An anonymous reader writes "It would appear that the Chinese government is currently censoring all photos on the site Flickr. A notice has been posted in a Flickr help forum about this, but the service currently doesn't have a fix for this. It would appear that China has turned on their Golden Shield Project to censor the site. 'Jain Hua Li, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, said he hadn't heard of Flickr until told about it in a conversation with a Chronicle reporter, and then suggested that the blocking may be because Chinese authorities are trying to protect children from racy images. Lucie Morillon, the U.S. representative for Reporters Without Borders, a French group that promotes free expression, said that the Beijing government often censors Web sites under the guise of protecting children or national security. She called the blocking of Flickr "one more blow against the free flow of information online by Chinese authorities" and added that it is particularly lamentable in light of promises by China to loosen restrictions before the 2008 Olympics in Beijing.' Thomas Hawk has a well-considered opinion to offer on this issue."
Not only have US leaders thought of this, but they've already tried putting it into practice. Does no one remember the Communications Decency Act [wikipedia.org] which passed into law and was eventually shot down by the Supreme Court? Every couple of years there's something new that they want to ban from adults due to "for the children" arguments.
Yeah, because banning pornographers from advertising to children is *totally* the same as China's suppression of all political or anti-Communist speech. Totally.
An amendment to CDA banned all discussion of abortion on the Internet. Remember that they first came for the Communists because everybody hated Communists. Hopefully somebody will speak up when they come for you.
I actually thought the first post was quite funny but I suppose anyone suggesting that the US govt might like to censor anything is offensive to some people. The reality is that the US goverment and certain states in particular have a long history of censorship.
I try and avoid buying Chinese produce but this is bloody difficult nowadays being that the seem to make everything.
If you mean this as a small crusade to economically punish the Chinese state into your way of thinking, I'd view it as counter-productive - the state censorship was *strongest* when China had the weakest economy, and when it had the least amount of contact with the outside world. If China's export market crumbled the economy would take a big hit, but that would not mean the censorship would
Censorship under the guise of protecting our children or national security. Thank god that stuff only happens in China and not here in the United States...
Oh... er...
...nevermind
Think you are cute, do you? Well, frankly, I'm sick and tired of how people like you so quickly - no later than the fucking first post?! - hijack this thread to "how bad it is here in the US". I'd be glad to join you on Bush-bashing over there [slashdot.org], but this one is about China, OK?
That area of the country, for the time period of the games, will be treated differently. It'll look great. You'll be able to sit in your hotel room and view all the stuff you want. (pro-Tibetian Falon Gong porn, whatever...)
The rest of the country? No.
A month later? No.
BTW, don't check your business email or log in to the corporate VPN from China. You know the story: "all your trade secrets are blong to us".
You guys want us to buy all the stuff you make, and you don't want to allow your people access to the ideas we make.
How much longer are you going to let this authoritarian bullshit go on? Do you realize how powerful China could become if it embraced concepts like "the free exchange of ideas"? You guys could be mining helium on the Moon, then building interplanetary transportation and communication networks with the Europeans and the Africans (if they can also get their act together in the next few dec
your words are basically "shut up and respect the guy in charge"
Yes, evil China. In the west, we never let the guy in charge decide, we always look for what the average person wants. There will never be a war that isn't supported by a vast majority... Err...
that's not wrong according to western values, that's wrong period, according to all human values
According to western human values. The human rights of the UN are very strongly western values. When they were drafted, few non-western countries had a say.
it's called democracy, and it is the right and provenance of every single soul on this planet
According to which universal truth?
Hold the flamethrower for a second. I don't say tyranny is great. However, this blind love with "democracy" is not productiv
Every war starts out supported by a vast majority. It isn't until about two years in that the protests start. It's like that with every war, from Vietnam to WWII.
That is the current consensus in western society, yes.
is there another way to look at this issue?
Hundreds. In fact, mankind has lived 99% of it's existence subscribing to non-equality. The very same way we would call someone antisocial or insane if he claimed that group X is more or less valuable than other humans, the same way you would have been looked at as a nutcase in most of human history. People would be upset and consider you endangering their very morals if you had claimed that slaves, jews, christians, greeks, women or whatever they oppr
slavery still exists. it always will, under the radar, in some form or another. does this mean you stop fighting slavery? furthermore, at some point in the past, slavery was more prevalent than it was today. so is this proof of progress in the world?
It is an excellent argument against your "universal human rights". Because for millenia slavery was perfectly acceptable in most human societies. How do you dig that? By claiming "progress"? That the "universal human rights" have only been discovered recently?
Now, there are only two ways to parse this: Either, progress is inherent and any future state is by definition advanced to any past state. Or, you include a judgement by deciding what you consider progress and what not. Judgements are always based on v
universal human rights always existed, exists everywhere now, and always will exist
Is that a belief or a fact? If it is a fact, please point me to the evidence of universal human rights, say, 200 million years ago, when there were no humans. Ok, that's an invalid argument you say, so let's kill your second all-quantor. Please point me to the universal human rights in the Andromeda galaxy. Hey, you said "everywhere", not me.:-)
No, I'm not just playing stupid here. There's a point. The point is that your definition lacks. If you agree that "universal human rights" can't have existed before
science and logic. ha! you want to reduce humanity to a math problem
"Compassion is an emotion evolved through natural selection to facilitate the survival of the species. The same goes for all of our primitive moral instincts. They are nothing more than techniques that improve our fitness for natural selection."
yes, agreed 100%. and? is it ever another way?
"You can kick and scream all you like (and that's all you have done here) but in the end your position isn't logical."
That is weird, you know? Because usually the position of absolute moral values is the position of the fundamentalist. Actually, that's pretty much what the word means.
at the same time, i hew to moral equivalency: that humanity has more in common in values than differences.
Now we're getting somewhere. Thanks. Yes, humanity has lots in common. If more or less depends on how you enumerate, so let's just ignore that. It seems the whole thing is that we approach from different directions. I'm trying to understand humanity by what Korzybski calls extension [wikipedia.org], while you appear to define the world according to the prin
Ummm, the chinese have a *right* to live however they want as a independent society ( until they try to force it onto other countries, or become a danger to the rest of the world ). As do we. Dont forget that there are people on this planet that thing democracy is just as wrong as we might think of theirs..
Who wins when there is a disagreement? Who get to make the decision of what is the 'right' way to live and the 'wrong' way? ( ill give you a hint, its not you )
Ummm, the chinese have a *right* to live however they want
Exactly. The individual Chinese have every right to live however they want, until they try to force their preferences onto others, or make threats against them. If some (or all) of them don't want to be censored, they have every right not to be.
No offence but who gives a fuck about violating the "wishes" of human rights violators.
Do you feel the same way about the US government. They also violate peoples human rights. The two most current examples are Gauntanamo Bay and the rendition torture express flights being operated by the CIA.
No, you sue / charge the owners/operators. Much as you would do with a corporation that has overstepped its boundaries.
Now, i agree its hard to get somone transferred out of the country to face charges, but it DOES happen on occasion, and it doesnt mean they cant at least try, even if the request is denied.
by Anonymous Coward
on Saturday June 09 2007, @05:09PM (#19453383)
... Don't watch the Olympics. Let the media carrying the Olympics know that you're boycotting them, and will try to get others to join the cause vs. Chinese censorship. Try to avoid purchasing goods made in China, or from companies with close relationships with China. Otherwise, they'll continue to do what they want with all the money the West sends them...
Economics, the only science where ethics and morality are thrown out the window.
I believe the word you were looking for was "politics". Economic science is predicated on ethical behavior, although I will admit that it -- like all other forms of science -- is essentially amoral (though not immoral -- it simply leaves morality up to the individual participants).
Of course, you failed to mention that they got kicked out of the Olympic Village and the Olympics higherups threatened the USA(and Australia, who harbored the second-place winner evil for supporting their protest) with ostracision from the Olympics if they didn't kick them from their teams.
by Anonymous Coward
on Saturday June 09 2007, @05:31PM (#19453557)
A couple of days ago was the anniversary of the Tianenmen Square Massacre. Several major sites were carrying a story about a Flickr album depicting the event. No doubt the Chinese Communist Party censors picked up on it and decided to block.
Is a shame Occident is supporting and sponsoring an oppressive regime, we are the ones that are doing business with them betraying ourselves, freedom, democracy and our occidental roots and values. We are the ones blame, not China; they just found is easy to play with us using their own rules because now days Occident only cares about saving some bucks.
I wonder what happened to Occident, great promises of freedom and equality are fading away in our old and corrupt society.
Which one of you upload the picture of the tank man [wikipedia.org] onto Flickr? Boy, that must have been an embarrassing moment for the party and they don't like to be reminded of it. That and pictures of shooting hundreds and thousands of college students demanding what is promised to them in their constitution.
Seems if you want something not to be pirated in China, how about adding extras like the Dalai Lama, Falon Gong or Tiananmen Square? Software makers, be sure to feature a Falon Gong extra in the tutorials. Movie makers: How about a cameo by the Dalai Lama in the next Pirates of the Caribbean movie? Google Maps: when you zoom in on Tiananmen, show perspective mapped photos of what really happened.
Is there a group somewhere consisting of people who know computers using their skills to attack computer systems run by oppressive regimes and shut down their ability to do this sort of thing?
China has a group of hackers that do nothing but make viruses, spyware, to try and infiltrate and sabotauge foreign computers.
I would tell you that the world is large enough for several evils, but that wouldn't do your point justice, which... well, if you had a point, it wouldn't do it justice.
Your point basically comes down to : my allegations about bush are a conspiracy theory, so they must be right ! But the real situation is much less spectacular (obviously). Bush, and the American public, actually listen to your self-important dribble, and give you a "mission". The mere fact that you accuse your government is something Hong Kong would kill, or at least imprison you.
So please, join the real world. You'll find it to be a much more logical place than that scary illogical hole you occupy right no
Come on China, (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Come on China, (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Come on China, (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Come on China, (Score:5, Informative)
I actually thought the first post was quite funny but I suppose anyone suggesting that the US govt might like to censor anything is offensive to some people. The reality is that the US goverment and certain states in particular have a long history of censorship.
As usual, wikipedia has a pretty decent page on the subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_Un
I am not saying that the US is as bad as China, but no government is above trying to censor things they dont aggree with for any number of reasons.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you mean this as a small crusade to economically punish the Chinese state into your way of thinking, I'd view it as counter-productive - the state censorship was *strongest* when China had the weakest economy, and when it had the least amount of contact with the outside world. If China's export market crumbled the economy would take a big hit, but that would not mean the censorship would
Thank God that wouldn't happen in the US (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh... er...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's how it's done in America: they don't use guns. They use lawyers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not News (Score:3, Informative)
The great Firewall (Score:2)
Quick everyone make flickr clones! Oh wait...
Olympics will be exempt (Score:5, Insightful)
The rest of the country? No.
A month later? No.
BTW, don't check your business email or log in to the corporate VPN from China. You know the story: "all your trade secrets are blong to us".
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, isn't this what encryption is for? (God help you if your company doesn't encrypt it's VPN)
So let me get this straight (Score:2, Informative)
You guys want us to buy all the stuff you make, and you don't want to allow your people access to the ideas we make.
How much longer are you going to let this authoritarian bullshit go on? Do you realize how powerful China could become if it embraced concepts like "the free exchange of ideas"? You guys could be mining helium on the Moon, then building interplanetary transportation and communication networks with the Europeans and the Africans (if they can also get their act together in the next few dec
How much longer? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
A fix? (Score:3, Funny)
Techincally if fickr circumvents this, they are violating China's wishes, and could be sued charged with treason and extradited.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
there is something greater in importance (Score:2, Insightful)
namely, it is the wishes of the average chinese person
your words are basically "shut up and respect the guy in charge"
no, fuck you. the guy in charge needs to respect the guy on the street. in china, he does not do this. that's wrong
that's not wrong according to western values, that's wrong period, according to all human values
it's called democracy, and it is the right and provenance of every single soul on this planet
do you understand? or are you still so
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
your words are basically "shut up and respect the guy in charge"
Yes, evil China. In the west, we never let the guy in charge decide, we always look for what the average person wants. There will never be a war that isn't supported by a vast majority... Err...
that's not wrong according to western values, that's wrong period, according to all human values
According to western human values. The human rights of the UN are very strongly western values. When they were drafted, few non-western countries had a say.
it's called democracy, and it is the right and provenance of every single soul on this planet
According to which universal truth?
Hold the flamethrower for a second. I don't say tyranny is great. However, this blind love with "democracy" is not productiv
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
all people SHOULD BE equal?
That is the current consensus in western society, yes.
is there another way to look at this issue?
Hundreds. In fact, mankind has lived 99% of it's existence subscribing to non-equality. The very same way we would call someone antisocial or insane if he claimed that group X is more or less valuable than other humans, the same way you would have been looked at as a nutcase in most of human history. People would be upset and consider you endangering their very morals if you had claimed that slaves, jews, christians, greeks, women or whatever they oppr
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
slavery still exists. it always will, under the radar, in some form or another. does this mean you stop fighting slavery? furthermore, at some point in the past, slavery was more prevalent than it was today. so is this proof of progress in the world?
It is an excellent argument against your "universal human rights". Because for millenia slavery was perfectly acceptable in most human societies. How do you dig that? By claiming "progress"? That the "universal human rights" have only been discovered recently?
Now, there are only two ways to parse this: Either, progress is inherent and any future state is by definition advanced to any past state.
Or, you include a judgement by deciding what you consider progress and what not. Judgements are always based on v
Re:i think i'm beginning to understand your proble (Score:3, Insightful)
universal human rights always existed, exists everywhere now, and always will exist
Is that a belief or a fact? :-)
If it is a fact, please point me to the evidence of universal human rights, say, 200 million years ago, when there were no humans.
Ok, that's an invalid argument you say, so let's kill your second all-quantor. Please point me to the universal human rights in the Andromeda galaxy. Hey, you said "everywhere", not me.
No, I'm not just playing stupid here. There's a point. The point is that your definition lacks. If you agree that "universal human rights" can't have existed before
again, your essential problem: asperger's (Score:3, Insightful)
you want to reduce humanity to a math problem
"Compassion is an emotion evolved through natural selection to facilitate the survival of the species. The same goes for all of our primitive moral instincts. They are nothing more than techniques that improve our fitness for natural selection."
yes, agreed 100%. and? is it ever another way?
"You can kick and scream all you like (and that's all you have done here) but in the end your position isn't logical."
no, it's not logical. nor will it ev
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
fundamentalism is my enemy
That is weird, you know? Because usually the position of absolute moral values is the position of the fundamentalist. Actually, that's pretty much what the word means.
at the same time, i hew to moral equivalency: that humanity has more in common in values than differences.
Now we're getting somewhere. Thanks. Yes, humanity has lots in common. If more or less depends on how you enumerate, so let's just ignore that. It seems the whole thing is that we approach from different directions. I'm trying to understand humanity by what Korzybski calls extension [wikipedia.org], while you appear to define the world according to the prin
Re: (Score:2)
Who wins when there is a disagreement? Who get to make the decision of what is the 'right' way to live and the 'wrong' way? ( ill give you a hint, its not you )
Re:there is something greater in importance (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. The individual Chinese have every right to live however they want, until they try to force their preferences onto others, or make threats against them. If some (or all) of them don't want to be censored, they have every right not to be.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Do you feel the same way about the US government. They also violate peoples human rights. The two most current examples are Gauntanamo Bay and the rendition torture express flights being operated by the CIA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendit
Re: (Score:2)
Sue a website? (Score:2)
Now, i agree its hard to get somone transferred out of the country to face charges, but it DOES happen on occasion, and it doesnt mean they cant at least try, even if the request is denied.
If you don't like the Chinese Government... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe the word you were looking for was "politics". Economic science is predicated on ethical behavior, although I will admit that it -- like all other forms of science -- is essentially amoral (though not immoral -- it simply leaves morality up to the individual participants).
Your war on economics is badly misguided.
Re: (Score:2)
Not Surprised (Score:3, Funny)
I've yet to know if they know what human rights means.
Shorter list (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
The Reason is Obvious (Score:5, Informative)
We are the ones blame (Score:2)
I wonder what happened to Occident, great promises of freedom and equality are fading away in our old and corrupt society.
OK, Fess Up (Score:2)
Using Censorship against them (Score:4, Interesting)
Seriously: I have a friend who just got back from a visit in China. He said the Communist Party is very scared about losing its grip on society. They've very, very worried about losing control. Something you haven't heard in the mainstream media: Chinese, particularly the poorer ones, are really sick of the rich getting richer. When the Chinese Government wants to build a road, they pick a poor area, flatten it and kick the poor locals out. Increasingly, people are getting sick of it and the government is worried: This is why they're banning things left, right and center: http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/2275.asp [indiadaily.com] http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/PEK16528
Re: (Score:2)
China has a group of hackers that do nothing but make viruses, spyware, to try and infiltrate and sabotauge foreign computers.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In the real world, or just in Command and Conquer Generals?
I thought that most spyware originated in the US where you could sell marketing data you gathered for the greatest returns.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But the real situation is much less spectacular (obviously). Bush, and the American public, actually listen to your self-important dribble, and give you a "mission". The mere fact that you accuse your government is something Hong Kong would kill, or at least imprison you.
So please, join the real world. You'll find it to be a much more logical place than that scary illogical hole you occupy right no