BYR Achieve · 镜像论坛

福布斯报告说，Google创始人于达沃斯表示，在中国调整内容检查: Brin曾经反对这项交易，他出生于苏联：“感受这种压力，我从来不要象这个方向妥协。”。但是，他的观点改变了，他说，当他和中国人讨论此事的时候：“他们很自豪中国的成就，这样可以让更多的信息进入中国，这是比较好的。” 斟酌Sergey的话，有三点： 1.一部分中国人不喜欢谷歌的检查，事实上，看不起谷歌，Googel和其他搜索引擎一样。这样看来，中国人之间存在意见分歧。(这是可能的，中国那么大。) 2.在Google.cn自查之前，Google.com已经90%的时间都在自查(据谷歌本身的数字)。所以，即使你看Google.com，基本上等于看Google.cn。 3.Google.com显示标题和内容可能因为检查而被过滤，但是Google.cn没有。也许你认为中国的ISP屏蔽了一些内容，但是Google.com至少也过滤了一部分。 Sergey Brin说：“在商言商，没有办法。” 。Larry Page补充, “我们一直考虑怎么做，但我认为，作为一个公司，不能人云亦云。” 。我相信Larry。2006年，Google改变了他们的搜索结果，一段时间以来，Google努力与中国协调。 “也许现在的办法更明智。”。美联社援引Sergey半年前的话。当时，Sergey透露，中国几乎所有的用户使用没有检查的Google.com。 *根据当地法律规定，本文有所删改。原文： Google Comments on China Censorship Again Forbes reports on statements on Google China censorship given by the Google co-founders at Davos: Brin said he was instinctively opposed to the deal because he was born in the Soviet Union. “Having felt that kind of oppression, I would never have wanted to compromise in that direction.” His opinion changed, he said, when he talked with Chinese people about it. “They’re really proud of what China has accomplished. They feel that as much information as can go into China, the better off it is.” I have three comments on this, not to debunk, but to balance Sergey’s words: * I talked to other Chinese people who didn’t like Google’s censorship move, in fact, downright despised that Google was now working together with the Chinese government just like every other search engine in China already did. So apparently, opinions among Chinese were divided. (It’s impossible to be any other way, too, considering China’s size.) * Google.com was accessible 90% of the time before Google.cn started with a self-censored search engine (according to Google’s own figures). So even when you just look at Google, there was already information getting into China. * Google.com shows the title and snippet of pages which themselves may be censored in China. Google.cn does not show the title and snippet of such pages. Even when you consider that a Chinese ISP blocks the page anyway once you click on it – which may or may not always be the case – this means Google.com was (and is) at least disclosing parts of the information, whereas Google.cn is disclosing no such thing (they only disclose that something is missing, but won’t say what). According to The Guardian, Sergey Brin also said that “On a business level, that decision to censor... was a net negative.” Larry Page however added, “We always consider what to do. But I don’t think we as a company should be making decisions based on too much perception.” I believe Larry is referring to the perception that Google helped shape with their informal corporate motto they held for years. It was no coincidence that Google in early 2006 removed, and then changed, some of their help entries on censorship, only after people noticed they were not in sync with what Google was doing now. For some time, Google’s own perception clashed with their China move. “Perhaps now the principled approach makes more sense,” the AP quoted Sergey around half a year ago. At the time, Sergey revealed that almost all the Google users in China still used the non-censored Google.com search. In other news, Google, along with other tech companies as well as human rights organizations, is reaching out to create a code of conduct “to promote freedom of expression and privacy rights.”

Google在中国调整内容检查