Slashdot Mirror


Google.cn Attack Part of a Broad Spying Effort

CWmike writes "Google's decision Tuesday to risk walking away from China (Um, the world's largest Internet market) may have come as a shock, but security experts see it as the most public admission of a top IT problem for US companies: ongoing corporate espionage originating from China. It's a problem that the US lawmakers have complained about loudly. In the corporate world, online attacks that appear to come from China have been an ongoing problem for years, but big companies haven't said much about this, eager to remain in the good graces of the world's powerhouse economy. Google, by implying that Beijing had sponsored the attack, has placed itself in the center of an international controversy, exposing what appears to be a state-sponsored corporate espionage campaign that compromised more than 30 technology, financial and media companies, most of them global Fortune 500 enterprises. The US government is taking the attack seriously. Late Tuesday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton released a statement asking the Chinese government to explain itself, saying that Google's allegations 'raise very serious concerns and questions.' She continued: 'The ability to operate with confidence in cyberspace is critical in a modern society and economy.'"

52 of 515 comments (clear)

  1. Hillary Clinton released a statement? by Cornwallis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That ought to scare 'em.

    1. Re:Hillary Clinton released a statement? by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Funny

      Wouldn't you be scared if a woman who answers phone calls at 3am while dodging sniper fire turned her attention towards you? ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:Hillary Clinton released a statement? by ReverendLoki · · Score: 5, Funny

      I believe in this case, the appropriate joke would be "1998 called, they'd like their joke back."

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    3. Re:Hillary Clinton released a statement? by iceborer · · Score: 4, Funny

      It put the fear of God into the Pakistanis.

    4. Re:Hillary Clinton released a statement? by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 5, Informative

      Uh, being married to the guy counts as 'involved' to most people. Just because she wasn't in the room does not negate that.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    5. Re:Hillary Clinton released a statement? by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 5, Funny

      To be fair it was clearly a marriage of convenience and not a real marriage. She's was and is doing the same thing. The difference is no one in their right mind would admit to sleeping with her.

    6. Re:Hillary Clinton released a statement? by MrNaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They already gave us the projected budget surplus. It's not their fault we blew it on a War On Terror.

      --
      I hate printers.
  2. Why did she even bother? by jandrese · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...asking the Chinese government to explain itself

    Why is the government wasting time with this? Everybody knows what the answer is going to be, the Chinese government is going to deny everything and change nothing. Unless Secretary Clinton is willing to back up those words with some sort of action, they are just a waste of breath.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
    1. Re:Why did she even bother? by Mashhaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The same reason I heard from my manager at one of the investment banks that went tits up. The same reason we spend billions on security theater.

      "Perception is reality."

      While on the face of it this is a crass and ridiculous statement, the fact remains that it makes some kind of warped, diabolical sense once you are under a certain level of scrutiny. It becomes more important to look like you're making a difference, than to actually make one. If you are perceived to be adding value and working hard, you can be slacking off all day and still get promoted at the end of the day.

      Honestly, it seems to me more like a publicity stunt than anything. Keep the other party from getting more ammo, while making the uninformed feel good and warm and fuzzy inside.

    2. Re:Why did she even bother? by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't you think she knows that? It's called protocol. Either A) she's just putting up a strong showing for american audiences and has said something completely different to the Chinese, or B) she really is going to do something. Who knows what? So far Obama has not shown much interest in rocking the boat any (see Wall Street bail out for evidence) but Hillary Clinton is not exactly the kind to shy away from a fight.

      It'll be interesting -- I would like to see some tougher trade policies with China. For me personally, I'm really tired of importing Chinese goods that are made with no pollution controls, especially when those goods are laced with cadmium or melamine. I'm also annoyed that they sabotaged the Copenhagen talks on climate change. In fact, this could be exactly what the administration is reacting to, maybe Obama et al. got burned and are in no mood to play nice with China the way past presidents have done.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    3. Re:Why did she even bother? by Dahamma · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Are you serious? It's politics. It's an official statement by the US Secretary of State claiming the US govt has received evidence from Google and demands an explanation. The Chinese government is VERY conscious about world perception, and their own embarrassment or humiliation, etc. Calling them out like this will force them to respond, and they have learned from several previous International fiascos (SARS, lead, tainted milk, etc) that lying and denying everything when the proof is already out usually just causes lot more harm than good. You are right that they probably will have to deny it (lead paint is one thing, govt sponsored international industrial espionage is another) - but they are going to lose a lot of international credibility in the process.

      This kind of potential leverage in international politics and diplomacy doesn't come along very often, so I hope the US govt keeps up the statements like this to keep the Chinese govt on the defensive!

    4. Re:Why did she even bother? by Xtravar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, because the President should help terrorize the populous by over-reacting to a stupid Nigerian with explosive underpants.

      And I don't think anyone 'controls' Hillary Clinton. She's a fierce lady.

      --
      Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
    5. Re:Why did she even bother? by Dahamma · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's more or less exactly what happened when the USA got caught using the Echelon system for the exact same purposes as the Chinese are now mounting these attacks.

      So the US was hacking into human rights workers' information in order to find and imprison its own citizens that were speaking up against them? Right.

  3. It still amazes me... by Bicx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... that what began as a simple web search company is now so large that it is capable of potentially altering the course of international diplomacy.

    1. Re:It still amazes me... by TrippTDF · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah, I don't think anyone really realizes the power of Google now. They have a lot of power for content creators, advertisers, technology companies, and millions of people. It is not a start-up: It is the most powerful company on the face of the planet, but no one realizes this yet.

    2. Re:It still amazes me... by fotoguzzi · · Score: 5, Funny

      What began with a mischievous woman eating an apple is now so large as to cover the earth with its seven billion descendants.

      --
      Their they're doing there hair.
    3. Re:It still amazes me... by StuartHankins · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Information is power, and whomever controls the flow of information is very powerful.

    4. Re:It still amazes me... by sconeu · · Score: 4, Funny

      <VOICE type="Darth-Vader">
      Do not underestimate the power of the Google.
      </VOICE>

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  4. Google may lose China... by DigitalSorceress · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They may lose china, but in the eyes of many, "not being evil" is worth more.

    Go Google, make me proud!

    --

    The Digital Sorceress
    1. Re:Google may lose China... by characterZer0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Google is not getting out because they think operating in China was evil, they are getting out because they think operating in China carries excess financial risks.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    2. Re:Google may lose China... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      A lot of people go "They won't do it, China is 1/5th (or 1/6th) of the worlds population!"

      Google can have the other 4/5ths (or 5/6ths). No Internet company started in China will grow outside of China the way they are set up.

      Let them stew in their "secure" system they put in place. Put your efforts elsewhere. When you gain the rest of the world - then China will obey Google, not the other way around.

    3. Re:Google may lose China... by geminidomino · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Prove it.

      How about the fact that they stayed this long, and are only *considering* pulling out (they haven't yet) now that they've been victimized.

    4. Re:Google may lose China... by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think that what you wrote is part of Google's thinking. Another part of it was that Google has a concept of how they run their business. That concept has been successful.
      Censoring their search results was a compromise of their concept, but didn't break it. Google perceived the hacking of their servers by the Chinese government as breaking their business concept. If the Chinese government could not be trusted to keep the "deal" that Google had made with them, then Google can no longer count on the Chinese government honoring any commitment that would allow Google to make money.
      In light of this, I, also, expect that Google expected people to work around the known censoring they were doing to make such censorship moot.
      I think that we must still be suspicious of Google, just as we must be suspicious of any large organization, but in this case, this appears to be an act in good faith.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    5. Re:Google may lose China... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Read their announcement. They have decided that they are no longer willing to censor search results. They are interested in speaking with the Chinese government on the possibilities of continuing to operate in China without censorship (use your own expertise as to the likelihood of that happening). Google has said that if they can't agree with the government, that they will close down google.cn.

      They've already made their decision, they gave the ball back to the Chinese to decide whether they want Google to be allowed to operate without censorship. Frankly, an uncensored Google in China may be better than Google leaving China.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    6. Re:Google may lose China... by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But they have ALREADY stopped censoring and have forced https connections for Gmail.

      The Ball is in China's court.

      They have done EXACTLY what they promised they would do.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  5. It's about time. by bigredradio · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Everybody seems to walk on egg shells as to not cause friction with China because of the "possible" loss of customers they get access to. I applaud Google for this. Just because China has 1.3 billion people does not make them all good customers. I know a lot of software developers who would rather stay out of China because after the first license is sold, it's pirated and re-distributed by their competitors. So my point, why compromise your ethics for a hostile business environment that might lead to further problems and minimal increase in the balance sheets. Way to go Google!

  6. Government ordered security holes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That's because they apparently were able to access a system used to help Google comply with search warrants by providing data on Google users, said a source familiar with the situation, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak with the press.

    See why leaving back doors open for law enforcement and other Government organizations actually decreases our security?

    See why "if you do nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about" is complete utter non-sense?

    By making the government's job easier, they've opened up the door to malicious attacks by foreign governments.

    The FBI (the whole Executive branch for that matter) and Congress should be ashamed of themselves for their stupidity in ordering such back doors.

    The only fear I have for my security is the idiocy of the US Government in "protecting" me.

    Morons.

    1. Re:Government ordered security holes. by andy1307 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      According TFA, this is an internal system. No different from a log file. How is this a backdoor? Can the law enforcement agencies access it from the outside?

    2. Re:Government ordered security holes. by DeadPixels · · Score: 5, Interesting
      TFA doesn't say, but one of the links in the summary says that it was accessible from compromised machines in Google offices.

      That's because they apparently were able to access a system used to help Google comply with search warrants by providing data on Google users, said a source familiar with the situation, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak with the press. "Right before Christmas, it was, 'Holy s***, this malware is accessing the internal intercept [systems],'" he said.

      What I find interesting is that Google apparently hacked them back:

      Google's security team eventually managed to gain access to a server that was used to control the hacked systems

      Personally, I'd be interested in knowing what the Google team did to turn the tables, even if it's a few months or years down the line after this incident is over.

  7. Powerhouse? US 15 Trillion China 4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    China is not a powerhouse.
    It is growing rapidly but it is a nightmare police state joke.
    When the demographic collapse hits all the "miracle" dreams about China will fade.
    Their population is ageing rapidly, they have an imbalance of women to men and they have huge internal problems.

  8. That Ices Open Systems for Me by tjstork · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is going to go down as the biggest piece of corporate "do-gooding" since Henry Ford did the $5 day. I can't even begin to calculate how much Google went up in my mind for doing this. They may have lost a bunch of potential customers, but for what its worth, they've just got me for life.

    Whatever their motives, Google did the right thing, and in a big way. I didn't see Microsoft stepping up to the plate like that, Apple didn't step up to the plate like that, and I'll remember that when I choose platforms.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:That Ices Open Systems for Me by MaWeiTao · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As others have mentioned, Google didn't do this because it's the good thing to do. They did this because it makes good business sense. If it had been financially advantageous to remain in China and even court their government more closely Google would have done that instead.

      I'm really tired of people casting corporations in such simple-minded light. Corporations exist to make money, and usually do so within the boundaries of the law. The people running these companies certainly may hold a particular set of morals, but ultimately they have to make decisions based on what's best for the company.

      I think the important thing here is that China isn't nearly as important as Americans seem to believe, especially in the business world. Business idiots, in particular, seem to have a hard-on for China, despite the fact that they get burned time and time again. It's true that China has a massive population, but how many of those actually have disposable income? And of those who do have money to spend, how many of those have the money or inclination to spend on foreign goods as opposed to what's made by Chinese companies?

      The advantage China enjoys over many other developing nations is that they're far further along in their economic development and are approaching a developed nation status. And that's assuming their economic growth isn't over-inflated as many are beginning to suspect. Certainly the Chinese are very nationalistic and ambitious, but that's really only advantageous for themselves and not the rest of the world. There are many other nations around the world seeing significant growth which have the chance to become very strong competitors for China, there's India, much of southeast Asia, South America, especially Brazil.

      When it comes down to it, China needs the rest of the world far more than the rest of the world needs China. Five or ten years ago I suspect Google's management would have decided staying in China was worth the risk. Today, that's obviously not the case.

      And there's something else to consider, some companies are more entrenched than others and some have more to lose in China. it's probably a lot easier to successfully knock off Google's products than it is Apple's or Microsoft's. There are dozens, of search engines, hundreds if not thousands of web apps and countless social networking sites. And there's a lot less loyalty to any particular tool than you find in the West. Something new comes along and as long as it's halfway decent people start using it. As quickly as companies fail there are many more right behind ready to take their place. All this is, without question, hurting Google's chances in China. There's no reason for Chinese to use Google, but there is certainly a lot of incentive for Chinese companies to steal what they can. And the Chinese government sure as hell isn't going to enforce foreign copyrights.

  9. Statescraft by TiggertheMad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why is the government wasting time with this? Everybody knows what the answer is going to be, the Chinese government is going to deny everything and change nothing. Unless Secretary Clinton is willing to back up those words with some sort of action, they are just a waste of breath.

    Because by publicly asking the government to respond, they are making them look like a pack of inept idiots. It tells the rest of the world that they are attempting to spy (still), and doing a bad job of it. Security services globally will probably now be reviewing their intrusion detection procedures, making it more difficult for the Chinese government skript kiddies to make headway toward their goals. It will scare away some companies considering investment in China, slowing their internal ecenomic growth, and costing them money. It is also the first step in the diplomatic process that can lead to condemnations from the UN, sanctions, or even war. Rational states don't simply skip to straight to attacking other states over stuff like this.

    The very fact that they have put this in the public realm as opposed to quietly telling the Chinese government that they know what they are doing (which they have been for years) indicates that the next step in the process is being taken.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:Statescraft by metrometro · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Hey COO, we need to locate a remote technology office. This will support the economy of Brazil, China, India, Poland." "Let's choose... ANYWHERE BUT CHINA, because they will steal our stuff."

      Public perceptions matter. And statements like this drive headlines, which drive perceptions. There's some line-in-the-sand drawing happening: we'll put up a lot of shit, but not so much with the stealing our data. So knock it off, or things will get unpleasant.

      We've tried the no-talk, all-action approach: Iraq reconstruction. How well did that work?

    2. Re:Statescraft by zorg50 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It is also the first step in the diplomatic process that can lead to condemnations from the UN, sanctions, or even war.

      Would the UN condemn one of the five countries in its own Security Council?

  10. Re:Seriously, FUCK China by lorenlal · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Chinese government is corrupt, authoritarian, and oppressive.

    Sticks and stones... Oh wait, you're talking about China?

    Carry on.

    Yours,
    The US government

  11. The Borg by m0s3m8n · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Chinese are all about assimilation of technology. And most companies are happy to help. Boeing, you want to sell us planes, then you have to build some components here. Bring in your fancy machine tools and expertize.

    --
    Conservative, mod down for violating /. political norms.
    1. Re:The Borg by lennier · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "The Chinese are all about assimilation of technology. "

      Yes. And this is Slashdot, a website which is generally in favour of people assimilating, reverse engineering, decrypting, hacking, cracking, opening, jailbreaking, repurposing, learning, making, rebuilding, customising and sharing technology. We believe in the right to read, the right to copy, Stallman's Four Freedoms, that technology should be owned, not licenced, that DRM is evil because it blocks a user's ability to control their own technological destiny, that software patents stifle innovation, that copyright and region coding keeps media prices artificially high, that censorship is an intrinsic evil, that business models must perpetually innovate, that nobody owes buggy whip makers a living, etc.

      We believe that We The People Have The Right to learn stuff, copy stuff, and share stuff, and that technology is only safe when the user is in the driving seat.

      Oh... but suddenly all that is bad if CHINA does it? Eek! Scary Asian people stealing our freedom (to control them).

      I say, let China assimilate all they want. The bigger problem here is US corporations who think they have the moral right and practical ability to *stop* other countries sharing technological information - and then foolishly built business models on that foundation of sand.

      Sell stuff to China if you choose to. Don't sell stuff to China if you choose to. Just don't expect them to 'respect' your crazy ideas that information is property, which it isn't. I mean, this is Slashdot - we know that, right? We read Lawrence Lessig and Cory Doctorow, we put Creative Commons on our photos and GPL on our code, we know that information *should* be copied because that's its strength... right?

      Don't try to 'sell' your secrets to China with one hand while trying to grab them back with the other, because that's like posting your drunk party photos on Facebook then saying 'but I didn't mean for the world to see me naked!'

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
  12. more reasons for a US-China split by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Further reasons the administration might not like what China is doing right now are economic. China ties their currency exchange rate to the U.S. dollar in a way that keeps theirs low relative to ours. This essentially creates a permanent trade imbalance between the exporter (CHina) and the importers (U.S. mostly, also Europe). I hear people say all the time that China owns a huge portion of the U.S. debt and it would be a big disaster economically if they sold that debt. This is incorrect, if the Chinese sold their U.S. debt they'd be doing us a favor because it would depress the value of the dollar and make our manufacturing more competitive. In the past when unemployment has been rock-bottom in the U.S., this wouldn't help us much. Right now it would help our economy a lot to create manufacturing jobs because our unemployment is 10%. Paul Krugman quantified this by saying that China's exchange rate policy amounts to 1.4 million lost jobs in the U.S. The people at the federal reserve and the treasury know this. Ben Bernake himself has been quoted as saying chaiman-speak equivalent for the Chinese are playing with fire.

    The conclusion here is that I suspect that if Clinton is mentioning this, the administration is planning on using this as leverage to get economic or other concessions out of the Chinese.

    --
    Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    1. Re:more reasons for a US-China split by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Warning: Conspiracy Theory

      This is why I would not be surprised if the current US economic situation is intentional. China's economic actions (trade, currency, debt) have long irritated US elite. Knowing that China is our next economic competitor, I think the US powers that be have been manipulating China all along. We rode the Chinese manufacturing train for as long as could, waited until China was near a tipping point, then intentional manipulated the global markets to cause a huge wave to hit China. An Economic tidal wave. China is currently faking all its major numbers, lying about its market conditions, and printing money hand over fist. China is on the verge of economic collapse.

      http://www.fundmymutualfund.com/2009/10/kyle-bass-hayman-capital-october-letter.html

      "The People's Bank of China (PBoC) expanded Chinese M1 money supply by a staggering 28.7% year-over-year from September 2008 to September 2009."

      "To us, one of the most compelling sets of data points to come out of China is the substantial drop in prices for goods and services (Purchasing Price Index (-11.4% year-over-year), Wholesale Prices (-7.1%), and Producer Price Index (-7.9%)) in an environment where not only money supply, but also credit, investment and "retail"sales are increasing at double-digit percentage rates." This downturn started after the financial collapse last September and has not responded to any of the fiscal and monetary stimulus so far."

      Make no mistake about it. We are at war. An economic war with China, and the ultimate goal is complete domination of the world.

  13. Re:Powerhouse? US 15 Trillion China 4 by Xest · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Indeed it's true. I see many people talk of fearing China, but the reality is it simply doesn't have the military equipment to fight far from it's shores, it doesn't have the stability to guarantee that if it does send it's soldiers outside it's borders that it wont lose territory to dissidents inside it's borders. Contrary to popular belief it doesn't have that much support from Russia, partly because it's still locked in border disputes with them, the same goes for it's other neighbours in almost every direction who would love the opportunity of China spreading itself to far to claim territory they believe is their own.

    Economically it could certainly be a problem, but in terms of us losing it's manufacturing facility the likes of India which is of a similar population would gladly pick up the slack, and in the current weakened economic situation in fact, most countries would be willing to take on a big manufacturing boost.

    That's not to say they couldn't be a problem at all of course, if they backed up North Korea by having North Korea threaten further to launch nukes whilst providing them military support to try and wave of the US and such from attacking it in response to such threats it'd be a big deal. Similarly any war with them would still be a hell of a headache, but the point to take away is this, no matter what China does, even if in the worst case they decide to pursue a military route, whilst they'd cause a lot of harm and damage, they'd have absolutely no chance of winning. Even their nuclear stockpile is relatively small, particularly when you take into account modern American ICBM defences.

    In a way though it's a real shame, because China has so many smart people, it has such potential to be a thriving peaceful modern nation. It's perhaps ironic that the lust for power and control at the top of China is exactly what stops China from becoming a more powerful player on the international stage. It has a big population, but it can't unilaterally take on the world despite seeming to believe otherwise.

  14. Re:suspicious timing by Xest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, not really.

    I can't think why anyone would think that making such an international drama and giving up $600m in annual profit would be worth doing just to distract attention from the fact a handful of people are whining about getting the phone to use 3G instead of 2G in some areas on the Nexus One.

    What next? Microsoft purchases a nuclear missile and launches it at Russia to distract everyone from the fact no one is buying the Zune?

  15. Non-aggregated data = Backdoor by professorguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a backdoor because the obvious way to store search data is to aggregate it immediately and delete the source. Which is what any sane engineer would do.

    Enter the cops: Don't delete that data, I might want to spy on someone. What do you mean China is using that data to spy on someone? How dare they!

    And that's why it's a back door.

  16. It has been going on for years by kilodelta · · Score: 4, Informative

    Back in 2001 I was working for state government. Our web site was defaced and I started tracing the sources through our border routers, etc. It resolved back to China.

    So I did what any sane administrator in government would do, I just blotted out the known IP ranges from China.

  17. It's their company... by sootman · · Score: 4, Informative

    ... they can do whatever the hell they want.

    "Google's decision Tuesday to risk walking away from China (Um, the world's largest Internet market)..."

    They're not REQUIRED to do business with anyone. Some customers are just too much of a pain in the ass to be worth it. Imagine you own a store and there's an item you buy for $5 and sell for $10. If someone comes in and offers you $9 for it, would you sell? Sure, why not, it's still pretty good. How about $8? $7? $6? $5.50? $5.25? $5.05? $5.01? At what point do you tell them "Piss off, you're wasting my time"? I personally would much rather deal with a thousand nice well-off customers than a million pain-in-the-ass cheapskates.* Seems to be working pretty well for Apple too. :-)

    So same thing here. If Google doesn't feel like dealing with China's BS, they don't have to. Let someone else try to make a buck off that headache.

    * disclaimer: before anyone gets their panties in a knot, I'm not saying rich people are nice and poor people aren't. I'm talking about CHEAPNESS here--someone who has nothing better to do with their time than argue over every nickel versus someone who's content to pay a fair price. Cheapness** is why the US is so beholden to China right now. See also Schmatta.

    ** and a few other things

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  18. Re:Why not ask about human rights in China? by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google made a move everybody else was afraid to make, and they're too big to be ignored. This is going to have a geopolitical domino effect, that's why everybody is now concerned. It is rare that a corporation should make such a bold statement that preempts what I'm sure are a lot of well laid foreign policy plans both public and private. They're forcing action on the issue, and now each nation is going to have to grandstand. We'll see how much real substance is addressed, but if other corporations start coming forward like a bunch of women coming out of hiding in a serial rape case, then you can be sure that for any number of constituency reasons (contributions included) there will be so much pressure on Congress that it could topple the foreign policy direction of the executive branch.

    --
    I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
  19. Rules, Rules, Rules by TiggertheMad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When has UN condemnation ever acomphished anything?

    Even if the condemnation doesn't scare off investors (Which China wants and needs), it is the next step in the process. International diplomacy is a game with rules.

    Who exactly woud sanctions against China hurt? (Hint: not China)

    Yes it would actually hurt China. They need markets to sell to. While it wouldn't also cause other short term pain, it would allow development of markets in other countries, eroding China's long term markets. China is not the only game in town by a long shot.

    Who is going to declare war on a country with over a billion people and manufacturers most of all but the most secretive millitrary hardware for just about the rest of the world?

    Again, China is not the only market, especially for military hardware. While China is a powerful country, it cannot stand alone against the world. While warfare isn't on the table yet, China will not be able to behave like this indefinitely without suffering repercussions.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:Rules, Rules, Rules by ajs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      International diplomacy is a game with rules.

      You're a funny guy.

      And a correct one.

      As with nearly any large, social system, international diplomacy has layers of rules and exceptions and more rules and more exceptions, accreted over time.

      Chess is a useful analogy. There are standard openings in chess. Everyone who has a working familiarity with the game knows most of them at a glance. There are some other, less standard openings. Then there are crazy things that beginners do. Except, sometimes a grand master will use one of those crazy openings specifically because it's something that his opponents don't have a set response for.

  20. Re: "credible" threat? by davide+marney · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The thought was, China will suffer a major loss of prestige if Google goes through with this. Other companies will follow suit, leading to loss of access, loss of influence, loss of opportunity, and ultimately, loss of business.

    China will lash out with wounded national pride, as they seem wont to do. This will further alienate them from the international community, leading to further loss of status.

    Loss of prestige will encourage civil unrest, something China dreads. In some places, China seems to be a tinderbox, just waiting to catch fire. They are suffering from the global recession just as much as anyone.

    That is a whole lot of pain that China doesn't need right now.

    --
    "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
  21. Re:Powerhouse? US 15 Trillion China 4 by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, I'm sure China will be as damaged by their 'collapse' as we have been by ours.

    China is a powerhouse whether you like it or not. China has been the cultural, political, and economic epicenter of the largest continent on earth for the better part of five thousand years. Almost every society near China is directly derivative of Chinese society. China contains nearly 20% of the world's entire population. They will be second only to the US in GDP very shortly. China is second only to the US in military expenditures, and has nearly 1 million more active duty military personnel than the US (sobering considering that the US could not defeat China in any of the proxy wars it has fought in Asia). Ask the Germans or the French how well technological superiority works against vast numbers and huge territory in a conventional war. And while I'm not one of the nutjobs who think war with China is around the corner, if their economic growth falters and it destabilizes their society, they may change their approach to a more aggressive one regionally to rally nationalism, perhaps even to the point of provoking a war with India over Arunchal Pradesh or trying to absorb Taiwan.

    China is a police state, even a nightmare, but if you think China is a joke you might find that the punchline is not so funny.

    --
    I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
  22. Re:Powerhouse? US 15 Trillion China 4 by Artifakt · · Score: 5, Informative

    Basically, any nation that starts a nuclear war against either the USA or Russia, without being able to win a decisive victory, loses everything. If they manage to destroy say, 30, 40, or even 50% of either superpower's population and assets, they just provide the justification for an absolutely overwhelming retaliatory strike.

          Remember US history for the 1940's. The US declares war on Japan, with an immediate demand for unconditional surrender, and publicly announces that this is the only thing they will accept. The War declaration in Congress makes this a binding matter on the executive branch, that the US will not accept a conditional surrender except by direct order of the President.
        The following are a few of the publicly expressed remarks of the time, generally approved by the majority of Americans listening:

          "By the time we're through with them, the Japanese language will be spoken only in hell."

          "I hate Japs! I'm telling you men, that if I met a pregnant Japanese woman, I'd kick her in the belly!"

                                              Both by Fleet Admiral William "Bull" Halsey

    You'll note that Halsey is quite clearly talking Genocide as an acceptable response. He got promoted after that.

            During the 70's the Soviet Union conducted top level strategic simulations exercises (sit around a table style war games scenarios) with its general staff. One of the noted outcomes of those was that, whenever scenario casualties exceeded the roughly 20 million from WW2, someone on the staff spotted and mentioned that fact, and commanding generals and admirals almost invariably swiftly urged the politbureau to immediately allow retrofitting of cobalt jackets on nuclear devices and permission to deploy them specifically against civilian population centers, or the release of weaponized smallpox or anthrax to the front lines for field artillary use, or other such acts. The Soviet Union's analysis was that, in a real war, once casualties reached about 20 million, there was a better than 50-50 chance command would stage a coup if civilian authorities didn't approve all the most extreme measures in the Soviet arsenal, and an even higher likelihood they would give orders to totally exterminate the enemy population bases with them if they got the means to do so. Whether they would have been so determined to take it into runaway mode in a real war is, of course, speculative, but there's certainly at least some chance.

       

    --
    Who is John Cabal?
  23. Re:suspicious timing by VoxMagis · · Score: 4, Funny

    No, not really.

    I can't think why anyone would think that making such an international drama and giving up $600m in annual profit would be worth doing just to distract attention from the fact a handful of people are whining about getting the phone to use 3G instead of 2G in some areas on the Nexus One.

    What next? Microsoft purchases a nuclear missile and launches it at Russia to distract everyone from the fact no one is buying the Zune?

    Don't give them IDEAS!

    --
    -- I really need to bleed off some of this /. karma.