<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Never glad confident morning again!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.owen.org/blog/444/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.owen.org/blog/444</link>
	<description>Thoughts from Owen in Africa</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:02:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: beev</title>
		<link>http://www.owen.org/blog/444/comment-page-1#comment-1926</link>
		<dc:creator>beev</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:39:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.owen.org/blog/?p=444#comment-1926</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m gonna continue using Google Adsense because I think it&#039;s a good system. I&#039;m not exactly sure how I feel about the Chinese situation, though I think Google&#039;s argument is reasonable. Whether they are right or wrong is the kind of question that may not be answerable for another 20 or 30 years.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m gonna continue using Google Adsense because I think it&#8217;s a good system. I&#8217;m not exactly sure how I feel about the Chinese situation, though I think Google&#8217;s argument is reasonable. Whether they are right or wrong is the kind of question that may not be answerable for another 20 or 30 years.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Not Little England</title>
		<link>http://www.owen.org/blog/444/comment-page-1#comment-1925</link>
		<dc:creator>Not Little England</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 22:10:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.owen.org/blog/?p=444#comment-1925</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Google: Barder vs Barder...&lt;/strong&gt;

Well said Brian, couldn&#039;t have said it better myself. So I may as well quote the lot, right? My employers are accredited by the British Council, we&#039;re ... improve our business ... in China with their assistance... The way to remove a regime such as i...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Google: Barder vs Barder&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Well said Brian, couldn&#8217;t have said it better myself. So I may as well quote the lot, right? My employers are accredited by the British Council, we&#8217;re &#8230; improve our business &#8230; in China with their assistance&#8230; The way to remove a regime such as i&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.owen.org/blog/444/comment-page-1#comment-1924</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2006 18:57:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.owen.org/blog/?p=444#comment-1924</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;
I don&#039;t agree with these attacks on Google.&#160;

&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The best policy for dealing with authoritarian states which impose censorship and other illiberal restrictions on their citizens is almost always to encourage them to open up by maximising their contacts with the outside world, not&#160;by boycotting them and increasing their citizens&#039; isolation.&#160; In the bad old days of the Soviet Union, there were valiant and eventually successful efforts by the west, including the western media, to encourage dialogue with the Soviet leadership and with as many ordinary Soviet people as it was possible to reach, including official visits to the west.&#160; All these contacts were subjected to severe restrictions and censorship by the KGB and other organs of repression, but eventually they helped to build a critical mass of public opinion in the USSR that had gained some knowledge and experience, however limited and controlled, of what was happening in the outside world, and this led to increasing questions about why the Soviet people were being prevented from enjoying the same freedoms.&#160; No-one, to the best of my knowledge, damned western media and other bodies such as the British Council for fostering these contacts even though it entailed accepting KGB restrictions and censorship.
  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I see no material difference between that situation and the position of Google in China today.&#160; Indeed, the argument for continuing to encourage contacts between Chinese people and the outside world is even stronger than it was during most of the Soviet era in the USSR because the process of opening up China to the outside world is much more advanced, and continuing at a much faster pace, than was the case in the USSR until Gorbachev appeared on the scene at five minutes before the eleventh hour.&#160; Moreover the internet, even when subjected to inherently objectionable censorship and restrictions, is a new and potent instrument&#160;for fostering&#160;contact and for breaking down barriers, and it would be crazy not to make the maximum possible use of it to encourage China to emerge from its antique totalitarian régime.
  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I shall continue to use Google with a clear conscience.
  &lt;strong&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Brian&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>
I don&#8217;t agree with these attacks on Google.&nbsp;</p>
<p>The best policy for dealing with authoritarian states which impose censorship and other illiberal restrictions on their citizens is almost always to encourage them to open up by maximising their contacts with the outside world, not&nbsp;by boycotting them and increasing their citizens&#8217; isolation.&nbsp; In the bad old days of the Soviet Union, there were valiant and eventually successful efforts by the west, including the western media, to encourage dialogue with the Soviet leadership and with as many ordinary Soviet people as it was possible to reach, including official visits to the west.&nbsp; All these contacts were subjected to severe restrictions and censorship by the KGB and other organs of repression, but eventually they helped to build a critical mass of public opinion in the USSR that had gained some knowledge and experience, however limited and controlled, of what was happening in the outside world, and this led to increasing questions about why the Soviet people were being prevented from enjoying the same freedoms.&nbsp; No-one, to the best of my knowledge, damned western media and other bodies such as the British Council for fostering these contacts even though it entailed accepting KGB restrictions and censorship.
  </p>
<p>I see no material difference between that situation and the position of Google in China today.&nbsp; Indeed, the argument for continuing to encourage contacts between Chinese people and the outside world is even stronger than it was during most of the Soviet era in the USSR because the process of opening up China to the outside world is much more advanced, and continuing at a much faster pace, than was the case in the USSR until Gorbachev appeared on the scene at five minutes before the eleventh hour.&nbsp; Moreover the internet, even when subjected to inherently objectionable censorship and restrictions, is a new and potent instrument&nbsp;for fostering&nbsp;contact and for breaking down barriers, and it would be crazy not to make the maximum possible use of it to encourage China to emerge from its antique totalitarian régime.
  </p>
<p>I shall continue to use Google with a clear conscience.<br />
  <strong></strong></p>
<p><strong>Brian</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dearieme</title>
		<link>http://www.owen.org/blog/444/comment-page-1#comment-1923</link>
		<dc:creator>dearieme</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2006 01:52:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.owen.org/blog/?p=444#comment-1923</guid>
		<description>Mind you, Browning thought that a &quot;twat&quot; was a nun&#039;s wimple.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mind you, Browning thought that a &quot;twat&quot; was a nun&#8217;s wimple.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Owen</title>
		<link>http://www.owen.org/blog/444/comment-page-1#comment-1922</link>
		<dc:creator>Owen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2006 00:47:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.owen.org/blog/?p=444#comment-1922</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Matt&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;You ask a good question. I think the problem is hypocrisy - the gap between the image they want us to have of them (&quot;do no evil&quot;) and the reality of corporate greed. &#160;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I don&#039;t use MSN partly because I don&#039;t like Microsoft. I used to like Google because they weren&#039;t like all the others, or so I believed. &#160;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Owen&#160;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt</p>
<p>You ask a good question. I think the problem is hypocrisy &#8211; the gap between the image they want us to have of them (&quot;do no evil&quot;) and the reality of corporate greed. &nbsp;</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t use MSN partly because I don&#8217;t like Microsoft. I used to like Google because they weren&#8217;t like all the others, or so I believed. &nbsp;</p>
<p>Owen&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Owen</title>
		<link>http://www.owen.org/blog/444/comment-page-1#comment-1921</link>
		<dc:creator>Owen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2006 00:20:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.owen.org/blog/?p=444#comment-1921</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Robert -&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I stand corrected.&#160; I think your decision is admirable and I hope that others will follow.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Owen&lt;br /&gt;&#160;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Robert -</p>
<p>I stand corrected.&nbsp; I think your decision is admirable and I hope that others will follow.</p>
<p>Owen<br />&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert</title>
		<link>http://www.owen.org/blog/444/comment-page-1#comment-1920</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2006 00:18:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.owen.org/blog/?p=444#comment-1920</guid>
		<description>Thanks for linking to our story on our decision to withdraw from Google AdSense. Just for the record, we are not hosted on Blogspot; we have our own hosting and own our own domain. We use the Blogger tool to compose and edit posts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for linking to our story on our decision to withdraw from Google AdSense. Just for the record, we are not hosted on Blogspot; we have our own hosting and own our own domain. We use the Blogger tool to compose and edit posts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MatGB</title>
		<link>http://www.owen.org/blog/444/comment-page-1#comment-1919</link>
		<dc:creator>MatGB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:35:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.owen.org/blog/?p=444#comment-1919</guid>
		<description>So, why does Google get all this flack?&#160; MS and Yahoo have been in China and censoring completely for years.&#160; Google runs an uncensored chinese language service at the dotcom, and an openly censored version that informs the user at the .cn &#160;&#160;MSN and Yahoo aren&#039;t getting any flack for censoring and not informing the users, but Google get slated for censoring and informing the users?&#160; I have many many concerns about Google, but this isn&#039;t one of them.&#160; I genuinely think that openly announcing to users they&#039;re being censored is a good thing, not a bad one.&#160;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, why does Google get all this flack?&nbsp; MS and Yahoo have been in China and censoring completely for years.&nbsp; Google runs an uncensored chinese language service at the dotcom, and an openly censored version that informs the user at the .cn &nbsp;&nbsp;MSN and Yahoo aren&#8217;t getting any flack for censoring and not informing the users, but Google get slated for censoring and informing the users?&nbsp; I have many many concerns about Google, but this isn&#8217;t one of them.&nbsp; I genuinely think that openly announcing to users they&#8217;re being censored is a good thing, not a bad one.&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
