I am more than a bit wary about any tech from China. Call that tin foil hat syndrome or whatever.
Call that tin foil hat syndrome or whatever.
I’d go with “common sense”.
Call that tin foil hat syndrome or whatever.
Racism. It’s racism and xenophobia.
Don’t forget US American propaganda based on commercial interests!
The Uighur’s issue is most certainly racism, xenophobia and also genocide. As much as I have a problem with that it would not be the reason I would not buy the tech. I have zero trust with a nation that actively steals from any nation it can get away with. They have no morals on where the line should not be crossed. And you want to give them access to your data. This is why countries are banning use of their tech being anywhere near government communications.
This is why countries are banning use of their tech being anywhere near government communications.
No, that’s also racism and xenophobia. They spread propaganda about supposed backdoors in network hardware, but can never actually point to any. If there’s no exfiltration, you aren’t “giving them access to your data”.
I have zero trust with a nation that actively steals from any nation it can get away with.
Considering a lot of Chinese network hardware, specifically Huawei, is at the literal forefront of technological development, continually developing and producing the fastest devices with the highest throughput, etc., it is false to say they’re just stealing their tech. They’re beating out all the countries you could posit that they’re stealing tech from. Moreover, if you’re basing your supposed trust in a tech manufacturing company/country based on whether or not they steal tech secrets, what countries could you possible trust? The USA steals tech through (government enacted) corporate espionage against firms competing with firms in the USA[1][2]. You’d be hard pressed to find any country with tech manufacturing that isn’t engaging in corporate espionage.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/14/chinese-scientists-accused-seed-theft https://finance.yahoo.com/news/engineer-fled-charges-stealing-chip-040117005.html https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/aug/16/how-fake-award-for-a-tycoon-left-oxford-university-open-to-chinese-influence https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/jun/30/theyre-being-watched-chinese-pro-democracy-students-in-australia-face-threats-and-insults https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/06/china-technology-theft-fbi-biggest-threat https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-64206950
Right so that’s entirely meaningless. Read my comment again. I didn’t say they don’t steal tech, what I said was two-fold:
- Every country with manufacturing ability steals tech. Therefore basing whether you trust a country/company on that factor is worthless.
- There are some fields, such as networking tech made by Huawei, where they can’t possibly be stealing tech, because they’re at the forefront, ahead of all competitors.
You took the one very specific thing I didn’t say in my comment (namely, that they don’t steal tech), and decided to just shit out a bunch of links saying they do. Yet, you didn’t address any of the points that I did make, such as saying that is a meaningless angle to look at this from.
it is false to say they’re just stealing their tech
I must be misunderstanding this comment then.
As for them being at the forefront, you would have to point to a metric. AFAIK Apple is the company that has moved to 3nm process before any other tech company. Apple’s camera are dog crap, but other than that they are streets ahead. As for being ahead in networking, there is not really such a thing. Networking standards are agreed before implementation. It is not that the signal is stronger or there is a better reception. The difference between 4g and 5g is down to coding how the signal is sent.
Every country with manufacturing ability steals tech.
This really is not the case. Companies look to steal tech not nations. Western countries play ball with each other on this one. As for how good Huawei is, how do you think they got the expertise. The west was quite happy to let them come to our universities to help them catch up. And now they are biting the hand that fed them. Not only that but they are interfering in politics of other nations. They have a campaign to intimidate citizens of other states, right up to the point of kidnapping.
So no that is not racism. That is taking a moral approach to not trust a rogue state ran by a dictator.
AFAIK Apple is the company that has moved to 3nm process before any other tech company. Apple’s camera are dog crap, but other than that they are streets ahead.
Sure, but I didn’t say they were at the forefront in every facet of tech. That “just” in my comment you quoted is also doing some heavy lifting: they aren’t only (“just”) producing stolen IP-based tech; they are in part but not entirely. What I said was again two-fold:
- Not everything they produce in tech is stolen IP, such as the network hardware I mentioned (see below); and
- Since every country with tech manufacturing is engaging in corporate espionage, that is a useless metric to judge a country/company’s trustworthiness.
Networking standards are agreed before implementation. It is not that the signal is stronger or there is a better reception. The difference between 4g and 5g is down to coding how the signal is sent.
There is plenty of room for advancement in network tech that’s largely independent of the specific protocol it’s carrying. That’s why I mentioned Huawei in particular, because they have had some of the highest-throughput carrier-grade switches (that is, a single device can switch a much higher number of connections at a much higher bandwidth than alternatives). To simplify: instead of an ISP needing a dozen switches from a competitor to achieve the throughput of it’s supported bandwidth for the number of customers it has, it might need only a couple of the Huawei switches. And, frankly, it can be the case that a particular piece of hardware is able to put out a stronger signal than alternatives, for the exact same protocol (e.g., 4G or 5G); you could very well produce a consumer grade WiFi router with larger signal range, or a cellular tower with a larger signal range (yes, there are physical limitations to these, but we aren’t saturating that in general yet).
This really is not the case. Companies look to steal tech not nations.
Well as I said the USA as a nation performs corporate espionage on foreign companies who are direct competitors to a USA-based company. I would think other nations do too, but I didn’t look that far as I have more familiarity with my chosen point of reference, the USA, and all I needed to show was existence.
As for how good Huawei is, how do you think they got the expertise.
Once again, missing the point. You can’t steal tech that your competitor doesn’t have. If they were producing the exact same tech, you could speculate that it’s purely stolen IP. But if they’re at the forefront, as I’ve said, they can’t possibly have stolen it (else, the people they stole it from would also be able to produce it).
Not only that but they are interfering in politics of other nations. They have a campaign to intimidate citizens of other states, right up to the point of kidnapping.
This is blatantly false xenophobic fearmongering and frankly off-topic to this conversation. The original point was that it was irrational (fueled by racism and/or xenophobia) to flatly distrust Chinese tech. I mean, if you wan’t to play there, would you not consider the USA’s meddling in foreign politics, including having colonies, and funding and helping enact coups and installing puppets, to be just as problematic? To preempt, it’s not whataboutism to point out a double-standard: if you don’t trust Chinese tech for the reason you just listed, you also can’t trust USA tech (or really any “Western” tech for that matter). But if you aren’t so flatly distrusting of Western tech just by nature of being produced by the West, you need to assess why you are flatly distrusting of Chinese tech just by nature of it being produced by China.
So no that is not racism. That is taking a moral approach to not trust a rogue state ran by a dictator.
It is racism, because it’s founded in the racist notions of “Orientalist mystery”, Yellow Peril, Western chauvinism, and white supremacy. It’s hypocritical to take a “moral approach” to only one country; if it was truly a moral approach, you would apply it to any other country having the problematic characteristics you’re trying to point out. Also “rogue state” here is meaningless, and it’s not ran by a dictator (but I think you either know that, and don’t care, because it’s keeping with popular rhetoric, or don’t know that, because you don’t care enough to educate yourself and would rather keep with popular rhetoric).
And the government can’t say or do anything about it because that would be authoritarian and unbecoming of a civilized capitalist society which promises market freedom. Right?
I still love that Jake Sullivan talk where he admits that the whole free market bullshit they’ve been promoting can’t actually compete with what China is doing. It’s an absolutely incredible read, Sullivan claims that the American economy lacks public investment, as it did after World War II. And that China is actively using this tool.
last few decades revealed cracks in those foundations. A shifting global economy left many working Americans and their communities behind.
The People’s Republic of China continued to subsidize at a massive scale both traditional industrial sectors, like steel, as well as key industries of the future, like clean energy, digital infrastructure, and advanced biotechnologies. America didn’t just lose manufacturing—we eroded our competitiveness in critical technologies that would define the future.
He also opined that the market is far from being able to regulate everything, and “in the name of overly simplified market efficiency, entire supply chains of strategic goods, along with the industries and jobs that produced them, were moved abroad.”
Another problem he identified is the growth of the financial sector to the detriment of the industrial and infrastructure sectors, which is why many industries “atrophied” and industrial capacities “seriously suffered.”
Finally, he admitted that colonization and westernization of countries through globalization has failed:
Much of the international economic policy of the last few decades had relied upon the premise that economic integration would make nations more responsible and open, and that the global order would be more peaceful and cooperative—that bringing countries into the rules-based order would incentivize them to adhere to its rules.
Sullivan cited China as an example:
By the time President Biden came into office, we had to contend with the reality that a large non-market economy had been integrated into the international economic order in a way that posed considerable challenges.
The People’s Republic of China continued to subsidize at a massive scale both traditional industrial sectors, like steel, as well as key industries of the future, like clean energy, digital infrastructure, and advanced biotechnologies. America didn’t just lose manufacturing—we eroded our competitiveness in critical technologies that would define the future.
In his opinion, all this has led to dangerous consequences for the US led hegemony:
And ignoring economic dependencies that had built up over the decades of liberalization had become really perilous—from energy uncertainty in Europe to supply-chain vulnerabilities in medical equipment, semiconductors, and critical minerals. These were the kinds of dependencies that could be exploited for economic or geopolitical leverage.
Today, the United States produces only 4 percent of the lithium, 13 percent of the cobalt, 0 percent of the nickel, and 0 percent of the graphite required to meet current demand for electric vehicles. Meanwhile, more than 80 percent of critical minerals are processed by one country, China.
America now manufactures only around 10 percent of the world’s semiconductors, and production—in general and especially when it comes to the most advanced chips—is geographically concentrated elsewhere.
At the same time, according to him, the United States does not intend to isolate itself from China.
Our export controls will remain narrowly focused on technology that could tilt the military balance. We are simply ensuring that U.S. and allied technology is not used against us. We are not cutting off trade.
Source: The Electric Viking 🤡
If you disagree with any specific points he makes feel free to let us know what they are and why. 🤡
I’ve reached a point where after just reading the headline I can tell it’s another yogthos Propaganda post.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=lK1TOBc5Txc
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
