China Telecom Blocking Skype Calls 297
Retrospeak writes "According to a Reuters report China is starting to block Skype service in Shenzhen, an affluent southern city of China. Local Chinese media report that China Telecom has plans to eventually block the service throughout its coverage area nationwide. Could this have something to do with the fact that China Telecom charges close to $1 per minute for calls to United States and Europe?" From the article: " A China Telecom spokesman had no comment on the reports about the Shenzhen blockage, but gave a broader view. 'Under the current relevant laws and regulations of China, PC-to-phone services are strictly regulated and only China Telecom and (the nation's other fixed-line carrier) China Netcom are permitted to carry out some trials on a very limited basis,' he said."
This is surprising from Communist state-run media? (Score:5, Insightful)
It may be a censorship issue (Score:2, Insightful)
It's the way of such governments.
Re:Best of luck with that (Score:4, Insightful)
You think you have it bad? (Score:2, Insightful)
Nope (Score:5, Insightful)
It's hard enough to sue a sovereign nation for violating it's *own* laws, let alone over something like this. IANAL either, but I can tell you that a snowball would have a better chance lasting in hell than Skype would have in winning such a suit.
Re:You think you have it bad? (Score:3, Insightful)
Excellent point!
When I read TFA, I was wondering "Why is this listed as 'Your Rights Online', when it is clearly a political discussion. China maintains a stranglehold on their populace and the only thing we can do is bitch about is Skype getting blocked?
I'm sure China's telco blocking Skype what this guy was pissed about when this [asianamericans.com] photo was taken.
Lived in China two years, no surprise to me (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny, I was in Beijing two months ago and there was a HUGE billboard for Skype, right in the center of the business district.
My guess is that they are just using a heavy hand to pressure skype into two things:
1) handing over some money/bribes.
2) making sure they can listen in on conversations
3) They did something like this to Google a few years back. Even now google experiences outages all the time. I guess this is just the way the chinese gov't is used to doing business.
Skype just has to figure out the right person to bribe and this will all go away.
Priorities (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Sad Future of Broadband Access in other countri (Score:5, Insightful)
Can you join a Nazi party in your Country? Many European Countries you can not, in the US, you can.
Can you buy a copy Mein Kamf? Many Countries you can not, in the US, you can.
Can you buy anything that is printed? In the United Stated, bomb making books are printed and sold, legally.
Are your basic rights outlined in your constition? Freedom of Speech, Right to Assemble, Freedom of the Press and Freedom of Religion are the basic foundations of this Country are protect by our Bill of Rights.
Europe and other countries can bash us for many reasons and in some areas are more free than we are, but in the Big Picture, we are more free than anyone else.
Never thought I'd say this (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm usually all for leaving other countries' governments alone, but I'm starting to feel like there's a certain threshold which you can stifle people's rights, and China is well past that and needs to be dismantled/reshaped.
Btw, I should note, that I don't feel like this solely due to Skype - I could care less about skype.. Watching a country try and make information and self-education disappear is both hillarious and saddening. It is hillarious because they will never succeed in the long run, it is saddening that they have succeded in general for now and succeeded in limiting so much other information.
Overreacting (Score:2, Insightful)
I think this is just overreaction by Reuter and other slashdotters. Internet based phone is incredibly common in China, you can buy "IP Phone cards" that work with any phone for ridiculously cheap prices. (100 RMB cards selling for 50 RMB, plus buy one get one free.)
Skype has always been somewhat blocked in China since they signed the agreement with tom.com. Sometimes buying credits directly from Skype.com doesn't work unless you're an existing user. Sometimes the entire skype.com site is blocked.
As for popularity, QQ has far more users and is known by even non-computer users...
What a joke (Score:5, Insightful)
If I'm blocked from attending a town hall meeting put on by my President because I'm a Democrat, I'm not very free.
If elections can be decided by a court, I'm not very free.
If neoconservatives can threaten to impeach judges because they don't decide cases based on religious contrine, I'm not very free.
If big businesses can invest their money wisely enough to buy off a Congress, I'm not very free. (See the energy, telecommunications, defense, highway bills.)
If oil companies formerly run by our Vice President get no-bid contracts and take over Iraqi oil fields, I'm not very free.
If the government office in charge of investigating abuses of power (like those no-bid contracts) say they're "too busy" to investigate Cheney, despite having three times the case load when they approved a Clinton investigation, I'm not very free.
If my uncle down south, along with others, is asked to leave his church because he's a card-carrying Democrat, I'm not very free.
If wealthy people get billions of dollars and, as a result, we cripple state budgets and tens of thousands of people die because of a Hurricane, I'm not very free.
The truth is, honest to God, I'd trade in my copy of "My Struggle" if it reversed all those things. Freedom is in the eye of the beholder. The rich and the religious feel very free. In fact, they feel ENTITLED. But the truth is, there's a reason Norway is #1 on the UN's list of countries to live in and the U.S. is #37. I can't imagine Norwegians are screaming for liberty and freedoms. They're free, they go about their lives, and they do well.
The U.S. has turned a corner and is on a very dark path right now. If you don't see it - even just a glimpse of it - then you need to, because power tends to consolidate, and if past actions lend to future ambitions, we're in for big trouble as neocons continue gaining strength.
Your simple test is misguided. It's not about which party you can join. After all - Germany had a problem with Nazis and outlawed them. We spent a better part of the 20th century tearing to pieces Communists in our own. Even today, in the 21st century, many folks spend their time talking about "killing" (yes, hate speech) the liberals who ruin this country. They are perverse, sick, disgusting individuals who are so entrenched in a false system of values.
The true test of freedom is the consolidation of power. Is it centralized in the people in America? I would say less and less. Corporatism is the new threat - and the neocons (and even many Conservatives) are perfectly aligned to feed it. This threatens our values. These are not our American values -- hell, they're not even good Christian values, if you want to bring religion into it.
Love your country, Mullen. Just don't love it too much. The Constitution is a pitiful and weak thing -- it is not the protector of our great democracy.
We are.
still enjoying the DMCA ? (Score:1, Insightful)
Can you get a fair trial in front of your peers ? in the US you can't [guardian.co.uk]
Can you read books in your library without fear of being persecuted ? in the US you can't [epic.org]
Can you report stories as a journalist without fear of revealing your sources and being jailed ? in the US you can't [commondreams.org]
freedom is a good idea but its not working out very well in USA
Re:Sad Future of Broadband Access in other countri (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What a joke (Score:5, Insightful)
We are.
I wholeheartedly agree. And I agree with many things you've said: corporations and their bitches, aka lawyers, are consolidating power at an alarming rate and Americans don't do enough to protect our liberties. However, I have issues with your idea of freedom.
If I'm blocked from attending a town hall meeting put on by my President because I'm a Democrat, I'm not very free.
If my uncle down south, along with others, is asked to leave his church because he's a card-carrying Democrat, I'm not very free.
Your idea of freedom seems misguided. You can flip it and look at it from the other point of view. If a congregation believes that a Democrat in their midst is a bad thing, then its their freedom to turn that person or persons away. Is that truly what God would want? Most decidedly not, but its their choice to do so. Likewise, banning someone from a town hall meeting because of their political persuasion is their choice as well. Is it politically savvy to do so? Probably not. Will it create anger and unrest? Yes. Does it infringe on your rights to attend that meeting?
If you always look from the perspective of how you were screwed of your freedom then any decision anyone makes is an infringment of your freedom. Get pulled over for speeding? Infringment of my freedom! Why? Because I'm obviously not free to speed.
If neoconservatives can threaten to impeach judges because they don't decide cases based on religious contrine, I'm not very free.
Sure you're free. Just as neocons are free to threaten to impeach judges for not voting along neocon lines, you're free to fight back if you disagree with them. Simply because you disagree with people doesn't mean your freedom is trampled on. You are guilty of what you imply: that we don't do enough to protect our freedoms.
Re:This is a problem? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Communist 'cement-heads' always last to 'get it (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, true, but this story has nothing to do with that, it's just about good old robber-baron style capitalism, big companies who are well-connected with the government abusing the rights of consumers to protect their profits.
Re:What a joke (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:What a joke (Score:4, Insightful)
Every American has the right to have their criticism of the government heard by the government. Every American has the right to demand accountability. A President who locks himself away behind loyalty oaths, yes-men and closed doors comes frighteningly close to negating those rights.
You seem to be confused about what freedom is (Score:1, Insightful)
Are organizers of an event not free to block anyone they like?
If elections can be decided by a court, I'm not very free.
So what would be freedom then? for YOU to decide based on what you would prefer? If an election is close and has questions about votes, wouldn't you want some kind of arbiter to come in and settle things? Define the freedome you are thinking you lost here - especially since by any major newspaper tallies, the votes came out the way the election did.
If neoconservatives can threaten to impeach judges because they don't decide cases based on religious contrine, I'm not very free.
That's odd, I thought the ability to threaten other people in the government without being shot was actually rather liberating!
If big businesses can invest their money wisely enough to buy off a Congress, I'm not very free. (See the energy, telecommunications, defense, highway bills.)
Get your own money and buy off who you please if it's so easy then. After all, you are Free to do so.
Do you think only the right have money? Well then it must not come dwn to only money that controls things or else there would be more balance.
If oil companies formerly run by our Vice President get no-bid contracts and take over Iraqi oil fields, I'm not very free.
In what way did this impinge on YOUR freedom. Did you have a bid that got rejected?
If the government office in charge of investigating abuses of power (like those no-bid contracts) say they're "too busy" to investigate Cheney, despite having three times the case load when they approved a Clinton investigation, I'm not very free.
Again irrelevent to the topic of Freedom for citizens of this country. How did that affect your freedom?
If my uncle down south, along with others, is asked to leave his church because he's a card-carrying Democrat, I'm not very free.
Again in what way is he not free to start another church? Should the chruch be oblidged to keep in people they do not welcome? Should you be obliged to let weathly oil execs stay in your house for a week because they want to?
If wealthy people get billions of dollars and, as a result, we cripple state budgets and tens of thousands of people die because of a Hurricane, I'm not very free.
Depiste the pretty horrific leap to judgement and lack of train of thought, again how does that affect your freedom? Not at all.
The truth is, honest to God, I'd trade in my copy of "My Struggle" if it reversed all those things. Freedom is in the eye of the beholder.
If freedom is all relative, then you are only as free as you feel. thus America is indeed the land of the free for those that think they are. You are in a prision of your own devising, and should proabably try visitng someplace that really does understand what lack of freedom really is.
You just lack no notion at all of what freedom is, vs. what you see as corruption of the system. There is a very real difference between corruption and freedom and the sooner you understand this basic fact the sooner you might make more lucid arguments. My perscription is to have you read Reason for no less than two years and come back when you are a sensible Libertarian instead of a flaming liberal who forces Democrats to loose elections and throw the whole damn system out of wack.
Re:What a joke (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, if you take the most extreme elements of any movement as you've done, you're going to be able to paint a ghastly picture. The authoritarian "Right" despite their rhetoric to the contrary, is as interested in centralization of power as the authoritarian "Left" is. The Patriot Act is now permanent. Those with power will have the information to discredit their political opponents, just as the soviets did. It's just a matter of deciding to use any information that your party can get, as Herbert Hoover and Nixon did.
"The Right" makes itself look good by comparing itself favorably to Communism and trying to convince people that every Democrat is a Communist, or that every person on the left wants centralization of power. There are a few socialist Democrats (who I don't agree with) but the majority of Democrats are not socialist. And sure, you can run a radio talk show and selectively allow folks on the air (Rush Limbaugh's callers are more heavily screened than any other call-in show) or selectively discuss a person's view but that isn't honesty, however much it looks like it. Given enough material, I can selectively quote just about anyone to make them look like an idiot.
Bush has not been honest by any stretch of the imagination. He's claimed to be for tax cuts, while increasing government spending. You can't have both. Either ask people to sacrifice so we can have the best military in the world, or give up the dream of being a global superpower and cut taxes. One or the other. Go for the middle and you're a 'flip-flopper.' Bush decides what he wants, and then manipulates people to get it. Nobody in their right mind thought that Saddam was trying to get Uranium from Iraq.
Look at how he manipulated people to believe that Iraq was behind 9-11. Even if you support the war against Iraq, you have to admit that deceptive means were used to launch it.
Bush claimed he wanted to give more power to the states, yet "No Child Left Behind" is a mandate on the national level. Why does this bill have to be implemented at the national level as opposed to the state level? Why hasn't Bush even funded his own bill? If the funds don't exist to run NCLB, then scrap the attached mandates.
As governor of Texas, Bush claimed that a recount was preferable in the case of a close call, then tried to shut down the recount back in Florida, while simultaneously calling for recounts in New Mexico. His party (not him personally) has since set in place Diebold voting machines which don't even leave a paper trail. This is a stupid thing to do on purpose. If it's a mistake, it's readily solved. But it hasn't been. A mistake of this import should be fixed before the next election.
Putting aside the question of whether Bush could
Re:What a joke (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't get it? You're complaining because the economic well-being of companies is debated by congress? I'm don't get it.
Power is, to some degree, like a zero sum game. Political donations influence elected officials.
The purchase of influence dilutes the influence of voters, and is hence anti-democratic.
Re:Sad Future of Broadband Access in other countri (Score:2, Insightful)
I object to your simple-minded "simple test" for a country's freedom. piecewise offers a number of "if"s, of which I consider some much more relevant than the items of your simple test, and some less so. But I believe he missed out on a few important ones, which I would like to add. For conciseness, these tests are for non-freedom:
Re:Sad Future of Broadband Access in other countri (Score:2, Insightful)