Google's Project Dragonfly 'Terminated' in China

Post by khc » Wed, Jul 17, 2019, 4:46 PM UTC

ctime wrote: post #115

khc wrote: post #86

As an overseas Chinese (born and grew up in Hong Kong but have relatives in China) I am sadden by this and HN comments. Any claim that Google would have helped China censor Chinese citizens ignores the fact that Chinese search engines are already censored. Because laws in this area are often vague, I can see that dragonfly would apply varying levels of censorships and as a side effect, allow people to access some inf…

Enabling censorship and oppression should not be a race to the bottom - which is what you are advocating for. I don't understand how any search engine approved in China could be "surfacing better information in queries" - they are all effectively under the same authoritative control. Are you placing your believe in hopes and prayers that real information will be "accidentally" leaked to the oppressed masses in China?…

Post by khc » Wed, Jul 17, 2019, 4:46 PM UTC

tempguy9999 wrote: post #116

khc wrote: post #86

As an overseas Chinese (born and grew up in Hong Kong but have relatives in China) I am sadden by this and HN comments. Any claim that Google would have helped China censor Chinese citizens ignores the fact that Chinese search engines are already censored. Because laws in this area are often vague, I can see that dragonfly would apply varying levels of censorships and as a side effect, allow people to access some inf…

> Because laws in this area are often vague, I can see that dragonfly would apply varying levels of censorships It doesn't follow to me. The reverse actually. 'laws in this area are often vague' for a reason - so that You Can't Do That becomes not a judicial matter with precise as possible definition, but a matter of personal feeling. Then the rulers can come down hard on whoever just because they didn't like somethi…

Post by TelmoMenezes » Wed, Jul 17, 2019, 4:49 PM UTC

khc wrote: post #125

TelmoMenezes wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any claim that Google would have helped China censor Chinese citizens ignores the fact that Chinese search engines are already censored. So what? That does not make censorship morally acceptable. This would be the same as saying that using slave labor is ok, if you do it in a country that already accepts slavery anyway, and you are treating you slaves better. > And by surfacing better information for queries, it ca…

Comparing this to slavery is silly. This is more like when the entire country is enslaved, and you move to the country. The analogy breaks down because the fact that you may or may not have slaves doesn't change the supply and demand of the slaves. When you said all information is filtered by the government, that shows your ignorance of how things work in China. The rest are not worth responding to.

Post by matz1 » Wed, Jul 17, 2019, 4:52 PM UTC

sorokod wrote: post #122

ezoe wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both US and EU exercise censorship in the name of: + copyrights + trademarks + patents(really bogus patents) + religion(these days, US outright ban any casual religious reference because it offend some believers, resulting modifying some manga/anime/game) + national security + ex-political party symbol(swastika, but they can't tell the difference between nazi symbol and Buddism symbol which is widely used in Japanese…

Perhaps you can share the moral justification used by the Chinese government?

Post by tempguy9999 » Wed, Jul 17, 2019, 4:53 PM UTC

khc wrote: post #133

tempguy9999 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because laws in this area are often vague, I can see that dragonfly would apply varying levels of censorships It doesn't follow to me. The reverse actually. 'laws in this area are often vague' for a reason - so that You Can't Do That becomes not a judicial matter with precise as possible definition, but a matter of personal feeling. Then the rulers can come down hard on whoever just because they didn't like somethi…

That's definitely the intend of having vague laws. But whether Google is in it or not doesn't change that