U.S. Ambassador Huntsman on China

Tonight, I will be listening in on the China Town Hall presented by the National Committee on U.S. Chinese relations. I learned about the event through a friend’s post on Facebook. The event is funded by the Starr foundation. The goal of the event is to educate the United States about China.

The speaker is Jon M. Huntsman, U.S. Ambassador to China. The event is being webcast and audience members may submit questions.

Ambassador Huntsman thanks the audience. He talks about how China is the most important relationship that the United States has. He considers it the most important bilateral relationship in the world.

He talks about the entry of China into the WTO in 2001. He says China is on the world stage. He talks about the importance of the younger generations in both the United States and China. He believes the younger generation in America needs to learn Chinese. He talks about the importance about cross cultural understandings between the two different generations.

Ambassador Huntsman claims that human rights are a part of who America is and it will be part of our relationship with China.

Ambassador Huntsman also talks about the strategic distrust between China and America.

He points out some rocky parts in the relationship. Military to military communications between the United States and China are very poor. Military expenditures in China are not transparent.

He also talks about the rise of internet blogging in China.

Q: How to work on the currency war?

Huntsman does not want to talk about the currency issues, leaving it to the Department of Treasury. He feels the market will dictate the outcomes. He believes China will re-balance by reducing its exports and increase its domestic consumption. He is talking about the uptick in exports to China. He foresees greater Chinese investment in the United States as well as an increase in U.S. Exports to China.

He feels it comes down to a properly balanced currency and believes that the correct policy is in place to move towards that.

Q: How does the United States debt effect a relationship with China?

Huntsman feels the United States has too much debt. He believes China holds 2 trillion dollars in U.S. debt. He feels debt is bought and sold in a free market environment and a lot of countries buy and sell U.S. debt.

Huntsman does not feel that debt is not a factor at the negotiating table in trade deals.

Q: With China’s reserves growing at $2 billion a day, does the U.S. body politic have the patience not to impose sanctions against China?

Huntsman feels everything will be dependent on the revaluation of Chinese currency.

Q: What leverage does the United States have to get the China to play by international rules of trade?

Huntsman says there are international trade bodies which both China and the United States is a part of. He talks about the transition to the rule of law.

He talks about having trade disputes (approximately 2-3%) taken to the WTO.

Currently, China tends to respond with equivalent charges (or charges of equivalent value) whenever the United States brings a charge.

The relationship with China will soon overtake trading with Canada. He values it at $400-$500 billion dollars.

Overall, Ambassador Huntsman feels that a lot is working between the United States and Chinese trading despite difficulties.

Q: How would the U.S. Resolve conflicts in South China Seas?

Huntsman feels that the South China sea is something that the United States has always taken an interest in owing to the amount of trade. He feels the United States has an interest in the freedom of navigation. He wants to keep the South China seas open for the free flow of trade and commerce. The United States has a forward deployed military to ensure that those lanes will stay open.

Q: Can China make significant social progress without backing away from authoritarianism?

Huntsman says history will decide. If you want a genuinely innovative society, (because you can only maintain a society on cheap labor for so long), he feels innovation will require freedom. He believes it will require the free flow of information, including the internet that is devoid of outside control.

Q: How do you feel about the awarding of the nobel peace prize to Liu Xiaobo? Is the U.S. Doing anything?

Huntsman feels the award is an important gesture to freedom and democracy. He feels that Liu Xiaobo is very important symbolically.

The wife of Liu Xiaobo has been using the internet to send out information.

Huntsman says that in a nation of 400 million internet users, there will be a national discussion about the award in China. He believes there is a lot of chatter in China about the award.

Q: How is the United States and China cooperating on climate policy? What can American’s do?

Huntsman believes that there is a very important topline negotiations regarding emissions reductions, including the Copenhagen goals. This will be discussed in Cancun later. The United States does not have the kind of climate change bill that indicates the United States is taking the issue seriously enough.

He wants to see alternative energy cars. 70% of power in China is fueled by coal, that may require sequestration. He wants to see new buildings in China to be built to environmentally sound goals.

When you look at clean energy issues, he feels positive things are happening on the ground.

He feels it is important for individuals to raise awareness about sustainable communities.

Q: Strategic engagement has not lead to democratization, how do you justify continuing the policy?

Huntsman believes that China is a very different China than it was. He cannot believe there would be the kind of active internet community or blogosphere. The kinds of conversations he is having with college students are very different today. It is not an American style democracy. He feels that changes in China are driven by information technology and the blogosphere which push change. One blogger in China has 125 million followers.

Q: Congressman John Conyers Jr. asks about the amount and quality of aid China is sending to African nations.

Huntsman feels it would be a good thing if the African aid spoke to good governance and infrastructure development rather than simply taking out raw materials to fuel the mothership.

He wants to see China leave behind stronger health care, better governance, and a better infrastructure in Africa as well as Latin America.

Q: With midterm elections coming up, some members of congress are expressing anti-Chinese sentiments and how much influence do they have?

Huntsman feels that people care deeply about the U.S. Chinese relationship during election cycles. People care and want to talk about these issues.

Huntsman feels that it is very hard to explain the U.S. Chinese relationships in 15 second soundbites.

Huntsman wants to focus on points of agreements, but feels that the election cycle is not the best time to do so.

I submitted the following question and will see if there is a response.

Some observers note that the restrictive controls on information, Chinese censorship, for example are impacting China’s ability to compete globally and innovate. Is there significant pressure from the younger generation to open China up? Do you see more foreign companies withdrawing from the Chinese market, like Google did, owing to the restrictive controls? What do you make of the Washington Post report that China’s latest Communist party central committee meeting “ended with only the vaguest mention of political reform” despite internal pressures for such reform?

My question was not asked, but I feel other questions covered much of the ground if not the specifics.

Some people may recall the other posts I did on China.

You can find the discussion of Mary Kay Magistad here.

You can find the discussion by Anchee Min here.

You can also review my own experiences involving blogging and censorship.

Fixing nothing, but fixed nevertheless.

I recently complained about the fact that Craig’s list had moved the post I made linking to photographs I took while homeless to the “isle of the misfits”- basically a Craig’s list junk heap.

Moved?

I received some very negative feedback from what appears to be the person who is a Craig’s list “helper”.

I guess the Craig’s list ‘helper” is called a “peanut” named TheFixxer and he runs a blog. Dismissing my complaints as ridiculous and suggesting I have no recourse is the gist of the “help” I received from TheFixxer

TheFixxer wants to ignore the fact that people can post to links on Craig’s list.

The TOU states:

“Your linking to any other webites is at your own risk.”

It is clear Craig’s list expects people to link to their website. I linked to my website. I posted homeless photographs in the photography section.

The TOU goes on to state:

“You acknowledge that craigslist does not pre-screen or approve Content, but that craigslist shall have the right (but not the obligation) in its sole discretion to refuse, delete or move any Content that is available via the Service, for
violating the letter or spirit of the TOU or for any other reason.”

I’m not going to get into a detailed legal analysis of this troublesome language. I’m just going to say, let’s pretend you do have the absolute right to remove homeless photographs from the photographs section- I’m still going call you out for doing that.

In any event, Craig’s list does include instructions on how to
link to pictures as well as URLS. People are allowed to post to these things.

Now, I didn’t post an ad. But the ad section is interesting in noting that 98% are correctly flagged.

What about the other 2%?

What about the other 2%? 2% may not sound like a lot, but given the potential volume of posts, it actually could be a very large number in the aggregate.

They don’t even give statistics for the Isle of the misfits. One can only speculate.

Now lets get to another few “loose facts”.

The Fixxer apparently claims he was blocked on this forum. That is not true. TheFixxer could post to this forum. I merely said, “Good-bye.” I also closed the next post totally to threads, but not the post TheFixxer is referring to. TheFixxer could still post to it or this blog.

TheFixxer claims I’m making money on this forum from click-n-pay google ads. I am not making any money from this forum. I think the fact that I was living in a homeless shelter should be proof of that.

TheFixxer uses words such as “claim to be a non-practicing lawyer”.

Here’s some non-legal advice for TheFixxer: You might want to spend some time checking out your facts. You might come across an article, like this one, that might confirm that I am a lawyer who became homeless.

I could try to respond to the thread, but I can’t seem to find it on Craig’s list.

Update: I posted a link in the media forums about the John R. Finnegan award winner on the Freedom of information day.

I found this on the Craig’s list media discussion forum sidebar.

I also posted my hot air balloon pictures to Craig’s list, but those were not moved.

Twittercide: Tweet DNS by Twitter.

The latest account closure by Twitter will not be ignored.

Let me begin by pointing out something some people may not know. According to Wired in 2009:

“Late this year, Twitter announced deals with Google and Microsoft access to people’s tweets and the right to post them in search results so that they can datamine those tweets and put ads around them.”

So that is what Twitter is about.

I have documented several times my attempts to use Twitter as a social networking tool. Any attempt I make, has been repeatedly met with the same consequence- account suspensions and closings.

Let me begin by saying that Twitter, in a social networking sense, is nothing more than a giant mosh pit of information. People enter topics in which they no know one and shout out whatever they want in 140 characters. Sometimes, people work together to keep a topic trending and simply post anything that keeps the topic trending.

People use Twitter for a variety of things including soliciting support for nonprofits and self-promotional activities (such as celebrities who tweet about their latest project.)

For the most part, my use of Twitter has been to promote the efforts to save Dollhouse through the twitition and about my love for Eliza Dushku. I have tweeted about a lot of other subjects, including video games, movies, nonprofits, politics- but my most common tweet has been about Dollhouse and my love for Eliza Dushku. I follow only Eliza Dushku. In many respects, my tweets are not much different than a fan of Justin Bieber tweeting about his music or saying they love him.

Let’s take a close look at my brief history with Twitter:

Most recently Twitter had closed most of my accounts.

These accounts and my followers on these accounts were never recovered.

I recently opened a new account with no followers. When I retweeted Ben Cousin’s tweet the other day, it did not have much of an audience because I had lost all the followers on my other accounts. I do, however, have no problem in tweeting to people who have tweeted about something, like Battlefield Heroes, links to my blog post about Battlefield Heroes.

If you tweet, you expect people to respond to your tweets. There’s not a lot of privacy to tweeting. You make public statements and you can expect people to respond to them. If you don’t like a tweet, you can ignore it. Some people have locked their twitter accounts so you cannot tweet them. Those are personal choices. My point is: when Twitter arbitrarily suspends my account, it makes a decision for you. It decides what information you will receive or send. Increasingly, it is making those decisions based on pay for text promotional tweeting.

I have already commented extensively on the fact that people can have multiple Twitter accounts. I have noted that Twitter allows you the technical ability to tweet a lot.

“Nothing I did was not made possible by Twitter in their intentional design. If Twitter wanted to limit the of tweets I make or the number of replies I have, they can code it into Twitter.“

“I’m not sure why they give us so many tweets and then get upset when we actually use them. “

It affects a lot more than me. When my accounts get closed, I can no longer use third party applications or even retweet messages about Twitchange or other social justice causes.

I have been suspended for tweeting about community events, such as MLK Day events, as well as donations to Haiti.

I’m tired of using a so-called social networking service that repeatedly suspends my accounts. It forces me to start all over and try to rebuild my followers. No matter what I do, at some point, Twitter seems to simply decide it does not like it and my account is suspended or closed.

I’m moving on to another social networking service. My experiences with Twitter indicate it cannot be relied upon to effectively organize. Any third party developer is risking their livelihood on the hope that Twitter does not suspend its users accounts.

The truth is there are other social networking sites. They may not be as effective in the short term, but if they aren’t wiping out my followers every so often, at least I stand a chance of building a base of support or getting a message out. Just look at my Twitition and you can see how the momentum just died with the account closures. To whoever made the Twitition application, good luck to you! I really liked the application, but it’s just not compatible with Twitter’s policies. My suggestion: develop for something other than Twitter. My experience suggests it is very hard to tweet about your twitition when your account gets closed- take it from me.

Charities which are hoping that people will get the message out might be disappointed with the results. People who put too much stock in the number of followers they have, might be surprised to find out how many of their followers are simply one person who has been forced to open multiple accounts.

Twitter is willing to sell my tweets to Google and Microsoft but at the same time, it wants to suspend me for tweeting?

Meanwhile, over on Facebook, I keep getting people posting about the Rally to Restore Sanity in the comments fields. Some of these people are posting about an event Comedy Central is hosting. (Spam? Not by my account. They are just talking about something that interests them. I’m free to ignore their posts.) At least, however, Facebook is not closing their accounts.

The only reason I continued to try to use Twitter was to follow Eliza Dushku. I did not try to follow anyone else. At this point, I’m done with Twitter.

Hooray for censorship on Twitter.

Hooray. Twitter closed another account. I guess it was too risky to actually use Twitter for anything. I know people are leaving Twitter and some feel the Twitter moment has passed. It does depress one to think that one cannot actually tweet on Twitter but so be it. I appealed the most recent suspension, of course, but at this point, I think I’ve given Twitter every opportunity to actually live up to its claim of “social network”.

Twitter=you follow the approved tweets. Do not tweet to strangers. Ironically, some of the approved tweets would probably make Larry Flint blush. My tweets about writing scripts and love are apparently, too much.

Summary Judgment Arguments

The court hearing on the Catholic Charities case was today. Catholic Charities moved for summary judgment.

I made myself available by telephone for the court to call as I am in Elko, Nevada.

The hearing began with the court asking whether I was going to be available for trial. It is a good question. I could only say that I anticipated I could attend, but obviously the lack of money and the distance pose enormous problems.

After that, it was a long question and answer session by the judge. I feel that my earlier written pleadings do a much better job of trying to clarify the situation than my oral presentation. Given the fact that the proceedings began at 6:45 a.m. pacific time this is no surprise.

I am not sure how long it will take for the judge to issue a ruling.

Basic background about the case can be found here.

The legal documents for summary judgment can be viewed here.

Other legal documents relating to the case are here.

One other Administrative Note.

My on-going dispute with Twitter, in which they shut me down for apparently using Twitter to of all things, Tweet, has left the Dollhouse Twitition in rather bad shape because anyone trying to click on creator of the Dollhouse twitition (e.g. Tore Simonsen) gets this ugly message.

Not much I can do about that though.

Regular followers of my posts on Dollhouse and censorship will recall my on-going disputes with Twitter. My old accounts, as well as the followers, were never recovered.

Boring legal paperwork finished.

It is unfortunate that litigation is so horribly boring and time consuming. One could easily lose perspective and forget that this all started because I was trying to express my love for Eliza Dushku.

My response to the request for answers to interrogatories is here.

My response to the request for production of documents is here.

I’m not adding the attachments, because the file sizes are probably too large.

Twitter versus Twitter.

Twitter continues to maintain its position that my accounts should be suspended. I continue to appeal the suspension.

A few things should be noted:

1. You can have multiple twitter accounts.

2. They set the limits on your how you tweet.

Nothing I did was not made possible by Twitter in their intentional design. If Twitter wanted to limit the of tweets I make or the number of replies I have, they can code it into Twitter.

I want to be clear: Any Justin Bieber fan who tweets “excessively” about their love for Justin Bieber while supporting their new album could just as easily have their account closed if Twitter is allowed to have its way.

The point of social networking is to social network. As a result of Twitter, I lost all of the followers I had- people who truly responded to my messages. What good does it do to try to tweet and make new contacts if Twitter can simply close your account?

This is not just something that affects me, it affects others as well. Make no mistake about it: I was using third party tools while Tweeting- but no more. Adobe Air and TweetDeck- now worthless to me. Twitition- can’t really leverage it with my accounts closed.

At the end of the day, the Tweeple should be able to decide whether or not to support my efforts to save Dollhouse- not Twitter.

RT True ♥ http://bit.ly/azq0aG and sign http://twitition.com/jtlak

Twitter stomps on homeless campaign to save Dollhouse.

No activity on Twitition for a while.

http://twitition.com/jtlak

I would also like to add that other people have been allowed to Tweet to save Dollhouse in the past. This makes my suspension highly suspect.

You may recall suspensions from the past.

I’m not sure why they give us so many tweets and then get upset when we actually use them. I’m not sure why Twitter gets to override the hundreds of people following me. If people don’t like my Tweets they can block me. It’s too bad that our ability to social network lies in the hands of private censors.

Twitter censors again.

They have suspended THREE of my accounts again. I constantly read stories about people using Twitter for all kinds of things. I have seen tweets to save shows like Ugly Betty and in anticipation of the cancellation of Heroes. I have seen tweets professing nothing but love for Justin Bieber. My tweets are no different than these and yet my accounts constantly get suspended.

I have no idea how long it will be before they begin trying to suspend accounts of Justin Bieber fans for expressing their love for Justin Bieber and promoting his new album, but it is clearly no different.

What is the point of social networking if everything you do has to constantly be approved by some private censor? What is the point of tweeting to make friends if they can just be wiped out at the appearance of some arbitrary censor?

I just want to interject about this story on the internet.

“Almost four in five people around the world believe that access to the internet is a fundamental right, a poll for the BBC World Service suggests.”

If it is a fundamental right, clearly Twitter cannot be trusted to safeguard such a right.

Make no mistake about it: Twitter will suspend anyone for any reason. I have posted about Twitter suspensions in the past. Their rules are vague and they seem to apply whenever they decide to apply them.

The only strange activity is on the part of Twitter. Twitter wants to pretend it is a social networking site, but in fact, its suspensions are arbitrary and capricious.

Twitter continues to attack accounts at random.

And I just discovered they suspended two of my accounts!

Eh two? Way to CENSOR Twitter. No freedom medal for you.

Twitter needs to decide once and for all- is it going the way of top down control (that is the path of censorship) or is it truly a social networking site in which people can actually exchange information.

Make that THREE of my Accounts.

Ban Twitter.

It does not appear that social networking sites like Twitter are prepared to adequately protect the free flow of information in this society and they are making a mockery of the internet.