We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Samizdata quote of the day… or The Law of Unintended Consequences …the Great Firewall has been an enormous boon to freedom. Without it, the authorities in China would not have been foolish enough to allow the entire country to have internet access. With it, they thought they would be able to control the flow of information, so they hooked up to the net, and now they’re in a position where disconnection is unthinkable.
– Perry Metzger
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
From what I understand software to get around the Great Firewall is available, but the Chinese government has detection software that can tell if the ‘getting around’ software has been installed and thus knows who’s been naughty.
It looks to me as if this is a game of measures and countermeasures with no permanent winners or losers, but everyone involved is developing cyberwar skills at an amazing rate.
Here in the Great Pacific Northwet, many many people are of Chinese descent. Some families have been here many generations, some are recent. My doctor is second generation Chinese, as are several others in the clinic I go to. I had many classmates in school who were Chinese. One thing they all had in common (other than missing the Scandinavian Eyefold I have, and sporting black hair.) is that none were stupid. Whether that is because of the generally accepted, by me at least, proposition that immigrants to America tended and tend to be the hardiest, most adventureous and smartest, I don’t know.
Gerry N.
A slightly different take on the Great Firewall here:
…This is all to make a larger point about how trivial inconveniences can drastically change behaviour. There’s probably something in it.
@Rob Fisher: the tradeoff was not, however, between having a free internet without restrictions in China and having the Great Firewall. It was between having nothing and having the (very leaky) Great Firewall.
Certainly, people have less access to information than if the Great Firewall wasn’t there, but they have vastly more than if the government had been too terrified to allow the internet at all, which was the likely alternative. Believing themselves able to effectively control the network, they installed it. Now, knowing they can’t possibly remove it without destroying the economy, they rationalize that most people don’t evade the firewall on a daily basis (which is true, but not nearly what they had hoped for initially).
Under the circumstances, the Great Firewall was a boon — it gave the government the illusion of control while opening up the country far beyond what was previously imaginable.
Pause to consider just what widespread access to pirated Western television has done to the culture. (There are scores of local bilingual fans who lovingly subtitle every episode of Western entertainment shows and then mass distribute them inside the country.) Sure, a lot of it is tripe, but on the other hand, hundreds of millions of people are getting very regular glimpses of life in much freer countries. That’s only one change that the network has brought…
Last night I was laying in bed enjoying a bit of the hypnogogic when it flashed before my eyes: a botnet generating not spam, but long strings of random numbers with just enough structure to simulate an encoded message.
Of course, botnets are immoral, but my, wouldn’t that just overload the world’s monitoring programs?
No I’m sure this is COMPLETELY wrong, it not fits the collective mindset. This is observing by westerner not understand what he seeing. I grew up under communism and once thing I learned was communists OBSESSED with small shit. The idea someone somewhere is getting through net (any net, not The internet) DOES give these people sleepless nights. To think otherwise is credit with more rationality & less emotional motivations than ALWAYS the case.
As we say on the internetz, this is awesome with awesome on top 🙂
Kristaps is right. But OTOH, the discussion here seems to take it as a given that a communist government is some kind of a monolith with one brain and one hand. In reality, that is never the case, and it often happens that one hand does not know what the other is doing – or
worsebetter yet, they are actively fighting each other.It is a valid point that the state exaggerates the small stuff, but I believe a more subtle and sinister explanation can be found. They don’t need to concern themselves with overt displays of power, but rather the mere constant reminder of the state’s existence and pervasiveness has a pschychological effect stronger than anything else.
The effect is all the more stronger when looked at as “reverse pschychology”: “We are already so powerfull, we can afford to give you proles table scraps without worrying “
I am with Kristaps on this. I suspect that is not how they think at all. If there are some scraps for the proles, it is not for want of trying to deny them said scraps.