13 ms·

Google Needs to Come Clean About Its Chinese Plans

268 points by panarky 8y ago

est 8y ago
Fact 1: Google only pulled search business out of China. adsense/adwords/maps works fine in China Fact 2: Search engines are more and more irrelevant these days. All interesting new content are either from Weibo or Wechat (or other closed garden) Fact 3: all reports about "Google returning to China" are based solely on the "Intercept report"[1] as source. I suggest everyone take a look at it. I think there's a huge misunderstanding. Maybe it's in-app search for some domain business only instead of web-wide search? Fact 4: Firewalls in China has a hierarchical layers of blocking. Some times the plain text http is effected, sometimes it's the DNS, sometimes it's the tis certs, most of the time it's heuristics (e.g. SVM model to classify traffic) and random. There are also collateral blocking, like a blocking a CDN. You can't guess exactly which one piece of information was the culprit. And it all varies in places and time. All "blocking" are based on empirical assumptions, no one have ever done a large scale, down to the packet level study of it. Administrative notices of taking down articles are blurry as hell. Sometimes there's even corporates faking govn't orders to remove some review as PR move. So it's very hard to suggest if an "article" should be blocked or not. The chinese govn't utilize this method to force everyone to "self-censorship" and some business are making a profit of it. [1]: https://theintercept.com/2018/08/01/google-china-search-engine-censorship/ https://theintercept.com/2018/08/01/google-china-search-engi...
- wavefunction 8y ago
  >Google only pulled search business out of China. adsense/adwords/maps works fine in China That's "google search" if just by a different name >f2 see part 1 >f3 Google returning is contradicted by p1+p2 >f4 what does that have to do with p1-3 though
  - est 8y ago
    > what does that have to do with p1-3 though FTA > Documents seen by The Intercept, marked “Google confidential,” say that Google’s Chinese search app will automatically identify and filter websites blocked by the Great Firewall. This part does not make much sense. It's simply impractical.
- guywhocodes 8y ago
  Maps "works", there are essentially zero updates for many years. Walk down a street in Shanghai where business pop up/ shutdown/ move more often than annually on average, hardly a single name ever correlates with google maps.
  - oh-kumudo 8y ago
    Worth notice is that, foreign companies are forbidden to collect its own map data in China, let alone something like Street View.
    - guywhocodes 8y ago
      Individuals too, there seem to have been by Chinese standards extremely high fines issued related to OSM.
- seanmcdirmid 8y ago
  > Fact 1: Google only pulled search business out of China. adsense/adwords/maps works fine in China YouTube and Gmail also don't work in China, which are significant. They technically didn't leave China, however, because they never entered it. > Fact 2: Search engines are more and more irrelevant these days. All interesting new content are either from Weibo or Wechat (or other closed garden) I think you mean to qualify that with in China? > Fact 4: Firewalls in China has a hierarchical layers of blocking Most of the western-world web moved to HTTPS specifically because China was inspecting plain text packets. It was interesting to watch the change over happen from 2008-2011.
  - est 8y ago
    > I think you mean to qualify that with in China? I mean even if the "android app" came out how does it gain traction? Does anybody actually use an "app" to search on mobile phones?
    - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
      If it was my only alternative to baidu, maybe.
      - est 8y ago
        A search engine as an app? You type some phrases into an app, the app displays results in a webview, you click the SERP, then what? a browser opens? Why don't you use the browser on your phone directly for searching? That's why I think Google is working on some ROM feature, not an app. Or maybe there are some misudnerstanding from the "source" If it's an app it's doomed to fail.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
        helloindia 8y ago
        Are you aware of the fact that Google has search apps on both iOS Appstore and Android Playstore? If you want to know who is using such apps, look up the reviews on them.
- knuththetruth 8y ago
  Fact 5: The Chinese Government, which Google will collaborate with to operate in China, has upwards of two million Uighurs and Muslim minorities in what the UN calls a “massive internment camp.” Uighurs are also reported to be being detained upon re-entry into the country, with some then “dying in custody” https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-rights-un/u-n-says-it-has-credible-reports-that-china-holds-million-uighurs-in-secret-camps-idUSKBN1KV1SU https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-rights-un/u-n-says-...
  - est 8y ago
    Fact 6: the phone or computer you are using are manufactured in China with child slave labor. https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-child-labor-2012-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-child-labor-2012-1 https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-microsoft-and-lenovo-failing-on-child-labor-checks-says-amnesty/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-microsoft-and-lenovo-fai... I can guarantee you that labeling China with these can go on forever, but how does your fact help with the quesiton we are discussing? btw Yes I do think Google made the wrong move to cooperate with China. But also I don't think a search app is the plan here. Maybe there are some misunderstanding from the source.
  - dnomad 8y ago
    Isn't it strange how in just a few days we go from "credible reports" of 1 million individuals to a fact of two million people in one "massive" "camp"? What's going to happen by Monday?
- mapgrep 8y ago
  >all reports about "Google returning to China" are based solely on the "Intercept report"[1] as source False. There has been a lot of independent reporting on this (even if credits Intercept for getting it first, and yes I work there). NYT confirmed based on "two people with knowledge of the plans." https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/01/technology/china-google-censored-search-engine.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/01/technology/china-google-c... WSJ confirmed based on "a person familiar with the matter." https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-considering-censored-search-engine-for-return-to-china-1533157785 https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-considering-censored-sea... Reuters confirmed with "two sources said." https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-google/google-plans-return-to-china-search-market-with-censored-app-sources-idUSKBN1KN09C https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-google/google-plans... VICE confirmed with "a source inside the company." https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/9kmdm8/google-china-censorship-secret-android-app https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/9kmdm8/google-china-cens...
  - est 8y ago
    well, it's good to know the same two people are verified again and again. I do really appreciate those links. Are there any further development besides the initial "Intercept report" details? My best guess is that Google China somehow partnered with a major Android ROM developer in China to provide a search component in Android system, some kind of integration with "Custom Search API". It's nothing like the full search experience is returning to China, but technically it's based on the same google search infrastructure.
    - knuththetruth 8y ago
      It’s odd that you’re willing to so vehemently question sourced reporting, while simultaneously postulating, without any evidence, that a very narrow, favorable to Google scenario is likely to be the case.
      - est 8y ago
        Those newer sourced reporting adds the "media credibility", reduced the noise, but did not increase signal. Thus multiple sources equals one source to me. Source is not some kind of score that can be accumulated, if you believe source quantity than quality then you are fallen into the power user trap. I like to analyze the structure & dynamic of a topic, not the number of "sources".
- robjan 8y ago
  Maps does not work in China. Source: in China
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - rustacean 8y ago
    google web map always works in mainland
  - est 8y ago
    this one does http://maps.google.cn/ http://maps.google.cn/
  - client4 8y ago
    Maps work better in China than Japan. Source, living in Shanghai and Beijing with occasional Japan trips got a year.
    - jmknoll 8y ago
      Google maps is not accessible without a VPN in China. Not sure what the disagreeement is about. I’m looking at it being blocked on my computer right now. You can see your own location in the Maps app, but that’s based on the phone’s GPS, not a google service. Not sure what the comparison to Japan is, but maps works fine in Tokyo. I use it extensively every time I go there.
      - client4 8y ago
        I forgot to clarify, I'm using Google Fi in Beijing right now. My point was that, even though maps may be blocked, it really works flawlessly. It's better than Baidu maps, though Baidu has made great strides in quality lately.
        methou 8y ago
        But how did you get the Google Fiber in Beijing? * edit: grammar.
- baybal2 8y ago
  >Fact 1: Google only pulled search business out of China. adsense/adwords/maps works fine in China Adsense in China is franchised to a Chinese company.
  - est 8y ago
    DFI is pretty hard to pull off in a country like China.
- lawn 8y ago
  > Fact 2: Search engines are more and more irrelevant these days. All interesting new content are either from Weibo or Wechat (or other closed garden) Uh no. I don't see how you could even think that.
  - vageli 8y ago
    I initially had that reaction but then remembered the initiative Facebook has to provide "internet" to impoverished places (basically just a portal to Facebook). And it's not just other countries—most of my non-technical friends do not browse news aggregators where they are exposed to multiple new sources (it's amazing how many blogs and smaller sites I've found because of HN and reddit).
yeukhon 8y ago
EFF complains about this ONLY because EFF partnered with Google https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/work-eff-summer-apply-be-google-public-policy-fellow https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/work-eff-summer-apply-.... You don't hear Mozilla or Apple complaining about Google returning to China though. I am not really sure why Google matters in China and how this matters to anyone. You enter someone's country and you ought to obey the local laws there. Just as Chinese companies entering U.S. need to respect U.S. laws. There is no conflict of interest. It's simply a business decision. If people really care about privacy and what not, Google wouldn't have 50,000 engineers today. It would be like 1/3 gone at least. But why so many Googlers are staying anyway? I don't have to spell the answer but I will: $$. So let's not pretend we are not guilty of being an enabler. To come clean, one must be totally out of the whole Google business. This means Googlers should all quit - but trust me, most people won't, even though they cheer others to stand up. I am not being cynical at all, just being realistic about hypocrisy and reality.
- Dagwoodie 8y ago
  In fact, SV has begun to bring Chinese-style censorship to the US.
- ardy42 8y ago
  > I am not really sure why Google matters in China and how this matters to anyone. You enter someone's country and you ought to obey the local laws there. Just as Chinese companies entering U.S. need to respect U.S. laws. That assumes a certain moral equivalency between local laws that just isn't the case. Would you say the same thing about the Nuremberg Laws? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Jewish_legislation_in_prewar_Nazi_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Jewish_legislation_in_pre...
  - chibg10 8y ago
    Moreover, there IS a huge conflict of interest on Google's part as far as its users' privacy goes. Suppose China becomes a significant part of Google's business in a number of years. Does anyone familiar with China doubt that its government would be willing to exercise that leverage over Google to extract private user information ... even about it's non-Chinese userbase? How would future Google respond? Would there not be a gigantic financial incentive for Google to hand it over? Would it be willing to leave the Chinese market to withhold its user's personal data? None of this is certain, but the risk is real enough imo that it makes me uncomfortable as a US-based Google user. Sure, you can argue "well the US has done this in the past" but A) it's much more possible for Google to say "no" in the US, and B) the US government's interest in such data has historically been limited to (admittedly arguably overzealous) national security concerns, whereas the CCP's interest in such data seems to be for "whatever we can get out of it."
rqs 8y ago
> Eight years after Google initially took a stand against Internet censorship by exiting the Chinese search market Wried, don't just mention the censorship reason. The bigger picture is [0][1]: 1. China government demanding content deletion by "Red-Header Files" (Government document) rather than law (As it will make the censorship too apparent), and it's violated Google's policy. NOT because of Google is an anti-censorship enthusiast as many people think they are. 2. During that time, Google (including Gmail) also under attack (with possible internal help) by a group of hackers who Google claims are sponsored by the government. Now, 8 years later, things changed a lot. Especially after the implementation of the China Internet Security Law (中华人民共和国网络安全法)[2] which makes censorship a public responsibility ... [0] https://techcrunch.com/2010/01/12/google-china-attacks/ https://techcrunch.com/2010/01/12/google-china-attacks/ [1] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/google-probes-possible-inside-help-on-china-attack/article1207344/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/google-pr... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Internet_Security_Law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Internet_Security_Law
aviv 8y ago
Why are we going as far as China? Facebook, Google, Apple, Twitter, among others need to come clean about their censorship of conservative voices right here in their back yard. All the folks who rallied for net neutrality are now cheering for the coordinated Big Tech assault on free speech. This needs to be talked about. Agree or disagree with the voices they are silencing (ie. Alex Jones), what is happening these days is a dangerous precedent.
- scarface74 8y ago
  It's no "assault on free speech". The right of free speech doesn't mean that private corporations have to be a platform for it. The right embraced private corporations having "religious and moral rights" with the cake shop and Hobby Lobby cases. This is the other side of the coin.
  - aviv 8y ago
    Exactly. And look at the uproar that the bakery caused with the constant mainstream news coverage back then. But now? Silence, and if not silence, total justification and questioning why Big Tech didn't do it sooner.
    - scarface74 8y ago
      When did the mainstream right start openly embracing racist as thier people outside of the South? I could never see any former Republican President or leadership in the modern era support someone like Alex Jones. Alex Jones podcast was not "banned" from Apple's platform. Apple never hosted either the media or the RSS metadata. Anyone who wants to listen to the podcast can go on Google do a search find the feed subscription and add to the podcast app. Edit: Changed "was banned" to "wasn't banned".
      - aviv 8y ago
        That's not my point. I don't like or listen to the guy, but your reaction shows precisely why they chose him. Who is next? If they can take down someone as vocal as Alex Jones, they can take down anyone.
kodablah 8y ago
It is simply not possible to both cooperate with the Chinese (or, to a lesser extent, any other) government against its citizens and remain transparent. Part of this type of cooperation includes a requirement by the government for opacity. This is easier for less-principled and/or more closed companies. You can only not-cooperate transparently (and even then, only sometimes). The real problem is you can't have a we'll-publicly-disagree-but-do-it-anyways approach with China like you might elsewhere. There's a reason a CEO might make a public post disagreeing with the approach of one government yet will forever remain mum concerning another. Just stop requiring growth at all costs, chalk up the China (and military) market as a loss, and continue operating at your massively profitable status quo. It may seem like it's a double standard when other companies have access to those markets sans media backlash, but just recognize the differences are known out here in the masses.
- iamshs 8y ago
  >There's a reason a CEO might make a public post disagreeing with the approach of one government yet will forever remain mum concerning another. Can anybody help me find the video or podcast of a prominent VC from SF heading its Chinese operations goes silent when asked about Chinese censorship. I just can't recall the name or seem to find it in my bookmarks.
- Leary 8y ago
  Yes! Thank you for writing this. I bought Baidu stocks after the dip and haven't done very well lately. Perhaps with posts like this we can stop Google from infiltrating China.
- Cthulhu_ 8y ago
  > Just stop requiring growth at all costs, chalk up the China (and military) market as a loss, and continue operating at your massively profitable status quo. This is what Google did initially; instead of censoring themselves like the Chinese government demanded, they opted to leave the Chinese market entirely. But that's almost ten years ago now; meanwhile, the Chinese economy / GDP has doubled, its connected population has more than doubled, and Chinese internet companies have entrenched themselves. China will - if it isn't already - be the biggest potential market for internet companies.
gonyea 8y ago
Why? It’s not like they’re using slave labor. Google will reveal their plans if and when it suits them.
- nasoieu 8y ago
  Some people believe we have to apply the same Western, liberal standard to all nations of the Earth.
  - phobosdeimos 8y ago
    That would imply that there actually IS such a thing. The West is not a monoculture. The political and cultural differences between the Netherlands and the US are as vast as the cultural and political differences between the US and China.
  - int_19h 8y ago
    We have to apply the same Western liberal standard to companies that are registered and headquartered in a Western liberal country, and especially to the kind of stuff that they produce in such a country. They're welcome to spin off a Chinese branch to implement all this - with the engineers doing censorship filters and executives signing off on them subject to that censorship themselves. As it is, they want to reject the "liberal standard" while earning that money, but not when they are spending it.
bobjordan 8y ago
I'm an American, own and operate two Chinese companies (an operations/engineering consulting company and a factory). I was here when Google left. From the end user's viewpoint, internet censorship has only become more strict. While VPN access has never been totally unavailable, it can be painful to use. I've changed my browsing habits to settle for using Bing more than I otherwise would have. At the same time, I'm thankful at least Bing is here. At least, Bing provides reasonable access to search results for technical queries in English. Like, returning helpful answers to Stack Overflow programming questions. Baidu is useless for this. From a business point of view, to give you some sense of my perspective. I'm not operating with corporate deep pocket money, own 100% of my company, bootstrapped, sales between $1-$3M USD/year for past five years. At this point, I guess I fit into a class of entrepreneur best labeled "multi-national small business owner". It is a tough segment to try to operate in. It requres a complex business structure with entities in several countries (now in China, Hong Kong, and USA). Lots of filings and tax issues to deal with. Being an American makes it even harder with rules and regulations. So I read this article from the viewpoint of my own biases and experiences (as we all do). What struck me was, the EFF takes a pain to focus on "the public, Google’s users, and Google’s employees". Further, they ask - "What sacrifices will Google make to its own operating practices in order to enter the Chinese market? Will it have to comply with China’s internal strict regulations, and how will these compromises affect its offerings outside of China?" From my view, first let me just be frank, China does not give a fuck about Google. If Google comes to China, it will not change China's policy in any way. If Google does not come to China, it will have zero impact on China's policy, in any area. So to address the first question EFF raises. Yes, with every company that comes to China, the company must adapt to China, not the other way around. There will be many sacrifices and changes to operating practices. As there are for every company that enters China. For the second question. Yes, to compete here in China, Google will have to adapt to China's strict regulations regarding the things they do not want to be discussed. But, China is well aware of how to operate with separate sets of rules. Hell, they invented "One country, two systems" by integrating Hong Kong. It will not affect Google's offerings outside of China. But while inside their walls, you got to follow their rules. Last, Google has direct competitors that are in China. This EFF article makes no mention of "shareholders" or "business". But, Google has the responsibility to their shareholders to enter new markets to compete where there is a void. It is not Google's responsibility to fight China. As far as human rights, censorship, etc, that is not Googles fight either, but one thing is certain, choosing to avoid China cannot help things in the future. If you are not here, physically inside China operating, there is zero chance you can have an impact, should the time ever arise. Net/net. I think it is better for all parties to have Google back in China.
throw2016 8y ago
This disproportionate focus on China is being used as a distraction from the all encompassing surveillance currently run by the NSA, GCHQ and Google, Facebook and others which is a far bigger and ongoing threat to democracy and citizens here. China's actions are limited to China. There is hardly any activism against the invasive surveillance of SV companies or protests against the NSA. This forum itself has its fair share of apologists for surveillance capitalism. Where are the protests in front of Google and Facebooks campuses and in Washington? So if people don't care about these issues at home how can they care about them in China? This is simply not credible or serious. China's actions don't impact you, your governments and companies here do. In the absence of any mainstream activism, just singling out China for outrage and anger is duplicitous and comes across as motivated more by politics than any genuine concern for the issues.
- gurkendoktor 8y ago
  > China's actions are limited to China They're not, see the comment by ardy42. > There is hardly any activism against the invasive surveillance of SV companies or protests against the NSA There are plenty of encryption projects around here, and I would not describe the HN crowd as pro-NSA or even pro-Facebook. Keeping Google insulated from the influence of the Chinese market seems at least somewhat realistic as an activism goal. Separating Google from the US gov't is simply impossible. (EU citizen here, if that makes a difference.)
- 394549 8y ago
  > There is hardly any activism against the invasive surveillance of SV companies Wut? It's obvious that's not true at all, and really easy to prove. Just read this NY Times article from yesterday, about how privacy activists got a law passed in California to reign in those same SV companies: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/14/magazine/facebook-google-privacy-data.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/14/magazine/facebook-google-....
  - throw2016 8y ago
    This only proves the point, the whole perspective of the nytimes piece is a lone 'accidental' activist fighting against the system facing pushback at every stage. Where are the software engineers of SV who work for these companies and implement these programs in the activism, where are the dissenters, where are all the folks who are outraged about China on every article? Without mainstream activism against surveillance capitalism, NSA surveillance, secret courts, secret processes and secret orders surveillance will become a dragnet few will be able to escape from. How can we hold China accountable for the same things we are doing? The least that can be done by the tech community is try to get Snowden back with full honors, but like Assange he lies discarded with zero activism, and even demonized in some sections of the press as a 'traitor' and here we pretend to care about these things.
europeanperson 8y ago
I've said it in another thread, and I will say it again: "the majority of the world sees the U.S. as the world's biggest threat to world peace, yet I don't see anybody on Hacker News claiming companies shouldn't do business with the U.S. Since the war in Iraq, can we think of something that the Chinese government has done that is worse? I disagree strongly with the notion that the Chinese government's influence on the world is somehow worse than the influence of the U.S. I do think there is something to be said about boycotting governments that abuse human rights, but I think it is hypocritical to think that somehow that doesn't apply to the U.S." If you are against doing business in China because they compete with your own country, then say so. Don't try to disguise it as some sort of moral compass and then exempt the U.S. which has waged unjustified wars for decades that have killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people.
- sctb 8y ago
  > Please don't use Hacker News primarily for political or ideological battle. This destroys intellectual curiosity, so we ban accounts that do it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
client4 8y ago
Is it just me, or on all of the recent China articles is there been a noticeable increase in newly-created accounts with "quality of local newspaper comment sections" comments? I'm not super pro China, but there is a lot of FUD and poor commenting going on.
- Leary 8y ago
  r u suggesting that we are the target of a Russian influence campaign?
  - client4 8y ago
    Nice reference of CNN populist talking points. Anyone with a laptop, agenda, and free time can work to sway public opinion. For instance, your account is 28 days old. Not to exclude you from the conversation, but poor comments from new accounts does look dubious. Ardy42 is new as of 47 days
    - paradite 8y ago
      Not to exclude you from the conversation, but your account is newer than mine and your recent comments look dubious.
      - client4 8y ago
        3 years is a far cry from 30 days.
- robjan 8y ago
  Impossible to verify, but they are known as the wumao / 50 cent army
dingo_bat 8y ago
Since Google has compiled with EU censorship why is this a big deal anymore? Or are we admitting to having double standards when it comes to China?
- icebraining 8y ago
  I don't remember Google's plans in the EU being shrouded in secrecy like these ones.
  - dingo_bat 8y ago
    Oh, can you point me to a list of all the links google has censored in the EU?
    - icebraining 8y ago
      No, because those aren't plans.
- pertymcpert 8y ago
  The two are different. It's not double standards, its standards.
  - dingo_bat 8y ago
    How are the two things different?
phobosdeimos 8y ago
I'm seeing a lot of anti Chinese propaganda these days. I come from a small country whose first priority is always the economy so it seems awfully shortsighted. China isn't going to disappear you know. Best learn to get along.
stevespang 8y ago
"(Google) has been secretly re-considering an extended collaboration with the massive censorship and surveillance-wielding state" . . . . . it's all about the MONEY
scarface74 8y ago
Why does Google anymore need to come clean than any other American business that does business with China?
- gurkendoktor 8y ago
  Because a future Google that is susceptible to blackmail by the CCP is dangerous in a way that most other companies just can't be. Gap, at worst, can be ordered to change their t-shirt designs[1]. But nobody considers crappy t-shirts a source of truth, unlike Google Maps or Google Search. What if (when) China asks Google to apply censorship outside of China in order to stay in the Chinese market? [1] https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/15/news/companies/gap-tshirt-map-of-china/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/15/news/companies/gap-tshirt-m...
AndrewKemendo 8y ago
I said this on another thread, but it bears repeating: If you do interesting or novel technical work with a Chinese company, especially on things like AI, it will be used by the People's Liberation Army and the Ministry for State Security. You can almost guarantee it. So if you don't want to work on technology used by a military, then don't work on technology with any Chinese based company.
SZJX 8y ago
Absolute BS. Don't Google censor tons of results already according to the US law? Dare they show any pro-ISIS website to the American audience? Dare they stop performing all those DMCA takedowns? What's the fundamental difference between these two? Each country has its own laws regulating the online space and neither China nor the US is an exception to this. I really don't think any of them can offer any sort of convincing response to such questions. Just another display of typical arrogance and double standards that they have long shown, nothing new at all. It's exactly like how people would clamor to censor all sorts of alt-right websites with glee, but defend all Trump-bashing websites to death. It's not that I approve of any alt-right ideology at all, but if they are serious about real "free speech", they need to drop this sort of double standards asap. Otherwise it's just another laughable exercise in hypocrisy and only labeling what helps their own interests as "just", exactly what the US government has been doing overseas in all these decades. Nobody would buy into such nonsense.

268 points by panarky 8y ago

est 8y ago

Fact 1: Google only pulled search business out of China. adsense/adwords/maps works fine in China Fact 2: Search engines are more and more irrelevant these days. All interesting new content are either from Weibo or Wechat (or other closed garden) Fact 3: all reports about "Google returning to China" are based solely on the "Intercept report"[1] as source. I suggest everyone take a look at it. I think there's a huge misunderstanding. Maybe it's in-app search for some domain business only instead of web-wide search? Fact 4: Firewalls in China has a hierarchical layers of blocking. Some times the plain text http is effected, sometimes it's the DNS, sometimes it's the tis certs, most of the time it's heuristics (e.g. SVM model to classify traffic) and random. There are also collateral blocking, like a blocking a CDN. You can't guess exactly which one piece of information was the culprit. And it all varies in places and time. All "blocking" are based on empirical assumptions, no one have ever done a large scale, down to the packet level study of it. Administrative notices of taking down articles are blurry as hell. Sometimes there's even corporates faking govn't orders to remove some review as PR move. So it's very hard to suggest if an "article" should be blocked or not. The chinese govn't utilize this method to force everyone to "self-censorship" and some business are making a profit of it. [1]: https://theintercept.com/2018/08/01/google-china-search-engine-censorship/ https://theintercept.com/2018/08/01/google-china-search-engi...

wavefunction 8y ago
>Google only pulled search business out of China. adsense/adwords/maps works fine in China That's "google search" if just by a different name >f2 see part 1 >f3 Google returning is contradicted by p1+p2 >f4 what does that have to do with p1-3 though
- est 8y ago
  > what does that have to do with p1-3 though FTA > Documents seen by The Intercept, marked “Google confidential,” say that Google’s Chinese search app will automatically identify and filter websites blocked by the Great Firewall. This part does not make much sense. It's simply impractical.
guywhocodes 8y ago
Maps "works", there are essentially zero updates for many years. Walk down a street in Shanghai where business pop up/ shutdown/ move more often than annually on average, hardly a single name ever correlates with google maps.
- oh-kumudo 8y ago
  Worth notice is that, foreign companies are forbidden to collect its own map data in China, let alone something like Street View.
  - guywhocodes 8y ago
    Individuals too, there seem to have been by Chinese standards extremely high fines issued related to OSM.
seanmcdirmid 8y ago
> Fact 1: Google only pulled search business out of China. adsense/adwords/maps works fine in China YouTube and Gmail also don't work in China, which are significant. They technically didn't leave China, however, because they never entered it. > Fact 2: Search engines are more and more irrelevant these days. All interesting new content are either from Weibo or Wechat (or other closed garden) I think you mean to qualify that with in China? > Fact 4: Firewalls in China has a hierarchical layers of blocking Most of the western-world web moved to HTTPS specifically because China was inspecting plain text packets. It was interesting to watch the change over happen from 2008-2011.
- est 8y ago
  > I think you mean to qualify that with in China? I mean even if the "android app" came out how does it gain traction? Does anybody actually use an "app" to search on mobile phones?
  - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
    If it was my only alternative to baidu, maybe.
    - est 8y ago
      A search engine as an app? You type some phrases into an app, the app displays results in a webview, you click the SERP, then what? a browser opens? Why don't you use the browser on your phone directly for searching? That's why I think Google is working on some ROM feature, not an app. Or maybe there are some misudnerstanding from the "source" If it's an app it's doomed to fail.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - helloindia 8y ago
        Are you aware of the fact that Google has search apps on both iOS Appstore and Android Playstore? If you want to know who is using such apps, look up the reviews on them.
knuththetruth 8y ago
Fact 5: The Chinese Government, which Google will collaborate with to operate in China, has upwards of two million Uighurs and Muslim minorities in what the UN calls a “massive internment camp.” Uighurs are also reported to be being detained upon re-entry into the country, with some then “dying in custody” https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-rights-un/u-n-says-it-has-credible-reports-that-china-holds-million-uighurs-in-secret-camps-idUSKBN1KV1SU https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-rights-un/u-n-says-...
- est 8y ago
  Fact 6: the phone or computer you are using are manufactured in China with child slave labor. https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-child-labor-2012-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-child-labor-2012-1 https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-microsoft-and-lenovo-failing-on-child-labor-checks-says-amnesty/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-microsoft-and-lenovo-fai... I can guarantee you that labeling China with these can go on forever, but how does your fact help with the quesiton we are discussing? btw Yes I do think Google made the wrong move to cooperate with China. But also I don't think a search app is the plan here. Maybe there are some misunderstanding from the source.
- dnomad 8y ago
  Isn't it strange how in just a few days we go from "credible reports" of 1 million individuals to a fact of two million people in one "massive" "camp"? What's going to happen by Monday?
mapgrep 8y ago
>all reports about "Google returning to China" are based solely on the "Intercept report"[1] as source False. There has been a lot of independent reporting on this (even if credits Intercept for getting it first, and yes I work there). NYT confirmed based on "two people with knowledge of the plans." https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/01/technology/china-google-censored-search-engine.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/01/technology/china-google-c... WSJ confirmed based on "a person familiar with the matter." https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-considering-censored-search-engine-for-return-to-china-1533157785 https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-considering-censored-sea... Reuters confirmed with "two sources said." https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-google/google-plans-return-to-china-search-market-with-censored-app-sources-idUSKBN1KN09C https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-google/google-plans... VICE confirmed with "a source inside the company." https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/9kmdm8/google-china-censorship-secret-android-app https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/9kmdm8/google-china-cens...
- est 8y ago
  well, it's good to know the same two people are verified again and again. I do really appreciate those links. Are there any further development besides the initial "Intercept report" details? My best guess is that Google China somehow partnered with a major Android ROM developer in China to provide a search component in Android system, some kind of integration with "Custom Search API". It's nothing like the full search experience is returning to China, but technically it's based on the same google search infrastructure.
  - knuththetruth 8y ago
    It’s odd that you’re willing to so vehemently question sourced reporting, while simultaneously postulating, without any evidence, that a very narrow, favorable to Google scenario is likely to be the case.
    - est 8y ago
      Those newer sourced reporting adds the "media credibility", reduced the noise, but did not increase signal. Thus multiple sources equals one source to me. Source is not some kind of score that can be accumulated, if you believe source quantity than quality then you are fallen into the power user trap. I like to analyze the structure & dynamic of a topic, not the number of "sources".
robjan 8y ago
Maps does not work in China. Source: in China
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- rustacean 8y ago
  google web map always works in mainland
- est 8y ago
  this one does http://maps.google.cn/ http://maps.google.cn/
- client4 8y ago
  Maps work better in China than Japan. Source, living in Shanghai and Beijing with occasional Japan trips got a year.
  - jmknoll 8y ago
    Google maps is not accessible without a VPN in China. Not sure what the disagreeement is about. I’m looking at it being blocked on my computer right now. You can see your own location in the Maps app, but that’s based on the phone’s GPS, not a google service. Not sure what the comparison to Japan is, but maps works fine in Tokyo. I use it extensively every time I go there.
    - client4 8y ago
      I forgot to clarify, I'm using Google Fi in Beijing right now. My point was that, even though maps may be blocked, it really works flawlessly. It's better than Baidu maps, though Baidu has made great strides in quality lately.
      - methou 8y ago
        But how did you get the Google Fiber in Beijing? * edit: grammar.
baybal2 8y ago
>Fact 1: Google only pulled search business out of China. adsense/adwords/maps works fine in China Adsense in China is franchised to a Chinese company.
- est 8y ago
  DFI is pretty hard to pull off in a country like China.
lawn 8y ago
> Fact 2: Search engines are more and more irrelevant these days. All interesting new content are either from Weibo or Wechat (or other closed garden) Uh no. I don't see how you could even think that.
- vageli 8y ago
  I initially had that reaction but then remembered the initiative Facebook has to provide "internet" to impoverished places (basically just a portal to Facebook). And it's not just other countries—most of my non-technical friends do not browse news aggregators where they are exposed to multiple new sources (it's amazing how many blogs and smaller sites I've found because of HN and reddit).

yeukhon 8y ago

EFF complains about this ONLY because EFF partnered with Google https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/work-eff-summer-apply-be-google-public-policy-fellow https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/work-eff-summer-apply-.... You don't hear Mozilla or Apple complaining about Google returning to China though. I am not really sure why Google matters in China and how this matters to anyone. You enter someone's country and you ought to obey the local laws there. Just as Chinese companies entering U.S. need to respect U.S. laws. There is no conflict of interest. It's simply a business decision. If people really care about privacy and what not, Google wouldn't have 50,000 engineers today. It would be like 1/3 gone at least. But why so many Googlers are staying anyway? I don't have to spell the answer but I will: $$. So let's not pretend we are not guilty of being an enabler. To come clean, one must be totally out of the whole Google business. This means Googlers should all quit - but trust me, most people won't, even though they cheer others to stand up. I am not being cynical at all, just being realistic about hypocrisy and reality.

Dagwoodie 8y ago
In fact, SV has begun to bring Chinese-style censorship to the US.
ardy42 8y ago
> I am not really sure why Google matters in China and how this matters to anyone. You enter someone's country and you ought to obey the local laws there. Just as Chinese companies entering U.S. need to respect U.S. laws. That assumes a certain moral equivalency between local laws that just isn't the case. Would you say the same thing about the Nuremberg Laws? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Jewish_legislation_in_prewar_Nazi_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Jewish_legislation_in_pre...
- chibg10 8y ago
  Moreover, there IS a huge conflict of interest on Google's part as far as its users' privacy goes. Suppose China becomes a significant part of Google's business in a number of years. Does anyone familiar with China doubt that its government would be willing to exercise that leverage over Google to extract private user information ... even about it's non-Chinese userbase? How would future Google respond? Would there not be a gigantic financial incentive for Google to hand it over? Would it be willing to leave the Chinese market to withhold its user's personal data? None of this is certain, but the risk is real enough imo that it makes me uncomfortable as a US-based Google user. Sure, you can argue "well the US has done this in the past" but A) it's much more possible for Google to say "no" in the US, and B) the US government's interest in such data has historically been limited to (admittedly arguably overzealous) national security concerns, whereas the CCP's interest in such data seems to be for "whatever we can get out of it."

rqs 8y ago

> Eight years after Google initially took a stand against Internet censorship by exiting the Chinese search market Wried, don't just mention the censorship reason. The bigger picture is [0][1]: 1. China government demanding content deletion by "Red-Header Files" (Government document) rather than law (As it will make the censorship too apparent), and it's violated Google's policy. NOT because of Google is an anti-censorship enthusiast as many people think they are. 2. During that time, Google (including Gmail) also under attack (with possible internal help) by a group of hackers who Google claims are sponsored by the government. Now, 8 years later, things changed a lot. Especially after the implementation of the China Internet Security Law (中华人民共和国网络安全法)[2] which makes censorship a public responsibility ... [0] https://techcrunch.com/2010/01/12/google-china-attacks/ https://techcrunch.com/2010/01/12/google-china-attacks/ [1] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/google-probes-possible-inside-help-on-china-attack/article1207344/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/google-pr... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Internet_Security_Law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Internet_Security_Law

aviv 8y ago

Why are we going as far as China? Facebook, Google, Apple, Twitter, among others need to come clean about their censorship of conservative voices right here in their back yard. All the folks who rallied for net neutrality are now cheering for the coordinated Big Tech assault on free speech. This needs to be talked about. Agree or disagree with the voices they are silencing (ie. Alex Jones), what is happening these days is a dangerous precedent.

scarface74 8y ago
It's no "assault on free speech". The right of free speech doesn't mean that private corporations have to be a platform for it. The right embraced private corporations having "religious and moral rights" with the cake shop and Hobby Lobby cases. This is the other side of the coin.
- aviv 8y ago
  Exactly. And look at the uproar that the bakery caused with the constant mainstream news coverage back then. But now? Silence, and if not silence, total justification and questioning why Big Tech didn't do it sooner.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    When did the mainstream right start openly embracing racist as thier people outside of the South? I could never see any former Republican President or leadership in the modern era support someone like Alex Jones. Alex Jones podcast was not "banned" from Apple's platform. Apple never hosted either the media or the RSS metadata. Anyone who wants to listen to the podcast can go on Google do a search find the feed subscription and add to the podcast app. Edit: Changed "was banned" to "wasn't banned".
    - aviv 8y ago
      That's not my point. I don't like or listen to the guy, but your reaction shows precisely why they chose him. Who is next? If they can take down someone as vocal as Alex Jones, they can take down anyone.

kodablah 8y ago

It is simply not possible to both cooperate with the Chinese (or, to a lesser extent, any other) government against its citizens and remain transparent. Part of this type of cooperation includes a requirement by the government for opacity. This is easier for less-principled and/or more closed companies. You can only not-cooperate transparently (and even then, only sometimes). The real problem is you can't have a we'll-publicly-disagree-but-do-it-anyways approach with China like you might elsewhere. There's a reason a CEO might make a public post disagreeing with the approach of one government yet will forever remain mum concerning another. Just stop requiring growth at all costs, chalk up the China (and military) market as a loss, and continue operating at your massively profitable status quo. It may seem like it's a double standard when other companies have access to those markets sans media backlash, but just recognize the differences are known out here in the masses.

iamshs 8y ago
>There's a reason a CEO might make a public post disagreeing with the approach of one government yet will forever remain mum concerning another. Can anybody help me find the video or podcast of a prominent VC from SF heading its Chinese operations goes silent when asked about Chinese censorship. I just can't recall the name or seem to find it in my bookmarks.
Leary 8y ago
Yes! Thank you for writing this. I bought Baidu stocks after the dip and haven't done very well lately. Perhaps with posts like this we can stop Google from infiltrating China.
Cthulhu_ 8y ago
> Just stop requiring growth at all costs, chalk up the China (and military) market as a loss, and continue operating at your massively profitable status quo. This is what Google did initially; instead of censoring themselves like the Chinese government demanded, they opted to leave the Chinese market entirely. But that's almost ten years ago now; meanwhile, the Chinese economy / GDP has doubled, its connected population has more than doubled, and Chinese internet companies have entrenched themselves. China will - if it isn't already - be the biggest potential market for internet companies.

gonyea 8y ago

Why? It’s not like they’re using slave labor. Google will reveal their plans if and when it suits them.

nasoieu 8y ago
Some people believe we have to apply the same Western, liberal standard to all nations of the Earth.
- phobosdeimos 8y ago
  That would imply that there actually IS such a thing. The West is not a monoculture. The political and cultural differences between the Netherlands and the US are as vast as the cultural and political differences between the US and China.
- int_19h 8y ago
  We have to apply the same Western liberal standard to companies that are registered and headquartered in a Western liberal country, and especially to the kind of stuff that they produce in such a country. They're welcome to spin off a Chinese branch to implement all this - with the engineers doing censorship filters and executives signing off on them subject to that censorship themselves. As it is, they want to reject the "liberal standard" while earning that money, but not when they are spending it.

bobjordan 8y ago

I'm an American, own and operate two Chinese companies (an operations/engineering consulting company and a factory). I was here when Google left. From the end user's viewpoint, internet censorship has only become more strict. While VPN access has never been totally unavailable, it can be painful to use. I've changed my browsing habits to settle for using Bing more than I otherwise would have. At the same time, I'm thankful at least Bing is here. At least, Bing provides reasonable access to search results for technical queries in English. Like, returning helpful answers to Stack Overflow programming questions. Baidu is useless for this. From a business point of view, to give you some sense of my perspective. I'm not operating with corporate deep pocket money, own 100% of my company, bootstrapped, sales between $1-$3M USD/year for past five years. At this point, I guess I fit into a class of entrepreneur best labeled "multi-national small business owner". It is a tough segment to try to operate in. It requres a complex business structure with entities in several countries (now in China, Hong Kong, and USA). Lots of filings and tax issues to deal with. Being an American makes it even harder with rules and regulations. So I read this article from the viewpoint of my own biases and experiences (as we all do). What struck me was, the EFF takes a pain to focus on "the public, Google’s users, and Google’s employees". Further, they ask - "What sacrifices will Google make to its own operating practices in order to enter the Chinese market? Will it have to comply with China’s internal strict regulations, and how will these compromises affect its offerings outside of China?" From my view, first let me just be frank, China does not give a fuck about Google. If Google comes to China, it will not change China's policy in any way. If Google does not come to China, it will have zero impact on China's policy, in any area. So to address the first question EFF raises. Yes, with every company that comes to China, the company must adapt to China, not the other way around. There will be many sacrifices and changes to operating practices. As there are for every company that enters China. For the second question. Yes, to compete here in China, Google will have to adapt to China's strict regulations regarding the things they do not want to be discussed. But, China is well aware of how to operate with separate sets of rules. Hell, they invented "One country, two systems" by integrating Hong Kong. It will not affect Google's offerings outside of China. But while inside their walls, you got to follow their rules. Last, Google has direct competitors that are in China. This EFF article makes no mention of "shareholders" or "business". But, Google has the responsibility to their shareholders to enter new markets to compete where there is a void. It is not Google's responsibility to fight China. As far as human rights, censorship, etc, that is not Googles fight either, but one thing is certain, choosing to avoid China cannot help things in the future. If you are not here, physically inside China operating, there is zero chance you can have an impact, should the time ever arise. Net/net. I think it is better for all parties to have Google back in China.

throw2016 8y ago

This disproportionate focus on China is being used as a distraction from the all encompassing surveillance currently run by the NSA, GCHQ and Google, Facebook and others which is a far bigger and ongoing threat to democracy and citizens here. China's actions are limited to China. There is hardly any activism against the invasive surveillance of SV companies or protests against the NSA. This forum itself has its fair share of apologists for surveillance capitalism. Where are the protests in front of Google and Facebooks campuses and in Washington? So if people don't care about these issues at home how can they care about them in China? This is simply not credible or serious. China's actions don't impact you, your governments and companies here do. In the absence of any mainstream activism, just singling out China for outrage and anger is duplicitous and comes across as motivated more by politics than any genuine concern for the issues.

gurkendoktor 8y ago
> China's actions are limited to China They're not, see the comment by ardy42. > There is hardly any activism against the invasive surveillance of SV companies or protests against the NSA There are plenty of encryption projects around here, and I would not describe the HN crowd as pro-NSA or even pro-Facebook. Keeping Google insulated from the influence of the Chinese market seems at least somewhat realistic as an activism goal. Separating Google from the US gov't is simply impossible. (EU citizen here, if that makes a difference.)
394549 8y ago
> There is hardly any activism against the invasive surveillance of SV companies Wut? It's obvious that's not true at all, and really easy to prove. Just read this NY Times article from yesterday, about how privacy activists got a law passed in California to reign in those same SV companies: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/14/magazine/facebook-google-privacy-data.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/14/magazine/facebook-google-....
- throw2016 8y ago
  This only proves the point, the whole perspective of the nytimes piece is a lone 'accidental' activist fighting against the system facing pushback at every stage. Where are the software engineers of SV who work for these companies and implement these programs in the activism, where are the dissenters, where are all the folks who are outraged about China on every article? Without mainstream activism against surveillance capitalism, NSA surveillance, secret courts, secret processes and secret orders surveillance will become a dragnet few will be able to escape from. How can we hold China accountable for the same things we are doing? The least that can be done by the tech community is try to get Snowden back with full honors, but like Assange he lies discarded with zero activism, and even demonized in some sections of the press as a 'traitor' and here we pretend to care about these things.

europeanperson 8y ago

I've said it in another thread, and I will say it again: "the majority of the world sees the U.S. as the world's biggest threat to world peace, yet I don't see anybody on Hacker News claiming companies shouldn't do business with the U.S. Since the war in Iraq, can we think of something that the Chinese government has done that is worse? I disagree strongly with the notion that the Chinese government's influence on the world is somehow worse than the influence of the U.S. I do think there is something to be said about boycotting governments that abuse human rights, but I think it is hypocritical to think that somehow that doesn't apply to the U.S." If you are against doing business in China because they compete with your own country, then say so. Don't try to disguise it as some sort of moral compass and then exempt the U.S. which has waged unjustified wars for decades that have killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

sctb 8y ago
> Please don't use Hacker News primarily for political or ideological battle. This destroys intellectual curiosity, so we ban accounts that do it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

client4 8y ago

Is it just me, or on all of the recent China articles is there been a noticeable increase in newly-created accounts with "quality of local newspaper comment sections" comments? I'm not super pro China, but there is a lot of FUD and poor commenting going on.

Leary 8y ago
r u suggesting that we are the target of a Russian influence campaign?
- client4 8y ago
  Nice reference of CNN populist talking points. Anyone with a laptop, agenda, and free time can work to sway public opinion. For instance, your account is 28 days old. Not to exclude you from the conversation, but poor comments from new accounts does look dubious. Ardy42 is new as of 47 days
  - paradite 8y ago
    Not to exclude you from the conversation, but your account is newer than mine and your recent comments look dubious.
    - client4 8y ago
      3 years is a far cry from 30 days.
robjan 8y ago
Impossible to verify, but they are known as the wumao / 50 cent army

dingo_bat 8y ago

Since Google has compiled with EU censorship why is this a big deal anymore? Or are we admitting to having double standards when it comes to China?

icebraining 8y ago
I don't remember Google's plans in the EU being shrouded in secrecy like these ones.
- dingo_bat 8y ago
  Oh, can you point me to a list of all the links google has censored in the EU?
  - icebraining 8y ago
    No, because those aren't plans.
pertymcpert 8y ago
The two are different. It's not double standards, its standards.
- dingo_bat 8y ago
  How are the two things different?

phobosdeimos 8y ago

I'm seeing a lot of anti Chinese propaganda these days. I come from a small country whose first priority is always the economy so it seems awfully shortsighted. China isn't going to disappear you know. Best learn to get along.

stevespang 8y ago

"(Google) has been secretly re-considering an extended collaboration with the massive censorship and surveillance-wielding state" . . . . . it's all about the MONEY

scarface74 8y ago

Why does Google anymore need to come clean than any other American business that does business with China?

gurkendoktor 8y ago
Because a future Google that is susceptible to blackmail by the CCP is dangerous in a way that most other companies just can't be. Gap, at worst, can be ordered to change their t-shirt designs[1]. But nobody considers crappy t-shirts a source of truth, unlike Google Maps or Google Search. What if (when) China asks Google to apply censorship outside of China in order to stay in the Chinese market? [1] https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/15/news/companies/gap-tshirt-map-of-china/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/15/news/companies/gap-tshirt-m...

AndrewKemendo 8y ago

I said this on another thread, but it bears repeating: If you do interesting or novel technical work with a Chinese company, especially on things like AI, it will be used by the People's Liberation Army and the Ministry for State Security. You can almost guarantee it. So if you don't want to work on technology used by a military, then don't work on technology with any Chinese based company.

SZJX 8y ago

Absolute BS. Don't Google censor tons of results already according to the US law? Dare they show any pro-ISIS website to the American audience? Dare they stop performing all those DMCA takedowns? What's the fundamental difference between these two? Each country has its own laws regulating the online space and neither China nor the US is an exception to this. I really don't think any of them can offer any sort of convincing response to such questions. Just another display of typical arrogance and double standards that they have long shown, nothing new at all. It's exactly like how people would clamor to censor all sorts of alt-right websites with glee, but defend all Trump-bashing websites to death. It's not that I approve of any alt-right ideology at all, but if they are serious about real "free speech", they need to drop this sort of double standards asap. Otherwise it's just another laughable exercise in hypocrisy and only labeling what helps their own interests as "just", exactly what the US government has been doing overseas in all these decades. Nobody would buy into such nonsense.