Archive for the ‘Censorship’ Category
It appears Google and the Chinese government still aren’t the greatest of friends. Over the weekend it has emerged that Google’s Android Market is once again inaccessible from within mainland China — though not for the first time. Google and China have a long, troubled relationship. Google’s anti-censoring stance last year likely did little to help.
The Android Market is the latest Google app to (re-) join the blocklist along with fellow in-house services GTalk, Gmail, and Google+ along with other popular social services such as Twitter and Facebook. Unsurprisingly, local mobile app stores are still accessible.
Are you an Android user based in China? Talk to us at: [email protected]
While half a world away the events in the UK riots are captivating the world for not only the violence that’s occurred, but the methods in which local governments and law enforcement are looking at curbing future public unrest — cellular/social networking blackouts. And while some critics in the U.S. may stand up and call out UK officials for the blatant misuse of power, the problem of censorship and social blackouts are just as alive and real in the U.S…
Infamous iPhone Dev Team member MuscleNerd has recently found his Google+ account suspended – for not using his real name. Oh Internets, how our anonymity has always been a respected and an allowed idea. Google on the other hand slaps the hands of those that wish to be recognized, how they have always been recognized – by their internet handles.
Up until the suspension, MuscleNerd had around 3k people in his Circles, so obviously Google’s claims of it’s new attempt at Social Networking “working best” if used with real names is false. If his real name was Charles McDynasty, I would have never found him – but searching MuscleNerd would grant me access to his + feeds.
Jay Freeman (aka @Saurik) wrote up a nice little piece at his Google+ account expressing his thoughts on the current wave of account suspensions. He explains how many people on the interwebs or in real life are known by their handles.
One specific person I know in this situation is not a writer, but is instead a hacker (of course in the good sense of “making things possible”): MuscleNerd, a very famous member of the iPhone Dev Team (with almost 230,000 followers on Twitter). MuscleNerd is an example of someone who is almost entirely known by his handle, a situation quite unlike the oft cited Lady Gaga: despite most people not recognizing her real name, we at least know that it is “Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta”.
What are your thoughts on this way of controlling your social network? Does it make sense to limit it with your real name? Did you keep from joining the + network because of this?
- December 30, 2010 12:29 pm
Internet phone services such as Skype are about to have a much harder time operating within China’s borders, if at all. China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology stated that “We are carrying out with relevant authorities a campaign to crack down on illegal Voice over Internet Protocol phone services” — In this case, “illegal” means any service that is not state-owned and under the direct control of the Chinese government. On that same note, vice-minister Xi Guohua was quoted by the Beijing Morning Post saying that “only state-owned major Chinese telecommunications operators were licensed to provide internet phone services linking telephones and computers”.
In a country with 450 million+ internet users, such a restriction has far-reaching consequences that will affect one of the world’s largest internet markets. Not surprisingly, Chinese citizens are already voicing their displeasure on internet forums and websites, claiming the crackdown is being enforced solely for the benefit of state-owned monopolies and their over-priced services — services that Skype and others offer at much lower costs. Regardless, such a crackdown is a disappointing and unnecessary.
- December 21, 2010 6:55 am
Four days — that’s how long the unofficial Wikileaks iOS app lasted in the App Store. Sometime late last night, Apple removed said app without any explanation as to why. Yes, the site has posted controversial material. But thats what news organizations do. They report the news, regardless of what it is. The man behind Wikileaks, Julian Assange, has an equally questionable drama surrounding his personal life too with various accounts of sexual assault originating in Sweden. But even with all that considered, is it enough to warrant removing the app from the App Store?
Apple can and does do whatever it wants in regards to app approvals. That’s the nature of their closed system. And while Wikileaks supporters can still find news pertaining to the site itself as well as the content it continues to publish each and every day all over the web, the removal of the app isn’t really that big of a deal. Apple censoring current events just because they are “unpopular” is.
Thoughts? Should Apple have pulled the Wikileaks app?
BlackBerry users in Saudi Arabia were gearing up for their device’s certain death. With hours to spare, it has come to light that someone (RIM or Saudi Arabia) caved and managed to strike a deal. Given the Kingdom’s rather firm approach to the whole matter, I’d wager it isn’t them who bent under pressure. That medal (if you can call it that) goes to RIM.
While I see the business side of the decision, that doesn’t negate the fact it’s a very bad decision. Giving countries local access to BlackBerry servers under the false guise of increased security (we all know it’s for censorship) of their own undermines the platforms biggest selling point — security. If everyone and the brother can start tapping into BlackBerry users’ data, the whole “BlackBerry is secure” mantra goes out the window.
So it’s a bittersweet victory. Saudi residents get to keep a fully functioning BlackBerry at the expense of security.
The world of iPod docks and accessories is probably never ending. If there were one brave soul who decided to catalog it all, it would be a monumental undertaking that would more than likely be the death of him. Poor guy. There’s just so much junk out there. In order to keep your own product from not blending in, you have to be different. Is the Snowflake Speaker different enough?
Sadly, this is nothing more than a concept from the head of designer Sylvain Gerber. But if it were real, would you buy it? To my eyes, it looks like a Ferris Wheel at the fair. You?
And the battle wages on…
The latest in an almost juvenile yet entertaining (and I’ll admit it, liberating) move by Google has them yet again, sticking it to the red man. We’ve already seen Google close up shop with their .cn search page, choosing to redirect it to google.hk — Hong Kong’s freer flowing version. China responded by filtering results. So Google countered again with another “catch me if you can” by implementing the now common accompanying Twitter feed essentially killing two censored birds with one stone. First off, the Twitter feeds included in search results are not censored, including plenty of highly controversial topics involving China. Second, Twitter itself has been more or less banned in China for obvious reasons. Awesome, a twofer!
So now we all just sit back and wait for China to make their next move and then see how Google responds. It’s fun for me and I’m sure it’s fun for a lot of you out there. Nothing like a little playground justice, huh?
LA Times Tech Blog
Since Google made their bold stance to pull out of China regarding censorship issues earlier this year, the internet world has been in a firestorm. More recently however we’ve actually seen more controversy and actions taken regarding the “bigger picture”. For instance, this past week GoDaddy announced that they too would be following in Google’s footsteps and abandoning any further .cn domain registrations. Also on the list of potential movers is Dell, whom stated the idea was on the table.
One company whom so far has publicly (and rather proudly) voiced that they will continue operations in China is that of Microsoft. Former CEO Bill Gates was quoted saying:
At some point you have to ask yourself, do you want to do business in that country or not…”
Microsoft PR has gone on further stating that while they [Microsoft] appreciate other companies’ stances on the censorship/China issue, Microsoft remains committed to China and obeying local laws.
It is this stance that has Microsoft in the cross-hairs of the US Government body who took to their podiums today to denounce Microsoft’s decision as foolish and short sighted while simultaneously praising Google for theirs. And for the most part, I agree with the governments stance.
For me personally, Microsoft’s viewpoint leaves a sour taste in my mouth. Their defense — that they’re merely obeying local laws — is a bullshit excuse and response. What if China supported mass genocide and the killing of red headed step children thanks to specially crafted chips implanted in every person residing in the country at birth that allowed constant 24/7 tracking? If Microsoft made such a chip for much broader users, would they continue to directly deal with China and sell them said chips simply because they were merely “obeying the law”?
Now I realize the genocide example is an extreme example that fortunately is not taking place (in China anyway). But the main point still stands. Merely pushing off all of their reasoning as “because they said so” is the worst defense Microsoft could use. In the end it leaves them looking like pro-communist anti-consumer rights supporters which isn’t exactly the image they want to portray.
So again I ask: Is this all getting overblown or is Microsoft treading a fine line?
DailyTech
