Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Government The Internet Your Rights Online

China Explains Internet Situation In Whitepaper 115

Posted by kdawson
from the for-some-definitions-of-free dept.
eldavojohn writes "In a new whitepaper, China has declared the Internet to be 'the crystallization of human wisdom' and officially issued what appears to be a defense of its policies on Web censorship, while at the same time making contradicting statements like 'Chinese citizens fully enjoy freedom of speech on the Internet' and (in the same paper) 'Laws and regulations clearly prohibit the spread of information that contains content subverting state power, undermining national unity, [or] infringing upon national honor and interests.' The paper also claims some questionable superlatives such as 'China is one of the countries suffering most from hacking.' On the positive side, this 31-page document might be offered as an operating guide for businesses, like Google, looking to understand exactly what the law is surrounding the Internet in China. The document is a rare glimpse of transparency in China's regulations."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China Explains Internet Situation In Whitepaper

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    'US citizens fully enjoy freedom of speech on the Internet' and (in the same paper) 'Laws and regulations clearly prohibit the spread of material that contains copyrighted content, undermine intellectual property rights, [or] infringe patent laws.'

    Yeah, it goes both ways. But at least China keeps it inside their borders and isn't trying to censor me or you. USA, copyrights and patents on the other hand...

    • by kheldan (1460303)

      Chinese citizens enjoy freedom of (state approved) speech on the internet

      There, China, fixed that for ya.

      • by jopsen (885607)
        I think GPs point is that we do the same thing... The only difference is the definition of "state approved".
        (An important definition, but still we also limit freedom of speech).
      • by rant64 (1148751)
        Pay attention!
    • You misunderstand free speech. In the US you are free to speak your words as you wish.
      • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Not if my words are a computer-readable description of a patented algorithm, or a DRM system, or (depending on where the person I'm talking to happens to live) a strong encryption algorithm.

        I would not, of course, equate these restrictions with what China is doing, but don't pretend the US laws are perfect.

    • by flyneye (84093)

      So, the Chinese Govt. lies to its people and has hoodwinked the vast majority into accepting its bullshit and authority. How is that any different than the United States? They have a gullible majority of population, we have Democrats and Republicans. Their government changes the rules on the fly and declares it always so, ours got us to pay income tax, believe the Fed is powerful over the sovereign states, and daily toss around unconstitutional legislation assuring us of the legalities of their bullshit cod

  • Free-ish Speech (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Rotworm (649729) * on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @03:12PM (#32500482) Homepage Journal
    Do Chinese people enjoy freedom of speech on the Internet in a substantively different way than we do?
    I can say whatever I want, except things that are against the law to say. It's the same system in China, but they have different laws. I'm no expert, but I think the only meaningful difference is that citizens cannot criticise the government -and don't get me wrong, that's a big difference, but they report they are trying a system where the nation is unified. Maybe I disagree with that approach, but I think it's suspect to say that China opposes freedom of speech when they only differ on a single issue.
    Further, there are many laws here in Canada that limit speech, that don't have a corresponding law in China. Specifically, I'm thinking about race.
    • Re:Free-ish Speech (Score:5, Insightful)

      by eldavojohn (898314) * <eldavojohnNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @03:19PM (#32500586) Journal

      Further, there are many laws here in Canada that limit speech, that don't have a corresponding law in China. Specifically, I'm thinking about race.

      I would posit that the difference in your Canada vs China comparison is that the laws are better defined for you than they are a Chinese citizen. Like, what the hell does "non-harmonious" mean exactly? You don't know but you seem to have lost your job because of it.

      Think for a minute about what the phrase "speech against the government" could mean in China. Is saying "The Yang-tse river is so polluted!" considered speech against the Chinese government? Is complaining about your working conditions okay? Is criticizing the United States' copyright laws okay when your government has pledged time and time again to combat piracy?

      I think the biggest issue is that all of the above can be against the law on a case by case basis decided by the state. In Canada, are you afraid of the government disliking you for some reason and then reviewing your internet usage and history to find something to prosecute you under?

      • The most efficient way to ensure arbitrary prosecution under the law is to keep the laws subjective in nature:

        Phrases like, "unity...national honor...and interests...." provide nice means to ensuring your enemies are at your mercy.

        Criticize Chinese society all you like, but you have to give it props for being crafty and efficient with persecution!
      • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

        by Jurily (900488)

        I would posit that the difference in your Canada vs China comparison is that the laws are better defined for you than they are a Chinese citizen.

        Are they now? [wikipedia.org]

        Think for a minute about what the phrase "speech against the government" could mean in China. Is saying "The Yang-tse river is so polluted!" considered speech against the Chinese government? Is complaining about your working conditions okay? Is criticizing the United States' copyright laws okay when your government has pledged time and time again to combat piracy?

        You know that well enough by the time you get out of grade school.

        In Canada, are you afraid of the government disliking you for some reason and then reviewing your internet usage and history to find something to prosecute you under?

        s/government/copyright organizations/ Yes.

        There is no substantial difference between China and the US, except for the theatrics. Just to really earn my Troll mod, who was the last President who was neither Republican, nor Democrat? Who gets to choose the candidates for those parties? And most importantly, who were the last two candidates who received all their campaign contributions from *entirely* different sets of corporation

        • by bhagwad (1426855)

          Are they now? [wikipedia.org]

          Just because you need to look it up doesn't mean they're not clearly defined.

          You know that well enough by the time you get out of grade school.

          Prevarication

          Just to really earn my Troll mod, who was the last President who was neither Republican, nor Democrat? Who gets to choose the candidates for those parties? And most importantly, who were the last two candidates who received all their campaign contributions from *entirely* different sets of corporations?

          Red Herring.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Further, there are many laws here in Canada that limit speech, that don't have a corresponding law in China. Specifically, I'm thinking about race.

        I would posit that the difference in your Canada vs China comparison is that the laws are better defined for you than they are a Chinese citizen. Like, what the hell does "non-harmonious" mean exactly? You don't know but you seem to have lost your job because of it.

        Think for a minute about what the phrase "speech against the government" could mean in China. Is saying "The Yang-tse river is so polluted!" considered speech against the Chinese government? Is complaining about your working conditions okay? Is criticizing the United States' copyright laws okay when your government has pledged time and time again to combat piracy?

        I think the biggest issue is that all of the above can be against the law on a case by case basis decided by the state. In Canada, are you afraid of the government disliking you for some reason and then reviewing your internet usage and history to find something to prosecute you under?

        What is to say that those phrases don't have a more specific meaning in Chineese (I don't know Chinese, so I don't know). English is a very vague language as it is and the Chineese mindset is very different from the Anglosaxian-American.

        I have had to explain the Swedish term "ministerstyre" (the Pirate Bay trials and some weapon system exports that slashdot haven't reported about) to a lot of English speaking people and it is really hard, not just because the English language lacks the words that is needed

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by DigiShaman (671371)

          Tiananmen Square, June 3, 1989. Did that event not solidify exactly what the hell is going on there? Your attempt at moral relativism is pathetic.

        • I would posit that the difference in your Canada vs China comparison is that the laws are better defined for you than they are a Chinese citizen. Like, what the hell does "non-harmonious" mean exactly? You don't know but you seem to have lost your job because of it.

          Think for a minute about what the phrase "speech against the government" could mean in China. Is saying "The Yang-tse river is so polluted!" considered speech against the Chinese government? Is complaining about your working conditions okay? Is criticizing the United States' copyright laws okay when your government has pledged time and time again to combat piracy?

          What is to say that those phrases don't have a more specific meaning in Chineese (I don't know Chinese, so I don't know). English is a very vague language as it is and the Chineese mindset is very different from the Anglosaxian-American.

          Well, I know Chinese. While the mindset may be different, "non-harmonious" and "speech against the government" are worthlessly ambiguous (or beautifully malleable, depending on your perspective) in both languages. If arbitrary censorship is what you're after, wouldn't broad, vague legislation be precisely the right tool?

          This is the free-speech equivalent of "enemy combatant" -- newspeak that conveniently means whatever your agenda wants it to.

      • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        In Canada, are you afraid of the government disliking you for some reason and then reviewing your internet usage and history to find something to prosecute you under?

        In America, I am increasingly afraid of this happening. With the laws that require ISPs and internet search companies to maintain records for longer and longer periods of time, as well as the use of National Security Letters by the federal government to obtain that information, this is more likely than ever before. When the government can access all of your online history without oversight and without your knowledge, it sets up perfectly for abuse.

      • by jandersen (462034)

        ... what the hell does "non-harmonious" mean exactly?

        It means "not in harmony with ..." - "harmony" is a concept that has a long history in Chinese culture, and translating it into English loses most of its meaning. In my experience it is something that makes excellent sense to a Chinese, even if it doesn't seem obvious to an American. Apart from that, is it not simply ill-will on your part when you claim not to understand what is meant? To me it seems obvious that it means "not in harmony with whatever general principles", in which case it becomes simply a

    • Unless you live in Pennsylvania, USA [switched.com]

      York Canada [dailyfinance.com]
      Lancashire, UK [timesonline.co.uk]

      We're more alike than you think.

      • I agree, be silent, be very silent. Better yet saying nothing might keep you out of trouble/

      • Re:Free-ish Speech (Score:4, Interesting)

        by OldHawk777 (19923) * <oh21&comcast,net> on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @04:11PM (#32501338) Journal

        Why a 15 digit prime number with a leading zero?
        100010001010011, 17491, 4453

      • Re:Free-ish Speech (Score:4, Insightful)

        by 2short (466733) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @05:25PM (#32502446)

          So in one case, a state Attorney General issues an inappropriate subpoena to try to stop internet criticism, it's obviously a ridiculous failure, and the headline in the newspaper is "Stunning Abuse of Power". He may even lose the election because of it.

        In the other case, the national government issues an official policy stating that online criticism of the state will not be tolerated and perpetrators will be jailed. The newspapers all support the government because it owns them. This won't impact elections, because they don't have any.

        Somehow, I am not having difficulty distinguishing these. Attempts to quash free speech ought to to be called out and combated. If you live in PA, you ought to vote against this tool. But come on: If you're trying to claim Pennsylvania is at all comparably oppressive to China, you're crazy.

        On the other hand, if you're trying to point out that the're is nothing magical about being an American; that totalitarian tools can rise to power and gain the support of PA Republicans as easily as Chinese Communists; that our vastly superior freedoms are only the result of historical luck and constant vigilance... then I'm with you, obviously.

    • Do Chinese people enjoy freedom of speech on the Internet in a substantively different way than we do?

      Yes, because the Chinese government's definition of "enjoy" is similar to the western world's definition of "suffer".

    • by jethr0211 (996156)
      Complete Freedom of speech... with the minor exception that (from the whitepaper): no organization or individual may produce, duplicate, announce or disseminate information having the following contents: being against the cardinal principles set forth in the Constitution; endangering state security, divulging state secrets, subverting state power and jeopardizing national unification; damaging state honor and interests; instigating ethnic hatred or discrimination and jeopardizing ethnic unity; jeopardizing
    • Re:Free-ish Speech (Score:5, Insightful)

      by somenickname (1270442) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @03:30PM (#32500766)

      The problem is that criticizing the government is one of the primary reasons to have the notion of "freedom of speech".

      • The problem is that criticizing the government is one of the primary reasons to have the notion of "freedom of speech".

        I would think that the primary reason for having the notion of freedom of speech is to point out and criticize use and abuse of power. In the colonial America around 1776, the abuse of power came directly or indirectly from governmental power (the English king). Today, there's also use and abuse of power from private and public companies.

        Look also at guilt and burden of evidence in civil vs. criminal cases: in civil cases, the verdict is decided based on a "preponderance of evidence" (51-49); in criminal

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by danlip (737336)

      but I think the only meaningful difference is that citizens cannot criticise the government -and don't get me wrong, that's a big difference

      That's more than just a big difference - there is one and only one truly important aspect of freedom of speech, and that is the right to criticize the government. I'm not saying other things aren't important to talk about, but any other law can be changed as long as you have citizens who care and have the right to criticize the current laws, so that right is what is truly important.

    • Laws and regulations clearly prohibit the spread of information that contains content subverting state power, undermining national unity, [or] infringing upon national honor and interests.

      read that carefully. it's subjective enough to cover just about anything. for example, say you start taking about porn ... does that infringe on national honor? perhaps you want to discuss middle eastern politics. does your view go against national interests? maybe.

      it sounds like you might be a chinese citizen, so considering your interpretation of that above, i suggest you go try our your new found freedom and see how far you get. please report back to us and let us know.

    • Do Chinese people enjoy freedom of speech on the Internet in a substantively different way than we do?

      Yes. The Chinese government engages in an active propaganda/disinformation campaign in an effort to rewrite history. Search for Tiananmen Square in a mainland Chinese search engine, and you will find lots of info on the place itself, but likely not so much on the violent crackdown in 1989, thanks to the government.

    • by poity (465672)

      What is freedom of speech but the acknowledgment that controversial, unpopular, or provocative ideas nonetheless have a right to be aired in the public sphere?
      What is the Chinese way of pursuing social harmony but the active suppression of controversial, unpopular, and provocative ideas from being aired in the public sphere?

      I recognize that the Chinese government has improved vastly, especially over the last 2 decades.
      But, contrary to your claim, the Chinese government does indeed oppose freedom of speech -

  • by Anonymous Coward

    "I suffered from a bullying problem in school too, Lisa"

    Visualization:

    Homer beating up on some kid

    Sure China has a 'hacking problem'

    • heya,

      Well said =).

      Also, not to be pedantic or anything, but I believe the original quote is:

      Homer: Oh, Lisa, I know how you feel. Did you know that when I was in grade school, I had a bully problem myself?
      (whip pan past a screen full of hippie daisies and psychedelic colors to the 1970s where a preteen Homer has a preteen Smithers pinned to a wall of lockers with his fist drawn back)
      Teenage Homer (singing): Everybody was (as he's punching Smithers in the stomach): kung-fu-fighting!
      (Smithers moans as a prete

  • by PIBM (588930) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @03:13PM (#32500516) Homepage

    'China is one of the countries suffering most from hacking.' is quite true: they are bashed a lot for it!

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by blair1q (305137)

      And I'm going to pile on.

      The vast majority of port scans in my router logs are from IP addresses in China.

      If they insist on filtering what goes into China, they should at least have the consistency to filter what comes out of it.

  • More ridiculous? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by butalearner (1235200) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @03:13PM (#32500520)
    Which is more ridiculous, China's claims in this whitepaper, or the RIAA's claims in the LimeWire suit [slashdot.org]? I'm leaning towards RIAA. Discuss.
    • by blair1q (305137)

      I'm leaning towards RIAA

      The RIAA is making a pro-forma claim based on a law they paid to have constructed.

      China is making a pro-forma claim based on a law they killed to have constructed.

      China FTW.

    • China's claims.

      The RIAA's claims, for all their outsized lunacy and frothy-mouthed legalese, are a) plainly ludicrous on their face, and b) finite in size, albeit gigantic.

      China's claims are couched in far more reasonable language, but since they lay claim to the free speech rights of over a billion people, I would argue that their claim is smaller in total numbers, but larger in actual impact and value.
  • by Pojut (1027544) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @03:14PM (#32500528) Homepage

    "You are free to do what we tell you! You are free to do what we tell you!"

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Laws everywhere are unclear. I think in China the rules are intentionally unclear at a scale not seen in the US.

      The most effective sensorship is self sensorship out of fear. The vast majority of sensorship is done at the local management level.

      In the US we have Safe Harbor times. No words need to legally be bleeped at midnight, Yet they are anyway.

      In the US it is much more clear and limited.
       

  • by blair1q (305137)

    So they presume their conclusion: that Communism is a good thing and any excess in the defense of it is valid.

    The rest of the world disagrees and wishes the government of China would just stop oppressing its people, starting with allowing those people to discuss the oppression.

    • by Pojut (1027544)

      So they presume their conclusion: that Communism is a good thing and any excess in the defense of it is valid.

      Quinn: "I think the great struggle is all made up...the only thing we're struggling against is him."
      Debbie: "So wait, you're saying Communism is bad?"
      Quinn: "What are you, two years old? Hasn't history proven that Marx's vision of an egalitarian utopia is unattainable, inevitably creating an oligarchy more oppressive to the proletariat than the bourgeoisie it vilifies?"
      Stormy: "I have to pee."

    • Communism was just a Red Herring!

  • Contradictory? (Score:1, Redundant)

    by zill (1690130)

    ...making contradicting statements like 'Chinese citizens fully enjoy freedom of speech on the Internet'...

    How is that statements contradictory? All man has the inalienable right to freedom of speech.

    It's another matter whether they still have freedom after speech.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by selven (1556643)

      The word "freedom" in legal contexts means not only that the government won't try to stop you from doing what you're free to do, but also that the government won't punish you for doing it. That's the standard definition Slashdot, and the rest of the world, has been operating under ever since the idea of freedom became important. No loopholes here.

    • How is that statements contradictory? All man has the inalienable right to freedom of speech.

      It's another matter whether they still have freedom after speech.

      There is a delay before many of your comments are published. That delay is to ensure that they are properly censored.

  • by PatPending (953482) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @03:27PM (#32500714)

    China has declared the Internet to be 'the crystallization of human wisdom'

    Imagine how proud Al Gore must be.

  • The paper also claims some questionable superlatives such as 'China is one of the countries suffering most from hacking.'

    I believe that Chinese, more than in any other countries, are all using Windows, and have a very poor knowledge of computing in general. Nearly all (if not simply all) banking access are windows only, and so are so many other websites. As a consequence, I wouldn't be surprised if the rate of trojaned workstation was a way higher in China, and simply considering the amount of people in
  • Given China's track record in other areas, can we really believe this document at face value? Perhaps we should view it as what China would like the world to believe, rather than the truth.
    • by DABANSHEE (154661)

      Just because they censor the web doesn't mean they stop Chinese saying what ever they want over the web. It just stops other Chinese hearing/seeing everything they want over the web. Plus there are about 200 odd countries so even if China only just makes it into the list of the top 20 most hacked countries, it still means China is one of the most hacked as that would mean being in the top 10%.

      • by walterbyrd (182728)

        I think you may have misunderstand the post to which you replied. That post made that point that Chinese propaganda is about as reliable as the old Iraqi minister of information.

        Consider China's accounting of their fighter jets being attacked by a US cargo airplane.

  • Free speech means being able to tell others how to decrypt DRM.
    • by Shakrai (717556) *

      It also means being able to call minorities racial epithets and sharing the knowledge required to build bombs and other destructive devices.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by MBGMorden (803437)

        Which I certainly don't see as a problem. Don't get me wrong, I think racism is a horrible, horrible thing, but I think it an equally horrible situation when people can be legally fined or jailed just for saying offensive things - racist or no.

        That's the problem with too many groups today. People have no capacity to separate activities which they find DISTASTEFUL, from activities which they believe should be ILLEGAL. To many it's all just one in the same. Growing up in the south, it's basically what I'v

        • by Shakrai (717556) *

          I don't see it as a problem either. Was just pointing it out as a truth. Free speech != speech that you agree with or speech that the government deems worthy of publication.

  • by fishexe (168879) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @03:38PM (#32500896) Homepage

    On the positive side, this 31-page document might be offered as an operating guide for businesses, like Google, looking to understand exactly what the law is surrounding the Internet in China. The document is a rare glimpse of transparency in China's regulations. (emphasis added)

    Actually, China issues documents like this all the time. They don't normally represent glimpses of transparency because they're in no way binding on the government. That is, you could follow all the substantive recommendations (if there even are any) and still be deemed to have "undermined national unity" or "infringed upon national honor" based on nothing but the PRC's desire to get you.
    Thus the first sentence above is apt but the second is questionable. Might this be a glimpse of transparency? Only time will tell. If companies carefully following the guidelines available manage not to run afoul of the PRC government, then the answer will be yes. Otherwise, it's no glimpse of transparency at all, and even muddies the waters a bit more than was already the case.

    • by grumpyman (849537)

      That is, you could follow all the substantive recommendations (if there even are any) and still be deemed to have "undermined national unity" or "infringed upon national honor" based on nothing but the PRC's desire to get you.

      Oh, I see, so it works like patriot act then?

  • Rights... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Notquitecajun (1073646) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @03:40PM (#32500928)
    For those of you who believe that our rights are somehow egregiously eroded in the US, I give you China.

    If freedom of speech is prohibited in the US, I haven't seen it.
    • by Shakrai (717556) *

      If freedom of speech is prohibited in the US, I haven't seen it.

      If you take the current nominee [wikipedia.org] to SCOTUS at her word [slashdot.org], it's only free speech if the value of the speech exceeds the "societal cost" of that speech.

    • For those of you who believe that our rights are somehow egregiously eroded in the US, I give you China.

      If freedom of speech is prohibited in the US, I haven't seen it.

      Isn't that kind of the point?

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by logjon (1411219)
      "Better than the worst" != "Acceptable Transgressions"
  • Freedom of Speach is Censorship

  • I am really sick of people making the internet out to be something it is not. The Internet is a bunch of protocols that facilitates end to end communication to the boundaries of it's network. It's as transparent as indoor plumbing. All it does is connect a user to services, it is not a information super-highway (urgh), an oracle of all human knowledge or a portent of the kurzweilian singularity.

    If one want to talk about those things you can talk about the services and their patrons that operate over the i
    • by neonKow (1239288)
      My car is technically a pile of metal, pastic, cloth, and oil, but it can also be a advanced mobility enchancer. The internet wasn't created to be an information super-highway, but that doesn't mean it's not that and more. You are a fool if you don't think the internet allows massive amounts of information to get around the world.
  • by jc42 (318812) on Tuesday June 08, 2010 @04:25PM (#32501526) Homepage Journal

    crystallization of human wisdom???

    Man, they've really handed one to the comedians with that one.

    Some time ago, I saw a quote from some old sage to the effect that libraries contain the summary of all human wisdom -- and much of its foolishness. It occurs to me that the same situation has developed on the Internet, but several orders of magnitude greater. Of course, since the Internet took off, the sum total of human wisdom probably hasn't grown all that much. So we should conclude that that, while the Internet may now contain a summary of all human wisdom, that summary is buried deeply in many orders of magnitude more foolishness.

    But consider what was predicted for television back in its early days, and what it developed into, I suppose this should have been expected for the Internet, too. The main difference here is that with television, the concentration of control into a corporate heirarchy was able to effectively eject most of the wisdom stuff, since that has never been as profitable as foolishness. This never worked with libraries, because they couldn't be organized into a controlled heirarchy. The Internet is even more impossible to control, since any person or small group able to set up a few links (wired or wireless) can establish their own small Internet playground outside the control of anyone. This allows for the aggregation of wisdom by the small crowds interested in such arcanae. It also allows the aggregation of anything else by other crowds interested in them.

    But anyway, we should make sure the phrase "crystallization of human wisdom" reaches the attention of all the comedians we can send it to. It has a great potential, especially coming from a Chinese government committee.

    • crystallization of human wisdom???

      to be fair, that's a translation.

    • crystallization of human wisdom???

      Of course, since the Internet took off, the sum total of human wisdom probably hasn't grown all that much.

      After crystallization, is the next phase "fossilization?"

  • If, as the paper claims, the Internet is the 'crystallization of human wisdom', then my recent purchase of a controlling interest in the world's leading cat photography company means I can retire early.
  • "Spend time with corrupt, homicidal political figures, and you'll hear a lot of self-pity. What kind of man throws political enemies in prison, and tortures them to death? Usually it's a guy who feels so sorry for himself, he feels justified doing anything. Killers, by and large, are whiny losers. But that doesn't make them any less dangerous."

    -- Michael Westen

  • An old school friend of mine is in China teaching at a university (important to note he is not a tramp around the world teaching english type, he is a Historian) He writes a blog also and often notes that he must use many different ways to publish works or even post to facebook/twitter/otr social media. He does not really write on current Chinese events but at most makes comparisons between history and modern events without condemning current policies. I see their censorship as fact and the clear contradict
  • This paper is nothing but an oozing mass of doublethink.

    "While absorbing good experiences of other countries in developing and controlling the Internet, China is prepared to work with them for the further progress of the Internet."

    How can you expect progress if your goal is to CONTROL THE FUCKING THING?!

  • China has declared the Internet to be 'the crystallization of human wisdom'

    So the Chinese Government finally admits that they are officially acting on behalf of and protecting their general population from wisdom. Heaven knows that the Chinese Government is the defacto expert on that very subject, and are no doubt the most practised in the art of 'head in the sand policy' of any society.

  • China is one of the countries suffering most from hacking.

    This is probably true in one sense, because I am sure they count any attempt to circumvent the government firewall as hacking, so they have a lot of hacking.

  • They say the same stuff to us. While that whole health care thing really didn't shut down the internet, it did scare people and was quite the bunch of bullshit.

    We're also told we have a free media, but this administration and the previous administration have both thrown reporters in jail. Of course all of this Net Neutrality talk is a bunch of bullshit too.
  • Talk about oppressive, did they HAVE to split it up in to eight pages?

  • the internet is actually the crystal meth of human wisdom

  • 'the crystallization of human wisdom'

    with all its goods and bads, it indeed exactly is as described. its very important.
  • I can tell who the Chinese government hired to draft that statement for them.

  • by mahadiga (1346169)

    "Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself." -- Leo Tolstoy

  • While China has the largest number of coal mining fatalities in the world [wikipedia.org], the highest road death toll [peopledaily.com.cn] (and actually said to be 40% higher than official figures [factbook.net]), the collapse of poorly-built schools in earthquakes [wikipedia.org], parents rioting in China because of lead poisoning from children's toys [wikipedia.org] - and one could go on and on - you have to ask the question...

    Is the Chinese government complicit in "undermining national unity" and "infringing upon national honor and interests"?

    Of course it is. In fact this shit happens

    • by mqduck (232646)

      I think you misunderstand, the move to capitalism is entirely reason for the "harmonious society" doctrine. Back in the day, communism was supposed to be about waging class warfare to establish a classless society. According to the CPC, communist ideology actually means promoting class harmony in developing the market economy.

  • You try to find some useful information in our government's paper? Why not go fishing on the steppe?

FORTRAN is a good example of a language which is easier to parse using ad hoc techniques. -- D. Gries [What's good about it? Ed.]

Working...