(转帖)艾泽拉斯大陆的钟声

作者：春天上树

《网瘾战争》迅速流行！总点击量已超过100万，有人称之为“2010年第一部大片”。整部影片以九城和网易争夺魔兽世界代理权事件为基本框架，把对游戏内容的审批和修改，两家公司的明争暗斗，文化部、新闻署的斗争，电击专家和陶宏开都嘲讽了一遍，另外还穿插了大量的2009年网络热点事件，比如绿坝，钓鱼执法，七十码，躲猫猫等，也反映了高房价等当今年轻人所面临的一系列巨大压力。

就这样一个视频，仅仅出自几个80后，90后的手笔，初衷仅仅为了游戏而呼喊，但《网瘾战争》的影响力不仅仅限于魔兽玩家，甚至是不玩魔兽的网友也在推荐。共同的真实经历最容易唤起共鸣，《网瘾战争》的台词真实、熟悉、草根、粗野而有力，让人产生共鸣。最后一段主人公号召所有的普通玩家举起手，共同反抗对手的时候，有网友哭了。有网友评论说，“当看着《网瘾战争》中那些游戏角色举起自己的手，我感受到的是如海潮般的共鸣。再小的力量也是一种力量，再小的声音也是一种声音，这次，我不想再沉默。”而视频下面的跟帖中，更是有大量的网友在“举手”。摘录一些网友的评论：

—— 我把《网瘾战争》归入了电影这个行列，并致以贺岁片的称号，希望不会因此而致使这部视频、影片失色。
——当看着《网瘾战争》中那些小人举起自己的手，我感受到的是如海潮般的共鸣。再小的力量也是一种力量，再小的声音也是一种声音，这次，我不想再沉默。
——我本以为我早已经被++习惯了，没想到还有一天会为WOW掉眼泪。
——如果昨天问我09年做好看的电影是什么也许我会说是阿凡达，但是今天，我一定会说是网瘾战争。
——虽然我不玩魔兽，可是这个片子我看哭了。
——当听到魔兽玩家的大段独白时，我为美丽的汉语而激动莫名。感谢你们，复活了这种伟大的语言！
——或许是我活了二十多年，唯一一部可以在视频里面哭着喊着说出我心里想说的所有话语的一部，国产的影片。这是真正的力量，可以刻在人心的力量。

艾泽拉斯大陆的钟声，意味着宣传、舆情机制的严重失误。

在中国，宣传领域从来都是敏感而重要的领域，相关部门也从来都是重要部门，其权力巨大甚至超越法律，机构庞大这官僚等信息沟通不灵的情况，加之资本环境的结合，部门逐利的动机，使其不断扩展自己的权力，触角伸向一切相关领域，但这种肆无忌惮的触角造成的各种结果却一再伤害宣传、舆情部门的公信力、民众接受度，最终伤害宣传的总体目标。

文化部和新闻出版总署为了各自的部门利益，为了各自所代表的资本利益而争夺，妄顾总体大局，利用文化、出版等敏感领域的重要权力进行魔兽游戏控制权的争夺，不惜让魔兽关停长达一年之久，最终激起玩家的强烈逆反情绪。这种逆反情绪不仅仅针对魔兽关停本身，从台词中就可以看出，这种逆反情绪已扩展到社会生活中的各个事件，从绿坝、70码、躲猫猫到钓鱼执法，最终指向“金子塔顶的服务者们”！可以这么说，文化部和新闻总署，已经成功的伤害了民族主义的坚定支持者；已经成功的把出于民族主义的单纯爱国热情转变为对社会的不满！

类似事例不仅仅出现在网游，现阶段，喉舌机构营造舆论的效率已经变得极其低下的，甚至是反面的。从“很黄很暴力”到“心绪不宁”的虚假新闻，再到现在的“各地群众支持封杀bt”虚假新闻，要么是敷衍到不愿去学校找一个真正的学生来采访！要么是轻视受众，采用老式的落伍式的高高在上的教育姿态，并在报道之后把评论关停。类似的低级错误一犯再犯，清楚的表明了喉舌机构低下的效率和其自我完善功能的丧失。能进入喉舌机构的从业人员，本都是业界翘楚，本不该犯这种低级错误，更不该缺乏基本的自我修正能力，但人一旦被制度化后，其行为无疑趋近制度。

同样，在google退出，电信运营商审查短信等时间沸沸扬扬之时，广电总局又闹出23日阿凡达强制下线、国产电影要占到总体时间2/3的新闻，这些事件都无一例外的激起反感。

这些都表明了宣传机制的失误，更重要的是，基于其本身的制度，和现今的社会现实，这是很难改变的。一方面，制度动机下，权力必然巨大，机构必然庞大，官僚主义不可避免，信息上传下达必然缓慢。另一方面，无远弗届的触角必然和逐利的资本结合，组织目标经过层层代理到达触角末端时已经让位于资本目标，仅仅成为一个堂皇的借口。从对网吧的管理就可以看出，庙堂之上对网吧严控的目的到江湖之中就变成基层部门获取利益的借口！

艾泽拉斯大陆的钟声，意味着民众逆反情绪在年龄段上的迅速扩大。

视频的作者说：“我作为一个游戏玩家，本来是这个社会上最无害的一群人，但现在却无法在自己的服务器与朋友一起玩游戏。”游戏的主要玩家，80后，90后，本来是迫于生活压力关注自身不问政治的人！本来是政治上最无害的一群人！本来是民族主义最坚定的支持者！现在，却被激怒了。

500 万！500万玩家！500万个年轻人！在加上身边的同龄人，一个非常庞大的人群。人在这个年龄段正是世界观和政治观念形成并稳定下来的阶段，任何外来刺激都会对其产生重要影响并固化的思维中。再过10年、20年，当他们进入中年，占据中国社会的主流了，他们会怎么对待自己周遭的世界呢？记忆中曾经的“憋屈” 又会怎么影响他们的政治选择呢？

艾泽拉斯大陆的钟声表明草根远比书生有力！

共同的经历让人产生认同；共同的经历让人落泪；共同的经历让人在观看视频时情不自禁的“举手”。简单、悲愤、粗野语言带来的共鸣；熟悉的各类事件带来的会心苦笑；都让这段为时一个多小时的视频成为一个经典。较之书生们悲情的自我牺牲式的文字，这段视频对思想的震荡，对现实的批评，对民众的触动都更加强烈！其意义也必将更加深远！

艾泽拉斯大陆的钟声意味着80、90后在公共事务上的响亮呼声。

这种亮相带有鲜明的人群烙印：以自我为中心，但仍向外扩展的社会关注方式；虚拟社会对他们的强大影响和虚拟社会带来的人群认同以及在现实中更加快速的链式反应；以互联网、多媒体、为代表的技术化的言论方式，今后带有类似鲜明特征的呼声会更多的在网上流传和表现。

从qq聊天、到网游、到《网瘾战争》，从被妖魔化到反妖魔化。从电子商务的泡沫到电子商务的营业从某种程度上都可以证明这样一个现象——作为中国互联网最主要的使用者，80后，90后的年龄就是中国互联网的年龄。30而立，随着80后、90后的成长，以后的互联网将会在社会公共事务中占据更加重要的地位。

高清版下载地址

电驴

ed2k://|file|[%E7%88%B1%E8%80%81%E8%99%8E%E6%B8%B8%E5%88%9B%E4%BD%9C%E5%9B%A2%E9%98%9F][%E7%AC%AC3%E4%BD%9C.%E7%BD%91%E7%98%BE%E6%88%98%E4%BA%89][GB][1024×768.x264.AAC].mp4|784774019|67F298CA261D14367195C922BA49CE66|/

BT磁力链接

magnet:?xt=urn:btih:NQCQFWMQKRTYK5UH5NBX2JTTBE5Q3SRD&dn=%E7%9C%8B%E4%BD%A0%E5%A6%B9%E4%B9%8B%E3%80%8A%E7%BD%91%E7%98%BE%E6%88%98%E4%BA%89%E3%80%8B%E4%B8%8B%E8%BD%BD%E7%89%88.mp4&xl=784774019

Firefox的广告，强大

希拉里·克林顿：互联网的自由(转自Financial Times)

网友翻译稿：

互联网自由
2010年1月21日
在华盛顿的新闻博物馆，美国国务卿希拉里·克林顿发表的演讲。
谢谢你，Alberto，为你这样好的介绍。能够到新闻展览厅来我很高兴。这个机构是对我们的一些最有价值的自由的一座纪念碑，有这个机会来讨论这些自由怎么来应对21世纪的挑战，我对此心怀感激。我高兴能够在这里看到许多朋友和前同事。
这是关于一项重要的议题的重要的演讲。但是在我开始之前，我想要简短地谈一谈海地。在过去的9天里，海地的人民和全世界的人民加入到一起来应对这一令人震惊的悲剧。我们这个半球曾经看到过艰难困苦，但是还少有像现在我们面对太子港这样的先例。信息网络在我们的应对中起到了关键的作用。在地震过后的几个小时内，我们和私人领域的伙伴们协同工作，设立了“HAITI”这条短信活动让全美国的手机用户可以向赈灾活动捐款。这一举动就是美国人民的慷慨地表现示例，而且它为赈灾筹集了超过$2500万美元的善款。
信息系统在地面上也起到了举足轻重的作用。
技术社团设立了交互式的地图来帮助确认人们的需要和目标资源。在星期一，一位7岁大的女孩和2名妇女从倒塌的超市废墟中由美国的救援队救出，之前她们发送了一条呼救的手机短信。这些例子是一个更为宏大的现象的体现。
信息网络的扩散正在我们的星球上形成一套新的神经系统。当海地或湖南有事发生的时候，其他的人可以实时地了解——从真实的人那儿。而我们也可以立刻行动。美国人能够立刻在灾难之后施以援手，被陷在超市里的女孩能够以我们在一个时代之前所不能做到的方式与我们取得联系。同样的原则适用于整个人类。当我们今天坐在这个时候，你们当中的任何人——或我们的任何一个孩子——都可以拿出我们每天随身携带的工具，把这一讨论向全球几十亿人传播。
在许多方面，信息从来没有如此自由。现在，比历史上的任何时候都有更多的方法将更多的思想传递给更多的人。即使是在威权国家中，信息系统也在帮助人们发现新的事实，让政府变得更有责任。
在奥巴拉总统十一月份访问中国的时候，他举行的一场市政厅会议中，在谈及网络的部分他重点强调了互联网的重要性。在回答一个通过互联网提出的问题时，他说信息流动的越自由，社会就会变得越强壮。他谈到了信息可以帮助公民们把政府锻造得更有责任，产生新的思想，和鼓励创造力。美国对这一真理的信念让我在今天讲这番话。
但是当联系变得前所未有的紧密中，我们必须承认这些技术并不是纯粹的好事。这些工具也被用来和破坏人类的进步和政治权利。正如钢铁可以被用来修建医院或机关枪，核能力可以为城市提供能源或摧毁它，现在的信息网络和由它们支撑的技术也有好有坏。帮助组织争取自由的运动的网络也可以让基地组织喷出仇恨，对平民施暴。有可能让政府更开放和提升透明度的技术也同样可能被政府劫持，用来打击异见者和抵制人权。
去年，我们看到了威胁信息自由的障碍。中国、突尼斯和乌兹别克斯坦提升了对互联网的内容审核。在越南，受欢迎的社交网站突然无法连接。上的星期五，在埃及，30名博主和运动家被拘禁。虽然很明显这些技术的传播在改变我们的世界，不明朗的是这些改变会如何影响人权和世界上大多数人的福利。
让技术与原则同步
新技术本身不会在自由和进步的过程中选择方向。但是美国会。我们主张一个所有人都可以平等接触到知识和思想的单一互联网。我们认识到这个世界的信息平台将由我们和他人共同打造。
这一挑战可能前所未有，但是我们要帮助能够自由地交换思想这一责任可以追溯到这个国家的诞生之初。宪法的第一修正案中的话就刻在这一建筑的前面一块重达50 吨的田纳西大理石碑上。每一代美国人都曾经为保护这块石头上的价值观而努力。
富兰克林·罗斯福在一九四一年他的四次关于自由的演讲中塑造了这些观念。那时，美国正面临着一系列的灾难和信心危机。但是这一信念：世界上的所有人都享有言论自由、宗教自由、免于欲望和免于恐惧的自由，则超越了他的时代的重重困难。
多年之后，我的一位英雄，埃莉诺·罗斯福（译者注：安娜·埃莉诺·罗斯福是总统罗斯福的夫人，一位不同寻常的第一夫人，她不是以传统的白宫女主人的形象，而是作为杰出的社会活动家、政治家、外交家和作家载入史册。）也曾为了让世界人权宣言采用这些原则作为基石而努力。他们为后来的每一代人指引了方向—引导着我们，激励着我们，在我们面临未知的时候让我们奋勇向前。
当技术突飞猛进，我们必须重新思考这些传统。我们需要将技术的进步与我们的原则同步起来。奥巴马总统在接受诺贝尔奖的时候，他谈到了需要建立起一个建立“在每一位个人的与生俱来的权利和自尊之上”的和平世界。我在乔治敦大学关于人权的演讲中也看到了我们必须找到方法让人权落在实处。今天我们认为要在21世纪的数字化前线保障这些自由是当务之急。
世界上有许多其他的网络—有些帮助转移人员或资源；有些则帮助有共同兴趣或协同工作的人们相互沟通。但是互联网是可以扩大所有其他网络的能力和潜能的放大镜。这也是为什么它为其用户保障了基本的自由。
言论自由
基本自由中的首条就是言论自由。这些自由不再仅仅定义为公民是否可以到城市中心广场批评政府而不担心受到报复。博客、电子邮件、社交网络和短信已经为交换思想打开了新的论坛—也为审查制度创造了新的目标。
就在今天我讲话的时候，政府审查者则正在拼命从历史纪录中抹去我的话。但是历史自身已经谴责了这些伎俩。两个月前我在德国庆祝柏林墙倒塌二十周年。聚集在那个仪式上的领袖们赞扬了曾经在屏障物的远端，透过传递被称为地下出版物的小册子为反对压迫做出榜样的勇敢的男女们。这些小册子质疑了东区的独裁者所宣称的动机，许多人因为散播它们而付出昂贵的代价。但是这些话穿透了铁幕的水泥墙和铁丝网。
柏林墙代表了一个分裂的世界，而它定义了整个时代。今天，这个墙的残存部分就保留在这个博物馆中——这才是属于它们的地方。我们时代的新的标志性基础设施是互联网。
它代表的是连接而不是分裂。但是即使网络在全球各国迅速扩张，虚拟的围墙也正在替代过去实体的围墙而被竖立起来。
一些国家建立了电子屏障，防止他们的人民接入到世界网络中。他们将搜索引擎返回的结果的中删去字句，名字和短语。他们侵犯了公民的隐私权，而这些人不过是发表了一些非暴力的政治性言论。这些行为和世界人权宣言相违背，这一宣言告诉我们所有人都有权“从任何媒介寻找、接受、传递不论国界的信息和思想。”随着这些限制性行为的扩张，一张新的信息铁幕正在把世界分离。越过这些屏障，录像和博客帖子正在成为我们这个时代新的地下出版物。
正如过去的独裁统治一样，政府们把目标对准了运用这些工具的独立思考者。在伊朗总统选举之后的示威中，小小的手机记录下来一位年轻女子被血腥谋杀的场面，成为控诉政府的残暴的电子起诉书。我们看到报道说，生活在国外的伊朗人在线贴出对他们的国家领导人的批评，他们在伊朗的家人却被隔离在传播之外。尽管有来自政府的高度恐吓，伊朗的勇敢的公民记者们持续地使用新技术向世界和其他公民们展示在他们的国家发生了什麽。通过为他们自己的人权而疾呼，伊朗人民鼓舞了全世界。
这种勇气正在重新定义技术可以怎样用来传播真理和暴露不公。
所有的社会都认识到言论自由有其边界。我们不会容忍那些向他人鼓吹暴力，如基地组织这些人——在此刻——正在用互联网来屠杀无辜人群。基于种族、性别、或性取向而将目标指向个人的仇恨性言论是应当受到指责的。很遗憾的事实是，这些问题也是这个国际化社区必须一起面对的与日俱增的挑战。那些用互联网来招募恐怖分子或散布窃取来的知识产权的行为离不开网络的匿名性。但是这些挑战不应该成为政府有系统的侵犯以互联网来实现和平的政治目标的人们的基本权益和隐私权的借口。
宗教自由
正如总统在开罗所说，“宗教自由是让人们可以共同生活的核心。”在我们寻找可以扩大对话的途径时，互联网可以提供不可估量的前景。我们已经开始让美国的学生和穆斯林社区的年轻人在世界范围内讨论全球性挑战。我们会继续用这一工具在信仰不同宗教的人群中鼓励探讨。
但是，有些国家，却利用互联网来搜寻和掐掉人们的信仰。去年在沙特阿拉伯，一人因为在博客上贴出了关于基督教的内容而被投入监狱。在哈佛的一项研究中发现，沙特政府屏蔽了许多关于印度教、犹太教、基督教，甚至伊斯兰教的网页。越南和中国等国采用了类似的方法来限制接触宗教信息。
正如技术不应该被用于惩罚和平的政治性演讲，它们也不应该被用于迫害和压制宗教少数团体。信者总是可以在更高层面上的网络中遨游。但是像互联网和社交网络这样的连接技术可以人们认为合适的方式来提升崇拜神的能力，让有相同信仰的人们聚集，从有其他信仰的人那里了解更多。我们必须努力推进线上宗教自由，就像我们在生活中所做的那样。
免于贫困的自由
当然，还有成千上万的人们的生活中还没有这些技术。在我们的世界，才华可以平等的传播，但是机会却不能。从过去的经验，我们知道，当人们不能接触到知识、市场、资金和机会的时候要提升社会和经济的发展常常力不从心，有时是徒劳无功。在这一点上，互联网也可以成为一个伟大的机会均分器。让人们能够接触到知识和潜在市场，网络可以创造出从无到有的机会。
去年，我亲眼目睹了一次。在肯尼亚，当农民开始使用移动银行技术，他们的收入增长了30%之多。在孟加拉，超过300,000的人通过手机注册学习英语。在非洲的撒哈拉，女性创业者用互联网获得小额贷款，与全球市场相连。这些进步的例子都可以被成千上万处于世界经济金字塔底部的人民拷贝。在许多情况下，互联网、手机和其他的互连技术可以做到绿色革命为农业实现的经济增长。你现在可以以非常低的投入获得巨大的产出。一项世界银行的研究发现，在一个典型的发展中社会，手机增长10%可以创造出人均ＧＤＰ接近1% 的年增长率。为了更直观地说明这一点，对印度来说，这一增长率可以被转换为每年增加约100亿美元。
连接全球信息系统就象现代化的一个坡道。在这些技术出现的最初的岁月里，许多人认为他们将把世界划分为有产者和无产者。这没有发生。今天使用中的手机有40亿台—许多是小供应商，三轮车夫和其他从传统眼光来看不能获得教育和机会的人。信息系统已经成为了一个伟大的水平仪，我们可以用它来使人们脱贫。
免于恐惧的自由
我们有很多理由充满希望，利用通讯网络和互联技术人们可以获得怎样的成就。但是总有人会利用全球信息系统而行不义。暴力的极端分子、犯罪联盟、性侵犯者和威权政府都想利用全球网络。正如恐怖分子利用我们社会的开放性执行他们的阴谋，暴力的极端分子利用互联网来推行激进和恐吓。当我们努力推进这些自由时，我们必须和那些以通讯网络为破坏和恐惧工具的行为作斗争。
政府和公民必须充满信心，保障国家安全和经济繁荣的核心系统是安全的，适应力很强。这些系统比那些攻击网页的小黑客们要强大。
如果我们不能信赖信息系统的安全性，我们在电子商务中采用网上银行，和守护价值几百亿美金的知识产权的能力就危在旦夕了。
针对这些系统的干扰要求政府、私人机构、和国际社会的协同应对。当骇客罪犯和组织一起攻击系统想获得盈利时，当儿童色情和的非法贩卖女人/女孩的社会顽疾转移到网上时，我们需要更多的工具来帮助执法部门与司法部门合作。我们对欧盟的《网络犯罪条约》而鼓掌。这能协助追讨这些违法行为而进行国际合作。
作为政府我们已经采取了行动，有专门的部门来加强全球网络安全所需外交解决方案。超过半打的不同机构已经在这一问题上协同工作，两年前我们设立了一个办公室来协调虚拟世界中的外交政策。我们已经向联合国和多边论坛提出了这一议题，将网络安全设进世界的日程中。奥巴马总统也任命了一位新的全球网络空间政策协调人，他将帮助我们更紧密的工作确保我们的网络自由、安全和可靠。
政权、恐怖分子和那些作为它们代理的人必须知道，美国会保护我们的网络。那些想在我们的社会和其他社会中干扰信息自由流动的人是对我们的经济、政府和公民社会的威胁。参与了网络攻击的国家和个人将承担后果和国际社会的谴责。在一个相互关联的实践中，对一个国家的网络进行攻击就是在攻击所有。为了强调这一点，我们会在国家中创造行为规范，鼓励尊重全球互联的共识。
互联的自由
我今天想讲的最后一个自由是从前面我已经提及的4个中引申而来：互联的自由—政府不应该阻止人们连接到互联网、网站或彼此相连。互联的自由就是网络空间的集会自由。它让每个人都可以上线、相会、有希望在进步之中合作。一旦你上了网，你不必成为一个大亨或摇滚明星就可以对社会产生巨大的影响。
一位13岁的男孩引爆了针对孟买恐怖袭击的最大规模的公众反响。他用社交网络来组织献血和捐献宗教性的慰藉书籍。在柬埔寨，一位失业的工程师将全球190个城市超过1,200万人聚集在一起抗议哥伦比亚革命武装力量（FARC）的恐怖运动。这一抗议是有史以来最大规模的反恐怖主义示威。接下来的数个星期中，FARC在其军事行动的十年里出现了最多的逃跑和离队情况。在墨西哥，一位受够了和贩毒关联的暴力行为的匿名的公民发出的一封电子邮件滚雪球似地成为了横扫这个国家32个州的大型示威。互联网可以帮助人性对抗暴力和极端主义。
在伊朗、摩尔多瓦和许多其他国家，在线进行组织都是推进民主，让公民有能力抗议可疑的选举结果的重要工具。即使是在美国这样有着成熟的民主体系的国家，我们也看到了这些工具改变历史的力量。你们当中应该还有人记得2008年的总统选举……（笑）
保障接入这些科技手段的自由能够改变社会，对每个人来说也至关重要。我最近听说了一位医生近乎绝望想要为他的女儿诊断罕见的疾病的故事。在咨询了24名专家之后，他还是没有获得答案。他最终得到了诊断——和治愈良方——用的是互联网搜索引擎。这也是为什么自由接入搜索引擎的技术如此重要的原因之一。
将原则应用于政策
今天我已经提出的这些原则将指导我们应对互联网自由问题和使用新技术的策略。我还想讲一讲我们如何把它们应用在实践中。美国已经承诺提供民主的、经济的和科技的资源来推动这些自由。我们是一个由来自于世界各个国家和分散在全球利益的移民组成的国家。我们的外交政策要有这样的理念作为前提，当人们和国家之间的合作增加时，不会有哪个国家比我们受益更多。在冲突分隔了各国时，也不会有哪个国家肩负着比我们更重的使命。
我们就在获得和互联随之而来的机会的最佳位置。随着这么多新科技的诞生，我们的责任是监督它们以善的方式被应用。要做到这一点，我们需要为21世纪的治国之术而发展能力。
重新编制我们的政策和优先级并不容易。为新技术而做调整从来都不容易。当电报被发明的时候，在外交圈里它引起了焦虑，因为每天都要接到华盛顿的指示，这种前景看起来不大受欢迎。而就象我们的外交官们最终掌握了电报技术，我有很强的信心世界也能从这些信息技术中挖掘到潜力。
我很骄傲，国务院已经在帮助40多个国家中受政府压迫而沉默的人。我们在联合国中也将提起对这一问题的注意，包括将互联网自由作为我们向联合国人权理事会提交的第一份解决方案中的一部分。
我们也支持发展新的工具，能够帮助公民实现他们的言论自由权利，绕过含政治目的的审查，我们将在全球奋发努力，确认需要工具的人们能够得到它们，用的是本地语言，能获得为了他们安全进入互联网所需的培训。美国帮助他们已经有一段时间了。美国人民和那些审核互联网的国家都应当明白，我们的政府为能提升互联网自由而自豪 。
我们需要把这些工具放到全球使用它们的人士手中，让他们以此来推进民主和人权、对抗气候变化和灾难，实现建立奥巴马总统所说的无核世界的目标，以及鼓励可持续的经济发展。
这也是为什么今天我宣布：到明年，我们将和产业伙伴、学术界、和非政府组织一起形成联盟，加强互联科技的能力，并把它们应用在我们的外交目标上。依靠移动技术、绘图软件和其他的新工具，我们可以让公民如虎添翼，充分体现出外交的杠杆效应。我们也能解决当前市场的创新不足问题。
让我给你们一个例子：创建一个手机应用，可以让人们在响应度，效率，和腐败程度上为政府部门评分。让这个想法成为现实的硬件已经在几十亿潜在用户的手中了。开发和使用一个软件相对来说更便宜。如果人们能够利用这一工具，能够带来让我们更好地部署外交援助、提高生活标准、为那些有责任心的政府鼓励国外投资——这些好处。但是，现在，手机应用开发商的没有经济动力自己来做这样的项目，而国防部缺乏一个机制使之成真。这一倡议能够帮助解决这种问题，在创新方面的有限投资将提供长期的收益。我们将和那些最适合做这一项目的专家们共同协作，我们需要人才和技术公司的资源及非政府组织一起实现最大产出。因此，所有在这个屋子里的人，你们都已获得邀请。
同时，对那些已经为推动我们的民主和发展目标而提出想法和正在努力的公司、个人和机构。国务院将提出一项创新竞争计划立刻地为这些工作而鼓劲。我们将邀请美国人发给我们他们最好的想法、应用和技术来帮助打破语言障碍，克服文盲率，通过提供人们所需的服务和信息而关联。比如说，微软，已经研发出了一个数字医生的原形可以为遥远的乡村社区提供医疗服务。我们想看到更多类似的想法。我们将和这一竞争的赢家一起工作，提供赠款，帮助让他们的想法成规模地实现。
私人领域和外国政府的责任
当我们和私人领域及外国政府一起合作来锻造21世纪的国家治国之术时，我们需要记住我们共同承担捍卫我今天所讲的自由的责任。
象信息自由这样的原则并非仅仅是个好政策而已，它们还是对所有参与者都有利的商业机会。我们对此感受深刻。利用市场的手段，一家突尼斯的公开上市公司，和越南的一家在审核环境中运营的公司总是比在一个自由社会中的同等公司的股价要更低。如果公司的决策者不能获得全球的新闻和信息源，投资者们对他们的决策会缺乏信心。审核新闻和信息的国家必须认识到，从经济的角度来看，不存在审核上实行政治性的还是商业性的区分。如果你的国家中的商业从业者无法获得任何一种类型的信息，最终必将遏止增长。
美国公司正逐步地在他们的商业决策中更多地考虑信息自由的问题。我希望它们的竞争者和外国政府对这一趋势密切关注。
谷歌最近在重新审视在中国的商业运营已经吸引了大量的注意就是最新的例子。我们希望中国政府能够对让谷歌提出这一声明的网络攻击进行一次彻底的调查。互联网已经是中国的巨大进步的源泉，有这么多人可以上线，这真的很好。但是，国家限制信息自由和违背互联网用户的基本权利，让他们面临这样的风险从下个世纪中的进步中把自己隔离开来。美国和中国在这一问题上有不同的观点。我们希望能够坦承地持续地就这些分歧交换意见。
这一问题并不仅仅是关于信息自由的；这是关于我们将在哪种世界中栖身的问题。这是关于我们是否能够生活在同一个互联网，同一个国际社区，和能够团结我们所有人的共识中的问题；否则在一个被分裂的星球中，接触到信息和机会要取决于你在哪里生活和绕过审查的能力。
信息自由支持和平和安全，为全球进步提供了平台。历史上，信息的不对称是导致利害冲突的主要原因之一。当我们面临着严重分歧和危险状况，在冲突中的双方能否获得同样的事实和观点变得至关重要。
在这一点上，美国会考虑由外国政府提出的观点—我们不会试图屏蔽他们和美国人民的交流。但是在受屏蔽的公民社会中就缺乏对外界论点的了解。例如，在北朝鲜，政府想完全的让公民与外界分割开。这种一面倒的信息增加了冲突的风险，让小的争执可能扩大化。我希望希望全球稳定的负责任的政府能够就解决这一不平衡而作出努力。
对于公司来说，考虑这一点不仅是为了占领了道德高地；而是公司及其客户之间的信任问题。所有的顾客都要以复杂的搜索结果和依靠他们所得到的信息而决策。能够获得这一信任的公司将在全球市场中繁荣不息。不能做到的就会失去它们的客户。我希望拒绝支持有政治动机的内容审核能成为美国技术公司的商标名片。这应该成为我们的国家品牌。我对全世界的消费者将为那些尊重他们的原则的公司而授予回馈而充满信心。
我们以谷歌重振互联网自由力量作为一个平台来解决全球性的对互联网自由的威胁，并呼吁美国媒体在面对外国公司要求审核和监管的情况下提前行动。私人公司也要分享捍卫言论自由的责任。当它们的公司行为可能破坏这一自由的时候，它们需要考虑什么是正确的，而不仅仅是为了追逐短期利益。
我们还鼓励正在以全球互联网倡议形式在做的工作—这是一个由技术型公司自愿组成的非政府组织、学术专家和社会性投资基金对抗政府要求进行内容审核的项目。这一倡议不仅仅是原则声明，还建立起机制载体来提升真正的可信感和透明度。作为我们支持有责任心的私人领域介入到信息自由中的承诺之一，国务院将在下个月让副国务卿Robert Hormats 和Maria Otero联席主持一次高层次会议，将提供网络服务的公司聚集到一起来谈论互联网自由。我们希望能够共同解决这一挑战。
结语
追求我今天所谈到的自由是正确的事。
也是聪明的事。推动这一计划，我们将我们的原则、经济目标和战略优先级统一到了一起。我们需要创造一个由网络和信息将人们联系得更紧的世界，扩展我们对于社区的定义。
考虑到我们所面临的重大挑战，我们需要全世界的人们和我们一起提供知识和创造力来重新构筑全球经济，保护我们的环境，对抗暴力极端主义，共建让每一个人都可以实现其天赋潜能的未来。
让我在结束的时候再一次向你提起那一位从太子港的废墟中抢救出来的小姑娘。她还活着，与她的家人团聚了，将会有机会重建她的家园，因为这些网络能够将原来的声音挖掘出来并扩散到全世界。没有国家、组织、或个人会被埋在压迫的废墟下。我们无法在人们被审查的高墙隔离在人类大家庭之外时还袖手旁观。我们也不能仅仅对此保持沉默只因为我们没有听见他们的呼喊。让我们再次承诺致力于这一事业。 让我们将这些技术作为推动整个世界的真正的进步力量。让我们一起向获得这些自由而前进。

演讲原文：

Statement: Hillary Clinton on internet freedom

 

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much, Alberto, for not only that kind introduction but you and your colleagues’ leadership of this important institution. It’s a pleasure to be here at the Newseum. The Newseum is a monument to some of our most precious freedoms, and I’m grateful for this opportunity to discuss how those freedoms apply to the challenges of the 21st century.

Although I can’t see all of you because in settings like this, the lights are in my eyes and you are in the dark, I know that there are many friends and former colleagues. I wish to acknowledge Charles Overby, the CEO of Freedom Forum here at the Newseum; Senator Richard Lugar* and Senator Joe Lieberman, my former colleagues in the Senate, both of whom worked for passage of the Voice Act, which speaks to Congress’s and the American people’s commitment to internet freedom, a commitment that crosses party lines and branches of government.

Also, I’m told here as well are Senator Sam Brownback, Senator Ted Kaufman, Representative Loretta Sanchez, many representatives of the Diplomatic Corps, ambassadors, chargés, participants in our International Visitor Leadership Program on internet freedom from China, Colombia, Iran, and Lebanon, and Moldova. And I also want to acknowledge Walter Isaacson, president of the Aspen Institute, recently named to our Broadcasting Board of Governors and, of course, instrumental in supporting the work on internet freedom that the Aspen Institute has been doing.

This is an important speech on a very important subject. But before I begin, I want to just speak briefly about Haiti, because during the last eight days, the people of Haiti and the people of the world have joined together to deal with a tragedy of staggering proportions. Our hemisphere has seen its share of hardship, but there are few precedents for the situation we’re facing in Port-au-Prince. Communication networks have played a critical role in our response. They were, of course, decimated and in many places totally destroyed. And in the hours after the quake, we worked with partners in the private sector; first, to set up the text “HAITI” campaign so that mobile phone users in the United States could donate to relief efforts via text messages. That initiative has been a showcase for the generosity of the American people, and thus far, it’s raised over $25 million for recovery efforts.

Information networks have also played a critical role on the ground. When I was with President Preval in Port-au-Prince on Saturday, one of his top priorities was to try to get communication up and going. The government couldn’t talk to each other, what was left of it, and NGOs, our civilian leadership, our military leadership were severely impacted. The technology community has set up interactive maps to help us identify needs and target resources. And on Monday, a seven-year-old girl and two women were pulled from the rubble of a collapsed supermarket by an American search-and-rescue team after they sent a text message calling for help. Now, these examples are manifestations of a much broader phenomenon.

The spread of information networks is forming a new nervous system for our planet. When something happens in Haiti or Hunan, the rest of us learn about it in real time – from real people. And we can respond in real time as well. Americans eager to help in the aftermath of a disaster and the girl trapped in the supermarket are connected in ways that were not even imagined a year ago, even a generation ago. That same principle applies to almost all of humanity today. As we sit here, any of you – or maybe more likely, any of our children – can take out the tools that many carry every day and transmit this discussion to billions across the world.

Now, in many respects, information has never been so free. There are more ways to spread more ideas to more people than at any moment in history. And even in authoritarian countries, information networks are helping people discover new facts and making governments more accountable.

During his visit to China in November, for example, President Obama held a town hall meeting with an online component to highlight the importance of the internet. In response to a question that was sent in over the internet, he defended the right of people to freely access information, and said that the more freely information flows, the stronger societies become. He spoke about how access to information helps citizens hold their own governments accountable, generates new ideas, encourages creativity and entrepreneurship. The United States belief in that ground truth is what brings me here today.

Because amid this unprecedented surge in connectivity, we must also recognize that these technologies are not an unmitigated blessing. These tools are also being exploited to undermine human progress and political rights. Just as steel can be used to build hospitals or machine guns, or nuclear power can either energize a city or destroy it, modern information networks and the technologies they support can be harnessed for good or for ill. The same networks that help organize movements for freedom also enable al-Qaida to spew hatred and incite violence against the innocent. And technologies with the potential to open up access to government and promote transparency can also be hijacked by governments to crush dissent and deny human rights.

In the last year, we’ve seen a spike in threats to the free flow of information. China, Tunisia, and Uzbekistan have stepped up their censorship of the internet. In Vietnam, access to popular social networking sites has suddenly disappeared. And last Friday in Egypt, 30 bloggers and activists were detained. One member of this group, Bassem Samir, who is thankfully no longer in prison, is with us today. So while it is clear that the spread of these technologies is transforming our world, it is still unclear how that transformation will affect the human rights and the human welfare of the world’s population.

On their own, new technologies do not take sides in the struggle for freedom and progress, but the United States does. We stand for a single internet where all of humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas. And we recognize that the world’s information infrastructure will become what we and others make of it. Now, this challenge may be new, but our responsibility to help ensure the free exchange of ideas goes back to the birth of our republic. The words of the First Amendment to our Constitution are carved in 50 tons of Tennessee marble on the front of this building. And every generation of Americans has worked to protect the values etched in that stone.

Franklin Roosevelt built on these ideas when he delivered his Four Freedoms speech in 1941. Now, at the time, Americans faced a cavalcade of crises and a crisis of confidence. But the vision of a world in which all people enjoyed freedom of expression, freedom of worship, freedom from want, and freedom from fear transcended the troubles of his day. And years later, one of my heroes, Eleanor Roosevelt, worked to have these principles adopted as a cornerstone of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They have provided a lodestar to every succeeding generation, guiding us, galvanizing us, and enabling us to move forward in the face of uncertainty.

So as technology hurtles forward, we must think back to that legacy. We need to synchronize our technological progress with our principles. In accepting the Nobel Prize, President Obama spoke about the need to build a world in which peace rests on the inherent rights and dignities of every individual. And in my speech on human rights at Georgetown a few days later, I talked about how we must find ways to make human rights a reality. Today, we find an urgent need to protect these freedoms on the digital frontiers of the 21st century.

There are many other networks in the world. Some aid in the movement of people or resources, and some facilitate exchanges between individuals with the same work or interests. But the internet is a network that magnifies the power and potential of all others. And that’s why we believe it’s critical that its users are assured certain basic freedoms. Freedom of expression is first among them. This freedom is no longer defined solely by whether citizens can go into the town square and criticize their government without fear of retribution. Blogs, emails, social networks, and text messages have opened up new forums for exchanging ideas, and created new targets for censorship.

As I speak to you today, government censors somewhere are working furiously to erase my words from the records of history. But history itself has already condemned these tactics. Two months ago, I was in Germany to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. The leaders gathered at that ceremony paid tribute to the courageous men and women on the far side of that barrier who made the case against oppression by circulating small pamphlets called samizdat. Now, these leaflets questioned the claims and intentions of dictatorships in the Eastern Bloc and many people paid dearly for distributing them. But their words helped pierce the concrete and concertina wire of the Iron Curtain.

The Berlin Wall symbolized a world divided and it defined an entire era. Today, remnants of that wall sit inside this museum where they belong, and the new iconic infrastructure of our age is the internet. Instead of division, it stands for connection. But even as networks spread to nations around the globe, virtual walls are cropping up in place of visible walls.

Some countries have erected electronic barriers that prevent their people from accessing portions of the world’s networks. They’ve expunged words, names, and phrases from search engine results. They have violated the privacy of citizens who engage in non-violent political speech. These actions contravene the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, which tells us that all people have the right “to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” With the spread of these restrictive practices, a new information curtain is descending across much of the world. And beyond this partition, viral videos and blog posts are becoming the samizdat of our day.

As in the dictatorships of the past, governments are targeting independent thinkers who use these tools. In the demonstrations that followed Iran’s presidential elections, grainy cell phone footage of a young woman’s bloody murder provided a digital indictment of the government’s brutality. We’ve seen reports that when Iranians living overseas posted online criticism of their nation’s leaders, their family members in Iran were singled out for retribution. And despite an intense campaign of government intimidation, brave citizen journalists in Iran continue using technology to show the world and their fellow citizens what is happening inside their country. In speaking out on behalf of their own human rights, the Iranian people have inspired the world. And their courage is redefining how technology is used to spread truth and expose injustice.

Now, all societies recognize that free expression has its limits. We do not tolerate those who incite others to violence, such as the agents of al-Qaida who are, at this moment, using the internet to promote the mass murder of innocent people across the world. And hate speech that targets individuals on the basis of their race, religion, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation is reprehensible. It is an unfortunate fact that these issues are both growing challenges that the international community must confront together. And we must also grapple with the issue of anonymous speech. Those who use the internet to recruit terrorists or distribute stolen intellectual property cannot divorce their online actions from their real world identities. But these challenges must not become an excuse for governments to systematically violate the rights and privacy of those who use the internet for peaceful political purposes.

The freedom of expression may be the most obvious freedom to face challenges with the spread of new technologies, but it is not the only one. The freedom of worship usually involves the rights of individuals to commune or not commune with their Creator. And that’s one channel of communication that does not rely on technology. But the freedom of worship also speaks to the universal right to come together with those who share your values and vision for humanity. In our history, those gatherings often took place in churches, synagogues, mosques and temples. Today, they may also take place on line.

The internet can help bridge divides between people of different faiths. As the President said in Cairo, freedom of religion is central to the ability of people to live together. And as we look for ways to expand dialogue, the internet holds out such tremendous promise. We’ve already begun connecting students in the United States with young people in Muslim communities around the world to discuss global challenges. And we will continue using this tool to foster discussion between individuals from different religious communities.

Some nations, however, have co-opted the internet as a tool to target and silence people of faith. Last year, for example, in Saudi Arabia, a man spent months in prison for blogging about Christianity. And a Harvard study found that the Saudi Government blocked many web pages about Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, and even Islam. Countries including Vietnam and China employed similar tactics to restrict access to religious information.

Now, just as these technologies must not be used to punish peaceful political speech, they must also not be used to persecute or silence religious minorities. Now, prayers will always travel on higher networks. But connection technologies like the internet and social networking sites should enhance individuals’ ability to worship as they see fit, come together with people of their own faith, and learn more about the beliefs of others. We must work to advance the freedom of worship online just as we do in other areas of life.

There are, of course, hundreds of millions of people living without the benefits of these technologies. In our world, as I’ve said many times, talent may be distributed universally, but opportunity is not. And we know from long experience that promoting social and economic development in countries where people lack access to knowledge, markets, capital, and opportunity can be frustrating and sometimes futile work. In this context, the internet can serve as a great equalizer. By providing people with access to knowledge and potential markets, networks can create opportunities where none exist.

Over the last year, I’ve seen this firsthand in Kenya, where farmers have seen their income grow by as much as 30 percent since they started using mobile banking technology; in Bangladesh, where more than 300,000 people have signed up to learn English on their mobile phones; and in Sub-Saharan Africa, where women entrepreneurs use the internet to get access to microcredit loans and connect themselves to global markets.

Now, these examples of progress can be replicated in the lives of the billion people at the bottom of the world’s economic ladder. In many cases, the internet, mobile phones, and other connection technologies can do for economic growth what the Green Revolution did for agriculture. You can now generate significant yields from very modest inputs. And one World Bank study found that in a typical developing country, a 10 percent increase in the penetration rate for mobile phones led to an almost 1 percent increase in per capita GDP. To just put this into context, for India, that would translate into almost $10 billion a year.

A connection to global information networks is like an on-ramp to modernity. In the early years of these technologies, many believed that they would divide the world between haves and have-nots. But that hasn’t happened. There are 4 billion cell phones in use today. Many of them are in the hands of market vendors, rickshaw drivers, and others who’ve historically lacked access to education and opportunity. Information networks have become a great leveler, and we should use them together to help lift people out of poverty and give them a freedom from want.

Now, we have every reason to be hopeful about what people can accomplish when they leverage communication networks and connection technologies to achieve progress. But make no mistake – some are and will continue to use global information networks for darker purposes. Violent extremists, criminal cartels, sexual predators, and authoritarian governments all seek to exploit these global networks. Just as terrorists have taken advantage of the openness of our societies to carry out their plots, violent extremists use the internet to radicalize and intimidate. As we work to advance freedoms, we must also work against those who use communication networks as tools of disruption and fear.

Governments and citizens must have confidence that the networks at the core of their national security and economic prosperity are safe and resilient. Now this is about more than petty hackers who deface websites. Our ability to bank online, use electronic commerce, and safeguard billions of dollars in intellectual property are all at stake if we cannot rely on the security of our information networks.

Disruptions in these systems demand a coordinated response by all governments, the private sector, and the international community. We need more tools to help law enforcement agencies cooperate across jurisdictions when criminal hackers and organized crime syndicates attack networks for financial gain. The same is true when social ills such as child pornography and the exploitation of trafficked women and girls online is there for the world to see and for those who exploit these people to make a profit. We applaud efforts such as the Council on Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime that facilitate international cooperation in prosecuting such offenses. And we wish to redouble our efforts.

We have taken steps as a government, and as a Department, to find diplomatic solutions to strengthen global cyber security. We have a lot of people in the State Department working on this. They’ve joined together, and we created two years ago an office to coordinate foreign policy in cyberspace. We’ve worked to address this challenge at the UN and in other multilateral forums and to put cyber security on the world’s agenda. And President Obama has just appointed a new national cyberspace policy coordinator who will help us work even more closely to ensure that everyone’s networks stay free, secure, and reliable.

States, terrorists, and those who would act as their proxies must know that the United States will protect our networks. Those who disrupt the free flow of information in our society or any other pose a threat to our economy, our government, and our civil society. Countries or individuals that engage in cyber attacks should face consequences and international condemnation. In an internet-connected world, an attack on one nation’s networks can be an attack on all. And by reinforcing that message, we can create norms of behavior among states and encourage respect for the global networked commons.

The final freedom, one that was probably inherent in what both President and Mrs. Roosevelt thought about and wrote about all those years ago, is one that flows from the four I’ve already mentioned: the freedom to connect – the idea that governments should not prevent people from connecting to the internet, to websites, or to each other. The freedom to connect is like the freedom of assembly, only in cyberspace. It allows individuals to get online, come together, and hopefully cooperate. Once you’re on the internet, you don’t need to be a tycoon or a rock star to have a huge impact on society.

The largest public response to the terrorist attacks in Mumbai was launched by a 13-year-old boy. He used social networks to organize blood drives and a massive interfaith book of condolence. In Colombia, an unemployed engineer brought together more than 12 million people in 190 cities around the world to demonstrate against the FARC terrorist movement. The protests were the largest antiterrorist demonstrations in history. And in the weeks that followed, the FARC saw more demobilizations and desertions than it had during a decade of military action. And in Mexico, a single email from a private citizen who was fed up with drug-related violence snowballed into huge demonstrations in all of the country’s 32 states. In Mexico City alone, 150,000 people took to the streets in protest. So the internet can help humanity push back against those who promote violence and crime and extremism.

In Iran and Moldova and other countries, online organizing has been a critical tool for advancing democracy and enabling citizens to protest suspicious election results. And even in established democracies like the United States, we’ve seen the power of these tools to change history. Some of you may still remember the 2008 presidential election here. (Laughter.)

The freedom to connect to these technologies can help transform societies, but it is also critically important to individuals. I was recently moved by the story of a doctor – and I won’t tell you what country he was from – who was desperately trying to diagnose his daughter’s rare medical condition. He consulted with two dozen specialists, but he still didn’t have an answer. But he finally identified the condition, and found a cure, by using an internet search engine. That’s one of the reasons why unfettered access to search engine technology is so important in individuals’ lives.

Now, the principles I’ve outlined today will guide our approach in addressing the issue of internet freedom and the use of these technologies. And I want to speak about how we apply them in practice. The United States is committed to devoting the diplomatic, economic, and technological resources necessary to advance these freedoms. We are a nation made up of immigrants from every country and every interest that spans the globe. Our foreign policy is premised on the idea that no country more than America stands to benefit when there is cooperation among peoples and states. And no country shoulders a heavier burden when conflict and misunderstanding drive nations apart. So we are well placed to seize the opportunities that come with interconnectivity. And as the birthplace for so many of these technologies, including the internet itself, we have a responsibility to see them used for good. To do that, we need to develop our capacity for what we call, at the State Department, 21st century statecraft.

Realigning our policies and our priorities will not be easy. But adjusting to new technology rarely is. When the telegraph was introduced, it was a source of great anxiety for many in the diplomatic community, where the prospect of receiving daily instructions from capitals was not entirely welcome. But just as our diplomats eventually mastered the telegraph, they are doing the same to harness the potential of these new tools as well.

And I’m proud that the State Department is already working in more than 40 countries to help individuals silenced by oppressive governments. We are making this issue a priority at the United Nations as well, and we’re including internet freedom as a component in the first resolution we introduced after returning to the United Nations Human Rights Council.

We are also supporting the development of new tools that enable citizens to exercise their rights of free expression by circumventing politically motivated censorship. We are providing funds to groups around the world to make sure that those tools get to the people who need them in local languages, and with the training they need to access the internet safely. The United States has been assisting in these efforts for some time, with a focus on implementing these programs as efficiently and effectively as possible. Both the American people and nations that censor the internet should understand that our government is committed to helping promote internet freedom.

We want to put these tools in the hands of people who will use them to advance democracy and human rights, to fight climate change and epidemics, to build global support for President Obama’s goal of a world without nuclear weapons, to encourage sustainable economic development that lifts the people at the bottom up.

That’s why today I’m announcing that over the next year, we will work with partners in industry, academia, and nongovernmental organizations to establish a standing effort that will harness the power of connection technologies and apply them to our diplomatic goals. By relying on mobile phones, mapping applications, and other new tools, we can empower citizens and leverage our traditional diplomacy. We can address deficiencies in the current market for innovation.

Let me give you one example. Let’s say I want to create a mobile phone application that would allow people to rate government ministries, including ours, on their responsiveness and efficiency and also to ferret out and report corruption. The hardware required to make this idea work is already in the hands of billions of potential users. And the software involved would be relatively inexpensive to develop and deploy.

If people took advantage of this tool, it would help us target our foreign assistance spending, improve lives, and encourage foreign investment in countries with responsible governments. However, right now, mobile application developers have no financial assistance to pursue that project on their own, and the State Department currently lacks a mechanism to make it happen. But this initiative should help resolve that problem and provide long-term dividends from modest investments in innovation. We’re going to work with experts to find the best structure for this venture, and we’ll need the talent and resources of technology companies and nonprofits in order to get the best results most quickly. So for those of you in the room who have this kind of talent, expertise, please consider yourselves invited to help us.

In the meantime, there are companies, individuals, and institutions working on ideas and applications that could already advance our diplomatic and development objectives. And the State Department will be launching an innovation competition to give this work an immediate boost. We’ll be asking Americans to send us their best ideas for applications and technologies that help break down language barriers, overcome illiteracy, connect people to the services and information they need. Microsoft, for example, has already developed a prototype for a digital doctor that could help provide medical care in isolated rural communities. We want to see more ideas like that. And we’ll work with the winners of the competition and provide grants to help build their ideas to scale.

Now, these new initiatives will supplement a great deal of important work we’ve already done over this past year. In the service of our diplomatic and diplomacy objectives, I assembled a talented and experienced team to lead our 21st century statecraft efforts. This team has traveled the world helping governments and groups leverage the benefits of connection technologies. They have stood up a Civil Society 2.0 Initiative to help grassroots organizations enter the digital age. They are putting in place a program in Mexico to help combat drug-related violence by allowing people to make untracked reports to reliable sources to avoid having retribution visited against them. They brought mobile banking to Afghanistan and are now pursuing the same effort in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In Pakistan, they created the first-ever social mobile network, called Our Voice, that has already produced tens of millions of messages and connected young Pakistanis who want to stand up to violent extremism.

In a short span, we have taken significant strides to translate the promise of these technologies into results that make a difference. But there is still so much more to be done. And as we work together with the private sector and foreign governments to deploy the tools of 21st century statecraft, we have to remember our shared responsibility to safeguard the freedoms that I’ve talked about today. We feel strongly that principles like information freedom aren’t just good policy, not just somehow connected to our national values, but they are universal and they’re also good for business.

To use market terminology, a publicly listed company in Tunisia or Vietnam that operates in an environment of censorship will always trade at a discount relative to an identical firm in a free society. If corporate decision makers don’t have access to global sources of news and information, investors will have less confidence in their decisions over the long term. Countries that censor news and information must recognize that from an economic standpoint, there is no distinction between censoring political speech and commercial speech. If businesses in your nations are denied access to either type of information, it will inevitably impact on growth.

Increasingly, U.S. companies are making the issue of internet and information freedom a greater consideration in their business decisions. I hope that their competitors and foreign governments will pay close attention to this trend. The most recent situation involving Google has attracted a great deal of interest. And we look to the Chinese authorities to conduct a thorough review of the cyber intrusions that led Google to make its announcement. And we also look for that investigation and its results to be transparent.

The internet has already been a source of tremendous progress in China, and it is fabulous. There are so many people in China now online. But countries that restrict free access to information or violate the basic rights of internet users risk walling themselves off from the progress of the next century. Now, the United States and China have different views on this issue, and we intend to address those differences candidly and consistently in the context of our positive, cooperative, and comprehensive relationship.

Now, ultimately, this issue isn’t just about information freedom; it is about what kind of world we want and what kind of world we will inhabit. It’s about whether we live on a planet with one internet, one global community, and a common body of knowledge that benefits and unites us all, or a fragmented planet in which access to information and opportunity is dependent on where you live and the whims of censors.

Information freedom supports the peace and security that provides a foundation for global progress. Historically, asymmetrical access to information is one of the leading causes of interstate conflict. When we face serious disputes or dangerous incidents, it’s critical that people on both sides of the problem have access to the same set of facts and opinions.

As it stands, Americans can consider information presented by foreign governments. We do not block your attempts to communicate with the people in the United States. But citizens in societies that practice censorship lack exposure to outside views. In North Korea, for example, the government has tried to completely isolate its citizens from outside opinions. This lopsided access to information increases both the likelihood of conflict and the probability that small disagreements could escalate. So I hope that responsible governments with an interest in global stability will work with us to address such imbalances.

For companies, this issue is about more than claiming the moral high ground. It really comes down to the trust between firms and their customers. Consumers everywhere want to have confidence that the internet companies they rely on will provide comprehensive search results and act as responsible stewards of their own personal information. Firms that earn that confidence of those countries and basically provide that kind of service will prosper in the global marketplace. I really believe that those who lose that confidence of their customers will eventually lose customers. No matter where you live, people want to believe that what they put into the internet is not going to be used against them.

And censorship should not be in any way accepted by any company from anywhere. And in America, American companies need to make a principled stand. This needs to be part of our national brand. I’m confident that consumers worldwide will reward companies that follow those principles.

Now, we are reinvigorating the Global Internet Freedom Task Force as a forum for addressing threats to internet freedom around the world, and we are urging U.S. media companies to take a proactive role in challenging foreign governments’ demands for censorship and surveillance. The private sector has a shared responsibility to help safeguard free expression. And when their business dealings threaten to undermine this freedom, they need to consider what’s right, not simply what’s a quick profit.

We’re also encouraged by the work that’s being done through the Global Network Initiative, a voluntary effort by technology companies who are working with nongovernmental organizations, academic experts, and social investment funds to respond to government requests for censorship. The initiative goes beyond mere statements of principles and establishes mechanisms to promote real accountability and transparency. As part of our commitment to support responsible private sector engagement on information freedom, the State Department will be convening a high-level meeting next month co-chaired by Under Secretaries Robert Hormats and Maria Otero to bring together firms that provide network services for talks about internet freedom, because we want to have a partnership in addressing this 21st century challenge.

Now, pursuing the freedoms I’ve talked about today is, I believe, the right thing to do. But I also believe it’s the smart thing to do. By advancing this agenda, we align our principles, our economic goals, and our strategic priorities. We need to work toward a world in which access to networks and information brings people closer together and expands the definition of the global community. Given the magnitude of the challenges we’re facing, we need people around the world to pool their knowledge and creativity to help rebuild the global economy, to protect our environment, to defeat violent extremism, and build a future in which every human being can live up to and realize his or her God-given potential.

So let me close by asking you to remember the little girl who was pulled from the rubble on Monday in Port-au-Prince. She’s alive, she was reunited with her family, she will have the chance to grow up because these networks took a voice that was buried and spread it to the world. No nation, no group, no individual should stay buried in the rubble of oppression. We cannot stand by while people are separated from the human family by walls of censorship. And we cannot be silent about these issues simply because we cannot hear the cries.

So let us recommit ourselves to this cause. Let us make these technologies a force for real progress the world over. And let us go forward together to champion these freedoms for our time, for our young people who deserve every opportunity we can give them.

Thank you all very much. (Applause.)

MySQL创始人发邮件寻求中国帮助

http://www.helpmysql.org/cn/

MySQL项目遇到大麻烦了

“如甲骨文把MySQL按照太阳微电子的一部分收购，将由数据库客户买单。

2009年4月，甲骨文宣布 其同意收购太阳微电子。由于太阳微电子已于上一年收购了MySQL，这就意味着闭源数据库市场的领先者，甲骨文，将拥有最受欢迎的开源数据库，MySQL。

如果甲骨文就此收购MySQL，它会像金钱能够买断一个开源项目一样对MySQL进行控制。事实上，对于大多数开源项目（例如Linux或 Apache），一个竞争者甚至无法通过任何可与之媲美的方式购得这种影响的十分之一。但MySQL的成功一直都依赖于其背后开发、销售和推广它的公司。公司（最开始MySQL AB，然后太阳微电子）始终拥有重要的知识产权（IPRs）、最著名的商标、版权及（目前为止仅仅用于防御性目的）专利。知识产权产生收入，并将这些收入的大部分重新投入到开发中，因此随着时间推移，不仅规模越来越大，同时也发展得越来越好。

如果这些知识产权落入MySQL的主要竞争对手手中，那么MySQL将即刻不再是甲骨文的商业高价产品的替代品。到目前为止，客户可以在新项目中选择使用MySQL，而不选择甲骨文产品。某些大型公司甚至为现有的软件解决方案从甲骨文迁移（转换）到MySQL。而且，每个人都可通过使用MySQL对甲骨文销售人员施加实在的威胁，以获得大幅折扣。如甲骨文拥有MySQL，那么做这种尝试的客户只能得到被嘲笑的结果。对于甲骨文来说，铲除这一问题将为其轻松产生每年不下10亿美元的收益。”

谷歌推迟了Gphone在中国的开发计划;传谷歌中国雇员参与了黑客攻击

“谷歌的发言人说谷歌推迟了两个Android平台智能手机在中国的开发计划，这两个计划的合作者是摩托罗拉和三星，手机开发完成后将交付中国联通。”（路透社 Reuters)

 

“Google 上周宣布，中国黑客对公司系统进行了精密的袭击，以致其知识产权被盗，公司需要重估在中国运营的可行性。

熟悉情况的消息人士告诉路透社上海办事处，攻击行动的目标其实是对 Google 网络特定部分有访问权的人，有关行动可能获得在谷歌中国办事处职员从旁协助。

两名消息人士昨天透露，Google 正在调查是否有一个或更多的中国雇员协助外人展开12月中针对它的网络攻击。”(CnBeta 网友投递)

 

路透社报导原文：

SHANGHAI/BEIJING (Reuters) – Google has postponed the launch of two mobile phones in China which use its Android platform, in the first sign its business in the country is starting to be affected by a dispute over hacking and censorship.

The manufacturers of the telephone, which was scheduled for launch in China on Wednesday, are Motorola and Samsung Electronics Co Ltd, and China Unicom would have been the carrier, a Google spokeswoman said.

A source familiar with the situation said Google Inc wanted customers to have a "positive experience" with the product, but felt that would be difficult considering the publicity surrounding the company in China at present.

Google said last week that it and other companies were targets of sophisticated cyber-spying from China that also went after Chinese dissidents, and threatened to pull out of the country.

It also said it no longer wants to censor its Chinese Google.cn search site and wants talks with Beijing about offering a legal, unfiltered Chinese site.

Android is an open source mobile operating system, already adopted by China Mobile’s OPhone and Dell’s Mini 3, which were launched in China late last year.

Analysts say that without search, Google’s most important business in China, the firm would struggle to retain a foothold is the world’s biggest Internet market by users.

The dispute could stoke tensions between China and the United States, already at odds over the value of the yuan currency, trade issues, U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and climate change policy.

Chinese officials have so far publicly fended off Google’s complaints and not openly flagged any talks with the world’s biggest Internet search company, which opened its Chinese-language search site in 2006.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu pressed the company a little more on Tuesday in comments that suggested scant room for giving way to Google’s demands.

"Foreign firms in China should respect China’s laws and regulations, and respect China’s public customs and traditions, and assume the corresponding social responsibilities, and of course Google is no exception," Ma told a regular briefing.

Ma did not mention censorship as being among those responsibilities, but other Chinese officials have.

Until now, the Foreign Ministry had avoided mentioning Google’s name in comments on the dispute that has also drawn Washington into demanding an explanation from Beijing.

But Ma, like other Chinese officials, did not directly hit back at the U.S.

When asked again about Google’s complaint it had been hacked from within China, Ma said Chinese companies have also been hacked.

"China is the biggest victim of hacking," Ma said, adding that eight out of 10 personal computers in China connected to the Internet had been hacked. This figure apparently included the many computers infected with viruses spread online.

Other countries are also being drawn into the dispute.

India’s national security adviser M.K. Narayanan told the London-based Times newspaper on Tuesday that his and other Indian government offices had been the target of hacker attacks originating from China on December 15, coinciding with attacks on Google and the other firms.

"There is no basis at all for this claim," Ma said.

Indian commerce and industry minister Anand Sharma declined to comment on the report.

He said he had not brought up the issue with China’s commerce minister when they met in Beijing on Tuesday.

(Additional reporting by Lucy Hornby; Writing by Ben Blanchard; Editing by Jerry Norton)

关于谷歌中国的六大混淆之处(转自华尔街日报)

 

国内很多文章的“关于谷歌中国退出的四大/五大误解”是来自于这个文章的，经常被省略的是第五点，经常被篡改的第一点(国内主流声音在14号以后已经统一为" Google has surely failed in China”  ,  What a F**king EPIC FAIL!!!!!)

Clearing Up Confusion on Google and China

From Silicon Valley to Zhongguancun, Google’s surprise announcement that it may pull out of China has fueled an enormous amount of discussion in recent days, not all of it 100% accurate. Below are some misstatements and misunderstandings we’ve seen:

1. Google failed in China

Google’s China operations contribute a small fraction of the company’s overall revenue – the company doesn’t disclose the amount, but analysts estimate it was a few percent of its total $21.8 billion in 2008 revenue, or several hundred million dollars. But Google has made significant progress in China in recent years, raising its share of the Internet search market to roughly 36% in the fourth quarter of 2009 from 13% when it started its Chinese-language google.cn site in early 2006, according to data from research firm Analysys International.

Many other foreign companies doing business in China would gladly forgo big profits in the short term for comparable market-share growth in China—especially in an industry where China has more users than any other country (384 million according to the latest statistics). Google has also been particularly popular among the highly sought-after demographic of young, educated, white-collar urban professionals. The company’s powerful brand of business and ethics (“don’t be evil) has also earned it a fair amount of good will among Chinese Internet users, many of whom are now mourning its (still uncertain) fate. While rival Baidu still has a much larger 58% share of the search market, its brand has suffered as a result of scandals involving paid results and allegations of censorship of sensitive news stories.

Google doesn’t say if it’s profitable in China, but there’s certainly no reason to assume it’s not. Baidu, its chief rival, reported net profit of about $153 million on revenue of $468 million for 2008, when it said it had 6,387 employees. Google’s revenue would have perhaps half or two thirds that amount, but it likely has a much lower cost base in China than Baidu, since Google is believed to employ well under 1,000 employees in the country, and can use technology developed by its U.S. headquarters.

2. Google.com is not accessible in China

Before Google introduced its China-specific search engine, Google.cn, in 2006, its global site Google.com was subject to periodic blocking in China. But for the last four years, Google.com has been almost always accessible to users in China.

However, the fact that Google.com can be accessed from China doesn’t mean that Internet users can get to forbidden content listed in the site’s search results. Links to sites that are blocked in China will still return error messages or time out when they are clicked. (In contrast, Google’s Chinese search engine, Google.cn, will filter out links to sites that don’t comply with Chinese laws and regulations.)

And of course, given the unpredictability of China’s Web restrictions, there’s no guarantee that Google.com will continue to be available to users inside China, at least not without “scaling the wall.”

3. Google has Gmail servers in China

Some reports have said that the reason Chinese hackers were able to access Gmail accounts is that Google has email servers physically located in China. This is not the case. Google says it has no email servers in the country.

Indeed, Google has said keeping its servers out of China was a deliberate move to help protect user information. When the company announced its plans to launch google.cn in January 2006, executives said one of the safeguards it planned to use to protect user interests was that it wouldn’t host user-generated content like email and blogs on servers in China.

Google had reason to be careful. In 2005, there was widespread outcry among rights activists and the U.S. government after Yahoo turned over user information to the Chinese government, which was used as evidence to sentence journalist Shi Tao to 10 years in prison. Yahoo said that, because its Chinese mail servers were inside China, the company felt compelled to comply with the authorities’ request.

4. Google.cn search results are already uncensored

After Tuesday’s announcement, Web users ran amok on Google.cn, looking up sensitive terms such as “Tiananmen 1989,” “tank man,” and even “sensitive words.” But many have been disappointed with the results, as searches for these terms still turned up the familiar disclaimer that “in accordance with local laws and regulations, a portion of the search results are not displayed.”

Google says that it hasn’t yet started to remove content filters on Google.cn, a process that could take weeks.

How to explain the images of tank man and links to sites about the Dalai Lama found via Google.cn? Many of the searches yielding fruitful results appear to have been conducted in English, a trick that often turns up fuller results on Google.cn than a search for the same term in Chinese. (To see what we mean, compare these Google.cn results for “Dalai Lama” in English and Chinese).

5. Google has identified Chinese dissidents as the targets of cyber attacks

Since Google revealed that it has been the target of cyber attacks, and that it had identified two Gmail accounts that had been compromised, a number of prominent Chinese activists have reported that their Gmail accounts have been hacked, in some cases repeatedly. Google says that these intrusions were not part of the larger, sophisticated attack on its security infrastructure, but likely the result of more pedestrian phishing scams or malware.

6. Google has already shut down its business in China

On Friday, Ministry of Commerce spokesman Yao Jian said that neither MOC nor the Beijing Municipal Commission of Commerce had received any information from Google about a planned withdrawal of its investment. A person close to Google also denied rumors that Google employees in China have ceased to report for work.

–Sky Canaves

评论:缺乏道德感的百度不会真正幸福(戴远程)

“幸福来得太快。”在谷歌尚未明确是否就此退出中国市场之际，百度员工已经赤祼祼地趁火打劫：如今百度负责广告销售的员工一早来到公司后的第一件事，就是列出谷歌的广告客户名单，开始逐个联系，百度人得意的说，“我们内部调侃这是捡钱计划。”差不多同时，百度首席产品设计师孙云丰在博客上公开撰文辱骂：（关于谷歌退出中国）“整个事情给我的唯一感受，就是恶心”、“证明google是个市侩分子。”

姑且不论孙云丰的观点是非对错，如果孙云丰代表百度骂谷歌，那他就严重地缺乏职业道德，辱骂竞争对手显然不是一家公众上市公司高管之所为能事；如果孙云丰代表自己骂谷歌公司，那么就有义务接受谷歌用户的回应和批评。可惜的是孙云丰一方面宣称自己观点毫无错误，另一方面，他又赶紧删掉了自己的文章并且四处要求删贴。也有人说删贴未必是他自己的意愿。那么，作为宣称“有道德感”的百度员工，孙云丰不应该屈从别人的意见删掉自己认为正确的东西。作为百度高管，孙云丰更不应该允许百度公关去打电话要求别人删贴。
新浪微博上有网友评论说，“单从商业价值和经济利益方面考量，都可以看出Google的不作恶，并不是作秀的口号。对于一个靠信息有序化赚钱的公司，必须要不作恶才行。百度正好相反，必须要作恶才行。”这句话说到点子上，谷歌退就退吧，百度未必就能继续一股独大。即使暂时抢下更大份额，如果不改变或者提升哪怕是一个世侩也该有的道德底气，百度终有一天遭世人唾弃。
当然，曾经我也经常使用百度，享受其便利搜索的同时也关注其成长。我曾一直很期待百度能成为一家负有责任感的道德公司，就像他们新编《壹百度》里所鼓吹的那样。遗憾的是，从百度高管到员工，似乎都没和这家公司一样完成这种道德上的转变。不要武断地以为我是在挟公器而泄私愤。以我跑IT线的最近两年跟百度人打交道的直观感受就是，百度严重地缺乏公关沟通原则并且势利：为了掩盖其负面新闻，百度公关可以不惜千里飞来又是许诺又是找高层拉关系；一旦目的达到或者遭拒，其公关团队转瞬就变得傲慢十足。
从最近频频曝出网友投诉百度上充斥恶意诽谤攻击他人名誉的网页链接可见一斑。百度不仅没有履行道德公司所必须的制止不良信息散播责任，却是为了暖味眼球和暴利空间，选择最大限度地纵容和助长这类恶意传播扩大化，给被侵权人带来更大的伤害。可悲的是，百度不以为耻反以为荣，似有将此恶习死扛到底的趋势。
“百度搜索引擎的核心价值就在于在网络空间里自由地抓取信息，靠信息有序化进行商业运作。”百度公关高管们不止一次地辩称，技术上无法屏蔽掉恶意诽谤信息。但如果以此逃避散播诽谤网贴的责任，那么，累积起百度巨大财富将李彦宏推上首富的百度竞价排名又作何解？那些活跃在百度线上线下，以收钱删贴的公司又是如何的生存？更近的例子是，如今百度上搜索孙云丰骂谷歌的贴子，缘何毫无例外地全部显示“页面无法访问”？百度何必如此掩耳盗铃。
百度原本可以更幸福的，他完全可以把商业价值建立在一个正确的价值观之上。谷歌的退出，无疑让百度迎来商业搜索史上可遇不可求的机遇，很不幸，百度根本不愿这么做。

作者:戴远程

关于Google为了保护知识产权而撤离的观点

Google总部在声明退出中国之后，立刻取消了所有中国工程师访问Google代码服务器的权限。 他们都是在上班后发现服务器的home目录进不去了。事先根本没有通知。 很多人写到一半的代码，就没法动了，要等几个礼拜之后，调动到美国才能继续写。

如果Google是有预谋的撤离，为什么要采取这种手段？他完全可以让员工继续工作，做一些善后工作。 比方说现在Google music，中国公司和美国做的是不一样的（music.google.cn 和 music.google.com）现在要取消中国的music了，完全可以让中国的工程师来做这个代码迁移的工作。

现在是中国的工程师全部带薪休假，由老外来接手善后事宜。

为什么Google突然那么不信任中国这边的团队？毕竟他们自己开发的代码，让他们自己来做迁移肯定效率更高啊

唯一的原因就是，Google内部的技术人员中被安插了Dang的特务（就在Google上海办公处）

事实真相就是，这个人在受到Dang的派遣，应聘Google成功之后，就把Gmail的关键代码down下来然后上交给了组织。

而这个组织破解gmail 系统的目的就是为了获取“人权团体”的邮件，这些在Google官方的声明都有

这样一来会暴露gmail系统的所有漏洞，而且Google 官方不能承认这个事情，否则他在国际上的声誉会大受影响。他能做的就是停止中国所有的工作，中国这边所有的工程师已经不能登陆google的代码服务器了。然后应该会抓紧几天时间修改一部分gmail代码

其实事情就是这样简单完全是突发事件，所以Google的官方声明，你去读一读原版，写的是很仓促的，字里行间都能读出他们最高层的震惊，就是 Google三个最高层的人临时讨论一致决定的。如果是什么和美国政府商量好的，你觉得堂堂Google的官方声明会写的那么潦草，一点正式文件的套路都没有？

Google撤离也不是因为互联网审查，这个当然是一件很让Google不舒服的事情，但这几年他不也就这么忍下来了嘛

这次的窃密行动，使Google有面临全面破产的危险（Google官方博客也说了，牵涉到知识产权的问题），说白了，再在中国呆下去，可能要威胁到整个公司的生存，所以才如此仓促的把中国部门的一切工作全部停掉

所以Google一开始还说打算和中国谈判，但是今天马上就放弃谈判的打算了，因为就算政府让步，Google也不能再留了，再留就有性命危险。也不是中国市场赚钱不赚钱的问题了，赚这点小钱，把整个公司的性命搭进去，风险太大了

关于Google工程师访问Google代码的权限，Google对于技术人员的诚信是相当信任的。即使是一个实习生，也可以访问99%以上的代码。 Google只有一个代码库，每个进去的人学到的第一条开发原则就是：搜！从代码库里面尽量搜索功能相似的代码，然后给原作者发Email。讲究这种整个公司的代码共享，才会达到有那么高的编码效率。而且Google的代码，注释，和技术说明文档是一体的，对每一个工程师都是公开的

你可以喷我，也可以提出其他的说法，但是请你在回复之前先看完全文，然后想想自己的说法能不能自圆其说！！

我只能说，tg你太辣手了，实在逼得人家混不下去了

==========================================================
这个事情还在调查中，有一个人，他是党员，来了Google没多久，就把gmail核心代码下载下来，而且现在这个人已经不知所踪了，这些是可以肯定的. 至于他是谁指使的，我们只是猜了
这两天Google总部派人过来和中国每一个工程师喝咖啡谈话，调查是不是这个人还有同伙. 同时总部在评估，这件事情造成了多少代码泄漏，哪些代码需要重写 等这些工作做完，就会开始转移中国这里的工程师（要是没有调查就转移，岂不是让别的卧底混入美帝了嘛）

网友讨论谷歌中国退出一事发表的趣图

强人做《谷百列传》为谷歌送行

谷歌，自外邦而来，但学儒墨之术，知礼仪廉耻。谷歌少时聪慧，博学多闻，才高八斗，则上知天文，下知地理而通晓古今，亦不乏年少轻狂，所言无忌。凡纵里乡亲有问必答，有惑必解，众人皆赏。是时，官府作为多有弊端，百姓怒而不敢言，唯有谷歌针砭时弊，锐言以对，揭人之短而显己长，官府怒之，以结怨恨。

谷歌初学，心怀壮志，学优为仕，当作谏客，忠言虽逆耳但利于行政，思盛唐朝，先魏征后继褚遂良，直言不讳而得重用，且芳名留史，代代相传以作佳话。谷歌心思，谏而能言，言以重用，是以酬志也。然在官场，谷歌心直口快，向无遮拦，揭短之多，树敌亦甚，众人皆怒，官府鞭策之。

恰逢此时，另一才子姓百名度，虽有才华，但好奉承，向来顺从，近官府而远君子，所言甚媚，得以重用。谷歌见之，忿忿不平，是以小人得志，而疏忠臣也。故而萧索，借酒解愁，酒到诗出，不乏风流，市井民女皆愿从之。官府见此，以谷歌淫荡，赐伤风败德之罪，罢其官职，贬为庶人。

谷歌官场难得志，终日寡欢，而渐悟其道，则多怨轻狂，得罪于仕。儒墨虽有所悟，却乏道术，不知功成、名就、身退之理。故而沉寂，藏身百姓之中，思咐良久，愿以从教，或为先生。愿遂孔孟之道，教化四海，亦能流芳百世。故寻四海之卷，博览群书，集百家之长，以成智慧。

先生如此，学生甚欢，多有发问，皆有所答，凡有疑惑，亦能相告，则传道、授业、解惑无不顺当。然官府见之，左右为难，策之书从何来，而征税费，又以危言蛊惑，封其书院，纳其学生转从百度。

谷歌再创，心灰意冷，仰天长啸，壮怀难酬，若有所思，古人云，莲为君子，出淤泥而不染，然己若莲藕，身染淤泥之中，扶君子而罪小人也。大丈夫者当心忧天下，不为名利所染，不为人言所畏。然在中原，忠言逆耳、从善如登，是风气之恶也。

此处不留人，自由留人处，谷歌再创之后，欲归故里，思乡土纯青，犹可展露才华以昭天下也。中华之憾，留作后人言，则自有大白天下之日也。