Original link: https://www.williamlong.info/archives/7299.html
On September 24, a Weibo netizen (user 2406409341) broke the news that a programmer from Chengde was working remotely on Github because of circumventing the wall. He answered user questions on the Internet and used zoom to work remotely. The Chengde Municipal Public Security Bureau fined him a small amount, but confiscated his “illegal gains” of 1.05 million yuan. This matter triggered heated discussions on the Internet.
According to the netizen’s account, the general process of the incident is:
In September 2022, the local security department found me. They believed that a Twitter account that posted a lot of xxxx remarks belonged to me. I said that I am currently working for a company overseas. My personal Twitter only occasionally likes and reposts the company’s tweets. The tweets that posted xxxx do not belong to me. I also introduced my work situation to them and showed my personal Twitter account. Information. They seized my mobile phone, laptop and several computer hard drives that day. It took about a month or so to return the equipment.
In April and July of this year, I made several more transcripts, introducing the work situation in detail, and providing the bank card for payment, the company’s registration information in the country where it is located, the consulting contract signed by the company and I and other supporting documents. During this period, the police The department said that the Twitter incident has been found to have nothing to do with me, but the circumvention of the wall will be punished, and my income will be deemed illegal income.
In August this year, a formal penalty decision was issued: it is illegal to circumvent the wall, and the income after circumventing the wall is illegal income.
On September 5 this year, I applied for administrative reconsideration. After communicating with the reconsideration department, they basically agreed with the opinions of the public security organs. I will need to go to the court for administrative litigation in the future.
During this period, I stated many times that github.com and the company’s after-sales support website can be accessed without circumventing the wall, and writing code can be completed on a local computer without circumventing the wall, but these explanations were not adopted.
At present, the information of this Weibo user has been cleared. Since the incident is too outrageous, let me guess the process of the incident:
I think if it is true as the programmer said, the person involved may have interacted with a specific Twitter while using Twitter. At the same time, the person involved showed off his income on social platforms such as WeChat. Therefore, the national security personnel It conducted an investigation. However, there is a problem with the way the parties involved responded to the investigation. You can just answer whatever others ask. There is no need to talk about things that have nothing to do with the case. In particular, you should not talk to others about your personal income.
Not showing your wealth is the most basic way of self-protection. If you show off your money to others, others will be jealous of you, start to plot against you, and try to squeeze all the money out of you. Their methods are difficult to detect.
Do not store your personal property directly in the bank. Even if it is exchanged for stocks and funds, it will be safer.
In response to the Chengde programmer incident, Hu Xijin believes that Chengde characterized a programmer’s overseas work income as “illegal income” and confiscated all of it. This is the heaviest financial penalty we have seen so far for someone who circumvents the wall. If the person being punished only goes online to write software and does not involve political issues, then this punishment is quite questionable. The “precedent” it sets increases social doubts and is not conducive to China’s expansion of opening up to the outside world.
The following is the full text of Hu Xijin’s Weibo:
A Chinese programmer living in Chengde works for an overseas company. He uses “circuit the wall” to receive company tasks on github to write code, answer user questions on support, and use Zoom to work remotely. The Chengde Municipal Public Security Bureau fined him a small amount, but confiscated his “illegal gains” of 1,058,000 yuan. This incident has a very large indirect impact on society, so it has attracted attention.
Chinese law prohibits informal channels from “jumping over the wall” for international network connections. The original intention of this legislation is to protect domestic political and ideological security and prevent the penetration of overseas values. Many years ago, when the Internet “Great Firewall” was first constructed, Lao Hu firmly expressed his support for its design and implementation, because it is in line with China’s actual situation and is a basic requirement for China’s national security in this era. China cannot let the American Internet giants wantonly exploit their territory, and our society will be kidnapped by them.
At the same time, it must be noted that China is a country that is open to the outside world. We have defended the independence of our own Internet, but this does not mean that we are completely isolated from the international Internet. As globalization continues to advance at the Internet application level, a large number of people in China need to use the international Internet to carry out their work, so some state-owned companies and institutions provide channels for international Internet connections. However, because those channels are limited, many people do not understand them, so some people still use their own methods to “climb the wall” to work on the external network. Judging from the information revealed on the Internet about Chengde’s handling of this matter, it should generally fall into this situation.
If we want to safeguard political and ideological security while maintaining the basic ability of Chinese society to open to the outside world and meet the needs in this area, we should treat relevant matters differently and not make a simple “one size fits all” approach or “endanger national security” Individual cases are used to measure other “censorship” behaviors that occur due to work requirements.
There are too many situations where people engaged in technology, media, and international exchanges need to access the international Internet. If their needs are cut off, the Chinese people will be closed off, and our overall ability to open to the outside world will shrink significantly. It is no longer others who mess with us, but ourselves giving up the opportunities and possibilities of the Internet era. I personally believe that it is necessary for the relevant administrative departments to conduct research on the domestic needs for connecting to the international Internet, open up more relevant legal channels, and promote orderly opening up.
Chengde characterized a programmer’s overseas work income as “illegal income” and confiscated all of it. This is the heaviest financial penalty we have seen so far for someone who circumvents the firewall. If the person being punished only goes online to write software and does not involve political or ideological issues, then this punishment is quite questionable. The “precedent” it sets increases social doubts and is not conducive to China’s expansion of opening up to the outside world.
Due to the tense relations between China and the United States, the ideological conflict between China and the West has intensified. Mutual political wariness between the United States and China, as well as between the West and China, is on the rise. At this time, we here still need to remain as calm as possible. The grassroots management departments should not get nervous when encountering civilian foreign-related situations, and should not have the understanding that stricter foreign-related management is more correct. The United States has gone to extremes when it comes to China. China must do a better job than the United States in maintaining confidence and encouraging opening up, so that we can have more tension and make our development more versatile.
This article is reproduced from: https://www.williamlong.info/archives/7299.html
This site is only for collection, and the copyright belongs to the original author.