, it is all Black with some white. In Latin America, it is mostly Native Mestizo mixed with White Spanish. Western EU is mostly White. Canada, Australia are mostly white. Russia is so hard core white that is all they accept. Only in America, do you have many different races. As such, we both make fun of ourselves as well as fight against the battle (Neo-Nazis, KKK, La Raza, Black Panther, Brotherhood of Islam, Sharpton's NAN are just some of the racists groups out there).

What I find funny is that EU likes to point out that having a single language in America is bad, but ignoring the very heavy racism that exists in EU.

Re:A new low?

[serialband]

Your own ignorance is showing. Ethnic jokes, regardless of race, may be funny to you, but not necessarily to those you make fun of.

Re:A new low?

[Runaway1956]

No sir, your own ignorance is showing. Nothing requires that a joke be perceived as funny by every person who hears it. BTW - it's no coincidence that I used Polish Jokes in my earlier post. My family is Polski. Want to hear some Polish jokes? I've heard them all - some are stupid, some are hilarious, and most fall somewhere in between. I guarantee that I'm not going to lose any sleep if you tell all the stupidest ones, and skip the ones that really are funny.

Re:A new low?

[Draek]

However, is this not exactly the type of unfair treatment that a considerable section of the /. population professes against?

Not really. Most of Slashdot, regardless of political leanings, maintains a healthy policy of making fun of everybody and everything, favoring Free Speech and to hell with political correctness.

If Michael Jackson didn't get a free pass by virtue of being dead, you ain't getting any simply by being Chinese.

Re:A new low?

[TastelessGarbage]

Nice try, white devil. If you were really Chinese, the paraphrase would have read "you", not "your". ESL Chinese rarely say otherwise.

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

Racial denigration? Using broken English for a fictional character is denigration? You never read or watch TV do you? Or your hypersensitivity over racism must really drive you crazy.

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the logic? Most people only speak one language, therefore I will make fun of multi-lingual foreigners learning my native language?

I hate to break it to you, but America has never been a single language country. Perhaps the suburban middle class is single language, but there are millions of Spanish speakers, plenty of Quebecois in the north east. In the early 1900s plenty of people spoke Italian, German, and French.

In fact, in our life time Spanish speakers may well out number English speakers in America.

Re:A new low?

[Draek]

For somebody with a background in Philosophy it ought to have been obvious: either you allow people to "oppress" others verbally, or you "oppress" those who would "oppress" others verbally. Either way, there's no escaping the "oppression" (if it really can be called as such).

We, as a Western society, have decided to go for the former and allow all speech to be made, even when it's unpleasant. We call it "Freedom of Speech", and its one right we, Slashdotters in general, are very proud of.

Furthermore, we mock everybody and everything. Rape victims, murderers, suicidal people, terrorists attacks, child pornographers, think of any subject and there's at least one or two +5, Funny posts regarding it in Slashdot's ample archive. So yeah, grow the fuck up and stop playing the victim here just because your grandpa was Chinese.

Re:A new low?

[riggah]

So to answer your final question: no, I am not embarrassed that my family cannot blend in. Sorry, I am proud that my family WILL NOT blend in. We are solidly middle class, if not upper middle. I am well educated, attending one of the most prestigious post-secondary institutions in the world, studying under some of the leading minds in my chosen fields. We are Canadian, but we are also Chinese. We have our cultural differences. We have different practices. If the point is to blend in, then it takes away the significance of multiculturalism. Multiculturalism is good PRECISELY BECAUSE we are all allowed to act differently and NOT to blend in and fully adopt all western practices. If we were required to blend in or risk social ostracization, then there is no point in multiculturalism. People practicing cultures different from the mainstream would be socially ostracized. I am happy that we will not blend in, and that we are different, and that we do not face popular oppression in Toronto.

Nor should you be embarrassed by "being different." There's no reason at all for you to completely blend in, or "hide" among the masses. In fact, as much as people claim, it is almost impossible to "blend in" to a point where no one will see a difference.
You're Chinese. I'm Puerto Rican. I may think that I "look like everyone else" (read: caucasian), but I am not, and people can see that just by looking at my skin tone. My girlfriend is Jewish (ancestry is Polish) and she calls me a spic. I call her a kike. She makes "latino jokes." I make Pollock and Jewish jokes. We laugh. Because as much as we pretend that we are all the same, we are not, and stereotypes exist. Stereotypes exist.

I'm getting away from my point, which is: when you set yourself apart, when you are proud of your differences, when you're proud to "NOT blend in" you also have to be ready for others to point out that you're different. You have to grow a little bit of a thicker skin if you set yourself apart from your peers or community. There is no choice.

It has nothing to do with race, but as a young man (in the early 90's) I pierced myself up. My hair was ridiculous colors. I dressed in outlandish ways. Of course, I've grown up since then, but I spent most of my teenage years and my 20's TRYING to look different.

It accomplished 2 things: one, it attracted the attention of people who were either like me (dressing the same, etc) or wanted to be like me. Great. The second thing it accomplished was that I was different, very different at the time; this was the early 90's... body modification and "being a freak" hadn't become as popular as it is now and getting your tongue pierced wasn't as common or as "cool" as getting your ear pierced in the 80's. I received the attention that I wanted and TONS of attention that I didn't want in terms of derogatory comments, ladies clutching their handbags, people outright asking what was wrong with me for "messing up my body" and asking why I didn't want to "be like everyone else." I was called freak.

Point being: although CHOOSING to be different is not the same as being born a minor ethnicity in a majority, you have chosen to hold on to what you think is your cultural identity. It's your choice. If, occasionally, someone hurls some Chingrish at you for a laugh, you need to learn to deal with it. Just as I CHOSE not to be like my peers, and received negative attitudes toward it, it was my choice, I dealt with it, and I grew a thicker skin because of it. I also think I'm a better person and more tolerant of others because of it.

Don't even get me started on the thinly veiled racism I receive when someone thinks I'm caucasian and they find out that I am Puerto Rican. Or the typically horrible "chicano accent" people try to affect at times, or the mistake of thinking "puerto ricans and mexicans are 'the same thing'"
It happens all the time. I pick my battles and most of the time, they aren't worth fighting.

I wonder how many people on /. w

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

I grew up in Hawaii and there every Polish joke is the same, but is told as a Portuguese joke. Why? Because back in the day the Portuguese were the foremen... They were poor but considered white by the business men and thus made into middle management of the plantations over the other immigrant races. So they were the butt of all the jokes.

Re:A new low?

[c6gunner]

Oh, sorry, I must have forgotten that I'm Chinese for a moment.

Me love your post long time!

That's Vietnamese, you racist bastard!

Re:A new low?

[Wyvern2005]

Ok, I'll grant you it's tacky...BUT-it's a fucking JOKE, get OVER it already. We're Americans..we make jokes about everybody, including each other...

Re:A new low?

[Anonymous Coward]

I grew up in Toronto, one of the most multicultural cities in the world
To be fair, if you grew up in Toronto, that would not make you that multicultural. Only in the last decade have they become that way esp. in the last 5. Cities like NYC, Miami, SF, and LA would be where you grew up and were truly exposed to the multi-cultural. If you remain in Totonto, then your children would be exposed to it. Right now, you are just getting use to it.

Note to editors: learn to FUCKING SPELL!

[Anonymous Coward]

blooming Chinese cell phone market but a very large price to pay for that in principals.

Oh really? What's the principals to USD exchange rate these days? Do we really have so many extra that we can give them to the Chinese?

Just because the red underline goes away doesn't mean the word is correct, editors...

Think Different?

[Anonymous Coward]

Guess that ruins that campaign then.

Re:Think Different?

[tacarat]

It said "think", not "act".

Re:Think Different?

[redhotgranny]

First they thought Dalai Lama is a cool poster boy and later they did some rethinking.

Chinese suppression of Dalai Lama seems to increase his popularity. In Tibet, his status among locals (non Chinese) is close to our rock stars. Almost every Tibetan who I met in Lhasa showed me a photo of him (secretively) and to my knowledge it is even illegal to have his photo over there.

Re:Think Different?

[rastoboy29]

pwned.  nice.  damn!

Re:Think Different?

[node 3]

Guess that ruins that campaign then.

Not really. In America (and other places, I'm sure) we're still allowed, by the government[*], to Think Different. But in China, the government (not Apple) outlaws thinking different.

[*] Well, for the most part.

Re:Think Different?

[Anonymous Coward]

Chinese suppression of Dalai Lama seems to increase his popularity. In Tibet, his status among locals (non Chinese) is close to our rock stars.

I LOLd

The status of the Dalai Lama is far beyond your puny rock stars. He is the manifestation of a god and even his shit is ground up and distributed to the people for its healing properties. Any one of those tibetans would crawl a thousand miles on their bellies if he needed it. You might think that in the west, the screaming fans would do anything for their favourite rock star but they fall out of lust pretty darned quickly when exposed to the grainy reality. The Tibetan culture is not based on teenage lust, it is based on enduring love from the wellspring of their souls.

And if you asked him any of that, he would smile and say that he was just a man like any other.

Re:Think Different?

[russotto]

Not really. In America (and other places, I'm sure) we're still allowed, by the government[*], to Think Different. But in China, the government (not Apple) outlaws thinking different.

China's not Oceania; there's no thoughtcrime there. You can think as different as you want, as long as you keep your mouth shut about it.

Re:Think Different?

[Anonymous Coward]

well said, and spoken like a true apple weasel.

can you not see that apple are colluding in this denial of peoples human rights and the reason for this is financial?

is there a more disgusting type of person in existence than the average apple customer?

if only they knew that the only sense in which they're expressing their personality with their little purchases is to send out a clear message to the effect of "i don't know much about technology" & "i don't have much of a personality really".

i hope you work your fingers to the bone in order to raise the cash to buy your next apple toy. die you hypocritical little vermin, die.

Freedom!

[kurt555gs]

Some here have commented about my enthusiasm of the Nokia N900, and this would be a perfect example. With Maemo5 as the OS, NO ONE but you decides what or how you will operate this device.

TO me, this in it's self means an awful lot!

Re:Freedom!

[agrif]

I agree with you, in that freedom to do what you will with what you own should be a right.

This is why I, and many others, jailbreak my iPhone. Unix shell and root privileges? Why, thank you, iPwn!

Yes, it would be a much nicer world if Apple let us have more freedom from the start, but it's Apple's right, I guess, to do what they want with the product they make. I take it as a good gesture, though, that Apple is not actively discouraging jailbreaking. Now, unlocking, on the other hand...

I see it as the same as the content locks on the Xbox 360, or the Wii. They'll only play approved content, before you hack them open. Which I do, and love. But you never hear of people whining that the Wii won't let you run arbitrary content. Is the iPhone very much different?

Re:Freedom!

[Anonymous Coward]

Same applies to my beloved Android phone too. That is, if you don't buy any carrier-locked model, but that's a problem only for Americans.

Re:Freedom!

[Mr2001]

I take it as a good gesture, though, that Apple is not actively discouraging jailbreaking. Now, unlocking, on the other hand...

"Apple has filed comments to the 2009 DMCA triennial rulemaking committee complaining about jailbreaking and asking that it be deemed illegal."

Not active enough for you?

Re:Freedom!

[Anonymous Coward]

So as in... 'NO ONE' will develop for the Nokia N900, watch as that platform gets a lot of crappy apps and unpolished crap. Good luck to it, but the future prospect do not look promising for that platform and I think a lot of people will be dissapointed a year from now looking back at the lack of progress/developers.
Knowing the type of people who will want it they are not the most willing to spend money, funny we never get followup articles to all these open source projects that take off or a government who wants to switch. A little article digging will usually show that some of the articles around here that drew a lot of attention, came out to be nothing or they abandon the project.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the phone needs backing by a bigger organization to get a proper environment setup on the phone.

Re:Freedom!

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the phone needs backing by a bigger organization to get a proper environment setup on the phone.

Sorry to burst YOUR bubble, but the only thing bigger than Nokia on the phone market is two Nokias...

Re:Freedom!

[kurt555gs]

"No one will develop", crappy apps, I have a link for you ....

http://bit.ly/7eQb6f/

Lets see, the best mobile browser on the planet, Fennec, is first introduced on exactly what platform? iPhone? Nope. Android? Not. WinCE? Don't think so.

Re:Freedom!

[kurt555gs]

Sorry .. Real link -> http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/mobile/

There.

How there they...

[Tharsman]

How dare Apple even consider obeying local laws!? What next? Underage sex censorship just because most countries dislike it? What about freedom?!!

Sarcasm aside, what do you expect? Apple has to obey the country laws. Free speech is not a right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, it just isn't. It's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it's people the right of socialized medicine.

Re:How there they...

[E IS mC(Square)]

If we hold the right to criticize Google and Yahoo, we also hold the right to criticize any and every corporate doing the same shit. Where were you when we discussed this earlier??? Fanboism is one thing, defending them no matter what is... wait - it's the same thing.

Re:How there they...

[node 3]

If we hold the right to criticize Google and Yahoo, we also hold the right to criticize any and every corporate doing the same shit. Where were you when we discussed this earlier??? Fanboism is one thing, defending them no matter what is... wait - it's the same thing.

You're calling Tharsman out for being a hypocrite. Do you have any comments of his where he complains about Google and Yahoo caving into the Chinese government? If not, then what's the basis for your post?

Re:How there they...

[Doctorer]

Sarcasm aside, what do you expect? Apple has to obey the country laws. Free speech is not a right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, it just isn't. It's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it's people the right of socialized medicine.

How dare Apple even consider obeying local laws!? What next? Underage sex censorship just because most countries dislike it? What about freedom?!!

Sarcasm aside, what do you expect? Apple has to obey the country laws. Free speech is not a right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, it just isn't. It's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it's people the right of socialized medicine.

Free speech is a right in China, and in any other sovereign jurisdiction. It is a right despite the country trampling on it, because human rights don't come from the whimsical concessions of governments.

Re:How there they...

[shutdown -p now]

Sarcasm aside, what do you expect? Apple has to obey the country laws.

Apple doesn't have to operate in China. If it doesn't do so, it doesn't have to obey the laws that are clearly immoral (by our standards).

Of course, this is rather moot anyway so long as China remains the #1 manufacturer fueling the consumerist society in the West. You can't in good faith buy Chinese-made goods in Walmart, and then complain that Apple (or Google, or whoever) wants to be a part of Chinese market, too.

Re:How there they...

[aussie_a]

It's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it's people the right of socialized medicine.

Us Australians, at the very least, actually do this. We think a certain segment of the American population is nuts for championing the current state of your so called hospitals and medical care. Anytime the topic comes up we simply shake our heads and thank god we don't live in America.

Are Australians just horribly intolerant? Or do the British and Canadians do the same thing?

Re:How there they...

[Doctorer]

It's like Britain and Canada insulting the US for not offering it's people the right of socialized medicine.

Us Australians, at the very least, actually do this. We think a certain segment of the American population is nuts for championing the current state of your so called hospitals and medical care. Anytime the topic comes up we simply shake our heads and thank god we don't live in America.

Are Australians just horribly intolerant? Or do the British and Canadians do the same thing?

I'm an Australian too, and I disagree. Generally the Australians who take your position have never listened seriously to the opposing arguments those Americans propose. In my reckoning, if someone is willing to invest so much energy and expense in promoting a position, it's worth at least giving a hearing (as we say, a "fair go") before being dismissed as nonsense.

Re:How there they...

[Bartab]

I hereby criticize you for criticizing Apple, Google, Yahoo and others for relenting to the monopoly on the initiation of force present in sovereign States such as China.

Re:How there they...

[Anonymous Coward]

If we hold the right to criticize Google and Yahoo, we also hold the right to criticize any and every corporate doing the same shit. Where were you when we discussed this earlier??? Fanboism is one thing, defending them no matter what is... wait - it's the same thing.

You're calling Tharsman out for being a hypocrite. Do you have any comments of his where he complains about Google and Yahoo caving into the Chinese government? If not, then what's the basis for your post?

You have a good point in that Slashdot is not one single person with one consistent opinion. But, it is fair to call out the difference in this discussion vs. fx the one about Bing on exactly same topic some weeks ago. All the people out in force here now voicing the opinion that it is just natural for Apple to follow local laws where not here saying the same thing about Microsoft, that discussion was dominated by outrage over how morally corrupt and evil it was to do this.

I'm of course not saying they have a duty to always voice their opinions in a consistent manner or anyting like that. Just noting a clear and interesting difference in how the exact same topic is discussed. And with the danger of being called a payed astroturfer, it seems that especially Apple has an interesting special standing with their users being able to evoke support and defence like this. Google had some of the same also, but not to nearly same degree, and less today than years earlier.

Re:How there they...

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't free market capitalism supposed to help spread freedom and democracy around the world?

Re:How there they...

[Anonymous Coward]

Many of us in the US feel the same way, that said many of us also interpret "insulting the US" as insulting a portion of US culture we don't belong to for proping up a system (Healthcare) that we consider to be inherently flawed.

Here comments about our healthcare system can be taken as a joke, the same way we can sometimes laugh about a car accident before the reality of the tragedy sets in. Please do continue to laugh and joke about how horrible it is, sometimes the easiest way to defeat strongly held bad ideas is to make good satire of them.

A tactic that would be far more likely to succeed, if you really care about oppression in China would be to lightly make fun (without "Chinglish" referenced above) of that Chinese oppression. To refuse to sell products there or interact with their government, or worse operate within their borders and refuse to abide by their laws, would only add fuel to a fire that has a chance of burning out on its own. There are a thousand and one ways to do this. Outright opposition generally fails because it is often difficult to save face while folding to principles that are founded well outside of your culture.

Re:How there they...

[transami]

There is a difference. Freedom of Speech is considered a fundamental right. When we compromise our principles for others we risk loosing them for ourselves.

Re:How there they...

[babyrat]

Generally the Australians who take your position have never listened seriously to the opposing arguments those Americans propose. In my reckoning, if someone is willing to invest so much energy and expense in promoting a position, it's worth at least giving a hearing (as we say, a "fair go") before being dismissed as nonsense.

I've lived the current situation in America for the past 10 years....I suppose that qualifies as a fair go, so I'll dismiss their arguments as nonsense.

Re:How there they...

[Culture20]

Free speech is not a right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, it just isn't.

Rights are not given by the state, they are recognized. You should have said:
Free speech is not a recognized right in China, no matter how much we think everyone should have it, China attempts to control speech.

Re:How there they...

[Surt]

It's even worse than not one person with one opinion. It's not even one audience. The self selecting sample who read apple stories is not the same group as the self selecting sample who read google stories.

Re:How there they...

[mvdwege]

In my reckoning, if someone is willing to invest so much energy and expense in promoting a position, it's worth at least giving a hearing

Are you really suggesting that we should give, as an example, a serious hearing to creationists and Holocaust deniers?

I'm very sorry, but some opinions are so worthless that the second it is clear someone is going to go on about them should be followed with: "I'm not going to listen to you". And I suggest the world would be a better place if journalists followed that rule.

Mart

Re:How there they...

[Doctorer]

In my reckoning, if someone is willing to invest so much energy and expense in promoting a position, it's worth at least giving a hearing

Are you really suggesting that we should give, as an example, a serious hearing to creationists and Holocaust deniers?

I'm very sorry, but some opinions are so worthless that the second it is clear someone is going to go on about them should be followed with: "I'm not going to listen to you". And I suggest the world would be a better place if journalists followed that rule.

Mart

I'm probably not what you would consider a creationist or a holocaust denier, but if you can demonstrate that you actually understand why some people believe these things (eg restate an extant argument for holocaust denial that a denier would recognise as their own) I will give you a turkey.

Furthermore, I've lived in Japan for ten years, but that doesn't in any way mean that I've followed Japanese politics and actively informed myself of the reasons each side gives for their positions. It's a lot easier to parrot the party line off CNN than actually listen, understand, and weigh an opposing argument... especially in America.

Re:How there they...

[mvdwege]

I don't havev to try and understand why people believe these things. They're delusional, and that's the end of it.

Mart

Re:How there they...

[Doctorer]

No, you're a gerbil, and that's the end of it.

(that is to say, just because you say something is so, does not make it so)

Re:How there they...

[mvdwege]

Everyone who professes belief in young-earth creationism, denies the Holocaust, or tries to say that Obama wants to implement death panels is just plain delusional. That's as true as saying the sun rises in the east.

Mart

Re:How there they...

[Doctorer]

Let me guess!

"...because I say so"?

Re:How there they...

[mvdwege]

No, because those are verifiable facts.

What are you, stupid?

Mart

Re:How there they...

[Doctorer]

I'm afraid you're engaged in a logical inconsistency. It does not follow that someone who says they believe A, B or C must be delusional. There are numerous other possibilities.

Quite frankly, your persistent refusal to acknowledge anything that could possibly exist in opposition to what you have already proclaimed "fact" demonstrates an astounding degree of arrogance.

Re:How there they...

[mvdwege]

I am afraid you are a moron.

The earth is not 6000 years old. The Holocaust did happen. The current US health reform does not include death panels. These are verifiable facts. Anyone claiming anything different is claiming objective reality does not exist. This is the very definition of delusional.

Mart

Re:How there they...

[Doctorer]

I am afraid you are a moron.

The earth is not 6000 years old. The Holocaust did happen. The current US health reform does not include death panels. These are verifiable facts. Anyone claiming anything different is claiming objective reality does not exist. This is the very definition of delusional.

Mart

I am afraid you are consistently incapable of distinction. Or reading.

You said that people are delusional for professing to believe A, B or C. I said that this is nonsense, because people may profess to believe something, anything, without being delusional. I could profess to believe that I am a porridge and not be deluded, but you are too caught up in being the sole arbiter of fact to see this.

I'll make it simple for you by restating my point a couple of comments back: before ridiculing others for their beliefs, take a moment to try and understand what exactly it is they believe. Otherwise, simple folk like yours truly will come along and help you to show everyone else just how arrogant and invincibly ignorant you are.

Re:How there they...

[aussie_a]

I've heard the rhetoric. I'm unpersuaded. Giving someone a fair go doesn't mean agreeing with them. It means listening to their arguments, and then drawing a conclusion.

The conclusion I've drawn is some Americans are bat-shit crazy when it comes to their insistence on not having universal health care.

Re:How there they...

[Doctorer]

I've heard the rhetoric. I'm unpersuaded. Giving someone a fair go doesn't mean agreeing with them. It means listening to their arguments, and then drawing a conclusion.

The conclusion I've drawn is some Americans are bat-shit crazy when it comes to their insistence on not having universal health care.

Coming to such a conclusion is your right, especially if you have given their arguments a fair hearing and drawn your conclusions on that basis.

Personally, I believe the argument isn't as much against universal health care reform as the model currently proposed. If someone offered you a free car on the condition that he get unlimited access to your wife, would you take the car? Surely you would say "there are better ways to get a car". That's what I believe these Americans have in mind - health care reform is an objective good, but the things that are being packaged with it mean that in this instance they must turn it down.

Oh FFS Slashdot

[GF678]

but a very large price to pay for that in principals

This is not how businesses work. You either comply with the laws of a country or you don't get to do business. It's not the modus operandi of corporations to fight for principals.

Do people writing these summaries not understand how the real world works?

Re:Oh FFS Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

"It's not the modus operandi of corporations to fight for principals."

Which is why it's such a brilliant idea to leave the running of society ever more in the hands of large corporations.
I suppose that's what the submitter tries to point out.

Re:Oh FFS Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

If you consider parents' basement part of the real world.

Re:Oh FFS Slashdot

[GF678]

Which is why it's such a brilliant idea to leave the running of society ever more in the hands of large corporations.
I suppose that's what the submitter tries to point out.

I didn't say I was happy about Apple's position, morally; just pointing out it's how things are. Trying to bring morality/principals into the issue seems like the submitter is naïve about our reality.

I get surprised when the OPPOSITE happens with companies.

Re:Oh FFS Slashdot

[sydneyfong]

Or alternatively, people who "naively" write these summaries are those who know exactly how the world works -- hordes of naive people on slashdot would take the bait hence extra page hits.

Honestly this stuff is getting old. No company in China is going to survive a second if they allow these "political sensitive" stuff to be published uncensored....

Re:Oh FFS Slashdot

[Thoreauly Nuts]

I didn't say I was happy about Apple's position, morally; just pointing out it's how things are. Trying to bring morality/principals into the issue seems like the submitter is naïve about our reality.

Thankfully, history is full of naive people who refused to accept "how things are" and did something to change reality instead. The complacent are nothing but an anchor holding back human progress...

Re:Oh FFS Slashdot

[lee1]

In the case of Google ('don't be evil'), the situation is more complex. For example, they have agreed to remove content from YouTube to satisfy the demands of the Pakistani government, who objected to videos that were critical of Islam. Google applies this censorship within the U.S., where no law requires it.

Re:Oh FFS Slashdot

[GF678]

Thankfully, history is full of naive people who refused to accept "how things are" and did something to change reality instead. The complacent are nothing but an anchor holding back human progress...

You only hear about the successful ones. The ones that tried and failed aren't heard of, and I bet they'd make the vast bulk of folks trying to change the world. We *generally* aren't influential enough on our own, and I don't believe most people are capable of projecting the influence necessary to get things changed.

Idealism is also a great way to get oneself killed. It's not always a fight worth fighting with the limited time we'll be alive on this planet.

Re:lol first post

[Anonymous Coward]

not this time zone

These are not American companies

[DreamsAreOkToo]

I keep telling people that these "American Companies" aren't American at all. Fewer and fewer of their worker's are American, their ideals are not American and their tax revenue isn't reported in America.

As a people, we need to take back America

Re:These are not American companies

[tpgp]

I keep telling people that these "American Companies" aren't American at all. Fewer and fewer of their worker's are American, their ideals are not American and their tax revenue isn't reported in America.

I think that you'll find that a large chunk of the profits go to Americans.

Re:These are not American companies

[Anonymous Coward]

Their lobbyists are certainly 100% Grade A American though.

Re:These are not American companies

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that you'll find that a large chunk of the profits go to a few Americans.

fixed that for you.

Re:These are not American companies

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems that very often I LOSE money to cheap, flimsy, and even unsafe products. I'd love to have the option to buy products made in the rest of the world but it's just not an option. Even if some corporate ass hat is getting a large chunk of the profits, the American consumer is getting ripped off on discussing scale.

Seriously I spend half my time at work pushing RMAs through (and not from your no name brands either).

I hate standing in line a single line behind 30 or so other customers at Walmart trying to get my money's worth.

Go ahead and tell me it's not China's fault for producing substandard products and that I, as an America, am profiting in some way from it.

As to the censorship debate? If they care about it they can have their own revolution and I'm sure Uncle Sam will be supportive as ever. Until then who gives a shit. I just want a working toaster oven and less phone time with India's finest RMA phone people. If they give me that... hell I'll be there to support their revolution should THEY decide to have one.

Re:These are not American companies

[tpgp]

Go ahead and tell me it's not China's fault for producing substandard products and that I, as an America, am profiting in some way from it.

Quality toaster ovens are available for you to buy (manufactured all over the world).

Yet you choose to buy the cheaper, inferior products.

Re:These are not American companies

[Anonymous Coward]

Allie Fox, is that you?

Re:These are not American companies

[aussie_a]

I actually agree with Dreams. If Americans can force this companies to start acting ethically, I think that'd be great. Of course it would probably spell the end of all activity within China which could very likely destroy both the American and Chinese economies. But hey, principles are worth fighting for (no sarcasm in that comment. I actually believe you should fight for principles). Your country was founded on principles. Perhaps not all of the people agreed on which principles, perhaps there were some who simply wanted more money and power, but there would have been, at one point, idealists who fought the good fight.

Of course, your so much more intelligent then me or Dreams because you're able to bring up bullshirt word-play arguments that truly show how superior you are in comparison with our feeble minds. Go you. You truly contributed to this conversation you coward.

Re:These are not American companies

[Anonymous Coward]

In the good old days the US was such a huge single market that many of the world's largest corporations could operate almost entirely within the US, with maybe an "export department" to deal with those funny foreigners. It is easy to describe those as "American Companies".

Those days are long gone. The creation of the EU single market, the rise of Asian economies and the fall of the USSR means that many companies genuinely are "multinational", not US companies with export departments. In many markets there is little potential for growth seen in the US or EU markets so it is Asia that is becoming a growing focus.

Overseas subsidiaries are not always "sucking away" jobs and profit from the USA, but represent separate operations in a separate part of the world. In fact, in many cases it would be more correct to say that businesses around the world outsource their capital raising and strategic management to the US. If the US becomes too hostile a place to do this the overseas parts of the business would be better off setting up a new corporate base in a friendlier jurisdiction such as Singapore. Why should the profit on a widget designed in Spain, made in Germany and sold in France with no involvement from any US person be subject to US taxes if the ultimate holding company was set up in the US, but not if it was chartered in Germany?

Re:These are not American companies

[Thoreauly Nuts]

“Merchants have no country. The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains. “ ---Thomas Jefferson

What else China censors ?

[abbe]

Can we have a Slashdot story for each of such things which China's sensors censor, on apple.slashdot.org ? Chinese censorship is too common for YRO...:-)

New Year Greetings.

Not just China..

[GrBear]

Guess what, Apple doesn't allow Canadians to purchase certain apps, movies and albums either.

It's called different laws for different markets.

Re:Not just China..

[Tangentc]

To be fair, those are most likely due to copyright and license concerns, and not censorship, so it's not really the same.

Still, I don't think this is terribly surprising and I fail to see why people are shocked. China is a HUGE market, especially in technology. Any profit seeking entity has a lot to gain there, and would be extremely irresponsible to their shareholders if they weren't to do whatever they had to to get into the market.

I don't mean to say I approve of censorship, I'm just saying that it isn't surprising.

Re:Not just China..

[Anonymous Coward]

But that capitalism at work. money piles build up and its owner get to dictate the market.
In china it evil comunist that dictact the market. THIS IS AWFUL, THE WORLD IS ENDING.
THE YELLOW PERIL IS COMMING. ERM I MEAN THE COMMIE ARE COMMING. ERM THE...
THE UN-AMERICAIN ARE COMMING. OMG! OMG! OMG!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Peril - But mostly to pass the all cap filter...
Yellow Peril (sometimes Yellow Terror) was a color metaphor for race that originated in the late nineteenth century with immigration of Chinese laborers to various Western countries, notably the United States, and later associated with the Japanese during the mid 20th century, due to Japanese military expansion. The term refers to the skin color of East Asians, and the belief that the mass immigration of Asians threatened white wages and standards of living.

Re:Not just China..

[Anonymous Coward]

copyright and license are only concerns because of laws. Laws made by gouvements.

In china some laws are what you call censorship.

In the dominion of illusionary proprety, some laws also forbiding copying and transmiting data. Those laws are censorship in the very same way that the chinese ones are.

Would that be ok if some chinese agent where to aquire the copyright of all Dalai lama's "IP" and was restricting its publication? i mean who is going to disagree a chinese court? What if you got buisness there?

If you can see the censorship we got here then i got no trouble beliving that most chinese dont feel they are censored at all. The chinese that complain are pirates(Arr!) or filthy porn surffer anyway.

the Anonymous Coward.

Re:Not just China..

[aussie_a]

It is business as usual. But the moment people start accepting reality is the moment we all give up. After all, what if people hadn't cared that your taxes went to some foreign king across the ocean that none of you would probably never see. What if they had said "such is life" and simply moved on with their lives? You'd still be part of the British Empire, or perhaps worse, part of some other country's empire that overthrew Britain in a world-spanning war.

The moment you go "eh, not surprising" is the moment the oppressors win.

Re:Not just China..

[fnj]

Alas, there are no Thomas Paines any more in the US, let alone in China.

Re:Not just China..

[Legion303]

"what if people hadn't cared that your taxes went to some foreign king across the ocean that none of you would probably never see. What if they had said "such is life" and simply moved on with their lives?"

What if we were forced to buy Apple's products, giving your analogy some semblance of relevance? It would be chaos!

Principles?

[Shoe Puppet]

Since when does Apple have any principles it could pay with?

Proofreading fails again

[tardibear]

The word is principles.

Cue all corporate apologists

[Anonymous Coward]

who would have no problem making money off of slavery as long as it was legal

overlooked bombshell in summary...

[Anonymous Coward]

Dalai Lama is coding iPhone apps!?!?

Seriously, Who Really Cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Honestly, I don't think any of you truly care. I know I don't. Apple is just a corporation, it can, for better or for worse, sell what it likes, when it likes, where it likes, as long as it doesn't break any laws doing so. Even if it does, there's not much that could happen to it, other than a small fine.

If any of you are so enraged, stop buying Apple products (easy enough for you GNU/Linux, "my kernel don't taint" bigots), and go and protest against this in whatever way you see fit. Please, if you have a shred of sincerity, you will.

I'd personally be much more concerned about who supplies the equipment for China's great firewall, of if a nation builds a Linux supercomputer/cluster to hack/analyze/accumulate sensitive data on its population, or to test nuclear bomb designs (it's better than building them, but it's still an evil use of technology, IMO).

Besides, is any information really free of censorship? Most news in the U.S. is driven by advertising dollars and ratings potential. Your news is filtered more than your bottled water.

Cross another one off the list

[rastoboy29]

I've never given Google or Yahoo a free pass on this issue, and I don't plan on buying AAPL stock any more, either.

I'm not willing to make money from asshole behavior, at least knowingly.

I believe it is against the *long term* interests of these companies to knuckle under to this sort of thing.  Simply don't operate in China.  Or do Sergei and Steve not have enough billions?  Bah.

Re:Cross another one off the list

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, the world is only as big as from east coast to west coast.
Hawaii? We have been to the moon!

Re:Cross another one off the list

[tangent3]

Mod parent +1, Naive

Re:Cross another one off the list

[harlows_monkeys]

Do you also refuse to buy any product made in China?

Re:Cross another one off the list

[Bartab]

I approve of your choice to sell Apple, Google, Yahoo and other stocks that operate profitably. Your, and others of similar stances, choice to sell depresses the market price of the stock allowing people like me to buy it undervalued.

Thank you, and please keep purchasing those iPhones.

Re:Cross another one off the list

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Do you also refuse to buy any product made in China?

If the manufacturer is known to violate basic human rights, then yes.
Or are you implying that every single company doing business in China is a human rights violator?

Re:Cross another one off the list

[Supa Jorell]

What does buying AAPL stock have to do with this? When you buy a share of a company, those funds are never seen by said company. They go directly to the holder of the stock...and you should've bought Apple stock last year - last year at this time, the stock was at $85/share and on Thursday it closed at $210....would have been a great return on your investment......

Re:Cross another one off the list

[Thoreauly Nuts]

Do you also refuse to buy any product made in China?

This comment isn't necessarily directed at you, but I always love people who use extremist arguments so they don't have to do anything at all. The world isn't black and white and you don't have to boycott all of China overnight to make a difference.

You can start by simply using sites like this to guide your purchases: http://www.stillmadeinusa.com/

Not only will you lessen support for China, but you are increasing it for your fellow Americans (assuming you are one).

Re:Cross another one off the list

[Anonymous Coward]

As long as he doesn't know it was made in China, it's OK. ...and I really don't think he'll try all that hard to examine goods either. He's satisfied as long as the company marketing it isn't visibly criticized in easily accessible media.

Re:Cross another one off the list

[babyrat]

Or are you implying that every single company doing business in China is a human rights violator?

I'm sure every company doing business in China is obeying the same chinese laws that Apple are. So if Apple is violating human rights by obeying those laws, then everyone else is too.

Re:Cross another one off the list

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

I'm sure every company doing business in China is obeying the same chinese laws that Apple are. So if Apple is violating human rights by obeying those laws, then everyone else is too.

You suck terribly at basic set theory.
Just how would the manufacture of, say shoes for example, have anything to do with censorship?

Control

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, that makes sense. I mean, Chinese society is a little better fit with the Apple "way" anyway. They probably never even had to be asked.

Principles

[tangent3]

Looking at the comments around, I'd say it seems far easier to demand that someone else follow your set of principles... than to follow them yourself.

Re:Principles

[Anonymous Coward]

Brilliant conclusion

Stupid

[anonieuweling]

There's stupid comments about local laws.
It appears that people do not discern any difference between laws and ethics.
Not everything that is forbidden by law is unethical.
Not all that is bad is forbidden by law.
And companies without the least of a spine are dime-a-dozen.
What is apple doing to explain the chinese that this is 'not so nice'?
Same for other situations that are in the way of truly free markets? (yes, markets aren't free, even yours isn't free)

tl dr (nt)

[fireylord]

no text

It's called a principle.

[Arancaytar]

There's a difference.

Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple... it really whips the (Dalai) Lamma's ass!

You're right. Law should be followed all the time

[IYagami]

Indeed, Rosa Parks should have obeyed the law and leave her seat to other people... according to your thoughts, no?

Sometimes you have to stand up against certain things.

Apple Supplier Code of Conduct

[evilsofa]

You would think from this thread that Apple has never advocated for human rights in China:
http://www.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/
Isn't it better for Apple to do it that way than to piss off the country that manufactures nearly everything Apple sells?

Re:Apple Supplier Code of Conduct

[Donkey_Hotey]

Wow, Apple stating on their website that they support human rights. All that proves is that they talk the talk, no more.

Stop Them in Their Tracks!

[b4upoo]

Here in America we can stop these censoring nations. We can revoke the business permits for any company inside the US that practices doing business with censoring nations. We might also consider criminal charges for violations of human rights for anyone who causes or contributes to censorship up to and including US officials who seek to censor porn within the US.

Re:Stop Them in Their Tracks!

[Anonymous Coward]

Or, we can just bomb Iran!

Re:Stop Them in Their Tracks!

[GaryPatterson]

You're not at all worried that the Chinese government holds enough US money to cause your economy to tank overnight? If they choose to sell all of their US dollars, your country is screwed for years to come. They don't want to do that, but if you start screwing with them, they can switch to other markets and pretty much screw your country over.

If you want to play hardball, you'd better have a better plan. You can't intimidate, physically attack, legally attack or even threaten them. You need them too much. So what do you have left? I'd say try to bring them around through trade. You have no other option.

Censorship is nothing compared to your economy being made to look like the whole financial crisis was a warm up for the next Great Depression.

Well, then maybe we customers should do so too

[unity100]

i mean, let go of some principles. like, respecting copyright ownership, patent rights and so on and pirate their products like there is no tomorrow. i bet they would go berserk if we did that wouldnt they. and maybe they deserve such a hypocrisy for their own hypocrisy.

No Surprise Here...

[flyneye]

This sort of news isn't surprising to anyone. You'd have to live in a cave under a rock not to realize Google and Yahoo would both feed a dead rat sandwich to their mothers if it meant a pennys profit.

Re:You're right. Law should be followed all the ti

[karnal]

In that context, shouldn't you say "Sometimes you have to sit down against certain things." :)

ROCKS

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple Censorship just ROCKS!

Re:Principals? Nice editing, slashdot.

[fnj]

You so right. Good inglish gramer and speling is so much moar importent than talkin about hyoomen rites.

If Chinese love freedom, this problem will solve..

[drinkypoo]

If Chinese love freedom, this problem will solve itself.

Microsoft?

[WindBourne]

Hmmm. I seem to recall that Microsoft was the first search engine to cave into Chinese demand to censorship, as well as turning over their source code to China, and that Google at least showed that a link was censored. So, why is it, that MS is not mentioned in the header?

Re:Microsoft?

[masmullin]

URL or it never happened.

Enemy of my enemy is my friend?

[superyanthrax]

Funny how the Cold War "enemy of my enemy is my friend" train of thought induces supposed defenders of freedom and liberty (i.e. Americans and the West) to support a brutal dictator (the Dalai Lama) who would impose slavery, poverty, and theocracy on Tibet and its people, and who would try his damnedest sell out Tibet to the British just so he can continue lording and abusing the area as his personal fiefdom. Also, I didn't know Apple had to pay in grade school directors for following Chinese laws.

orthographic ambiguity

[LandruBek]

Seriously! My new-year morning cobweb-covered mind was puzzled, thinking to itself, "Why are they saying *Apple* pays in 'in principals?' The Chinese struggle for freedom is constantly paying in principals, such as Wang Xiaoning, and it *is* a bitter price, but what do they have to do with Apple?" Then, uh, duh.

(But I do love me some orthographic ambiguities. See also "smote the sledded pole-ax on the ice" vs. "smote the sledded Polacks on the ice.")

Let's see here...

[Legion303]

Apple (along with any other company in its position) can do business in China according to its laws, Break China's laws, or refuse to do business in China. Only one of these options is guaranteed to make these companies money. If you think they're going to choose idealism over cash, you have some high-grade pot at your disposal.

Just Business

[okubax]

It's nothing personal, glad doing business with you - from Apple to you

Re:You're right. Law should be followed all the ti

[Reservoir Penguin]

Rosa parks was a citizen of the USA and she did not have much choice but to fight for her freedom, I respect her courage greatly for that. But coming to another country a foreigner should obey local laws, and if due to ethical dilemmas he is not able to do just that he always has a choice of returning to his own country. Somebody has pointed a great example - if I come to the USA, go to a hospital and start demanding free surgeries just because in my country universal health care is a human right, I'd be probably laughed off and deported.

Re:You're right. Law should be followed all the ti

[ThrowAwaySociety]

Indeed, Rosa Parks should have obeyed the law and leave her seat to other people... according to your thoughts, no?

Sometimes you have to stand up against certain things.

So you're saying that every black person who wasn't Rosa Parks should be condemned for not standing up for their rights?

Some people (and, naturally, most companies) just want to go about their business without getting in trouble. This is not a moral weakness on their part. Not everyone is a born crusader.

By the way, what have you done to protest censorship in China recently? Nothing? Then STFU already.

Re:You're right. Law should be followed all the ti

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm, NO. Rosa Parks was a citizen of the US. She was defying the injustice her OWN country was doing against her. An injustice which was shared by a significant percent of the US, AND actually deemed so by the core laws of the nation. Plus, she was HUMAN.

If she was Chinese, if they had a similar rule, and she did that; I am sure she would be in jail, and more importantly, few would give a rat's ass. Because they have different core laws, values, and ethics from us. As to which is better is a pointless discussion for another time.

But, in this case, Apple is a business. They made a business decision. It would cost them a lot less to comply with the local laws than to fund a lobbying, rebel, or bribery efforts to change them. Plus, those who want the app, have the will to find ways to get them, and those who don't, can keep feeling like they aren't missing out. A win, win.

China also hates bikini girls apparently

[smoothlandon]

Apple is very cautious about what they allow in the store because they are a VERY big target. The stories about difficulty getting apps approved are not exaggerated. I tried to release a Bobble Head Obama app before the election last year and it was rejected because it "ridiculed a public figure" - I responded that caricature was not the same thing as ridicule and never heard back from anyone. My most recent game took over a month to make it through their hoops - apparently it's ok to show massive amounts of cleavage like the infamous "Asian Boobs" app but if you have cartoon bikini chicks in the icon you've gone too far. I finally got my game in the store but was told that it would not be sold in China. I guess the Chinese hate girls in bikinis too! http://bit.ly/8Q0vyA

Company Complies with Local Laws

[GaryPatterson]

Company complies with local laws. More at 11.

Also in the bulletin, armchair commentators claim "I would do it differently," but lack any motivation or ability to do so.

Later, people criticising a nation while simultaneously lapping up everything it produces, failing to see the hypocrisy in their own actions. When questioned, they managed to compartmentalise the actions of support an oppressive regime and buying products produced under that regime.

Finally tonight, shocking news that laws are different in different nations. Many people in the US are amazed that their legal system isn't somehow carried over into the other 95% of the planet. Even more shocking is the news that people in other nations view their rights differently to people in the US.

My view of the posts in this topic - moral outrage based on nothing more than hot air. Sure, China is a bad place in some ways, but if you're going to criticise a company for doing business with them in a manner acceptable to the Chinese government, then you'd better follow that up by personally not purchasing anything made by any company with links to China. Anything less is pure hypocrisy. If you really care enough, drop the pretence of a moral high ground and talk to the average Chinese people. Get them interested in slow changes, and eventually the system will turn around. Going in with metaphorical guns blazing is a guaranteed failure with strong governments.

Re:If Chinese love freedom, this problem will solv

[shutdown -p now]

You can't truly love freedom until you taste it.

Re:If Chinese love freedom, this problem will solv

[drinkypoo]

You can't truly love freedom until you taste it.

One small taste, and nothing else will do.