February 2026

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Saturday, January 7th, 2006 09:25 am
Microsoft Shuts Down Chinese Blog

Microsoft's Web log service bars use of terms such as "democracy" and "human rights." On the China-based portal of search engine Google, a search for material the Dalai Lama, Taiwan and other sensitive topics returns a message saying "site cannot be found."

Last year, Web portal Yahoo! was the target of criticism when it was disclosed that the company provided information that was used to convict a Chinese reporter on charges of revealing state secrets.
Tuesday, January 17th, 2006 03:56 am (UTC)
> rests on the same shaky "weighting pro and contra" basis.

if I get you right, something that rests on a solid basis in this case would be - "fsck chinese commies, we wont give in to their pressure".

Somehow, denying 1 billion people such a useful tool as google is further from "do no evil" then the partial access they have now. even if google would not b3e blamed
Tuesday, January 17th, 2006 09:40 am (UTC)
----
1) It doesn't have to be "fuck the chinese"
2) It has to be "we don't change our content even if you don't like it - it's what is there on the web and we just reflecting that"

1) contradicts 2), because if you do (2) then it immediately follows that the chinese are not getting any google. (i.e. to hell with the chinese)

Similarly, google and friends excludes nazi results in germany (where they are outlawed).

Some custom processing is done for england, afaik.
---
The point is, we are basically arguing what 'evil' is.
Your position seem to be "any cooperation with opressive chinese government is evil".
I think that 'do no evil' means to piss off as little people as possible, maximise happiness, roughly speaking : ). I, for one, would be very unhappy without google, as several millions chinese, i am sure.
---
as for your google management remark - i am pretty sure there are commercial companies which base their decisions on lots of factors, besides maximising profits. 'do no evil' might as well be one of them.
---
PS google's blogspot.com is blocked in china altogether, gmail is often not avaliable, and cached links are removed from search results, too.. just to complete the picture.
----

Tuesday, January 17th, 2006 10:35 pm (UTC)
> No, not any cooperation. Cooperation that helps opression is evil. Cooperation that does not - is not evil. Cooperating with Chinese govt in order to make localized google interface in Chinese is not evil. Cooperating with Chinese govt in order to suppress dissent is evil.

Making chinese interface is not cooperating with government at all. (unless chinese government required it) Any _cooperation_ with _opressive_ government helps opression. You sell accounting software to the government - you help opression. You supply oil there - help opression, as government makes profit from it and gets more power. Any official economic relations (taxable ones) with chinese help chinese opressive goverment. So, under your definition of _do_no_evil_ china has to be embargoed untill they change their government. sounds like north korea to me, and quite evil, too.

My view on do_no_evil is - if everyone involved gets positive value from an action, this action is not evil. So, some chinese got _some_ google instead of _no_ google, positive. chinese government ok'd, positive (and I don't think the government could _harm_ anyone with skewed google, anyway). it is up to chinese to search their filtered google for information on how to get access to non-filtered one.

Just to compare, given my metric, yahoo giving out a blogger to chinese authorities - is quite evil, as this particular guy suffered a lot for nothing, as a result. Microsoft shutting down a blog - much less evil, as the person concerned can just go to another blog service..

So, so far, google quite lives up to their 'do no evil' motto.
---

As for the original topic, censorship - it is definitely present, but the thing is that on the internet is easy to get around the restrictions. And much easier then printing out 'samizdat'.

Wednesday, January 18th, 2006 10:00 am (UTC)
Ever heard about Jackson-Vanick? PRC, by the way, gets extemptions for it. Probably too big a market...
Jackson-Venick applies to contries wich restrict emigration. which china does not.

Yes, sure. Murder is evil, theft is much less evil - so, would I be wrong to say theft is evil and one should not steal?
I am not sure if shutting down a blog amounts to theft. I'd say it is more like unlicensed copying/destroying, which in my books much lighter then physical theft.

If one would say "I would not violate ten commandments" and then one would indeed never murder anyone and never cheat on his wife but occasionally steal and commit perjury - would you say he's quite living up?
I wouldn't say, definitely. But google never promised to adhere to ten comandments. "Do no evil" is quite different thing. And if with X everyone is better off than without X, then X is_not_evil.
Wednesday, January 18th, 2006 11:10 pm (UTC)
So, what is wrong with my definition of do_no_evil? (if with X everyone is better off than without X, then X is not evil)
Friday, January 20th, 2006 01:51 am (UTC)
Or, if you don't want to say anything about my definition of 'do no evil', maybe you can just hint what yours is? The one which google didn't leave up to?
Friday, January 20th, 2006 03:03 pm (UTC)
How _effectively_ throwing every single site out is a good thing, then?
----
Under your definition every single business on this planet is evil - it has to submit to local rules (don't show kiddie porn, don't deny holocaust, don't copy copyrighted software). they are submitting to local rules, hence are evil.
Saturday, January 21st, 2006 02:30 am (UTC)
You obviously know what is bad and what is good, fine. Good for you.
For the record, I do think that the law requiring every internet entity to filter results is sort of bad.
But the fact that one is adhering to laws we consider bad does not necessarily make him bad.

For example - all search engines filter nazi propaganda sites in europe.. because they have to do so according to a bad law. This does not make them bad at all.


Thursday, January 26th, 2006 09:18 pm (UTC)
While we were talking, google indeed started filtering search results itself. (making explicit notification when anything gets filtered)

Among the storm of comments from different sides, I found an interesting trend - all the users who actually live in china - want google to stay, even censored.

So no, in this case evil/non-evil is definitely not clear-cut .
Sunday, January 29th, 2006 08:18 am (UTC)
The text is present, it is in chinese, on the bottom of the page.
Says:
据当地法律法规和政策,部分搜索结果未予显示。
"Some results were removed from this search to meet local regulations"

btw, when searching google.cn from here, i got this in search results on tiananmen:
Eyeballing Tiananmen Square Massacre
Students from more than forty universities march to Tiananmen Square in protest of
the April 26 editorial in the ... Calling for freedom and democracy, demonstrating
students surround policemen near Tiananmen Square in Beijing, China, ...

--- and there are quite a lot results like this.

My first thought was that google gives me different view from that avaliable to chinese, so i took the trouble to go there via a chinese proxy - truth about tiananmen still in results

61.246.232.214:6588
Sunday, January 29th, 2006 08:32 am (UTC)
> Oh sure, to help to opress Chinese people or not to help

opression: the state of being kept down by unjust use of force or authority

Google does not keep anyone down, for that matter. They went into china and become oppressed themselves , ir they could stay outside and watch.

Noone except the chinese government prohibits people to go to the google.com and see for themselves.

In the same vein, if you do business in germany, you will have to avoid certain topics too. Kind of 'being oppressed'.

as for 'liberal'/'republican'/'democrat' whatever - these words dont have any meaning here. there are just people.
Wednesday, January 18th, 2006 10:02 am (UTC)
As for politruks getting smarter - they won't outsmart the whole world, and search engines are helpful for distributing new ways of going through the wall.
Monday, January 23rd, 2006 01:02 pm (UTC)
Similarly, google and friends excludes nazi results in germany (where they are outlawed).

any proof of this?
Thursday, January 26th, 2006 09:12 pm (UTC)
> any proof..
Sure, readily found on google(http://www.google.com.sg/search?q=google+filtering+results+france+germany&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official):
http://searchenginewatch.com/sereport/article.php/2165101