Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Huawei staff CVs reveal alleged links to Chinese intelligence agencies

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 178 posts

Re: Huawei staff CVs reveal alleged links to Chinese intelligence agencies

#141

Post by JumpCrisscross »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #120
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What path? Through legislation and free deliberation. > The NSA was found to be breaking the constitution No, it hasn’t. Many believe it is, but the courts have so far upheld the NSA’s activities. The American public’s views on the topic are mixed [1]. The fight is in convincing the public this is an issue. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/05/29/what-americ...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/federal-judge-says-nsa-... https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjolt/vol11/iss1/8/ The evidence suggests that blanket surveillance is a thing, and that's it very clearly unconstitutional. Of course in this situation it's always possible to appeal to "national security" but that's an unconvincing legitimisation unless it can be proved that national security has been enhanced to an…

It's shown up in court, but defendants have had a tough time showing legal standing [1]. Keep in mind that the state secrets privilege [2] is judicially mediated. Given the lack of demonstrable, specific harm, the matter is--rightly, in my opinion--deferred to the political branches as a political question (as opposed to a legal one).

That said, let's keep in mind context. Here we have a government program which we're able to freely debate. If enough of us prioritized its removal, it would be outlawed. That functions as a fundamental check totally lacking in China, moreso now that Xi is a dictator.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewel_v._NSA

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_secrets_privilege

Re: Huawei staff CVs reveal alleged links to Chinese intelligence agencies

#142

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

filoleg wrote: post #16
_8j50 wrote: post #12

Tons of former NSA persons work in the US private sector,especially within infosec.

The keyword here is “former”. In the Huawei scenario, a lot of them seem to be active intelligence officials, not former ones.

In the OP it's only one of them.

Re: Huawei staff CVs reveal alleged links to Chinese intelligence agencies

#143

Post by cheez »

geofft wrote: post #65
cheez wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - I don't think China is any more evil than the US. https://www.wired.com/story/inside-chinas-massive-surveillan... Slightly worse, I would think. Another reason not to give up your guns to the benevolence of government.

You're right, the US government would never violently expand its borders and encourage settlers from the majority race, oppress the existing people with police brutality, and track people through their smartphones.

I only said slightly worse but I'd rather my government oppress someone outside my country if I had to choose. In either case, don't give up your guns.

Re: Huawei staff CVs reveal alleged links to Chinese intelligence agencies

#144

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

bildung wrote: post #73
MiroF wrote: post #26

wild - this thread appears to be brigaded by pro CCP posters

> wild - this thread appears to be brigaded by pro CCP posters Is it so hard to believe that people not in agreement with you have actual reasons for that?

> Is it so hard to believe that people not in agreement with you have actual reasons for that?

When people are saying that the US is a bad actor on the same level as China, yes, that should be extremely hard to believe for anyone with a reasonable knowledge of current events.

Re: Huawei staff CVs reveal alleged links to Chinese intelligence agencies

#145

Post by tekkk »

It's sad to see these threads get quickly out of hand with emotions getting the best of some of the HN audience. I have been commenting from time to time in these threads, but it seems impossible at times to have rational discussion. I don't really feel strongly about China one way or the another, I just know they do not always uphold the same values as I do. (And so do many other things)

Anyway, I think it's important to look at this issue as a whole from also the viewpoint of the Chinese - to understand how the Chinese society works and why there is such strong emotional response when people start accusing China. Because I don't really have first-hand experience, I found these very interesting videos that I think are enlightening:

serpentza - How China stops Overseas Students Integrating

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uXreGimP-o

serpentza - China NEEDS an ENEMY to Survive!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg2fUGBQDMQ

The author who is from South-Africa has been living in China for some time, and how he describes his life there is quite illuminating. In short: China seems to have mastered how to create an "us vs them" culture and blatantly aggravates their citizens to move their focus away from their internal problems. Well, I know it's a little bit tangential, but I thought it was quite interesting.

Re: Huawei staff CVs reveal alleged links to Chinese intelligence agencies

#146

Post by monocasa »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #141
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/federal-judge-says-nsa-... https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjolt/vol11/iss1/8/ The evidence suggests that blanket surveillance is a thing, and that's it very clearly unconstitutional. Of course in this situation it's always possible to appeal to "national security" but that's an unconvincing legitimisation unless it can be proved that national security has been enhanced to an…

It's shown up in court, but defendants have had a tough time showing legal standing [1]. Keep in mind that the state secrets privilege [2] is judicially mediated. Given the lack of demonstrable, specific harm, the matter is--rightly, in my opinion--deferred to the political branches as a political question (as opposed to a legal one). That said, let's keep in mind context. Here we have a government program which we'r…

> Given the lack of demonstrable, specific harm, the matter is--rightly, in my opinion--deferred to the political branches as a political question (as opposed to a legal one).

I'm not sure how it can be relegated completely to political representatives, given that the secreacy means that the check on representative desicions (an informed populace voting for their representatives) isn't present.

> That said, let's keep in mind context. Here we have a government program which we're able to freely debate. If enough of us prioritized its removal, it would be outlawed.

You can freely debate specific policies in China, and broadly unpopular policies in China are suspended.

That can't be said for the US, where whether a law is passed has more to do with whether the ruling class supports it, rather than it's broad popularity.

https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/fi...

> That functions as a fundamental check totally lacking in China, moreso now that Xi is a dictator.

The whole 'Xi is a dictator' thing is severely overblown in Western media. Oh no, he has the same term limits as Angela Merkel now. Literally a dictator.

PS: linking to the states secrets wikipage to increase your number of citations is lol inducing.

Re: Huawei staff CVs reveal alleged links to Chinese intelligence agencies

#147

Post by avereveard »

geofft wrote: post #48
avereveard wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The thing about whataboutism is that it was correct . It was only a logical fallacy in the eyes of US jingoists who didn't want to admit that, actually, the US had tons of human rights violations and the US vs. USSR conflict was not a conflict of good vs. evil. When both A and B do a thing X, there are two potential logically sound conclusions: either that X is bad and both A and B are in the wrong, or that it's not…

yes, but it doesn't excuse the behavior at hand, doesn't further the discussion and it's sad to see whataboutism in both the fist and second most relevant comment in the discussion (at the time of the posting).

"but the usa does it" is neither a justification, nor a validation, nor an exculpation. it's just finger pointing and throwing poo at each other in the hope that people, instead of condemning both, concedes the point, leveraging outrage fatigue.

there's a reason why it's considered a propaganda tool, after all.

Re: Huawei staff CVs reveal alleged links to Chinese intelligence agencies

#148

Post by microcolonel »

Barrin92 wrote: post #128
microcolonel wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What the average American does not need to worry about is the Chinese coming after him because he smoked pot on the weekend. The primary threat to American civil liberties is their own government, not distant foreign ones. Sure, your own government is responsible for not trampling on your civil liberties; that doesn't mean it's somehow not worse to be also surveilled by the Chinese government, in addition to your o…

I simply responded to the point literally made in the post above which was >you can’t really argue that America and China are equally bad to Americans. Yes, the American government can be a 'bigger bad' for Americans than the Chinese government. And it's also not incoherent in a general context, because using China or some other cold war enemy as a strawman to divert attention from domestic civil rights violation is…

> Yes, the American government can be a 'bigger bad' for Americans than the Chinese government.

I didn't say the thing you are refuting, that was somebody else paraphrasing my more precise statement. I said that the Chinese government is more willing to be evil to Americans than the U.S. government. The outcomes are a matter of proximity and control.

The reason I made this distinction is because right now we are at a crossroads, deciding whether or not to potentially give the Chinese government more proximity and control when it comes to ordinary Americans. My point is that they really don't have your best interests at heart.

> Instead of falling in line with the US government circus of blaming China, Americans would do well to pay close attention to their own government.

This is not an either-or sort of situation. Americans would do well to pay close attention to both the domestic actions of the U.S. government (and their local and state governments), and equally close attention the foreign actions of the government of the PRC.

> As another poster pointed out, one of the primary reasons for this in the 5G arena is companies struggling to compete with Huawei.

I'm not even convinced there's much of a market for 5G in the U.S; but sure, there is a competitive angle to this. Tell me, though, why Huawei is so interested in making the carrier equipment, but the modems so much less so?

Re: Huawei staff CVs reveal alleged links to Chinese intelligence agencies

#149

Post by yorwba »

tekkk wrote: post #145

It's sad to see these threads get quickly out of hand with emotions getting the best of some of the HN audience. I have been commenting from time to time in these threads, but it seems impossible at times to have rational discussion. I don't really feel strongly about China one way or the another, I just know they do not always uphold the same values as I do. (And so do many other things) Anyway, I think it's importa…

A single person's opinion won't help you much in understanding "the Chinese viewpoint". To counter it with another opinion, I don't think the citizens of any country can be said to have a unified viewpoint. Chinese people are just as capable of having nuanced opinions on political issues and disagreeing with each other as everyone else.

Additionally, you can't just assume that emotional reactions to accusations leveled against China are all due to Chinese posters with an "us vs them" mentality. When I see accusations that are exaggerated, get the details wrong or are made up from whole cloth, I am prone to react similarly. Of course I feel the same about official party propaganda, but that doesn't tend to get posted to HN.

Re: Huawei staff CVs reveal alleged links to Chinese intelligence agencies

#150

Post by iihttfeer »

ptx wrote: post #114
geofft wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you know about the Jackson State massacre or the Orangeburg massacre, in both of which the police killed college and high-school students? Or the 1985 police bombing of a residential neighborhood in Philadelphia that killed six adults and five children and destroyed 65 houses? The US doesn't need to suppress people from talking. There's enough social control that people don't talk in the first place. The informat…

It's still a bit different, though. I hadn't heard of these incidents before, but when I read your comment (which would have been censored in China) I searched for "philadelphia 1985" and quickly found an old clip from Frontline reporting on the events (which would have been censored in China) on YouTube (where it would have been censored in China, setting aside that YouTube is blocked entirely). Wikipedia (which is…

The initial question that OP answered was if US police would hurt civilians.
Post reply on HN