China Blocks Web Searches About Protests 134
itwbennett writes "China is blocking searches on Google and microblogs for Zengcheng, a city in the country's Guangdong province, where protests have erupted against local authorities. The move is part of an effort to suppress information on the rioting."
They also block (Score:5, Funny)
Web searches about blocking web searches about protests, as well as protests about blocking web searches about protests. Web searches about protests about blocking web searches about protests are allowed, though.
Re: (Score:1)
I find this very insightful, because from a gov's perspective, talk/publicity about a protest is much worse than the protest itself.
Re: (Score:2)
As ACs post is a joke, +funny would be more appropriate.
Re:Zengcheng (Score:5, Funny)
Beautiful Zengcheng. Nothing bad has ever happened here. Much happiness to you.
Man, if I had fifty cents for every time I heard that...
Re:Zengcheng (Score:4, Funny)
...you would have 50 cents.
Re:Zengcheng (Score:4, Informative)
But would I have 50 cent or fifty cents [wikipedia.org]? HTH, HAND.
Re: (Score:3)
It's here because, as implied by Slashdot's tagline, it's "Stuff that Matters".
Re: (Score:3)
However, it's not news. It would be news if China suddenly grew a pair and _didn't_ censor it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Or the USians.
Evil.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't get me wrong, both the Chinese and United States societies have their woes, some in more places than others, but I am pretty sure that the majority of folk in both societies are trustworthy people just trying to get by. Many of our leaders, on both sides, might be dipshits, but labeling Americans (our proper title) and Chinese citizens in general as evil is nothing but pissy, whiney drivel.
We're b
Re: (Score:2)
Eat Satire, you fool!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't mod my own posts. ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
How much more obvious does China have to make it that they can't be trusted.
Free people everywhere should be preparing to confront the fascist Chinese government instead of joining them in a race to the bottom.
Although I agree the Government of China sucks, please don't lump all "the Chinese" people in with them.
People don't get to pick where they are born.
Peasant revolts (Score:3, Informative)
Explains their use of multinational corporations (Score:3)
Nothing better to kill a peasant revolt than a company town.
Quite the pro-business, anti-citizen country there (Score:4, Insightful)
So this is what businesses want our country to be like - where businesses can roam freely, and ask the government to cut coverage to (and search of) protests?
This is what we encourage when we send work offshore to these kind of countries. No thanks.
Re:Quite the pro-business, anti-citizen country th (Score:5, Interesting)
Do we really encourage this behavior by outsourcing work to China? It could be argued that this helps their situation.
Sure, "our" factories over there contribute to the Chinese government's budget, but it also contributes to the overall well being of the average Chinese person. More well fed, more education, and more opportunity. I can't help but think that this encourages liberalization in the long term more than anything.
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing it really does is gives maximum freedoms to business, while giving a few trinkets to distract from the non-freedom to regular people.
Still doesn't excuse sending work there, but to do everything to undermine that government.
Re: (Score:2)
More well fed, more education, and more opportunity.
More rioting too...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Get it through your thick American skulls -- plenty of people will happily sacrifice some of their freedom if it means that people much worse than them won't get those freedoms, either. For example, I don't need full and absolute freedom of speech but I would like it very much if spammers and crooks were told to shut up or go to prison.
Re: (Score:2)
Get it through your thick American skulls -- plenty of people will happily sacrifice some of their freedom if it means that people much worse than them won't get those freedoms, either. For example, I don't need full and absolute freedom of speech but I would like it very much if spammers and crooks were told to shut up or go to prison.
For some odd reason that doesn't seem to be how China works, though - the spammers and crooks (and worse) are in charge in many areas, and the riots the Chinese government keeps stamping out are generally a result of the rest of the population getting severly pissed off about this. In fact, that's pretty much inevitable - one of the reasons political freedom is so important is that it's the best way of stopping evil people getting into positions of power.
Re: (Score:2)
Think of what kind of crooks would be in power if they had more opportunities to instigate riots and hijack protests.
Re: (Score:2)
The kind that can't quite so easily get away with screwing over 99% of the population at a whim?
Re: (Score:2)
Each and every popular uprising, if successful, establishes yet another kind of aristocracy. In rare situations when new aristocracy is relatively benign compared to old one, the uprising or movement lasted long enough that simply blocking information on it in media wouldn't have any effect on it in the first place. It's a selection mechanism, and a pretty good one. When it doesn't work, you have "successful movements" like your stupid Tea Party.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Is there really any difference between the government owning industry and industry owning the government? Either way, they are in league, and to hell with the people. It seems to me, in both cases, it's more a case of them lying in the same bed than one owning the other.
Why doesn't someone just make a P2P proxy darknet? (Score:1)
Instead of a central server, you'd hold a list of potential servers which is everyone you connected to last time you were online. Only one out of your list needs to be online, and they'll propogate you a new list of IP addresses and ports(don't use just one port or that can be blocked too, randomize it).
Once on, you could file trade, browse the web through proxies, or chat.
I'd do
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
So now you think you invented Tor too?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How long were you in the coma? We had rules about that sort of thing at one time, back before software and business model patents.
Re: (Score:1)
There already exist several such projects. Tor and Freenet being only two of them.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Not good enough (Score:3, Informative)
I am a Chinese, and let me tell you what might happen to such software, just like the fate of many similar-purpose software before it:
1. Restriction of distribution: people can't easily search for it due to keyword filtering, any local or foreign links for downloading the software could be promptly made inaccessible.
2. Technical disruption: for example, set up "watchman" peer-to-peer nodes that use the same service, which may collect the IP addresses of people using the service, monitor their online activit
Re: (Score:2)
Must be working (Score:5, Insightful)
Not the usual news (Score:5, Informative)
What business wants again the US... (Score:2)
...is what these people are protesting against. Bad jobs are still bad even if it is the only practical option.
FUCK CHINA (Score:2, Insightful)
Really. I mean if you're a citizen of any country where you still have some freedom, any freedom, then FUCK CHINA.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
If you live in the US, you have more freedoms (both of things you can do, and from restrictions ie censorship) than 95% of the world. Putting in a snide comment about how you have "some freedoms [instead of lots of freedoms]" because you live in the US-- in a thread about China, no less-- is just insulting to the folks in China who would love to be able to actually criticize their government without being sent to labor camp.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd think that all the toxic chemicals in China would be worse than any STD.
On the other hand, if you want to cripple their government(and the people that send work over those kind of countries) for the second time in 200 years, I have no problem with that kind of fucking.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, we've seen how they deal with Islam. Just look at how they treat the Uighurs as compared to Han Chinese.
Come again? (Score:4, Insightful)
The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.
John Gilmore, quoted in Time Magazine [google.com]
Re:Come again? (Score:5, Insightful)
The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.
John Gilmore, quoted in Time Magazine [google.com]
That was the 90s. The Net in 2011 interprets censorship as a value-added customer experience enhancement service and downloads an app for it onto your non-jailbreakable iThoughtStation 451.
Re: (Score:1)
Definitely the comment of the year and a major candidate for the comment of the decade to come.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, did I really just write "half is glass full?" Clearly I need to do the dishes less often...
Half full, or half empty? Glass is easily downsized if one has a hammer.
Re: (Score:2)
What happens when the CCP decides the rest of the world's internet is undesirable, and stops peering with it? You feel like setting up a 3g uplink for several billion people?
Social stability (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm going to take a controversial stand here and probably be modded into oblivion but here it goes. This is a good move by China. Why? It increases social stability at the cost of individual rights. How many groups of self-described smart people in America are trying to roll back individual freedoms in the name of "it's better our way"? After all, freedom includes the freedom to make the "wrong" choice, and this this really pisses the smart people off. After all, they're the intelligent ones and know what the correct choices are politically, and anyone who opposes them isn't a noble dissenter but (a) mistaken (b) an idiot (c) probably medically insane.
You have to understand where China is coming from with this. The first and foremost priority of the government is to hold the country together. Everyone thinks of China as a monolithic entity, but this is just plain ignorant. China is a multicultural society, and like all multicultural societies it is fundamentally unstable. Action must be taken when unrest occurs, lest it spread throughout the country and result in the horror of all Chinese: a fragmented, divided China. China experienced the warlord era in the 20th century and never wants to go back. Before that, China lost sovereignty over its own territory (foreign concessions) and that wasn't much fun either. If a few peasants need to be crushed to ensure the bad old days will never return, then so be it. These protesters are making the "wrong" choice. All the smart people agree, and it is stupidity or insanity to oppose the choices they make. In China, the smart people really do control the government without that pesky democracy interference. Wasn't there an article here recently about the high government officials all being scientists and engineers? So, the government WILL do what it thinks is necessary to ensure social stability. And to Chinese, stability is more important than progress.
Why are the people protesting? China has a long tradition of the central government having limited control over the provinces and even less control over cities, counties, and lower branches of government. Corruption is endemic. Beijing promotes reform, but local officials are powerful in their own princedoms. It's kind of like trying to reform the State Department or the CIA from the presidency. However, Beijing CAN enforce its will when it comes to clearly overriding concerns like keeping the country from splintering apart. When a few thousand laobaixing [wikipedia.org] get screwed over, there's really nothing to be done. Moreover, the mandarins cheating the peasants is not a pressing national integrity concern, it's been happening in China for thousands of years. So some people in flyover territory get screwed...again, the smart people agree that this is not a problem at all and in fact is sometimes a good thing. After all, who doesn't enjoy a good redneck-bashing?
How's that Chinese tea that you're gulping down? (Score:4, Informative)
There's no excuse for what China does. You're using their excuses, their terminology, and their justifications. It reads like it was a scripted excuse instead of a sound justification.
All China did in 1980 was to find a way to cleanse their despotism. Seeing people like you, makes me think that it worked. Yes, that's a problem.
Unlike China, we like to still give the regular individual the chance instead of disappearing them, harvesting their organs for some Party member, and putting the family under house arrest for objecting to working conditions at the company town.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're arguing the wrong point to the wrong crowd.
To us, the Slashdot Crowd, Individual Rights is Social Stability. Anything that hampers Individual Rights is upsetting the Social Stability. Plus, your argument is weak on its main point, upsetting Social Stability is not necessarily a bad thing and doing so does not always result in violence. As long as we are free to make our choices and not be suppressed by the Government, we are happy and content.
China may have experienced some really nasty forms of gove
Re:Social stability (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a good move by China.
It depends on whether you define "China" as the government or those who are governed.
Re: (Score:2)
This problem is that this stability is established on suppression of dissents. It does not actually address the cause of instabilities. The unfairness in the Chinese society is well known.
Re: (Score:1)
It increases social stability at the cost of individual rights.
However, the suppression of individual rights is the very cause of social instability.
Re: (Score:2)
You can say it's what happened for thousands of years, but the cold war showed us that oppressive dictatorships are incompatible with long-term economic growth. If Chinese want to live in mud huts and caves (really, check out Yan'an) like they did before, then cho
Stability is the function of good living condition (Score:2)
You can't split the two without splitting society.
Without social stability, you don't get bearable living conditions for more than the governmental apparatus. See China, North Korea, India, Vietnam, Brazil, and Russia for examples of that. These countries are split - businesses get all the freedoms to run over regular people, while regular people are silenced or disappeared for doing the same things as business.
Re: (Score:1)
Searching for them is possible unlike China (Score:2)
Publishing and searching for that information is not a crime against the US, unlike China.
This just in (Score:1)
Headline from tomorrow's People's Daily: (Score:2)
There is no unrest in Zengcheng, and it's all instigated by subversive foreign elements.
Re: (Score:2)
No, they just don't report the story, per instruction from the government.
Re: (Score:2)
In truth, there are two headlines on this topic. The first is: Police arrest 25 to quell unrest in S China town http://europe.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2011-06/12/content_12678431.htm [chinadaily.com.cn] .
The Second is: Unfounded rumor sends local crowd into frenzy http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2011-06/13/content_12679447.htm [chinadaily.com.cn] .
These are just the English news sources.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Doesn't it suck when the commies are right?"
The Communist Party of China hasn't been "commies" in the traditional sense for a good while. They're more capitalist than parts of Western Europe.
I know about the Jasmine protests. How does that paper over the dissatisfaction with the current migratory labor situation (akin in some ways to southern Africa's with people going to the East for work rather than south.)?
The government isn't pushing the Go West initiative just for fun. They have an imbalance in the le
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"is all throughout western leftism"
I'm hardly a leftist.
"true-blue believers in communism and Maoism in the government"
Yes, and we have Tea Party members in the US government. We also have people in the government that are somewhere between Trotsky and Bakunin.
Are they likely to be the dominant force in it?
About as likely as a quick return to the Cultural Revolution is in China.
Is there a thread to your arguments other than just to naysay whatever is said and then declare that it's all part of a world consp
If they're blocking searches for "zengchang" (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Absolute BS (Score:3)
I just did this search http://www.google.com/search?q=China+Riot&hl=en&newwindow=1&num=10&lr=&ft=i&cr=&safe=images&tbs=,qdr:w [google.com] and came up with plenty of hits about the supposedly blocked subject. I am in central P.R. China.
This particular claim of censorship is nothing but lies by people who aim to discredit China. Again, the story is false, as a simple test will show.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you try the Chinese character search?
http://www.google.com.hk/search?hl=en&safe=off&qscrl=1&q=%E5%A2%9E%E5%9F%8E+%E6%9A%B4%E4%B9%B1&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq= [google.com.hk]
I doubt the government cares about controlling the foreigners.
Re: (Score:1)
It does mention the searches in 'Chinese' and I noticed the parents search was in English. And as you stated, I would also assume the Chinese government is only really interested in stopping wide spread riots in China and not to worried about people outside of their country.
FTFA:
"Google searches in Chinese for Zengcheng, a city in the country's Guangdong province, result in the browser's connection to the server being reset, with no search results offered."
Re: (Score:2)
I looked on Baidu (China's version of Google). Yes, I did my search in Chinese. The stories are there. Yes, the spin is a little different; however, the facts in the stories are consistent with what is found in the English version of China Daily.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I'm not surprised. Rumors about a topic being censored is more effective than censorship itself - it discourages people to search in the first place.
War with China (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah. I see.
So, we should destroy the manufacturing centers that make a lot of the items that the West currently doesn't and thus start a ripple effect of economic disaster.
Add to that, we should forget about the missile systems that in some cases are in mountain valleys that western systems probably couldn't take out even with a surprise first strike.
So, how many western cities are you going to consider a good trade for the chance to murder millions of Chinese and spread fallout over a wide area of eastern A
Stealth nets to the rescue! (Score:2)
The Giant with Feet of Clay (Score:2)
There's been much made the past couple of years about China the Rising Superpower. On balance that's a good thing, because what happens with China this century has existential repercussions the way that Al Qaeda and terrorism has never had and never will have. If things go badly between China and the rest of the world a great many people will die and nations will fall on a scale that would put the previous two world wars to shame.
But the thing that makes China watching such a nail-biter is that it is an e
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but you'll have to borrow a Chinese composer's theme rather than Prokofiev for the same effect.
Chessman? (Score:1)
Magento Agentur [itabs.de]
Magento [itabs.de]
Magento Schulung [itabs.de]
Magento Hosting [itabs.de]
I don't see any filtering here. (Score:2)
I'm visiting Shenzhen, a large city in the same province as ZengCheng. I hadn't heard anything about the protests (no surprise, since we're not keeping up with the news), so I thought I'd see what a search brought up.
I found a Wall Street Journal article as one of the first Google hits, no problems at all.
I'm often uncertain about the scope of the Great Firewall. I could read any online U.S. newspaper I tried thus far (this trip -- a previous year, the Washington Post was blocked while others were not).
Re: (Score:2)