Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday September 19 2017, @11:28AM   Printer-friendly
from the what-about-the-ones-you-did-NOT-catch? dept.

Chinese authorities have detained a software developer for selling computer services that allow internet users to evade China's "Great Firewall," which blocks access to thousands of websites, from Facebook to Twitter to some news outlets, a media report said Monday.

The software developer, who is from the coastal province of Jiangsu, near Shanghai, was arrested in late August and held for three days for building a small business to sell virtual private networks, the Global Times newspaper reported, citing the official Xinhua news agency. VPNs create encrypted links between computers and allow Chinese web users to see blocked sites by hiding the address from government filters.

Subscribers paid 10 yuan, or about $1.50, for one month of the developer's service. Authorities also seized the developer's earnings, which totaled 1,080 yuan, or about $165.

Some internet businessmen have faced far harsher punishments: Earlier this year, a 26-year-old entrepreneur who sold VPN services in Dongguan, near Hong Kong, was sentenced to nine months in prison.

How far away from having this happen in the West are we, really?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by jmorris on Tuesday September 19 2017, @04:52PM (10 children)

    by jmorris (4844) on Tuesday September 19 2017, @04:52PM (#570252)

    Nah, we see how censorship will come. It is already happening, haven't you been watching the whole Dailystormer fiasco? Obama gave ICANN to the U.N., which has no concept of free speech since it is a Parliament of Tyrants. So that solved the problem on that end. Dailystormer was suddenly banned from DNS and zero registrars would allow them to move their domain... assuming Google can eventually be sued hard enough to release it. They have found temporary refuge by somehow scamming a domain from Iceland, their laws require an act of Parliament nuke a domain and it promptly collapsed (for unrelated tawdry reasons) so the Powers that Be shot and missed em by a hair. For now. But properly registered domainname or no, the name doesn't resolve everywhere because Cisco explicitly refuses to resolve the name. More such "exceptions" will follow.

    And for 90% of people, the threat of being banned from Twitter and Facebook are more than enough to assure compliance. And they are already way beyond that. Remember, they aren't banning people for posts ON those services anymore, they are declaring individual People "unpersons" and removing them entirely from the normal Internet. Social media, Paypal, dating sites, the word goes out from somewhere and suddenly you don't have an account anywhere. Then they piously declare that "these are simply private companies, no 1st Amendment problems here."

    ISPs already deeply meddle with traffic wherever they are able. I had to reprogram to an outside DNS resolver to get around SuddenLink tampering. All they would need to do is block or redirect any outside DNS. Then they will make VPN access a "premium" Business Class service. Then require a business license to sign up for that level. Work from home? Well for a small fee they can allow you to access a single registered endpoint at your employer, do you have a note from your boss on company letterhead? Just keep turning the screws. Banning corporate VPNs on the backbone would be madness, they would have people shot because it is a matter of life and death to big business. But they can fairly easily make it so 90% of ordinary people have to go through the ISP monitor proxy. And they are government granted monopolies, think they are going to refuse the Intel services having a peek? There have already been ISPs pushing wildcard certs in "installation kits" so they can deep packet inspect https traffic and insert local ads, although that got slowed down by the device revolution.

    See the pattern? No heavy handed government censorship. After all, Trump can still win an election, so can't trust that much power to the overt State yet, best keep it safely and closely held down in the Deep State where The Party lives and writes the Narrative.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 19 2017, @05:03PM (9 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 19 2017, @05:03PM (#570257)

    Ha!!

    Perhaps I was too hasty in my previous judgments. It loos like perhaps you are finally seeing the "private business" model as the sham it is. It isn't the glorious individualist liberty loving fantasy we're sold, it is simply compartmentalized government. I think we need some major amendments to the constitution and bill of rights to cover these violations of citizen's freedoms. Common carrier status for ISPs, digital rights act, decentralized DNS, and severe restrictions upon EULAs that require private entities to respect the laws of the land.

    Corporations != people. Private business != above the law.

    Yes this opens up the internet for use by shitty fucking people but the alternative is dystopia. Repressing humanity has always resulted in violent blowback, and every liberal minded person I know is against censorship. Some can be temporarily blinded by their emotions, but a quick conversation usually restores sanity with little fuss. Conservatives? I'm not as sure, they seem to be more strongly ruled by emotional attachment to their beliefs. But hey, jmo is decrying private businesses so fuckit anything is possible!

    • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday September 19 2017, @06:11PM (8 children)

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday September 19 2017, @06:11PM (#570289) Journal

      Don't hold your breath. J-Mo is a master of compartmentalization; he typed the above screed while completely oblivious to the fact that it undermines his free-market-uber-alles shibboleths elsewhere.

      --
      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 19 2017, @08:23PM (7 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 19 2017, @08:23PM (#570336)

        Sorry, corporations are entities CREATED by governments, and as such, are not products of the Free Market. This is illustrated quite clearly with large corporations who screw up, such as Equifax having given away all their records on millions of people via a wildly insecure server while their CSO at the time was a music major.

        In the Free Market, you personally experience the consequences of your choices, both good and pad. No golden parachutes and "fines" in lieu of criminal prosecution.

        • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday September 19 2017, @08:34PM (6 children)

          by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday September 19 2017, @08:34PM (#570347) Journal

          This free market thing sounds awesome. How do we make it? And how do we prevent corporations-in-all-but-government-charter from appearing? Or is it okay so long as they're just using their own private mercenary forces rather than Eeeeeebil Gubbamint Lawmen (TM) to force their ways on people?

          --
          I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 19 2017, @08:52PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 19 2017, @08:52PM (#570354)

            And a lot of versions of me on different timelines had the same problem. So a few thousand versions of me had the [yells] INGENIOUS IDEA OF BANDING TOGETHER like a herd of cattle or a school of fish, or... those people who answer questions on Yahoo! Answers.

            So apparently the AC must have found the one link in Yahoo! Answers that brought them here :D

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 19 2017, @10:21PM (2 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 19 2017, @10:21PM (#570400)

            You're afraid of the possibility of an effectively unaccountable police force - so you're advocating to keep the effectively unaccountable police force to protect you from the possibility of another effectively unaccountable police force.

            We don't prevent anything. Unaccountable corporations only exist because GOVERNMENT has deemed them to be "people", special "people" who cannot be arrested, tried, imprisoned, and/or executed. In a free market there are only people, as in regular everyday people with no legally-protected "corporate veil" to hide behind.

            • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday September 20 2017, @01:45AM (1 child)

              by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Wednesday September 20 2017, @01:45AM (#570484) Journal

              You are a big fool. Humans naturally form hierarchies, and these reinforce themselves in the manner of a positive feedback: power to power, money to money, privilege to privilege, in an ever-escalating spiral. Removing any sort of check against this would only accelerate it.

              --
              I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
              • (Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @04:16AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 20 2017, @04:16AM (#570524)

                Well, then you've got nothing to worry about. Hard to think up a more powerful combination that a mercantilist world-empire with "private" corporations pulling the strings of a massive federal government. Which is of course exactly what you have now. Enjoy that "positive" feedback!

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by jmorris on Wednesday September 20 2017, @01:47AM (1 child)

            by jmorris (4844) on Wednesday September 20 2017, @01:47AM (#570486)

            We could start by declaring every corporation that is "Too big to fail" to also be too big to exist and break them up. The Joint Stock Corporation does have certain advantages in raising large sums for really large projects so outright banning them is probably a cure worse than the disease but the current model where every doctor and accountant registers an LLC is too far in the other direction.

            We always need to be on the lookout for "socialize the losses, but the gains are private" cronyism calling itself Capitalism. And what else is a Corporation? Investors can never be liable for more than the money spent on the stock, the officers generally have to eat a baby or something to be held personally liable, yet everybody has unlimited upside. Could we agree that publicly traded corporations should be limited to a low fixed number, forbidden from owning stock in or sharing officers with another and have a 99 year maximum lifetime? Perhaps an exception and some special rules for utilities, stable dividend paying entities with little change and little competition since they are already in bed with the government.

            Private, closely held corporations are much more similar to partnerships and a few changes in the law could enhance that, making the principle shareholders and officers more liable for misconduct.

            Monopolies almost always have one of two properties, a temporary accident soon corrected or a government connection creating and maintaining the monopoly. All anti-trust law is not evil either. Dangerous, but like government itself needed for certain purposes for which it is uniquely suited.

            • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday September 20 2017, @06:29AM

              by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Wednesday September 20 2017, @06:29AM (#570543) Journal

              Who are you and what have you done with the real J-Mo? Please, please, please tell me you threw him into an active volcano or something...

              --
              I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...