Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 26th Jul 2013 09:52 UTC
Legal "The pornography filtering system praised by David Cameron is controlled by the controversial Chinese company Huawei, the BBC has learned. UK-based employees at the firm are able to decide which sites TalkTalk's net filtering service blocks." The irony. It hurts.
Order by: Score:
Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 26th Jul 2013 10:01 UTC
MOS6510
Member since:
2011-05-12

Well, I guess Huawei has the experience.

Still, we've always been painted a picture of how evil some parts of the world are. Spying on citizens, censorship, freedom of speech suppression, Internet filtering, non-democratic behavior by the government, etc... little did we know it's just the same on our side of the fence.

Reply Score: 10

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by Kochise on Fri 26th Jul 2013 11:57 UTC in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Impossibru !

We are the good ! It is known since the 1000's that the evil are at far East ! And don't forget, -WE- are the only people blessed by the "One True God" (c)(TM)

Kochise

Edited 2013-07-26 11:58 UTC

Reply Score: 8

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 26th Jul 2013 12:01 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Please don't mention God,because I'm quite happy we haven't had any visitations from TempleOS lately, although after those Snowden revelations all those CIA/FBI claims of TempleOS may not be so far fetched after all.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by MOS6510
by Alfman on Fri 26th Jul 2013 15:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

MOS6510,

It all makes sense now, TempleOS is Snowden, and now he's in hiding. He was probably speaking in code all along ;)

Edited 2013-07-26 15:57 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by MOS6510
by Kochise on Fri 26th Jul 2013 16:31 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by MOS6510"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Oh yeah, that really makes sense, the Da Vinci Code provided some informations about the descendant of Jesus, while obviously the Bible contained the proofs of the upcoming NSA/FBI manipulations since 2000 years !

Scary...

Dan Brown ? Ron Howard ? Anyone ?

Kochise

Edited 2013-07-26 16:33 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by v_bobok on Fri 26th Jul 2013 18:02 UTC in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
v_bobok Member since:
2008-08-01

Sure nuff. West was always so democratic and social. All unicorns and ice cream for every democrat.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by someone on Fri 26th Jul 2013 18:34 UTC in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
someone Member since:
2006-01-12

Well, China only started blocking VPN connections since the middle of last year, while the major Canadian ISPs have been applying the same technology (DPI) to throttle Internet Traffic (downgrading all encrypted traffic) since at least 2006

Edited 2013-07-26 18:35 UTC

Reply Score: 5

Revenge - slow and sweet
by kwan_e on Fri 26th Jul 2013 13:48 UTC
kwan_e
Member since:
2007-02-18

Fight a war so you can force opium on us, will you? Well, we'll see about that, in 150 years!

Reply Score: 6

Chinese firm
by Alfman on Fri 26th Jul 2013 16:10 UTC
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

Why criticize Cameron for choosing a Chinese firm? I mean, assuming one is on board with implementing a net censorship regime in the first place, then he might as well go to the world experts, no?

I despise the whole thing with a passion, but really would this have been any less controversial with a system developed elsewhere? I would hope people find this appalling for what it is rather than where it came from.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Chinese firm
by Soulbender on Sat 27th Jul 2013 05:26 UTC in reply to "Chinese firm"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

But don't you see? Surveillance programs developed in the West are good because they're protecting you freedom and rights and cute little kittens (and no, not the profits of big business. Not that. At all).
All this foreign stuff is just evil, horrible foreign stuff. You can tell because it's not from the West. Fu-manchu rises again!

Reply Score: 3

RE: Chinese firm
by kwan_e on Sat 27th Jul 2013 08:50 UTC in reply to "Chinese firm"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

I despise the whole thing with a passion, but really would this have been any less controversial with a system developed elsewhere?


Yes it would.

See, censorship in a democracy is already VERY controversial. Then the fact that they use tax payer money to fund a Chinese supplied system makes the already VERY controversial into a holy-fuck controversial.

See, people aren't saying that it's only controversial because Huawei is selling the system. You would have noticed that there's already discontent with the plan.

And now they're complaining that an already bad plan is revealed to be worse.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Chinese firm
by Soulbender on Sat 27th Jul 2013 12:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Chinese firm"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

And now they're complaining that an already bad plan is revealed to be worse.


Except the situation wouldn't have been any better if they had decided on Cisco, Juniper, Websense or whatever.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Chinese firm
by kwan_e on Sat 27th Jul 2013 12:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Chinese firm"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

"And now they're complaining that an already bad plan is revealed to be worse.


Except the situation wouldn't have been any better if they had decided on Cisco, Juniper, Websense or whatever.
"

Censorship + Huawei/CCP is not worse than
Censorship + Cisco or
Censorship + Juniper or
Censorship + Websense?

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Chinese firm
by Soulbender on Sat 27th Jul 2013 13:13 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Chinese firm"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

It doesn't matter WHO restricts your freedom, it matters that it is done. You think it will magically be less restrictive with Cisco or Juniper?

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Chinese firm
by kwan_e on Sat 27th Jul 2013 16:49 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Chinese firm"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

It doesn't matter WHO restricts your freedom, it matters that it is done. You think it will magically be less restrictive with Cisco or Juniper?


Did you not understand the equations?

Have you not heard of the phrase "adding insult to injury"?

You seem to have a misapprehension here. I'm not saying the fact of Huawei increases the "Censorship" variable in the equation.

See, the "Censorship" variable is the same in all of the equations. Unless all the mentioned and unmentioned companies are the same, given that the "Censorship" variable is constant, it is logical that some results of the equation, of which the "Censorship" variable is constant, will be less than other equations with the same constant "Censorship" variable*.

To look at it another way, let's say someone ran over your dog and it happened in front of you. In one scenario, the person gets out of the car and kicks your dog's limp body to the side. In another scenario, the person backs over your dog and goes over it again once or twice.

In both cases, the dog's dead. What's done is done. But there's something about the second scenario that doesn't sit as well with us as with the first.

* The "Censorship" variable is constant.

Edited 2013-07-27 17:00 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Chinese firm
by Alfman on Sun 28th Jul 2013 03:29 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Chinese firm"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

kwan_e,


"Have you not heard of the phrase 'adding insult to injury'?"

Adding insult to injury is making a bad situation worse, but how exactly is technology from a Chinese firm adding insult to injury?


"let's say someone ran over your dog and it happened in front of you. In one scenario, the person gets out of the car and kicks your dog's limp body to the side. In another scenario, the person backs over your dog and goes over it again once or twice."

The second scenario is intended to reflect evil qualities in the person, so are you trying to infer that Chinese firms have evil qualities in and of themselves? If so, then that's the antithesis of my original post, if not then I don't get your analogy.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Chinese firm
by kwan_e on Sun 28th Jul 2013 06:39 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Chinese firm"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

kwan_e,


"Have you not heard of the phrase 'adding insult to injury'?"

Adding insult to injury is making a bad situation worse, but how exactly is technology from a Chinese firm adding insult to injury?


Because the Chinese firm in question is Huawei.

"let's say someone ran over your dog and it happened in front of you. In one scenario, the person gets out of the car and kicks your dog's limp body to the side. In another scenario, the person backs over your dog and goes over it again once or twice."

The second scenario is intended to reflect evil qualities in the person, so are you trying to infer that Chinese firms have evil qualities in and of themselves? If so, then that's the antithesis of my original post, if not then I don't get your analogy.


The second scenario is NOT intended to reflect evil qualities in the person. It is intended to reflect that, even in a irreparably bad situation, you can still add to it to make it worse.

If you're an atheist like me, a dead pet dog is a dead pet dog. No doggy heaven. But I still wouldn't like to see my dead pet dog's body treated badly.

Twice you've said "Chinese firm", as though all the criticism is because the firm is Chinese. The point is not that it's Chinese, it's because it's Huawei.

Reply Score: 3

Irony
by Soulbender on Sat 27th Jul 2013 08:42 UTC
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

The irony. It hurts.


Your use of the word irony hurts.
Irony would be to consult with Huawei (actually, make that any big networking corp.) on how to protect the internet freedoms of the citizens.
But this is something else and whatever it is it's not irony. The words "expected" and "sad" comes to mind.

Reply Score: 3