Slashdot Mirror


Ballmer Defends Microsoft In China

An anonymous reader writes "Mr. Ballmer has recently posted on the official Microsoft blog discussing future business in China and defending Microsoft's stance of cooperating with the government even as other large IT companies have begun making public condemnations (Google and Twitter being the most prominent). Couple this with Bill Gate's speech on China's censorship being not all that bad (a speech very well received by Chinese media) and you've got people wondering: Is Microsoft aiming to take Google's place in China?"

22 of 162 comments (clear)

  1. Are you kidding? by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

    you've got people wondering: Is Microsoft aiming to take Google's place in China?"

    Of course they are! What a dumb question.

  2. Of course by Sarten-X · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course. Microsoft wants to take Google's place everywhere.

    In China specifically, Microsoft can't pack up and leave like Google did. China's already a big target for their anti-piracy efforts Their only option is to play nice with the government and get cooperation, no matter how bad it really is.

    --
    You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    1. Re:Of course by Greg+Hullender · · Score: 5, Informative
      Bill Gates made this comment at the new hire party I attended when I joined Microsoft in 1994, so I can vouch for its authenticity. I heard him say it with my own ears. However, it's worth noting that what he said, in full, was "As long as they're pirating software, we want them to be pirating ours. Sooner or later, as their economy develops, they'll switch to paying, and when that happens, ours will be what they'll want to buy."

      I think China is developed enough to pay for software now, and I'm very sure Microsoft's anti-piracy efforts are genuine -- even though I haven't worked for Microsoft for two years now.

      --Greg

  3. Re:More than likely. by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, that's true. After all, they're only obeying orders, and so they bear absolutely no personal or corporate responsibility for the consequences of their actions. That's how it works, isn't it? Right? Right?

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  4. maybe Ballmer sees his reflection in China by Locutus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft's business tactics and China's public policies have some overlap. Microsoft probably sees little wrong with how the Chinese government runs the country as shown by the Gates and Ballmer statements. They resemble each other.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  5. Hey, maybe it's a good thing! by blind+biker · · Score: 5, Funny

    You know Microsoft's strategy of embrace, extend, extinguish? Microsoft is embracing China's censorship and lack of social liberties. Let's hope they get to the "extinguish" phase, quick!

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  6. Not at all like the USSR. Really! by jjo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "nothing at all like the situation was in the USSR". Yeah, right. There is no similarity whatsoever between the USSR and the PRC in the restrictions on freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and freedom of association. Not the tiniest bit of similarity. As different as night and day. Chinese censorship is not at all like Soviet censorship. Brin must be certifiably insane if he perceives a parallel between the two.

  7. Re:More than likely. by paeanblack · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's right son, just obey the orders. And get that vagonload of Jews to the gas chambers.

    And what of the wagonmakers? Must they stop making wagons because of how some of their wagons are used? What about the wheelwrights and axlemakers?

    At some point along that line, it no longer becomes immoral to remain in business, even if you are aware that some of your products are being used in an utterly despicable manner.

  8. Re:More than likely. by Greg+Hullender · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Actually, at least when it comes to Search Engine censorship, China always gave Microsoft a pass. I was responsible for the team inside MSN Search (now Bing) that developed the software to filter "objectionable content". (The "safe search" feature.) In places like the US, customers can turn it off, but in places like Germany and China, where there are laws, the customers cannot. I was uneasily expecting to have to incorporate a list of banned sites from the Chinese government, and while I didn't like it, I didn't see any way around it, and I spoke to our VP privately about it to make sure he understood my position. That my loyalty was to the company and I'd do what had to be done, even if I didn't like it.

    Much to my surprise, he was upset with me. He had VERY strong feelings about this issue, and he insisted China wasn't going to make us do it. That was the same month when China's president visited Microsoft before he visited George Bush, and in his speech on campus, he said, "China is a friend of Microsoft because Microsoft has always been a friend of China." Sure enough, whatever China made Google do, they didn't make US do anything special. Germany was a much bigger headache.

    So I guess I'd say, that, no, you actually don't have to go by those laws if you're in a country that puts personal relationships above the law. Apparently they really don't think of the law the same way we do, and that was a real eye-opener. For me, anyway.

    Or maybe the real truth was that the Chinese government figured out that our poor little search engine couldn't find the objectionable stuff anyway except by accident, and they just felt sorry for us. :-)

    --Greg (happily retired from it all now)

  9. Re:More than likely. by wealthychef · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At some point along that line, it no longer becomes immoral to remain in business, even if you are aware that some of your products are being used in an utterly despicable manner.

    The question is not whether Microsoft should remain in business. It's whether it should do business with a government that will use your products in a repressive manner. A wagonmaker could probably sell his wagons to someone who does not kill its own citizens for their ethnicity and still remain in business. But here is the crux. It won't quite make as much money. And the pure lust for profit is what is objectionable here.

    --
    Currently hooked on AMP
  10. Re:More than likely. by MozeeToby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What about when the order comes in for a wagon specialy designed for the purpose? China demands that they change their product in a way that everyone in the company has to recognize is unethical, but everyone just goes along with it and claims they're just following orders.

  11. Being Evil - Just Part of the Business Plan by careysub · · Score: 5, Informative

    With Google "Don't be evil" is a shibboleth that sets an aspirational goal which, as so often happens in the real world, may only be honored in the breech.

    With Microsoft "being evil" is, and has always been, at the core of their whole business model.

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  12. Censorship? Really? by mpapet · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Microsoft will cooperate as long as they have a shot at public sector revenue. This is hardly unique to China. If the nation of Venezuela wanted Microsoft products, they'd take their money.

    I think American crossed the line into full-scale hipocracy(sp!!) by calling China out on censorship. The Chinese are more overt, but the effects are the same.

    How about killing prisoners at Guantanamo? http://harpers.org/archive/2010/01/hbc-90006368 How was that story handled?? I'd argue that's a pretty serious situation and yet, somehow the mainstream media won't touch it. The title AP gave it was "Harper's questions three Guantanamo deaths." Somehow, prisoners under 24/7 observation are able to stuff rags down their throats AND THEN hang themselves? There's room for 'a question?' http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-01-18-guantanamo-deaths_N.htm?csp=34

    How about the *massive* transfer of weath orchestrated by the Fed and Treasury? It's a 'bailout.' Maiden Lane 3 somehow generates profits in a way obvious to exactly no one. GM's debt holders got barely pennies on the dollar depending on their debt senority and yet AIG's counter parties got every single cent back. And the headline is "this is troubling" ?? http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jan2010/db2010018_994080.htm

    Let's go back a few years to Sibel Edmonds story that *no* media would touch.

    I missed the part where the American Republic was a bastion of Freedom.

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
  13. Re:More than likely. by interploy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What corporate responsibility? Because it seems to me there's a lot of talk about corporate responsibility, but when it comes to it, the powers that be don't really care what a corporation does so long as they don't screw the shareholders/government. Otherwise, when a corporation comes into violation with the law (and assuming the defendants can afford to holdout for the duration of the trial), the most they'll get is some nominal fine that sounds big to the average person, but is really no more than a slap on the wrist.

    All this justification crap is just fluff. Here's the real reason Microsoft is in China: Microsoft wants to make money. China has money to spend. Therefore, Microsoft will cooperate with China so it can get some of it's money.

    That's it. Surprising, I know. Honestly, Microsoft could go on about how it'd give every Chinese person a fucking ice-cream shitting unicorn and it'd come to the same effect. So long as the shareholders are happy, it doesn't really matter what they say to the public.

  14. Re:I don't buy it. by sp3d2orbit · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They'd much rather have a secure, stable society than appease to every little whim.

    This is a fallacy. Authoritarian government do not promote secure, stable societies. They repress. They oppress. They don't allow people with grievances to air them or to hold the government accountable for their actions.

    Authoritarian governments CREATE instability because they eliminate the safety valves that prevent small grievances from becoming revolts.

  15. So, self-regulation is a fantasy? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Thanks for making it so clear that there is no hope for self-regulation at all. The only hope to keep companies behaving even the slightest therefor must come from government control. Nothing like a honest capitalist to make clear the need for government interference.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:So, self-regulation is a fantasy? by soupd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I honestly struggle to find an example where self regulation, where it is even possible, has not been abused. Public companies have a responsibility to shareholders - like it or lump it. How many shareholders really take an interest in the ethics or morals of the board as long as the dividends keep rolling in? As for Government 'interference', do you think it's in USG's interest to regulate Microsoft's potential courting of China as market? I'd wager that USG would be more interested in the possibility of exploiting whatever relationship Microsoft may be able to build.

  16. Sorry, that is a lie by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 3, Insightful

    MS is NOT selling its soul in China for revenue. You cannot sell what you do not have. Ballmer and Gates have no morals. Oh, they are not evil, that takes a commitment. They just have absolutely no moral compass whatsoever. Look at how Bill Gates does his charity work, always with an angle to somehow better MS. It is the way he thinks.

    And before you defend him, remember that is a LOT easier to have morals if you are rich. If MS pulled out of China what would happen to these two guys? Absolutely nothing. They ain't doing this to survive, they are doing it for yet another billion whose difference they will never ever notice.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  17. Re:More than likely. by Vicegrip · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google did the right thing, eventually. At the end of the day we are more than employees. We are citizens that benefit from freedoms hard earned. It is the utmost height of hypocrisy to then turn around and pretend there is nothing wrong with assisting the repression of people in foreign countries. One day, China may very well be the powerhouse of the world, western corporations' eagerness at supplying tools to assist Chinese repression will then come back to haunt us. Our failure to stand up against this hypocrisy will then have transformed into a failure to fight for our democratic rights.

    --
    Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
  18. Re:i will remember this by geekoid · · Score: 3, Informative

    "Only to see their stock price plummet. "

    Based on what? Google's stock didn't.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  19. Re:More than likely. by MasaMuneCyrus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Realistically, if you're making the gas chambers then you have decided your moral position by the business you are in. If you are making the actual tools of killing then there's a case that you have a moral duty to take care over how they will be used. But the further you get from that then the more your moral responsibility is diluted, to the point where it's lost in the noise.

    And that's exactly the issue, here. Most people likely wouldn't care if China was somehow using existing Microsoft services to send disinformation and propaganda to their citizens. It's the fact that China is saying, "Please modify your existing software so that it sends disinformation and propaganda to our citizens," and Microsoft is saying, "Ok, sure. What kind of censorship would you like us to make for you?"

    Regarding the wagonmakers analogy -- it's upsetting, but not a big deal if Nazis are using a wagonmaker's wagons to transport Jews to a fiery death. That's not the wagonmaker's fault, necessarily. What Microsoft is doing, though, is making a Jew-transporting wagon that is engineered for the purpose of sending Jews to their fiery death.

  20. Re:More than likely. by nobodie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You have hit the nail on the head. The Chinese idea of law is entirely alien to westerners. My favorite quote is from (as I remember it) Thomas Friedman at the NYTimes. Asking too many questions the official finally went to failsafe mode: "China is a country of law." This is true, but you must understand the crucial difference. Laws in China are not based on cases brought before a judge and/or jury. Laws in China are decided by rich plutocrats who control the legislative (communist party) the executive (communist party) and the judicial (communist party) branches of the government. In the old days (10 years ago) every company or any other organization had a president, who was any old figurehead. The second in command, the vice-president, had a seedy little office down the hall. That person was the Communist Party member. Their job was two-fold. First, they controlled the money. No money came in or went out without their consent. Second they controlled the "stamp". The stamp was the mark of an official decision. Similar to the signature of a president or CEO it makes things legal decisions. Nowadays even that flimsy excuse for a veil is gone. The party membership owns everything, decides everything and controls everything. They are the law and they are powerful and frightened. Read the news with these things in mind and you will understand China much better.

    --
    Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.