Strategic victory for Huawei.

[Takhisis]

Sorry but I have absolutely no trust in the US government which tends to put US corporations interests first. There are multiple examples of this such as the NSA spying Airbus for Boeing. This is not paranoid, there are proven cases. Another example is about the NSA listening to Angela Merkel's private conversations.

I have no trust in the US government either, especially with the Donald (and, more importantly, those who design his policies) in charge. But the US is still not China.

And yes, I am aware of the fact that the US has to be compared to China to be the better of the two.

Ehhhhhhh not really with Trump in charge.

Trump wants the US to become China. But it is not China yet, not by a couple orders of magnitude. There is still a civil society which tries to fight back, and I hope that it succeeds.

The difference in evilness is mostly a result of how they treat their own citizens. If you look at what these governments have done outside of their borders, the record of the US government is much worse.

To be fair though this is only because the US has been a lot more powerful and thus has far more scope for its actions outside its own borders.

Yes. The Chinese government is doing nothing that the US hasn't done before. Bankrolling allies, helping topple unfavoruable governments, suborning officials, destroying civil and environmental rights and selling them armaments (and training) that will as often as not be used tos tart wars or attack the population… yes, the US has done all that, which somehow helps people accept it whenever other powers, regional or global, do the same, because ‘oh the US already does it in X’.

 

[Hrothbern]

yes, the US has done all that, which somehow helps people accept it whenever other powers, regional or global, do the same, because ‘oh the US already does it in X’.

You do not need to be an allmighty power to meddle with dubious actions:

Human rights groups, activists, and surveillance experts have accused NSO of licensing its powerful Pegasus software to countries, including Saudi Arabia, that have used it to target individuals, hack into their phones, and monitor their communications.
A leading human rights campaigner and head of a prestigious London art gallery is the co-owner of an Israeli cyberweapons company whose software has allegedly been used by authoritarian regimes to spy on dissidents, the Guardian can reveal.
Yana Peel, the chief executive of the Serpentine Galleries and a self-proclaimed champion of free speech, co-owns NSO Group, a $1bn (£790m) Israeli tech firm, according to corporate records in the US and Luxembourg.
NSO is the subject of multiple ongoing lawsuits and has been criticised by human rights groups, including Amnesty International, which has asked Israel’s ministry of defence to revoke the company’s export licences.
https://www.theguardian.com/law/201...ights-advocate-serpentine-nso-spyware-pegasus

Nice combi !

 

[abradley]

"Strategic victory for Huawei."

Business
Huawei CEO says underestimated impact of US ban, sees US$100 billion revenue dip
View attachment upload_2019-6-18_3-24-53.gif
Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei attends a panel discussion at the company headquarters in Shenzhen, Guangdong province, China June 17, 2019. REUTERS/Aly Song
17 Jun 2019 02:45PM (Updated: 17 Jun 2019 05:17PM)

HONG KONG: Huawei Technologies founder and CEO Ren Zhengfei said on Monday (Jun 17) that the impact of US sanctions on the Chinese company was more severe than expected, and warned that revenue would dip to around US$100 billion this year and the next.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...timated-impact-of-us-ban-sees-us-100-11634276

What's the yogi Berra Saying: "It ain’t over till it’s over."

 

[wolfigor]

Sometimes we tend to forget that the global community needed to use more stick and less carrot with China's flagrant violations of norms and treatises (and human rights too) Where we are today is explicitly due to USA and WTO setting very specific demands, the Chinese envoy agreeing to said demands, and China subsequently balking away from fulfilling them.
Media tends to focus on the short term actions (i.e. Trump's tariffs) and not on the longer history of China's violations.
In some ways Trump is following up on what was initiated by Obama: China made very specific promises and violated them all.
Trump resumed the negotiations and China, again, failed to respect the agreements.

And PLEASE stop with this "what about USA"!
There is no comparison on the level of human right abuse, surveillance, and general disregard for human life and dignity that the Chinese Communist Party have shown and continue showing.
Ask the people in Hong Kong what they think about it

 

[Zelig]

Looks like a narrative fallacy; Trump's ability to follow the logic your post suggests is not credible.

 

[Farm Boy]

Hong Kong

Now to see how long the American threat to remove Hong Kong's special trade status in favor of the policy towards non colonial China stands for.

 

[innonimatu]

And PLEASE stop with this "what about USA"!
There is no comparison on the level of human right abuse, surveillance, and general disregard for human life and dignity that the Chinese Communist Party have shown and continue showing.
Ask the people in Hong Kong what they think about it

I can think of no other country more similar to the US than China. Both have government in bed with large corporations, with state power and corporate power too often mixing. Both are in love with the death penalty and imprisoning people. Both love mass surveillance and repression as a tool for keeping "social stability". And both have all this and will continue to have all this because they're Empires.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Looks like a narrative fallacy; Trump's ability to follow the logic your post suggests is not credible.

Still, if all we ever do is reflexively balk at or attack everything he ever does, even when we agree with him, we might as well be Fox News hosts. Our hatred and ridicule shouldn't override our judgement.

 

[Farm Boy]

Weird. European states have often looked that way to me, but the people's republic is a different beast entire unless I'm being ... well, it's unflattering.

 

[FriendlyFire]

because they're Empires.

China has like a few islands and Tibet not exactly an "Empire"
It sort of has NK as a protectorate but not really just keeping that country afloat as a buffer state. Its surrounded by other super powers, like Japan, India and not so super power Russia.

Large parts of Lost Outer Manchuria might flip back to China, given how incredibly improvised they have been while just across the border China starting to flourish economically
No chance of taking back Taiwan, if China is even close to building up it naval strength to be a threat then Taiwan will build nukes to restore its military security and forever remove the military option.

 

[Perfection]

There are so many satellite internet constellations getting thrown into space right now that it won't be very long before developing nations will continue to be able to leap frog over the traditional build-out of internet infrastructure much as they have already started to with the deployment of cellular internet and phone calls over traditional landlines, PCs and ISPs.

I'm not seeing satellites as ever being an improvement over fiber in the way cell phones are better than landline phones. The bandwidth and cost on fiber is so much better.

You are so pro-free market and libertarian!

(No)

I do not consider myself a libertarian, I am for a regulated market.

They don't. They have access pursuant to court orders to some data, much of which is encrypted and where "access to" is fairly irrelevant.

There's also various data that they could probably have de jure access to, but actually using access would burn US corporations to the point of them being unusable for the majority of the world, so that data is de facto not accessible.

I am skeptical here, by my understanding Google has complied with FISA requests to get emails from gmail accounts and the like.

Sometimes we tend to forget that the global community needed to use more stick and less carrot with China's flagrant violations of norms and treatises (and human rights too) Where we are today is explicitly due to USA and WTO setting very specific demands, the Chinese envoy agreeing to said demands, and China subsequently balking away from fulfilling them.
Media tends to focus on the short term actions (i.e. Trump's tariffs) and not on the longer history of China's violations.
In some ways Trump is following up on what was initiated by Obama: China made very specific promises and violated them all.
Trump resumed the negotiations and China, again, failed to respect the agreements.

I do not trust Donald Trump to have the patience and fortitude to have a consistent coherent policy with China, and especially not one that is based on human dignity. He may make policy decisions that a rationally acting better president might also make, but those are historical accidents.

China has like a few islands and Tibet not exactly an "Empire"
It sort of has NK as a protectorate but not really just keeping that country afloat as a buffer state. Its surrounded by other super powers, like Japan, India and not so super power Russia.

Large parts of Lost Outer Manchuria might flip back to China, given how incredibly improvised they have been while just across the border China starting to flourish economically
No chance of taking back Taiwan, if China is even close to building up it naval strength to be a threat then Taiwan will build nukes to restore its military security and forever remove the military option.

With China the imperialism comes from corporations which act overseas in coordination with the Chinese government to act on their strategic interests.

 

[Zelig]

I am skeptical here, by my understanding Google has complied with FISA requests to get emails from gmail accounts and the like.

Yes, absolutely, but "access to data that is stored in an unencrypted form, pursuant to some legal process" is a far cry from "free access to all data".

Email is not, and has never been a secure method of communication, and should never be treated as such. (Barring PGP email, which is really too much of a hassle to bother with - just use Signal.)

 

[Lexicus]

Yes, absolutely, but "access to data that is stored in an unencrypted form, pursuant to some legal process" is a far cry from "free access to all data".

Email is not, and has never been a secure method of communication, and should never be treated as such. (Barring PGP email, which is really too much of a hassle to bother with - just use Signal.)

Pff, everyone knows the only really secure method of communication is buying a burner phone for every conversation, breaking it in half and dropping it in a trash can, then dramatically turning and walking away.

 

[Broken_Erika]

Pff, everyone knows the only really secure method of communication is buying a burner phone for every conversation, breaking it in half and dropping it in a trash can, then dramatically turning and walking away.

Pfffft! Self destructing paper is the only secure method.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I'm not seeing satellites as ever being an improvement over fiber in the way cell phones are better than landline phones. The bandwidth and cost on fiber is so much better.

Currently, yes. With re-used rockets and ~$500,000 satellites, that begins to change. And the cost of both are continuing to fall.

 

[Aleksey_aka_al]

I do not consider myself a libertarian, I am for a regulated market.

Oh, the Chinese way. I see...

 

[plarq]

Huawei is literally "China do".

 

[Takhisis]

Yes, absolutely, but "access to data that is stored in an unencrypted form, pursuant to some legal process" is a far cry from "free access to all data".

Email is not, and has never been a secure method of communication, and should never be treated as such. (Barring PGP email, which is really too much of a hassle to bother with - just use Signal.)

But Signal requires verification with a phone number, which still compromises people's privacy. Especially in such a place as China where communicating with a marked number entails automatic re-education.

 

[Zelig]

But Signal requires verification with a phone number, which still compromises people's privacy. Especially in such a place as China where communicating with a marked number entails automatic re-education.

Modern messaging is mobile-first, and Signal is designed to be usable as the de facto standard modern messaging platform.

That being said, the threat model you're proposing isn't really practical. If I'm in China, I can verify Signal via an arbitrary non-Chinese VOIP number, and I can pollute the pool of "marked" numbers by sending verification texts to any arbitrary Chinese numbers. If you're being targeted by nation-state actors, there's no trivial "use this app" that's going to keep you safe anyway, you need serious opsec.