Is it really fair to say that people in China have access to the Internet? Maybe it's better to say that they have access to some AOL-ized version of the Internet, not the actual Internet itself. The difference between an open Internet and a closed one is not just a small difference of degree; they are entirely different things.
I currently live in China and the firewall isn't as bad as it looks. I used to believe it was meant to censor information but I increasingly believe that it is meant to encourage the digital economy in China. The Chinese alternatives (Baidu, TaoBao, RenRen, etc.) would probably have a much harder time without the firewall. That being said, as a free market enthusiast, I disagree with this kind of politics.
It's surely also designed to eliminate news of unrest, such as the famous protests, political and economic dissent, and allow prompt and easy arrest of citizens saying the 'wrong thing' on-line, or expressing opinions that might damage the party's hold on power.
> I currently live in China and the firewall isn't as bad as it looks.
But isn't that because it's ultimately a losing battle? Can't that still be what it was meant for? Promoting Chinese alternatives just seems like a nice benefit in keeping it around.
I sometimes work with developers in China, it's pretty common for me to send a link to some tech info on a blog etc and then have to copy and email the content instead, since the site is blocked for them. Even one site I created myself, which has <10 visitors/day and barely any content was blocked at some point.
