Chinese Government Cracks Down on Online Mapping Sites

About Directions

Special Announcement

Newsletter Sign Up

Calendar

Syndicate This Blog

RSS 0.91 feed

RSS 1.0 feed

RSS 2.0 feed

Top Referers

myteams.dot.ga.gov (88)
planetgs.com (75)
www.thegisforum.com (72)
www.spatialsciences.org.au (32)
manomano.livejournal.com (28)

Our Points

Wednesday, March 26. 2008

Chinese Government Cracks Down on Online Mapping Sites

China's Xinhua news agency reports that government feels that illegal mapping and GIS sites threaten state security and thus eight departments will keep a closer eye on them. Presumably, some will be shut down.

The State Bureau of Surveying and Mapping said there are some 10,000 such sites which show maps "without approval."

Posted by Adena Schutzberg at 06:00 | Comments (9) | Trackbacks (0) |

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

The Chinese Government says, "illegal mapping..." What about illegal "Time?" Actually, that would be cool, not to know what time it is.

[offensive joke removed]

#1 My Dog Hunts on 2008-03-27 09:55 (Reply)

Defining "illegal" can be quite different in from region to region. For example, prostitution is legal in Vegas but illegal for the rest of the country.

Recently, Google had to withdraw imagery of US army bases for national security reasons, and no other country has right to criticize about this because it's US government's own business. Read this from LA Times:
http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-fi-google7mar07,1,6259319.story

Similarly, it is the sole business of the Chinese Government to lay down its own laws and regulations to keep order of its national security. Nobody else has the right to point fingers for this either.

#2 robyin on 2008-03-27 11:38 (Reply)

OK, I'll be the devils advocate.

Actually, prostitution is not legal in Vegas... It is legal in all other cities in Navada and also is legal in Rhode Island, the Netherlands, Germany and is, as they say, the oldest trade in all parts of the world, legal or illegal. It still takes place in Portland, Oklahoma City and everywhere.

My point being, laws are trying to regulate things that can't be regulated. Time exists. Place exists. Killing the Internet would stop online mapping, but nothing else. I can give coordinates of 4100 & 16095; use your boyscout handbook and you have a location. Taking mapping sites offline won't stop anyone that truely wants spatial element information. It does show the restrictive, knee-jerk of a government, be it China or Cheney.

#3 My Dog Hunts on 2008-03-27 12:36 (Reply)

Thanks for correcting my mistakes regarding the "oldest trade".

I agree that taking mapping sites offline won't stop anyone that truely wants spatial element information.

However, if you read through the repot, the government is not trying to kill internet mapping as a whole. It is trying to set up regulartions and standards for what can be published and what can't, as well as correcting mistakes for maps that show wrong nation boundaries, etc.

"Some websites publish sensitive or confidential geographical information, which might leak state secrets and threaten national security," Min Said.

"It stipulated foreign organizations and individuals who intend to engage in surveying and mapping must obtain approval from the central government and accept supervision from local governments."

Taking maps showing wrong nation boundaries or security-sensitive info offsite, in my humble opinion, is actually what a sensible and responsible government should do, either it's USA or China.

#4 roybin on 2008-03-27 12:57 (Reply)

Wrong National Boundaries? How do you govern bad information?

Should the Government not allow someone to send me an email informing me that a presidental canidate is Muslum? Or that if I don't foward a link to shamrocks.com to seven people, that I will have bad luck for thirteen years? I wish they could stop these.

And I do think blocking information should be an option. Why should I let someone see what is in my backyard by going to google.maps or my County government GIS website! We should all be able to block.

But the Internet is a Pandor's Box and there is no such thing as a responsible government unless you are living in a small nordic village.

#5 My Dog Hunts (Link) on 2008-03-27 15:05 (Reply)

The aspects of China's initiatives to 'block' certain sites or activities -- is more in relation to the histerics of social manipulation, than it ever has been about 'national security'.

Just as our own government's administration has fought to ensure various contextual relationships of information to be either in or out of the hands of its nation's citizens -- one must agree that both countries are operating in a very similar manner -- and under the guise of 'national security'.

The reality remains -- that 'national security' is also dependent on the freedoms of its people to place its own government in check with such data and information. That is the basis of our democracy -- not simply the right the vote. Else, we would not have a media.

So many attempt to control it, however. A very sad thing to observe, really.

#6 Daniel (Link) on 2008-03-27 17:40 (Reply)

Sorry this bugs me no matter where I read/hear this. We don't live in a democracy. We live in a constitutional republic. Live in, meaning the US.

KoS

#7 KoS on 2008-03-27 19:02 (Reply)

Regardless of what you call it, KoS. There is no excuse for limiting the potentials of citizen freedoms in this nation, as they are the fourth and primary balance to the security of its Liberty.

#8 Daniel (Link) on 2008-03-28 12:57 (Reply)

Not sure if you mean: you in the generic or specific to me.

If to me. Then all I can say is, pick up a poly sci book and look at the definitions. I'm not defining the terms, I'm correctly applying those definitions.

If in the generic and to your last point. I agree, but there are always limits. And those limits can change time to time depending on the circumstances.

On the flip side, unrestricted "freedoms" can lead to an insecure nation. There is always a balance. I guess the scales of balance look different depending on ones own political and personal biases.

KoS

#9 KoS on 2008-03-29 11:32 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Advertisers

Polls

What's your opinion of the quality of Google's "new" U.S. dataset?

	November '09
Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun
						1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28	29
30