Tip of my hat, wag of my finger:
Tip of my hat to Google. Tip of the hat for refusing to bow to the White House's subpoena for the search records of one million users for use in its defense of the idiotic Child Online Protection Act (COPA... as in COPA Cabana). The (US) government has been rebuffed by the courts several times since they introduced the law back in 1998, but they are now attempting to prove what everyone already knows. It is really really easy to find porn on the internet. This would, they claim, support their demand for tighter control of adult content providers online (as opposed to the use for parental filters on local computers). Of course, like most legislation of this sort, it devolves responsibility for raising children from the parents to an outside source (in this case the government). Also, it is unlikely that measures such as the one's being proposed, would seriously impact a minor's ability to find porn. Where there is a 14 year old boy, there's a way.
Wag of my finger to Google as well, for their failure to stand up to China's demands for censorship. I brought this up earlier, but this only confirms the trend. China's 100 million (and fast growing) internet users are proving an irresistibly tasty treat to firms like Microsoft, Yahoo, and Google, and all it takes is one of them (or anyone else) to cave for special access and the rest have no choice but to follow suit or be shut out. A sad day for a company who's unofficial motto is "Don't be evil". Censoring references to Tiananmen Square and Taiwanese Independence certainly sounds like evil to me. From the article:

"We firmly believe, with our culture of innovation, Google can make meaningful and positive contributions to the already impressive pace of development in China," said Andrew McLaughlin, Google's senior policy counsel.

The argument is similar to the argument for overlooking China's human rights record when granting them entry to the WTO. If we let them into the global market, even with a few illiberal caveats, they will surely be unable to resist gradual liberalization once they are involved in the system. I agreed with this argument (mostly) for WTO entry, but I'm not sure that it is as valid with respect to information censorship. It would be better, I think, if western search companies refused entirely to do business with china on anything but open terms. Chinese discontent with local information censorship might then eventually grow to the point where they demanded access to the (uncompromised) services of Yahoo, Google, et al. An unrealistic scenario to be sure, but we can all dream.
Extra note: As the article points out, Google also complies with French and German laws restricting the mention of Nazi paraphernalia. I think these laws are likewise unjustified and illiberal and that firms such as Google should refuse to comply. Not mentioning nasty bits of history, does not make them go away. Just ask Japan, RE: Nanjing Again, probably impractical, but its the right thing to do.