And to think that Google would never submit to Chinese censorship in earnest is naive. Yahoo![1], Google, Microsoft, Cisco, AOL, Skype, and Nortel all willingly partook in aiding the censorship apparatus. Yahoo! even went so far as to out journalists and political targets for the Chinese government. Why wouldn't Google do the same?
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Yahoo!#Work_in_th...
Well AOL, Skype, and Nortel don't really exist as independent entities anymore. Microsoft already censors Skype globally (for profanity) the last I checked. Unfortunately censorship in other countries outside of China doesn't seem to get as much attention, but none of those tinpot dictatorship seem to have any trouble getting their hands on censorship technology from the west.
That Google already went down the road of developing a censorship platform with Dragonfly reveals their willingness to aid in government censorship.
The first news story I came a across searching (it seems fairly unbiased): https://m.sfgate.com/technology/dotcommentary/article/Cisco-...
Even in the example you linked, Yahoo! said "it must respect the laws of governments in jurisdictions where it is operating." How is complying with this different than complying with a U.S. Government subpoena?
Unless the user clicks the little down arrow next to the URL, which opens the popup menu with "Cached".
And even if that were also censored, the titles, URLs and the first couple of lines of text returned by Google would speak volumes about what's going on. Imagine googling Tiananmen and getting page after page of search results which all turn out to be inaccessible. What would that tell you?
Are you asking how censorship and subpoenas are different?
