Dem$%#@!&, Part II
A few days ago, I wrote about an AP story detailing how China is blocking certain words from MSN users' blogs and messages.
I figured then that the story would fizzle out, and told a commenter that the U.S. probably wouldn't respond in any way; I thought that would be the end of the tale, another sad example of why China isn't such a hot place to live right now.
Apparently, though, there are still a few more lives left in this cat of a story, as the LA Times reported yesterday.
As you'd expect from an LAT take on the same story that was covered by AP, the Times writers get a bit more in-depth with the entire issue. Specifically, they explore other ways in which U.S. companies "support local laws," as Microsoft argues it's doing now:
Not to beleabor the points that were very well made by Searls and Weinberger, but when are companies and governments going to realize banning key words and phrases is not going to keep those ideas from being expressed? China is banning "demonstration," but not "riot," "violent chaos," but not "violent uprising."
But what really worries me is if Microsoft, Yahoo, eBay and all the rest are so willing to work with the Chinese government on filtering software, what happens when China starts seriously demanding filtering software that works? Sure, the idea of banning particular thoughts and ideas has pretty much become a joke here in the States, but what happens when the companies--faced with the possibility of making billions of dollars if they can just appease a very sympathetic government--really start working on this stuff? And then what happens when they've finally done it, and want to try selling it over here?
I figured then that the story would fizzle out, and told a commenter that the U.S. probably wouldn't respond in any way; I thought that would be the end of the tale, another sad example of why China isn't such a hot place to live right now.
Apparently, though, there are still a few more lives left in this cat of a story, as the LA Times reported yesterday.
As you'd expect from an LAT take on the same story that was covered by AP, the Times writers get a bit more in-depth with the entire issue. Specifically, they explore other ways in which U.S. companies "support local laws," as Microsoft argues it's doing now:
Microsoft adds that filtering objectionable words is nothing new. In the United States, the company blocks use of several words in titles, including "whore" and "pornography."
Yahoo and Google, two other large Internet firms, have also imposed limits on search results in France and Germany, where Nazi propaganda and memorabilia are banned.
Not to beleabor the points that were very well made by Searls and Weinberger, but when are companies and governments going to realize banning key words and phrases is not going to keep those ideas from being expressed? China is banning "demonstration," but not "riot," "violent chaos," but not "violent uprising."
But what really worries me is if Microsoft, Yahoo, eBay and all the rest are so willing to work with the Chinese government on filtering software, what happens when China starts seriously demanding filtering software that works? Sure, the idea of banning particular thoughts and ideas has pretty much become a joke here in the States, but what happens when the companies--faced with the possibility of making billions of dollars if they can just appease a very sympathetic government--really start working on this stuff? And then what happens when they've finally done it, and want to try selling it over here?
1 Comments:
This seems silly of the Chinese to me. But like Pinky and the Brain, both Microsoft and China are plotting to take over the world
Post a Comment
<< Home