China's All-Seeing Eye

krou writes "Naomi Klein writes in Rolling Stone Magazine about China's Panopticon-like experiment called 'Golden Shield' taking place in Shenzhen using technology supplied by companies such as IBM, Honeywell, and General Electric. Klein writes: 'Chinese citizens will be watched around the clock through networked CCTV cameras and remote monitoring of computers. They will be listened to on their phone calls, monitored by digital voice-recognition technologies. Their Internet access will be aggressively limited through the country's notorious system of online controls known as the "Great Firewall." Their movements will be tracked through national ID cards with scannable computer chips and photos that are instantly uploaded to police databases and linked to their holder's personal data.' According to Klein, this is more than just a Chinese experiment, it's also one that holds ramifications for America and elsewhere: '...the most efficient delivery system for capitalism is actually a communist-style police state... The global corporations currently earning superprofits from this social experiment are unlikely to be content if the lucrative new market remains confined to cities such as Shenzhen. Like everything else assembled in China with American parts, Police State 2.0 is ready for export to a neighborhood near you.'"

uh oh

[the brown guy]

Anonymous Coward? Not for long...

No problem

[mark72005]

Put MediaDefender on it!

Re:Oh fuck.

[beakerMeep]

If it's anything like web 2.0, we'll be fine.

Re:I'm being entirely serious.

[theheadlessrabbit]

But you might start by getting involved. Be your own news source, instead of settling for second-hand sensationalism.

great idea!
how can we trust these lousy reporters, 'burn the lot of them' I say.

Lets have everyone, all 300 million of you Americans go and pack up all your bags, move to China, walk up to a chinese government official, and ask them "what's going on?"

thats a brilliant idea! you should go and get right on that.

or, for the sake of efficiency, we can have a small number of people go into an area and report on things for the rest of us!
yea!
We could even give those people special training!
Maybe they could even make a career out of going to these far away places on our behalf and reporting on events, situations and politics! what a brilliant idea!

Re:US + China connected?

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

And that's why I draw an eye patch on every dollar I get. Plus I give the pyramid an old timey mustache. Cause it looks cool.

Re:George Orwell, anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

I mentioned 1984 to a friend that lives in China and she has never heard of that book, or Orwell. So, yes, it is banned.

Wow, somebody give this guy a Nobel Prize for his exhaustive research and well-reasoned conclusion.

Re:Bla bla bla

[s4m7]

Thompson was a sensationalist. O'Rourke is an opinion writer...And don't confuse either with Naomi Klein.

wait, you mean this publication actually serves different viepoints and reader needs? They must be up to something nefarous. Trusty old fox news serves only one set of interests and we can sure rely on them!

Yeah, sure that'll work,

[Duncan Blackthorne]

It's always worked in the past, right? What a bunch of fucking bullshit. Know what else? We won't have to fire a single shot against China, ever, because they continue to perpetrate crap like this, there's eventually going to be a civil war over it. Human beings don't like being treated this way, and they can't jail the whole billion-plus of them -- not even by making the whole country into a prison -- which is essentially what they're trying to do. I don't care WHAT culture you're from, you can't make me believe that you LIKE being treated like a prisoner.

Re:I'm being entirely serious.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Special training" was probably intended to refer to a degree in journalism, not learning how to give Roger Ailes, Karl Rove, and Dick Cheney blowjobs.

Re:Bla bla bla

[Admiral Ag]

I can't think of anything intrinsically wrong with glossy magazines other than when you're reading one in the toilet and you notice you're out of lavatory paper. At that point, they are evil.

Do you actually read Rolling Stone? Sensationalist? More like soporific a lot of the time.