Google talks with Chinese government

Google has entered into discussions with China regarding censorship requirements for their Chinese search engine, Google.cn. Google initially agreed in 2006 to allow the Chinese government to censor its searches with the promise that should Chinese restrictions substantially clash with Google's vision of disseminating information, they would reconsider their agreement. On its official blog Google has announced that although China has not increased legal pressure, recent attempts to hack into the Gmail accounts of several prominent Chinese human rights advocates has it reconsidering their policy.

Google reports that hackers recently broke into the Gmail accounts of several Chinese human rights advocates living outside the country. Google believes that the attacks were mainly thwarted, however subject lines and creation dates from a couple of accounts may have been stolen. It also alleges that these hackers targeted other internet sights including finance, Internet, media, and chemical businesses using malware downloaded onto the users' computers.

Google decided that the attempted-hacks compromise their company vision of promoting human rights and will discuss these matters with China.

Google's talks marks only one of many debates about internet censorship in China. This summer China considered requiring the censoring software Green Dam on all computers. After significant controversy and opposition from scholars and intellectuals China changed course.

Invictus and nationalism

Today I went to see Invictus with the fam. My brother is heading back to the Y tomorrow so we went as a family--sans one of my rebellious brothers-- to watch Invictus. Andy, the brother who is leaving, is a big sports fan; so I assume we chose it partly because of his tastes.

Overall, I enjoyed the film. I thought Morgan Freeman did a great job portraying Nelson Mandela and the subject--overcoming racism-- is something that is always touching and inspiring. Although at times I thought the music was a bit saccharine and the last ten minutes of the crucial rugby match are all in slow motion. (10 minutes of slow motion grunting and growling gets a bit annoying).

I found my self slipping into collegiate literary analysis mode at times about the nationalistic themes in the film. Nationalism is basically the belief that a nation, whether it be the U.S., South Africa, or China, has some distinct characteristic which it is based upon. Oftentimes you see nationalist sentiment rears its head in the form of ethnic nationalism--e.g. Slavic Yougoslavia-- but it can also appear as civic nationalism such as the belief the Founding Fathers had about a nation where all men are created equal and so forth.

I have conflicted views of nationalism. I see the benefit that it has in establishing higher civic codes like with our Constitution (and Nelson Mandela's nationalism in the film). But I also dislike how often nationalism becomes something that divides us. I happen to think that a person is still a person whether they are born in America or China or even Canadia [sic]; and to create artificial boundaries because of borders is harmful to collaboration between peoples.

In American political discourse, it seems the right uses stronger nationalistic discourse. I am not a huge of fan of the 'Mericah, love it or leave it, statements. I prefer some form of collaboration with the rest of the world. But that is me.

However, (back to my original point), I really enjoyed Mandela's take on nationalism. Here Mandela had been elected as the president of South Africa after apartheid was overturned and blacks finally allowed the vote. Instead of retaliating eye for an eye, he took the higher ground. Inspired by a vision of South Africa where everyone was equal he refused to use political power and to strike back at the white minority who used to rule the black majority.

So in the words of Jesse Jackson (and now Harry Reid), my take home message is "can't we all just get along?"

Winter reads and finals

In response to my one reader's request (I didn't know that I had a reader), I will write again.

I just finished my third law school final in three days. Monday and Tuesday's exams went ok, although the eight-hour take home exam yesterday was kind of rough. But today's was a hundred times worse.

For the uninitiated, law school exams basically give you a story with a bunch of legal issues and then ask you to analyze the legal issues. This was one of those exams where about half-way in I couldn't see any more legal issues. Not a good sign.

I kept on writing, and decided I would stop thinking--that I was being too critical and should just write. Surprisingly, when I stopped think so hard I saw some more issues and wrote about them. It will probably turn out alright--sometimes I just like to complain.

I picked out some books for my Winter Break. (I do need to work on a brief for a class over break and should look for a job; and I want to play hockey; and I have a life, kind of; but I really want to catch up on my reading over the break). Depending on what I get for Christmas, it looks like I will read "The Stranger," ("L'Etranger" for you Francophones), by Camus, a book by Judge Posner on jurisprudence (Posner is a law professor at UChicago, jurisprudence means legal philosophies), and a book on the state of Climate Change science. Fun stuff, huh?

I may start The Stranger tonight. I think Camus' existential crisis would be a joyful reprise of my admin law exam. After that my brain will feel like this.