China has issued a clear warning against Google's plans to grow its business in the People's Republic and labelled the company a "political tool" after hacking claims the company made against Beijing last week. Google claimed on 1 June that it had uncovered a sophisticated spear phishing attack on prominent US individuals which …
China is full of shit
and can go to hell. They should be embarrassed at how messed-up they are. Torture, Communism, occupation, suppression, revisionism, cyber-crime. Fucking asshats, choke already.
What do they teach the kids in school nowdays...
Nothing wrong with communism. It is one of the most beautiful ideas ever - everyone getting everything they need, the reasons for war, starvation, suffering all gone, etc. It is an idea worth to die for and I suggest you actually read the Manifesto before spewing bullshit.
It is the power of the idea which has allowed homicidal c*nts with southern accents with every second word being "We simple folks..." to hijack the idea around the world. The Mao c*nt, the Koba c*nt, the Chervenkov c*nt, the Tito c*nt and many other c* word characters around the world.
China political system has never ever had anything particularly communist about it. Neither had USSR. Neither had any country in the eastern block. Neither had any of China satellites. They are all various forms of tyrannies or oligarchies which use the idea to disguise a repressive regime which favors a few at the cost of suffering of the entire population.
Anything but communist.
Re: China is full of shit
sooo... what is your knowledge of China, other then what _your_ _government_ have told you about it?
Nothing wrong? [Re: What do they teach the kids in school nowadays...]
How about the premise that your right to your own life, liberty and the products of your own efforts are secondary to "the collective?" That's not one of the most beautiful ideas ever, it's the ugliest idea ever.
re: What do they teach the kids
While I agree with your core assertion, of living in a communal state, where everybody's needs and wants are fufilled, is indeed a beautiful thing, I reject your theory that all suffering goes away. People will always want more than they are entitled to. More food, bigger house, more exotic transportation or frivilous toys (deemed unessential by the state). There will always be petty jealously, which when dropped in the lap of an armed government, there will always be war.
While we all try to pretend that we, as a specie, are civilized, compassionate and moral, the sad fact of the matter is that we aren't. And no matter what idiology you prescribe to, there will always be glaring examples of horrible treatment of those in the lower class.
Conversely, in a free market society, the onus is shifted away from the government, as a provider, to the individual and the only thing that limits them is any barriers they construct for themselves.
I've looked through a number of references for anything that mildly demonstrates a successful "communist" society and haven't been able to find one yet. There are a number of semi-successful socialist governments, but sadly they're starting to collapse under the weight of the demands placed on their citizens.
At best, Communism may be pragmatic at a very small scale, maybe a small community of several hundred to a few thousand, but in a nation of millions (in china's case, billions), a substantial of people simply will not have their most basic of needs met. That is a failure of the idology/system.
Feel free to flame away, just my two cents worth.
Sorry to burst any bubbles. Communism is and always will be an incredibly bad idea.
It is an idealistic mentality that is so disjointed from reality to border on the absurd.
If we could overcome all the flaws of humanity (including the need to eat I'm afraid) then and only then would it become a potentially viable system.
Places like China take many aspects of Communism (communal, re-distributed wealth, etc) and then add in a lot of tyranny to boot. Like most tyrannies the more time they say "peoples", "democratic" or "republic" the more suppressed the country likely is.
Taking what the OP has said about China then arguing how they aren't a real Communism is all well and good. Point to a real working communist country and then we can say that perhaps the OP is getting his terms confused. In the mean time, we can safely assume he is referring to Communism as China (a self declared Communist country) defines it. Which is pretty damned horrible.
so it's ...
Marx meets Malthus, which is a decent critique of communism which is rooted in human nature. I agree with the earlier poster that says communism in priciple is a good idea, but we haven't really had any proper implementation in practice. Unfortunately, the following is fiction, not fact:
@Veldan -- The trouble with your argument is...
...that the present Chinese Politburo isn't communist! Nor's it been so for years.
Today, you'd get a much better match between the Politburo and Ayn Rand than with Communism.
In China, that old communist bogeyman's long since dead; however, being in love with power and hanging on to it at all costs--as everywhere--isn't.
@Vega et al -- Have you ever studied control theory [as in electronics--not politics]?
If you have, then you'd well know that once a system has broken its servo/feedback loop then its state is irreconcilably out of control from within.
As with systems with broken feedback loops, your position, together with those of several of your diametrically opposed protagonists, are so polarised that no logical argument--or any number of them--would ever budge any of you from your respective positions--even if given absolute proof that any of you were wrong.
For everyone's sake, desist. Bothering to put your positions just wastes time and antagonises others to act similarly.
Can anyone tell me why over the past 40/50 or so years that debating and formal argument has gone the way of the dodo only to be replaced with protagonists' utterances that border on the sociopathic?
What's made the world so polarised in recent times that, by comparison, even Hitler and Churchill are beginning to look like bedfellows--at least, they've seemingly more in common?
Apparently Chinese politicians don't understand that in the USA, the big corporations control the government, not the other way round ...
Google doesn't do Search to Deliver, it uses IT to Phish for Novel Intellectual Property ...
..... in Advanced Interest Questions*
Don't be putting any money on that bet, Quxy, lest you want to walk home naked.
* And what do you imagine Windows does for Microsoft apart from showing them all that you are doing. It's a smart Command and Control double act but only really effective virtually whenever no one knows what IT is all about.
Politics ...... it's a funny peculiar old game with some very strange key players, and all of them essentially unknown.
Media attack from China
The foolish sounding denials and the threats against Google in the media do a far better job of reinforcing our negative views of China than anything Google could say.
And then some...
I think that you're right, then add the fact that they took a comment about an attack coming from China which was only ever implied to be the government and starting screaming about how it wasn't then.
They doth protest too much methinks? No one likes getting caught with their hand in the cookie jar.
Google are tools
Well, sometimes they act that way, anyway, but for China to try to take the moral high-ground on this is more than a little laughable!
(Posted AC simply to use the cool V for Vendetta Mask icon :-}) )
Is that another name for Michael Gove?
Google bounced a check?
Considering the way business is done in the PRC one would think Google could jsut write a big check out to the CPC and this would all go away?
Searching for Answers .... Delivering Solutions ..... A Good Use of One's Time in Space, Methinks.
"Considering the way business is done in the PRC one would think Google could jsut write a big check out to the CPC and this would all go away?" .... Eduard Coli Posted Monday 6th June 2011 22:06 GMT
Hi, Eduard Coli,
The PRC/CPC have a mountain of dollars/pretty printed paper for all of the goods that they supply to Uncle Sam, and realise that the exchange .... goods for pretty printed paper ... leaves them with nothing but a mountain of paper which costs virtually nothing ...... unless they can use that pile to purchase what they need. It is in Uncle Sam's national security interest to ensure that everything sold in dollars is as expensive as possible [take oil for example] so that they are delivered of it for virtually nothing, and populations are enslaved to the supply of pretty printed paper which is controlled by a cabal of bankers and their friends. Such powers to enslave are used by all paper currencies which are not freely delivered to populations to spend.
It is a neat trick which put the controllers of virtually worthless currency supply in surreal control of practically everything on Earth and beyond, although a most notable exception is control of the one thing which it would most need to guarantee its continuity, and that is greater intelligence shared in open transparent networks which are for building Future Worlds with much a Better Use of such a Neat Powerful Virtual Remote Control as is delivered with Greater Currency Flows/Pretty Printed Paper Purchases ...... for Delivery of Advanced IntelAIgent Missions/SMARTer Projects/Future Novel Programs with Cloud and CyberSpace Command and Control of Computers and Communications.
Imagine IT as a NEUKlearer HyperRadioProActive Power Source where Openly Shared and Transparently Internetworked Mutually Beneficial Intellectual Property is its Selflessly Sublime AIdDriver. Or is that Specification to be classified and/or considered somewhat Alien to Primitive Man, whereas it is just a Much Better Emergent and Evolving Revolutionary Use of IT and Media and Earthly Resources by the System and ITs Systems in Command and Control of Cloud and CyberSpace, Computers and Communications.
Or do you imagine that which controls Life on Earth, and IT, to be a lot more complicated than that? If so, please explain and share the difficulties which you see complicating all of the above, so that they may be freely discussed to resolve any problem/difficulty/complication/other random shared thought on such fundamental matters/radical proposals.
Speak up if you have anything to add and intelligent to say , or even something stupid if you must, for every voice can be heard if it says anything. The Great Game Secret is to try and ensure that whatever it is that you say, is perfectly harmless and magically constructive and can be shared with everybody and anybody so that they can support and reinforce it/aid and strengthen the Program.
Reckon you've things down here on Earth summed to a tee!
Perhaps you ought to run for parliament. You'd lift its collective IQ--now hanging around low room-temperature regions--to respectable levels.
"Don't believe anything until it has officially been denied."
You'd reckon security at Google would be substantially higher.
As I said in a post at the FBI/LulzSec hack story:
"...by now you'd think that two-level authentication/certificated/encrypted 'passwording' schemes would be commonplace when the stakes are high."
One would like to think that when someone's human rights are potentially at stake then 'password' security would automatically be of such a high order.
...But then, as it seems, perhaps not.
I find it amusing that china tries to take the moral high ground here.
china needs to wake up to itself and get its shit in order.
- Just TWO climate committee MPs contradict IPCC: The two with SCIENCE degrees
- 14 antivirus apps found to have security problems
- Apple winks at parents: C'mon, get your kid a tweaked Macbook Pro
- Feature Scotland's BIG question: Will independence cost me my broadband?
- Driverless car SQUADRONS to hit Britain in 2015