Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

China Using Net Censorship As a Trade Weapon?

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the nobody-likes-censorship dept.

Censorship 111

angry tapir writes "The Chinese government is using Internet censorship as a trade weapon against U.S. tech companies trying to do business there. China's ongoing censorship of the Internet is applied unevenly, with foreign companies often facing stricter rules than their Chinese counterparts, said Ed Black, president and CEO of the Computer and Communications Industry Association, to the U.S. Congressional-Executive Commission on China. (Of course, a lot of countries aren't thrilled by U.S. net censorship efforts.)"

cancel ×

111 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Net censorship, another U.S. job going to China (5, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38098944)

They took yer job, U.S. government!

Re:Net censorship, another U.S. job going to China (4, Insightful)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099228)

They took yer job, U.S. government!

Not sure if this is meant cynically or in humour, but the Chinese government is highly creative and quite indirect when it comes to the tit-for-tat of diplomacy. They've been at it for a bit longer.

Re:Net censorship, another U.S. job going to China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38100186)

They've been at it for a bit longer

Ah, so then China should file patent and sue US for infringement!

Re:Net censorship, another U.S. job going to China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38100272)

No they haven't. The current Chinese government took over and started "from scratch" after Chiang Kai-shek was ousted in 1949.

The vast majority of political, military and cultural leaders were exiled, re-educated or killed.

All this rot about a supposedly "ancient" oriental culture is a ridiculous romantic myth.

Re:Net censorship, another U.S. job going to China (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100502)

That is a rather narrow minded view of things.

Let us say that the United States is the offspring of a mostly European culture, that emerged from the dark ages about a thousand years ago. And, China has a culture that has been ongoing for more than 5000 years. Not GOVERNMENT, but culture. What with the worship of ancestors, I'll bet that a lot of Chinese can trace their ancestry back thousands of years. (I actually tried to test that idea once, but since I can't read Chinese, I couldn't tell if I found lineage pages, or Great Firewall warnings that meant "Achtung, foreign white devil, trespass here is verboten!")

Find me some Americans who can trace their ancestry back past the renaissance, and I'll think about conceding the point.

Re:Net censorship, another U.S. job going to China (1)

Muros (1167213) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100824)

Do you mean knowing of some ancestors from 1000 years ago, or all of them? I can trace my family to a man who died in the battle of Clontarf in 1014. But that's 30 or more generations ago. I don't expect anyone to know who all 1,073,741,824 of their ancestors from 30 generations ago were, or how many times each individual will appear in there (several thousands of times each when you go back that far).

On the subject of the dark ages... that was a few hundred years. Europe has thousands of years of history. I'm sure if you want to read through the history of China, you'll find some pretty damn grim periods too.

Re:Net censorship, another U.S. job going to China (2)

9jack9 (607686) | more than 2 years ago | (#38101442)

I'm sure if you want to read through the history of China, you'll find some pretty damn grim periods too.

For instance, 1966-1976 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_revolution [wikipedia.org] ).

Also probably not so hot:
An Shi Rebellion (China, 755–763)
Qing dynasty conquest of Ming dynasty (1616–1662)
Taiping Rebellion (China, 1850–1864) (see Dungan revolt)
Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–1945)
Warring States Era (China, 475 BC–221 BC)
Dungan revolt (China, 1862 –1877)
Yellow Turban Rebellion (China, 184–205)

Heck, that's 7 out of the top 16 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Net censorship, another U.S. job going to China (1)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#38101244)

"China has a culture that has been ongoing for more than 5000 years. Not GOVERNMENT"

By that definition Europe has a 5000 years of culture as well. Although at that time some of them were still in Asia.

Also, for a 5000 years they have a pretty shitty standard of living and literacy rates.

Re:Net censorship, another U.S. job going to China (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38107320)

Find me some Americans who can trace their ancestry back past the renaissance, and I'll think about conceding the point.

You ought to think about it anyway; it doesn't matter whether you can actually trace your family tree back to a particular long-dead relative or not, or how far back you can go; we all go back to the same Mitochondrial Eve, and that means that all of us have about the same claim to ancientness in our genes.

Find me some Americans who can trace their ancestry back past the renaissance, and I'll think about conceding the point.

I think I just did that for everyone.

Culture didn't change much (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38100900)

Culture is carried on by all members of the culture, not just its leaders.

Even when the Communists took over, everyday people still retained Chinese culture.

The romantic myth is thinking that ancient Chinese culture is that much different than modern Chinese culture

Re:Net censorship, another U.S. job going to China (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099696)

They gave us the bird flu by fucking pigs, lets give them the yak flu by fucking camels.

Re:Net censorship, another U.S. job going to China (4, Funny)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100218)

They gave us the bird flu by fucking pigs, lets give them the yak flu by fucking camels.

Oh, is it time for another of Herman Cain's foreign policy proposals?

SOPA in action (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099084)

see how the American Government like it!

Re:SOPA in action (1)

booyoh (2511204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099362)

Is just a new weapon that the US doesn't have... YET.

Re:SOPA in action (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099436)

Is just a new weapon that the US doesn't have... YET.

SOPA: Punish the man for the sins of a few.

Re:SOPA in action (1, Insightful)

poity (465672) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099622)

This is nothing like SOPA. The only similarity one can draw is that they're both using unethical methods to protect domestic businesses. However, the Chinese government is protecting their businesses from legitimate competition, whereas the US government is protecting their businesses from illegitimate competition (piracy).

Re:SOPA in action (3, Insightful)

cpghost (719344) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099718)

What is legitimate and what isn't, is often in the eye of the beholder. Or did you mean "legal" (as opposed to "legitimate")?

Re:SOPA in action (2)

fa2k (881632) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099828)

This is nothing like SOPA. The only similarity one can draw is that they're both using unethical methods to protect domestic businesses. However, the Chinese government is protecting their businesses from legitimate competition, whereas the US government is protecting their businesses from illegitimate competition (piracy).

If you allow each country to define "legitimate" for themselves, there is a great similarity between SOPA and this stuff on such an abstract level.

Re:SOPA in action (5, Insightful)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099984)

I don't quite get how sourcing labour in one country then exporting the fruits of that labour to another (think Chinese kids putting iPads together for $0.10 a day to get around US employer taxes then those iPads being sold for upwards of $600 or whatever in the States) can in any way be considered legitimate. OK, so it keeps Chinese kids off the streets (laughably), but child slavery does nothing for the esteem of the country, its perceived Human Rights record (I can tell you right now that the UK is no halo'd angel when it comes to Human Rights), nor its "carbon footprint" compared with per capita GDP.

Pedant point: the term "piracy" has been co-opted by the Entertainment and Media industry from its original meaning which referred to crimes against the Person and Ship committed on the High Seas. The co-opted meaning refers to the unauthorised bootlegging (ie copying and distribution) of recorded works. It has nothing to do with rape and pillage and murder on the High Seas, but it invariably carries a harsher sentence because why? Because E&M owns Government (and writes the rules to serve itself - what would you do in that position?), and E&M controls the flow of information.

When you control the flow of information you can make people believe what you want them to believe and get it to the point where any oppositional thinking is regarded as delusional paranoia, rejected and mocked by the masses, any repitition of which is further regarded as inflammatory and slanderous. Many of those historically considered as evil (Mussolini, Hitler, Gadhafi, Hussein) knew of those techniques and used them to advantage in ways that would (and do) give DHS and MI5 wet dreams.

Re:SOPA in action (1)

fsckmnky (2505008) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100690)

When you control the flow of information you can make people believe what you want them to believe

About the only valid accurate point in your rant.

Re:SOPA in action (1)

poity (465672) | more than 2 years ago | (#38102292)

Firstly, you are conflating moral legitimacy in labor exploitation with legitimacy of having a competitive and distinct product in an open free market. Yes, Apple loses moral legitimacy when they source from exploitative suppliers. However, that is not in any way related to the sort of legitimacy under scrutiny when we speak of legitimacy in terms of foreign companies competing with domestic ones in the Chinese market. I'm happy to agree with you on the issue of Apple's moral failings, and I'm sure we'd rarely if ever butt heads in that arena, but I'm afraid you've either through will or ignorance used the multiple contexts of the word "legitimate" to segue into a wholly different topic.

Secondly, your pedant point is well taken and I share your annoyance at the imprecision of language especially in the media, but the semantic that is used is insignificant to the point that is being made. We may despair the unfortunate connotations of an anachronistic term, but consider: A rose by any other name would smell as sweet; and conversely, a parasite by any other name would be as odorous. We should hold parasitic content publishers to a standard of fairness, but so too should we hold pirates (or whatever we wish to call them) to a standard of fairness.

In any case, two wrongs don't make a right, and those who hound the US for its transgressions upon fairness and moral boundaries should also hound any other country which are exposed for doing the same or worse. I have a problem with those who embrace double standards, and who use the US as a yardstick for the rest of the world while at the same time use a morally/ethically pure archetype as a yardstick for the US. Either everyone is judged by the same standard and progress is made, or everyone points fingers at everyone else and nothing is done.

Re:SOPA in action (1)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38103528)

Pedant point: the term "piracy" has been co-opted by the Entertainment and Media industry from its original meaning which referred to crimes against the Person and Ship committed on the High Seas.

Pedantic counterpoint: "Piracy" has carried that meaning for over 300 years now. It's a bit late to worry about it now.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=pirate&allowed_in_frame=0 [etymonline.com]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement#.22Piracy.22 [wikipedia.org]

Re:SOPA in action (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38100112)

However, the Chinese government is protecting their businesses from legitimate competition, whereas the US government is protecting their businesses from illegitimate competition (piracy).

Are you serious? Americans would love it if the U.S. government imposed crippling trade restrictions on foreign companies. "Buy American" would become the new national motto and patriotism would soar.

Re:SOPA in action (1)

cavreader (1903280) | more than 2 years ago | (#38105504)

I think you are close to getting your wish. The upcoming Presidential elections have already shown that the candidates in both the Democrat and Republican parties are being forced to support policies that put America first. Everything from moving to a non-interventionist foreign policy to eliminating government monetary aid to any foreign countries or international organizations are very popular positions.

Re:SOPA in action (1)

anyGould (1295481) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100480)

This is nothing like SOPA. The only similarity one can draw is that they're both using unethical methods to protect domestic businesses. However, the Chinese government is protecting their businesses from legitimate competition, whereas the US government is protecting their businesses from illegitimate competition (piracy).

I'd say a better comparison is that China is protecting their businesses at the expense of foreign businesses, while the US is protecting their businesses at the expense of... their other businesses.

And of course, if I was in China's shoes, I would be cheerfully putting the boots to US companies, since the US has abdicated any sort of moral authority in the matter.

Re:SOPA in action (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38101152)

I'd say a better comparison is that China is protecting their businesses at the expense of foreign businesses, while the US is protecting their businesses at the expense of... their other businesses.

Hey hey hey, you need to use the correct terminology here. It's not "their other businesses". It's "filthy stealing pirates" and "lazy entitled kids who got loans they couldn't afford for an unmarketable degree"

Re:SOPA in action (1)

anyGould (1295481) | more than 2 years ago | (#38102260)

I'd say a better comparison is that China is protecting their businesses at the expense of foreign businesses, while the US is protecting their businesses at the expense of... their other businesses.

Hey hey hey, you need to use the correct terminology here. It's not "their other businesses". It's "filthy stealing pirates" and "lazy entitled kids who got loans they couldn't afford for an unmarketable degree"

Unless they're a person who attacks and robs ships at sea, pirate is the wrong word (no matter what rich media moguls would have you believe). Your second point is probably more accurate - old money is never fond of new money. (Even if the "old money" used to *be* new a generation ago).

Come and knock on our door we've been waitng for u (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099106)

Come and knock on our door.....
We've been waiting for you......
Where the kisses are hers and hers and his,
Three's company too.

Come and dance on on our floor......
Take a step that is new.....
We've a loveable space that needs your face,
Three's company too.

You'll see that life is a frolic and laughter is calling for you......
Down at our rendez-vous,
Three's company, too

Shocking. (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099218)

This just in: China still operates under non-trivially mercantilist policies; US continues to cede moral high ground on issue as fast as possible at behest of entertainment industries.

News. At. 11.

just dont get it (1)

luther349 (645380) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099318)

why do these politations fail to understand this. piracy has been around forever and its not hurting there bottom line it never has. before pcs it was vhs and audio tapes. before those it was books. these companys refusing to upgrade to the new ways of the heavly connected world and offering shit product is whats really hurting them. i just got asked by my buddy today do you wanna go see a movie whats playing i replayed crap. its just there hot butten when there investors go wtf is going on why is your company's dieing a slow very loud death.

WTO sanctions (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099428)

Maybe it is time for the WTO to set some anti-sensorship restrictions. Not that what is happening in the U.S. couldn't happen at the international level.

Re:WTO sanctions (3, Interesting)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099558)

That would be difficult, given that China is a member of the WTO. Have been for ten years. A quite influencial member at that. If the WTO did set such restrictions, they would doubtless include a vague statement along the lines of 'States have a right to protect their cultural values through appropriate regulation' that could be interpreted as a licence for China to do whatever they like.

Tariff the B@stards! (4, Interesting)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099438)

Enough playing Tiddly Wings with China. Tariff them until our trade between them balances. If we keep rewarding lopsided trade, it will keep happening.

Plus, the US gov't can use the revenue right now.

Re:Tariff the B@stards! (2)

geoffrobinson (109879) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099568)

How about we just fire up the printing press to insane levels and make them choose between rampant inflation or maintaining their currency's exchange rate?

Re:Tariff the B@stards! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38104398)

You Americans already tried that with Bernanke's Quantitative Easing II. You almost lost your empire in the Middle East due to the inflation you stoked there. In fact, you may lose it yet, regardless of whether QE3 or QE4 happens; the Arab Spring is not over by any means.

Re:Tariff the B@stards! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099648)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiddlywinks ; )

Consequences (3, Insightful)

sjbe (173966) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100144)

Enough playing Tiddly Wings with China. Tariff them until our trade between them balances.

That's fine. How do you plan to deal with the large increases in prices of a huge number of goods? A lot of goods are made in China because of cost and it is highly non-trivial, not to mention expensive, to relocate all of that production. Much of the burden of the increased costs of goods will fall on the low income portion of the the population.

Riding your high horse isn't without a cost.

Plus, the US gov't can use the revenue right now.

What revenue? You think there would be no consequences? Raise prices suddenly on a wide variety of goods and you are almost certainly going to send the US economy into the tank again. Tax revenues would plummet much more than any money that would be raised from tariffs.

Re:Consequences (0, Troll)

misexistentialist (1537887) | more than 2 years ago | (#38101390)

Stuff from China is poor quality and has a high markup. I think the low income portion of the population (that spends almost all its money on rent/transportation/food anyway) wouldn't mind paying a little more if it meant they got factory jobs. Should also help with the government's courageous battle against deflation.

Comparative advantage (2)

sjbe (173966) | more than 2 years ago | (#38102096)

Stuff from China is poor quality and has a high markup.

That's complete nonsense which doesn't stand up to even the basic scrutiny. I've been to China myself and been in factories where they make parts for Dell, Emerson Electric, and about 10 other Fortune 500 companies with well deserved reputations for good to excellent products. While there is of course some shoddy production from China there is a lot of very high quality manufacturing as well - every bit as good as anything in the US.

I think the low income portion of the population (that spends almost all its money on rent/transportation/food anyway) wouldn't mind paying a little more if it meant they got factory jobs.

Imposing tariffs won't bring jobs back and we're not talking about "a little more". The cost of labor in the US is too high relative to other places in the world. Not just China either. If you cut off production from one location it will simply move elsewhere. China is not the only nation with low labor costs. Cut off production from everywhere else and you screw the economy. You seriously need to learn about comparative advantage [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Comparative advantage (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#38103492)

Imposing tariffs won't bring jobs back

It will, so long as manufacturing locally is less expensive than manufacturing overseas with tariffs apply, but still cheap enough to turn a profit. USA is a big enough market to be ignored.

Re:Comparative advantage (0)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38107338)

While there is of course some shoddy production from China there is a lot of very high quality manufacturing as well - every bit as good as anything in the US.

Sure, everything is made in China, and there's plenty of capable manufacturing in China, but on the other hand, I've never EVER seen anything from a Chinese brand that wasn't canned crap. So one might argue that the Chinese never make anything worth a shit unless someone forces them to.

Re:Consequences (2)

Duhavid (677874) | more than 2 years ago | (#38101812)

"because of cost and it is highly non-trivial, not to mention expensive, to relocate all of that production. Much of the burden of the increased costs of goods will fall on the low income portion of the the population."

True, but it was expensive to move it all to China to begin with, and that worked.

And, bonus, to go along with the uptick in costs, we might well have an uptick in employment. And those poor people might have a bit more money to offset the increase in prices. They did manage to get by before China came along, right? With the price increases, doing those jobs here will become more "affordable".

"Raise prices suddenly on a wide variety of goods and you are almost certainly going to send the US economy into the tank again. Tax revenues would plummet much more than any money that would be raised from tariffs."

I disagree, yes there will be consequences, but, the reason the US economy is in the tank to begin with is a lack of jobs. Raise prices and increase employment, and I think you will have a good thing ( for most, the wealthy who are gaining wealth arbitraging wage disparities will go backwards ). And with increased employment comes and increase in income tax. And spending ( my understanding is that 70% of the US economy is consumer spending, which isnt going to happen when people have no jobs ).

Re:Consequences (1)

sjbe (173966) | more than 2 years ago | (#38102256)

And, bonus, to go along with the uptick in costs, we might well have an uptick in employment

Huh? Increasing prices will increase employment? What universe are you living in? Increasing prices in the face of competition pretty much has exactly the opposite effect. Burying our head in the sand an pretending China doesn't exist isn't going to magically make things better. Furthermore increasing prices on some goods like steel makes everything you make out of those goods more expensive. It hurts economic growth in a very easy to demonstrate way. There is a reason virtually all economists think tariffs are a bad idea almost all the time. You are protecting a very few jobs at the expense of vastly more jobs.

I disagree, yes there will be consequences, but, the reason the US economy is in the tank to begin with is a lack of jobs.

The reason the economy went into the tank and remains there is a liquidity trap [wikipedia.org] specifically caused by the liquidity crisis in 2008. Lack of jobs is a by product, not the root cause of the problem. The jobs didn't just magically disappear of their own accord.

Re:Consequences (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38107326)

Huh? Increasing prices will increase employment? What universe are you living in?

If you increase the prices of foreign goods then you can increase the price of local goods. This is the same reason why a family of Texas oilmen would want to make war in oil-producing countries even if they can't get their hands on the oil which is there.

Re:Tariff the B@stards! (1, Interesting)

number17 (952777) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100768)

Back in 1998, Bob, head of the US company ACME, outsourced manufacturing to China. Bob loved this as his costs went down and his profits went up. He's now living the American dream.

Tablizer, says lets tariff them and Obama agrees.

Bob now has to pay a tax (tariff) on the goods he manufactures in China. Bob really likes living the American dream. In fact he's currently on an expedition to the North Pole. Moving production back to the US sounds like work for no gain. "Raise the prices" he says. "I'm too busy right now."

The End.

Re:Tariff the B@stards! (1)

slamb (119285) | more than 2 years ago | (#38101736)

That's a silly argument. Let's assume you're right: Bob has made his fortune, no longer cares about profit, and won't move back. Well, if the head of the company no longer cares, that's a short-term problem that will be resolved by the market. So let's look first at Carol, who still produces things in the US (there are some of these left) and is considering moving to China today. She sees we're about to create a tariff on goods manufactured in China (or even are just thinking about doing so) and hesistates. The tariff has been successful. Now let's look at David, who has just bought a company from Bob, which was foundering because Bob was off at the North Pole instead of keeping prices competitive, introducing new products, updating marketing/advertising efforts for changes in media, etc. David says that it's better to move manufacturing back because of the tariff.

Having no pressure to keep jobs in the US (a country with strong labor and environmental laws) essentially means that we're gutting its economy in favor of sending jobs to places where companies can do whatever the hell they want. Not only is that bad for the US, one could argue it's bad for the world. (Obviously China's economy is improving as a result, but they and other countries are paying an environmental cost for that.) I'm not decided on the issue, but I could see the merits of a tariff imposes on goods manufactured in any country that hasn't signed some key environmental and labor regulation (and perhaps passes audits by the UN or some other relatively neutral party) that starts at near-zero and increases to something huge over a period of 20 years. At the end, either there really is a relatively level playing field in terms of laws or there's an artificial incentive that keeps manufacturing in a better place. And the gradual increase hopefully avoids any major impact on the economy from a major price change.

No big deal (5, Interesting)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099444)

They fear outside influence on their populace, but the truth is China will eat its self politically from the inside out, you can not give your population a "taste" of capitalism and expect to maintain the same level of political control, it doesn't work.
So rather than outside influences driving the change it will be the inside influences that do this, they went from “Practice Marxism and not Revisionism” to “Praise profit. Praise profit. Praise profit. Praise profit. Praise profit.”

We live in interesting times.

Re:No big deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099464)

Don't worry, we'll just move to the Moon or share a bed with Elon Musk in his Martian bungalow.

Re:No big deal (2)

geoffrobinson (109879) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099670)

Plus, with their one-child policy they're a demographic powder keg waiting to go off (eventually). Either they are going to have too many sex-selected men looking for women or they are going to have too few young people to support all the old people.

Not worried about China. Ultimately, we want them to do well. Economics isn't always a zero-sum game.

Re:No big deal (1)

anyGould (1295481) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100544)

Plus, with their one-child policy they're a demographic powder keg waiting to go off (eventually). Either they are going to have too many sex-selected men looking for women or they are going to have too few young people to support all the old people.

Or, they'll just reinvent the mail order bride business.

Re:No big deal (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100998)

Actually, their one-child rule is supported by more than 2/3 of the chinese population. They KNOW that they are overpopulated. It will not hurt them to have that policy. The problem that they have is that they have been doing sex-selective abortions. As such, they have far too many males vs. women. That is also why Chinese gov. tolerates prostitution. BTW, India has the same issue. The difference is that now, dowrys are starting to go the other way (to the woman's family) and women are considered desirable. As such, they have slowed the sex-selection abortions.

As to economics, it is NORMALLY not a zero-sum game. That is when all play fair. The core of that, is that money MUST freely change, subsidies must be dropped, trade barriers must be dropped, and no dumping. The problem is that China employs ALL OF THESE. In addition, they are doing more and more. EU currently has trade barriers to many items from China. Clinton did that accord which dropped ours, but it was predicated on China honoring their part. They have not done so. At this point, we should slowly raise trade barriers to Chinese imports. By raising them slowly, we give them a chance to do the right things, while giving companies the chance to bring back manufacturing to here.

Re:No big deal (1)

geoffrobinson (109879) | more than 2 years ago | (#38101368)

I'm not saying anything about whether the one-child policy is popular or not. I'm saying it will create an unsustainable demographic trend.

Re:No big deal (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#38101794)

Why not? By allowing their population to fall, they can move to sustainability. Growth is not sustainable.

Re:No big deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38101500)

I live in China.
Adults without siblings can have multiple children without fees.
You can pay a trivial fee to have multiple kids.
The fee was expensive, it is now cheap.
Nobody cares about it.
The one child policy is not important.
It should not even be called that.
It should be called a multiple child tax on parents from multiple child families.

I'll say it simpler...

If the number children is greater than or equal to 2 then there is a child tax.

Wow, isn't that special, a tax. Watch out for that powder keg.

Re:No big deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38102488)

Oh, so now it's simply a system designed to deny poor people the right not breed.

Your government is unsustainable on a purely mathematical basis. It is simply inefficient. There /will/ be a revolution and you will transition to a free and open western style democracy or your country will inevitably collapse and be annexed by other powers.

You're told things are the way they are for "The greater good". You accept this, but are in fact unqualified to make this judgement because you are denied the information and knowledgeto do so. The fact that most of the population feels this way doesn't make it true.

It simply makes it a very big lie.

Re:No big deal (1)

RocketRabbit (830691) | more than 2 years ago | (#38104670)

Ah the old trickle down democracy theory. It hasn't worked and I don't think it will. Still it's another excuse to keep our factories over there and our fingers crossed over here, right?

Right?

Comparing US to China again? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099486)

Nothing unsightly has been done by the US in the last 100 years, that China or Russia have not been outdone several times over in the last 50... Our moral ground is as high as ever compared to the rest of the world's (super)powers.

Re:Comparing US to China again? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099576)

Nothing unsightly has been done by the US in the last 100 years, that China or Russia have not been outdone several times over in the last 50... Our moral ground is as high as ever compared to the rest of the world's (super)powers.

Nagasaki.
Hiroshima.
Game over.

Re:Comparing US to China again? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38100390)

Tokyo 1943. 100,000 civilians deliberately incinerated in 1 day.

Re:Comparing US to China again? (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100866)

LOL. You HAVE to be kidding. It saved many many lives by using those. As it was, Japanese leaders had shown over and over that they had ZERO concern for civilians. They raped and pillage all over the world. They did a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. They were so bad that after the first bomb fell, they were still trying to argue over terms, etc. while attacking us when we told them to surrender. We warned them that we would attack again, unless they surrendered shortly. The leaders CHOOSE to continue the war.

The Japanese leaders were as cowardly as yourself.

Re:Comparing US to China again? (1)

ProfBooty (172603) | more than 2 years ago | (#38104348)

Cultural Revolution or Great Leap forward or Stalin much?

The death tolls from those policies dwarfs any from firebombing, or nuclear explosions.

Re:Comparing US to China again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38100702)

"At least, we are not as bad as China (yet)" is a pretty weak praise.

Kinda reminds of Bitcoin fans saying "Bitcoins are pretty much like any real-world currency - see, its stability is just like Zimbabwean dollar's!"

aaah sarcasm (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 2 years ago | (#38101934)

Re:aaah sarcasm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38102498)

He's talking comparatively.

It's like "They're pillaging, raping and murdering, but we're only pillaging and murdering"

Re:aaah sarcasm (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 2 years ago | (#38102548)

i see.

Re:aaah sarcasm (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38102882)

lol go back to sleep. when you're ready to see the world for what it is, come back and discuss with the adults.

Re:aaah sarcasm (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 2 years ago | (#38104362)

lol go back to sleep

you mean like you ? no.

At least the US... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099494)

...is using net censorship to give themselves a trade disadvantage. By using censorship to drive innovation out of the US, they actually help other countries at their own expense. It's really a magnanimous gesture, if you think about it.

Go USA!

useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099544)

first the aritcle says "using Internet censorship as a trade weapon against U.S. tech companies" then "foreign companies often facing stricter rules" so which is it.... US or all foreign.... if its all, stop your crying, most countries put separate restrictions on foreign companies.... Stop making this sound like an attack against the US if its not....

Copyright / "IP Rights Chapters" (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099556)

How different is this from the US shoving "Intellectual Property Rights Chapters" down everyone else's throat in every Trade Agreement?

How will things be in the USA in 10 years? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099564)

We all talk about how terrible is Internet censorship in China, while in the meantime out own US congress (which by large does no longer represent the interests of US citizens) is considering laws to centralise control of the Internet, in the name of "security" and defending the interest of a small number of companies that heavily lobby on these regulations. This is happening right now, people. Wake up. You can keep criticising China, or maybe you can use that energy to do something about your own country. Or you can wait some years, and try to explain to your grandchildren why their freedom of speech is nowhere to be found.

Re:How will things be in the USA in 10 years? (2)

cpghost (719344) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099808)

Or you can wait some years, and try to explain to your grandchildren why their freedom of speech is nowhere to be found.

Look at it this way: earlier, dissidents from all countries used to host their sites in the US, because of the freedom of speech. In 10+ years, US dissidents will host their sites in countries like Ukraine, Russia, etc.., because of an out-of-control US government. And some of them already do: we call them file sharers here (or pirates, depending on perspective).

Re:How will things be in the USA in 10 years? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38100706)

Seriously, I think it depends how bad it gets. Big difference between the Chinese people (as in non-military/government/etc) and US citizens: the American people are MUCH more heavily armed. Even if the government banned firearms, they're so deeply ingrained into the country that they'd never find them all. That makes the American people much more dangerous to the politicians who live in the same land as them as opposed to the situation in China.

I don't think we're anywhere near that point yet, s*** would REALLY have to hit the fan first. Having said that, Americans have done it twice already when you count the Civil War. And no, it wasn't just about slavery, a lot of stuff happened. Mostly, it was about money but, what else is new? :P

Re:How will things be in the USA in 10 years? (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 2 years ago | (#38101894)

only a moron would think that a 7.62 firearm qualifies as 'being armed' in our modern time. mach 6 weapon was just tested. there are sound weapons. em weapons cruise missiles unmanned drones non lethal weapons. and most of them, are for controlling people who think like you.

Re:How will things be in the USA in 10 years? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38100836)

You're preaching to the choir. Stop telling us to wake up, we already know.

Re:How will things be in the USA in 10 years? (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#38101042)

I am sorry, but what laws are being pushed to 'centralize control' of the net?

Re:How will things be in the USA in 10 years? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38107342)

Well, we already have COPA (however you feel about it, it's centralization of authority) and the DMCA. There's plenty more where that came from. Anything that gives the federal government the power to regulate anything on the internet is centralization. So far things have worked amazingly well in the current model, with Net Neutrality as the first big problem that the industry can't solve, since the industry IS the problem.

Perhaps a fatal mistake? (2)

IWantMoreSpamPlease (571972) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099738)

(This is hinged of course on SOPA not passing)

I see this as a mistake by the Chinese gov't. The american companies should come back here where we dont' have such (restrictive) practices.
A win-win situation for us.

Course it'll never happen but it's nice to dream

so what the article is basically complaining about (4, Insightful)

nimbius (983462) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099748)

is the only time america cares about chinese government censorship is when it impedes the flow of the free market economy.
we censor many foreign products from american consumption based on trademark or patent, we censor our media from covering the
zucatti park raid, and even arrest them. our censorship prevented journalists from photographing returning c130 cargo planes carrying dead
and wounded soldiers during the iraq war, and prevents us from knowing who presidents like George Bush invited to the whitehouse.

our system is a revolving door of corporatocracy from which elites of the upper class are bred for leadership, much the same as china.
rule-in-perpetuity by a single party is really no different than having only two parties to choose from, neither of which accomplish any meaningful
longterm reform or change.

Re:so what the article is basically complaining ab (1, Insightful)

Stan92057 (737634) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100008)

Your always free to move to The Communist Government Of China if you don't like life here in the USA. For our OUR faults Ide much rather live here. If you don't vote or take part in community government you have no right to complain. Its just that simple.

Re:so what the article is basically complaining ab (1)

Bucky24 (1943328) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100310)

Running away (ie, moving to China) doesn't solve the underlying problem. Some people are actually willing to try and work for a change HERE.

Re:so what the article is basically complaining ab (1)

Stan92057 (737634) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100552)

That wasnt my point and People here have always been willing to work.

Re:so what the article is basically complaining ab (1)

RocketRabbit (830691) | more than 2 years ago | (#38104698)

No your entire post is bullshit of the rankest kind.

Merely participating in the voting process you are handing over legitimacy to an illegitimate system. There is literally no point in voting when there are only two official parties, and they are both essentially the same with the exception of having a few different corporate sponsors.

Re:so what the article is basically complaining ab (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38106030)

Generally we put a lot of effort and energy into pointing out that we hate that bs and want a government that prevents rather than supports censorship. I don't know whf you would think that "America" loves censorship when everyone from the gun-slinging right to the patchulli-scented left is pissed about the government's efforts to put an eye in every living room and a ragin every mouth. America hates censorship and corrupt politicians everywhere, and here most of all.

Maybe - Maybe Not (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099790)

Last time I was over there, I noticed Internet censorship varied city by city, and even in Beijing differently from one hotel to another. It might have a lot to do with the local service provider. Also, the service providers vary wildly from city to city. I don't believe there is a unified telco provider in China that provides you the ability to make phone calls in all cities, though that was two or three years ago.

Re:Maybe - Maybe Not (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38106686)

all mobile phone calls within anywhere in China is static dependent on plan and have no area code prefix. Unicom, Telecom, and Mobile are the 3 networks and although plans and service quality vary from area to area, plans and pricing seems to be even across the entire nation.

internet censorship based on the Golden Shield Project is even across the board. there are local censors that seem to mask certain ips, but i'm not sure what's the exact purpose. however, GSP censorship is off and on depending on the government's trade relations with the website's owners. like wikipedia for example, have been censored and uncensored many times in the past 5 years, least that i've seen was 3 days censored back in '08. my guess is now they have a dedicated team to make edits to controversial articles.

Hmm. Ask Tuvalu about that. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099800)

Ask those people who run internet gambling sites who are being closed down because the US is censoring the net.

Ask Wikileaks about US censorship on the internet.

I experienced it first hand. (2)

rchh (658159) | more than 2 years ago | (#38099894)

Almost all big computer technology companies have a .cn website- for their Chinese consumers. When I was in China, I tried to open Apple's website in Chinese [apple.cn] and it would often not work or crawl. If I open the same website using an open proxy, it would work smoothly.

Net Neutrality (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38099962)

China is selectively filtering and shaping its own internet traffic, including that of US companies operating in their country. Aren't these exactly the kinds of capabilities the US wants to give its own ISPs by preventing Net Neutrality, on top of forcing them to pay for the priority of their traffic?

Of course they are. So what? (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100798)

Seriously. So what? The chinese gov. is in a COLD WAR WITH THE WEST. They are using economic cheats to win it. The problem is that we have loads of idiots who think that Chinese gov. is friendly to the west. They are about as friendly as Germany was in 1936-39, or USSR was in 1945-1949.

Look, China has spies all over the west stealing technology. WHen they are not stealing, they simply buy and count on presidents like W to allow them to take it out (just one example from W was magnaquench; that allowed China to build decent guidance into their missiles).

O has been trying to get along, but is slowly ratching up issues with China. They need to ratchet it up quicker. In particular, we need to clamp down on their spies. Likewise, we need to take on their money manipulation and other economic treaty breaking. Otherwise, China will win this cold war via economic front.

Re:Of course they are. So what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38101608)

Is this Geithner?
Did you forget to take your meds again Timothy Franz?
Maybe you can try and start slinging opium for silver to save the economy.

Re:Of course they are. So what? (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#38101810)

No. But I am guessing that you are a highschooler or somebody from China.

Let me tie this into Net Neutrality (2)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 2 years ago | (#38100930)

Here, the Chinese government is deciding which businesses will be featured more prominently on the internet, which makes a big impact on that companies business. I keep getting called a tinfoil hat when I propose that ISPs could do the same thing. But here is a real world example of it. If you can filter and prioritize web sites, you can control business.

Some Web content blocked from appearing on U.S.-based sites in China appears on Chinese sites, he said. In some cases, China has redirected searches through U.S. services to a Chinese service, and its censorship of foreign services drives consumers to Chinese alternatives, he added.

The latter example sounds much like Verizon (and others) who redirect DNS lookup failures to their own search engine.

DON'T START A TRADE WAR WITH CHINA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38100934)

Because we're not already in a trade war with China and China isn't already handing us our asses, you see.

And why not. (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 2 years ago | (#38101852)

Facebook. Google. would you allow these companies, who is known to cooperate with the government of a country which is your rival, easy and free access to your national internet ? even americans dont trust facebook for example. why should china.

All I Can Say Is...... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38102308)

FUCK CHINA!

I was feeling sick (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38102452)

without a real China bashing post on /. for almost a day, now I feel better.

Time to some tricks of our own (0)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 2 years ago | (#38103074)

like maybe have the USN use submarines to start sinking every Chinese cargo ship they can find and sink em in deep water so there is no chance of investigation or recovery, and take no prisoners and make sure the captain & crew all die so there are no witnesses, if China wants an economic war then lets give them one

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?