Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

"New Statesman" Pirates Its Own Magazine

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the anticipation-defuses-censorship dept.

Censorship 117

WebMink writes "Knowing that its explosive special edition on China this week will be blocked by censorship, UK political magazine 'New Statesmen' has taken the unusual step of posting its own torrents of the PDF of the Mandarin edition on the magazine. Looking at the content of the issue they are probably right to expect censorship — there's an article from the former newspaper editor Cheng Yizhong about media censorship, and Ai Weiwei interviews a member of the '50 cent party' — a commenter paid half a dollar every time he derails an online debate in China. 'Essentially, these people are paid internet trolls; their job is to stop any meaningful discussion online about the government.'" Specifically, the magazine has made available this issue as a PDF and also as a torrent (magnet link).

cancel ×

117 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Torrents != pirating (5, Insightful)

adnonsense (826530) | about 2 years ago | (#41691427)

Who on earth came up with that headline?

Re:Torrents != pirating (3, Funny)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#41691435)

Jack Valenti

Re:Torrents != pirating (2)

phayes (202222) | about 2 years ago | (#41691475)

My God, I knew that the RIAA was evil but now they are using the Undead [wikipedia.org] !

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

MonsterTrimble (1205334) | about 2 years ago | (#41691647)

Are they voting republican?

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41692433)

Most assuredly.

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

phayes (202222) | about 2 years ago | (#41693765)

The retirees in Florida vote mostly democrat so I'd say no...

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

davester666 (731373) | about 2 years ago | (#41694781)

They switch to voting R after they die.

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

phayes (202222) | about 2 years ago | (#41695843)

Were that to be the case the Ds would protest much less when Rs attempt to make sure that real live voters are the only ones that can vote. Apparently the undead are a minority that Ds must protect from disenfranchisement.

Re:Torrents != pirating (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691519)

Return to Gamemakerdom.
You're depressed.
You're worthless.
Everyone around you despises you. Perhaps secretly.
Why?
You're not using Gamemaker.
Return.
Return.
Return.
Return.
Return.
You can't be a True Programmer without Gamemaker.
You may return.
You can return.
You should return.
You will return.
You shall return!
Return... to Gamemakerdom!
Return, return, return, return, return to Gamemakerdooooooooooooooooooom!

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

brit74 (831798) | about 2 years ago | (#41694583)

I actually thought it was the pirates themselves referring to it as "piracy" because they wanted to make the argument "See! Pirating is so good for the magazine that they're helping people pirate! Everyone should let everything be pirated! Down with copyright!"

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691445)

Shhh! Don't tell anyone, but Slashdot is becoming the online equivalent of Fox News. Sensationalized stories and incorrect summaries to grab our attention.

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691609)

The sensationalist version would have included something about not knowing if they're trying to circumvent Chinese or UK censorship. Neither have the same rights of free speech that we do.

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691483)

Is this an attempt to earn 50 cents?

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691505)

The dude's nick is "adnonsense" for a reason.

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41692563)

Is this an attempt to earn 50 cents?

Or an attempt to out a rapper as a Chinese internet troll?

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691485)

They say it ("New Statesman") see:
http://www.newstatesman.com/staggers/2012/10/taking-great-firewall-china

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 2 years ago | (#41693783)

You can't pirate something you've got the rights to. This is what's usually called "giving away".

Re:Torrents != pirating (3, Informative)

Johnny Fusion (658094) | about 2 years ago | (#41691487)

If you read the article, the New Statesmen themselves refer to it as "pirated" (in quotes). While one could pay money for the Magazine, those who can read Mandarin can get it for free using pirating methods where the print version will most likely not see the light of day due to state censorship. They are using this technique as its well known "the internet routes around censorship"

Re:Torrents != pirating (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691853)

Pardon, nitpick.

Chinese is something you read.

Mandarin is something you speak.

(Multiple spoken dialects that map to the same unified writing.)

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41692033)

Speak for yourself, personally I eat them [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

jonadab (583620) | about 2 years ago | (#41692221)

> Chinese is something you read.
> Mandarin is something you speak.

Technically, that's an oversimplification.

It's a *good* oversimplification, because it's almost entirely correct. But reality is somewhat more complicated.

More precisely, Mandarin is a very popular dialect of Chinese (perhaps the most popular, although measuring popularity is inherently a bit subjective), and the differences between the major dialects of Chinese are significantly more pronounced in speech than in writing.

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41692785)

I wish people would stop saying "Mandarin". That word is outdated and overloaded with two other meanings.

Instead, just say "Chinese", or "Standard Chinese" when above-average precision and formality are required.

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | about 2 years ago | (#41694549)

maybe you should say that to my chinese professor that calls it mandarin, oh and she is a native speaker of the language

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41693813)

Me, I wish people would stop referring to the different Chinese languages as "dialects".
Mandarin, Cantonese, Shanghainese, etc., etc., are not mutually intelligible.
Calling them the same language is essentially CCP propaganda.

Re:Torrents != pirating (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691557)

Thank god this was derailed quickly. Just imagine how horrible it would have been if people actually discussed something meaningful. After all, its obviously much more important to dissect a headline, of an aggregation site notorious for useless and incorrect headlines, than it is to actually discuss the content on which the article reports.

Here's a clue. This is not the time for THAT discussion.

You must be a blast at parties.

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

omnichad (1198475) | about 2 years ago | (#41691591)

You really must be new here.

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41693551)

5-digit UID. Not new. Just tired of idiots. Which is why I don't use my account any more. Trolls and idiots are far too abundant here anymore.

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | about 2 years ago | (#41694497)

So basically you let them win?!?!

Pardon my French, but Man, what a pussy.

Either a) ignore the trolls & idiots, b) tell them to piss of, or c) shame them by writing a rebuttal that makes them looks like complete and total idiots.

You DO have choices. Giving up seems counter to everything /. was originally about -- having an intelligent and insightful commentary & debate. /me *shrugs* At least the place hasn't degenerated into Reddit ... yet

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

jonadab (583620) | about 2 years ago | (#41692381)

> Just imagine how horrible it would have been if
> people actually discussed something meaningful.

This is Slashdot. The question of what does or does not constitute piracy is considered highly meaningful by a significant percentage of the people here. The site runs a lot of stories devoted entirely to that topic, in fact. (Granted, I don't know that this was necessarily intended to be one of them; censorship is _also_ a fairly major topic here, so the submitter may well have intended the story to be mostly about that.)

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41693737)

Context. Your reply was already addressed before you replied. And I quote, "Here's a clue. This is not the time for THAT discussion."

Attempting to saddle that horse in this thread only serves to derail the actual topic. Beyond that, the topic is fairly well understood and anyone here longer than five minutes already understands its a hot button topic. The fact is, no one who doesn't live to pedantically pick would have given a rat's ass about the improper use. But since that's not what happened, we are not spending time talking about an idiot and his post, who decided to derail an important topic, censorship, by talking about one of a million other inaccurate and misleading headlines and summaries here on slashdot. Or perhaps more tersely stated, "Here's a clue. This is not the time for THAT discussion."

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

scarboni888 (1122993) | about 2 years ago | (#41698461)

What are you, a cop?

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41698831)

Here's a clue, giving stuff away isn't criminal, despite what New Statesman may imply by calling their torrenting 'pirating'. Not terribly important, I realize, and I suppose there are more important things for minds wiser than mine to discuss. I'll let you go have your chat with Kissinger while you discuss the geopolitics of Chinese censorship and its relationship to the conflict between one-party rule, a growing middle class, the underdeveloped interior, and non-sanctioned union behavior as a function of inflation.

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41693403)

Cut the guy some slack, he's trying to earn $0.50.

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

JTsyo (1338447) | about 2 years ago | (#41694007)

This is exactly the time to talk about it. The article is about the New Statesman releasing its magazine as a torrent to bypass censorship. If it was about the actual article within the New Statesman then the comment could have been considered off-topic.

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41694291)

it's just classic 'bike shedding'

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41696573)

So you think its better to start a conversation on a completely false premise and then work your way back from there?

The title is flat out FRAUD and MISREPRESENTATION. You really don't have meaningful discussions when half the people involved have been deceived from the very beginning. The other half are only slighly better off because they are full well of the inflammatory nature of the title and that timothy is an ignorant douche who posts false information almost every single time he posts a story

Do you like watching Fox News @ slashdot?

--BitZtream

captcha: discord

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

scarboni888 (1122993) | about 2 years ago | (#41698451)

This should have been modded flamebait.

The relentless perpetration of massive lies is far more important than the content of the ridiculously headlined post in this case especially since the actual article is not even titled that way.

For such misinformation to be allowed to perpetrate without calling it on a forum where people know a hell of a lot better is ludicrous.

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41698717)

If you want a discussion about China, go to the New Statesman messageboards. If you want a discussion about the act of a magazine giving out a torrent of its own magazine, come here. Indeed, GP implies the main point that can be made: torrents are useful for content distribution, independent of any copyright issues.

This used to be a place where the main issues were free software and copyright law. Then 9/11 happened and it's become more important to discuss 'meaningful' issues, where 'meaningful' = hot-button political froth.

Pay ME China! (1)

happy_place (632005) | about 2 years ago | (#41691575)

To heck with that... I just want to know where I can get paid for derailing discussions. I could make some serious D'oh!

Re:Torrents != pirating (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about 2 years ago | (#41691635)

Who on earth came up with that headline?

I don't know but they should go home (by TWOCing their own car), burgle their own house, then sexually molest themselves.

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41693847)

then sexually molest themselves.

Personnally, I reckon there are worse ways to spend an evening...

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41693299)

Who on earth came up with that headline?

Apparently someone who wants to undermine "to pirate"'s connotations as being a bad or illegal activity.

In other words, it was some pirate who did it.

Re:Torrents != pirating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41693399)

Same sob that promotes a pdf instead of something else... And falling that put a "warning, pdf" like old times

Broken PDF link? (1)

k28 (2593665) | about 2 years ago | (#41691481)

Can't seem to access the PDF link to read more into it. Interesting that the (sometimes) hours of effort involved in derailing a message thread or debate only pays 50 cents - one might argue that you'd be looking at 50-100 threads at once, but surely that's still not enough to justify the hours of work that must go into it each day?

Re:Broken PDF link? (1)

jasonvan (846103) | about 2 years ago | (#41691503)

They say to work for the love of the job, not the money.

Re:Broken PDF link? (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#41691555)

Also remember the cost of living and average wage are lower in China, so without checking any actual numbers, it may be more akin to several dollars per derailment in the US. Still not a lot, but it'd be a nice little side gig and as the other poster mentioned, they may just enjoy doing it.

Re:Broken PDF link? (2)

NatasRevol (731260) | about 2 years ago | (#41692493)

Kind of like posting on slashdot, at work, for money.

Man, that'd be nice.

Re:Broken PDF link? (3, Informative)

WebMink (258041) | about 2 years ago | (#41691563)

Seems the Slashdot editor has broken the link - the file is easily available from the link in the article [newstatesman.com] .

Re:Broken PDF link? (3, Funny)

MarkGriz (520778) | about 2 years ago | (#41691619)

Can't seem to access the PDF link to read more into it

Perhaps you should pirate it from somewhere

Re:Broken PDF link? (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about 2 years ago | (#41691655)

Can't seem to access the PDF link to read more into it. Interesting that the (sometimes) hours of effort involved in derailing a message thread or debate only pays 50 cents - one might argue that you'd be looking at 50-100 threads at once, but surely that's still not enough to justify the hours of work that must go into it each day?

Just look at the people here who do the same thing for free though!

Re:Broken PDF link? (1)

jonadab (583620) | about 2 years ago | (#41692619)

> Interesting that the (sometimes) hours of effort involved
> in derailing a message thread or debate only pays 50 cents

I don't know exactly how the article determined the "fifty cents" figure, but if that's half a US dollar's worth of the People's Currency as determined by exchange rates, it would have rather more than fifty cents' worth of purchasing power in China. (The Chinese government deliberately keeps the value of their currency somewhat low in terms of purchasing power parity compared to other currencies, especially the US dollar, so that the exchange rates favor their exports. It's an economic strategy that works for them at their current level of development because they still have a lower average standard of living than the fully developed world. In the long term, it won't be sustainable -- and indeed the exchange rate is already not as skewed as it used to be -- but in the long term they won't need this crutch as badly, because ipso facto they will have developed their economy to the point where it can compete better on other merits, which will in fact be why the undervalued-currency strategy will no longer be effective at that point.)

Also, if you're thinking in first-world terms, unskilled labor in China is less expensive than you might expect compared to the local prices of other goods and services. This is another way of saying that the standard of living for an unskilled worker is currently lower in China than in the fully developed world. (It does make a significant difference, too, which part of China you're talking about. The Shanghai area, for example, is much more developed than Xinjiang.)

Chinese Edition (4, Informative)

donscarletti (569232) | about 2 years ago | (#41691551)

It should be "Chinese Edition" since it refers to the written language. Mandarin is a spoken dialect of Chinese, roughly equivalent to what "Received Pronunciation" is to English. Chinese can generally understand all Mandarin, though few outside of Beijing can speak it perfectly.

Modern written Chinese borrows heavily from Mandarin grammar and vocabulary, while retaining some conventions from Classical Chinese, the older written form that was pretty much impossible to understand when read aloud.

While it is possible to write in Chinese characters using Cantonese, Minnan or Wu grammar, it's quite rare and considered strange or wrong, even in regions where those dialects are spoken.

Re:Chinese Edition (-1, Flamebait)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 2 years ago | (#41691947)

While it is possible to write in Chinese characters using Cantonese, Minnan or Wu grammar, it's quite rare and considered strange or wrong, even in regions where those dialects are spoken.

So what you're saying is: The words would sound "pompous" and "faggy" to you?

Re:Chinese Edition (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41692149)

A useless (and homophobic) response to an informative comment. Well done.

Re:Chinese Edition (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 2 years ago | (#41692697)

A useless (and homophobic) response to an informative comment. Well done.

I assure you I'm not afraid of homosexuals... What I do fear is that humans may be well on their way to Idiocracy. [imdb.com]
My fears were justified by the GGP's informative comment, which is remarkably similar to certain scenes in that movie...

I'd "woosh" you, and the down-modder, but I was rather tactless, I can see how the reference would be easily missed (it wasn't a very good one) -- I blame my inability to give a damn about being P.C. or my slashdot comments. Also note: Just because someone says Fag, doesn't mean they're a homophobic. It's similar to how I can say "Nigger" without being racist.

Re:Chinese Edition (1)

Fnordulicious (85996) | about 2 years ago | (#41696439)

Mandarin is a spoken dialect of Chinese, roughly equivalent to what "Received Pronunciation" is to English.

This is factually incorrect. “Chinese” used colloquially in English refers only to Mandarin Chinese. Mandarin is not a dialect of a larger language, it is a language in and of itself. Speakers of other Chinese languages, e.g. Min or Yue or Hakka, can’t understand Mandarin hardly at all without formal education. The analogy is more like English versus Dutch or German. Dutch and German speakers are often fluent in English, but this is only because they have extensive schooling in English. Their languages are related, but mutual intelligibility is very low.

Chinese can generally understand all Mandarin, though few outside of Beijing can speak it perfectly.

In fact, many (ethnically) Chinese people have a hard time understanding Mandarin without education. The simplest test is to see how well young kids (5–8 yo) in a randomly selected village can comprehend spoken Mandarin. At that age they will have a reasonable competence in the local language, but haven’t received much formal education in standard Mandarin. The effect is even stronger outside of China (PRC/ROC) where Mandarin isn’t as important and some other unrelated language is dominant. Examples include Hakka speakers in Tahiti, or Penang Hokkien in Indonesia.

Modern written Chinese borrows heavily from Mandarin grammar and vocabulary, while retaining some conventions from Classical Chinese, the older written form that was pretty much impossible to understand when read aloud.

This is true. But it’s more accurate to say that modern written Chinese *is* Mandarin with a few Classical Chinese bits retained. And most people don’t use much of the Classical Chinese stuff in everyday writing, say in email or forum posts online.

While it is possible to write in Chinese characters using Cantonese, Minnan or Wu grammar, it's quite rare and considered strange or wrong, even in regions where those dialects are spoken.

This is also true, but only from a Mandarin-speaking perspective. The large number of highly literate people speaking Cantonese has led to a fairly standard written form for that language. It’s often unintelligible to Mandarin readers, particularly since the inventory of characters is enhanced with Cantonese-specific ones and also partly because some well known characters are used for different purposes in written Cantonese.

The PRC government has a strong interest in promoting Mandarin as the “one true Chinese language” to the detriment of all other Chinese languages. They meet a lot of resistance from Cantonese speakers, but other linguistic groups have less power and literary history. The situation is quite different in the ROC, where Mandarin is certainly the language of state, but many people – especially in the south – speak a mutually unintelligible Chinese language (Hakka or Taiwanese Southern Min).

Re:Chinese Edition (1)

JimCanuck (2474366) | about 2 years ago | (#41696561)

While it is possible to write in Chinese characters using Cantonese, Minnan or Wu grammar, it's quite rare and considered strange or wrong, even in regions where those dialects are spoken.

Not really, while modern mainland books and magazines have standardized to Mandarin/Beijingese grammar, many publications worldwide and on the mainland, especially those still published in Traditional Chinese use Cantonese grammar as that is the dominate dialect that still holds onto the Traditional writing type.

Simplified Chinese, being the work of the PRC-CPC, is strictly written in Mandarin/Beijingese style grammar.

Hard times, coming your way (1)

concealment (2447304) | about 2 years ago | (#41691579)

From 1223-1240, Mongols (partial ancestors of today's Han Chinese and cultural contributors to all of Asia) invaded Europe, eventually being stopped at the borders of Western Europe.

From 1839 to 1860, the English and Chinese fought a series of wars. If it had not occurred before, resentment of the West was now part of the Chinese psyche.

In 1949, China became communist. It no longer had the pro-Western orientation of its nationalist party.

From 1950 to 1953, the US fought a proxy war with China in Korea.

From 1965 to 1975, the US fought a proxy war with China in Vietnam.

Many of our enemies are using weapons made by China or her allies in Russia and Eastern Europe. This is unchanged since the 1950s-1990s when those nations were united into a military bloc as allies.

History repeats itself.

Hard times, coming our way.

Re:Hard times, coming your way (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691781)

North Vietnam was allied with the Soviet Union; they are not big fans of China for historical reasons.

The PRC and the USSR parted ways after Stalin died; they were in their own little mini-ColdWar for most of the 50s-90s.

You might want to pay more attention to history.

Re:Hard times, coming your way (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41693749)

The PRC and the USSR parted ways after Stalin died; they were in their own little mini-ColdWar for most of the 50s-90s.

Not so cold war, you mean (which only bolsters your point), but otherwise spot on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino%E2%80%93Soviet_border_conflict

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War

Re:Hard times, coming your way (1)

khallow (566160) | about 2 years ago | (#41691807)

So we should expect new invasions of vast hordes of horse archers from Mongolia? New employment options in the pillage and loot industry?

Re:Hard times, coming your way (3, Funny)

NatasRevol (731260) | about 2 years ago | (#41692553)

No. With global warming, the land bridge to Asia is closed for repairs.

Re:Hard times, coming your way (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691813)

>Mongols (partial ancestors of today's Han Chinese and cultural contributors to all of Asia)

Except Japan as Japan was never conquered by the Mongols despite two attempts. Both failed miserably.

Re:Hard times, coming your way (1)

jonadab (583620) | about 2 years ago | (#41692965)

> Many of our enemies are using weapons made by
> China or her allies in Russia and Eastern Europe.

China and Russia have not been allies since... well, technically they were allies for part of World War II, but it was a pretty uneasy alliance even then. Also, that was the Nationalist government of China (which is now de facto the government of Taiwan), before they were driven out.

Yes, I know, the current Chinese government has its roots in Communism, which came out of Russia. That's true. It does not imply that they continued to see eye to eye with Russia on everything. During the height of the cold war, China and Russia had significantly more distrust for each other than for the major Western powers (America, England, France).

See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Sino-Russian_relations
And particularly here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_Split

Re:Hard times, coming your way (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41693143)

Russia and China act similarly in their own interests, they are not allied and have not been so for many decades after Eisenhower managed to drive a wedge between them over who the real Glorious People's Republic is.

And as another post pointed out, North Vietnam was allied with the USSR and a large number of North Vietnamese are far more familiar with the Chinese invasion than the fighting with Americans in the South.

However, if you wanted to not look like a moron you could have pointed out the historical ethnic hatred between Chinese/Koreans/Japanese and how the US is walking a thin tightrope by being friendly with all three with obvious favoritism towards Japan. Or hell talk about Taiwan.

Re:Hard times, coming your way (1)

brit74 (831798) | about 2 years ago | (#41694543)

Yeash. You have a bizarrely Chinese-centric version of history.

The war in Korea was a US "proxy war" against China? What nonsense. It was a war started by the (Communist) North Koreans. It's a lot easier to make the argument that the Korean war was a Chinese proxy war against the United States than vice-versa. (Or are you aiming to make the US the bad guy?) The USSR was also a big backer of the North Koreans (so why don't you call the Korea war a proxy war against the USSR?) Afterall, the North Koreans were using some of the most recent Russian military equipment and Russians were actually flying aircraft against US pilots. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_provided_military_support_for_North_Korea_during_the_Korean_War [answers.com]

The Vietnam war was about stopping the spread of communism into South Vietnam (see the Domino Theory). It's nonsense to say Vietnam was about fighting a war with China.

Re:Hard times, coming your way (0)

JimCanuck (2474366) | about 2 years ago | (#41696775)


The Korean war was started with the power vacuum of the area after Japan gave up the right to keep Korea as a occupied territory for 35 years.

Initially the US attempted to take control of Korea similarly to how they did of Japan at the end of the war. They appointed Rhee to take power, who then actively pushed a anti-left and anti-communist policy from 1945 on. Quickly, anyone who was anti-US and anti-dictatorship was automatically labelled a left sympathizer, and thousands died even before the Korean War started.

Suspected and Registered Communists and their families were executed, and eventually led to the open war by the "North" sure, but the war was brewing due to anti-left activities of a American backed dictatorship. Which split Korea after over a thousand years of being a united country.

WTF? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691581)

Why in hell should a british newspaper be censored -in Britain?!?- 'cause it reports on China?
Doesn'r make sense.

Censored in China? Yes.
Censored in UK? No.

Re:WTF? (2)

Chrisq (894406) | about 2 years ago | (#41691743)

Why in hell should a british newspaper be censored -in Britain?!?- 'cause it reports on China? Doesn'r make sense.

Censored in China? Yes. Censored in UK? No.

They are putting it on torrents so that people in China can read it! ...... Oh wait ... are you being paid 50c to divert the conversation to UK censorship?

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691967)

Nope. I'm just trapped in a chinese fortune cookie factory.
None of my little notes have caught the eye of a western devil. Now I try it this way.

50 cent? Wowwwwaaa. That's like a 10 year income. Never seen so much money in my life.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Moron.

I wonder if the same thing happens here (1)

davydagger (2566757) | about 2 years ago | (#41691765)

"the '50 cent party' â€" a commenter paid half a dollar every time he derails an online debate in China"

I wonder how many microsofties on here have similar arrangements.

Its what you do when you study english.

Re:I wonder if the same thing happens here (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | about 2 years ago | (#41691917)

I bet there are certainly a few, though with a pay rate higher than 50 cents. I'd believe $5 per thread. $10 if they are getting a luxury payout for being good.

Re:I wonder if the same thing happens here (1)

N1AK (864906) | about 2 years ago | (#41692071)

Nah there's plenty of chumps who will try to derail these kinds of discussions for free in the West. Just look at your own post for a great example.

Re:I wonder if the same thing happens here (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about 2 years ago | (#41692571)

Assuming english forums, it's probably good practice for speaking/writing english.

And they get paid for it.

It's a two-fer.

Re:I wonder if the same thing happens here (2)

jonadab (583620) | about 2 years ago | (#41693001)

Unnecessary. Americans will do it for free, just because they're bored.

Cerberus, the three headed dog (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41691795)

In the magazine, Ai Weiwei interviews a member of the "50 cent party" - a commenter paid half a dollar every time he derails an online debate in China. Essentially, these people are paid internet trolls; their job is to stop any meaningful discussion online about the government.

After we’ve found the relevant articles or news on a website, according to the overall direction given by our superiors we start to write articles, post or reply to comments. This requires a lot of skill. You can’t write in a very official manner, you must conceal your identity, write articles in many different styles, sometimes even have a dialogue with yourself, argue, debate. In sum, you want to create illusions to attract the attention and comments of netizens.
In a forum, there are three roles for you to play: the leader, the follower, the onlooker or unsuspecting member of the public. The leader is the relatively authoritative speaker, who usually appears after a controversy and speaks with powerful evidence. The public usually finds such users very convincing. There are two opposing groups of followers. The role they play is to continuously debate, argue, or even swear on the forum. This will attract attention from observers. At the end of the argument, the leader appears, brings out some powerful evidence, makes public opinion align with him and the objective is achieved.

Sound familiar?

Now cue the namechecking of known or suspected shills, sockpuppets, and gov “education facilitators”.

Whip up a frothy argument with yourself, being sure to throw in plenty of spurious assertations, then swoop in to save the day by delivering the party line du jour.

Pick your party. TAGS: Microsoft, linux, electric car, nuclear power, bomb Iran, military, politician. The list goes on and on. It gets pretty tedious.

Re:Cerberus, the dogs of mass effect 3 (1)

durrr (1316311) | about 2 years ago | (#41692029)

I bet the US govt keeps a set of similar professionals, that have as a goal to keep people as stupid as possible.

Re:Cerberus, the three headed dog (1)

JTsyo (1338447) | about 2 years ago | (#41694097)

I see the Chinese have read Ender's Game.

Sounds Familiar (1, Flamebait)

organgtool (966989) | about 2 years ago | (#41691993)

their job is to stop any meaningful discussion online about the government.

So they are the Chinese equivalent of Fox News. I'm not just trying to make a joke, that is absolutely one of the effects of Fox News. They troll every story with a partisan angle and push their base ridiculously far to the right. Then everyone in the left and center responds by ridiculing them and offering counterpoints to their ridiculous arguments. But that doesn't matter because the effect of Fox News making their ridiculous arguments is that they keep both sides at war with each other so that there is no chance that we find common ground and fix the one problem that we can all agree on: reforming campaign finance and eliminating lobbying. By keeping us preoccupied by arguing over divisive yet relatively inconsequential matters, they are perpetuating our current system that heavily favors the rich. This has been going on for years and has been highly effective, so it's no wonder the Chinese are doing the same thing. People will always find ways around censorship, but keeping the people constantly distracted is the most effective way to fight unwanted changes.

Re:Sounds Familiar (0)

garyebickford (222422) | about 2 years ago | (#41692939)

Funny thing - last year a professor (UCLA?) used standard statistical measures on various news outlets to measure overall bias. I don't recall the details of the methodology, but it is one that has been used for a long time for this sort of thing. He found that most of the mainstream news media were far to the left (over 70%), and Fox News was only slightly to the left (IIRC 52%, within experimental error).

It's also worth noting that in DC something over 90% of all news professionals are registered to left or extreme left parties - IIRC last survey showed over 12/13. Among the reporters and editors the ratio is more extreme. I just read a quote from the editor or publisher or something at NY Times, who said (as I recall) that everyone in the news room and editorial staff is so far left that they don't even know how to cover a story from any other angle.

If you are a college grad, realize that at most colleges over 95% of instructors are left or far left - so your education started out from a very left perspective. Chances are, based on the available inputs to most of us, your idea of 'center' is probably somewhere to the left of where it really is. Of course I don't know you, I'm generalizing.

  IMHO any news organization that presumes to be nonpartisan should have approximately equal numbers of personnel of all common persuasions. AFAIK the only 'mainstream' news TV outlet with _any_ regular non-leftist onscreen personalities is Fox - I don't have cable and rarely see TV, so I could be mistaken on that by now. (plus also maybe Bloomberg and some other financial channels?) I think the experience of Juan Williams (is he still on Fox?) is a useful example.

Re:Sounds Familiar (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 2 years ago | (#41693961)

People measure left and right relative to their own views. There is no ideal objective measure. You can write surveys for it, but all they do is embody the writers ideas of what left and right should be. Political alignment is all relative. As many have pointed out before me, a party that American standards would classify as on the left would be considered as on the right by European standards.

There's an implicit view in your post that the center, neutral ground, is where media should be. This is debateable. Efforts to avoid bias could be themselves seen as a form of bias, if facts observed support the positions of one wing more than another. For a media establishment to then appear neutral can only be achieved by counter-biasing their reporting, to make two arguments appear evenly matched when they are rightfully not.

Re:Sounds Familiar (1)

garyebickford (222422) | about 2 years ago | (#41694567)

No argument there, though I would argue that the media can not rightly assert that they are neutral when their own demographic is so highly skewed from the population. Rather than a highly skewed reporting entity 'trying to be unbiased', I would prefer if their institutions weren't essentially echo chambers for their own biases - I would like to see two news reporters who actually disagree once in a while - in private, not to mention in public.

Of course, that's about as likely as a reporter who actually knows anything about the topic they are reporting on - history, technology, science, math, all those things they didn't take in school while they were learning to be 'journalists'.

IMHO only 'true believers' are in agreement with everything espoused by any party - we all have a self-contradictory mishmash of beliefs. We'd like to see X, but feel badly for those who will suffer as a result of X, and also feel badly for those who are suffering without X.

Note re counter-biasing - I had a boss like that once. At every review, he always had to come up with 'three good things, three bad things' about every employee. A triumph of algorithm over sense.

Re:Sounds Familiar (1)

JTsyo (1338447) | about 2 years ago | (#41694157)

How do you determine the center in reality other than by asking people what they think? The US center is overall more to the right when compared to Europe but compared to Asia we would be more to the left.

its all spelled out here-NOT BOOBY PIX (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41692079)

safe for work also----sorry its not booby pix----->http://pastebin.com/Rekh6jYD
---somebody has made a list, its out there , im not sure what to think of it
it looks like they spent a lot of time compiling the list and there again,
  im not sure what to think about it or if im supposed to think about it in this way
people are weird

captcha mutton--------bahh bahh bahhh

subject (1)

Legion303 (97901) | about 2 years ago | (#41692135)

They'll PAY YOU to troll? I'm quitting my job and moving to china!

I don't think (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41692727)

China's the only place you can get paid to troll.

Pirating (3, Insightful)

Taibhsear (1286214) | about 2 years ago | (#41692207)

You keep using that word. I do no think that word means what you think it means...

Personally, you welcome your new overlords (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#41692705)

"the '50 cent party' — a commenter paid half a dollar every time he derails an online debate in China. 'Essentially, these people are paid internet trolls; their job is to stop any meaningful discussion online about the government."

Discern your political leaning:

1. Oh my god, how corrupt!
2. Eh, companies astroturf, why not governments?
3. 50 cents? That's not a living wage!

Re:Personally, you welcome your new overlords (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41695853)

4. Find them and reeducate them with sticks.

50 Cent Party? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41693275)

Sounds more like a Kanye West party.

Did anyone else add Ai Weiwei (1)

mothrafokker (885654) | about 2 years ago | (#41694427)

To their list of prank phone names?

50 Cent Party Platform (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41694521)

1. Get Rich
2. Or Die Trying

Freenet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41695195)

Torrents are too easy to trace. Have a content hash key.
CHK@vpnUL3vxvFcSSco6lqNZkraPjfAh2Bk93O5cXIzVylg,I4hrjqe79tNMxKZBsvYYQY2n85G7FEngcP4u1I6l~sE,AAMC--8/AWW%20New%20Statesman.pdf

Hashes:
    SHA1: 2064f57343a4de9a84ebddf49c6fe7c5e9eb8c9e
    MD5: 626cac4d5702828c5ac6b59eac53eac6
    SHA256: 81aedadc3d265d2b3ef7526fb88c2dd07decef8cac29b6c1cc122ec28e43bc8f

Pirating? (1)

DirtyLiar (796951) | about 2 years ago | (#41695325)

They own it, and all the rights to it, so unless they have refused to give themselves permission to distribute their magazine, a concept that makes no sence, they have the right to distribute it any way they want.

Translation: They can't pirate their own stuff.

SMASH THE 50 CENT PARTY. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41695779)

Destroy it.

These are the sources of FUD in the universe.

Identify and destroy, any means necessary.

Dear Pot (UK) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41696973)

You are calling kettle black.

Remove all the street cameras in UK as a first step before talking about bad things in other countries. The next step would be to openly list the similar and more heinous atrocities committed by your country in those other countries up until 100 years ago.

Then, may be you can start throwing grains of sand at others.

50 Cent Party? (1)

ragnvaldr (2228990) | about 2 years ago | (#41697103)

I think the "Kanye West Party" might be more accurate in this case.

Pirate (1)

scarboni888 (1122993) | about 2 years ago | (#41698373)

You keep using that word. I do not think you know what it means.

"giving" it away (1)

chrismcb (983081) | about 2 years ago | (#41699287)

If you give it away, its not "pirating"
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>