over the can on google
 

for collaboration with the Chinese govt. to censor freedom.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/24/D8FBCF686.html

and this from the company whose motto is "don't be evil." I'm not making this up.

BBC was talking about this this morning and the analyst they interviewed was somewhat of an apologist for Google, noting that the Chinese Government was already censoring Google's U.S. site in China. She made it sound like Google was trying to be a positive force in opening up more information to the Chinese. Nonetheless, it's hard to listen to that when thinking about the motivation that easier access to 1.2 billion Chinese (200 million of them already online) must pose.

I can't wait until they all join here. Then this party will really get going.

I found this particularly interesting considering last week's talk that MSN and Yahoo gave up info to the US govt about kiddie porn search requests, while Google did not. In yesterday's SF Chronicle a letter to the editor praised Google and claimed that's why he's with Google, "Because it protects my privacy." (Is that really the motivating factor? How long have you known about this?) The same edition of the paper carried an update on the story saying that MSN and Yahoo actually did not turn over that info. Now this from Google.

I have a really good friend from school that's Chinese and she watched the presidential debates in '04. She was over at our place a couple of nights later and my wife asked her how she liked them. In her very good British English, "Well, it was interesting but it's different from our form of democracy." Yes it is, yes it is.

LOL her "form of democracy."

A friend of mine was just in China to pick up a girl (that no one in China wants--at least she wasn't the victim of female infantcide) for adoption, anyway, talk to some young adults who were very surprised to learn that in the USA you can have as many kids as you want.

it's a whole nother world. China's a mess. they are getting richer, but the rural poor are not sharing in the bounty. that will lead to some very big problems.

Quick question... what is "Over the can on..."? I had never seen it until Brian on CB posted it about 50 times yesterday.

Also, I may have posted this here before, but one of the BYU poli sci professors wrote a book not too long ago saying that China is in for big problems soon because the percentage of males will be so much greater than females. I guess this has historically lead to problems. If I had time, it'd probably be an interesting read.

Bare Branches

What happens to a society that has too many men? In this provocative book, Valerie Hudson and Andrea den Boer argue that, historically, high male-to-female ratios often trigger domestic and international violence. Most violent crime is committed by young unmarried males who lack stable social bonds. Although there is not always a direct cause-and-effect relationship, these surplus men often play a crucial role in making violence prevalent within society. Governments sometimes respond to this problem by enlisting young surplus males in military campaigns and high-risk public works projects. Countries with high male-to-female ratios also tend to develop authoritarian political systems.

Hudson and den Boer suggest that the sex ratios of many Asian countries, particularly China and India -- which represent almost 40 percent of the world's population -- are being skewed in favor of males on a scale that may be unprecedented in human history. Through offspring sex selection (often in the form of sex-selective abortion and female infanticide), these countries are acquiring a disproportionate number of low-status young adult males, called "bare branches" by the Chinese.

Hudson and den Boer argue that this surplus male population in Asia's largest countries threatens domestic stability and international security. The prospects for peace and democracy are dimmed by the growth of bare branches in China and India, and, they maintain, the sex ratios of these countries will have global implications in the twenty-first century.

I personally feel China and India are on a collision course with one another with the rest of the world (US included) getting caught in the wake.

The days of a single super power, both politically and economically, are quickly coming to an end. The new economies in the east already dictate the price of fuel in North America. How long before their respective militaries are equally equipped and capable as the US military?

It's not just fuel, either. One of my clients is a manufacturer of heavy euiqpment in Europe and they complain constantly of the difficulty of finding quality raw steel products they need for their machines. They attribute the shortage to China, which is essentially absorbing all the steel the world's prdocuers can supply, driving up prices for the rest of the world.

Flaunting ignorance time: What does 'over the can' mean?

r.f.

For the love of all that is holy, what does "over the can" mean?

I may be wrong, but it sounds like going #2.