Slashdot Mirror


Google Faces Renewed Protests and Criticism Over China Search Project (theintercept.com)

On Friday, a coalition of Chinese, Tibetan, Uighur, and human rights groups organized demonstrations outside Google's offices in the U.S., U.K., Canada, India, Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Sweden, Switzerland, and Denmark, protesting the company's plan to launch a censored version of its search engine in China. The Intercept reports: Google designed the Chinese search engine, code-named Dragonfly, to blacklist information about human rights, democracy, religion, and peaceful protest, in accordance with strict rules on censorship in China that are enforced by the country's authoritarian Communist Party government. In December, The Intercept revealed that an internal dispute had forced Google to shut down a data analysis system that it was using to develop the search engine. This had "effectively ended" the project, sources said, because the company's engineers no longer had the tools they needed to build it.

But Google bosses have not publicly stated that they will cease development of Dragonfly. And the company's CEO Sundar Pichai has refused to rule out potentially launching the search engine some time in the future, though he has insisted that there are no current plans to do so. The organizers of Friday's protests -- which were timed to coincide with Internet Freedom Day -- said that they would continue to demonstrate "until Google executives confirm that Project Dragonfly has been canceled, once and for all."
Google "should be connecting the world through the sharing of information, not facilitating human rights abuses by a repressive government determined to crush all forms of peaceful online dissent," said Gloria Montgomery, director at Tibet Society UK. "Google's directors must urgently take heed of calls from employees and tens of thousands of global citizens demanding that they immediately halt project Dragonfly. If they don't, Google risks irreversible damage to its reputation."

81 comments

  1. The Googs suck end of story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When greed trumps morality work for google

    When lying trumps honor work for google

    When you do evil, work for google

    1. Re:The Googs suck end of story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google is the second most unethical technology company in all of existence.

    2. Re: The Googs suck end of story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the first is Wikileaks

    3. Re: The Googs suck end of story by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 0

      No, the first is whatever IT company set up Hillary's server.

      Wikileaks is just a correction factor.

    4. Re: The Googs suck end of story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The first is Microsoft, who has stifled and destroyed the computer industry since the very beginning and has now conned millions into using a spyware/crippleware marketing platform as an OS.

      And the only problem with Wikileaks is Julian being a pretentious, entitled douchebag.

    5. Re: The Googs suck end of story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Datamining companies are king and the Googs (love it) is already on the edge of legality. There world will be restricted as they abuse this unregulated space.

      With china this is just a whole new path for The Googs, much like IBM and hitler during WW2. This time around i bet we hold google responsible for their bad behavior

    6. Re: The Googs suck end of story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Googs. Its like a reverse racist, facist, sexist name for a company that has fallen and is now making bad choices.

  2. Censorship by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    for Communist China will get noticed.
    People want to be able to find the history of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests.
    To LOL at a cartoon of a political active bear.
    To look up topics like 1984, term limits.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:Censorship by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      Let me guess. You're a beta tester for Dragonfly and you found NOTHING, NOTHING AT ALL, about the Tienanmen Square Massacre when you searched.

    2. Re: Censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Hong Wei Bing is alive and well I see.

    3. Re:Censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't think they give a fuck about that, I can assure you that they just want to watch porn, play violent video games and watch mindless reality shows like the rest of the world.

  3. Good show on now at 4840KHz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're listening, you are the resistance!

  4. The problem with monopoly by AlanObject · · Score: 1

    It is a problem when you can't boycott the "do no evil" company because there is no competition.

    1. Re:The problem with monopoly by sgage · · Score: 2

      I do my best. I will not use Chrome, or Google Search, or anything else Google if I can possibly help it. Of course, half the web sites out there have Google Ads and analytics and whatnot. But the web is just about over anyway. Tragedy of the commons.

    2. Re:The problem with monopoly by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      It is a problem when you can't boycott the "do no evil" company because there is no competition.

      There is Baidu.

    3. Re:The problem with monopoly by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      What the fuckity fuck, we spent years, centuries, millenia without them. They are fucking nothing, only our work makes them something. DuckDuckGo is already a better search engine, and email services are a dime a dozen, neither here nor there. Alternate video catalogues are growing and google social media just rolled over and died. They are fuck all, just their brand of marketing, their marketing delusions, jammed in your face all day everyday. Google spend more time marketing themselves than they do anything else, just an entire ALPAHBET of bullshit, of censorship and seeking to corrupt democracy.

      Not only do they have competition but it is gaining on them as we speak.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    4. Re:The problem with monopoly by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "What the fuckity fuck, we spent years, centuries, millenia without them. They are fucking nothing,"

      No, the web was fucking nothing before search engines. It was a research toy. Before Hotbot it was all but useless. And Hotbot didn't scale, nor altavista. So now we have Google.

      "DuckDuckGo is already a better search engine,"

      And just like that, you lost all credibility. Go on, pull the other one. DDG is absolutely useless. In the dozen times I've tried it, it has delivered useful results zero times. Google has what I want in the top ten results at least 80% of the time. Wake me up when DDG can even hit 20%.

      "Not only do they have competition but it is gaining on them as we speak."

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:The problem with monopoly by serviscope_minor · · Score: 0

      Of course, half the web sites out there have Google Ads and analytics and whatnot.

      It helps running noscript. I have google analytics and a bunch of others blacklisted.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  5. The Great Wall by found404 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Meanwhile, Apple has the equivalent of a Social Score (they track calls and emails), removed all apps that bypass censorship in China while also granting China full control of iCloud Data (including daily Face Shots and GPS)... this is just for starters.

    They do have colorful ads that keep telling us how much they value privacy while they purposely track, data-mine, data-horde and report on every single user of their ecosystem. They have become China's Great (digital) Wall. The MSM... silent.

    1. Re:The Great Wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      links please. I mean everything you say confirms my priors, but you are just some rando on slashdot, give me something I can use to convince other people.

    2. Re: The Great Wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair all of the information he said was on Slashdot articles over the last 8 months you just have to combine a few. I don't remember where they all are, but I never miss a Slashdot article.

  6. Maybe you should ask the Chinese what they want by greggman · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why do all the countries and non-Chinese seem to want a say in what services Chinese people get access to? Why is not having Google there to provide info better than having them there? By not having them there all you have is Baidu. How is adding competition to Baidu bad for the Chinese people?

    1. Re:Maybe you should ask the Chinese what they want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because it's not competition. It's the same Chinese gov't hand up both puppet's asses.

    2. Re:Maybe you should ask the Chinese what they want by greggman · · Score: 1

      They won't have the same results nor have the same features. It is competition.

    3. Re:Maybe you should ask the Chinese what they want by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Why do all the countries and non-Chinese seem to want a say in what services Chinese people get access to?

      Because the "Chinese Model" of authoritarian state capitalism is the biggest challenge to Western liberal democracy. It is an enticing model to the leaders of many developing countries who want prosperity without freedom.

      It isn't just about China, it is about the future of humanity.

      Why is not having Google there to provide info better than having them there?

      It isn't. Google should stay in China. It is better them to be there and be engaged. The idealism of the protesters is misdirected.

    4. Re:Maybe you should ask the Chinese what they want by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Why is not having Google there to provide info better than having them there?

      It isn't. Google should stay in China. It is better them to be there and be engaged.

      If Google were a humanitarian organization, you'd be absolutely correct. But Google is a corporation whose entire reason for existence is collecting information about people, and making money with it. They also seem to be very good at that. If they stay in China, they will only help make China better at that, except China doesn't just want to make money with it. They want to target people for abuse. By staying, Google will only be assisting with abuse. It will not make the world a better place. It will in fact make it worse faster.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Maybe you should ask the Chinese what they want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not that leaders of many developing countries want prosperity without freedom. It's rather that China and USSR had a difference of opinion on how to democratize. China stated that material wealth had to come first, while USSR thought political freedoms should come first. China thinks that USSR had lost the bet when USSR imploded and became Russia, and was in a far worse state then if they had followed China's opinion that economic development was more important step first then having a democracy.

    6. Re:Maybe you should ask the Chinese what they want by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 0

      China stated that material wealth had to come first

      The government of China never said any such thing. They have never declared an intention to democratize, regardless of how prosperous they become.

    7. Re:Maybe you should ask the Chinese what they want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was never going to be full democratization in the Western sense (at least not under Communism), but political freedoms would be more in the future. This actually has been something that even Sun Yatsen spoke about during 1920s. The Communist party under Deng Xiaoping is little different that that of the KMT Left.

      You have to understand that the CCP political scientist has a VERY different view point on what it means to be democratic. They have labeled Western forms as formalistic, and that as long as you hold elections and have representative governments, etc. that you would be considered a "democracy" despite how terribly its run. The CCP political scientist don't necessarily believe that should be the case, and have stated that being democratic means understanding and giving what the people need and want, and not simply about having elections. In the case of e.g. Trump they would say that abomination isn't because the masses ACTUALLY wanted Trump, but that they were tired of e.g. corruption, or lack of jobs, or dwindling spending power, etc., and it was up to the government to freaking figure that out, and give what people actually wanted, instead of masses voting for Trump. They have made a distinction between representative democracies (classic "formalistic" Western democracies), and representational democracies, stating that the CCP has the later.

  7. Not so family friendly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can quote me on that to everyone

  8. Google by phantomfive · · Score: 2

    Google is an example of a company that was ruined by money. They had a great mission, "Organize the world's information." Now they have lost track of that in their pursuit of advertising dollars. I think if they had remained smaller, and kept their goal to be "organize the world's information," they would be a better company today. "Better" of course being different than the stock market's usage of "most profitable."

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Can you imagine a task so great, the resources needed, and its created for free and given on gratis.
      Well they're not the first nor the last to be ruined by $$. Also if people didn't want such services they ( google, facebook, Apple) would have died already.
      Technological determinism was never a critical factor when paired against human behavior.

      Long live the surf!

    2. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google is an example of a company that was ruined by money.

      Uhhhh, name one company that was not "ruined" by money. Its a feature, not a bug.

      Something american schools have failed to teach is that nazism (and fascism in general) was a corporate response to socialism. Pastor Martin Niemöller's famous poem begins with "First they came for the socialists..." and then by the 3rd stanza they finally come for the jews.

      Unchecked capitalism leads directly to repression of the disenfranchised in the pursuit of wealth supremacy. Capitalism has its place, but it needs to be kept in its place.

    3. Re:Google by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Uhhhh, name one company that was not "ruined" by money.

      Apple. They got ruined by the death of Jobs, not by money.
      Facebook hasn't been ruined by money yet. They're still the same clunky software that people love, they haven't lost focus of their original product (and never stopped abusing users' privacy, either).
      Oracle has also kept their original focus.

      The main point is that Google has clearly changed their focus, and for consumers it's not in a good way. The secondary point was a diagnosis of why: because they found more money elsewhere.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Facebook hasn't been ruined by money yet.

      lolwut? They were ruined by money from the start. You can't spoil something that is already rotten.

      Apple. They got ruined by the death of Jobs, not by money.

      Ehh, its easy to point at the death of jobs because its was such a soap opera. But I'd like to see some actual metric to back that up. Otherwise it just sounds like availability bias.

      And FWIW, one thing Donald Jesus Trump has taught me is that Jobs was also a sociopath with narcissistic personality disorder. Jobs's "reality distortion field" was just a PR euphemism for gaslighting. And the way he denied his daughter, even lying about having a vasectomy, and making her mother go on food stamps while he was raking in the Apple money - that's straight up NPD behavior. And don't even get me started on his amoral buddhism, JFC. With a sociopath NPD at the helm, Apple was one sustained tantrum away from disaster.

    5. Re:Google by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      And FWIW, one thing Donald Jesus Trump has taught me is that Jobs was also a sociopath with narcissistic personality disorder.

      And Dunning–Kruger makes you believe you have the ability to diagnose psychological disorders?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    6. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ?And Dunning–Kruger makes you believe you have the ability to diagnose psychological disorders?

      No, not DK. The combination of dealing with two NPDs in among my in-laws (sister-in-law and niece's ex-husband) at the same time as DJT's rise has taught me a whole fuckton about NPD, sociopathy and machiavellianism. I was once like you, blind to what NPDs are, kinda thought that shit only happened in hollywood movies. It doesn't. Its real fucking life and is horrible. Go read the saddest place on reddit if you actually want to learn and aren't just a Jobs fanboi with low-grade flying-monkey syndrome.

    7. Re:Google by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "Apple. They got ruined by the death of Jobs, not by money."

      Nope. They took Jobs back due to love of money. They could have had BeOS and a CEO who would still be alive, but they went with Steve and NeXTStep instead, and now you're holding it wrong.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also if people didn't want such services they ( google, facebook, Apple) would have died already.

      Of course people want the services. What you can't argue is that they willingly, knowingly pay the price.

    9. Re:Google by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Oh, sure, it's the money, not doing a deal with the NSA and bringing on a CFR functionary as CEO. Must be the money that turned Google sociopathic.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    10. Re:Google by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Don't let the GP bother you - cultural support for high priests in a Science orthodoxy is rapidly waning. Degrees are starting to head towards obscurity.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    11. Re:Google by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The combination of dealing with two NPDs in among my in-laws (sister-in-law and niece's ex-husband)

      Were they evaluated by a psychologist and diagnosed with DPD, or is that just something you deduced yourself?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    12. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like how you think you can bullshit away inconvenient facts.

      Were they evaluated by a psychologist and diagnosed with DPD,

      In fact, yes, my niece's ex is such a sociopath that he actually demanded they both be evaluated as part of the custody dispute, because he thought he could fool a professional. He picked the evaluator - the best in New York city. He paid $60K for it - it was an extremely comprehensive, multiday process that involved both of them, the kids and the extended family. He couldn't fool the evaluator. He scored in the 98th percentile for psychopathic deviancy on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory.

      This is the same guy, who just like steve jobs, is raking in millions each year while the mother of his children had to go on food stamps because not only did he refuse to pay child support, he cancelled her and the children's health insurance, car insurance and baically refused to pay anything forcing her into pro per while he literally spent millions on his own divorce lawyers - another favorite tactic of NPDs known as financial abuse.

      So yeah, I know exactly what I'm talking about. You, on the other hand do not have a fucking clue and yet are so fucking sure of yourself. You know what describe that behavior? Dunning-Kruger.

    13. Re:Google by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      That's too bad.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    14. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it is. And yet it is not the point. You've been taken to NPD school, I sure hope you learned the lesson because its a civic emergency that most people in the country don't know how NPD works.

    15. Re: Google by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      No haha. You are still an idiot who tries to diagnose people psychologically that you've never even met or talked to. Not even a traines PhD psychologist will do that. And while we're at it, the only psychological conditions you seem to know happen to be the most trendy ones right now. Do you know any others?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    16. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Free Market is the greatest and only way to truly organise human society, innovation, and progress. If you don't like it, move to Cuba.

    17. Re: Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not even a traines PhD psychologist will do that.

      Uh, no. You are confused by the so-called "Goldwater Rule" which is an ethical guideline adopted by a large professional organization of psychologists after some made notable public diagnoses of Barry Goldwater. Don't conflate that guideline with it being impossible to make an evaluation of public behaviors. Many psychologists have already evaluated the public behaviors of people like Trump and come to the same conclusion.

      But you seem to be a hardcore ostrich, so I'm done crushing your Dunning-Kruger pathology. Enjoy your delusions of competence.

  9. They're not a democracy by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Informative

    they're a Kleptocracy at best. Their "president" just gave himself more or less unlimited power. You can't really ask them what they want.

    Thing is the world's turned a blind eye to China abusing it's people for the sake of cheap consumer goods since Nixon. Not sure why we care now.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:They're not a democracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Thing is the world's turned a blind eye to China abusing it's people for the sake of cheap consumer goods" - That's half true. But it's ~= its. Disappearing 10^6 Uighurs in labor camps (a low estimate) is a legitimate talking point / target of PR finger wagging. It's our shame that we buy the product anyway. We need to divest from these pariah states as soon as possible.

    2. Re:They're not a democracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not sure why we care now.

      Because the west generally believed that economic liberalization would lead to political liberalization as a function of a rising middle-class that would eventually demand more social freedom and would have the clout to make it happen. And maybe that was true. Maybe it still is true, but its definitely taking longer than most western leaders hoped (under Xi Jinping they have begun backsliding) and China's embrace of AI (authoritarian intelligence?) seems to be the oligarchy's attempt to prevent it.

      One thing you can't dispute is that the standard of living in China has dramatically increased over the last couple of decades. If there is a poster-child for economic liberalization, its China. In 1990 66% of the country lived in absolute poverty (less than $1.25/day) in 2013 its only 1.9%.

      That's not to say the its all wine and roses with capitalism, in fact I just posted this blunt criticism. But if you want to understand what's been happening, you gotta deal with reality.

    3. Re:They're not a democracy by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Opening up China made sense right up until the Tiananmen Square Massacre of 1989. I've no idea why they thought it would work after that. Well now they've built a monster and have to deal with it. Idiots.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    4. Re: They're not a democracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say that.. The world is doing what to the US first policy?

    5. Re:They're not a democracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't think China is not more socially free than they were in the past, then I don't know what you're seeing, or you simply do know much about Chinese history. Whether they would become a Western democratic clone, is totally different subject, and probably not remotely likely until China feels that their economic situation matches that of other developed countries. Politically there's the belief that there's still much work to get done, and democracies, with all tension of opposing sides wastes a lot of energy, and tons of things get undone when the opposing side comes in and unravels a lot of work, see e.g. Trump vs Obama.

    6. Re:They're not a democracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't think China is not more socially free than they were in the past,

      Not what I said. I said they've been backsliding under winnie-the-poo. They were make slow but steady progress until shortly before his ascent to the throne. They still had a long way to go even then.

      a Western democratic clone,

      Your phrasing echoes china's authoritarian propaganda that democracy isn't suitable for chinese people because of various hand-waving excuses. Maybe that works with people who don't know jackshit about china. That's not me.

    7. Re:They're not a democracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Socially they are more free. Perhaps POLITICALLY they may be not anymore freer. There's a clear difference between the two terms, although one can argue there has been some political changes, that have allowed even CAPITALISTS, to join the party. If you know Chinese history well then you would know what Chinese society was like pre 20th century. You would also know what social life was like in the early PRC era as well, and you would see that society is MUCH freer than it was back in the days.

      Since you don't seem to differentiate between the two terms social versus political, I'm not sure you should be commenting at all about these things because you appear clearly out of your depth.

      BTW. I never said that democracy wasn't suitable for Chinese people. Just that in terms of development, that Chinese political scientists generally think a ways to go before the government thinks there can be more political freedoms. The Chinese political scientists generally believe that modernization must occur first before political freedoms. Else you get something similar to India, a country that may pass as democratic but failed to modernize. And by modernize, I mean in a political/social sense, NOT in the technological sense.

  10. What do Chinese people want? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I still haven't found any article that talks about what most Chinese people want. All of these groups are speaking for them.

    Would you prefer a restricted Google or none at all?

    1. Re:What do Chinese people want? by cavreader · · Score: 1

      "All of these groups are speaking for them"
      They are speaking for them because protesting within China is not allowed. The only protests the Chinese government allows are those aimed at Japan.

    2. Re:What do Chinese people want? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you prefer a restricted Google or none at all?

      Would you prefer a Velvet covered boot or just the regular one to the face?

      Aren't false dichotomies fun you greedy SV asshole?

  11. Re: Maybe you should ask the Chinese what they wan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Big Brother Google's PR flacks always trot out this long, incoherent antisemitic screed whenever the Goog gets bad press. Sorry guys, nobody is fooled.

  12. Re:What do all humans want. by wolfheart111 · · Score: 0

    To be heard...

    --
    [($)]
  13. Re:What do all humans want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hear me .... Lib.com socio-slut fantasy. All humans want to fuck your sister. They do not care if you hear them doing-the-deed.

  14. Re:What do all humans want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Meh. Give most people a microphone and they'll complain no matter how good their life is.

  15. Re: What do all humans want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe because most people don't have that great of a life so the sample is skewed that way. On the bright side, we've progressed from willy-nilly torturing just anyone anymore. We reserve that for fewer cases and pretend it's not happening.

  16. English concern for China is well established by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These guys seem legit.

  17. Re: Maybe you should ask the Chinese what they wan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And our humanity needs more trump. You know there are more than one way to live right?

  18. Censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Censorship for al-Qaeda does not get noticed by anyone other than a few anons on 8chan. It is so audacious that no one believes they are doing it. Note the date on that post. That was uncovered two and a half years ago and no one has faced consequences, but people who talk about al-Qaeda are getting banned and deplatformed from financial services.

  19. Opening up China was always about cheap labor by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    nothing more, nothing less. American corporate interests were tired of paying American Union wages.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  20. What about Yahoo and Bing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is nobody protesting about Yahoo and Bing with their censored search in China, for years already?

  21. Re:What do all humans want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to be in a herd?

  22. New search engine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google censors everything here in the US so they should be good at making a search engine for china, I personally stooped using them a while ago first I went to bing and than I went to the new search engine Lookseek.com they have there own search results

  23. Google is doing the right thing and must get into by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just got back from china, not having google there is a giant pain. No decent maps in english, no good search. Google must get in there anyway they can, just because we dont agree with a government, it dont mean our companies should not do everything they can to get into the biggest markit in the world. China is so much more advanced tn US in so many things, in the last 20 years they build mega cities, more freeways, bulet trains and better infrastructure tn US. Google and every other company should respect local laws of the country they are in, the people in that country are happy with their laws and government and just because we dont agree with them it dont mean we are right.