7162430
story
Comments: 214 +- Search: Bing Censoring All Simplified Chinese Language Queries on Saturday November 21, @05:08AM
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topiccensorship.gif); width:44px; height:55px;
censorship
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicms.gif); width:75px; height:55px;
microsoft
boggis writes "Nicholas Kristof, a New York Times journalist, is calling for a boycott of Microsoft's Bing. They have censored search requests at the request of the Chinese Government (like certain others). The difference is that Bing has censored all searches done anywhere in simplified Chinese characters (the characters used in mainland China). This means that a Chinese speaker searching for Tiananmen anywhere in the world now gets the impression that it is just a lovely place to visit."
Related Stories
It is sweet to let the mind unbend on occasion.
-- Quintus Horatius Flaccus (Horace)
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.
contrast (Score:5, Funny)
Re:contrast (Score:5, Informative)
Google also censor results in China. Search for Tiannamen Square or Falun Gong on google.cn and you find just the same whitewashed results as with Bing. The difference is merely one of implementation. Google has done it by censoring the results in their country-specific site. Bing have done it by censoring results when you search using a language form popular in mainland China. It's hard to say conclusively which is least effective. With Google you can search via one of their international sites to get around it. With Bing you can enter search terms in a different language such as English. Both are, of course, subject to the Great Firewall of China interfering when you follow results to places like Wikipedia etc. which is not the fault of either Google or Bing.
So in summary, Google innovates and Microsoft copies. Not much change there, but unfortunately they have both sold out to the Chinese government. Neither is clean.
Parent
Some quasi-scientific experiments (Score:5, Informative)
Assuming we have an Internet surfer searching for information about Tiananmen square.
Inputs can be "Tiananmen" or tian1an2men2 in simplified Chinese (which will not render on /. due to missing UTF8 support)
Compare the Google returns for searches
http://www.google.de/search?hl=cn&safe=off&q=tiananmen&btnG=Search [google.de]
http://www.google.cn/search?hl=cn&safe=off&q=tiananmen&btnG=Search [google.cn]
http://images.google.de/images?hl=cn&safe=off&q=tiananmen&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi [google.de]
http://images.google.cn/images?hl=cn&safe=off&q=tiananmen&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi [google.cn]
(note the difference in the TLD, safe search is off in all cases)
Wildly different results, the CN domain returning no image of Tank Man and the DE domain returns nothing BUT him.
Trying that again in traditional Chinese:
http://images.google.de/images?hl=en&safe=off&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&start=0 [google.de]
http://images.google.cn/images?hl=en&safe=off&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&start=0 [google.cn]
Results almost identical, with only a slight variation in their order.
http://www.google.de/search?hl=en&safe=off&um=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=iw&start=0 [google.de]
http://www.google.cn/search?hl=en&safe=off&um=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=iw&start=0 [google.cn]
Results again wildly different. Both searches now return Chinese content, but the DE domain prominently features a YouTube link to our good old friend Tank Man, while the CN domain prominently features a city map and Baidu links, which are guaranteed to not contain something about Tank Man, I can assure you.
This get's more pronounced if we search for Tiananmen in Chinese AND the year number 1989, which simply must return some content about the protests if the search engine itself is any good.
http://images.google.de/images?hl=en&safe=off&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%201989&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi [google.de]
http://images.google.cn/images?hl=en&safe=off&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%201989&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi [google.cn]
Same result: both searches return pages entirely in Chinese, but the DE domain return a Chinese photo of the protests first and the CN domain returning only photos of The Party Leaders and happy soldiers.
Let's compare the results with other TLDs
Russia:
Parent
Re:Some quasi-scientific experiments (Score:4, Informative)
http://images.google.de/images?hl=en&safe=off&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&start=0 [google.de]
http://images.google.cn/images?hl=en&safe=off&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&start=0 [google.cn]
I don't speak (or read) Chinese but I do know Japanese and can recognise simplified vs traditional characters. I'm pretty sure that search is in simplified characters. I replaced the "men" with the Japanese "mon" which is identical to the traditional Chinese "men" and the results changed significantly. Link:
http://images.google.de/images?hl=en&safe=off&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80&btnG=Search+images [google.de]
Parent
Re:Some quasi-scientific experiments (Score:5, Informative)
IThe footer of google.cn reads "According to local laws, regulations and policies, some search results are not shown." (google translation)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The gist is that google, ms and yahoo can't do a damn thing about it. Their choice is either to abide chinese law or not operate in the market. Idealism not withstanding, china is the fastest growing market and if the day should come when search is NOT censored by the government, they will need an established presence in the market or they'll merely be also-rans.
In the meantime we all get treated to the spectacle of exactly how newspeak will be implemented. The only question remaining is whether the future
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
>>>Google has done it by censoring the results in their country-specific site. Bing have done it by censoring results when you search using a language form popular in mainland China.
>>>
The Microsoft solution strikes me as the quick-and-dirty solution, while the Google method shows more advanced programming.
And for those that say, "Google shouldn't censor results," then you are naive. If Google did not censor, then Chinese government would block them completely and MS would quickly obtain
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And for those that say, "Google shouldn't censor results," then you are naive.
Some people say Google shouldn't censor results because it is immoral to do so. If it is immoral to censor results, the fact that MS will gain dominance in China is irrelevant. So is the fact that failure to censor will hurt Google's bottom line. Most moral realists believe that moral norms trump other norms, so if it is immoral for Google to censor, then they shouldn't censor.
Note: I'm not necessarily in that camp. I'm not sure whether censoring results in China is morally prohibited or not. I'm just
Re:contrast (Score:5, Insightful)
Logically, accepting "someone else may do it if I don't" as a justification for your own immoral behavior guarantees a state of immoral behaviour existing. The only possibility of achieving a state without the immoral behavior is to not engage in it oneself. Yes, you are exchanging a certainty of their being immorality for a possibility that there might not be, but some of us consider that progress. And you might be surprised what an example can achieve sometimes.
My take on things.
Parent
Re:contrast (Score:4, Interesting)
>>>Some people say Google shouldn't censor results because it is immoral to do so. If it is immoral to censor results, the fact that MS will gain dominance in China is irrelevant.
>>>
Not really. You have the choice of two evils:
(1) Google and Microsoft coexist. They both censor but at least there's competition and choice.
(2) Google is blocked from China. Microsoft is allowed in because they "play ball". MS quickly becomes a monopoly.
Option 1 has one evil (censorship). Option 2 has two evils (censorship and a corporate monopoly). I choose the lesser of the two evils which is option 1, and I suspect Google has the same thought process. ----- I also recognize that in politics, things change over time. Sometimes in the future I expect that Google will pressure China to remove the censorship from search results. Google can not exert that pressure if they are not in China.
>>>I'm just trying to explain why your claim that others are naive is insulting and false.
(shrug) It's not my fault the opposite side didn't bother to think it through. It's a bit like the Slavery protester John Brown, who believed all he had to do was grab a military base and the slaves would rise up. He didn't think it through either, and ended-up dead
Parent
Re:contrast (Score:5, Insightful)
Google also censor results in China. Search for Tiannamen Square or Falun Gong on google.cn and you find just the same whitewashed results as with Bing. The difference is merely one of implementation.
I don't agree. I think there is a clear moral difference. Google seem to be doing the minimum they need to do to comply with Chinese law - restricting what is seen via the (effectively Chinese govt. owned) .cn domain in China. MS are apparently censoring everything that is seen by anyone using simplified Chinese anywhere in the world. Yes, they could use another language - if they even release that some search results are 'going missing'. So MS get the 'evil' award in this case because they are in practice censoring far beyond what even Chinese law requires.
Parent
JEE (Score:4, Funny)
"Just Enough Evil"?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If Congress passes a law requiring google to censor the internet, then google would do it. I would not expect anything less. They would probably put a lot of money into trying to have the law repealed, but they would follow it while it was legitimate.
Are you saying that if Congress passed a law requiring censorship (which is not a very far-fetched idea. Maybe not to the extent that China does, but I would not be surprised if there were some sort of law passed in the next 20 years that required somethin
Evil? (Score:3, Insightful)
From TFA:
Think about this. Most web sites that are in simplified Chinese are probably in... Wait for it... China!
So I'm guessing that since discussion of topics contrary to the state agenda will get you thrown in jail, that most sites written in simplifi
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Okay, you're posting all over the place with this stuff. What evidence do you have that Bing is censoring results? Google admits that they censor results. Microsoft say that they do not. So back up what you're saying with something, please. TFA hasn't held up. It makes sense that if the vast majority of online presence in a particular language is in mainland China where online censorship is the rule, that the results
Re: (Score:3)
What were your search terms?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:contrast (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, this gets more interesting having looked into this more closely. It's just about possible that Microsoft is being less evil than Google in this case. Whilst Google admits to deliberate censorship both on its google.cn site and (to a much lesser extent but still to some extent) on its google.com site (they eliminate some Falun Gong results from their image search - they admit this), Microsoft are pleading a different case. Basically, Microsoft have stated that the way their search engine works is to return results with a preference toward sites in the language searched in. Naturally when you search in simplified Chinese characters, which are overwhelmingly used in mainland China as opposed to places like Hong Kong and Taiwan which use the complex form, most of the results in that language are going to be from mainland China. And mainland Chinese websites are, well, not going to be essays about Tiannamen Square or have many pro-Falun Gong material.
I condemn censorship, but Microsoft's explanation is eminently plausible. In fact, if you thought about it, it's a natural consequence of returning search results in a particular language if that language is more or less exclusive to a particular nation that censors.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course it's very possible that there are people outside of Mainland China writing about Tiannamen, using simplified Chinese. A Google search (not a Bing one!) should confirm that.
So who speaks simplified Chinese?
619,427 censored individuals in NYC, as of 2007 (Score:3, Informative)
Re:contrast (Score:4, Insightful)
No, this is dangerous. MS are setting a precedent - a search engine censoring results globally for one language, regardless of the local laws of the country being served.
The Chinese government must love this: you can no longer get around the censorship by simply using a proxy in another country. Sure, you could search in English, but most Chinese people don't have a good enough grasp of it.
Parent
The Google route? (Score:2)
Are they stating on said search results that they have filtered the results due to Chinese laws?
I mean, they can be only so subtle about it before China decides to block it entirely but at least MS could dangle that bit of info there for any one curious to wonder "Hey, now what law is that and why is it enforced?"
The evil government route? (Score:3, Interesting)
Are they stating on said search results that they have filtered the results due to Chinese laws?
I mean, they can be only so subtle about it before China decides to block it entirely but at least MS could dangle that bit of info there for any one curious to wonder "Hey, now what law is that and why is it enforced?"
It's most likely illegal to give people unbiased information or hint at the fact you are being compelled to give limited information. Living with government abuses is a condition of doing business in any country.
It's not just China that does this anyway, they just do it worse than most. Behavior of this type is common in most countries. I've seen a few blatant examples of this kind of censorship from the UK coming from both the government and private interests. It's likely that for every government abuse of
Anyone surprised? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is Microsoft.
They probably meant to only censor these things in China, but v1 of their filters are worldwide.
They'll have it fixed by v3. Probably. Maybe. I doubt it.
(Note: I also think that the MS Bing commercials are about the dumbest I've seen. They beat out the mother and son's college roommate making kissy faces at each other. And that takes doing.)
Re:Anyone surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
Smart people will choose products based on their needs and their research on the matter. Commercials are for the people who associate brands with lifestyles (i.e. silly people). Don't be surprised if you find their commercials dumb, be uh, depressed that there exists a target audience for those commercials. Hmmmm. I need to re-think this. :(
Parent
Re:Anyone surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
The type of people who say I should get "real" jeans called Levis, instead of the same quality but lower priced Arizonas or Wranglers. I used to fall for that nonsense, listening to the advice of the crowd ("Levis are cool; others are not") but not anymore.
Parent
not really (Score:5, Informative)
Re:not really (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Chinese (Score:5, Insightful)
Bing censors at the "request" of the Chinese government. Google [slashdot.org] censors at the "request" of the Chinese government. Yahoo [slashdot.org] censors at the "request" of the Chinese government. As a result of whatever you care to attribute the subservience of the Chinese people, 21% of our species is subject to the filtering policies of the Chinese government. Ultimately the Chinese must be the the reason this tyranny comes to an end. Or not.
The marketing companies of the West aren't interested in fighting their battles. Stop expecting ad pimps to be responsible for liberating anyone. Instead, raise your expectations of the Chinese.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The marketing companies of the West aren't interested in fighting their battles. Stop expecting ad pimps to be responsible for liberating anyone. Instead, raise your expectations of the Chinese.
Stop expecting the Chinese to be responsible for liberating anyone. Instead, despair.
Re:Chinese (Score:5, Insightful)
The marketing companies of the West aren't interested in fighting their battles. Stop expecting ad pimps to be responsible for liberating anyone. Instead, raise your expectations of the Chinese.
Stop expecting the Chinese to be responsible for liberating anyone. Instead, despair.
Not us anyone, but themselves. There is no reason to despair for 1.34B that prove ultimately incapable of liberating themselves. Most of their wounds since the late 1800's are culturally self induced.
It'd be nice to see them finally get the fuck up as a modern, democratic (or at least humane in the modern sense) nation, but there is a point that you just go "agh, WTF" and just sit back and watch the train wreck, waiting to see if it implodes into a self-sucking black hole, hoping it doesn't fuck up nearby nations in the process.
I find it deplorable that search engines, corps and entire governments bend over to China's economic might and implement/look over things that are unjustifiable by any modern notion of morality. But social reform is not their job or duty - that's the people's. The onus is eventually on them.
One could argue that knowledge is power, and that by removing search access to them you deprive them of the ability to fight for freedom. But the Chinese as a whole aren't some tiny tinie minority fighting for survival with bows and arrows. They have always proved themselves resourceful, and at some point they need to take responsibility for their own destiny.
Their freedom is not dependent on western search engines or corporations choosing to fight a moral fight that is not their own and for which they are not capable of even dreaming to win. Freedom, freedom in the modern sense of the world as people in the developed world knows, that depends on them, the Chinese people.
Parent
Re:Chinese (Score:5, Informative)
While the Chinese political system was rapidly turning to the end of its dynastic cycle (the pattern is pretty consistently recurrent in Chinese history), the wounds were not self induced.
The mix of colonialism and outright invasion together with cultural shock from military defeats sent China into a state of coma.
Much of the setbacks of China in the past two centuries was about drinking too much western coolaid. Not that the western ideas were worthless, but the political reforms that were supposed to "modernize" China was so laced with immature imitation of western ideology that they basically failed one by one. (Not unlike what's happening when the US tried to set up a government in Iraq)
If there's a rational explanation to China's deaf ears on petitions to human rights, freedom, democracy and the such, it's not because of some evil agenda, but rather the fact that it was tried, and didn't work out. Yes, maybe they didn't try hard enough, but nobody's in a hurry to take those risks again.
I hardly see early 1900's warlordism and subsequent fuck ups like the Cultural Revolution as the result of western cool aid. Human rights, freedom and democracy had never been tried out. The only that had ever been tried was industrialization. But human rights, freedom and democracy? When were they tried? And certainly there had been Chinese polities that have enjoyed them to various degrees of success (Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau.)
Everything that has been tried in mainland China has been about twisted concepts of modernization and industrialization, during the unraveling of the Qing dinasty (or more like a lip service as reaction to Western/Japanese interventionism.) It was pretty much non-existing with the warlords period and during the Sino-Japanese war. And then, they went at it again with the establishment of the PRC within the frame of failed ideologies and false, snake-oil sociology.
At no point there has been a single entity or polity in Mainland China that has tried human rights, freedom and democracy. Ergo, they can't claim they have given up on them because they are failed concepts.
Parent
Re:Chinese (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Chinese (Score:4, Interesting)
I am home-staying with a Chinese family, and they are generally very nice. They are a well educated, well-to-do family, both parents having lived and worked in Japan for at least a decade, and are currently working in Australia.
However, in the few political discussions I have had with them (which I really don't want to get drawn into, for obvious reasons that I am Taiwanese, anti-Chinese Communist Party, anti-KMT, and me being their tenant an'all :-P) they seem to have a very warped view on having democracy in China (with hints that it applies to all Asian countries too!). It seems that they like the idea of democracy, but insists that it simply would not work in China because of greed and corruption, not in the top echelons of government, but instead at the lower levels where, according to them, it is apparantely impossible to control. Their view is that the democracy that exists in Taiwan is a shambles, almost as if they see it as a farcical show.
However - this is a family that has emigrated and enjoyed the freedom of Japan, and Australia (eg they have two kids!!). So, what seems to be weird about their thoughts are:
1. They are quietly proud of themselves being of Chinese heritage (well actually that can be said of most nationalities)
- but they choose to live anywhere but China, yes I heard them say they'd much rather be in Oz or Japan than China.
2. They quietly want the respect and admiration of the westerners/foreigners (again, who doesn't like that) to the extent they'll show that they are educated enough to agree that democracy is a Good Thing(TM)
- but they criticise the free and democratic Taiwan. They insisting that Taiwan is part of China, common cultures etc blah... but that Taiwan's democracy must be a joke, they should not follow suit because China does not work that way. How in the world can they possibly expect respect when they choose the bad thing while *knowing* that it is bad, for the 'practical' reason namely that Chinese people are too corrupt? Am I alone in thinking that it must cause them some pain to think like this? not being able to hold your head up high the very moment the topic of politics come up in polite company - "oh that lofty idea, its good, but Chinese people can't do it, but don't you dare insult us and can we has some respect plz!"
I suspect the reason that they still have these views despite having lived abroad for so long may partly be helped by the internet. I have noticed that they get their dose of news from Chinese media, and not the western outlets (well the parents do - I hope the kids will not be subjected to too much of this biased, ultra-nationalist reporting). It is sad to see that the stranglehold of the CCP is so strong though.
In relation to your post - no I do not to expect the Chinese will fix the problem of filtering themselves anytime soon, there are plenty who are fine with what seems to be contradicting thoughts that their government feeds them through their monstrously powerful media.
Parent
The NYT reporter misses the forest for the trees. (Score:4, Interesting)
In other words, Microsoft has cleverly created a big hole (in its agreement with Beijing) that allows uncensored information to flood into China. The only catch is that the query must be in some language (e. g., English) that is not simplied Chinese.
By contrast, Google censors everything in China, regardless of the language used for the query.
Besides, Microsoft's scheme will encourage ordinary Chinese to learn a foreign language: English., Japanese, etc. Doing so is always positive as many Western languages means many channels by which foreign ideas can enter China, thus modernizing it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The reporter at the "New York Times" completely misses the big picture. If Bing is censoring only simplified Chinese queries, then anyone in mainland China can do a search in any other language and obtain the full uncensored results.
In other words, Microsoft has cleverly created a big hole (in its agreement with Beijing) that allows uncensored information to flood into China. The only catch is that the query must be in some language (e. g., English) that is not simplied Chinese.
By contrast, Google censors everything in China, regardless of the language used for the query.
Besides, Microsoft's scheme will encourage ordinary Chinese to learn a foreign language: English., Japanese, etc. Doing so is always positive as many Western languages means many channels by which foreign ideas can enter China, thus modernizing it.
More likely google tried to do the wrong thing because they had to and succeeded. Microsoft tried to do the wrong thing because they had to and messed it up.
We have seen the results of Microsoft's work and Google's work. Google is an innovative technology company, Microsoft are a bunch of clowns with an innovative and sometimes illegal marketing strategy.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Why? Couldn't he just buy one [wikipedia.org], like Bill did in the first place?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not true. I live in China, and can easily find info on Tiananmen square, I just have to use google.com and not google.cn.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I see your point. But think about this: if Google or Bing were filtering English language results at the request of the American government, would you be happy to swap over to Mandarin?
Microsoft has become as evil as Google? (Score:5, Funny)
Gasp!
Once we're boycotting all the search engines that have caved into to the demands of the Chinese government, what search engines are left?
Re:Microsoft has become as evil as Google? (Score:4, Interesting)
By the way, I do realize that one of the main reasons that the search engines are not telling China to fuck off is pure and simple: money. There is a lot of ad revenue to be had by companies like Google and Bing.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Once we're boycotting all the search engines that have caved into to the demands of the Chinese government, what search engines are left?
If you think that very few search engines would be left, then there's a better strategy for you: Instead of boycotting search engines, boycott Chinese products. That's what your government wants to achieve by flooding media with anti-China news. The sooner you boycott Chinese products, the sooner I get back a shit-free Slashdot. Oh, wait! What have I been thinking? After boycotting Chinese products, there will be news flood about some other country.
And join the Amish? (Score:3, Insightful)
boycott Chinese products
The United States has outsourced so much of its manufacturing to Chinese firms that in 2009, the Amish are almost the only group who can pull off a boycott of products made in China.
hmmmm (Score:5, Funny)
Google maps and satellit images do not match at TS (Score:5, Interesting)
Interestingly, for Tianamen Square, the google maps location seems to be about a block east of the satellite photo:
http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=tiananmen+square,+china&sll=-25.335448,135.745076&sspn=39.349464,79.013672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Tiananmen+Square,+Dongcheng,+Beijing,+China&ll=39.903745,116.393924&spn=0.016559,0.036564&t=h&z=15 [google.com.au]
compared to
http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=tiananmen+square,+china&sll=-25.335448,135.745076&sspn=39.349464,79.013672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Tiananmen+Square,+Dongcheng,+Beijing,+China&ll=39.903745,116.393924&spn=0.016559,0.036564&z=15 [google.com.au]
I wonder if their maps are shifted or their images are shifted? Anyone in Beijing have a GPS handy to get a reading for the square?
Google still the best option for Chinese people (Score:3, Informative)
For Freedom Day (Score:4, Insightful)
I've been on the fence about listening to China, but no more. I conclude that the American idea of freedom, the American revolution, is an ongoing experiment and must apply everywhere in the world. We Americans by nature are assholes, so we may as well do something productive with it. We are obligated to participate, to be subversive to tyranny or even tendencies towards it, everywhere we go and we must be that way at home.
American companies operate because they are granted license to by the people of the united states as a whole.
At home, nor abroad, can we tolerate any government that violates any fundamental liberty. Even if we cannot agree on what fundamental liberties all, we must be dedicated to the idea that the more liberties that we uphold, the more we have. We forget that freedom is so sacred as of late, and we listen too much to those who would say that we have freedom too much.
I say that we say that for right now today is Freedom Day. Take a second to glance at the Constitution and understand that the government is allowed to do only what is on that little piece of paper and you are allowed to do everything else. Write whatever you want, go to a gun store, read something subversive, stop by a church, hang with some protestors, revel in the fact that you are free and can do things. Even as we bum out about how the west has gotten the short of the stick in manufacturing, we should be extremely cognizant that we can do so many things our counterparts in China and other parts Asia cannot, I can take my made in Chinese flag and I can burn it.
Today is Freedom Day, and so is every day. Remind yourself that you are free.
"Tibet oppression Han" -- simplified chars (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Google also censor search results in China. And conceivably more effectively if you can't get access to Google sites outside of China. (Typically, Google find a more savvy way of pulling off the technical feat of search-censorship than Microsoft). Yahoo has been the worst of the big three based on what information is available to us - they actually handed over the confidential information of a pro-democracy campaigner over there.
Re:Chinese Censorship != Attempt to Rewrite Histor (Score:4, Insightful)
Sorry, but no. I have a lot of respect for CHINESE PPL, but for China, the gov.? Nope. Their approach is no different then it was 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, or 60 years ago. Basically, it is a totalitarian state that is AFRAID of its ppl. Otherwise, they would have finished tianiman. Worse, they are the ones doing major destruction around the world in terms of pollution, economy, etc. I hold them (and W) mostly responsible for the current economic situation. CHina was given a gift by Clinton in giving them MFN as well as into WTO. And they have reneged on their part (free their money and drop their trade barriers). Instead, they have actually increased trade barriers, manipulate their money to make cheap cheap cheap exports relative to all other western money, use no pollution control to keep the cheapest prices and are subsidizing various industries. Nearly everything that the Chinese gov. is doing is regarded as unethical as well as illegal in almost the entire world. If another nation (developed or not) were doing the same to China, they would be upset. I do not hold the chinese ppl responsible for this (unlike I hold Americans responsible for voting in W a second time).
Finally, Chinese gov. IS attempting to rewrite 64. It is not simply that they are keeping it quiet, but they have recently taken to speaking about it as these ppl were terrorists. That is re-writing. It would similar if American gov. stated that Kent State murder was because students had physically taken over a number of buildings, holding hostages, and was killing soldiers.
Parent