The Separation of Internet Content Regulation in the Face of the Convergence of Information and Communication Technologies: The Controversies, Challenges and Solutions for China1/LA SEPARATION DES CONTROLES DU CONTENU D'INTERNET EN FACE DE LA CONVERGENCE DES INFORMATIONS ET DES TECHNOLOGIES DE COMMUNICATION: LES CONTROVERSES,LES DEFIS ET LES SOLUTIONS POUR LA CHINE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: More than ten different departments in China have varying responsibilities for regulation of content of publications on Internet. This separated regulatory structure has caused many challenges in face of convergence of information and communication technologies (ICTs), particularly Internet. These challenges include high compliance cost to ICT enterprises which effectively reduce incentives for high-tech startup companies and are detrimental to innovative ability of Internet itself. More generally, it creates tension for China's successful engagement with international community, decreases international competitiveness of Chinese ICT enterprises and stifles development of global ICTs. China needs to adopt a more sophisticated approach to regulate Internet content and overcome these challenges in near future. Failure to do so will widen gap between China and world's developed countries in Information Age. Key words: Internet; regulation of Internet; content regulation; China Resume: Plus d'une dizaine de departements differents en Chine assument les responsabilites variees du controle du contenu des publications sur Internet. Cette structure regulatrice separee a cause beaucoup de defis en face de la convergence des informations, des technologies de communication et surtout de l'Internet. Tous ces defis contiennent un cout de conformite eleve pour les entreprises ICT ( Information and communication technologies en anglais) , qui decouragent effectivement les startups high-tech et qui sont defavorables pour la capacite innovatrice d'Internet lui-meme.Plus generalement, il cree de la tension pour l'engagement de la Chine avec la communaute internationale, diminue la competitivite internationales des entreprises ICT chinoises et ralentit le developpement de l'ICT. La Chine a besoin d'adopter une approche plus sophistiquee pour regulariser le contenu d'Internet et surmonter tous ces defis dans le proche futur. Si l'on faillit faire cela, la distance entre la Chine et les pays developpes s'agrandira dans l'Age d'Information. Mots-Cles: Internet; regularisation d'Internet; controle du contenu; la Chine (ProQuest: ... denotes non-US-ASCII text omitted.) Regulating content of published information has been a common public policy challenge for both Eastern and Western political regimes throughout history. The regulatory challenge has included attempts to protect children from exposure to material containing erotic content to prevention of hate speech. In some periods of Chinese history, China has been one of most regulated jurisdictions as far as content regulation has been concerned. This is paradoxical because China has made great contributions to enable information flow and knowledge sharing since ancient times: China was country in which paper and typed letter printing technologies were invented. Each of these inventions was revolutionary in enhancing exchange of information and knowledge. By contrast, China's strict approach to content regulation has sometimes also been very shocking. The notorious event of burning books and burying Confucian scholars in Qin Dynasty (221BC-206BC)3 and so called literary inquisitionsin middle of Qing Dynasty (1644AC - 1911 AC) are just two examples. 4 The pages of history both in China and in some parts of Europe record that content regulation has been a very controversial issue for societies around world. Entering age of Internet, with its widespread information dissemination capabilities and without centralized administration, question of whether and how to regulate online content presents even greater challenges. As John Perry Barlow observed: the Internet is too widespread to be easily dominated by any single government. By creating a seamless global-economic zone, borderless and unregulateable, Internet calls into question very idea of a nation- state. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".