4 ms·

That's what this law is about. > In 2018, media reports that Google was working on a prototype for another censored Chinese search engine surfaced, which was m

That's what this law is about. > In 2018, media reports that Google was working on a prototype for another censored Chinese search engine surfaced, which was met with backlash from some Google employees. The development, called ‘Project Dragonfly,’ was shortly after suspended, according to The Intercept. The US government did not force Google to stop Dragonfly.

KaoruAoiShiho 4y ago
Congress called multiple hearings on Dragonfly and many politicians criticized it. China only ever enforced its consistent censorship policies without targeting any foreign company. Doing this you would admit is an aggressive move to target a Chinese company rather than a reciprocal action as the parent insinuated.
- mannerheim 4y ago
  In other words, nobody forced Google to cancel Dragonfly. If China can enforce a censorship policy, America can enforce a consistent not-based-in-China policy.
  - KaoruAoiShiho 4y ago
    I'll stick with my formulation of politicians in the US forced China to end Dragonfly, thanks. America can do anything it wants, I just wanted to dispute the idea that it would be a reciprocal action. I think it would be a pretty big uncalled for escalation.
    - mannerheim 4y ago
      How did the US force China to end it?
- seanmcdirmid 4y ago
  > China only ever enforced its consistent censorship policies without targeting any foreign company. That is patently untrue. China's enforcement of its GFW ban list (which is still an unpublished state secret) has been very focused at specific companies, especially in the earlier days when they didn't just ban everything. CNN, for example, was on the s-list for many years due to Tiananmen Square (ironically, being unblocked later while NyTimes would get on the s-list for publish an at article about Xi's family wealth). China's censorship policies (again an unpublished state secret) are anything but consistent. They are mostly applied for personal retribution (don't publish articles about the leader's family financial assets) or business advantages (don't let in competitors that would challenge domestic champions).

KaoruAoiShiho 4y ago

Congress called multiple hearings on Dragonfly and many politicians criticized it. China only ever enforced its consistent censorship policies without targeting any foreign company. Doing this you would admit is an aggressive move to target a Chinese company rather than a reciprocal action as the parent insinuated.

mannerheim 4y ago
In other words, nobody forced Google to cancel Dragonfly. If China can enforce a censorship policy, America can enforce a consistent not-based-in-China policy.
- KaoruAoiShiho 4y ago
  I'll stick with my formulation of politicians in the US forced China to end Dragonfly, thanks. America can do anything it wants, I just wanted to dispute the idea that it would be a reciprocal action. I think it would be a pretty big uncalled for escalation.
  - mannerheim 4y ago
    How did the US force China to end it?
seanmcdirmid 4y ago
> China only ever enforced its consistent censorship policies without targeting any foreign company. That is patently untrue. China's enforcement of its GFW ban list (which is still an unpublished state secret) has been very focused at specific companies, especially in the earlier days when they didn't just ban everything. CNN, for example, was on the s-list for many years due to Tiananmen Square (ironically, being unblocked later while NyTimes would get on the s-list for publish an at article about Xi's family wealth). China's censorship policies (again an unpublished state secret) are anything but consistent. They are mostly applied for personal retribution (don't publish articles about the leader's family financial assets) or business advantages (don't let in competitors that would challenge domestic champions).