__/ [ dapunka ] on Wednesday 13 June 2007 11:33 \__
>
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> Yahoo stockholders vote against anticensorship proposal
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | Yahoo shareholders voted down a proposal that would have forced
>> | management to adopt stronger policies regarding government attempts
>> | to limit Internet access and to curtail freedom of speech in
>> | countries where Yahoo operates.
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php?id=813106908&rid=-50
>>
>> This was exactly the same story at Google. Investors can't give a damn
>> about humanity; it's all about the money.
>>
>> Yahoo: China's censoring Flickr
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | Popular among a growing class of digital-photo enthusiasts in the
>> | world's second-largest Internet market, Flickr has not shown photos
>> | to users in mainland China since last week, amid rumors that Beijing
>> | took action after images of the Tiananmen Square massacre in early
>> | June 1989 were posted.
>> `----
>>
>> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6190356.html
>>
>> 'Book burning' and deception is also a Microsoft turf (see below), so it's
>> somewhat relevant. The same goes for greed.
>
> Yeah, Yahoo and Google's willingness to go along with China's
> censorship crap is a money thing for sure - the Chinese market is /
> huge/.
There is certain stuff the SEs have been censoring since the very early days,
as a matter of policy, and universally. It's a dilemma. In China, they have
Baidu to compete against and they would get banned if they did not censor
(there have recently been rumours about Baidu extending to the West as well,
but that all got squashed last night).
It's funny how the West needs to suck up to any repressive regime. At the
time (last year), a panel in the states criticised the Big 3... Yahoo for
letting the government get information that jailed a user... Google for
censorship (which I think was made worse since the panelist/judge had
witnessed the Holocaust and therefore had strong feelings on the matter)...
I can't recall how Microsoft fit into this.
> But there's another side to it: is it better for the Chinese people to
> have access to a bowlderized internet, or should they have no net at
> all?
The Chinese government had been making policies that involve bans, usage
limits, and censorship recently. They are not alone though. The Internet is
transforming into something else and quite some time ago, people predicated
that China would get its own (sub)Internet. There's also the idea of a
Google dark Net... or an Internet where pages are not being published in the
conventional way; instead, they just get submitted to an authority like a
search engine. A centralised type of Web with authority would a scary
transformation.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | "This sig seemed like a good idea at the time..."
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
12:20pm up 2 days 4:16, 8 users, load average: 1.51, 1.10, 1.06
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project
|
|
