本人有个习惯,上班前都要看看新闻,今天一上班,打开凤凰网新闻,首先就看到“国新办网络局就谷歌搜索退出中国内地发表谈话”的消息,看来google滚蛋之事已铁板钉钉,虚伪的GOOGLE终于要在今天滚蛋。我尝试输入google.cn,google.com和g.cn,都自动跳转到google.com.hk,看来还没有彻底滚出中国,也看出和某国总统一样不是美国爷们儿,是个大姑娘。GOOGLE咋这么混蛋呢?要滚出中国就彻底点,别那么拖拖拉拉,真的想代表月亮鄙视你,舍不得就老老实实按照国家法律办事,如果实在不想在中国待就彻底滚回你的太平洋另一边去。一看就看透你的本质,你还是舍不得滚蛋!难道你是眷恋嫦娥奔月的温柔?我看你是虚伪无敌的王八蛋,像个小媳妇一样,羞羞答答,刷小脾气,想在大人面前撒撒娇再捞一点好处?咋那么像新嫁人的媳妇一样呢,天天给你吃给你喝,最后就骂了你几句别到处污染别人小孩子,别老是给小孩子看黄色录像,别老是说夫家坏话,结果你就哭着离家出走啊。你想滚可以啊,但是可别再和我家粘上关系,你想干啥?跑去我老弟家,和他苟合,这算什么?还想待在豪门不走啊?你真是很淫荡呢,布兰妮都比不上你,希尔顿更是望尘莫及了。想和伍兹哥比一比谁更淫荡?还是想和我们的冠希哥比一比谁更下流? 天啊,你不会真的跑去香港去找我们冠希哥学习的吧。杯具,莫大的杯具,感觉已经是餐具了。
祝你在老二家待的愉快!被欺负的话别再跑回来哦!
欢迎您来到谷歌搜索在中国的新家:
发现一个问题google的网页,图片2个栏目是使用.com.hk之外,其它的视频,地图,咨询,音乐,问答等仍然使用google.cn的域名。
WHY???
————————————–漂亮的分界线 2010.3.30—————————————————–
说明一点:
希望和我讨论的人先认真看看文章,读懂意思再和我交流。
如果你不是轮子,又想和我讨论google的事情,请留言,我会认真和你讨论;
留言时请用你常用的网名、邮箱和博客,其他的俺一律视为讨厌的美国轮子来俺博客扫荡。
对于轮子哥,俺实在瞧不起………..
————————————–漂亮的分界线 2010.4.1—————————————————–
由于这篇小文我关闭了游客留言,因为它吸引了太多的苍蝇。对于轮子苍蝇,如果智商低想不通想问为什么,请你自焚去,在天堂小李哥会告诉你原因。世界有多大,你就给我滚多远。over!
对于认真和我讨论的朋友,我是尊敬你的,对你没有任何恶意,请多多交流!
————————————漂亮的分界线 2010.4.2———————————————————
不是有朋友给我留言说国外没有审核和过滤吗?是不是这样?
请同胞们擦亮你的眼睛!!!!!!!!!!!!
美媒称谷歌在其他多国妥协接受网络审查
环球网实习记者谭利娅报道,虽然谷歌表示是因为无法接受中国内地的网络审查制度才将搜索引擎服务转移到香港,但美国媒体报道称,谷歌并没有停止同其他国家在互联网审查上的纠纷。在很多国家,谷歌为了利润而不得不进行妥协。
据美联社3月31日报道,即使在那些谷歌并不准备退出的国家,它所面临的信息过滤压力也是越来越大。例如,在土耳其和泰国,当地法律迫使谷歌阻止内容不恭的视频,以使本国的创立者或国王免遭公众的奚落;另外,谷歌还遵守德国、法国和波兰的法律,不提供有关支持纳粹的信息。
网络审查的要求经常会令谷歌面临棘手的平衡难题。它在国际市场上对更高利润的追求使之陷入到巨大的文化和法律差异中,而这些文化和法律又与它所谓的让世界信息“普遍获取”的理想运动相抵触。
报道称,谷歌虽然离开了中国大陆,但是,它很可能在其他国家继续接受审查。
特意找了相关原文出处,美联社3月31日的文章,不相信中文的自己看英文。
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Google Inc. didn’t stop wrangling with censorship when the company moved its search engine out of mainland China to shed its restraints on what can be shown on the Internet.
Even in countries Google has no intention of leaving, the world’s Web search leader has been under increasing pressure to filter information. For instance, local laws prodded Google to help shield Turkey’s founder and Thailand’s monarch from public ridicule by blocking unflattering videos of them in their home countries.
The company also complies with laws in Germany, France and Poland that force it to exclude information that promotes or supports Nazi causes. Google has edited discussion forums in India to remove comments that the government flagged as violations of its restrictions against speech that’s indecent, immoral or threatens public order.
The censorship demands often thrust Google into a tricky balancing act. Its pursuit of higher profits from international markets has entangled the company in vastly different cultures and laws that conflict with its idealistic crusade to make the world’s information “universally accessible.” Even as it censors some information, Google says it’s fighting to ensure
that the Web’s most popular gateway doesn’t also become the Web’s main muzzle.
“We are fundamentally guided by the belief that more information for our users is ultimately better,” said Nicole Wong, Google’s deputy general counsel.
After four years of censoring search results in China, Google finally abandoned the effort last week. That decision was driven not only by the extent of Chinese censorship demands but also by hacking attacks traced to China on Google, at least 20 other U.S. companies and human rights dissidents.
But the censorship compromises seem likely to continue in other countries.
And even when Google resists censorship requests, its search engine and services can be cut off in a growing number of countries that are erecting barriers similar to the so-called “Great Firewall” that China has built to prevent traffic to its list of forbidden sites.
Access to Google’s services have been blocked at some point in at least 25 of the 100 countries where they’re offered, according to the company.
In some countries such as Spain, the barriers have been limited to a few Web pages that were barred under a court order. Other countries are far more repressive, with some of the most pervasive interference occurring in Iran, Vietnam, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Burma and China, according to evaluations by the Open Net Initiative, a partnership that tracks Internet censorship. Google also worries that Australia’s government is going overboard with a proposal that would require Internet service providers to weed out information.
Microsoft Corp., Yahoo Inc. and other major Internet companies also must grapple with such demands. Google, though, is the biggest target because it processes about two-thirds of the world’s search requests, and its YouTube service is the top spot for sharing video, with more than 500 million videos.
The flood of content has coincided with more people connecting to the Internet, giving governments even more desire to control the medium.
Except for child pornography, which is generally illegal even to possess, Google doesn’t proactively screen content to determine whether it should be included in its search index, according to Wong. Instead, she said, Google makes an assessment after it has been notified that it may be breaking a country’s law.
“We reactively remove (content) because countries and the regulators are in a better place to make the evaluation than we are,” Wong said. “It’s a better system to have them identify what they believe violates their laws than for us to try to guess.”
When Google honors a government request, Wong said the company prunes as little information as possible. For instance, even if Google takes down a link to a Nazi site on its German search engine, Google.de, it won’t necessarily remove the material in another country, such as France, governed by similar laws. (And given the worldwide nature of the Web, Google couldn’t keep a German Internet user from seeing the material elsewhere, such as through the U.S.-based Google.com.)
Google also alerts its users when material has been omitted. For instance, a recent search in France for a white supremacist site included a note stating that 16 results had been removed to honor a legal request. Google referred people to chillingeffects.org, a site that fights for free speech.
Notices also pop up in the United States to explain why Google doesn’t censor results that offend some people. People who enter “Jew” in Google’s search box will see an in-house ad that points to a page where Google apologizes for listing an anti-Semitic site.
Google is far more likely to remove material from YouTube and other content-sharing services it runs, such as orkut and Picasa, than from its search index.
The company’s guidelines in these forums generally prohibit nudity, hate speech and extreme violence. Those restrictions often jibe with the laws in some countries, making it easier for Google to submit to certain censorship requests.
Google relies on its users to identify videos that may violate the guidelines. Once it’s notified of a potential problem, the company’s own reviewers make a judgment call about whether to remove offending clips.
It doesn’t always happen fast enough to satisfy some countries, as Google recently learned. In February, an Italian judge held three current and former Google executives criminally responsible for a 2006 video that showed a group of bullies tormenting an autistic teenager. The clip was watched about 5,550 times before Google removed it.
Google is appealing the judge’s verdict and still feels comfortable enough with Italy’s Internet laws to remain in the country.
Lauren Weinstein, co-founder of People for Internet Responsibility, which fights for free speech and privacy rights, and Robin Gross, executive director of a civil rights group called IP Justice, both said they admire how Google has navigated its global censorship challenges. But Weinstein worries that even limited cooperation with government restrictions will encourage more censorship demands.
“If you give an inch to some of these governments, the next thing you know they want a mile,” Weinstein said. “What happened in China is just the beginning, not the end for Google.”
AP Business Writers Greg Keller in Paris and Colleen Barry in Milan, Italy, and Associated Press Writers Ciaran Giles in Madrid, Spain; Marco Sibaja in Brasilia, Brazil; and Ben Stocking in Hanoi, Vietnam, contributed to this report.
如果你认为这段英文是我写的话,请自己去美联社原文出处看,地址:http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TEC_GOOGLE_CENSORSHIP?SITE=FLSTU&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
还有一片澳大利亚的新闻,自己看
澳大利亚严词回应谷歌批评 质疑谷歌信誉度
本报堪培拉3月30日电 澳大利亚政府29日严词回应谷歌对其网络安全计划的批评,并对谷歌的信誉度表示质疑。
去年12月,澳政府宣布了将立法对“拒绝分级制度”的网站进行屏蔽过滤的网络安全计划。被过滤屏蔽的内容主要包括儿童性侵犯、犯罪教唆等。在前一段时间的征求公众意见中,谷歌等批评澳网络安全计划过滤内容“太宽泛”,并将影响到网络速度。
澳联邦通讯部长康内在3月29日晚接受澳洲广播电视台的一次采访中表示,尽管谷歌奉行所谓的“不作恶”原则,但谷歌负责人最近还是惹出了一些麻烦。他说,“谷歌最近搞了一个叫做BUZZ的服务,人们说,瞧啊,你们自己不也侵犯了用户的隐私?谷歌负责人则回应说,‘要是你有些东西不想让别人知道,你一开始就或许不该把它弄出来。’这位谷歌负责人还对华尔街的分析人士称,‘我们热爱金钱。’”康内质问,“人们是不是应该把网络的过滤政策干脆交给谷歌来制定呢?”
据报道,谷歌推出其新服务BUZZ将社交网络的功能链接到其GMAIL上,在今年2月份一度引发有关隐私问题的争论。许多用户抱怨,他们的社交情况在未被告知的情况下一下子被公开了,而且,他们对谁在跟踪关注其个人空间也几乎没法可控。