7 ms·

It's easy to shut down the site when you are losing the search game to local competition. In any case, even though I find freedom of speech to be necessary and

It's easy to shut down the site when you are losing the search game to local competition. In any case, even though I find freedom of speech to be necessary and encouraged, I do not think that Google is right to imply in this blog post that the Chinese government is behind the attacks.

twism 17y ago
But who else would want to garner information from emails of human rights activists in China?
- imajes 17y ago
  that's incredibly naïve. Plenty of organizations would find that information useful.
  - pyre 17y ago
    That may be true, but the facts lend themselves to the implication that the Chinese government is involved. Though that might not be true, it likely is true that the Chinese government is the the single largest entity with the highest interest in these emails.
recampbell 17y ago
I do not think that Google is right to imply in this blog post that the Chinese government is behind the attacks. Unless they have evidence to support that implication...
- tjic 17y ago
  Reading between the lines, that's exactly what I saw.
- alanthonyc 17y ago
  Google simply stated the facts. The implication (or more accurately, the inference) is yours.
chrischen 17y ago
It's hard not to imply that.
siculars 17y ago
Ya, true. Perhaps there is some other hand at play behind the scenes investing treasure in obtaining information on outspoken China human rights activists.
JCThoughtscream 17y ago
The targeting of Chinese human rights activists' email accounts don't seem Suspicious to you? Exactly what /private/ group would have motive for this?
- nfnaaron 17y ago
  It seems very likely it's the Chinese govt. But I don't doubt that other governments have an interest in what activists all over the world do, including our own.
  - JCThoughtscream 17y ago
    A fair point. Heard recently that the "Iranian Cyber Army" attacked Baidu as well. Nothing major - they weren't able to do much more than hassle Twitter, and they didn't do much to Baidu either.
- lallysingh 17y ago
  Someone wanting to blackmail the activists.
- pyre 17y ago
  There are supposedly a lot of hyper-nationalistic youths (specifically in the teens-20s age range) in China right now. I could see a group of them being hackers and feeling that they are doing this for the 'honour of their country' or something similar.
  - adrianwaj 17y ago
    It'd be more like 1 hyper nationalist cherry picking the best hackers through tests and exam results and then telling them (ie forcing them) to weed out dissenters and whatever else they can get.
  - est 17y ago
    Chinese nationalistic is a coin with two sides. It's could be turned against Party and govn't easily. Just think of what happened in 1989.
kvs 17y ago
Google is doing something good. This could be a catalyst for something bigger & better. But, kudos to you for putting things in perspective. Baidu is where 77% of Chinese get their search done. Google is at 19% there. Edit: @maxklein read the Northrop Grumman report linked on this post in case you think attribution to a country is solely based on origin IP. Usually, it's a bit more deeper than that.
cellis 17y ago
Why do you defend the Chinese government at every chance you get? Edit: I am talking about this http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1036908 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1036908 in particular.
- EricBurnett 17y ago
  If this person believes in the value of the Chinese government, it is their right to defend that opinion, just as it is your right to argue against it. Of course, the fact that they have a dissenting opinion by arguing that China should be allowed to suppress dissenting opinions is certainly ironic (from the linked post).
- maxklein 17y ago
  Because I believe in china, the chinese government and the chinese system. I will defend what I believe in, even though it's obviously shared by very few people here. I think it would be unusual if I did not defend something I believe in. And yes, you may think I am wrong, but don't forget that _I_ think you are wrong. What's the difference? If this where a chinese board, you would be the one in the minority.
ashu 17y ago
Yours is a ridiculously cynical argument. 17% of China is far larger than 100% of Germany or France.
- kvs 17y ago
  I am talking about 19% of Chinese who have Internet access (from a total of 200 million people) and you're talking about 17% of population. Here is some actual numbers/data. http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/23/comscore-internet-population-passes-one-billion-top-15-countries/ http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/23/comscore-internet-popul...
drhodes 17y ago
maxklein was introducing a key point in the debate here, and was downmodded. I think negative votes should be reserved for spam, offtopic and that ilk. Otherwise, people will not voice dissent, thus ignoring an entire branch of reasoning, which ironically is what this entire debate comes down to.
bgurupra 17y ago
What were you trying now max?Social Engineering people to downvote you ? :-) JK
- EricBurnett 17y ago
  We definitely need more granular flags. People shouldn't need to be downvoted for expressing a dissenting opinion, but I agree that in the current HN climate it was inevitable.

twism 17y ago

But who else would want to garner information from emails of human rights activists in China?

imajes 17y ago
that's incredibly naïve. Plenty of organizations would find that information useful.
- pyre 17y ago
  That may be true, but the facts lend themselves to the implication that the Chinese government is involved. Though that might not be true, it likely is true that the Chinese government is the the single largest entity with the highest interest in these emails.

recampbell 17y ago

I do not think that Google is right to imply in this blog post that the Chinese government is behind the attacks. Unless they have evidence to support that implication...

tjic 17y ago
Reading between the lines, that's exactly what I saw.
alanthonyc 17y ago
Google simply stated the facts. The implication (or more accurately, the inference) is yours.

chrischen 17y ago

It's hard not to imply that.

siculars 17y ago

Ya, true. Perhaps there is some other hand at play behind the scenes investing treasure in obtaining information on outspoken China human rights activists.

JCThoughtscream 17y ago

The targeting of Chinese human rights activists' email accounts don't seem Suspicious to you? Exactly what /private/ group would have motive for this?

nfnaaron 17y ago
It seems very likely it's the Chinese govt. But I don't doubt that other governments have an interest in what activists all over the world do, including our own.
- JCThoughtscream 17y ago
  A fair point. Heard recently that the "Iranian Cyber Army" attacked Baidu as well. Nothing major - they weren't able to do much more than hassle Twitter, and they didn't do much to Baidu either.
lallysingh 17y ago
Someone wanting to blackmail the activists.
pyre 17y ago
There are supposedly a lot of hyper-nationalistic youths (specifically in the teens-20s age range) in China right now. I could see a group of them being hackers and feeling that they are doing this for the 'honour of their country' or something similar.
- adrianwaj 17y ago
  It'd be more like 1 hyper nationalist cherry picking the best hackers through tests and exam results and then telling them (ie forcing them) to weed out dissenters and whatever else they can get.
- est 17y ago
  Chinese nationalistic is a coin with two sides. It's could be turned against Party and govn't easily. Just think of what happened in 1989.

kvs 17y ago

Google is doing something good. This could be a catalyst for something bigger & better. But, kudos to you for putting things in perspective. Baidu is where 77% of Chinese get their search done. Google is at 19% there. Edit: @maxklein read the Northrop Grumman report linked on this post in case you think attribution to a country is solely based on origin IP. Usually, it's a bit more deeper than that.

cellis 17y ago

Why do you defend the Chinese government at every chance you get? Edit: I am talking about this http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1036908 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1036908 in particular.

EricBurnett 17y ago
If this person believes in the value of the Chinese government, it is their right to defend that opinion, just as it is your right to argue against it. Of course, the fact that they have a dissenting opinion by arguing that China should be allowed to suppress dissenting opinions is certainly ironic (from the linked post).
maxklein 17y ago
Because I believe in china, the chinese government and the chinese system. I will defend what I believe in, even though it's obviously shared by very few people here. I think it would be unusual if I did not defend something I believe in. And yes, you may think I am wrong, but don't forget that _I_ think you are wrong. What's the difference? If this where a chinese board, you would be the one in the minority.

ashu 17y ago

Yours is a ridiculously cynical argument. 17% of China is far larger than 100% of Germany or France.

kvs 17y ago
I am talking about 19% of Chinese who have Internet access (from a total of 200 million people) and you're talking about 17% of population. Here is some actual numbers/data. http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/23/comscore-internet-population-passes-one-billion-top-15-countries/ http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/23/comscore-internet-popul...

drhodes 17y ago

maxklein was introducing a key point in the debate here, and was downmodded. I think negative votes should be reserved for spam, offtopic and that ilk. Otherwise, people will not voice dissent, thus ignoring an entire branch of reasoning, which ironically is what this entire debate comes down to.

bgurupra 17y ago

What were you trying now max?Social Engineering people to downvote you ? :-) JK

EricBurnett 17y ago
We definitely need more granular flags. People shouldn't need to be downvoted for expressing a dissenting opinion, but I agree that in the current HN climate it was inevitable.