So? We constitutionally shipped back a liner of refugees back to Germany to die before WW II. "Constitutional" doesn't mean "moral". This is about right and wrong - concepts about which business law is devoutly silent.

You really don't understand what Baidu is. It's a fascist corporation teamed with the Chinese government to perception manage a billion people. It's not a plucky lemonade stand. It's not a business.

Thus, in libertarian heaven, all search engines are indeed private, so... everything you read and see and hear is subject to whatever the company owners collectively think you should. Tyranny, same as if they owned the roads you travel on.

"Sorry, My. Grumpy, but our manager informs that you are not welcome on Roads Numbers 456-780. Please remove your vehicle from our private property or we'll notify our private police force, which you'll notice have a laser battery pointed at you up above. And oh, yes, it seems you are banned on all competing roads in the area, just to give you a heads up. You must have got someone important angry over at corporate, ha ha. You know, watch what you say, watch what you do. Words to live by, indeed. We hope for your future patronage on the Richard Cheney Memorial Highway System, Incorporated. Have a nice day. Get out or get shot."

Doesn't mean you have to obey another country's laws, either. I'm looking at you, Yahoo.

Bullshit.

A nation of business-addled fools blindly following their bosses' leads.

God handed the constitution to Jefferson on a mountain in the 1780's? The founders did not envision a private (government-controlled, for fuck's sake!) company controlling access to the world. They didn't have to. They didn't want to. They expected us to evolve and add more rights. They did not see the document as holy writ. They gave us the 9th amendment to slap us in the face with that fact. Rights exist whether or not the holy book explicitly enumerates those rights. So, fuck the constitution, as I am sure Jefferson would say. Fuck private company takeover of the world. Corporations are legal government-created fictions. They are OUR dogs. We are not theirs. HEEL, bitches.

Corporation only exist by government fiat. They have no other existence and derive all rights from our common will through our laws. They are a game, a fiction, a cheat.

Shoved into a Supreme Court ruling by a former railroad trust lobbyist turned Supreme Court clerk using his unique position. Never was our choice.

In China is there is only one microphone. Sucks to be the rest of the universe, I guess.

The right to force a business which has sole control (in China) of access to the world's news and uses that access to control the populations' perception? That right comes from our ass. Same as the rights to free speech, freedom to assemble, freedom not to be killed like a dog on the street if some business deems it necessary. There are no "rights" other than those we seize for ourselves, never have been. Rights are artificial and we buy them with intelligence, sweat, and blood.
We do not derive our rights from a "piece of paper", as Bush dismissively called it, but from our collective will. The constitution of the United States is not a holy book. It was a flawed piece of work, as its writers understood. That's why they crafted the 9th Amendment: rights enumerated in the document are not the static and only rights of man. Other rights exist, and they left that open for future generations to define.
The writers lived in houses without communications systems. They walked or rode horses. Corporations did not really exist. They did not envision a world in which mega-sized non-human non-governmental essentially lawless and untouchable and unfindable entities would seize control of the news outlets and "privately" censor the world.
NO. They would not approve of that and neither should anyone else. They'd kill to stop it.
A world of "private" businesses controlling our spaces, communications, food, water and employment is a feudal oligopoly. We did not build our country only to finally grant utter tyranny to rich Randian collectivists we can't even begin to overthrow because they don't physically exist. Hell, they have their own private police and armies to protect them from overthrow.
Take the right or live in hell. Your choice. Unless, of course, you're planning on cooperating with the new world order and being one of the bosses.

Ayn Rand.

A lot of comments mention that it would make sense to make a robot along the same pattern as a human: Can use same tools, access same spaces, etc. etc. My question is: if your {AI | robot} can't be distinguished from a real human, why can't you just use a (cheap, ubiquitous) human? Answer: we invent machines precisely to augment our abilities, to do what we aren't so good at: computing faster and less error-prone, be stronger, access spaces we can't, don't get bored, tired, damaged by some harsh environments, etc. etc.

I'm with Angle: see what job (or collection of jobs) your machine needs to perform, then build the best possible machine given the contraints, for that job/s. (Not that they have achieved it with the floor suckers, but hey...)