Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Censorship Your Rights Online

China Shuts Down 17,000 Internet Bars 599

Astin writes: "According to this article, Chinese authorities have shut down more than 17,000 Internet bars for failing to block Web sites considered subversive or pornographic. Out of the 94,000 Internet bars in China, 17,488 have been shut down and another 28,000 were ordered to install monitoring software soon. Of the 27 million Internet users in China, about 4.5 million rely on these bars. Foreign news organizations fall under the category of 'subversive'."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China Shuts Down 17,000 Internet Bars

Comments Filter:
  • Wow... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:15PM (#2596525)
    CNN and Porno are the same evil in china?

    Looks like they are thinking before their time!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:17PM (#2596547)
    We might not like it, but China has their way of life.. and that's not going to change any time soon.

    As far as the internet bars go, serves them right for not installing monitoring software. They violated the law - the got shut down. I'm sure as soon as they pay their fines and install the proper software they'll be back up and running. China is not like Russian in the days of Stalin. They're actually a very progressive society - for socialists that is...
  • Huh. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Karen_Frito ( 91720 ) <Frito_KAL@yahoo. ... minus herbivore> on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:18PM (#2596552) Homepage
    How long until we see "17,800 Internet Cafes in the United States were shut down last week due to the newly passed Eagle Act, which requires blocking all pro-terrorist sites."

    ?
  • by ApheX ( 6133 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:19PM (#2596560) Homepage Journal
    People are complaining about the loss of civil liberties and privacy in the US with the wake of the 9-11 attacks. But be thankful that we still have freedom of speech and press and that we aren't getting government filtered content stuck down our throats. I am suprised that though a lot of china is so technologically advanced, their society is not...
  • by Talisman ( 39902 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:26PM (#2596614) Homepage
    Indeed, they once did try, and sadly, it failed.

    However, just because one attempt was crushed, doesn't mean the next one will be. If anything good is to be extracted from that mess, it proved that a 'free' mentality pervades a large minority, or perhaps a timid majority.

    The hard-liners are getting old. They will die soon. If you can't beat them punch-for-punch, let nature take care of the problem.
  • by Ieshan ( 409693 ) <ieshan@@@gmail...com> on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:33PM (#2596672) Homepage Journal
    Actually, I can't say that it would be illegal in a "bar", but in a cybercafe environment, by law in MA at least, you're required to have internet filtering which blocks nudity and other "offensive" content. In a restricted, over 21 environment, perhaps this isn't such an issue, but in a mall or a place with any sort of store window, police complaints and actual orders to shut your business down can be handed out with very little discrimination. I know, I net-admined one for a year.

    My friend and I recieved, on one occasion, a visit from the local police department, concerning that children had acceess to our machines and that our machines could be set to display objectionable content. The woman who had filed the complaint did not actually see objectionable content or had an experience where her child did, she merely voiced the possibility that it could happen.

    Police seem to take this sort of stuff seriously. I'm not sure why it's any surprise that a government particularly against free speech would have a slightly more aggrevated reaction.
  • by aliebrah ( 135162 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:37PM (#2596710) Homepage
    I'm sure that you'll notice the irony that increasingly many of these things are now happening here in the USA as well. Go figure.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:44PM (#2596756)
    BTW, where can I get a high-resolution picture of that man standing in front of the tank in Tienanmen Square?


    Not in an Internet bar in China.
  • by SubtleNuance ( 184325 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:46PM (#2596772) Journal
    If your trying to build a community that has to support the physical needs of 3 billion people - from each according to ability, to each according to need - you might also find the blatant and mind-numbing propaganda by capitalists via advertisers subversive. I find corporate news incredibly biased and leading... they certainly serve their corporate masters.

    USofAmerica is a Plutocracy - I dont have to explain how their media re-enforces certain 'subversive' ideals... christ, imagine if the Communist news media was pushing its agenda into America... wouldnt Americans, via McCarthy inspired mass-hysteria, not be a little put-off? Would it too not be considered "subversive".

    Remeber people, right and wrong is very much a matter of perspective.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:49PM (#2596791)
    I was actually surprised just how much Internet penetration there was. Basically, everywhere I went there were Internet cafe's, and most of them worked pretty well. There were definite brownout periods, but when things worked I was only paying about $20 Chinese per hour (a couple of bucks USD) for decent speed Internet access.


    The funniest time was when I went with my wife to her hometown, in southern China. In a city of 100,000 people (which they call a village in China), I was the only non-Chinese person who had been there in over 2 years. People turned and stared at me wherever I went (my in-laws were joking that they should have charged admission to see me). Yet just down the street was a perfectly functional Internet cafe.


    These things happen slowly, but they do happen. Don't think for a second that Chinese dissedents can't figure out how to use encrypted proxies or whatever, to get information in or out, just as easily as we western geeks do to get around stifling workplace rules...

    :-)

  • by prisoner-of-enigma ( 535770 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:55PM (#2596833) Homepage
    Okay, so we're just supposed to look out for freedom on the home front, eh? "Screw the rest of the world, I'm looking out for ME!" It's called isolationist, and it's largely to blame for two World Wars last century. Go pick up a history book, you might learn something.

    Was 9/11 horrific? Of course. But what should we do about it? Well, the Taliban is pretty much gone, so that's thing number one. But in the long run, America's security has a lot to do with the rest of the world. If we don't stand up for freedom everywhere, we risk being the only place on Earth where it's practiced (albeit imperfectly).

    Now, I'm not going to say "get over it" because you've already been told that. I'm going to say "do something about it". You gripe and moan about people's priorities, but I don't hear any solutions coming from you, or even a point other than you don't like people getting on with their lives. It is possible to carry on a normal life and not forget about a horrific event. We did it for about 4 years during WWII, and we still haven't forgotten Pearl Harbor. Let people deal with things their own way, and stop trying to make people conform to your idea of mourning.
  • by Gulthek ( 12570 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:57PM (#2596843) Homepage Journal
    Okay, you twisted my arm...

    A short summary of the Tianamen "incident" of 1989:

    Originally it was a popular protest by students to restore the honor of CCP Secretary Hu Yaobang after his death. He was sympathetic to the growing democratic movement and was forced to resign (dishonorably) in 1987.

    The request was denied and a hardline editoral was published which led to further protests.

    As the movement grew larger and larger, and more and more out of control, it was moralized by the advancement of anti-corruption in the government. So they could be said to be disruptive for a morally correct reason.

    The protests turned into a series of hunger strikes, and sympathetic protests in many other major cities.

    The protests grew stronger and stronger, leading to the paralysis of the cities' normal operation.

    During all this the CCP was split on the proper action to take. But they could tolerate such disruption only so much, and were fearful that this activity would grow so much that it woud lead to another cultural revolution.

    By the time the cities had been "occupied" for more than a month, hard measures were decided upon.

    The students were asked to peacefully leave, but they refused. During the month of protest their movement had become more and more radical, any moderate protest leaders had been driven out and removed from positions of power.

    The government greatly wanted a calm ending to this movement but could see no other recourse but to forcefully remove the protestors, which turned quite ugly due to the radical nature of the protest by then and an overreaction by the army.

    Any sort of pro-democratic spin on the movement was *only* added as part of a positive spin to win support and demonstrate that they (the students) were justified in their activity. But it was really more anarchy than democracy that the movement was representative of.

    The CCP, whether through indecision, fear of bad press, or other factors, was incredibly patient with the protest. Can you really imagine any country allowing its cities to be occupied by a hostile, anti-government protest? Check out the story of the US reaction to the WTO protests in Seattle.

    But don't just listen to me, go to your local library and check out some books on the subject. The excellent "Tianamen Papers" just came out last February, which documents much of the party actions that I've just described.
  • Re:IT is. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Computer! ( 412422 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @02:00PM (#2596866) Homepage Journal
    Of those, what percentage do you think are operating without blocking software?

    Probably around 0%, because China means business.

    By the way, when you said that "it is their country," I think you needed to be more specific. I think you meant to say "it is their regimes country."

    Either way, notice the possesive "their". Remember the Cultural Revolution? Well, probably not unless you're old, but these people chose this form of government. It is to be assumed that this is what they want, or at least that this is not undesirable enough to spawn another revolution a la USSR. I say let the Chinese government govern their people however they want. They are a major power, not an island dictatorship. They seem to be doing some things right, and they haven't fucked up Hong Kong yet. "Information wnats to be free" is more accurately "We wish information was free". Unfortunately (or not), it can't happen everywhere.
  • by quartz ( 64169 ) <shadowman@mylaptop.com> on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @02:13PM (#2596928) Homepage

    What's confusing me is that there were a few thousand *STUDENTS* in Tiananmen. You know, students. As in "educated, above-average people who are as different from anything you can call 'majority' as you get". As in "bah, they'll grow up and they'll come to their senses eventually". As in "we're 1.2 billion people here, we need someone with authority to rule us; that fancy democracy thing is not for us, but those 'intellectual' pricks just don't understand". Is it clear now?

    And btw, the majority may be silent, but it's never timid.

  • Note to the Chinese (Score:3, Interesting)

    by KupekKupoppo ( 266229 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @02:15PM (#2596939)
    If you're going to sites that are not in Chinese, use the Babelfish translater as an impromptu proxy.

    Just tell it to translate the page you want to see from Chinese to English (or such), and it will ignore all the non-Chinese characters on the screen. So you'll get the website.

    People have been using that to bypass filters at work for quite a while.

    -k.
  • by ToastyKen ( 10169 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @03:09PM (#2597273) Homepage Journal
    Can you really imagine any country allowing its cities to be occupied by a hostile, anti-government protest? Check out the story of the US reaction to the WTO protests in Seattle.

    In Seattle, non-lethal weapons were used. Even in many third-world countries, protests are broken up with rubber bullets, not live ammunition. And if you complain that the students were radical, why not also point out that the gov't was hardline and refused to budge?

    Now, I'm generally very defensive about China when Slashdotters rant about how evil it is without looking at the reality and practicality of the situation there, as it is making a lot of positive progress these days, but this is a case where the gov't could have done any number of things to avoid killing students, and it chose not to. Why? Not because it "had no choice", but because it too heavily weighs "stability of our nation" over individual lives. For that matter, even the "patience" may have been a bad thing, as a more controlled suppression of the protests earlier could have turned out a lot better.

  • State organs (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Pseudonymus Bosch ( 3479 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @04:15PM (#2597652) Homepage
    (8) Injuring the reputation of state organs;

    So, is it legal to say that the organs that the State extracts from executed prisoners are the best organs money can buy?
  • by bnenning ( 58349 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @04:39PM (#2597778)
    Who said that our system is the best?


    Not me, but I will firmly claim that it is much better than China.


    When you criticize China, are you doing so because you've really thought about the issues, or because that's all the media has told you to do here?


    I criticize the Chinese government because they are fundamentally hostile to individual freedom, believe that the citizens exist to serve them, and have no reservations about abusing their people to maintain their power. Yes, I know you can list things the US government has done that are not good, but the magnitude of the abuses is not comparable. Even the fact that you can criticize the US in this forum is a testament to the freedom that you enjoy here that you would not in China.

  • by poemofatic ( 322501 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @04:46PM (#2597819)
    So they could be said to be disruptive for a morally correct reason.

    You seem to be greatly afraid of "disruptions". No, don't tell me -- cultural revolution, right? Well here's a thought. The cultural revolution could not have occured on the scale it did if it wasnt for the (in)famous groupthink with which the Chinese are still struggling. By avoiding criticism, suppressing discussion, punishing "incorrect" reasoning, the Chinese strong men are supporting this tendency. They are promoting tribalism and so endangering their society.

    Frequently, when speaking with ethnic Chinese, I hear such phrases as "We chinese do/say X..", instead of "I think". In a recent NYtimes report on AIDS, the author of a popular internet diary was interviewed about his recommendations for govt. AIDS policy. He felt the need to preface his remarks with "Well, I am only an individual, so I'm not qualified to judge.." My question is, who the hell _does_ judge policy, if not human beings? It is this fear of being the nail which sticks out, this sense of doing what your neighbor does, which has turned china into a giant gasoline pool, waiting for a spark. In an open society [amazon.com], individuals may go crazy, but the culture as a whole remains sound. Instead, the authorities whom you are defending have chosen to live in a closed society. They always fear the smallest flame.

    In the US, we did have violent demonstrations in Seattle, they were publicized, debated, and no revolution, no mass bloodshed. In china it's forbidden to even mention Tiananmen square, secret police prevent people from assembling there on anniversary dates, professors fear for their jobs if they bring it up. The justification is fear of "disruptions", but few dare to ask why such a small spark can set fire to a whole nation.

    Instead of ritually defending the CCP, or "we chinese" as a nation, those who truly care about the health of society should attempt to promote freedom of speech, of criticism, of protest. Strive towards open government and an open culture. This will provide channels to dredge the lake, and chinese human beings (as opposed to "The Chinese") will finally be able to speak for themselves without fear of commiting "incorrect" criticism.

  • by cybercuzco ( 100904 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @10:27PM (#2599075) Homepage Journal
    Shanghai was far cleaner than LA or New York at twice the population!

    One word: Automobile. Once all the nasty point source pollution problems are cleaned up or moved to where you, as a foriegner, cant see them, I would say most cities in china are much cleaner in the US, simply because they dont have alot of automobiles.Give the people of Shanghai 8 million cars, especially unregulated ones, and your pollution problems are back. Similarly, Eliminate all the cars from LA, and the air will be crystal clear year round. The sad part is, the more westernized china becomes, the more cars there will be, and the more and more polluted cities like Shanghai will become.

Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.

Working...