What Can't You Say On China's Social Networks? 130
An anonymous reader writes "China's 450 million Internet users have taken to social networks in a big way. But these social networking sites, founded on the promise of free expression, have an uneasy existence under an authoritarian regime that punishes certain kinds of expression. This article from IEEE Spectrum tells the story of Sina Weibo, the white-hot social networking phenomenon that has taken over China in the past few years. Citizens have used the microblogging service to protest and rebel — but the Chinese government is getting more sophisticated in its handling of these online grumblings. Side note: an English-language version of Sina Weibo is reportedly on the way. Wonder if it will take off in the US?"
Re:What Can't You Say On US's Internets? (Score:2, Interesting)
- "Obscene" or violent porn, even if only acted - [citation needed]
- Ordering cheaper medical drugs from other countries - Import laws apply here, not necessarily internet related (the 'net only makes it a bit easier)
- Ordering pot or drugs - Laws against well predate a prevalent internet
- Sharing knowledge if it's copyrighted - Not directly the Government's will; most of that is civil litigation, though it might be enabled by poor legislation.
- Sharing entertainment if it's copyrighted - See above
- Revealing wrongdoing within US government (Wikileaks) - Might have a point here...certainly, there's some stuff that ends up in closets that shouldn't be, but let's also note that the DoJ hasn't directly done anything on this front, they're only probing as hard as they can.
- Posting knowledge of how to make bombs or certain other technical information - I can agree with letting this information be free, just go after the asshats who use it...
- Implementing your application or website in a certain way if it's software patented - Yes, patents are bullshit, but in a sane world, companies wouldn't try and patent a method for someone moving their finger across a glass surface for a distinct surface...i.e., companies don't have to patent the blatantly obvious.
- Anything else that hurts the business of Big Money Intangible Industries (Pharma, RIAA, MPAA, BSA) - Don't even really know what you're getting at here. You seem to be getting on a Copyright point, addressed above.
That said, the only things the US Government is really only actively cracking down on are alleged large scale piracy sites; and that only by domain seizure. Compare that to other locales where SWAT are engaged and seize equipment, the whole nine yards, talk to me then.
Re:Difference? (Score:4, Interesting)
what if you draw stick figure porn, then say that one of the participants is 17 years old ?
all the false equivalencies in these comments (Score:4, Interesting)
look, folks: i can sit here, and criticize barack obama and his policies and the democratic party, all i want, here in the usa
i can't threaten his life though
ok, right there, that limitation: what does that mean? does it mean that because there are SOME limits on my freedom of expression, that that is logically equivalent to ANY limit on my expression?
"i can't threaten the president's life. therefore, i live in tyranny, and that limitation is equivalent to ANY limits on my expression, such as a limit on my right to criticize political ideologies"
is that a valid logical statement in your eyes?
no? then why don't you see that all the limits some of you have listed in this thread on your freedom of expression in the west is also NOT equivalent to what china does?
what you are doing, frankly, is showing hamfisted ignorance on your part. you reveal your own crude, uneducated way of looking at the concept of your freedom and your rights
some intellectual charity for you: in every society that ever existed, currently exists, and always will exist, limits will be placed on what you can say or do. because some people say and do things that are CRIMES. now, you may not agree with classifying some behaviors as crimes that currently your society stands against. which is fine. you can say "this behavior XYZ is not criminal, my society is wrong for saying that behavior XYZ is criminal." it is 100% legitimate for you say that
what is NOT legitimate for you to say is "because society places some limits on some behaviors, this is equivalent to society limiting ANY behavior, it's all the same. " no, it is NOT all the same. each behavior is DIFFERENT, and must be evaluated DIFFERENTLY, and some behaviors are PERFECTLY VALID subjects for limitation. do you understand that? please understand there will ALWAYS be some behavior that society classifies as crimes. you need to make peace with that fact, because that fact is never going away
to wit: just because a society classifies some expression as crime does not mean that it is equivalent to another society that classifies SIMPLE POLITICAL EXPRESSION as a crime. THAT'S the problem with china, and it is a valid criticism, a criticism that is NOT nullified, because the usa goes after kiddie porn. really
that's really the truth. please understand that engaging in false equivalencies only makes you look like a fool who doesn't understand what freedom of expression really is, and how it exists in natural philosophical tension with other fundamental freedoms in this world, with or without any government policies in play. grow up, develop a more sophisticated and nuanced way of looking at your world. because some of you right now look like idiots engaged in subject matter you simply do not understand