Not sure how accurate it is. A reader of my blog (http://blogs.salon.com/0001319) in Beijing told me google was accessible when the Harvard Law site claimed it wasn't.
Google isn't a China-based ISP, the target of the pledge, and would not have been asked.
The pledge was supposed to limit the kind of content available to users in China. But Google is still available through yahoo. So the intent of the pledge has been completely circumvented. Whether through strict obedience to an order or through incompentence (or both) is anybody's guess.
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure how accurate it is. A reader of my blog (http://blogs.salon.com/0001319) in Beijing told me google was accessible when the Harvard Law site claimed it wasn't.
Google isn't a China-based ISP, the target of the pledge, and would not have been asked. The pledge was supposed to limit the kind of content available to users in China. But Google is still available through yahoo. So the intent of the pledge has been completely circumvented. Whether through strict obedience to an order or through incompentence (or both) is anybody's guess.
Yes, it does. This incident serves to show that the internet self-censorship pledge Yahoo took several weeks ago is virtually meaningless.