Slashdot Mirror


China Hits Back At Google

sopssa writes "After Google yesterday started redirecting google.cn users to their uncensored Hong Kong-based google.com.hk servers, the Chinese government has now hit back at Google by restricting access to Google's Hong Kong servers. 'On Tuesday mainland China users could not see uncensored Hong Kong-based content after the government either disabled certain searches or blocked links to results.' China Mobile, the largest wireless carrier in the country, has also been approached by the Chinese government to cancel a contract with Google about having google.cn on their mobile home page for search. China Unicom, the second largest carrier in China, has also either postponed or killed the launch of Android-based mobile phones in the country."

432 comments

  1. OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    WHY are there NO comments for this yet?!??!

    1. Re:OMG by _merlin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      OK, here are your standard template responses:

      • OMFG China is evil for censoring your internet!
      • Google should GTFO China if they don't want to follow the law!
      • China needs Google more than Google needs China.
      • The Chinese government is doing more harm than good with this isolationist policy.
    2. Re:OMG by toastar · · Score: 3, Funny

      Thanks for doing the work for me!

      OMFG China is evil for censoring your internet!

    3. Re:OMG by TheNarrator · · Score: 1

      * Google is somehow a greedy capitalist bastard for doing all this. I have no idea why or how, but they're a big company so this whole thing must be part of some diabolically clever evil plan.

    4. Re:OMG by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 0, Troll

      Still, people will want to express their pretentious piousness and show how sacred it all is for them, blah blah blah. Those that live in the US will be quick to point out the heinousness of Chinese policy, but very slow to recognize anything untoward in their own country's policies, foreign or domestic. Way too much Kool-Aid.

    5. Re:OMG by dimeglio · · Score: 1

      This is nothing new. China being China always kept a close eye on its people. Maybe Google thought there was a Berlin wall to topple so they pushed on it. Nah, it pushed back, not quite ready to fall. After all the great wall of China is much larger.

      --
      Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
    6. Re:OMG by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think you've been paying attention to our news and politics lately. Criticizing the government has almost replaced baseball as our national pastime. Of course, the reason it has become so popular probably has to do with the fact that we can do it without getting arrested and interned in a re-education facility. Unlike in, say, China.

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    7. Re:OMG by sortius_nod · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      No, your government just bombs the fuck out of countries that disagree with them...

    8. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      If that is the American policy, we are seriously slacking. There are plenty of countries that disagree with us right now, Lets see Iran, Syria, Russia, France (Fuckin Frogs), North Korea, China, etc. Correlation != causation. Just because the we have bombed some of the countries we disagree with, does not me that is the sole cause of why were doing it. You should have learned this is high school at the very least. I know I learned it at my public high school.

    9. Re:OMG by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

      You forgot the über-cynic:
      "Every decision Google makes is about maximizing shareholder profit because they're evil money-grubbing capitalists trying to destroy society!"

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    10. Re:OMG by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

      ... this whole thing must be part of some diabolically clever evil plan.

      You mean like New Coke was?

      --
      $ make available
    11. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Screw China, and the companies that outsource too them. And google sure does not need China, no one does.

    12. Re:OMG by VanGarrett · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah? So? My country has a bigger dick than your country.

      Are you talking about this?

    13. Re:OMG by groovyPost · · Score: 1

      WHY are there NO comments for this yet?!??!

      Not very interesting. China says play by our rules or get out. Google needs China more than China needs google. IMOP, this is just one way China get's to squash western competition from entering into China in the search space.

    14. Re:OMG by the+gnat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nice strawman. Slashdot is full of left-libertarian US citizens, and we've been wailing about our less enlightened national policies for years. I for one would love to see Dick Cheney sharing a jail cell with Hu Jintao and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but every time one of the latter two gentleman is a topic of discussion, I always see dozens of comments saying "what about Guantanamo Bay/Abu Grahib/warrantless wiretapping blah blah blah?" - as if that excuses any amount of misbehavior by other governments. Well, I think we should withdraw all our troops from foreign countries, try or release everyone at Guantanamo, and send the entire Bush administration to the ICC. Do I have your permission to criticize the Chinese government now, or are you going to start whining about something else?

      Besides all that, the simple fact is that the US legal system continues to be more permissive of unbridled free speech than almost any other country in the world. We send people to jail for all sorts of stupid reasons that I certainly don't support, but you can march through Washington DC with a sign comparing Obama to Hitler, and mutter about a 2nd American Revolution, and you won't be hauled off to jail. Most of us wouldn't have it any other way.

    15. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about
      *Boycott and embargo China till they drown in their own plastic Wal~Mart hell.
      *Line all the Chinese up and march 'em into the ocean to see just how many times the line wraps around the Earth.
      *Google who?

    16. Re:OMG by sc0p3 · · Score: 1

      One more template comment, Congrats Google for finally adhering to your 'Do No Evil' Policy. Censorship in China was a black mark against your name and by putting your belief in freedom of information above profit margins you have partially restored my faith.

    17. Re:OMG by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      h. Those that live in the US will be quick to point out the heinousness of Chinese policy, but very slow to recognize anything untoward in their own country's policies, foreign or domestic. Way too much Kool-Aid.

      Nice attempt at the appearance of "balanced viewpoint", but it seems like you are either a. ignorant of the United States and its people, b. just America-bashing for the fun of it or (and this is my personal favorite) c. just ignorant. Either way, you're the one sucking down the Kool-Aid. As it happens, a lot of us are pretty damned dissatisfied with our various forms of government here, and we're pretty damn vocal about it. We can talk about it on public forms like this one. We can call the President of the United States a porchmonkey if we want to, and nobody will arrest us (although some of our neighbors might burn down our house.) We can even, if we get sufficiently worked up about it, change how our government(s) operate. It's not easy, to be sure, but is still a lot more than anyone living in China (or any other totalitarian regime) can say for themselves. So watch your tongue.

      And we have every right to point out the heinousness of Chinese policy because it is heinous. Whether or not you like the United States doesn't change that fact one little bit.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    18. Re:OMG by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, your government just bombs the fuck out of countries that disagree with them...

      Only if they have something we want, just like every major power since the Roman Empire has done, all throughout history. We don't agree with North Korea, for example ... they don't have a single goddamn thing we want, but do keep making threatening noises about nuking our allies, so we keep buying them off with free food and diesel fuel. So we don't bomb other nations just because they disagree with us: fact is, most of the world is full of complete assholes who disagree with us, and while actually do have enough bombs to take care of them all, there wouldn't be much left when we finished the job.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    19. Re:OMG by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know I learned it at my public high school.

      Oh, he learned it. It's just that irrational finger-pointing at the U.S. has apparently replaced the national sport of many countries. That's too bad ... there's plenty of legitimate criticisms to make.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    20. Re:OMG by Teppy · · Score: 1

      Yes, but kudos to Google for pushing. When was the last time you saw a company even 1/10th Google's size do something "right" just because it's right? This is humiliating for the bureaucrats in China.

    21. Re:OMG by electrons_are_brave · · Score: 1
      One good effect of this is that Google - who have spoken out against net censorship in Australia - can now gently suggest that Australia is in the same club as countries like China.

      By taking the high moral ground in China, they can act to protect a free market place in Western democracies who are moving increasingly towards censorship.

      And, of course, it's another little chip away at China, who are really looking like the emerging world power of the 21st Century. And their isolationist, inward-looking culture is not something you want in a superpower.

    22. Re:OMG by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Just because it's right? One would guess that the attacks they suffered from Chinese locations had contributed, but I guess not..

    23. Re:OMG by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The thing you've got to bear in mind is that China is developing. Back in 1989 China was much poorer and peoples lives were much more controlled - to the point where the government told them where to live and where to work. Essentially it was sort of like North Korea. Then Tiananmen happened. The government basically won that round but they were seriously rattled. They decided on a policy of economic reform but kept the politics unchanged. Now I suspect that most Chinese people saw development as a priority. China quickly became capitalist. It's still rather poor - GDP per capita is between Albania and Turkemenistan. Still the state's strict control over the economy has largely gone. They can afford computers and can get on the internet. Chinese netizens have had regular skirmishes with the government, e.g. Grass Mud Horse.

      More seriously there growing numbers of mass incidents, the PRC term for riots usually ones against corrupt local officials. Plus there's a good chance that rapid growth driven by exports might slow if America stops importing. And in any case 1989 is not the only outbreak of anti government activity - there was the Beijing Spring and pretty much total anarchy during the Cultural Revolution.

      It's also interesting that the Beijing Spring happened in 1977 after Mao died. There was a second Beijing Spring in 1997 after Deng Xiaoping died - the China Democracy Party was founded and allowed to register by some local authorities until the central government banned it and rounded up the members.

      Now Hu Jin Tao is about to retire. Essentially China is due for a political crisis. While it is inevitable that the Chinese government will try and slam the door, it's not completely guaranteed that they will succeed.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    24. Re:OMG by icebraining · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You better check again the provenience of each component of your computer. Odds are at least one of them was made in China.

    25. Re:OMG by SETIGuy · · Score: 1

      And we can complain about it. And if you come here, you can complain about it... Right in front of the White House. Try going to Tienanmen Square with a bunch of your friends to complain about the policies of the Chinese government. Really.. Try... I'll buy the ticket.

    26. Re:OMG by spazdor · · Score: 1

      'Round here, we call that the Manhandle.

      --
      DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
    27. Re:OMG by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 1

      Trying to maximize shareholder profit does not automatically make anyone a money-grubbing capitalist.

      Trying to maximize shareholder profit at the expense of every ethical principle without any thought as to what is right or wrong DOES make someone a money-grubbing capitalist. People like me get accused all the time of thinking profit is evil. I don't think profit is evil... I think profit at the cost of ethics and even human life is evil.

    28. Re:OMG by xQx · · Score: 1

      Why is it that we get upset with a company (association) like the MPAA or RIAA strong-arm national governments to push their agenda, but all cheer on Google when they use their international power to corrupt the policies of a sovereign country?

      Just food for thought? ... I mean, who are we to say giving people unrestricted access to information is not evil? Even if you disagree, can't you see the logic behind an argument that #1. Maybe the world would be a better place if the detailed instructions for weapons of mas destruction weren't easily avaliable to every psychopath, and #2, People are happier in an oppressive society if they don't KNOW they are oppressed because they are not EXPOSED to the truth?

      PS: Don't worry, I'm on the other side of this issue - I hope Google sticks it to those oppressive Chinese government types, and I hope it sets a precedent for Stephen Conroy (Australia) and I hope the MPAA and RIAA burn in hell - but you do have to recognise the double standard in this... and probably admit that Google did deserve this retaliation.

    29. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But not bigger than China.

    30. Re:OMG by kanguro · · Score: 1

      That's not yours, originally. You bought it to Spain. :P

    31. Re:OMG by kanguro · · Score: 1

      OK. But in the European Union you can do that, and you are protected with medical care to boot. Your way is not the only way, even with the many good things you can do.

    32. Re:OMG by tqk · · Score: 1

      WHY are there NO comments for this yet?!??!

      Have you heard of censorship? :-) Sorry, that's just a flippant way to answer, speaking to the situation. My, what a comment that was of yours. Not.

      The funniest part of this battle is when you look at Baidu's "Business Overview." It strives to serve Chinese web pages. That's it. Google gave Chinese businesses, students, scientists, ... access to foreign buyers, markets, and information.

      To keep the former away from *one* of the latter (information), the PRC cuts them off from all three. How to shoot yourselves in the foot, PRC! Totalitarian idiots.

      Good job on this one Google and Sergey. I'm liking you a lot more today. Thanks.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    33. Re:OMG by oldhack · · Score: 1

      Yep, cuz, you know, we would nuke the motherfuckas from the orbit, I swear.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    34. Re:OMG by the+gnat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But in the European Union you can do that, and you are protected with medical care to boot. Your way is not the only way, even with the many good things you can do.

      What's your point? I would never claim that the US government is anything close to a perfect system; the debate is about free speech and laws restricting to it. And while I think the EU is mostly very good on civil liberties and better than us on some other unrelated issues, it's worth mentioning that they are far more willing to restrict speech - and I'm not just talking about Germany's prohibitions on Holocaust denial. Google "Ireland blasphemy" if you're curious. On the moral scale, this can't compare to the thousands of civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan, but it's one instance where the US clearly is superior.

    35. Re:OMG by radtea · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We can even, if we get sufficiently worked up about it, change how our government(s) operate.

      Almost certainly false. You can't even muster up a viable third party, something your neighbours to the north have been doing with clockwork regularity every thirty years or so for the past century.

      The American system of government is broken. Congress has approval ratings that regularly dip below 20% and sometimes into the single digits, but incumbents are returned over 80%, sometimes over 90%, of the time. That is the reality of your broken governmental system. You can SAY anything you damned well please, so long as (a very few of) you vote for one of two almost identical parties.

      The only reason the anti-conservative radicals of the Republican Party and the sometime budget-balancers of the Democratic Party look so completely different to you is that they are the only two tiny bumps on the otherwise atomically smooth surface of mainstream American politics. You have a populace so politically naive that a set of minor tweaks to your broken for-profit health care system is considered "socialism", for heavens sake!

      All of which said: obvious the US is in pretty much infinitely better shape, culturally and politically, than China, who are shooting themselves in the foot with this ridiculous policy. The Chinese people need access to information to prosper, and by attempting to restrict it the Chinese government is in epic fail territory.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    36. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can SAY anything you damned well please, so long as (a very few of) you vote for one of two almost identical parties.

      So I can't say what I please if I don't vote for one the two major parties? Explain the fact that I do exactly that, please.

    37. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So we don't bomb other nations just because they disagree with us: fact is, most of the world is full of complete assholes who disagree with us, and while actually do have enough bombs to take care of them all, there wouldn't be much left when we finished the job.

      Which is probably why Texans feel comfortable talking about seceding from the Union. Except for Austin, but lots of Texans don`t really consider that city part of Texas anyways.

    38. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh, maybe. Chinese culture is traditionally much more collectivist than western cultures. While there might be a crisis, and there might be a period of time where it seems like that sort of stuff is getting better, I fully expect China to revert to its traditional political norms. Unfortunately, I think those norms can only get you so far. That sort of society is generally much more bureaucratic and (as a result) is much less conducive to innovation. Its kind of like a giant company -- very difficult to do new things. Sure, you might have a Steve Jobs run things from time to time and do cool stuff, but most of the time your going to have Steve Ballmer. The end result is that Democracy is invented by western cultures, then forgotten, and then rediscovered; but in China the same shit happens for 3000 years.

    39. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Korea definately had something the US wanted - a military outpost and ally on the borders of both the USSR and China.

    40. Re:OMG by yuhong · · Score: 1

      Yea, I have a submission about how maximizing shareholder value harms mental health:
      http://slashdot.org/submission/1188074/Why-Modern-Business-Is-Bad-for-Your-Mental-Health
      Good thing Google moves away from shareholder value, otherwise this would not have been possible at all.

    41. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were all censored by China.

    42. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes you can do all that. But does it matter? Will you do something? There is not much that indicates the last.

      So in the end, is it that the difference is only that you think you can actually make a difference?

      Isn't that the perfect victory of the state?

    43. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US society *is* the re-education facility.

    44. Re:OMG by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      You can SAY anything you damned well please, so long as (a very few of) you vote for one of two almost identical parties.

      So I can't say what I please if I don't vote for one the two major parties? Explain the fact that I do exactly that, please.

      I think what the GP is trying to say is, in short, "talk is cheap."

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    45. Re:OMG by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      they can act to protect a free market place in Western democracies who are moving increasingly towards censorship.

      Don't confuse a free market with freedom of speech/expression - Australia has a free market, at least to the same extent as the US, but does not have freedom of expression enshrined in any law, bill of rights or court ruling, and likely the only real obligation the Australian government has to protect that is the fact that Australia is a signatory and has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. That does not exclude censorship, and while it's admirable that Google is raising its concerns, no politician on either side of politics will take seriously any comparisons with China, and a more nuanced approach is necessary.

      And, of course, it's another little chip away at China, who are really looking like the emerging world power of the 21st Century. And their isolationist, inward-looking culture is not something you want in a superpower.

      You'd prefer an expansionist, aggressive one? Many would contend the US post-WWII was, if not isolationist, certainly inward-looking - name one superpower that wasn't inward-looking in terms of its culture at its height. All powers consider themselves to be the greatest and would hardly look at other cultures and go "you know what, we should consider adapting parts of a culture which hasn't come to be as dominant as we are". Such is the hubris of power.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    46. Re:OMG by nemock · · Score: 1

      In the US and most of the West, there is an equally disturbing form of censorship that no one seems to talk about ... it's called political correctness and self censorship. You say we can call the President a porchmonkey. But in truth, your ability or willingness to do so really depends on who the President is. Look at recent history to observe this point.

    47. Re:OMG by amRadioHed · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The American system of government is broken. Congress has approval ratings that regularly dip below 20% and sometimes into the single digits, but incumbents are returned over 80%, sometimes over 90%, of the time.

      The American voting system is completely broken, but that example you give has nothing to do with it.

      As a whole Congressional approval is always low because no one likes those 98 senators and 434 representatives wasting our money on pork-barrel projects in their districts. But what we do like are those 2 senators and 1 representative bringing money and jobs to our district, thus individually they tend to have high approval and are easily reelected. That's one of the few parts of our system that actually makes sense.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    48. Re:OMG by mjwx · · Score: 2, Insightful
      So, how are those free speech zones going.

      and I'm not just talking about Germany's prohibitions on Holocaust denial. Google "Ireland blasphemy" if you're curious

      Nice straw man, but these laws aren't really enacted (Downfall, the source of the angry Hitler videos broke all the German taboo's and with near universal accolades in Germany, also the angry Hitler video's are quite popular with ze Germans). Same with Ireland, when was the last person charged with blasphemy (HINT: Ireland is holding a referendum to have it removed from their constitution). The only difference between saying something immensely stupid in Europe and saying something immensely stupid in America is the American police wont take you to safety before some redneck takes it upon himself to correct your thinking.

      The US has as many restrictions on free speech as Europe, they are just enforced differently.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    49. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dare you to try walking through DC with a sign comparing Obama to Hitler.
      It's very likely police are going to try to stop you, possibly tazering you to get you to leave. No, it's most likely not legal, but that will be the least of your worries with 50 000 volts going through your nuts.

    50. Re:OMG by akayani · · Score: 1

      Criticising the government has always been a national pass time in Australia. They are a pack of pricks that will be the first to the wall when the revolution starts!

    51. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Freedom is a relative thing (In a kingdom, thats even more true, especially if the king is your brother, but I digress), every country has differing amounts of freedom. In most western countries, terrorists are subject to the same laws as the general population. In the US, there are special laws that wouldn't pass the sniff test against the general population. In most western countries, wiretapping must be done by warrant from courts, in the US that (sadly) went away. There are many western countries that are more liberal democracies than the United States, which has become a more conservative democracy (sadly), and it seems the political right in the US has been pressing to make the US a more conservative democracy. Pressing for security seems to be the biggest reason (or excuse) for the (aforementioned) restriction of rights and freedoms. In contrast, China (and some eastern european countries, still paying fealty to Russia) are extremes in terms of Conservative Democracies (so much so, they are not considered to be democracies at all, but in their total democratic content, they are most conservative, or least liberal in terms of rights and freedoms). Personally, when I see George W. Bush suspending part of the American Constitution, it looks a lot like Hitler burning the Reichstag. Not good. So maybe comparing China to the U.S. may not be the best example.

    52. Re:OMG by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Taiwan, Hong Kong and even Singapore aren't particularly collectivist. China was collectivist back when the economy collectivised. That's not really true now. Essentially China now looks like a poor authoritarian (as opposed to totalitarian) country like Taiwan or South Korea in the 1970's. Both of those democratised once they had a middle class. For for first time since the communists came to power China is developing a middle class who will want property rights and the rule of law.

      The difference between totalitarian countries where the government essentially crushes civil society and authoritarian ones where it merely gets rid of people that openly oppose it is an important one. Back in the 50's China was completely totalitarian and it was pretty much impossible for anyone to even think of opposing it 1984 style. Now people know that open dissent is still dangerous but the government isn't really able to control people's thoughts.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    53. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      left-lbertarian?

      Ha Haa Haaa

      You probably get confused over Shia and Sunni as well. Or Protestant and Catholic in Northern Ireland. Or Communism and Fascism. Or Big Endians verus Little Endians.

      If you are going to spout this rubbish, do it from your basement rather than in the appropriate countries otherwise you could get in serious trouble.

    54. Re:OMG by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > The thing you've got to bear in mind is that China is developing.

      Granted, they're *actually* developing, unlike most "developing countries" where the word "developing" is a sadly ironic euphemism. China is actually making tangible improvements, specific things we can point to and say with a straight face, "See, this is much better than ten years ago".

      Nonetheless, China is developing at a very controlled (government-controlled) rate, and that rate is fairly slow. Deliberately slow, to all appearances.

      China has a *lot* more developing to do if they ever want to be anything like a first-world country, and they don't appear to be in any hurry about it. This whole thing with Google is just one very small example of how the Chinese government is very much NOT ready to fully set communism to the side and allow the economy to grow freely. (And yes, the free flow of information *is* part and parcel of a proper market economy.)

      Maybe that's okay, and they'll get there in time. Maybe too much change too fast would be traumatic, and "boiling the frog" is a valid way to minimize that. Maybe "slow and steady wins the race". Maybe.

      But there is also a very real danger that the next finance minister or party leader or whoever will decide that China has had "enough reform" and things will start to gradually slide back toward where they were. China's future hangs in the balance. It would really only take one person in the wrong place at the wrong time to screw it up.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    55. Re:OMG by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I have to agree that China could go completely hog wild, like Japan in the 1930's. The difference is that they're bigger, have nukes and also have a larger industrial base. In that scenario future archaeologists will probably be trying to reconstruct our civilisation by digging through the radioactive ash layer once the dark age following WWIII ends in a couple of thousand years.

      My point is that looking at China now I'd forecast a series of anti government movements, all but the last one are crushed. The last one would lead to a more or less free society country which would have a much lower and possibly zero chance of deciding to fight WWIII against everyone else.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    56. Re:OMG by Ironhandx · · Score: 1

      Its about time the national pastime became criticizing the government. The number of people in your country that vote based on "Oh, I recognize that name *check*" or "Hmm, this name looks friendly" is disturbing.

    57. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I for one would love to see Dick Cheney sharing a jail cell"

      What about Bush, Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Nixon, all former members of the CIA involved in the Iran Contra conflict, anyone responsible for invading Iraq... Oh I could keep going on with this list...

    58. Re:OMG by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1

      All powers consider themselves to be the greatest and would hardly look at other cultures and go "you know what, we should consider adapting parts of a culture which hasn't come to be as dominant as we are".

      History is littered with examples of cultures that have acted much like hermit crabs. Rome is probably the most well-known. Not only did they import Greek culture wholesale, including but not limited to religion, art, literature, drama, philosophy, etc. In fact the Romans were so slavish in their aping of the Greeks that sometimes it's hard to tell which is which sometimes. Rome was neither the first nor the last. As powerful as Greek culture was, when Alexander overran the Persians, he became enamored with their culture and even started to dress like them. The Seleucid kingdom although Greek at the top remained culturally quite Persian. This same pattern occurs elsewhere, sometimes in layers. The Normans are remembered for their Francification of England following the Norman conquest, but while there was some lasting impact on the language, the actual cultural impact was shallow and temporary. And their influence was mitigated by limited numbers albeit positioned at the top. Ironically, at the top of the Norman pyramid were Vikings, as the Norman duchy was given to a Viking raider by the King of France to pacify him mere generations before the Norman Conquest.

      China itself is an interesting example, wherein the Mongols adopted Chinese culture almost immediately after their conquest, and were distinguishable from the natives only by their lack of subtlety. Then during the Manchurian occupation the reverse happened, where the Manchus essentially waged a war against Han culture even after the completion of their conquest, although many Manchurians could not resist the power of Han culture (even the less savory bits to the Western perspective like foot binding). Japan presents another interesting case where while completely convinced of their own superiority, they nonetheless made every effort to rapidly Westernize and ape Western dress, industry, government (they actually created a Parliamentary body based on the British House of Lords for their somewhat-dispossessed-by-the-Meiji-Restoration daimyo), etc.

      --
      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
    59. Re:OMG by tbannist · · Score: 1

      If I'm not mistaken that's not exactly right, the majority of congress is elected via the state's gerrymandering procedures that use historical trends to maximize the number of representatives elected from the governing party at the time. The reason incumbents are re-elected most of the time is because each region is stacked towards one of the two parties. Comfortable margins for those in power, and massive landslides for those who are not. Thus sending the maximum number of representatives from the party that controls the state.

      I seem to remember there being a web site which was able to predict before the election campaign started who would win every congressional district with a 98% accuracy rating. Essentially, the results are fixed most of the time. There's about 15 (iirc) competitive districts in the entire country.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    60. Re:OMG by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 1

      We do in fact bomb countries, and even specific people, but we normally have a higher threshold than "disagree". See for yourself ... you just posted something that the US government would likely "disagree" with. Are there any bombs falling on you at the moment? Are stormtroopers kicking down your door? Are we proposing that your right to freely speak your mind be limited? Are we attempting to block or filter your internet access? No? Hmm. Looks like we can tolerate disagreement then. Of course, that wasn't your real point, was it? You were just out to score some easy anti-American points.

      We're actually okay with that. The whole point of my post was that we as a country tolerate dissent, and as a matter of fact we have built a culture (or counter-culture, if you will) that values disagreement and criticism, whether it be of each other or the of the government. You would fit right in around here.

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    61. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      send the entire Bush administration to the ICC

      Yeah, they would get pwned in Icecrown Citadel.

    62. Re:OMG by cramoft · · Score: 1

      No, your government just bombs the fuck out of countries that disagree with them...

      Only if they have something we want, just like every major power since the Roman Empire has done, all throughout history. We don't agree with North Korea, for example ... they don't have a single goddamn thing we want, but do keep making threatening noises about nuking our allies, so we keep buying them off with free food and diesel fuel. So we don't bomb other nations just because they disagree with us: fact is, most of the world is full of complete assholes who disagree with us, and while actually do have enough bombs to take care of them all, there wouldn't be much left when we finished the job.

      I disagree on Korea, I want and love Kimchi

    63. Re:OMG by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      It's true that gerrymandering is a problem, but Senators are still reelected about 90% of the time so there doesn't seem to be much room for it to make a huge difference in Representative reelection rates. I think the major impact of gerrymandering is influencing the party of the Representative.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    64. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Criticizing the government has almost replaced baseball as our national pastime.

      The scary part is the cosplay element. That's new.

    65. Re:OMG by electrons_are_brave · · Score: 1

      Re the censorship issue in Australia: You are correct, but, still, every little drop of ammunition helps. Sadly, in these political battles, rationality and facts matter far less than propaganda and sound bites.

      Re isolationist and inward looking.Again you are correct. When I said "isolationist" I was quoting someone I know who was over in Copenhagen as an environmental lobbist and that was the word he used. Which I guess brings up the point that agressive superpowers may be super-scary, but in economic and environmental terms, superpowers can never be "isolated" in any true sense.

    66. Re:OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hah! Seriously. There is a complete lack of originality in thought here (America) about China... Just the same crap parroted over and over again.

    67. Re:OMG by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      No, your government just bombs the fuck out of countries that disagree with them...

      Only if they have something we want, just like every major power since the Roman Empire has done, all throughout history. We don't agree with North Korea, for example ... they don't have a single goddamn thing we want, but do keep making threatening noises about nuking our allies, so we keep buying them off with free food and diesel fuel. So we don't bomb other nations just because they disagree with us: fact is, most of the world is full of complete assholes who disagree with us, and while actually do have enough bombs to take care of them all, there wouldn't be much left when we finished the job.

      I disagree on Korea, I want and love Kimchi

      I've never tried that ... what is it?

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    68. Re:OMG by cramoft · · Score: 1

      What is Kimchi or Kimchee. Kimchi is a form of fermented cabbage. Similar to Sauerkraut, but more intensely flavored. It is fermented in wooden barrels with brine, hot peppers, ginger, chopped radish, garlic, salted dried shrimp and fish sauce. In my opinion the best produces a slight a effervescence feel on the tongue. It is the the Korean national dish and has been for 3000 yrs. All households have at least 2 barrels in various stages of fermentation. I'm not Korean...

  2. Ping Pong by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google, it's your turn ...

    This will end when Google is completely blocked (or 'filtered') by China. I really don't see any other outcome. China will never budge on these issues (at least not in my lifetime) and Google has already burned some of its bridges to China.

    1. Re:Ping Pong by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This should have been the way its done all along!

      If the Chinese government wants to filter the internet, the onus should be on the Government, not the corporations. They've already built their great firewall - why is that not working fine enough?

      Seriously, Google has to alter the way it serves up web pages? Thats like re-programming the entire application! Why not have China Filter everything that goes out and comes in, and if its not to their liking - its their own problem? And if Google doesn't like it - then they shouldn't be there.

    2. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      I wonder if Slashdot is blocked?
      • Tiananmen Square
      • Falun Gong
      • Free Tibet!
      • Zhen-Shan-Ren is Buddha law
      • Thoughts after reading Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party
      • tyranny
      • deceit
      • history of killing
      • depravity
      • Liu Binyan
      • Liu Xiaobo
      • Dalai Lama
      • cat abuse
      • cashfiesta
      • buy corpses
      • mascot (yeah, mascot)

      Yup, I guess so.

    3. Re:Ping Pong by Aeros · · Score: 1

      yes and its called the "Great Firewall of China"?

    4. Re:Ping Pong by MakinBacon · · Score: 3, Funny

      They've already built their great firewall - why is that not working fine enough?

      Apparently the Great Firewall of China is as effective at keeping out Google as the Great Wall of China is at keeping out Mongolians.

      ZING!

    5. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why I completely don't understand Google's actions. They're only getting themselves blocked. If they wanted to do some good in the world, they could have given the EFF free political ads on their platform, or advertise Pirate Parties during elections on \http://google.*/, or something like that.

    6. Re:Ping Pong by kvezach · · Score: 1

      As far as I understand, the kind of filtering China is doing here is based on URLs, so that the firewalls don't have to be too stateful. That's why people in China can contact Google HK just fine, but when they try to search for "tiananmen" or "tank man", boom, timeout.

      However, when using SSL, the URLs aren't actually transmitted in plaintext; it would take China a CPU-intensive man-in-the-middle attack to break it. So why can't Google just retaliate by redirecting http://google.com.hk/ to a special https://google.com.hk/ or something to that effect? Further blocking would become cat-and-mouse, and would require China to block Google outright.

    7. Re:Ping Pong by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      Or Google could start redirecting users to random proxy services.

    8. Re:Ping Pong by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As any Slashdot Libertarian will tell you, corporations are more efficient than governments(and this is often true, though neither so often nor so dramatically as the Slashdot Libertarians would have it).

      And that, in short, is why clever governments tend to try to shift much of the implementation work on to the corporations. China may be ostensibly communist; but they aren't morons, and they follow this pattern. To a nontrivial extent, the greatest triumph of the "Great Firewall" is not the ability to block content(at which it is rather mediocre); but the ability to block particular companies. User studies consistently show that even minor inconveniences(delays of a few seconds, little site usability glitches, and the like) deter consumers on the web. Being put on the "Great Firewall"'s hit list would definitely qualify as an inconvenience to any web-based business. Nice site you have there, wouldn't want anything to umm, come between, you and your customers...

      That's the real trick. If you have leverage over the companies, they will be oh so careful to toe the line(and if the line isn't clear, they'll just toe extra carefully). The "Great Firewall" gives leverage over web-based companies. Wireless telcomms are, presumably, beholden for spectrum and tower siting permissions, and they know it(presumably, there are fat state and military comms contracts, as well).

      If you try to emulate the East German model of "Hey, let's have something like half the population working, at least informally, for state intelligence" you'll spend so much of your GDP on guns that your people will run out of butter and turn the guns on you. That just doesn't work all that well, medium to long term. However, if you create a system where there is real money to be made, just by following a few little political rules, suddenly the profit-seekers will go from being your enemies to being your hatchetmen. Any successful police state will work in this fashion(or be literally starving and falling apart, I'm looking at your DPRK..)

    9. Re:Ping Pong by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Just to play the part of the devil's advocate here, let me ask this: is censoring their search engine according to US laws different from censoring according to Chinese laws? There is a lot of material Google doesn't index because to do so would violate US or international laws. China has a different set of material they want censored. I happen to be in the US, so the laws here make sense to me and the Chinese ones seem repressive. Perhaps if I were Chinese, I would have a different opinion.

    10. Re:Ping Pong by TENTH+SHOW+JAM · · Score: 1

      Ponder Google the company. They earn money from people clicking on ads and buying things. China has many people who can click on ads to be sure, but relatively few who can even afford to buy things. Perhaps Google assessed the cost of filtering results versus the profit to sell to the relatively few and worked out that it was not economically viable.

      Then Google tries negotiations to expand their profit margins. If it costs less per click for Google with unfiltered results, then that is more profit for Google. Google can now afford to stay. So Google ask China to do this for them. China Says No.

      Google then say "We have dirt on you and will air it unless you do"
      China : I Dare You.
      Google (to world): China have been hacking your systems
      China: And? We do these things for peace, harmony and the mud grass horse.
      Google: Well, since we can't do unfiltered search in China, we will do it next door. The worst thing you can do to us is block us. Total loss was only a sector of the market that wasn't really making profit. We wait for the Chimerican Revolution and roll into China as the saviour of the tubes.

      --
      A sig is placed here
      To display how futile
      English Haiku is
    11. Re:Ping Pong by Bugamn · · Score: 3, Funny

      Let's get it banned in USA too. SEX

    12. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      US internet censorship is very minor: DMCA violations, child-porn, and libel.

      China censors: Tibetan and Taiwanese websites, any police brutality, Tiananmen Square protests, freedom of speech, pornography, international news sources, religious movements, personal blogging websites... and has imprisoned many people over violations.

      Comparing US censorship to Chinese censorship is ridiculous.

    13. Re:Ping Pong by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      Why not have China Filter everything that goes out and comes in, and if its not to their liking - its their own problem?

      Kinda like the US filters out Cuba? Actually no, the US government just threatens the corporations just like China is doing.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    14. Re:Ping Pong by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

      I don't think Google goes to the extent of saying "your query is against U.S. law so we won't give you results", as they once did in China.

      --
      $ make available
    15. Re:Ping Pong by Thinboy00 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Google doesn't want to provoke China to take its employees hostage or something.

      --
      $ make available
    16. Re:Ping Pong by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So, Google should try to make the American standard the global standard? Since they are an American company, that may make sense.

      The reality is that if Google wants to participate in a market, they have to play by the rules of that market.

      In the case of China, they don't like the rules any more and since they can't get them changed, they are effectively leaving the market.

      Yahoo and Microsoft have been pretty quiet about this. It's too bad they aren't will to take a stand.

    17. Re:Ping Pong by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As any Slashdot Libertarian will tell you, corporations are more efficient than governments(and this is often true, though neither so often nor so dramatically as the Slashdot Libertarians would have it).

      It's true pretty much all of the time. The problem that the libertarians miss is that the interests of the corporation align with those of the population very rarely. Somehow, it's not particularly reassuring when you are being exploited to know that the exploitation is happening very efficiently. Someone working inefficiently on your behalf is usually better than someone working efficiently against you.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    18. Re:Ping Pong by VanGarrett · · Score: 1

      If you were Chinese, you would have the opinion that the Chinese government has groomed you to have. Supposedly. The fundamental problem with a Communist system, is that the truth must be kept secret from the people. So long as they remain in ignorance of the possibility of having plenty, and on their own terms, they'll continue to work and slave as they always have. Let them see that there are other, easier ways that they could be living, on the other hand, and they soon become disgruntled. The sorts of things that the Chinese Government wants stripped from their internet, are relating to liberty and freedom.

      It seems to me, that any truly good system should not require ignorance on the part of its constituents, but should instead encourage them to learn as much as they can.

    19. Re:Ping Pong by ooshna · · Score: 1

      Shitty Wok take your order prees.

    20. Re:Ping Pong by the+gnat · · Score: 4, Informative

      is censoring their search engine according to US laws different from censoring according to Chinese laws?

      It depends: what does China not censor that the US does?

      I'd say that the key difference is that in the US, criticism of the government, exposure of official misdeeds, and calls for regime change are not suppressed, which is why I still see members of the Revolutionary Communist Party passing out pamphlets calling for violent revolution, and why Rick Perry can talk about Texas seceding from the US. The government may outlaw child porn and make copyright law increasingly onerous, but it doesn't try to use censorship to protect its own position. In China, on the other hand. . . well, I'll just quote a section of their criminal code:

      Whoever incites others by spreading rumors or slanders or any other means to subvert the State power or overthrow the socialist system shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than five years, criminal detention, public surveillance or deprivation of political rights; and the ringleaders and the others who commit major crimes shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than five years.

      I'm sure you can find some equally brain-dead sections of US legal code, but the only thing even close to this in intent would be direct threats against the life of the president.

    21. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Australia too: Small tits.

    22. Re:Ping Pong by solferino · · Score: 1

      China will never budge on these issues (at least not in my lifetime)

      I think you're being overly pessimistic. The Soviet Union only lasted from 1922 to 1991. Everyone born during that period who's still alive today outlived it, including some people who were born before its inception. The People's Republic of China was only founded in 1949. Again, I think it's quite likely that a large proportion of people alive today will outlive it.

    23. Re:Ping Pong by GlassHeart · · Score: 1

      China will never budge on these issues (at least not in my lifetime)

      I don't know how old you are, but 100 years ago today China was a monarchy - the real kind that people had to revolt to overthrow. In 1949 it split into two pieces, and today in Taiwan (which calls itself the Republic of China) you can observe a loud, obnoxious, but vibrant democracy, even though martial law was not lifted until 1987. China, on the other hand, lost decades to the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution, and in many ways is 20 years behind Taiwan, going through their rapid economic rise just like Taiwan did in the 80s. In the 90s, the Taiwanese were rich enough and began paying more attention to government, and in 2000 threw out the long-ruling KMT party in elections.

      So if you have another 30 years to live, I'd be cautiously optimistic.

    24. Re:Ping Pong by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As stated by various UN declaration most of the World ,at least in theory, believes in certain universal rights, which is a PC way to state that there are moral absolutes above any national laws. We believe the the right to free speech is absolute, hell if you believe that Democracy is an absolute right then you can just says that since PRC government was not democratically elected then all the laws it enacted are illegitimate.
      Now I hold no illusions that all the nations that matter will unite to boycott PRC economically. But it is still possible to be a moral man in the immoral world. I have found out that I can often replace household goods from China with EU made ones which are only marginally more expensive. P.S. The other real problem of course is the apathy of 300-400 million Chinese who profited economically in the last 20 years under the current regime's economic policies. If there will a revolution it will be led by the other 1 billion angry peasants and I doubt that they will demanding democracy, human rights and free market. More like take by force anything valuable from fat city dwellers and redistribute it among the poor.

      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
    25. Re:Ping Pong by StarWreck · · Score: 1

      *googles Cuba* Nope, not filtered. You sir, are and idiot.

      --
      ... and in the DRM, bind them.
    26. Re:Ping Pong by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      I'd say that the key difference is that in the US, criticism of the government, exposure of official misdeeds, and calls for regime change are not suppressed

      There's a lot of stuff (that we eventually learned about) which was suppressed.
      In every Administration there are stories that newspapers sit on for years at a time because the Feds ask them not to publish, and some that never get made public.
      Then there are the "official" misdeeds we'll never know about thanks to a veil of National Security keeping out the public and the media.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    27. Re:Ping Pong by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      I wonder if a Chinese blogger can quote the same section of their criminal code, and be arrested for doing so based on that code? No, I don't wonder; it seems reasonable that alerting others to the censoring nature of our oppressors will lead to jail time/death ("any other means" would include discussing the law). But, it would be interesting to find confirmation.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    28. Re:Ping Pong by the+gnat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In every Administration there are stories that newspapers sit on for years at a time because the Feds ask them not to publish, and some that never get made public. Then there are the "official" misdeeds we'll never know about thanks to a veil of National Security keeping out the public and the media.

      Agreed, but this is a separate issue - there is still no legal action that the government can take to prevent publication, and not much they can do after the fact. The New York Times sat on the NSA warrantless surveilance story for a year because the Bush administration asked them too, not because the secret police held a gun to Bill Keller's head. When they finally published it, the administration and its supporters were livid - I remember seeing many of the more enthusiastic right-wing bloggers demanding treason trials for the reporters and editors involved. Yet no legal action was taken; Bill Keller is still in charge, and James Risen published his book. This is because we have several decades of legal precedent (starting with the Pentagon Papers, if not earlier) that not only is prior restraint unconstitutional, reporters can't be penalized for publishing classified information because they weren't legally bound to protect it in the first place.

      The only situations I've seen where the government was allowed to censor third-party publications have been books or articles by former spies, where the appropriate agency (usually the CIA) has redacted some information. I think this is usually ass-covering for the author (and perhaps publisher), since they may be liable for revealing classified secrets that they learned as part of their job.

      I certainly agree that our government errs strongly on the side of too much secrecy, but my original point stands - these issues only concern what information the government (and media) is obliged to reveal, not what it can suppress through criminal prosecution.

    29. Re:Ping Pong by ppanon · · Score: 1

      Or even "your query is against U.S. law so we won't give you results. BTW, your source IP address and the time of this query has been forwarded to the appropriate government political apparatchik".

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    30. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, the GP might be in his 60s or 70s. A lot of grandparents are getting online to keep in touch with grandkids.

    31. Re:Ping Pong by shentino · · Score: 1

      Which is something I wish all the "Don't Be Evil" purists would understand.

      Failure to comply with Chinese censorship regulations is probably a crime...the kind of thing you go to jail for.

    32. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean "Someone working inefficiently _against_ you is usually better than someone working efficiently against you."

      Lets not forget that we are talking about China here (thou applicable just as well to the US).

    33. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Advocating the "overthrow or destruction" of any government (federal, state, or local) in the U.S. by force or violence is against federal law.

    34. Re:Ping Pong by radtea · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The government may outlaw child porn and make copyright law increasingly onerous, but it doesn't try to use censorship to protect its own position. In China, on the other hand. . . well, I'll just quote a section of their criminal code:

      The difference being that the Chinese system is incredibly fragile. It is unable to withstand the utterly devastating assault of one lone individual saying, "Hey, I think our government is doing something really stupid. This is why..."

      The American system, despite being utterly broken in almost every important respect, is more than comfortable with that kind of critique.

      Really, it comes down to a measure of how robustly powerful the Anglo-European system of democratic government is compared to every other model, particularly the delicate and flimsy Chinese model, which apparently needs draconian laws to protected it from the dangerous scourge of... bloggers!

      It would be dead funny, if those Chinese Communist losers didn't actually kill innocent Chinese people who want nothing but to have their voices heard as one amongst many in the true song of Chinese democracy.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    35. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It depends: what does China not censor that the US does?

      Is this a serious question?

      If so, the answer is: File-sharing software.

    36. Re:Ping Pong by Kingrames · · Score: 1

      If you really want to offend China, just say this:
      Japanda.

      --
      If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
    37. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny - you should try talking to some members of the Revolutionary Communist Party about how hard they have had to work to be able to pass out newspapers and how many of their membership have been shut up in the process. You'd be surprised how many of them are still living underground hiding from the government here.

    38. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. You can't use the same methods to provide tennis shoes as providing, say, emergency response services.

      Well, you can, but it generally doesn't result in better quality for the consumer.

    39. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first amendment of the United States, does not give freedom of speech to slander or guarrantee immunity from prosecution for spreading false rumors. I don't see how this section of Chinese criminal code is anything other than sensible. Well ok the "or overthrow the socialist system" part seems like if you encouraged people to vote against socialism, you would be guilty of a crime. But hey, if we had socialized medicine in the US think about how much less annoying health insurance news yuo would have to pay attention to :)

    40. Re:Ping Pong by Corbets · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem that the libertarians miss is that the interests of the corporation align with those of the population very rarely. Somehow, it's not particularly reassuring when you are being exploited to know that the exploitation is happening very efficiently.

      Err, that's different from government how? Most of what my elected politicians due is not to my benefit; they pander to the masses in order to get reelected and maintain their positions of power. Whether that happens to mean signing into law a construction project that no one except the workers needs, or just plain lying about something, it really doesn't align with my interests.

    41. Re:Ping Pong by the+gnat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Funny - you should try talking to some members of the Revolutionary Communist Party about how hard they have had to work to be able to pass out newspapers and how many of their membership have been shut up in the process. You'd be surprised how many of them are still living underground hiding from the government here.

      sigh. . .

      I'm familiar with Chairman Bob's histrionics, and I don't believe a single fucking word of it. We see this all the time coming from armchair revolutionaries, okay? Lyndon LaRouche is a particularly notorious case; I'm not sure if there's any part of the US (or British!) government that he hasn't claimed is out to destroy him. No one is stopping the RCP from - for instance - setting up a large display in the middle of UC Berkeley campus explaining how the Cultural Revolution was actually really awesome, and how the counter-revolutionaries had it coming anyway. Dude, I could seriously walk over there and buy one of their newspapers tomorrow. The police, who have much more serious villainy to deal with, leave them alone as long as they don't try to incite riots that result in property destruction.

      It's sort of the price you pay for living in the Bay Area - we get beautiful scenery, temperate climate, liberal social atmosphere, and we also get California government and some of the most obnoxious, self-righteous far-left remnants in the country. They're clinging to a glorious past that never really existed, and dreaming of unleashing yet another massive bloodletting, and they're desperately, futilely trying to convince everyone else that they still matter - and they don't. I grit my teeth and bear it, because, after all, at least they haven't started any wars recently, and it seems churlish to get upset about these fools when Dick Cheney is still enjoying his retirement.

    42. Re:Ping Pong by riq · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      This is about business, not about moral.
      If you believe that Google is leaving China because they are communist, and because they deserve freedom then... Didn't the Bush administration teach you anything ?

    43. Re:Ping Pong by Colz+Grigor · · Score: 1

      Google, it's your turn ...

      "Turn"? You make it sound like this is a game. Why does Google have to do something, now? Google's goal was to stop censoring their results in China, which they've succeeded in. If it was ever a game, it's pretty much over, now.

    44. Re:Ping Pong by mjwx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's true pretty much all of the time.

      No, I'd barely even say it's true half the time.

      The thing libertarians and just about everyone else misses is, as long as a corporation is making money a great deal of inefficiency goes unnoticed. No one cares as the bottom line looks good. Seeing as Government services are about the "service" not the "bottom line" they always get noticed for any inefficiency. Corporate efficiency is only looked at when a corporation is losing money (including share price). Take the US health care system, insurance companies are making money hand over fist but the process is so bureaucratic and inefficient.

      As ScrewMaster said, smart governments move to a corporate management model for services to get rid of the bureaucracy but maintain the government ownership (taxpayer funded) keeping emphasis on service provision not the bottom line (hence it's a corporation that is always losing money). It's called corpoatisation.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    45. Re:Ping Pong by magores · · Score: 1

      In Beijing right now. No, it's not.

    46. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say that the key difference is that in the US, criticism of the government, exposure of official misdeeds, and calls for regime change are not suppressed.

    47. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well it sounds nice, but corporations are made of people, working, collaborating, pursuing their self interest. So if everyone is pursuing their own interest, it is very rare that interests align. It is called sometimes competition and it is always good. And someone working inefficiently on my behalf, is usually payed by me.

    48. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As any Slashdot Libertarian will tell you, corporations are more efficient than governments(and this is often true, though neither so often nor so dramatically as the Slashdot Libertarians would have it).

      It's true pretty much all of the time. The problem that the libertarians miss is that the interests of the corporation align with those of the population very rarely. Somehow, it's not particularly reassuring when you are being exploited to know that the exploitation is happening very efficiently. Someone working inefficiently on your behalf is usually better than someone working efficiently against you.

      You guys seem to be describing Atlas Shrugged where the corporatists are the hero, not libertarianism. Many libertarians abhore the the corruption and cronyism of many large corporations ... Murray Rothbard, an important figure to many libertarians (Ron Paul willl quote him), held the big corporations largely responsible for the 20th century march to aggressive statism. Rothbard called himself and "anarcho-captialist", stating that capitalism was the truest from of anarych and vice versa. Libertarianism in the US has is roots in the anarchist movements, all of which denounce the monopolistic tendencies of todays big corporations. A libertarian should oppose all institutions that infringe on personal liberty, including a corporation.

    49. Re:Ping Pong by xaxa · · Score: 1

      I don't think Google goes to the extent of saying "your query is against U.S. law so we won't give you results", as they once did in China.

      You might like to look at Chilling Effects.

      Also Wikipedia.

      I would much rather they did say "this result cannot be given due to local laws" (or whatever). People ought to know, so they can challenge the laws.

    50. Re:Ping Pong by Philip_the_physicist · · Score: 1

      Actually google are quite obviously unhappy with the American system too, as shown by their support of chillingeffects.org. I suspect google would like it if there were no restrictions on linking to content at all, and would probably be quite happy to see copyright law massively weakened (because of youtube), and other similar things that many /.ers are in favour of.

      They are either playing by the rules of the markets, or leaving, but either way, they, like everyone else, want to change the rules to me more favourable to them. They probably aren't going to fight the PRC because it isn't a profitable enough market at the moment, given the enormous cost of hardening their systems even more to deal with the load of attacks the can expect in such a fight.

      Google are out to look after themselves, but that doesn't mean that what they want is bad for web users.

    51. Re:Ping Pong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As any Slashdot Libertarian will tell you, corporations are more efficient than governments(and this is often true, though neither so often nor so dramatically as the Slashdot Libertarians would have it).

      Government inefficiency is true the vast majority of the time and to an enormous extent. We have spent the better part of a thousand years making it so, since the magna carta.

      Democracy is much less efficient than monarchy, all that discussion instead of one man making an edict.

      Jury trials are so much less efficient than having a Lord declare your guilt or innocence.

      etcetera, etcetera.

      Inefficiency is one of the positives of our system of government, not one of the negatives. We ought never hope for efficient government.

    52. Re:Ping Pong by col.+Fudge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sure you can find some equally brain-dead sections of US legal code, but the only thing even close to this in intent would be direct threats against the life of the president.

      Being from outside the US I've always found it interesting that the position of the president is held in such regard. In a sense you argued against yourself by in this last statement. Why should the penalties for conspiring to murder the president be any different than conspiring to murder your neighbour. I agree the president's job is likely more important than your neighbours, unless your neighbour is about to find a cure for cancer, but is the president's life any more important?

      The fact that the president is idolized is not that different than what the Chinese do with respect to the State. I've always found it interesting that I've never heard anyone argue about the view of american president's.

    53. Re:Ping Pong by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      > This is about business, not about moral.

      That's a false dichotomy. Acting in a moral way can be good business.

    54. Re:Ping Pong by Kirijini · · Score: 1

      You're right. Freedom from prior restraint is a long standing American principle.

      "Here, then, is to be discerned the genuine meaning of this section in the bill of rights... Every man may publish what he pleases; but, it is at his peril, if he publishes any thing which violates the rights of another, or interrupts the peace and order of society; as every man may keep poisons in his closet, but who will assert that he may vend them to the public for cordials? If, indeed, this section of the bill of rights had not circumscribed the authority of the legislature, this house, being a single branch, might in a despotic paroxism, revive all the odious restraints, which disgraced the early annals of the British government. Hence, arises the great fundamental advantage of the provision, which the authors of the constitution have wisely interwoven with our political system; not, it appears, to tolerate and indulge the passions and animosities of individuals, but effectually to protect the citizens from the encroachments of men in power."

      Respublica v. Oswald, 1 U.S. 319, 1 Dall. 319 (1788) (cited in Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931))

      This is the earliest American case I could find on prior restraints. It's published in the United States Reports, which is supposed to be United States Supreme Court decisions, but this particular case seems to be from the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. It is referring to the freedom of the press provision in the Pennsylvania Bill of Rights in the 1776 Constitution - it read "That the people have a right to freedom of speech, and of writing, and publishing their sentiments; therefore the freedom of the press ought not to be restrained."

      Check out the PA 1776 Constitution. It's an amazingly democratic document. The fifth article of the bill of rights read: "That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection and security of the people, nation or community; and not for the particular emolument or advantage of any single man, family, or soft of men, who are a part only of that community, And that the community hath an indubitable, unalienable and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish government in such manner as shall be by that community judged most conducive to the public weal. "

    55. Re:Ping Pong by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      And do you actually think the information you got actually *came* from Cuba? No, its information from somewhere else.

      Try booking a flight to Cuba. Or doing any other business with them if you are an American. The US government makes it a crime to do such things and levies huge fines and/or jail time if corporations try.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    56. Re:Ping Pong by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      They should open Tor gateways in Hong Kong. We could do with a few more Gb/s of bandwidth.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    57. Re:Ping Pong by quincunx55555 · · Score: 1

      ...hell if you believe that Democracy is an absolute right then you can just says that since PRC government was not democratically elected then all the laws it enacted are illegitimate.

      Why limit this to PRC? If one believes that Democracy is an absolute right, then none of the current major governments are legit. You might find a Democracy in smaller governing bodies, organizations, etc.

    58. Re:Ping Pong by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      As any Slashdot Libertarian will tell you, corporations are more efficient than governments(and this is often true, though neither so often nor so dramatically as the Slashdot Libertarians would have it).

      It's true pretty much all of the time. The problem that the libertarians miss is that the interests of the corporation align with those of the population very rarely. Somehow, it's not particularly reassuring when you are being exploited to know that the exploitation is happening very efficiently. Someone working inefficiently on your behalf is usually better than someone working efficiently against you.

      pfexec mod +10

      I can't seem to make conservative friends/relatives see that very simple point. It is most strikingly true when looking at health care insurance.

    59. Re:Ping Pong by the+gnat · · Score: 1

      Being from outside the US I've always found it interesting that the position of the president is held in such regard. In a sense you argued against yourself by in this last statement. Why should the penalties for conspiring to murder the president be any different than conspiring to murder your neighbour. I agree the president's job is likely more important than your neighbours, unless your neighbour is about to find a cure for cancer, but is the president's life any more important?

      I'm not sure what the penalties are - my point was that simply saying "I'd like to kill the president" can get you in very serious trouble with the Secret Service, whereas "I'd like to kill all liberals/all infidels/my husband" is fine, as long as it doesn't rise to the level of conspiracy. There are a variety of explanations for why the president's life is more important, starting with the fact that he's commander-in-chief of the largest military in the world by a considerable margin. A better argument is that since four US presidents were assassinated while in office, and several others had attempts on their lives - and we've only had 44 presidents in all - the Secret Service has plenty of reason to be paranoid.

      It's still nothing like China, because I'm free to say virtually anything I want about the president or any other part of the government, as long as I don't threaten his person. Personally, I don't think we should hold the president in any higher regard than we'd hold any other public employee, but I nonetheless agree that law enforcement should err on the side of caution when assessing potential threats. I also believe that violence against the president is violence against our system, and while I think Bush should have been dragged out of office in handcuffs by, say, 2006 or 2007 at the latest, I would never have condoned violence against him. (Well, except the Iraqi shoe-thrower - that was kinda funny.)

  3. Let the games begin by jamesyouwish · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This is going to be a long battle with everyone loosing in the end. Now they are removing Android Phones from China. I wish Google luck and hope they stick to it.

    1. Re:Let the games begin by InsaneProcessor · · Score: 1

      Without Android phones, what is there to use with the same capability?

      --

      Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
    2. Re:Let the games begin by sopssa · · Score: 1

      HTC Windows Mobile phones. Seriously - they're open, have the same capabilities and are nice to use. But don't go with other providers with WM phones, because only HTC has went out of their way and created nice UI and design for it.

    3. Re:Let the games begin by confused+one · · Score: 1

      I hope that was tongue-in-cheek... There's nothing to prevent a Chinese company from forking and producing a compatible linux based smartphone OS. Think Red Flag Linux.

    4. Re:Let the games begin by jamesyouwish · · Score: 1

      Of course that is what they will do. "Do Evil" will be the new phone OS moniker.

    5. Re:Let the games begin by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Windows Mobile will run windows with an IE like China 'sell out' browser.
      http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/03/winphones-first-big-native-code-casualty-firefox-on-winmob.ars
      MS will be happy to help track and report you via closed MS applications on sealed C# with Silverlight or XNA only devices.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    6. Re:Let the games begin by Straterra · · Score: 1

      iPhones. The last time I was in China (November), the elite rich had iPhones, and everyone was trying trying to sell iPhone knock-offs.

    7. Re:Let the games begin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have *any* source about your last sentence or are you just as full of FUD as the company you're talking about ?

    8. Re:Let the games begin by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

      HTC is in Taiwan. Does China even recognize the existence of Taiwan? I think not.

      --
      $ make available
    9. Re:Let the games begin by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      HTC Windows Mobile phones. Seriously - they're open, have the same capabilities and are nice to use.

      With WP7 announcement, WM is effectively dead in the water. And WP7 isn't open anymore...

    10. Re:Let the games begin by shentino · · Score: 1

      Why are they taking android away?

      Did Google's little sneak tactic piss off Beijing and make them thunder down an ultimatum of "GTFO OR ELSE!"?

    11. Re:Let the games begin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      come september not anymore.
      microsoft wants to go all apple with their mobile os
      there is meego i guess. (nokia intel mobile os)

  4. And let the war begin by courteaudotbiz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This war could be really hard. But in the end, it's the Chinese people who lose, not Google nor the Chinese "government".

    1. Re:And let the war begin by confused+one · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If I were a Google exec in China, I'd be worried about being formally charged with violating local (Chinese) laws.

    2. Re:And let the war begin by courteaudotbiz · · Score: 1

      But I think it's Google's North American HQ who should have taken preventive measures, like pulling'em out of there!

    3. Re:And let the war begin by confused+one · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some of the execs are likely to be Chinese nationals.

    4. Re:And let the war begin by Toze · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I remember when reading cyberpunk novels felt like escapism.

      :T

      --
      No OS on the planet can protect itself from a user with the admin password. - Yvan256
    5. Re:And let the war begin by idontgno · · Score: 1

      Good point. Who knew that Gibson and Sterling were documentary writers.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    6. Re:And let the war begin by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      Agreed that the Chinese people lose. But.... So does the Chinese government and so does Google. Google is throwing away MANY MANY millions of dollars maybe billions to do what they think is right. And China is getting a fuck ton of bad press, and their science industry is hurt by this, hurting the people does hurt the goverment.

    7. Re:And let the war begin by troll+-1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This war could be really hard. But in the end, it's the Chinese people who lose, not Google nor the Chinese "government".

      In historical context the Chinese people are currently relative winners.

      China has a long history of extremely violent and bloody revolutions. The relative political stability of the past 60 years is pretty much unprecedented. If the past is any indication, the transformation to complete freedom in China is not likely to go as peacefully as it did with the Soviet Union.

      Sudden change in China usually results in the deaths of millions. They have little history of peaceful change. The government has an obligation to tread cautiously.

    8. Re:And let the war begin by Bugamn · · Score: 1

      This Spring, in the Cinemas: China vs. Google: It doesn't matter who wins, the chinese loses.

    9. Re:And let the war begin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. The most interesting part will be when western media will start blaming Google for what the Chinese government does.
      As ridiculous as it would be, I'm sure it will happen at some point.

    10. Re:And let the war begin by psiclops · · Score: 1

      They made a statement that the decision came from North American HQ and their Chinese Arm had nothing to do with the decision. However as i'm sure they would have been the ones to implement it, dunno what's gonna happen.

      --
      i spent five minutes thinking and all i got was this crappy sig
    11. Re:And let the war begin by groovyPost · · Score: 1

      This war could be really hard. But in the end, it's the Chinese people who lose, not Google nor the Chinese "government".

      Nah... Google loses period. The Chinese people will find a way to the data and sites they want to get to. Google on the other hand will lose out in Revenue. For instance, from the article it says contracts are already being canceled and the android roll out will be canceled. Yup, google loses.

    12. Re:And let the war begin by StarWreck · · Score: 1

      60 years ago in 1950, the Communists in China were still fighting to expel the Nationalists from China. After they succeeded they began farm collectivization, "The Great Leap Forward", which was so poorly managed that it resulted in the starvation of between 20 and 30 million people between 1959 and 1962. This kind of murder by starvation is referred to as a holodomor. The genocidal holodomor perpetrated by the Soviets against the Ukrainians from 1932 to 1933 killed between 7 and 10 million people. The Holocaust perpetrated by the Nazi's against Hebrews and others killed between 11 and 17 million people. Just think of the pain and agony that 20 to 30 million people went through as they slowly starved to death. 9 million people are thought to have starved to death in 1960 alone.

      --
      ... and in the DRM, bind them.
    13. Re:And let the war begin by jack2000 · · Score: 1

      So what? That doesn't mean they have to rest in coffins full of the earth from their homeland... Or does it...

    14. Re:And let the war begin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      60 years? You might want to read up on the period known as the Cultural Revolution.

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

    15. Re:And let the war begin by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It didn't go peacefully in the USSR, either. For one thing, you might have noticed that there's no such country, anymore. And then there were:

      Sumgait massacre
      War in Nagorno-Karabakh
      War in South Ossetia
      War in Abkhazia
      War in Transnistria
      Civil war in Tajikistan
      and many more.

      War in Chechnya is also, to large extent, a legacy of the Soviet collapse.

    16. Re:And let the war begin by tokenshi · · Score: 5, Informative

      Wong wong wong... I mean wrong.

      China had a republic for a few years after the end of the Qing dynasty (1912-1949 to be exact.) Had they stayed with it, this conversation probably would not even be happening right now.

      The revolution was violent sure... But far less people died overthrowing the Qing than have been killed by the Communist Government in even the last 20 years (Uygurs, Tibetans, Zhuang, Falun Gong, etc. have all been victimized by the government in all manner of ways including straight up murder.)

      China's current political stability is a ruse, nothing more, you go into southern China (Guangxi, Yunnan) and it's basically the wild west right now.

      I lived in Yangshuo (Guangxi) for almost three years, and Beijing for one year, and lost count of how many times I saw government personal of one for or the other behaving like heshehui (mafia.) I can elaborate more if people care, the point is, the China's government is hurting its people.

      Google isn't exactly doing right by them, but at least they're taking a moral stand.

    17. Re:And let the war begin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice spin, but you neglect that China was already facing mass famine well before the great leap forward, without which the communists wouldn't have gained so much support. 'be fed or be free' was a rallying cry of the communists. Not suprisingly, they chose to be fed.

    18. Re:And let the war begin by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there are plenty of expatriate Tibetans who'd be happy to take those jobs.

    19. Re:And let the war begin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many revolutions did France have when osilating between democracy/republic and empire (a la Napoleon)? Quite a few.

      Many countries' histories are filled with violence. It is not a valid excuse to deny freedoms.

    20. Re:And let the war begin by macshit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      China has a long history of extremely violent and bloody revolutions. The relative political stability of the past 60 years is pretty much unprecedented. If the past is any indication, the transformation to complete freedom in China is not likely to go as peacefully as it did with the Soviet Union. Sudden change in China usually results in the deaths of millions. They have little history of peaceful change. The government has an obligation to tread cautiously.

      Though oddly enough, the "relative political stability of the past 60 years" in China has also resulted in the deaths of millions....

      The PRC government may trot out "stability" as a justification for their authoritarian policies, but if push comes to shove, there's little doubt they're quite willing to sacrifice large numbers of their populace to stay in power.

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    21. Re:And let the war begin by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1
      I don't think you're qualified to talk about China's 'historical context'.

      The relative political stability of the past 60 years is pretty much unprecedented.

      Uh, what about Kangxi and Qianlong of the Qing? Mu and Ping of Zhou? Wu of Han? Chongzong and Renzong of Western Xia?

      China's history is extremely mixed. For every bloody revolution there have been several bloodless (or relatively so) palace coups. It's just that the latter don't get noticed so much. It is however a gross oversimplification to categorize China's history of political change as one huge bloodbath.

      --
      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:And let the war begin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then again, the political stability in the US has also come at the cost of deaths in the millions...

  5. Google needs to pull out. by Beelzebud · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation. They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.

    1. Re:Google needs to pull out. by courteaudotbiz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But hey, when the labor is cheap and can do almost the same as our expensive labor, who cares?!? North American citizens? Mmmmmmmm wait a minute.... nope, the WalMart parking lot is still full....

    2. Re:Google needs to pull out. by hey! · · Score: 1, Funny

      Pull out?

      No need, China baby. You see, you can't get in trouble the first you do it; the seed of democracy won't be planted the first time. After the first time, we'll have to pull out. That is unless we do it standing up.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:Google needs to pull out. by DragonWriter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation. They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.

      Capitalists, as a class, aren't particularly known for being supporters of workers rights, free speech, or a fair marketplace. In fact, they are the class against whom advocates of workers rights are usually struggling, the class that seeks to suppress negative comments on their products through the legal system, and a class that seeks to lobby government to protect their own interests by creating barriers to entry to the markets in which they have established themselves.

      I'm not saying those things are true of Google's owners, in particular, but certainly the idea that capitalists wouldn't deal with people for the reasons you describe is, well, hard to reconcile with most of the history of capitalists.

    4. Re:Google needs to pull out. by kindbud · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.

      Yeah, but which one are you talking about, the communists or the capitalists?

      --
      Edith Keeler Must Die
    5. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, it would be less cheap if the currency was valued properly. I expect over the next few years the costs will be going up. Already there is a big push to use the interior regions in China to keep costs down. Quality/consistency is still a huge issue. I don't anyone importing from China that doesn't continually get shoddy merchandise.

    6. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Beelzebud · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah that's a very good point. Capitalists were also against workers' right to unionize, free speech, and a fair marketplace.

      I should have phrased it as "How can a free nation decide to do business with a totalitarian country.

    7. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Beelzebud · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It wouldn't be the first time middle class citizens did something against their own best interests.

    8. Re:Google needs to pull out. by panda · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.

      They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.

      And neither do the capitalists here in the States.

      --
      Just be sure to wear the gold uniform when you beam down -- you know what happens when you wear the red one.
    9. Re:Google needs to pull out. by MattskEE · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.

      Who cares about fair? As long as US businesses can do profitable business with a totalitarian communist nation then they will.

    10. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL you're kidding, right? You think US capitalists value those things? You don't have to go to China to see the flaw in that argument, but the paradox should have given you a clue.

    11. Re:Google needs to pull out. by fysdt · · Score: 1

      Who cares about ethics anyway....

      *ducks*

    12. Re:Google needs to pull out. by shoehornjob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      MONEY GREED MARKETSHARE umm...does that answer your question?

      --
      "We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
    13. Re:Google needs to pull out. by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.

      Nah, the real problem is that the Chinese government keeps changing the rules. Every business there is doing something illegal, due to the complexity and arbitrariness of the Chinese regulatory environment. That means any time the government wants to, it can squeeze them or drive them out of China. On top of that, some government agency can just make up rules on the spot and crush a business on that basis alone. And you can't count on the bureaucrats to stay bought. Well, maybe local Chinese businesses can, but not the foreign ones that are getting shafted here.

      Business thrives in a world where the rules are constant. Either government is fair and consistent or when it's bought, it stays bought. Uncertainty like this kills the ability of business to predict what it should do in the future. Even if you don't get mugged by the Chinese government, you still need to take them into account.

    14. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Workers' rights are a diminishing phenomenon in good ol' capitalist USA these days.

      Imho, you can only make money by exploiting someone. Be it the buyer paying enough to make you profit, or kids in a sneaker factory in China, it's how you make money. Capitalists, I'm sure, on the whole, have no problem doing either.

    15. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Xemu · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation. They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.

      The US capitalists shouldn't worry: the totalitarian communist nation don't put a lot of value into those things either.

      --
      Tell your friends about xenu.net
    16. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Moridin42 · · Score: 1

      Well.. the problem with your revised question is that.. a free nation hasn't. Companies do.

      If I buy a wheel of british cheddar, a free nation didn't decide to import it nor buy it. A company decided. An individual decided. It is no different when the country is china or when the product is anything else.

      The only thing a free nation does is permit the business to occur. It wouldn't be quite so free if it didn't.

      --
      I don't expect morality, equality, consistency, or justice from the law. I expect only legality.
    17. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes you think capitalists value workers rights and free speech? The free market is about beating your competition. A monopoly is victory. Trampling your workers for an edge is fair game. Trampling free speech for an edge is fair game.

      Capitalists in the US knew full well that business in China could end up not being fair. It was a risk worth taking. To google, knowing that its email service can and is being hacked is a much bigger risk to its brand than losing China (at least for now...).

    18. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite the opposite here. You chose a word and then brought things forward that are avid in modern day China.

      Obama policy has been labeled as totalitarian due to the illicit use of authority and enforcement. Remember that it was not quite legal to tap with Bush W.

      This is about fair business here - for Google at least. Not cool to rape with any kind of hate that they are finding in China.

      With rights, speech, and fairness, this was so overdone that today you have a Readers' Digest in Chinese that is published in many places world wide.

    19. Re:Google needs to pull out. by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Walking by the men's clothing in the local Wal-Mart yesterday, I stopped to see what the labels said on stuff I would actually want to wear.

      Balgladesh.

      Pakistan.

      If I were in a Macy's or even a Neiman-Marcus, would I find Chinese-made garments there? Yup.

      It's not as simple as you think. Wal-Mart is only chasing the cheapest goods and most favorable terms. The 'fashionable' retailers only add fashion to get the shoppers inside the door. Same race to the bottom.

      None of which excuses our government for fixing the rules, the corporatists for taking the money and voting with their eyes shut, and the corporations for taking the bait and being hooked.

      Or will you excuse Cole-Haan, Tommy Hilfiger, FUBU, Lexington Furniture, the whole bunch for seeking to maximize profits without regard the welfare of their remaining workers?

      Pah.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    20. Re:Google needs to pull out. by TheSync · · Score: 1

      Capitalists, as a class, aren't particularly known for being supporters of workers rights, free speech, or a fair marketplace.

      Slashdot posters, as a class, are particularly known for making sweeping abstract generalizations with no data to support them.

    21. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

      You're describing an Anarcho-Capitalist form of government, and that is not what we have here. Companies are not legally free to do business with whoever they want. We have sanctions against Iran, North Korea, Cuba, etc. etc., that block companies from trading with certain countries.

      Now granted a lot of corporations find legal loopholes to get around this, but the fact is that our government has always put limits on who we can trade with. We do not have anarcho-capitalism here, and we never will.

    22. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Beelzebud · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Read up on the labor movement of the early 1900's, or the era of the robber baron, and tell me that capitalists have a good track record with civil rights. They don't. China is a perfect real world example of why capitalists still doesn't have a good track record on civil rights.

    23. Re:Google needs to pull out. by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      I should have phrased it as "How can a free nation decide to do business with a totalitarian country.

      Well.. the problem with your revised question is that.. a free nation hasn't.

      Are you arguing that the United States of America hasn't, through various acts of Congress and ratified treaties, decided to trade with totalitarian states including China, or are you arguing that the U.S.A. isn't a free nation?

    24. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean "as a class"? "As a class" has absolutly no fucking meaning. Stop doing that. Capitalism == free market place. FULL STOP. Worker's rights (yeah right, what rights?) and free speach have really nothing to do with capitalism. And by the way, the US is *not* a capatilist country, contrarily to what many believe. Get your facts straight before you start to preach.

    25. Re:Google needs to pull out. by rolfwind · · Score: 1

      A good % of people's priorities in buying is the price tag. Sure, consumer A may buy a Mac (or other perceived premium brand) in consideration of the service or other desirable feature, but at the same time they'll be willing to settle for the cheapest broom/plates and other commodities like the rest of the population. "Capitalists"/Business_Owners usually cut the costs they can so they can provide stuff as cheap as possible, especially with competition around. As for providing benefits, they like keeping the status quo (or cheaper) unless forced to otherwise.

      It's not the business owners that are the sole bad guys. They all didn't move to China at once. Business owner A saw that he could make his product cheaper in China, so he moved his factory there. He made more sales at the expense of business owners B, C, D, and E. Now B, C, D, and E have to reconsider their strategy and possibly make the same move.

      If the people, many of whom are also regular working folks, stuck with the products of business owners B, C, D, and E -- they wouldn't be supporting the strategies of A and would retain more jobs here. So placing the blame on the business owners alone is quite wrong.

      China was not the first move to a global marketplace. After the war, Germany and Japan were our Chinas. Then Hong Kong and Taiwan and Singapore later on as the first two became too expensive. Now it's China and India. Maybe the African countries will be next.

      Unless the government starts putting some type of tariff on Chinese originated goods, though, this will continue until their standard of living or income is roughly comparable to ours or 1/2 of that or some significant fraction.

      The problem is that the population of India and China are so huge... compared to Japan, Germany, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong.... that we may well go broke before that happens. Even if we don't, they'll consume such resources, and the world is becoming so small, that there will be another resource race before long.

    26. Re:Google needs to pull out. by robberbarron · · Score: 1

      In a sense, you can compare the China of today to the US in the 1920s. No real (enforced) labor laws. No real (enforced) environmental protection laws. No real (enforced) occupational safety laws. The Chinese version of Al Capone was just arrested. It remains to be seen if the same internal forces that created OSHA and the EPA in the US will also cause China to change.

    27. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Capitalists, as a class, aren't particularly known for being supporters of workers rights, free speech, or a fair marketplace.

      Go away, you communist.

    28. Re:Google needs to pull out. by sourcerror · · Score: 1

      The US is trading with Iran by proxy. (Through Germany or France, I don't remember.)

    29. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Google wants it in the butt? I think they've just got it.

    30. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to re-read your own comment. Since when do capitalist care about workers rights, free speech or a fair marketplace, these are things typically valued by a democracy not capitalism.

      When was the last time you heard of a monopoly voluntarily breaking it's self up because it thought that would make a fairer marketplace? Or giving pay rises because they value there workers?

    31. Re:Google needs to pull out. by gangien · · Score: 2, Funny

      not directly. But thanks to the fact that in a free market, a worker can choose to work where he or she wants, guess what happens? the employers have to care about their employees, or else they'll leave. Good lord, look at all the people on slashdot, benefiting from technology, one of the places where capitalism has been allowed to thrive. What do we bitch about? meetings, coffee not being warm? booo fucking hoo.

      Or let's look at hong kong. a place where government did very little. in 50 years, less than a life time, they went from being third world, to being among the richest.

      So in reality, they care about the workers, because they want the most of the workers.

    32. Re:Google needs to pull out. by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      Chinese laws themselves are quite straightforward and simple. The problem is that they are a bit too simple. I'm not a lawyer but I have read some of their laws and contracts. After reading, I said to myself, "that's it?" You will not see pages and pages of details you typically find in American laws and contracts. It is often hard to tell what can and cannot be done after reading the legal docs. People fall back to common sense. This, however, gives the executive branches a lot of power. A contradiction is that while China is pretty much a totalitarian society, people there simply breaks laws for little convenience or advantages on a daily basis and nobody seems to care as long as they don't try to become a public figure.

      On the hand, we have very thorough laws -- everything is codified -- but they are extremely complicate, full of exceptions and conditions. You rarely understand all the legal details. This places huge power in the hand of legislators and lawyers. That's why we have huge number of legal disclaimers and disclosures that are basically useless -- because there are too many.

      both are systematic problems that cannot go away in any foreseeable times.

    33. Re:Google needs to pull out. by TheSync · · Score: 1

      Read up on the labor movement of the early 1900's, or the era of the robber baron, and tell me that capitalists have a good track record with civil rights.

      I don't think anyone (including the labor movement) was particularly interested in anyone else's rights - except their own - in the early 1900's. For that matter, it may still be the case. Here is another example.

    34. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure how in the hell capitalists here in the U.S. decided we could do fair business with a totalitarian communist nation.

      They don't value workers rights, free speech, or even a fair marketplace.

      I'm...totally confused. Why would people who don't care about workers rights, free speech and a fair marketplace be unable to do business with people who don't care about workers rights, free speech and a fair marketplace?

    35. Re:Google needs to pull out. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I should have phrased it as "How can a free nation decide to do business with a totalitarian country.

      In a free nation, individual entities are, well, free to decide for themselves. By definition.

    36. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yo hit the nail right on the head there Beezlebud. Especially with the lack of enforcement of intellecual property protection laws.

    37. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Beelzebud · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Using two isolated examples as some sort of failure of the labor movement, as a whole, is intellectually dishonest.

      The labor movement put a stop to child labor, indentured servitude, and gave the workers rights that the robber barons denied them. You can hate unions all you like, but don't try to play it off like the labor movement had no positive results. They're one of the main reasons there is such a thing as a middle class.

    38. Re:Google needs to pull out. by KlausBreuer · · Score: 1

      Mhm... which "free nation" are you talking about?
      The one where the president can have absolutely anybody (incl. his own citizens) arrested, kept for an indefinitive time period without trial, and have them (quite officially) tortured?

      --
      Free PC version of ChipWits at http://www.breueronline.de/klaus/chipwits/
    39. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Moridin42 · · Score: 1

      No. Just.. no. Anarcho-capitalism is, by definition, not a form of government. It is a theoretical political system that lacks government. Second, your revised question was how does a free nation decide to do business with a totalitarian government. It does not. Free nations permit by default. They do not whitelist. Or, if they do, they are not free nations.

      Perhaps you define free nation differently.

      --
      I don't expect morality, equality, consistency, or justice from the law. I expect only legality.
    40. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Moridin42 · · Score: 1

      Are you arguing that the United States of America hasn't, through various acts of Congress and ratified treaties, decided to trade with totalitarian states including China

      Yes. The acts of Congress and the ratified treaties of which I am aware make no decision to trade with China. They do make decisions to make it easier for the companies who are engaged in trade. Related, to be sure, but separate and different than doing.

      or are you arguing that the U.S.A. isn't a free nation?

      The US isn't a free nation in much the same way that its economy isn't capitalist. It approximates to some degree on both spectra, but reality makes either one practically impossible to implement.

      --
      I don't expect morality, equality, consistency, or justice from the law. I expect only legality.
    41. Re:Google needs to pull out. by The+Loony+Monk · · Score: 1

      such blanket statements ... in the early 1900's there were capitalists/free marketers that supported the labor movement here are 3: Benjamin Tucker, Lysander Spooner, The New England Labor Reform League ... Look into anti-statist capitalists for those that support labor movements .. we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water.

    42. Re:Google needs to pull out. by The+Loony+Monk · · Score: 1

      "When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will." - Bastiat I think that is the crux of the reason why business is done with China ... you cannot change an entity with wich you do not interact.

    43. Re:Google needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mhm... which "free nation" are you talking about?
      The one where the president can have absolutely anybody (incl. his own citizens) arrested, kept for an indefinitive time period without trial, and have them (quite officially) tortured?

      Wow, you sound like a royal douchebag. Quit being so dramatic and just make your point without any of the stupid fluff.

    44. Re:Google needs to pull out. by TheSync · · Score: 1

      They're one of the main reasons there is such a thing as a middle class.

      What is the definition of the middle class? People keep using this term, but no one appears intellectually honest enough to define it. People aren't object oriented constructs.

  6. I'm a Little More Concerned About by eldavojohn · · Score: 1

    The Chinese citizen employees at Google.cn. My thoughts are with them if they are experiencing anything negative other than unemployment from their parent company's decision to thumb their nose at the Chinese government.

    Let's hope that working for Google.cn doesn't leave them with a social stigma or government imposed sanction or -- far worse -- bodily harm to them and their families. Hopefully their red society didn't give them a scarlet letter.

    That said, the Chinese people have little to look forward to with Baidu in such a dominating lead they can stagnate back to the stone age and people won't have much of a choice. It'll be interesting to see how much of Google.cn's 35% marketshare Bing manages to snag.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:I'm a Little More Concerned About by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      Yes, don't upset the status quo or you might get hurt!

    2. Re:I'm a Little More Concerned About by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      No, the problem is that your BOSS upset the status quo which might result in you being unhireable jobless and perhaps tossed in a prison. If Google went to their employees and said 'alright guys, here is what we are going to do, if you dont want to risk it you can quit now'. Maybe they did, but I doubt it. So you can see the unfairness.

    3. Re:I'm a Little More Concerned About by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

      Google explicitly stated in their blog that they (the executives in the U.S.) made the decisions on their own and without consulting their Chinese employees.

      --
      $ make available
    4. Re:I'm a Little More Concerned About by Aladrin · · Score: 1

      Note that Google didn't decide to make their Google.cn people break the law by uncensoring results. Instead, they took the traffic away from China's servers and sent it to Hong Kong instead.

      I don't know if that gets their Chinese employees fully in the clear (because China can make anything illegal simply because they're having a bad day) but it does make sure that nobody -in- China had anything to do with any already-illegal activities.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    5. Re:I'm a Little More Concerned About by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and that helps the workers. But just because the chinese workers can prove they are innocent doesn't mean they won't have people against them. Like in the U.S. the government hired lawyers for GITMO detainees being called al queada seven. I can see something similar but government supported happening towards these employees.

  7. Google, leave China alone... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They obviously know what's best for their people, and you're just interfering. (sarcasm) Just let it go, pull completely out of the market, and call it a day. Besides, the longer this lingers on, the more Chinese black hats are gonna slam your servers.

    Just "concede" defeat (and Chinese ass-hattery) and call it a day.

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
    1. Re:Google, leave China alone... by Toze · · Score: 3, Funny

      LEAVE CHINA ALONE!

      How fucking dare anyone out there make fun of China after all it has been through!

      It lost its great leader, it went through civil war. It had two fuckin splitters.

      Tibet turned out to be an independent nation, a source of international conflict, and now China's going through a custody battle. All you people care about is.. readers and making money off of it.

      China is a COUNTRY. What you don’t realize is that China is making you all this money and all you do is write a bunch of crap about it.

      It hasn’t performed in the free market in years. Its song is called “March of the Volunteers” for a reason because all you people want is MORE! MORE-MORE, MORE: MORE!

      LEAVE IT ALONE! You are lucky it even sold goods to you BASTARDS! LEAVE CHINA ALONE!..Please.

      /croken

      --
      No OS on the planet can protect itself from a user with the admin password. - Yvan256
    2. Re:Google, leave China alone... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 1

      The moderators today are in such a pissy mood. I thought this was funny, not trollish, but what do I know?

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
    3. Re:Google, leave China alone... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe a redirect to here when they fully shut down? Just a thought.

    4. Re:Google, leave China alone... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Just "concede" defeat (and Chinese ass-hattery) and call it a day.

      What, why? If you give in to evil at the first sign of opposition, then evil will always win. It is true there is no way Google is going to single-handedly cause China to stop censoring, but imagine if you lived in China, and suddenly some multi-national corporation shows they care enough to make a small stand in favor of the people, in favor of freedom?

      It is without a doubt having an effect on some people, look at these flowers that were laid at google's Chinese headquarters. I think it must be impossible to gauge how the Chinese people feel about this, and most of them probably are more worried about dust-storms than about Google, but some people do care and appreciate it.

      --
      Qxe4
    5. Re:Google, leave China alone... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should post this on YouTube... you might be the new Chris Crocker...

    6. Re:Google, leave China alone... by Philip_the_physicist · · Score: 1

      I liked it, but then I've already posted, so I can't use my modpoints.

    7. Re:Google, leave China alone... by Toze · · Score: 1

      haha, thanks- I don't think I've got the golden locks for it, though, and Seth Green pretty much nailed the parody.

      --
      No OS on the planet can protect itself from a user with the admin password. - Yvan256
    8. Re:Google, leave China alone... by Toze · · Score: 1

      :D Thanks for the props, guys.

      --
      No OS on the planet can protect itself from a user with the admin password. - Yvan256
  8. Well, by JNSL · · Score: 5, Funny

    China hits like a girl.

    1. Re:Well, by courteaudotbiz · · Score: 1

      You mean, histerically? Or like a totalitarian regime? Please be more precise when refering to girls...

    2. Re:Well, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      girls are those things made of pixels on your computer screen

    3. Re:Well, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      It's Chun-Li kicking M. Bison's ass.

  9. Is this really that surprising? by vivin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Everyone expected China to do this. It also means that they are saying that the Chinese in HK are different from the rest of China. I wonder if that will affect anything. Not to be cynical, but I am sure the propaganda machine will go on overdrive to put a spin on it.

    --
    Vivin Suresh Paliath
    http://vivin.net

    I like
    1. Re:Is this really that surprising? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Everyone expected China to do this. It also means that they are saying that the Chinese in HK are different from the rest of China.

      Wait, the mainland Chinese have been able to access Google's .hk search, without filters, all along but .cn was censored? That makes no sense. OK, I'll read the article...

      Ah, OK - so google.com.hk was already censored. Google just rubbed the dog's face in it by redirecting .cn so lots of mainland users would see the 'you've got censorship' page. The actual action taken was telling the companies to cancel their deals with Google.

      Perhaps my reading comprehension is on the fritz, but the summary led me to believe China had changed their great-firewall settings in response to Google's redirect, and it sounds like that didn't happen.

      Good on Google for giving up the Android in China business to take a stand. I'm not sure if throwing grenades on the way out was the best long-term strategy, but somebody over in Mountain View ought to go hang a set of brass truck nuts on their HQ sign.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    2. Re:Is this really that surprising? by phantomfive · · Score: 2, Informative
      And here is the propaganda. It basically says Google should abide by the customs of whatever country they operate in. It completely ignores the Hong Kong issue. An earlier editorial claimed that Google had broken their written agreement. They seem a bit annoyed that they couldn't accuse Google of breaking the law.

      My favorite quote from the article, from Premier Wen Jiabao:

      "The Chinese government will create opportunities for you, and ask you not to lose the opportunities," Wen said.

      A mob boss couldn't have said it better.

      --
      Qxe4
    3. Re:Is this really that surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone expected China to do this. It also means that they are saying that the Chinese in HK are different from the rest of China. I wonder if that will affect anything. Not to be cynical, but I am sure the propaganda machine will go on overdrive to put a spin on it.

      Why would it affect anything, or require extra propaganda? In many ways HK is like a different country, with its own judicial system, police force, passports, currency, border crossings, etc. And it's not exactly a big secret in China that the Chinese in HK are treated very differently from those in the mainland.

  10. Actually... by eexaa · · Score: 1

    Google philosophy is just not compatible with chineese, whatever it is, so they finally don't like themselves. Then, Who Cares? I see that google probably doesn't really like this, as they are losing ~15% of potential GMinion population; but this is the only disadvantaged side I can imagine.

    (btw., news from friends from china - google services are usually easily available via commonly known proxies...so it's probably not that hard at all)

  11. Next move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The next obvious move for Google is to launch their own satellites and provide free satellite internet access for everyone in the world.

    1. Re:Next move by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Uh no. Iridium has proven that is not an economically feasible alternative. HughesNet has demonstrated the ping times are not suitable for gaming. Google isn't that stupid.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    2. Re:Next move by Idiomatick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The goal would be giving access to information for the Chinese people. NOT gaming... I know this is /. but even so priorities!

    3. Re:Next move by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

      The next obvious move for Google is to launch their own satellites and provide free satellite internet access for everyone in the world.

      I was going to say that if you really want to piss off China you want to set up a major shop in Taiwan, but apparently Google already has offices there anyway.

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    4. Re:Next move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Satellites? You mean, the kind of thing China proved earlier that it can shoot down (and doesn't mind leaving wreckage in important orbits either)?

    5. Re:Next move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like this one? http://www.o3bnetworks.com/

      According to their homepage animation, it almost reaches the latitude line of Korea. Their about page says south of 45degrees, which is everything but the northernmost portions. And everyone thought it was for Africa...

    6. Re:Next move by mahadiga · · Score: 1

      Wow.

      --
      I'd like to buy homeland for our 10 million people. http://twitter.com/mahadiga
  12. Good for China! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Google watches literally EVERYTHING you do. Google has used its dominance to attack and undermine Apple, and has tried to kill off the iPhone (for example). I think it is a good thing that China is not allowing these shenanigans to continue and are being brave enough to stand up to the most evil company in the world.

    1. Re:Good for China! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, they're watching you right now. Quick, the tin-foil hat's over there!

  13. China will come to regret this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It may be an hour later, or a year later, but China will be hungry for Google again.

    1. Re:China will come to regret this by linzeal · · Score: 1

      Why, they will just steal the IP they want and sell it back to us at 30% of the price. They do it with everything else so why not search engines ?

    2. Re:China will come to regret this by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Why, they will just steal the IP they want and sell it back to us at 30% of the price. They do it with everything else so why not search engines ?

      You mean, their search engine will only have 30% as much advertising?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  14. Now... by Trayal · · Score: 1

    ... we shall see how much money google can make over VPN only traffic!

  15. Google's war with China by yorgasor · · Score: 0

    The war between China and Google will certainly become more interesting when Google develops its own nuclear weapons. They probably have all the information they need to complete them, all they have to do is... google it.

    --
    Looking for a computer support specialist for your small business? Check out
    1. Re:Google's war with China by gman003 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The information on how to build nukes hasn't been that hard to find since the seventies. There are actually some full designs that are declassified, due to some weird loophole in Swedish (I think) law. The difficulty has almost always been materials. There is not yet a way to transmit plutonium over TCP.

    2. Re:Google's war with China by jamesyouwish · · Score: 1

      Google can partner with Gates and his new mini Nuclear Reactors.

    3. Re:Google's war with China by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Yes, but any enterprising billionaire can make some... Generating plutonium is, like, '40's tech. I think Google can handle it...

    4. Re:Google's war with China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is not yet a way to transmit plutonium over TCP.

      Not with that attitude!

  16. Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by pubwvj · · Score: 0

    The Chinese government doesn't seem to understand that it is very easy to circumvent their great wall of censorship. They merely hurt themselves and their own people. Of course, what this does is give a competitive advantage to people smart enough to get around the government - a bit of evolution in action.

    1. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course they understand it. The purpose of the Great Firewall, like the Australian filtering, is to cause sufficient inconvenience and paranoia in the average user that they simply knuckle under. The map for this sort of thing is from Orwell's 1984. What counts is that you're never sure you're being watched, so you must always assume you are. That is how the Chinese government and that gang of liberty-haters in Rudd's government in Australia operate. Make it difficult enough and make it sound much more technically imposing and encompassing than it really is, then who cares about the 1-5% of computer users with the technical knowledge to circumvent the filters. They still basically have to keep it quiet lest the thought police come along and knock on their door.

      This is what you get when you have a government that is stark raving terrified of its citizens. All nations should beware of politicians who show those classic signs of fear and loathing of freedom. Most politicians and bureaucrats are precisely of that nature, because the freer the citizen is, the more contained their own power is.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by vux984 · · Score: 0

      This is what you get when you have a government that is stark raving terrified of its citizens.

      LMAO. Clash of the memes!

      Yet in America all the "tyranny", warrentless wiretapping, no-fly lists, copyright/dmca insanity, airport "security", corruption and rampant pandering to special interest,,, all this is regularly attributed by slashbots as "This is what you get when you have a government that no longer fears its citizens." and is modded up.

      So apparently, whenever the government attempts to impose / imposes absurd levels of control over its citizens its both "stark raving terrified of its citizens" and yet "no longer fears its citizens".

      Good to know.

    3. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First of all, I'm not an American. Second, I never said Western governments are pure and good (I mean, I did directly name the Australian government). But I can tell you this, you can type "George Bush waterboarding Guantanamo" in Google in the United States, and get some pretty damning pages up right off the top. Try typing "Tienanmen massacre" in China and see what you get up.

      It's night and day, no matter how much you pathetic Chinese government apologists try to assert differently.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by headkase · · Score: 1

      I never used to support the NRA when I was a kid, now I think it should be a legal requirement for every household to own at least one fully-automatic machine gun and enough ammunition to take out a city block. This realization emerged when I began to see random loss of life as less important than shooting the soldier who won't listen to you - a Citizen - but instead listens to centralized government. I don't trust my local government any more but I can go to my representatives house and beat the snot out of him/her, the bunch in Washington it too insulated from a good old fashioned hanging to make balanced decisions anymore.

      --
      Shh.
    5. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      So apparently, whenever the government attempts to impose / imposes absurd levels of control over its citizens its both "stark raving terrified of its citizens" and yet "no longer fears its citizens".

      Um, yes, that is basically it. They are terrified with what its citizens can do with the information. They are scared for their political offices, they realize that an enlightened citizen is a citizen who knows to not trust their government. However, they realize that the fever of revolution has long since passed in America. No one wants to take up arms against tyranny because they can easily take up arms against them. They feel safe. On the other hand in China/Australia there isn't a guarantee to bear arms for the average citizen, therefore governments are not trusting of their citizens because if a small number of citizens can get arms they can quickly overpower other citizens and convert them to their ideology.

      Basically, in America if you go out to a street and start shooting in all directions, you are going to be shot. Not by the police, but rather by your neighbor. If you do the same thing in China/Australia, they have to rely on the police. And a rogue police force has no checks and balances by the citizens, so if it acts against the government's wishes, the only hope is the military. When you involve the military in politics... well.. you get what happens in South America: the military takes over the government.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    6. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      You're talking past each other.

      Your point seemed to be that bad things are a consequence of a government afraid of its people. His point is that others attribute bad things as a consequence of a people afraid of its government. Strictly speaking, they aren't contradictions, but there is something poetic about that.

    7. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Uh, what are you on about? I think you pretty much entirely missed my point.

      That said, I'd like to address one point:

      "Try typing "Tienanmen massacre" in China and see what you get up..."

      Is this really any better? Hell, its not even really that different.
      http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html

      Not that I'm saying the West is as bad as China. I don't think that at all.

      No, I was pointing out that when China does something like this someone says they are terrified of their citizens. When the west makes a move in the same direction, its because they don't fear their citizens enough. I found it an interesting juxtaposition... that we rationalize why two different governments are on precisely the same sort of march against freedoms (even if the west isn't as far down the path) for apparently polar opposite reasons: terrified vs not afraid

    8. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      The difference is that one can speak out against what's going on in Texas, without fear of government reprisal. While the Communist regime doesn't necessarily go after every person that bitches a moans, believe you me, any ACLU-like organization in China would see its chief members sent off to prison for some serious re-education. Western countries do some bad things, but the level of China's censorship and policing of public utterances is something else entirely, though there are no doubt some western politician's like the Australian PM who seem to have similar ambitions at thought control.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    9. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Well, of course if you are afraid of someone, then if you can do it, you make them afraid of you, just to be sure they don't harm you out of their own self-interest.
      After all, the whole cold war was built on that concept.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    10. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

      "Try typing "Tienanmen massacre" in China and see what you get up..."

      Is this really any better? Hell, its not even really that different.
      http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html

      Not that I'm saying the West is as bad as China. I don't think that at all.

      I'm sorry, did you just make a parallel between nationwide censorship of government brutality and an elected school board mandating partisan bias in a high school social studies curriculum?!?

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    11. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      where the hell did you get the idea that this guy is a Chinese government apologist? He's saying that they aren't incompetent, not that they're angels who can do no wrong.

    12. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps the point is that you take comfort in trivialities like what a Google search returns. In other words, you think the US government is morally superior because you can easily find the evidence of its wrongdoings.

      Take into consideration the possibility that openness and the _appearance_ of democratic control is, in itself, an effective mechanism for totalitarianism. After all, if we're in control of our government and it does something wrong, who's to blame? If we didn't like torturing, why did we allow our government to do it? The government is therefore innocent, like a child who simply didn't know it was wrong until we scolded it. And you're arguing that because we have openness, that the availability of pictures makes it morally more defensible to having committed the crime in the first place.

      Nobody here is or was claiming that China is doing the right thing. Others are merely pointing out that democracy has not stopped the US from engaging in the same kind of behavior. You're saying that's ok because we write about or take pictures of the act.

      Who is the apologist here?

    13. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the end both did something wrong. So who in this world has moral authority?

    14. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by GPLHost-Thomas · · Score: 1

      Well, for the moment (as in, at this right minute) typing "tian an men" on google in China actually links to the Wikipedia article about the massacre (first link). ! :)

    15. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try typing "Tienanmen massacre" in China and see what you get up.

      OK

      #
      Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
        - [ ]
      The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, referred to in much of the world as the Tiananmen Square massacre and in the People's Republic of China (PRC) as the ...
      Naming of incident - Background - Protest development
      en.wikipedia.org/.../Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989 - 57 - -
      #
      American Thinker Blog: Tienanmen massacre 20 years ago today (Updated)
        - [ ]
      4 Jun 2009 ... Tienanmen massacre 20 years ago today (Updated). Thomas Lifson. It was 20 years ago today that China savagely repressed the democracy ...
      www.americanthinker.com/.../tienanmen_massacre_20_years_ag.html - -
      #
      Tienanmen massacre_
        - [ ]
      200816 ... 8** ...
      zhidao.baidu.com/question/43239646.html -
      #
      Tienanmen Massacre - Discussion. Who is Tienanmen Massacre? What ...
        - [ ]
      License. This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Tienanmen Massacre". ...
      www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Tienanmen_Massacre/ -

    16. Re:Chinese Gov Doesn't Get It. by jrumney · · Score: 1
  17. 4 to 1 by confused+one · · Score: 1

    Does it matter? Chinese outnumber Americans 4 to 1...

    1. Re:4 to 1 by ChinggisK · · Score: 1

      Not only that, Chinese outnumber Google employees ~132,564 to 1.

    2. Re:4 to 1 by confused+one · · Score: 1

      good point : )

    3. Re:4 to 1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that, Chinese outnumber Google employees ~132,564 to 1.

      Never tell me the odds!

    4. Re:4 to 1 by Urkki · · Score: 4, Funny

      Does it matter? Chinese outnumber Americans 4 to 1...

      Depends on how you count. If you count total body mass, the number might be the other way around...

    5. Re:4 to 1 by Noam.of.Doom · · Score: 1

      Not only that, Chinese outnumber Google employees ~132,564 to 1.

      Your sir, have just made my day!

      --
      It is the universe that makes fun of us all.
    6. Re:4 to 1 by Idiomatick · · Score: 2, Interesting

      3:1 still (Fascinating that the average chinese person weighs 75% of that of an american almost EXACTLY.... 180lbs vs 135lbs)

    7. Re:4 to 1 by Noam.of.Doom · · Score: 1

      Not only that, Chinese outnumber Google employees ~132,564 to 1.

      Your sir, have just made my day! :D

      --
      It is the universe that makes fun of us all.
    8. Re:4 to 1 by Noam.of.Doom · · Score: 1

      You*

      --
      It is the universe that makes fun of us all.
    9. Re:4 to 1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it matter? Chinese outnumber Americans 4 to 1...

      4 girls to each guy? Sounds like a good ratio!

    10. Re:4 to 1 by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

      Does it matter? Chinese outnumber Americans 4 to 1...

      4 girls to each guy? Sounds like a good ratio!

      Something tells me you don't have a firm grasp on the demographic consequences of China's One Child Policy...

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    11. Re:4 to 1 by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Don't be so negative! Google can still beat them. Remember the Alamo!

    12. Re:4 to 1 by tokenshi · · Score: 1

      I've thought about this for quite some time... Because of my personal history with China.

      We have a much much better trained military then China, so in theory, if we got into a war where ground fighting became an integral part (because lets be honest, they have enough people to where they could conscript, and then use their people as bullets,) we could still probably take them. Provided we don't fight them in the mountains, or jungle.

      I'm not advocating war with China mind you, because that would definitely be a clusterf***, but let's be honest -- China's largest accomplishment aside from the 2008 Olympics opening ceremony is that they make our shoes and ipods, and as we all know from dealing with Apple customer care, they suck at that job pretty hardcore.

    13. Re:4 to 1 by mjwx · · Score: 1

      We have a much much better trained military then China, so in theory, if we got into a war where ground fighting became an integral part (because lets be honest, they have enough people to where they could conscript, and then use their people as bullets,) we could still probably take them. Provided we don't fight them in the mountains, or jungle.

      We'd have to fight the Chinese on Chinese soil or at best the war would end in a stalemate.

      But China will never start a war with the US or NATO.

      Why, because despite the near absolute certainty of Chinese victory all the fighting will take place in China. China has no real way to project its conventional power (no transports, carriers, logistics and so forth). NATO navies and air forces rule the open seas. But the body count could be 3:1 or 4:1 and China would still win, of course at the expense of all the progress China has made over the last 50 years, all the infrastructure destroyed, cities in ruin, economy wrecked, massive shortages and it is a large dissatisfied population scares the Chinese government more then losing 250,000 people as a dissatisfied population was what caused the last Chinese government to fall.

      Meanwhile as US and European governments resign amongst a war of fingerprinting life goes on. I'm more worried about another Bush getting into power then I am about a Chinese attack, both will hurt my nation (Australia) but the former is more likely.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  18. Don't Forget Our Pollution Exports by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But hey, when the labor is cheap and can do almost the same as our expensive labor, who cares?!? North American citizens? Mmmmmmmm wait a minute.... nope, the WalMart parking lot is still full....

    You forgot about the icing on the cake: they don't care about their environment! Since their officials are all corrupt, it's just a matter of greasing some of the bureaucratic wheels and those heavy metals in the drinking water aren't a problem! Not only are we exporting unskilled labor, we're exporting our pollution!

    *cough*

    What's that you say? Their people are suffering? China uses the same planet we do? We'll eventually suffer from each other's pollution? I liked it better when my point of view was limited to my immediate surrounding area where I can find a coffee maker for $12 at Walmart.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Don't Forget Our Pollution Exports by gujo-odori · · Score: 1

      I don't often shop at Walmart, at least in part because the nearest one to my house is about 25 miles away. However, it's surprising just how much US-made stuff I notice on the shelves when I do go there.

      More, at least in my experience, than I see at the Target which I shop at more often because it's quite near my house.

      Basically, other low-end chains like Target (and even higher-end chains, even) have very little that's made in the US. Based on what I see on the shelves on my rare visits, I doubt Walmart even has the highest percentage of Chinese-made stuff. Even if they do, it's a matter of a very small degree. Yet, somehow, Walmart seems to be the one that gets all the flack for a practice they all engage in.

      It's damned hard to find stuff made in the USA anymore. It's damned hard to find stuff that isn't made in China. So if you're going to be shopping at a store that sells mostly Chinese-made stuff (and you are, because that's the only kind there is), it might as well be Walmart. They have lower prices and a better selection than the others. Just watch out for the Walmart whales pushing shopping carts; you wouldn't want to be hit by one of those.

    2. Re:Don't Forget Our Pollution Exports by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Bullshit, their prices are pretty much the same and I have never been in a target, kmart or other big box store as nasty as the average walmart.

    3. Re:Don't Forget Our Pollution Exports by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      I doubt Walmart even has the highest percentage of Chinese-made stuff.

      My guess is that it would be BestBuy

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    4. Re:Don't Forget Our Pollution Exports by cerebis · · Score: 1

      Not only are we exporting unskilled labor, we're exporting our pollution!

      It's worse than that, since the manufacturing done at higher emission standards would mean less pollution for the same product. As this would inevitably be at a higher cost, consumption would go down and products would reflect that tendency via feedback. Factor in this effect for the entire supply chain from raw materials and energy to finished product.

    5. Re:Don't Forget Our Pollution Exports by gujo-odori · · Score: 1

      I can only comment on ones in California, granted, but the 3 Walmarts here that I have been too are all better than any of the Kmarts here that I'd been too (have never been to one since they became Sears, so can't comment on that) and are in the same category as Target WRT nastiness or lack of same. What, specifically, do you think is nastier about Walmart other than the astonishing fatness of many of the customers. WRT pricing, I can always get a better deal at Walmart than Target on most stuff. Surprisingly, though, JC Penney often beats Walmart on children's clothing and the quality is way better.

      Other quality tip: look for clothing made in Vietnam. Walmart sometimes has some, and the quality is generally much better than Chinese-made.

    6. Re:Don't Forget Our Pollution Exports by lexsird · · Score: 1

      I tried to shop at local stores to keep as much of my own money out of Wal-Marts hands, but here is the problem. I will just end up buying the same junk but only at a higher marked price. In my minds eye, I was hoping to find that our local shops carried good quality, American made products, that I would be willing to pay extra for to; a) support our economy, b) have a higher quality product. This was wishful, naive thinking I found out. So much is NOT made here and what is, I am dismayed at their prices. This trade deficit will be our downfall if nothing else I am afraid. We have lost local manufactures here in the heartland, those that we never dreamed would leave. I feel as though we have been sold out by politicians to corporate interests. We seem to have the finest bureaucrats, officials and politicians that money can buy here in America. I am currently in college retraining for something else to do for a job, and the "globalism is good, nationalism is bad" message being shoveled down my throat in my Geography class is something I just ignore lest I just snap. This is a trade war that we are losing with China. I am glad Google is firing a shot over their bow...no matter what their reason. Perhaps it might inspire some of our cowardly/corrupt politicians to follow suit. Chances of that are like throwing a roll of quarters into the air and they land, break, scatter, roll around and all stop on their edges. Optimistic and liberal with my odds, no?

      --
      Take the Red Pill.
    7. Re:Don't Forget Our Pollution Exports by Nesman64 · · Score: 1

      I don't often shop at Walmart, at least in part because the nearest one to my house is about 25 miles away. However, it's surprising just how much US-made stuff I notice on the shelves when I do go there.

      Thank you. Most of the Walmart bashers fail to notice that Walmart's store brand (Great Value) is all made in the US.

      Now, I don't have a problem with bashing Wally World, but please do it honestly. I try to shop elsewhere because of the soul crushing depression that hangs in the air there.

      --
      coffee | nose > keyboard
  19. Re:Let me be the first to say by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

    Not in China, at least. But there's still several billion people elsewhere in the world.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  20. Drawing politcal blood by DigiShaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think Google and everyone else knew this was a losing battle. The point however was to call the CCP out in the open and force them to bleed a little. The blood is fresh, but will anyone from the inside the party attempt reform? I find it hard to believe there is no descension among the party. Question is, how many and do they have the courage and fortitude to see this through?

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:Drawing politcal blood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The blood is fresh, but will anyone from the inside the party attempt reform? I find it hard to believe there is no descension among the party. Question is, how many and do they have the courage and fortitude to see this through?

      Well, with people encouraged to spy on their neighbours, not to mention widespread wiretapping and monitoring, it seems difficult for a dissenting voice to be heard.

      The upper echelons are well off, they have an additional incentive to not rock the boat.

    2. Re:Drawing politcal blood by cpghost · · Score: 1

      They learned the lesson from the Soviet communists: as soon as they start political reforms (they were the first to start economic reforms, so they're not totally averse to reforms per se), they won't be able to keep their firm grip on their population. So they agree to keep going, hoping they'll remain in power for as long as possible.

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    3. Re:Drawing politcal blood by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      The problem with governmental systems like China's is that there isn't just one player. While Western democratic systems tend to have a clear line of authority, inevitably civilian in nature (except in Constitutional Monarchies, where the executive is essentially above the political fray), in China you have a queer duck that is part civilian or semi-civilian Party (Communist Party) and partially military (the PRC). This is not much different than how the Soviet system worked, though the Chinese Ministry of State Security is not nearly the independent player that the KGB was. Still, the fact remains that in such a system, even if the bulk of one part of the power structure is unhappy with a policy, the requirement that consensus always be maintained often renders reformist movements within the power structure impotent. In such a system, change can only happen slowly. The PRC has basically backed away from stopping economic reforms (though, in fact, it and its leadership have considerable investments, so it remains a key beneficiary of China's economic growth), but political reform is a whole other beast, and even if the Party itself felt some need at meaningful reforms, the PRC would have to be in agreement.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:Drawing politcal blood by dragisha · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Google si important thing, but Google works on money. Unless they are subsidized by US gov for losses they get for this... behaviour... they are ones being hit hard here. For Chinese people, they are just-another-internet-search and/or just-another-mobile-vendor... Winner is probably MS - US company always playing "nice". and Chinese gov is bussiness-as-usual.

      --
      http://opencm3.net, http://www.nongnu.org/gm2/
    5. Re:Drawing politcal blood by IorDMUX · · Score: 1

      I find it hard to believe there is no descension among the party.

      I would presume that there would be plenty of descension in the party, given the number of skyscrapers in Beijing and the likelihood of someone getting canned for this.

      Dissension, on the other hand? Probably not so much.

      --
      >> Standing on head makes smile of frown, but rest of face also upside down.
  21. Over-underestimator. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This war could be really hard. But in the end, it's the Chinese people who lose, not Google nor the Chinese "government".

    You grossly overestimate Google's importance.

    You grossly underestimate the Chinese people.

  22. PR Stunt by oldhack · · Score: 1

    The whole thing smells like a PR stunt. Google still maintains sales office and R&D center in China. What, those won't get hacked by the Chinese?

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  23. Who didn't see this coming? by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 1

    I am surprised that it took this long for China to block the latest trick by Google. Who didn't see this coming the moment it was mentioned in the press?

    Of course this is or would become a cat and mouse game. China blocks, Google counters, China counters Google's counter.

    1. Re:Who didn't see this coming? by skine · · Score: 1

      Of course Google knew that China would shut them down (partially).

      That's why they went to Hong Kong, which has different laws.

  24. In communist China... by paxcoder · · Score: 1

    web crawlers help you not find content.

  25. Hit 'em where it hurts by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you really want to hurt Google, don't completely block access... just filter out all their ads.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by cpghost · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why not? So Google will finally require https as opposed to http for their search engine front, just like they do with Gmail. A couple less eavesdroppers in the middle can't be too bad.

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    2. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by getNewNickName · · Score: 1

      Why would the Chinese government take the chance to allow information to roam free just to make Google lose a bit of revenue? Whereas the control over information is price-less to them.

    3. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by eulernet · · Score: 1

      The other solution is to ban all Android based phones.

      This will hurt Google a lot more in the long term.

    4. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by 517714 · · Score: 1

      Maybe Google realized that selling ads in China was a little like peddling refrigerators to eskimos ^h^h^h^h^h^h indigenous peoples of the Arctic and Sub-Arctic. The real money is selling Chinese products to the rest of the world. Google will act duly repentant to the Chinese Geovernment and proceed unhindered with business that is aligned with the interests of the Chinese Government.

      --
      The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
    5. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google's main product is the search... block the indexing... take and not give.

    6. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by groovyPost · · Score: 1

      If you really want to hurt Google, don't completely block access... just filter out all their ads.

      Awesome!

    7. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      Why not? So Google will finally require https as opposed to http for their search engine front, just like they do with Gmail. A couple less eavesdroppers in the middle can't be too bad.

      The hardware required for that quantity of https connections is wildly more expensive.
      It isn't nearly as simple as flipping a switch on the existing infrastructure.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    8. Re:Hit 'em where it hurts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except the whole point is that the CCP doesn't want its people to have access to information it doesn't like. Much better to force a company to filter for you or ban them entirely, from an economic standpoint.

  26. Whoops! by copponex · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You made the assumption that the US government would allow such a move. We have several client states that would revolt if we provided democratizing influences like free access to information. These states include: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey...

    The US Government would now allow such a move against China either, since they are our most lucrative trading partner, and damn close to becoming more than that. Money matters to us a hell of a lot more than freedom.

    1. Re:Whoops! by evilviper · · Score: 1

      We have several client states that would revolt if we provided democratizing influences like free access to information. These states include: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey...

      Pakistan and Jordan have minimal internet censorship. I seriously doubt their losing that ability would become an international row...

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    2. Re:Whoops! by celle · · Score: 1

      "Money matters to us a hell of a lot more than freedom."

      Yes, sickening isn't it?!! Just a bunch of spoiled brat pussies who would sell out to anyone for a price.

    3. Re:Whoops! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't really list Turkey with those other nations. First, it is a secular government. Second, they recently withdrew their ambassador. Third, they are contemplating shutting down a US airbase in Incirlik. Finally, Turkey is a republic with democratic values including free information access. I wouldn't go as far as calling the easily offended Turks a client state. You take them for granted.

    4. Re:Whoops! by copponex · · Score: 1

      Turkey has a secular military, not a secular government. And they certainly don't value free access to information since they also recently banned the pro-Kurdish party. We have been helping Turkey kill Kurds for years in exchange for political and military support in the middle east. Just across the border we support Kurdish rebels in Iraq. Another spot of American foreign policy dripping with irony.

      The decision appeared to be a setback for the government’s efforts to bring Kurds into the political system. Last month, the government presented a landmark plan calling for the free use of the Kurdish language in the media and in political campaigns, restoring Kurdish names to towns that had been given Turkish ones, and a new committee to fight discrimination.

      The Kurdish party, known as the DTP, applauded those efforts but has refused to join the government and other lawmakers in calling for the Kurdish rebels to lay down their arms, a position many analysts believe led to the court’s ruling on Friday.

      http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/12/world/europe/12istanbul.html

  27. Well let me say this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Supplies!!

  28. U.S. Dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google's pull-out or not will have exactly zero effect on the amount of U.S. dollars flooding into China. Why would the Chinese govt. care in the least if google leaves.

    1. Re:U.S. Dollars by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The one reason the Chinese government could care is that it is extremely sensitive to foreign criticism. Look at how it reacted to criticism of the Beijing Olympics or, heck, even at a stupid film festival in Melbourne that nobody had ever heard of before because it showed a documentary on the ethnic Uighurs in China, to the point where the Chinese government even authorized hacking of this speck-on-the-wall festival's website (I'm sure the organized were thrilled by the Streisand Effect). It's precisely this that Google is likely hoping forces China to loosen restrictions. Of course, Google has probably miscalculated to some degree. As much as China hates foreign criticism, it acts all the worse at internal criticism.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:U.S. Dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Chinese government is acting like a 15 yr old female.
      Criticism will drive her into exactly the opposite direction you expected.
      She does have concerns about her own well being and the world, but when it comes to deal with problems, she tends to shut it off or forcing her ideals to others. Never investigate alternative perspectives, never compromise. This kind of mentality leads to either win-lose or lose-lose situations. Criticism can drive anyone insane and act irrationally. I have read much of them over the course of ten years, those comments would only make things far worst. It is exactly like criticizing a teenage girl, see what will happen?

      Americans and the US government acting like a 25 yr old father: love to show off how righteous or how capable he is. However, he is absolutely clueless of how others think of him. When it comes to dealing with teenagers, he will automatically deploy the "I know better" tactics of criticizing and eventually forcing a teenager to comply. The outcome of all this is going to be bad. Look what happen when you deal with other teenage boy country? They stab you in the back.

      The dilemma of Google is that: you have to throw morality out of the window when in business. Sure, Google did take a moral stand, SHE just gone all emotional and does everything the opposite. So the Chinese Govnt did hack/shut up some people, so what? They cannot shut up their beliefs. If the Govnt kill them, it would just make them heros.

      What are the things in common? Simple: profit. Despite long history of political unrest, Chinese are mainly driven by profit and not politics. Profitability is the ultimate adhesive: even if all Chinese were brain-wash to believe the government act in their own interests, money talks. Remember that SHE is a teenager, all that is needed is a nudge in the right direction. Mass marketing of morality/freedom will go nowhere: everything is connected in an action-reaction scenario, SHE is now in emotional defensive state, what should you do? The key is INCENTIVES to do the right thing. If politicians still won't listen, the end result is that they die off like dinosaurs and be replaced by younger generations. Who wants to be remembered being an idiot in history?

      Take this as an example: "combating" prostitution in China is a big show, they know they cannot completely eliminate it because it will shift the problem to other crimes. After the show is over, everything back to "normal", profit as usual. Let's say you tell them to take sex education seriously, SHE will just go emotional and give all the lame reasons like "we're are a very traditional/conservative country...blah blah blah". But if one day China wake up to the fact that problems should be handled in a positive, matured manner, only then China has grown up.

  29. And now ladies and gentlemen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a big fucking deal.

  30. Here we go... by jaxtherat · · Score: 1

    Let the great pissing contest of 2010 begin...

    --
    http://www.zombieapocalypse.tv/
  31. crud, I just regionalized my android app to Cn by cellurl · · Score: 1

    I spent all this effort to put china in my app
    Back Seat Driver V

    and now it won't come out, bummer.

    values-zh-rCn
    values-zh-rTW

    Charity without money, priceless

  32. Re:Let me be the first to say by Darkness404 · · Score: 1
    Lets see here, 1.1 billion people against a few million in government.

    I think this quote from Samuel Johnson basically sums it up

    I consider that in no government power can be abused long. Mankind will not bear it. If a sovereign oppresses his people to a great degree, they will rise and cut off his head. There is a remedy in human nature against tyranny, that will keep us safe under every form of government.

    The masses of China are all dirt poor, they don't know what they are missing. Those privileged few with access to the internet either A) Are underground so Western media doesn't know about them B) Realize that under this oppressive system they can enjoy wealth while others starve and so long as its working for them, why change or C) Don't think China is evil. By censoring they start waking up group C, the natural progress of technology is going to soon give -everyone- in China access to the internet. If they keep showing that they censor, people are going to wake up and overthrow the government. It will happen once technology has improved and the quality of living gives the average Chinese citizen internet access and the knowledge that they won't be starving.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  33. Re:Let me be the first to say by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Owned. No one can win against the Chinese government when they buy from a "Nokia Siemens" like supplier, unfortunately.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  34. Unfortunately... by RingDev · · Score: 2

    Then, Who Cares?

    The stock holders. As much as we can commend the Google leadership for their moral stances, they are a corporation and they are beholden to the stock holders.

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    1. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One would hope that stock holders were rallying behind Google on this decision........

      Hahahaha, this weed is great!

    2. Re:Unfortunately... by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Except they've put in their statements that sometimes they may not do what's best for the stock holders, if it's not morally acceptable, IIRC.

    3. Re:Unfortunately... by doug20r · · Score: 2, Funny

      Agreed, the stock holders should now be suing the Google board.

    4. Re:Unfortunately... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      If you ever bought Google stock, I hope you paid attention to that whole "Don't be evil" thingy. It's not there just for lulz.

    5. Re:Unfortunately... by celle · · Score: 1

      "they are a corporation and they are beholden to the stock holders."

      Except the only stockholders that matter are the ones that started google as they have most of the stock that counts.

  35. For the glorious revolution against the communits! by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    China will never budge on these issues (at least not in my lifetime)

    The Chinese government will budge if they think they are about to be lined up and shot by the enraged population. Each time they do something that irks the 'masses' they are one step closer to this end. this might happen next year, it might happen next century. The only thing I can say is that Google leaving China isn't a net plus for the communist government.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  36. Re:Let me be the first to say by Skillet5151 · · Score: 1

    Sorry to rain on the populist parade but I don't think petty internet censorship alone is sufficient provocation for most people to feel inclined to risk their own lives and moreover the lives of all their friends and family by participating in any schemes of violent rebellion. The corollary to that quote should be that any government power can be abused forever as long as the abuses aren't flagrant enough to drive people to risk everything in revolt. See US Congress.

  37. Robots.txt next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone else expect them to restrict google from indexing their content? I mean, why share that with the Googlebot?

  38. Re:Let me be the first to say by sortius_nod · · Score: 1

    Yeh, because there's never been a rebellion in the US...

  39. Re:Let me be the first to say by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I consider that in no government power can be abused long. Mankind will not bear it. If a sovereign oppresses his people to a great degree, they will rise and cut off his head.

    While I generally agree with this (witness the former Soviet Bloc, the American South etc.) I sometimes wonder if it always applies. For example, the conditions in North Korea have been appalling for 50+ years. How much longer before the people rise up and cut off the sovereign's head?

  40. Jail for setting up satellite channels by Dennis+Sheil · · Score: 1

    And what happened to that guy who was thrown in jail for non-fraudently fixing satellite dishes so they could see certain channels? Oh yaa, that was in the US, forget about it. Of course Al-Manar is "terrorist"...according to the US, and other current/former British colonies (which I'll call CFBC's). This seems to be a CFBC confusion though, no other countries in the world aside from the CFBC's (and Holland for some reason) see Al-Manar or Hezbollah as terrorist.

  41. Re:Let me be the first to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course he was wrong. As long as there are enough people who are still comfortable enough or feel they have too much to lose the they will put up with almost anything. The US illustrates this.

  42. Google's pr fest smells by PietjeJantje · · Score: 1

    This pr fest from google smells. A list of events: 1) Google decides to play and be evil, and go in China and censor their results (define this level of censorship as 50%), 2) China tightens censorship (to 100%), 3) Google takes the moral high ground and says it does not like censoring. Well, they liked 50%, so, they should shut up instead of, once again, act the "do no evil" thing out of pr purposes, and flee like they are morally superior. Google's only real motivation is clearly evident from 1) and is: get more page views, so you can sell more adds and increase profit. Looks like a power play to me. Google is losing on the Chinese market to Baidu. But here comes the White Knight google, aiming at the internet savvy youth who know how to bypass censoring anyway. It is the whole fake thing all over again. If they weren't a fake White Knight, fighting the evil forces of this world, they wouldn't have been in China to start with. And now they lost their right to whine and complain. If only the thing would end. Either stay and be evil or get out and move on. But nooo, this thing will last and last and last. It's about money after all, and hoping the power play will result into an opening and an increased marketing share.

  43. IP = the New Oil by stimpleton · · Score: 1

    This is why speeches and retoric from the US are turning to IP.

    I predict that in the future, when technology/infrastructure/utilities can run at little cost, IP(or specifically the revenue stream thereof) will be the new oil.

    A country will be invaded for failure to adhere to IP.

    --

    In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
    1. Re:IP = the New Oil by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      Holy shit what a sad future. Here I was betting on nanotechnology/singularity, and politics "wins out."

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  44. Re:Let me be the first to say by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Informative

    But look at -what- the Chinese government are censoring. Terms like the Tienanmen Square massacre where people died, that can certainly spark protests. Religion is censored, and as we know from history even small differences can lead to large problems.

    People would and have risked their lives in the name of religion. People have and would risk their lives in support of those who they believe died for a worthy cause.

    If it stayed like this, I doubt it would inspire revolutions. But with all of the talk about it, it is going to make people wonder -what- they are censoring. When they figure out what, they won't understand why. When they finally understand why they will see that the Chinese government is corrupt.

    Think about it this way, if you don't know about curse words, there is no need to look them up. But how many of us once our parents told us that one word was a "bad word" tried to look it up in the dictionary? None of us would look it up otherwise, but once we know that it is "forbidden" knowledge we will look it up. The Chinese government and Google are effectively telling us that there -are- "curse words" tempting some of the citizens to look it up.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  45. One strategy... by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    - China tells Google to play along. Google refuses.

    - China tells Google to be nice or ELSE. Google threatens to leave.

    - China says 'make my day'. Google serves Chinese queries via google.com.hk.

    - China blocks google.com.hk. Google says 'fine, we are done'.

    - China blocks all Google enterprises in China, Android phone rollouts are stopped, etc.

    - Google rescinds licensing for Android to Chinese manufacturers. Somehow.

    - Google fires off a restraint of trade action, gets U.S. Customs to impound all incoming Android phones.

    - Chinese manufacturers petition their government (privately) to make nice with Google.

    - China stops with the .hk blocking and merely filters.

    - Google calls off the dogs.

    - All quiet.

    Or something like that.

    Does Google have a shred of leverage with Android and any other 'products'? Maybe they stop indexing Chinese content for international use? I dunno, but this is as sensible as anything else.

    Except that the Chinese may not actually care about the potential impact. And Google may yet lose out somehow. But I'm betting they feel like this is losing something they never actually had. NO loss.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    1. Re:One strategy... by francium+de+neobie · · Score: 1

      Android phones are worth, what? 0.0001% of China's total GDP?

      It's not that powerful a motivator for Beijing.

  46. Google to Block China! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tomorrow Google will announce that no search results pointing to sites in China will be displayed.

    Chinese companies see their overseas business drop by 5% in the first month . . .

  47. Conspiracy theory anyone? by pablodiazgutierrez · · Score: 0, Troll

    Google founders are fairly liberal (they donated money to the No on 8 campaign in California, for example), so I wouldn't be surprised if they had a fondness for Obama and his health care plan. The decision to redirect google.cn to the HK version came a few weeks after the initial announcement, but exactly the day after the passing of the health care bill. This would certainly distract some attention away from the right wing scaremongers at FOX and others, which would in turn help the democrats. The timing is just too neat to be casual. Is it?

    PS: Nothing that there's anything wrong with the move, should it be like this. Just idly speculating...

    1. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really, really hope you don't actually believe what you just posted ...

    2. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, the entire planet and all events thereupon revolves around the USA getting the sort of health care the rest of us take for granted.

    3. Re:Conspiracy theory anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhmm... it sounds far fetched, but I wouldn't discard someone had some laughs about it in a meeting.

  48. Re:Let me be the first to say by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've watched a few interviews with people in North Korea, the people there honestly believe that the rest of the world is filled with starvation and that North Korea is the only place with "plenty" (even though many starve) they are told that their leader is a best selling author (I remember on one of the interviews the Korean asked if they had read Kim-Jung-Il's books because they were said that they were worldwide best sellers) and basically told that Korea is the best place on earth. They have complete isolation (embargoed against most western countries, no internet, no outside TV/radio) and honestly believe the propaganda.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  49. China's dillema by pearl298 · · Score: 1

    At some point China (and any other country which restricts free speech) must either (1) degrade their Internet service severely or (2) allow a "leaky wall" Option 1 means that they will inevitably fall behind the rest of the world in areas like science and commerce which they care about. If that process is continued long enough they become irrelevant - like the notion of Somalia invading the US. Option 2 means that they will have to live with losing all control over the information they most want to suppress. This is one area where a democracy is far better equipped to deal with than any totalitarian government.

  50. Re:Let me be the first to say by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

    You mean the Whiskey Rebellion?

    --
    $ make available
  51. Re:Let me be the first to say by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

    ...Because we all know there haven't been any rebellions in the US (there never was a Confederate States of America, right?) and no riots at all, right?

    And of course there have been -no- protests at all. Nope.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  52. Re:Let me be the first to say by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

    They might just wait for him to die and then overthrow the government.

    --
    $ make available
  53. Re:For the glorious revolution against the communi by Chyeld · · Score: 1

    The majority of the 'masses' are doing just fine and are about as interested in lining the 'government' up as they were before this whole brouhaha. That's the unfortunate result of living in a country where the government actively controls the media, you are always told you are doing well and any inconveniences are necessary sacrifices for the good of the cause. Which is also why China won't budge an inch over this, since Google has the power to cause the populace to believe differently.

  54. Country Vs. Company by cyberzephyr · · Score: 1

    Where's William Gibson when you need him!

    I detect "Neuromancer" type stuff happening.

    Shhhhh. The Yakuza might get you!

    --
    I'm here for the experience, not the Hyperbole.
  55. Google should go to war by yelirekim · · Score: 1

    They should task all of the potentially soon to be laid off workers with the new full time goal of dismantling internet censorship in China. I for one would welcome WWIII at their hands.

  56. More than censoring, China is being spiteful! by erroneus · · Score: 1

    This is much better than just censoring content. This goes to show what all companies doing business in China can expect. This kind of anti-chinese information just can't be made-up. I wonder what company will be next to pull out of China?

    1. Re:More than censoring, China is being spiteful! by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      I wonder what company will be next to pull out of China?

      To me, it sounds like Hong Kong just became China's Delaware, where 90% of our corporations are based out of due to corporation-friendly legislation. Only thing that would prevent me from packing up and moving operations to Hong Kong would be the bullet my family would have to pay for, which may be deterrent enough to keep everyone from following Google's move.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    2. Re:More than censoring, China is being spiteful! by erroneus · · Score: 1

      You seem to be incorrect. GoDaddy has followed Google's lead. Gives me warm-fuzzies to see this. Now we need a windfall of other companies prepared to leave China as well.

  57. Overdrive not needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe their propaganda machine is strong enough, it doesn't need overdrive for little disturbances like this. It smoothed out, tidied up national memories of Tiananmen, something like this is peanuts compared to that.

  58. Re:T-Based? by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

    their uncensored Hong Kong-tbased google.com.hk servers

    If I know anything about genetics there must be some adenine base servers directly opposite these servers. Can they start redirecting traffic there?

    [emphasis converted to italic]

    FTFY.

    --
    $ make available
  59. Re:Let me be the first to say by VanGarrett · · Score: 1

    Really? I can think of two big ones, off hand.

    American Revolutionary War
    American Civil War

    There've also been a great deal of smaller-scale rebellions involving labor unions, which have been the direct cause of the creation of new laws, over the decades. Now, we haven't gone all out as the French have done, and gone so far as to drag our ruler out of his home to chop his head off with a heavy, keen-edged blade, but that's partly because we have laws in place to depose our president if he screws up too bad, and also because any conflict that headed in that direction was stopped before that result came about.

  60. I don't shop at WalMart. Still can't boycott China by jeko · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ever since I watched Tiananmen in horror, I have tried to boycott China. That boycott has failed miserably.

    I just fixed my brakes last Saturday. I literally tried every auto parts store in town. I could not find rotors not manufactured in China, not in my town on a day's notice. I have no doubt I could have gotten some mail-order, but not in time to get to work on Monday and still keep my job.

    I bought a camping knife as a present from Buck Knives, a "Made in the USA" company last year. Despite the advertising claims, the knife came stamped "Made in China."

    I bought a set of Carhartt work clothes last year, another "Proudly made in America" company. They arrived with manufacturing defects. Did some checking, sure enough, Carhartt is moving it's manufacturing to China.

    I got so fed up when a 14mm wrench snapped in my hand last year I was ready to cough up for Snap-On tools. Guess where Snap-On is moving their manufacturing?

    Even the "proud-to-be-an-American-we-support-the-troops" redneck favorite companies Spyderco pocketknives and Surefire flashlights are moving to China.

    Neal Stephenson was prophetic. The only thing we know how to make in this country any more are pizzas and movies.

    --
    He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
  61. Re:Let me be the first to say by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

    hey might just wait for him to die and then overthrow the government.

    I dunno about that... when Kim Il-Sung died in 1994 and his son Kim Jong-Il took over there was no overthrow of the government - No rumblings of any kind...

  62. Re:For the glorious revolution against the communi by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    The majority of the 'masses' are doing just fine and are about as interested in lining the 'government' up as they were before this whole brouhaha

    The majority of the masses always are. Most revolutions have been lead by a dissatisfied middle class, not by the peasants revolting. The peasants are too busy staying alive to think of rebellion. The middle class in China has grown a lot over the last few years, which makes the current regime's position more fragile.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  63. Re:Let me be the first to say by phantomfive · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The key is you have to keep most of the people relatively satisfied. Based on latin american dictatorships, if you can maintain a base of 30% that actively supports you, plus another 50% that is indifferent, then you can maintain power, even if the remainder are dying miserable deaths.

    --
    Qxe4
  64. Not that bizarre. by Kittenman · · Score: 1

    I just read in the NZ Media that Bill Gates will be building Nuclear plants in the near future.

    --
    "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
  65. US Gov. backs Google. by doug20r · · Score: 1

    Interesting how closely the US Government backs Google in this dispute. They recently stated that this shows it is too difficult to do business in China. Clearly just propaganda as this dispute has nothing to do with difficulty doing business, Google are immaturely pushing a political agenda or a PR stunt and were already able to comply with the Chinese laws. I don't consider Google a force for good in the free world, quite the opposite.

  66. Re:Let me be the first to say by Cheney · · Score: 1

    Can you make this a car analogy?

  67. Google's 'guilt on suspision' standards are a by doug20r · · Score: 1

    disgace. Google have still not provided any evidence, have not withdraw the allegation or apologized to the Chinese government, yet they charge on causing damage. There should really be a law against what Google are doing, certainly not socially acceptable.

  68. Re:Let me be the first to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only if you promise not to shoot parent on a hunting trip.

  69. Re:Let me be the first to say by mog007 · · Score: 1

    I'll give it a shot: Many new cars have a computer chip or circuit of some sort that's installed at the factory which imposes a limit on the maximum speed of the car. While the car could be capable of speeds in excess of 150 MPH, it might be limited to 120. Now, if you weren't aware of this fact, you probably wouldn't even notice, because you wouldn't drag race your car to see that it's only hitting 120. Given the knowledge that there's an artificial limitation on your car's speed, you might look into methods of bypassing the chip.

  70. Re:Let me be the first to say by mog007 · · Score: 1

    Kim Il-Sung is still the de jure leader of the country. He's either the President of the communist party, or head of the cabinet, or both. Yes, North Korea has a corpse as a leader, and the North Koreans don't see that as a strange concept.

  71. Chinese protectionism by williamhb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    China has worked out how to be protectionist without being provably protectionist to the WTO. So, rather than offer an (illegal) export subsidy to it's manufacturers, it lowers its currency by regulation to give the same mathematical effect without allowing retaliation from other WTO countries. Rather than applying illegal tax or tariff penalties on foreign corporation, it uses clandestine hacking attempts, trumped up charges tried in closed courts (eg, Rio Tinto), and creates an environment where anybody could be arrested at any time at the government's whim, to make life uncomfortable for foreign corporations on its shores, while cosseting its own companies that have close ties to the government.

    And, sadly, Obama, Brown, and other western leaders just play along, making comments like "we mustn't go down the seductive but damaging path of protectionism", not realising that their largest trading partner has already run gleefully down the path of protectionism and the west has just been too blind to notice.

    1. Re:Chinese protectionism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think no one has noticed then you haven't been reading the news.

    2. Re:Chinese protectionism by Philip_the_physicist · · Score: 1

      And, sadly, Obama, Brown, and other western leaders just play along, making comments like "we mustn't go down the seductive but damaging path of protectionism", not realising that their largest trading partner has already run gleefully down the path of protectionism and the west has just been too blind to notice.

      ...or too well bribed by their old school-friends in big business to notice.

    3. Re:Chinese protectionism by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      Well, and it doesn't help that our tariff on chinese goods is basically zero percent while their tariff on our goods range from 60% to 10%.

  72. Re:I don't shop at WalMart. Still can't boycott Ch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We make and manage information.

  73. Re:I don't shop at WalMart. Still can't boycott Ch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I bought a camping knife as a present from Buck Knives, a "Made in the USA" company last year. Despite the advertising claims, the knife came stamped "Made in China."

    They meant that the box it came in was made in the USA...

  74. Re:I don't shop at WalMart. Still can't boycott Ch by StarWreck · · Score: 1

    I've been buying Seagate Hard Drives since my first add-on 50MB hard-drive in my 386. Some of the really old ones were actually made in Japan (weird, huh?) and almost all of the new ones, even my 1TB drive were made in Thailand. Never had even 1 fail on me. I ordered a pair of 2TB drives... they came stamped "made in china"... both have already failed and I'm waiting on a replacement.

    Are workers in China really that much cheaper than workers in Thailand?!?!?

    --
    ... and in the DRM, bind them.
  75. "We make and manage information." by jeko · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Also known as producing and shuffling paper. :-)

    But seriously, I've heard your argument since 1975. "We're losing the low-value grunt work. The high-dollar brain work will still be here."

    Except it didn't work out like that. We lost manufacturing. We've also lost research. The simple fact is when you're facing a labor pool of four billion desperate people with little-to-no-civil-rights and the same genetic possibilities as you, you're not going to compete on quality alone.

    Your argument -- "They ain't never gunna be as smart as we are" -- has already been put to the test. It failed. The opposing viewpoint -- "It's a race to the bottom" -- has already been proven.

    I'm just hoping we can pull up short of impact.

    --
    He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
    1. Re:"We make and manage information." by snowwrestler · · Score: 2, Informative

      By value the U.S. is still the #1 manufacturer in the world ( http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=33962 ). And our research system, considered as the sum of government, corporate, and university research progams, is still very strong. (I'd say it's the best but don't have a citation...who's better?)

      --
      Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
    2. Re:"We make and manage information." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yeah - but things like software patents and out-of-hand patent system in general is starting to make a difference.

      I already hear screeching noises when developing houses are more and more attacked by patent trolls. The same for medicine and other stuff.

      At the end the country with the less restrictions will will stay in first gear with R&D, while an increasing stringent patent and other suppressing system will bring development in the USA to a grinding halt, or at least slow down considerably.

      You can say a lot about China (and you would be right), but they are not so stupid to let big company's and patent trolls decide what can be researched, developed and build - or not.

      Sure - the government is keeping those things in hand, but general you will see a increasing development and research cycle with little restrictions. It would not surprise me if China would surpass the USA in certain fields in not too far distance.

      Unbridled greed can be as much devastating as a totalitarian government.

    3. Re:"We make and manage information." by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      We need to raise our tariffs again. Its not the only solution, but all our import tariffs with mexico, china, etc.. are 0.5-2%, while for China, US goods face heavy tariffs. 65% for agriculture, ~20% for other goods.

      So not only are they payed less, have no environmental concerns, no rights, etc.. but the US artificially stacks the market against local manufacturing by not matching other countries ridiculously high tariffs against us.

      I don't know the economic theories used to justify basically 0% tariffs, but it sure seems like an intentional guaranteed wealth transfer from the US to other countries. Its like our government woke up one day and said, "you know, we are so damn rich, and the rest of the world has so little, we might as well attempt to make the rest of the world more stable by sharing the wealth".

  76. Morals or Money by asamad · · Score: 1

    So it comes down to doing the right thing or going for the money.

    My Guess in the long run, bad for Google. China will at some point of time outstrip the US, specially when they don't open up their markets for example the pegged rmb. Some company will fill the gap in China and they will grow bigger than Google. Look at the telco how big are they :)

    This presumes that India take quite a while to come on line - which it looks like they are slow to get the ball rolling.

    But cudos to Google, they are doing the right thing which is why I would/do buy from google. and why I feel like I can trust google, keep it up guys you have my support :)

  77. Re:Let me be the first to say by guyminuslife · · Score: 1

    I consider that in no government power can be abused long. Mankind will not bear it. If a sovereign oppresses his people to a great degree, they will rise and cut off his head. There is a remedy in human nature against tyranny, that will keep us safe under every form of government.

    I'm wondering how many millennia of human history dispute that claim.

    --
    I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
  78. Need more search engines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google? eh, so what.. can't we just use another search engine and another adwords provider? .. oh, thats right... everyone else went out of business...

    The trouble with google (and microsoft) is that they're "too big to fail". Can you imagine a world where microsoft or google closes their doors? what would happen? will they need to bail them out some 20 years from now, after google is running every "e"-thing?

    We need about 200 search engines, let China keep up with that...

    1. Re:Need more search engines by doug20r · · Score: 1

      Agreed, this is the real problem, Google are just too dominant, and the solution is more competition. Sorry Google the only way for you is down in a free fair world and it is rather ironic that the Chinese government is helping us to a free fair world and the US government is backing Google.

  79. Re:I don't shop at WalMart. Still can't boycott Ch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work for a company (kinda, I work for a manufacturer's agent) that recently moved its factories from New Zealand to China. The prices for the goods have dropped 50% as a result, however, the quality has dropped more than 50%. The rangehoods they make don't extract as much from the air, not nearly as much. But at the end of the day, consumers only really care about price. And cheap goods is what China's good at.

  80. Re:I don't shop at WalMart. Still can't boycott Ch by Kagetsuki · · Score: 1

    Don't forget apple juice. The last time I went to America I purchased apple juice for my children, and promptly threw it away when I noted the juice was made from Chinese apples. The juice was branded Disney by the way. Actually my last experience in America I intend to keep my last - it's going down hill and it's extremely depressing that countries like China are on the rise against that.

  81. Re:I don't shop at WalMart. Still can't boycott Ch by Kagetsuki · · Score: 1

    Japan makes very good hard drives, the Seagate drives you owned were probably re-branded Hitachi drives.

  82. Lets keep an eye on MS / Yahoo / Nokia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice opportunity for Microsoft and Yahoo to show how much committed to freedom of information they are. Lets keep our eyes open and see whether MS/Yahoo/Nokia will react. Whether they will pick up the mobile contracts or not.

  83. No ground gained by sixknowspring · · Score: 1

    This is just going to be a back and forth thing. I don't think this battle over censorship is going to go anywhere. Google is losing it's China market, and, well, China is still going to be censoring everything.

  84. Re:I don't shop at WalMart. Still can't boycott Ch by quacking+duck · · Score: 1

    We make and manage information.

    Unless it's pure science, information and knowledge aren't worth much without some practical application. Traditionally, this resulted in a manufactured product--faster hard drive, better LED lights, improved engines, a new medicine.

    More recently, products are a little less tangible--software, applications, entertainment.

    Funny thing is, information is easier to copy than physical products. If the only thing you produce other than military hardware is "information" (i.e. intellectual property) and you're indebted to a country who doesn't care at all about your laws protecting IP, *and* you've outsourced most of your manufacturing, *and* the IP driving that is available to local workers who may or may not steal it to get a payout higher than the little you're paying them, you don't have a very rosy future.

  85. Re:Let me be the first to say by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Worth remembering that most people in early-to-mid USSR believed all that, too.

  86. Over/Under on # years before US is in shooting war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    with China?

    Fuck China. Why Chinese people allow for this kind of oppression to exist is beyond me...

    If our own government wasn't bought and paid for by our own corporate interests, we'd be telling China to go fuck themselves in a number of areas.

  87. For the moment, no censorship on google by GPLHost-Thomas · · Score: 1

    2010-03-24 11am gmt+8 (beijing time), google.cn continues to redirect to google.com.hk. From Shanghai ADSL, a request for "tian an men" on google.com.hk is not blocked (in chinese or english), doing the same request on images.google.com.hk shows that famous photo of the student blocking the tank. I wonder what request exactly is blocked here!

  88. Win Win or back room dealing by hhawk · · Score: 1

    This seems like a back room deal. Google unfilters (and moves to Hong Kong, which is still China), and China blocks traffic to the main land as it so decides with its great firewall.. the net result is the same as before and both sides win.

    --
    http://www.hawknest.com/
  89. google.cn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is working fine this morning of Wednesday 24th (using China Unicom 3G), not sure what drugs the OP is on...

  90. Google will never win by superyanthrax · · Score: 1

    They will follow our laws, or they won't be doing business in our country. If they want to leave their 30% market share behind, don't let the door hit you on the way out. Baidu has the other 70% and will gladly take the 30%.

    If they want to holler "human rights" and make up random junk about hackers, then they can GTFO. We will not knuckle under to a foreign corporation and give them extraterritoriality. The time for that has passed by more than 60 years.

  91. False? Not. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    Almost certainly false

    Almost certainly true, which is why I qualified my remark with "if we get sufficiently worked up about it". The reality is that life in America hasn't gotten bad enough yet, for enough of us. That will change eventually, however. My point is still valid: our legal system does, in fact, permit us to make changes but only if we make the effort.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  92. Chinese very hypocritical here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just day's ago the Chinese government were criticizing Google that they were linked together with the US government, and took their decisions from them.

    At the end of the day though, it's plain for all to see how the corporate China takes direction from the Chinese government, and really China's distrust of Google on this just comes from the experience within itself.

    cfm.

  93. Re:I don't shop at WalMart. Still can't boycott Ch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only thing we know how to make in this country any more are pizzas and movies.

    Considering that Movies can be offshored pretty easily, even Movies won't last forever.

  94. Re:I don't shop at WalMart. Still can't boycott Ch by profke · · Score: 1

    Neal Stephenson was prophetic. The only thing we know how to make in this country any more are pizzas and movies.

    And I am not that sure about the quality of the movies, either... :-)

  95. How many times do we have to re-iterate this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) The Chinese government did nothing. The HK version of Google (as all non CN versions) have always been keyword censored. Nothing new here.

    2) Google never seriously expected to be allowed to operate uncensored. It makes no sense for Google to be uncensored if the resulting websites are still blocked.

    3) Censorship in China is slowly lifted as more people become tech savvy and wealthy allowing them to bypass blocks. Commercial VPN services are rarely blocked, unless they give out free account which reach a too wide audience too fast. I you've ever been to China, you know that dropping censorship overnight is like handing knifes to toddlers. Censorship has to come down, and it will, but it's not something you can expect to do overnight with a population that has been censored and programmed since birth.

  96. Just wait until Australia's filter comes online! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Love all the talk about China and its filters... Hmmm... I remember reading somewhere that our wonderful 'free' and democratic government in Australia is looking at introducing the same thing. I wonder how long it will take for Google and good ol' Oz to have a falling out?

  97. Collective response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the 'solution' is simple: In US and EU, start blocking incoming http requests from China. Let them suffer from not being able to access the information on the internet. Start blocking facebook, wikipedia, youtube, yahoo, live, blogger, msn, twitter, wordpress, amazon, myspace, microsoft, bing, ebay, linkedin, rapidshare, craigslist, imdb, bbc, orkut, cnn.... need I go on?

    1. Re:Collective response by Archon-X · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you were trolling or not, but you could disable access to all of those sites, and the only people that would care in china would be the expats.

  98. Jamming? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Satellite signals are quite easily jammed as was demonstrated lately with gps.

  99. It's all about porn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As far as I know, google makes money with ads, and porn based ads are what we see most often. The matter here is that China government censors porn, and google can't publish porn based ads, so they left using the hack as an excuse, and will come back when China goverment allows porn. In the end, ABBA is always right ( you know : money, money, money...).

  100. Let's outsource there! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have an idea! Let's outsource even more of our manufacturing and engineering to China. Once we've exported away the little advantages we still have, China can become the dominant world power and I'm sure they'll act responsibly then.

  101. The earth is trembling by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 1

    The earth is trembling. I bet those Luddites at Google didn't think of that! Ha! Distinguished engineer Ken, changed the CS world with his buddy Dennis, but I bet he didn't see this coming!

    Kidding aside, grab a deck chair and enjoy -well, appreciate- the spectacle unfold.

    --

    I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
  102. And to explain this by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    The US banks are very efficient. They can have their cake and eat it too. Huge bonuses when they speculate wildly with the funds of customers. Then huge bonuses when they efficiently get a huge bail out.

    From the banks point of view, this is efficiency.

    It is very efficient that crocodiles get a healthy meal twice a year during the migration. Problem is that you are the buffalo being dragged to a watery death. Efficiency sucks when it happens to you.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

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

  103. and the winner is... by GNUPublicLicense · · Score: 1

    That war between google and China is non-sense... it does too much favor a company that sells locked-closed sources operating systems. Fishy. Are they behind all this?

  104. So why all the solar panels then? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    So if the Chinese don't care about the environment, why do they invest so much in solar panels?

    And it is a bit rich coming from an American who consume far more then anyone else on this planet, to complain about another country. Americans complaining another country polutes. That is like the pot made of dark matter and boiling sulfu complaining the shiny new, mirror finished sun powered kettle is black.

    China pollutes to be sure, but America does NOT have the moral upper hand here. It is like a rapist complaining that I didn't hold open the door for a woman.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

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

  105. Google should retaliate by filtering China! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think Google should retaliate by filtering China!

    So whenever anyone tries to search for anything about Chinese companies, Chinese manufacturing or Chinese products, it's filtered...

  106. Re:I don't shop at WalMart. Still can't boycott Ch by xtracto · · Score: 1

    Someone should make a page like RIAA-radar making a huge database of everything you can buy and indicating if it is "Chinnese-free".

    I know your sentiment... it has happened to me in a similar way. I went to a Mexican crafts market (and when I say market it is the street-kind of-market and not walmart or similar) looking to buy some typical stuff to get some friends in Germany (where I am living now) and to my surprise, a lot of the textiles people where selling had a "made in china" label, although the styles *where* the same as the typical Mexican stuff. That made me really sad.

    --
    Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  107. so your government takes ILLEGAL action by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so your government takes ILLEGAL action. I don't see that this makes much difference, except to be hypocrisy. Any government official arrested for illegal wiretaps yet, for example?

  108. Re:Let me be the first to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sometimes it takes a thousand years but history begs to differ change WILL COME

  109. US has the most people in prison by minstrelmike · · Score: 1

    Kind of funny how the 'free-est" country on Earth also has the most prisoners per capita.

  110. Re:Let me be the first to say by 2obvious4u · · Score: 1

    You must be female. All males, upon first entering a new car, take it to the nearest open strait away and "tap out" the car. When you hit the rev limiter you become disappointed and look for the mod chip to remove that nuisance.

  111. Re:Let me be the first to say by jwhitener · · Score: 1

    But look at -what- the Chinese government are censoring. Terms like the Tienanmen Square massacre where people died, that can certainly spark protests. Religion is censored, and as we know from history even small differences can lead to large problems.

    People would and have risked their lives in the name of religion. People have and would risk their lives in support of those who they believe died for a worthy cause.

    If it stayed like this, I doubt it would inspire revolutions. But with all of the talk about it, it is going to make people wonder -what- they are censoring. When they figure out what, they won't understand why. When they finally understand why they will see that the Chinese government is corrupt.

    Think about it this way, if you don't know about curse words, there is no need to look them up. But how many of us once our parents told us that one word was a "bad word" tried to look it up in the dictionary? None of us would look it up otherwise, but once we know that it is "forbidden" knowledge we will look it up. The Chinese government and Google are effectively telling us that there -are- "curse words" tempting some of the citizens to look it up.

    I forget where I saw/read this, but someone was able to interview quite a few young to middle aged Chinese people, and asked them questions like, "do you know what happened in T. Square", etc...

    Very few of them knew, and most importantly, very few of them cared. I think you overestimate the desire of the average person to truly dig deep and find the truth beyond what is fed to them.

    Heck, even in our "open information" society in the USA, look at how much misinformation was slung about and still believed to this day about health care reform? The vast majority of Americans who actually even bother to watch the news, watch Fox and do no further research.

  112. Re:Let me be the first to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have complete isolation (embargoed against most western countries, no internet, no outside TV/radio) and honestly believe the propaganda.

    Or is that just what they want you to believe...

  113. Hello by popsnake · · Score: 1

    Great article