Jef Raskin Title Image
Download THE Download an Alpha Version of The Humane Environment
This is a very alpha release of THE. It runs on Mac OS 9 and on OS X under Classic (you may have to uninstall the CarbonLib extension).
Uh oh. Ease of use begins with ease of installation. Also, while in nitpicking mode, the writing on this page is apalling. For example, the editors name is shortened to THE, which reads as the word "the" when it should be written as T.H.E. or just typed out in its entirety. Had to read it more than once; very poor.
What is for sure is this; great ideas explode onto the software scene and are adopted very quickly. Ask the guy who created Konfabulator. Its pointless to talk about how something is wrong; especially something as good as OSX. Its much more useful and positive to create the alternative that you desire.
This editor sounds interesting; I wonder 1) why it only runs in classic mode, and 2) why everyone hasnt leapt on its concepts the way that they leap onto other great software metaphors.
Would you have had the French stay out of the American Revolution?
The French didnt trigger the American Revolution, they supported it once it was well underway. That to my simple mind, seems like a defensible action. Something is already well under way, and you give moral and material support to the side you think is right, after weighing up the potential consequences.
Uh oh. Are they a menace? They are certainly irritating, but are they a threat to us?
and someday it will fail.
And believe it or not, we might live to see it. I agree with you about speaking out against them; you should never ever shut up. I would add that its probably not a good idea to buy their goods if you dont like the PRC. All of these things individuals should do, and I agree with boycotts in general.
What I cannot support or stomach are these clowns that cant see the wood for the trees; who cant see that even though the PRC way of life is not for us, it is not within our rights to force them to change.
Of course, what we do with our money is our business. This is probably the most persuasive and powerful tool we all have to hand. A boycott of Chinese goods could persuade them to behave in different ways and boycotts are not force, in the way that pumping objectionable search results into Chinese browsers is a kind of force.
A pure Chinese instigated blodless revolution. Its possible, and when they do it (I think its inevitable) it will be legitimate, long lasting and good for everybody.
This seems to be the key difference that you are missing.
Not at all. The Chinese have already had a sucessful revolution to destroy their monarchy. They can do it again, and fix this present government if they think that it needs fixing.
As for the way Europeans can can discuss censorship laws, this is a consequence of the European citizenry not settling for anything less than what they want. They reap the benefits of that, and deserve the type of life that they get from this behaviour.
What is fascinating is that people from these Eurppean countries that forbid certain types of thought do not understand that looking from outside both perspectives, the Chinese censoring political thought and the Europeans doing the same are essentially the same action. The only difference is the type of philosophies that are banned.
Both perspectives ban thought because it is "dangerous to stability and order", "causes the potential for social unrest" and so on. The similarity in the language each uses to defend these actions is often surprising.
Try and take a look at if from the third perspective, if you can; it really throws it all into a different light.
This is the central problem of American attitudes to other cultures. "So be it" is one way of looking at it, and not the only way. If they can make Google or any service provider (Qualcomm, M$, Cisco, you name it) filter their content, then there is no "so be it", rather, "fix it or get out".
I am not argueing that the laws of a government are directly representative of the country governed; I am saying that it is the responsibility of the Chinese citizenry to change the way that they are governed, not Googles or the US Government's or yours or my responsibility.
I am saying that our way of life, and our personal lives are not ever to be traded so that the Chinese, Saudis, Kuwaitis or anyone else can be persuaded by force or otherwise to live the way that we do.
I am saying that if any of these countries, and the many others that I would rather die than live in want to change, it is for their respective citizenry to effect the change, and not for any outside third party to engineer it by cultural invasion.
That is why it is acceptable for Google and all those other countries to trade in China. If there is a revolution, then after its over, they can adapt to the new situation. If there is no revolution, then the Chinese citizens get the government they deserve, just like everyone else does.
Do you count Chinese who don't like the censorship as some kind of sellout race-traitors?
Post before toking on the pipe.
Who are these "real" Chinese that you speak of? All Chinese citisens have the power to execute a revolution, and that nation has done it before; your problem is you dont like the way it has all turned out. You cant concieve of a billion people all wanting to be communists, well, sorry to burst your bubble, but they DO want to be communists, and not you or anyone else has the power to stop them from being communists.
If they decide that they want to dump communism, they will come to that decision in their own time, organically, or at least that would be the best, least disruptive way for us. Pushing them is just stupid, but then we can see what stupid foreign policy looks like and the main source of its chaotic consequences every day on the news....at least in Europe we can.
You are exercising your freedom of choice to not submit to their system. The unfortunate souls born in the PRC (People's Republic of China) don't have that same freedom of choice that you are exercising yourself.
That is my right. I choose to live here rather than say, Dubai, where such rights dont exist. The people there or anywhere can live the way that they want; what I do not do is assume that my choice or philosophy is right for everyone.
You say that 'they can live in whatever way they like'. Really? The 'they' you are referring to must be the elite few that really run the PRC.
No. The "man in the street" in China can spill their own blood if they want to live in another way. They should not rely on Google, USA inc or any other outside force to do thier dirty work for them. If they want a revolution they can have it. If not, then they have to live in the system that they have inherited.
I wonder if you would risk your own life and the life of your entire family to make China "free". Thats the true test; wether or not you would forfeit your own life for those people, who you dont know anything about.
If you are a Chinese citizen, I stand corrected in advance about you not knowing anything about them, but, even if you are a Chinese citizen, you have no business asking the USA to come and solve your problems, rather like the Iraqi "dissidents" like Mr. Chalbi who only have their own lust for power at heart.
Your duty is to go to your own country, make your case, fight your own war and take the consequences, whatever the outcome may be.
It's ridiculous only if you believe that the American way of life is the only way, and the right way for people to live and organize themselvs.
The Chinese on the other hand believe a different thing. They belive, to take from your quote, that a governments legitimacy has nothing to do with democratic elections "conducted in an uncensored arena of free expression".
On whatever planet that may theoretically take place.
Now, I accept that they believe that, live by that, and good luck to them. As long as they dont try and make me live by their rules, they can live in whatever way they like.
Some people on the other hand, are incapable of understanding that the ways of other countries are, whilst being unsuitable for us, perfectly legitimate ways of self organization. They tend to be people who have never travelled extensively, perhaps speak only one language, and are generally insular and culturally unexposed. In other words, its not their fault that they are limited in their understanding of other cultures, and its not their fault that they come to these wrongheaded conclusions.
It doesnt make them less wrong I'm afraid.
And as for "nothing" happening to you if you post "subversive" text on Slashdot, think back to the Kuro5hin poster who got a visit from the FBI simply because he posted on that site.
Or this guy who got a visit just for speaking in a gym.
Why? Because you merely believe that they should have access to the same type of sources that you do? That is not a reason why a culture should be changed via pressure from a company based in another jurisdiction.
How could anyone not want to know that certain sources are being systematically hidden from them (and in particular, which sources)?
You mean, "how could they possibly not want to be like me?" Believe it or not, there are billions of people who dont live like you, dont want to, and have made this choice conciously. The first step to understanding another persons culture is to accept that they can be different to you AND equal. As soon as you do this, you cannot talk about changing China to suit yourself, and your personally held opinions.
I don't think it's calling someone stupid to point out that he or she deserves the same access to information (even if some of that information is imperfect) that the rest of us enjoy.
By saying that they deserve access to what you get, you are superimposing your own standards on people you dont even know. There are cultures where unlimited access to, for example, pr0n is not something to be enjoyed, but something to be stomped on, and supressed. They are not wrong for trying to block it and anything else that they dont want, and Google is not evil for obeying those laws.
Knowing the degree of censorship is helpful to promoting change even if everyone in society knows, in general, that censorship is occurring.
The Chiese do not need you to pat them on the head like children, in a "there there little Chinese man we will make you free" fashion. They can make their own decisions, come to ther own conclusions about how they want to organize themselvs, and then carry out their plans, all without your approval or consent.
To say that change needs to be "promoted" is paternalistic, nauseating and very wrong headed.
It is certainly not "OK" to "point out that censorship in China is a bad thing". The Majority of Europeans think that fining CBS $900,000 dollars for inadvertantly showing a female breast on TV is utterly insane, but its your business if you are an american, and no one elses. I brought in the 911 example because clearly, Amerca (where Google is from) has plenty of its own problems with censorship and media control. Rounding on Google for conplying with local censorship laws in another country while American society is in thrall to its own tight media control is a little...silly dont you think?
All Google has to do is guarantee that in the USA UK etc their results are not censored in any way.
Wether you take their word for it or not is another matter, but it is perfectly possible for them to run different services for each territory.
The one that you and I think is best is the "pure" uncensored index, and we use that one. The other people with different standards use the other ones.
Google remains on top, we get what we need, they get what they want, and we all live peacefully next to each other.
Do you think that the Chinese are so stupid that they need Google (or you for that matter) to tell them that they are not "free"?
And as for this "false picture" being presented to the Chiese by their government, your time would be much better spent correcting those people that think, for example, that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 911.
I'll leave it to you to compare who is free and who is not, who is getting uncensored news and who is not.
What I am saying is if Chinese society is not adhereing to Maxist norms, it is their responsibility to fix it not yours.
What you consider evil, when it happens in your country, is your responsibility, not anyone elses. If that were not the case, the EU should "rightly" invade and overthrow the US governemt because it practices the death penalty.
As soon as you take responsibility for policing someone elses problems, you end up with your own society being damaged. We cant even trust our own governments to organize themselvs without corruption, incomptence and negligence, what makes anyone think that they are competent enough to solve the problems of Chiese society? Its just absurd.
The extreme of that is when we tolerate genocide because it's their nation.
Its certainly true that western governments pick and choose which genocide they will prevent. This however is another, separate question to the one of Google censoring news for China, and all the other companies working there under Chinese government regulations.
This is the thing I really dislike about many right-wing libertarians (you seem to belong to this group).
That was a bad guess.
Essentially promoting social darwinism/economical exploitation/etc, but hiding this all behind the nice word "freedom".
False.
Freedom, i.e. economical freedom for those who have money or freedom to suppress others for those who have power (not suprisingly, being rich and being mighty correlates strongly).
These are your ideas which you are superimposing on what I posted.
As for being honest, its your turn to be honest, since Ive already done that.
Are you willing to give up your way of life, and possibly your own life and the lives of your relatives so that people somewhere else in the world can live by your personal ideas of what is right and wrong? Because that is precisely what we are talking about - the death of your way of life and the possible physical death of your family, just to satisfy your "philosophy".
If you are willing to make that sacrifice, then by all means, fly to China personally and organize their next revolution, but do not expect everyone else in the USA / UK or anywhere else to sacrifice their lives for your ideas. And dont expect us to break you out of gaol when they lock you up for counter revolutionarly activities. Or espionage / sabotage.
If the Chinese want a revolution, then they should organise their own one. They are not pets for you to pat on the head. They are not less wise or insightful than you. They are perfectly capable of solving their own problems and finding their own solutions.
This is what I am talking about. Your paternalistic twaddle pulls your neighbors and fellow countrymen into a death spiral; better that you physically go to these places unilaterally and without the consent, order or approval of your government to instigate the changes you belive to be needed rather than risk the very values that you think are so perfect by allowing your government to dirty its hands in this sort of immoral meddling.
And as for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it is for the UN to enforce and police its resolutions and treaties, not the self appointed, unnacountable, mad dog, loose cannon, "policemen to the world".
under a fascist-communist state that jails, tortures, blackmails, censors, and executes them.
The American government does all of this to its citizens; how is any of that different from the Chinese governments behaviour? The Chinese also invaded and colonised Tibet because "Religion is poision" and the Tibetans needed to be "freed from the corrupt Tibetan regime" keeping Tibetans in thrall to irrational superstition.
Its precisely the same, in every way, down to the fradulent "elections" used to engineer consent, Falung Gong / Branch Davidians, Xinhua / Fox News...these are paralell societies that are rapidly converging.
The Chinese people have the government that they deserve; thats why its possible to talk about "The Chinese" in this case; it is the Chinese people and culture that has produced and which sustains their "repressive" government.
The real question that you have to ask yourself is this; are you willing to permanently give up your way of life to "free" the Chinese, Iraqis, Saudis, Rock& Roll hungry blog crazy Iranians and anyone else that does not live and think as you do? Already the USA has been changed beyond recognition as a direct result of its insane "live as we do or die" foreign policy, to the point that the USA now looks more like Soviet era Russia than the America that we all loved and admired. Internal passports, rock stars pulled off of planes and deported as subversives...who would have thought it possible?
If you are honest, you will say that your life (and your way of life) is not worth giving up so that the Chinese can have uncensored Google. Once you make that decision, the only tool left to you is a boycott. Thankfully, boycotts work, and you can do it. This is of course, your personal choice, and Sergey & co have their own decisions and judgements to make.
They are right to go to China. If there is (another) Chinese revolution, of whatever shape, you can bet that the companies that were there before that revolution would take advantage of thier carefuly cultivated contacts and networks to entrench themselvs, and frankly its probably a "better" thing that a company like Google is there. Or would you prefer another large software comapny to dominate a new China?
Personally, I don't like the fact that a company which wears its ethics on its sleeve, so to mangle the metaphor, by stating "Don't be evil" as its company motto would self censor to fit into the demands of a foreign government.
Your ethics and the ethics of the Chinese are not the same. Just because you think its good that news is not filtered it does not automagically follow that this is the correct way for every society to organize itself.
It is precisely this sort of "we know best for everyone" thinking that starts wars. Your country is your business, and other peoples countries are their businesses respectively.
If you dont like the way the Chinese organize themselvs, dont spend your money on goods made there. That is your choice, and your very great power, but dont expect people to adopt your morality, standards, ethics or anything else for that matter, because what they do is not your affair. There are enough problems in the world without more international meddling from "one size fits all" people who think they know whats good for everyone.
Google by adapting to Chinese society are in fact being absolutely "not evil". They are showing true respect for Chinese society and sensitivities, which is precisely the way that all humans should interact with each other.
Finally, there is no such thing as "the fundamental freedoms that are the basis of the internet". The basis of the internet are a set of protocols and nothing more. How the Chinese and for that matter the Saudis see the internet is just as valid as how you see it. IMHO that is its true beauty.
Re:Philosophical v. practical origins of IP law
on
Is IP Property?
·
· Score: 1
Practically, when we speak of "freely benefitting from someone else's intellectual property rights" there is a problem when it comes to people with a huge business advantage over the individual.
When someone who is absolutely huge, like Raytheon for example, and can make use of an individuals patent without paying a royalty, the individual is hurt, and Raytheon gets bigger. Without IP rights they could do this with and to all the small inventors and developers, and that is clearly against the natural rights and sense of fairness of all right thinking individuals.
Intellectual Property has to be a right, as a form of property, to protect the small inventor against the huge corporation, otherwise we will come to a situation where only huge corporations make money off of innovation because they have such a massive head start over the little guy.
Just because there are IP rights defined in law it does not immediately follow that you cannot dispose of those rights in any way that you like; including and not limited to for example, releasing your rights under a GPL licence in the case of software. Without IP rights ensrhined in law, once again, it would be impossible to mount an attack on a company with a monopoly on operating systems. The GPL is enforcable. IP rights are needed as a protection for societey as a whole. IP property rights equally and reasonably applied to all is the best way to form a free and creative society.
And in case you need it spelled out, software patents are un-reasonable.
Slashdot Mirror
Of putting a snake's tounge at the end of a pool cue?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!
Uh oh. Ease of use begins with ease of installation. Also, while in nitpicking mode, the writing on this page is apalling. For example, the editors name is shortened to THE, which reads as the word "the" when it should be written as T.H.E. or just typed out in its entirety. Had to read it more than once; very poor.
What is for sure is this; great ideas explode onto the software scene and are adopted very quickly. Ask the guy who created Konfabulator. Its pointless to talk about how something is wrong; especially something as good as OSX. Its much more useful and positive to create the alternative that you desire.
This editor sounds interesting; I wonder 1) why it only runs in classic mode, and 2) why everyone hasnt leapt on its concepts the way that they leap onto other great software metaphors.
And if there's anything wrong, you can ssh in.
And much much later, you can sssssshhhhhhhhhhh them up when they bawl.
You can ping them when they are naughty.
If you are feeling gentle, you use tsh.
When you need REAL discipline, you use bash.
the next target will be painted on our foreheads
That space is reserved for the mark of the beast.
Thats why they have to enact these laws.
Just like the days of cassettte
You know its right!
How' bout just thinking for yourself and not worrying if things should be black or white?
You go first.
Rubbish.
This has nothing to do with "what its like to live under a dictatorship".
Would you have had the French stay out of the American Revolution?
The French didnt trigger the American Revolution, they supported it once it was well underway. That to my simple mind, seems like a defensible action. Something is already well under way, and you give moral and material support to the side you think is right, after weighing up the potential consequences.
Did you oppose the war in Iraq?
Which one?
I think we agree on that.
We absolutely and totally concur on that.
the menace of the PRC
Uh oh. Are they a menace? They are certainly irritating, but are they a threat to us?
and someday it will fail.
And believe it or not, we might live to see it. I agree with you about speaking out against them; you should never ever shut up. I would add that its probably not a good idea to buy their goods if you dont like the PRC. All of these things individuals should do, and I agree with boycotts in general.
What I cannot support or stomach are these clowns that cant see the wood for the trees; who cant see that even though the PRC way of life is not for us, it is not within our rights to force them to change.
Of course, what we do with our money is our business. This is probably the most persuasive and powerful tool we all have to hand. A boycott of Chinese goods could persuade them to behave in different ways and boycotts are not force, in the way that pumping objectionable search results into Chinese browsers is a kind of force.
A pure Chinese instigated blodless revolution. Its possible, and when they do it (I think its inevitable) it will be legitimate, long lasting and good for everybody.
This seems to be the key difference that you are missing.
Not at all. The Chinese have already had a sucessful revolution to destroy their monarchy. They can do it again, and fix this present government if they think that it needs fixing.
As for the way Europeans can can discuss censorship laws, this is a consequence of the European citizenry not settling for anything less than what they want. They reap the benefits of that, and deserve the type of life that they get from this behaviour.
What is fascinating is that people from these Eurppean countries that forbid certain types of thought do not understand that looking from outside both perspectives, the Chinese censoring political thought and the Europeans doing the same are essentially the same action. The only difference is the type of philosophies that are banned.
Both perspectives ban thought because it is "dangerous to stability and order", "causes the potential for social unrest" and so on. The similarity in the language each uses to defend these actions is often surprising.
Try and take a look at if from the third perspective, if you can; it really throws it all into a different light.
I get a choice between Hot Tiger Penis soup or Wu Tang sword lessons.
Once per week.
so be it.
This is the central problem of American attitudes to other cultures. "So be it" is one way of looking at it, and not the only way. If they can make Google or any service provider (Qualcomm, M$, Cisco, you name it) filter their content, then there is no "so be it", rather, "fix it or get out".
I am not argueing that the laws of a government are directly representative of the country governed; I am saying that it is the responsibility of the Chinese citizenry to change the way that they are governed, not Googles or the US Government's or yours or my responsibility.
I am saying that our way of life, and our personal lives are not ever to be traded so that the Chinese, Saudis, Kuwaitis or anyone else can be persuaded by force or otherwise to live the way that we do.
I am saying that if any of these countries, and the many others that I would rather die than live in want to change, it is for their respective citizenry to effect the change, and not for any outside third party to engineer it by cultural invasion.
That is why it is acceptable for Google and all those other countries to trade in China. If there is a revolution, then after its over, they can adapt to the new situation. If there is no revolution, then the Chinese citizens get the government they deserve, just like everyone else does.
Do you count Chinese who don't like the censorship as some kind of sellout race-traitors?
Post before toking on the pipe.
Who are these "real" Chinese that you speak of? All Chinese citisens have the power to execute a revolution, and that nation has done it before; your problem is you dont like the way it has all turned out. You cant concieve of a billion people all wanting to be communists, well, sorry to burst your bubble, but they DO want to be communists, and not you or anyone else has the power to stop them from being communists.
If they decide that they want to dump communism, they will come to that decision in their own time, organically, or at least that would be the best, least disruptive way for us. Pushing them is just stupid, but then we can see what stupid foreign policy looks like and the main source of its chaotic consequences every day on the news....at least in Europe we can.
You are exercising your freedom of choice to not submit to their system. The unfortunate souls born in the PRC (People's Republic of China) don't have that same freedom of choice that you are exercising yourself.
That is my right. I choose to live here rather than say, Dubai, where such rights dont exist. The people there or anywhere can live the way that they want; what I do not do is assume that my choice or philosophy is right for everyone.
You say that 'they can live in whatever way they like'. Really? The 'they' you are referring to must be the elite few that really run the PRC.
No. The "man in the street" in China can spill their own blood if they want to live in another way. They should not rely on Google, USA inc or any other outside force to do thier dirty work for them. If they want a revolution they can have it. If not, then they have to live in the system that they have inherited.
I wonder if you would risk your own life and the life of your entire family to make China "free". Thats the true test; wether or not you would forfeit your own life for those people, who you dont know anything about.
If you are a Chinese citizen, I stand corrected in advance about you not knowing anything about them, but, even if you are a Chinese citizen, you have no business asking the USA to come and solve your problems, rather like the Iraqi "dissidents" like Mr. Chalbi who only have their own lust for power at heart.
Your duty is to go to your own country, make your case, fight your own war and take the consequences, whatever the outcome may be.
It's ridiculous only if you believe that the American way of life is the only way, and the right way for people to live and organize themselvs.
The Chinese on the other hand believe a different thing. They belive, to take from your quote, that a governments legitimacy has nothing to do with democratic elections "conducted in an uncensored arena of free expression".
On whatever planet that may theoretically take place.
Now, I accept that they believe that, live by that, and good luck to them. As long as they dont try and make me live by their rules, they can live in whatever way they like.
Some people on the other hand, are incapable of understanding that the ways of other countries are, whilst being unsuitable for us, perfectly legitimate ways of self organization. They tend to be people who have never travelled extensively, perhaps speak only one language, and are generally insular and culturally unexposed. In other words, its not their fault that they are limited in their understanding of other cultures, and its not their fault that they come to these wrongheaded conclusions.
It doesnt make them less wrong I'm afraid.
And as for "nothing" happening to you if you post "subversive" text on Slashdot, think back to the Kuro5hin poster who got a visit from the FBI simply because he posted on that site.
Or this guy who got a visit just for speaking in a gym.
It would be better if that were apparent.
Why? Because you merely believe that they should have access to the same type of sources that you do? That is not a reason why a culture should be changed via pressure from a company based in another jurisdiction.
How could anyone not want to know that certain sources are being systematically hidden from them (and in particular, which sources)?
You mean, "how could they possibly not want to be like me?" Believe it or not, there are billions of people who dont live like you, dont want to, and have made this choice conciously. The first step to understanding another persons culture is to accept that they can be different to you AND equal. As soon as you do this, you cannot talk about changing China to suit yourself, and your personally held opinions.
I don't think it's calling someone stupid to point out that he or she deserves the same access to information (even if some of that information is imperfect) that the rest of us enjoy.
By saying that they deserve access to what you get, you are superimposing your own standards on people you dont even know. There are cultures where unlimited access to, for example, pr0n is not something to be enjoyed, but something to be stomped on, and supressed. They are not wrong for trying to block it and anything else that they dont want, and Google is not evil for obeying those laws.
Knowing the degree of censorship is helpful to promoting change even if everyone in society knows, in general, that censorship is occurring.
The Chiese do not need you to pat them on the head like children, in a "there there little Chinese man we will make you free" fashion. They can make their own decisions, come to ther own conclusions about how they want to organize themselvs, and then carry out their plans, all without your approval or consent.
To say that change needs to be "promoted" is paternalistic, nauseating and very wrong headed.
It is certainly not "OK" to "point out that censorship in China is a bad thing". The Majority of Europeans think that fining CBS $900,000 dollars for inadvertantly showing a female breast on TV is utterly insane, but its your business if you are an american, and no one elses. I brought in the 911 example because clearly, Amerca (where Google is from) has plenty of its own problems with censorship and media control. Rounding on Google for conplying with local censorship laws in another country while American society is in thrall to its own tight media control is a little...silly dont you think?
Not that you were doing that.
That is utter rubbish.
All Google has to do is guarantee that in the USA UK etc their results are not censored in any way.
Wether you take their word for it or not is another matter, but it is perfectly possible for them to run different services for each territory.
The one that you and I think is best is the "pure" uncensored index, and we use that one. The other people with different standards use the other ones.
Google remains on top, we get what we need, they get what they want, and we all live peacefully next to each other.
That is the epitome of "not evil"
Do you think that the Chinese are so stupid that they need Google (or you for that matter) to tell them that they are not "free"?
And as for this "false picture" being presented to the Chiese by their government, your time would be much better spent correcting those people that think, for example, that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 911.
I'll leave it to you to compare who is free and who is not, who is getting uncensored news and who is not.
Or is that a bad idea?!
What I am saying is if Chinese society is not adhereing to Maxist norms, it is their responsibility to fix it not yours.
What you consider evil, when it happens in your country, is your responsibility, not anyone elses. If that were not the case, the EU should "rightly" invade and overthrow the US governemt because it practices the death penalty.
As soon as you take responsibility for policing someone elses problems, you end up with your own society being damaged. We cant even trust our own governments to organize themselvs without corruption, incomptence and negligence, what makes anyone think that they are competent enough to solve the problems of Chiese society? Its just absurd.
The extreme of that is when we tolerate genocide because it's their nation.
Its certainly true that western governments pick and choose which genocide they will prevent. This however is another, separate question to the one of Google censoring news for China, and all the other companies working there under Chinese government regulations.
Best not to mix these two scenarios up.
This is the thing I really dislike about many right-wing libertarians (you seem to belong to this group).
That was a bad guess.
Essentially promoting social darwinism/economical exploitation/etc, but hiding this all behind the nice word "freedom".
False.
Freedom, i.e. economical freedom for those who have money or freedom to suppress others for those who have power (not suprisingly, being rich and being mighty correlates strongly).
These are your ideas which you are superimposing on what I posted.
As for being honest, its your turn to be honest, since Ive already done that.
Are you willing to give up your way of life, and possibly your own life and the lives of your relatives so that people somewhere else in the world can live by your personal ideas of what is right and wrong? Because that is precisely what we are talking about - the death of your way of life and the possible physical death of your family, just to satisfy your "philosophy".
If you are willing to make that sacrifice, then by all means, fly to China personally and organize their next revolution, but do not expect everyone else in the USA / UK or anywhere else to sacrifice their lives for your ideas. And dont expect us to break you out of gaol when they lock you up for counter revolutionarly activities. Or espionage / sabotage.
If the Chinese want a revolution, then they should organise their own one. They are not pets for you to pat on the head. They are not less wise or insightful than you. They are perfectly capable of solving their own problems and finding their own solutions.
This is what I am talking about. Your paternalistic twaddle pulls your neighbors and fellow countrymen into a death spiral; better that you physically go to these places unilaterally and without the consent, order or approval of your government to instigate the changes you belive to be needed rather than risk the very values that you think are so perfect by allowing your government to dirty its hands in this sort of immoral meddling.
And as for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it is for the UN to enforce and police its resolutions and treaties, not the self appointed, unnacountable, mad dog, loose cannon, "policemen to the world".
No, I would not force liberty on anyone
Sadly the US Govt. doesnt agree with you.
under a fascist-communist state that jails, tortures, blackmails, censors, and executes them.
The American government does all of this to its citizens; how is any of that different from the Chinese governments behaviour? The Chinese also invaded and colonised Tibet because "Religion is poision" and the Tibetans needed to be "freed from the corrupt Tibetan regime" keeping Tibetans in thrall to irrational superstition.
Its precisely the same, in every way, down to the fradulent "elections" used to engineer consent, Falung Gong / Branch Davidians, Xinhua / Fox News...these are paralell societies that are rapidly converging.
The Chinese people have the government that they deserve; thats why its possible to talk about "The Chinese" in this case; it is the Chinese people and culture that has produced and which sustains their "repressive" government.
The real question that you have to ask yourself is this; are you willing to permanently give up your way of life to "free" the Chinese, Iraqis, Saudis, Rock& Roll hungry blog crazy Iranians and anyone else that does not live and think as you do? Already the USA has been changed beyond recognition as a direct result of its insane "live as we do or die" foreign policy, to the point that the USA now looks more like Soviet era Russia than the America that we all loved and admired. Internal passports, rock stars pulled off of planes and deported as subversives...who would have thought it possible?
If you are honest, you will say that your life (and your way of life) is not worth giving up so that the Chinese can have uncensored Google. Once you make that decision, the only tool left to you is a boycott. Thankfully, boycotts work, and you can do it. This is of course, your personal choice, and Sergey & co have their own decisions and judgements to make.
They are right to go to China. If there is (another) Chinese revolution, of whatever shape, you can bet that the companies that were there before that revolution would take advantage of thier carefuly cultivated contacts and networks to entrench themselvs, and frankly its probably a "better" thing that a company like Google is there. Or would you prefer another large software comapny to dominate a new China?
Personally, I don't like the fact that a company which wears its ethics on its sleeve, so to mangle the metaphor, by stating "Don't be evil" as its company motto would self censor to fit into the demands of a foreign government.
Your ethics and the ethics of the Chinese are not the same. Just because you think its good that news is not filtered it does not automagically follow that this is the correct way for every society to organize itself.
It is precisely this sort of "we know best for everyone" thinking that starts wars. Your country is your business, and other peoples countries are their businesses respectively.
If you dont like the way the Chinese organize themselvs, dont spend your money on goods made there. That is your choice, and your very great power, but dont expect people to adopt your morality, standards, ethics or anything else for that matter, because what they do is not your affair. There are enough problems in the world without more international meddling from "one size fits all" people who think they know whats good for everyone.
Google by adapting to Chinese society are in fact being absolutely "not evil". They are showing true respect for Chinese society and sensitivities, which is precisely the way that all humans should interact with each other.
Finally, there is no such thing as "the fundamental freedoms that are the basis of the internet". The basis of the internet are a set of protocols and nothing more. How the Chinese and for that matter the Saudis see the internet is just as valid as how you see it. IMHO that is its true beauty.
Because you cannot take woman into space.
Practically, when we speak of "freely benefitting from someone else's intellectual property rights" there is a problem when it comes to people with a huge business advantage over the individual.
When someone who is absolutely huge, like Raytheon for example, and can make use of an individuals patent without paying a royalty, the individual is hurt, and Raytheon gets bigger. Without IP rights they could do this with and to all the small inventors and developers, and that is clearly against the natural rights and sense of fairness of all right thinking individuals.
Intellectual Property has to be a right, as a form of property, to protect the small inventor against the huge corporation, otherwise we will come to a situation where only huge corporations make money off of innovation because they have such a massive head start over the little guy.
Just because there are IP rights defined in law it does not immediately follow that you cannot dispose of those rights in any way that you like; including and not limited to for example, releasing your rights under a GPL licence in the case of software. Without IP rights ensrhined in law, once again, it would be impossible to mount an attack on a company with a monopoly on operating systems. The GPL is enforcable. IP rights are needed as a protection for societey as a whole. IP property rights equally and reasonably applied to all is the best way to form a free and creative society.
And in case you need it spelled out, software patents are un-reasonable.