Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Plans To Launch Censored Search Engine In China, Leaked Documents Reveal (theintercept.com)

Posted by msmash on from the don't-be-evil dept.

Google is planning to launch a censored version of its search engine in China that will blacklist websites and search terms about human rights, democracy, religion, and peaceful protest, The Intercept reported Wednesday, citing leaked documents and people familiar with the matter. From the report: The project -- code-named Dragonfly -- has been underway since spring of last year, and accelerated following a December 2017 meeting between Google's CEO Sundar Pichai and a top Chinese government official, according to internal Google documents and people familiar with the plans. Teams of programmers and engineers at Google have created a custom Android app, different versions of which have been named "Maotai" and "Longfei." The app has already been demonstrated to the Chinese government; the finalized version could be launched in the next six to nine months, pending approval from Chinese officials.

The planned move represents a dramatic shift in Google's policy on China and will mark the first time in almost a decade that the internet giant has operated its search engine in the country. Google's search service cannot currently be accessed by most internet users in China because it is blocked by the country's so-called Great Firewall. The app Google is building for China will comply with the country's strict censorship laws, restricting access to content that Xi Jinping's Communist Party regime deems unfavorable. [...] When a person carries out a search, banned websites will be removed from the first page of results, and a disclaimer will be displayed stating that "some results may have been removed due to statutory requirements." Examples cited in the documents of websites that will be subject to the censorship include those of British news broadcaster BBC and the online encyclopedia Wikipedia.

65 of 132 comments (clear)

  1. Do No Evil - by supercell · · Score: 1

    Glad they took slogan that out of their corporate vision statement. Google is corporate POS.

    1. Re: Do No Evil - by sttlmark · · Score: 1

      The should have just changed it to "Do no evil (unless there's a massive market opportunity)"

  2. Well by DaMattster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It just goes to show "Do No Evil" was complete and utter media theatre. Google will do anything for the almighty dollar!

    1. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-1826153393

    2. Re:Well by r_naked · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It just goes to show "Do No Evil" was complete and utter media theatre. Google will do anything for the almighty dollar!

      Absolute power corrupts absolutely. I am sure that when Larry and Sergey started Google, they had good intentions. I really believe that at the time that wanted to: "Do no evil". However, when the money starts flowing in, and the shareholders demand that the stock price keeps climbing, you start off with: "Well this isn't THAT evil". Eventually you end up with: "Fuck it, remove the slogan and let's conquer the world".

      --
      -- http://anonet.org -- The internet the way it was meant to be. Check it out, you may be surprised.
    3. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      From the Gizmodo article
      " But it’s also about doing the right thing more generally – following the law, acting honorably, and treating co-workers with courtesy and respect."

      It reminds me of the Nuremberg defense from WWII. Google is "only following orders" and so are not responsible for their crimes.

      An unjust order is still unjust, even if it is law in a country.

    4. Re:Well by Kenja · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The question here I guess is, which is more "evil"? No access, or censored access? I just got back from China, and having to use Bing felt wrong.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    5. Re:Well by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Censored hands down! The same can be said with the US-Sino trade relationship. The PRC is an abusive authoritarian regime. It functions and continues to exist because WE allowed it access to the modern world.

      China would be freer today if Nixon had never gone there. The existence of the modern world isn't a secret you can keep. Its not as if people in the USSR did know about the western world. Its not like they were not actively trying to smuggle in goods and information.

      What not allow China to access US networks, not allow China to sell into US markets, not allowing Chinese nationals to attend US universities would do is cripple them economically. Which by now would have turned them into a failed state or let the ROC (having access to purchase US build war machines) to come back in reclaim the mainland.

      Seriously what our society has done is act as a collaborator with regard to Chinese oppression. We got cheap plastic BS and place to dump garbage in exchange for selling out our own industry creating a every expanding wealth gap in our own society and enabling three more generations oppression of the Chinese people. It SUCKS and ITS EVIL

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    6. Re:Well by Zocalo · · Score: 2

      having to use Bing felt wrong.

      I'm pretty sure that actually *is* wrong. Only a complete sociopath would actually force someone to use Bing! :)

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    7. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It just goes to show "Do No Evil" was complete and utter media theatre. Google will do anything for the almighty dollar!

      Except work on US defense projects.

    8. Re:Well by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      I am sure that when Larry and Sergey started Google, they had good intentions. I really believe that at the time that wanted to: "Do no evil".

      Except they didn’t come up with that slogan - Marissa Mayer did.

      Larry and Sergei were probably just trying to make some bucks in the Dot Com boom, like hundreds of thousands of other college students were trying to do at the time.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    9. Re: Well by drew_kime · · Score: 1

      Taiwan was going to conquer the mainland lol.

      Vizzini agrees.

      --
      Nope, no sig
    10. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The motto was never "Do no evil." It was "Don't BE evil." That is relevant; a non-evil person will sometimes still do evil things...but will try to amend once the appropriate amount of guilt sets in.

      And it doesn't matter; the motto was only there to endear themselves to the public. And it has been long-since abandoned. It has ZERO relevance. I wish people would stop mentioning it.

      Anyway, all civilized people KNOW that censorship is morally wrong. It is a universal absolute. Potentates (including and especially corporate overlords) that engage in censorship are knowingly doing something morally wrong for a profit. That is exactly what google is doing here, all justifications about "greater good" or "cultural harmony" are utter bullshit.

    11. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      China would be freer today if Nixon had never gone there. The existence of the modern world isn't a secret you can keep. Its not as if people in the USSR did know about the western world. Its not like they were not actively trying to smuggle in goods and information.

      You're assuming that humans will always move towards freedom and democracy, as long as they aren't prevented from doing so by a repressive regime. The post-Soviet history of Russia suggests otherwise, though. Russia did become a free country, with true democracy and free media... and yet, by now it's most of the way back to being a repressive dictatorship. If they were to formally abolish democracy and the freedom of the press at this point, it would be no more than a formality, making official what is in place in reality already. And this whole slide back towards autoritarianism has happened with overwhelming public approval.

    12. Re:Well by DrSpock11 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      So Google engineers are so outraged that their company works with the DoD that they stage protests, petitions and resignations. But working with the Chinese government, one of the world's foremost oppressors of human rights, is fine with them.

      The hypocrisy and hatred for their own country above all else by many on the American left is stunning.

    13. Re:Well by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      PRISM is not just for the USA anymore.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    14. Re:Well by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Russia did become a free country, with true democracy and free media...

      For about three minutes.

      by now it's most of the way back to being a repressive dictatorship.

      That's because the old repressive regime never actually went away. They just swapped places a bit and changed their clothes.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    15. Re:Well by DogDude · · Score: 1

      having to use Bing felt wrong.

      Jesus, you're a good little Google addict, aren't you?

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    16. Re:Well by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      The question here I guess is, which is more "evil"? No access, or censored access? I just got back from China, and having to use Bing felt wrong.

      Considering censorship itself is an evil act, I think no access would be the morally right thing to accept instead of censored access. Internet going into China will be censored, and thus damaged; and so if the Internet works as intended, it will reroute itself around China.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    17. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The old repressive regime DID go away. The new regime isn't made up of old government officials from the Communist era. Rather the new regime is made up of basically old "bootleggers", smugglers and petty "criminals" who actually had somewhat of an inkling of how a market economy worked. These people who were relatively underground during the Communist era gained power once SOEs shares were divided up amongst the people. They were the ones who had capital to buy up those shares, and gain power.

      BTW Russia decided to divide up their SOEs in such a matter following MIT think tanks. Russia is STILL pretty pissed off by what happened in the 90s, and think it was a US conspiracy to make sure Russia was a shit hole after the fall of Communism by simply giving them horrible advice. Meanwhile China was telling Russia at the time that their way wasn't correct, and that the market must reform first before political changes.

    18. Re:Well by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It just goes to show "Do No Evil" was complete and utter media theatre. Google will do anything for the almighty dollar!

      Two things about your statement:

      1) The expansion of choice even if it is regulated choice is a good thing regardless of how you spin it. Censorship is imperfect and gets less perfect the more players are involved. Given the option between one in country source of information, or one in country source of information + an external source of information that has been given guidance on how to provide that information, the latter option will always provide users with more access to previously censored content.

      2) Do No Evil never existed. You're probably thinking of "Don't Be Evil" a phrase used by Google once in any formal marketing material, and that was in the IPO documents back in the mid 00s. The phrase was never in their corporate philosophy, never appeared on their website, and only exists in their internal code of conduct. If one thing is clear it's that people's unrealistic wishful thinking of how Google works was just that, wishful thinking.

    19. Re:Well by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

      Give it a rest. Larry and Sergey were richer than God before the first use of the phrase you're misquoting (Don't Be Evil) was ever released, during Google's IPO. That was also the last time that phrase was used publicly by anyone except for tech worshipers applying their own wishful thinking as to the company that Google was.

      Secondly there's nothing evil about their actions here. If anything it's quite the opposite. Google is giving the Chinese choice of a second search engine which they currently don't have access to. Censorship being an imperfect tool that it is breaks down the more players are involved. I'm sorry that your idealistic world view of coming into another country and breaking down it's government from the inside isn't panning out quite like you hope, but this is still a net good thing.

    20. Re:Well by syn3rg · · Score: 1

      In communist China, Google searches YOU!

      --
      The contents of this message have been doubly encrypted by ROT13
    21. Re:Well by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Censored hands down!

      Nope. Censorship relies on the absolute control of information. Absolute control of information is best achieved through a single source that is under complete control. Adding a second player as a source of information, and one that is ultimately external to the government will result in ever more previously censored content slipping through the cracks.

      By launching a censored service in China the result is less censorship and more access to wider material.

      Censorship is very imperfect, even if you do ultimately control everything, but even less perfect when you add 3rd parties to the mix.

    22. Re:Well by fredrated · · Score: 1

      The American left doesn't hate the country, they hate stupid people like you.

    23. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The American left doesn't hate the country, they hate stupid people like you.

      ok, so the American left hates half the population. Hate is Hate and the Democrats have a very long history of Hate, and racism, and lynching and everything else evil in the world... Hater

    24. Re:Well by larryjoe · · Score: 2

      It just goes to show "Do No Evil" was complete and utter media theatre. Google will do anything for the almighty dollar!

      It also shows that supposedly intelligent people are easily caught up in meaningless propaganda. It has always been obvious that "Do no evil" had no useful purpose. Evil has no universally accepted definition, and therefore "Do no evil" has as much meaning as "Do no X". Furthermore, very few people outside of comic book villains actually intend to do evil. Murderers and criminals have rationalizations that turn what others might view as evil into non-evils and sometimes even virtues. In fact, this is exactly what is happening with Google support for Chinese censorship and monitoring.

    25. Re:Well by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      The motto was first suggested either by Google employee Paul Buchheit at a meeting about corporate values that took place in early 2000 or in 2001 or, according to another account, by Google Engineer Amit Patel in 1999. Buchheit, the creator of Gmail, said he "wanted something that, once you put it in there, would be hard to take out", adding that the slogan was "also a bit of a jab at a lot of the other companies, especially our competitors, who at the time, in our opinion, were kind of exploiting the users to some extent".

      Where did you get Marissa Mayer's name in this?

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    26. Re:Well by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Rather the new regime is made up of basically old "bootleggers", smugglers and petty "criminals" who actually had somewhat of an inkling of how a market economy worked.

      Berezovsky was a member of the Science Academy. Prokhorov worked for the Sports & culture ministry. Potanin worked for the department of trade and his parents were high-ranking party members.

      And to top it off Bad Vlad was a senior officer in the KG fucking B.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    27. Re:Well by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I don't have quite the faith in Wikipedia that you have. Here's one mention of Mayer's involvement, from 2012:

      "Eleven years ago on Thursday, Mayer was one of 15 Googlers behind the company's famous motto: Don't Be Evil."

      Admittedly that declares it was more of a group effort.

      Regardless, all of these "origin stories" occurred well after Google was founded, and none of them involve Larry or Sergei.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    28. Re: Well by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      With access to modern American made military equipment against a mainland China that had we left them in isolation would have still be working with Soviet WWII era cast offs that even in our current timeline they were still flying into the 80's talking B-29 clones here.

      Yes I think its entirely probably that they could have been defeated in an armed conflict. Taiwan would have posses the ability to remotely destroy the mainlands industrial centers while the mainland would posses no means whatsoever of counter measures or counter attack. American sourced vastly superior naval hardware would similarly keep China from landing any conventional forces. Literally Taiwan would be able to destroy the means of production and just wait until starvation forces their surrender.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    29. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I thought Trump's "America First" slogan was ridiculous. My internal monologue was, "of course Americans put America first, you idiot" etc.

      But since Trump has come to power, liberal have gotten louder, which makes their arguments easier to hear, and.... not only are most of their arguments shit when it comes to practicality and integrity, but distinctly anti-American.

      I'm hearing this from acquaintances, old coworkers, college mates, etc.

      It's stupefying.

      I grew up in CA. I went to a very liberal college (UCSC). I'm still in CA. I genuinely believe Trump is ultimately healthy for the country.

    30. Re: Well by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      You are assuming that "we" would be able to isolate China.

      I think that "we" does not include Russia or India, who have far more modern military equipment than WW2 standard. If they were selling their equipment to China, Taiwan's hypothetical superiority would be much diminished.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    31. Re:Well by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      What's worse? Giving someone no food or poisoned food?

  3. How long before this happens elsewhere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If Google caves in China, just imagine how this will eventually play out elsewhere. I don't believe search engines should be censored for people, other then parental options for younger children.

    1. Re:How long before this happens elsewhere by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. The same techniques developed for China will be used elsewhere (including the United States and Europe).

      It's time to use less Google products.

      I use Brave browser as opposed to Chrome. It's OK.
      And use DuckDuckGo and Bing as much as possible. (both suck compared to Google.)
      I use ProtonMail for my primary email - as opposed to gmail. I like it so far.

      Now how to get away from Google Drive? ;-( That's a problem

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    2. Re:How long before this happens elsewhere by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Now how to get away from Google Drive? ;-( That's a problem

      Onedrive
      Dropbox

      Or, if you prefer to roll-your-own, there's always OwnCloud.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    3. Re:How long before this happens elsewhere by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      Thx. Will take a close look at ownCloud.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
  4. Name it Poohgle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    After the dear leader's favorite bear.

  5. Boycott, anyone? by Harvey+Manfrenjenson · · Score: 1

    So, I just literally googled "how to boycott Google".

    It's not as difficult as I thought it might be. There are non-affiliated search engines (DuckDuckGo, Bing, WolframAlpha). There are obviously alternatives to Chrome. Youtube (a Google property since 2006) might be the hardest thing to find a replacement for.

    The real problem, of course, is that you would need a *lot* of people to participate for a boycott to have any effect on corporate decisionmaking.

    1. Re:Boycott, anyone? by DarkOx · · Score: 2

      and none of that really matters because half the pages you visit will use google services of some kind, and they will still collect all the information on you they want ( well enough anyway that they can still deliver ad impressions based on which is their actual business).

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    2. Re:Boycott, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      half the pages you visit will use google services of some kind

      You can use uMatrix and other means to block those "google services".

    3. Re:Boycott, anyone? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Why? For providing a second source of searching the internet to the Chinese thereby weakening the effects of state run censorship through mistakes and imperfections in the control of an American company?

    4. Re:Boycott, anyone? by Harvey+Manfrenjenson · · Score: 1

      Why? For providing a second source of searching the internet to the Chinese thereby weakening the effects of state run censorship through mistakes and imperfections in the control of an American company?

      An interesting theory, that Google's decision will ultimately weaken the effects of state censorship. But I see it differently.

      Right now there are about a billion Chinese citizens who are acutely aware of the fact that they lack certain basic human rights-- such as free speech, freedom of association, and free access to information. They are rapidly becoming richer, more cosmopolitan, and more globalized. They realize that most of the civilized world has freedoms they don't enjoy. You're already seeing some push-back in the form of quiet civil disobedience (using technology to bypass the Great Firewall, smuggling in "forbidden" books/movies, etc.) Eventually there will be push-back through political means as well-- it's just a matter of time. Xi Jinping may have declared himself president for life, but he's not immortal.

      What Google's decision will do, I think, is to reduce the urgency of this push-back. It "normalizes" the status quo. Instead of going out of their way to get access to a real search engine, a lot of Chinese will simply make do with the "look-alike" Chinese version-- which I'm sure will work wonderfully for everyday tasks like reading about the next Marvel blockbuster, and only blocks you from a few pesky little topics that their authoritarian masters don't approve of.

      I would argue, also, that if an authoritarian regime wants to infringe on human rights, we should not provide them with the tools to do so. Period. What was it Lenin said-- when it finally comes time to hang the capitalists, the capitalists will sell us the rope?

    5. Re:Boycott, anyone? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      That's a good analysis but I'm not sure it would necessarily pan out that way due to the current social situation.

      You can't normalize what is already normalized. There are a good chunk of young people who have lived now their entire lives with the censorship. They know it too. Last time I was in China for longer than a quick holiday I got a local SIM, local internet connection, and on my first day I just out aloud in the office "damn what do you use instead of Google maps?" Expecting a list of alternative map services I instead was recommend software to bypass the censorship. It is completely normalised in China. People accept the censorship and work around it when they have to. There's no urgency to change anything, no urgency to overthrow any government, just living happily with the status quo.

      I ended up downloading a program from the app store that was recommended called "Break the Wall". One of my american colleges told me it worked well and was recommended to her by the phone shop which sold her the SIM card.

  6. Not enough money by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

    Google didn't want to do that, but they had to because they don't make enough money. They also didn't want to sell your data to anyone and everyone, but they need the money.

  7. Capitulation by nickmalthus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It is disgusting to see technology developed in Western liberal democracies twisted into tools of censorship and oppression. However this isn't unprecedented, US companies IBM and GMC clamored for Nazi market share in the buildup to WWII. As others have mentioned once this new censorship "feature" is enabled other authoritarian governments will insist it be used in their countries as well. On more step on the road to turn-key tyranny Edward Snowden warned us about. However one positive aspect of this is that it damages the notion of unfettered free market principles of government championed by the right. This is a unambiguous example of a corporation putting profit over civil liberties and human rights.

    --
    If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be-T J
    1. Re:Capitulation by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

      It is simply called Corporatism.

    2. Re:Capitulation by PrimaryConsult · · Score: 1

      However one positive aspect of this is that it damages the notion of unfettered free market principles of government championed by the right. This is a unambiguous example of a corporation putting profit over civil liberties and human rights.

      Except this is entirely in response to a government regulation / requirement. In places without that requirement, no such censorship exists.

  8. So what ? by aepervius · · Score: 1

    "Do no evil" is only good as far as you are a privately owner 100% company. As soon as shareholder enter in play , then forget it, only one rule is permissible : "do no illegal stuff" the rest is potentially a way to get sued if you demonstrably dropped profit and/or shareholder suffered through it, and yes "do no evil" is a ground to get sued if it can be demonstrated company would have been able to do more money by being legally evil, e.g. bowing down to governmental censorship in other countries. It does not matter what a company says about moral In the very end their only duty is toward fiduciary responsibility toward shareholder.

    So yes this step surprised nobody whatsoever.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:So what ? by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Informative

      the rest is potentially a way to get sued if you demonstrably dropped profit and/or shareholder suffered through it

      Stop repeating stuff you've heard stupid grown-ups say.

      https://www.nytimes.com/roomfo...

      https://medium.com/bull-market...

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  9. Don't be evil by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unless, y'know, a dictatorship requires us to be evil before it'll let us make money.

    1. Re:Don't be evil by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Can you point me to a public Google document that is dated from this decade that actually has those words in it?

    2. Re:Don't be evil by Shikaku · · Score: 1

      And before anyone tries to say that isn't Google, it's their Alphabet subsidiary and its official website: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... https://abc.xyz/

  10. But no weaponized AI at least .... by mackil · · Score: 1

    Taking the moral high ground with weaponized AI, but not when it comes to censorship?? I really hope this isn't true.

    1. Re:But no weaponized AI at least .... by AnthonywC · · Score: 1

      The former has the potential to wipe out humanity and is directly killing people. And while I don't support censorship either, in the US all the MSM practices self-censorship to various degrees and they don't even cross their party lines most of the times. The US MSM also effectively practice propaganda to only promote their own political version of reality; most American are too ignorant to know that they are brainwashed.

  11. Censored search better than no search at all by jddimarco · · Score: 1

    Let's put this in perspective. The problem here is not Google. Google doesn't want to censor its search engine, but it has to, in order to operate in China. It's all well and good for Google to decide not to operate in China, but it's fine also for them to come up with a censored (i.e. partial) search engine that can legally operate in China, as did Microsoft. Previously they chose to do the former. As a form of protest or boycott, it had little effect on China: it just pushed Chinese internet users to other search engines. Now Google is choosing to do the latter. It may be a better strategy: it at least gives Google an opportunity to provide (partial) search to Chinese internet users.

    1. Re:Censored search better than no search at all by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      What a lovely straw man you have there. You're really trying to claim the alternative to a censored search is no search? Seriously? Your faith in the gullibility of the people here is...remarkable.

      Would you mind if I translated your comment into actual English? I think it would go something like this:

      "Nothing to see here, folks. Move along. I said move along!

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  12. Report users who search by AHuxley · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Tiananmen Square 1989
    Taiwan.
    Tibet.
    Student movement.
    89 people's movement.
    All the people topple communism.
    Operation Yellowbird https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  13. It is also Censored elsewhere by Gabest · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe. Learn more

  14. Google: Pay us for evil. by WCMI92 · · Score: 1

    Their new slogan.

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
  15. Good by thegarbz · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Having a censored Google in China is better than having no Google in China. Censorship is not perfect. Results and information slips through the cracks constantly. By adding a second choice there's a second gap for censored content to slip through. A big foreign owned gap that isn't quite as tightly controlled as the state run gaps.

    1. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Corporatist-enabled dis/mis-information is a good thing? What "slips through the cracks" is going to outweigh the flood of "fake news"?

  16. China will affect USA Google Queries as well by aberglas · · Score: 1

    Once Google starts making money in China, China will have leverage over Google by threatening to restrict Google in China. This means that China will be able to insist that certain terms and pages do not appear anywhere, or at least get very low ranking.

    Recall the way that China got all airlines to drop the term Tiawan. In the USA, you will not see it.

    It is the job of Google to make money for its shareholders.

    1. Re:China will affect USA Google Queries as well by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Once Google starts making money in China, China will have leverage over Google by threatening to restrict Google in China

      What the hell are you talking about. China already has leverage over Google and always has. It's why they pulled their services out of the country in the first place.

      This means that China will be able to insist that certain terms and pages do not appear anywhere, or at least get very low ranking.

      See my original comment, you have just proposed an imperfect censorship tool and we are now applying it to a different company with different operations and logarithms. When you pour water into a sieve some goes through. You pour water into two sieves, even more goes through.

      Recall the way that China got all airlines to drop the term Tiawan. In the USA, you will not see it.

      A stupid comparison given that the USA is aligned with most of the western world in their recognition of a one China policy which does not formally recognise nor have diplomatic relations with the Republic Of China. You may also note that requirement was to not recognise Taiwan as China insists the ROC is part of the PRC. Instead what was achieved is that most airlines simply removed country names cleverly skirting the entire issue, another good example of weak censorship not achieving its complete goal.