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

Who Owns Huawei?

papers.ssrn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 334 posts

Re: Who Owns Huawei?

#151

Post by joejerryronnie »

throwaway8879 wrote: post #61
adventured wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. What's being floated in this thread is an absurd premise. By that premise, Norway controls Microsoft and Apple because they own part of the companies via their sovereign fund. Microsoft by itself of course is worth as much as Norway's entire fund. Snapchat is a publicly traded company, of which institutional money representing primarily US investors controls the dominant position in the company. Reddit is minorit…

>By that premise, Norway controls Microsoft and Apple because they own part of the companies Even so, Norway's political/ideological/moral objectives are in line with the west's. There is a difference between the Norwegians having some influence in something, as opposed to the Chinese.

[flagged]

Re: Who Owns Huawei?

#152

Post by throwaway94857 »

joejerryronnie wrote: post #148
throwaway94857 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to elaborate on the unity of the different elements of Chinese society you mention. Chinese institutions are all unified under a single structure, and that structure is the Communist (in name only) Party. Party members are embedded in every single important facet of society. Education, the military, the government, the private sector, it's all linked and unified by the party. Now, we can compare this structu…

You're assuming the centralized "neocortex" model (i.e. communism/socialism) is more effective than the distributed model (i.e. marketplace/capitalism/crowd sourced). Who knows, at this point, but the next decade will be very interesting to watch.

China is not Communist or Socialist though. They are basically fascist, or if you want to be strict about the definition of fascism they represent an entirely new form altogether.

Re: Who Owns Huawei?

#153

Post by blahblahblogger »

adventured wrote: post #48
georgeecollins wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. I think you are used to Western Companies where the default is private ownership. All major Chinese companies began as state owned enterprises, and it is usually necessary to get investment from one to get a charter. So ostensibly private companies have a big state investment. Plus a trade union committee implies a government structure.

> All major Chinese companies began as state owned enterprises Tencent, Baidu, Alibaba, Ctrip, JD.com and dozens of other major Chinese Internet companies did not begin as state owned enterprises. They were all born during the prime years of Deng's philosophy holding sway over how the Chinese Government implemented economic policy. At one point Yahoo and Softbank owned about 80% of Alibaba as an example. The state ha…

To what extent do CEOs like Jack Ma, who are known in the West (at least on here), acknowledge the reality of this system?

Or do they?

Re: Who Owns Huawei?

#154

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

ordinaryradical wrote: post #5

The most informative comment I’ve heard about Chinese business is that one needs to take the western conception of state / military / corporation and chuck them out the window. In essence these are all descriptive functions of the same entity in China, and any apparent separation is just that—apparent. I know some may reply that, for example, Lockheed effectively lives at this nexus also. It’s a good argument, and pr…

The comparison to the CIA and Mossad is rather absurd. Huawei has grown because it has been able to offer similar or better networking equipment as competitors for lower prices. Recently, it has also been able to produce smartphones which are arguably superior to the iPhone and cheaper. In other words, they clearly are trying to outperform their competitors in their key markets. They're growing rapidly because they've succeeded in doing so.

Re: Who Owns Huawei?

#155

Post by md224 »

throwaway94857 wrote: post #139
ordinaryradical wrote: post #5

The most informative comment I’ve heard about Chinese business is that one needs to take the western conception of state / military / corporation and chuck them out the window. In essence these are all descriptive functions of the same entity in China, and any apparent separation is just that—apparent. I know some may reply that, for example, Lockheed effectively lives at this nexus also. It’s a good argument, and pr…

I'd like to elaborate on the unity of the different elements of Chinese society you mention. Chinese institutions are all unified under a single structure, and that structure is the Communist (in name only) Party. Party members are embedded in every single important facet of society. Education, the military, the government, the private sector, it's all linked and unified by the party. Now, we can compare this structu…

I'm pretty conflicted on this topic.

On the one hand, I've heard that authoritarianism is soul-crushing and I've been raised to believe that individual freedom is paramount. On the other hand:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metasystem_transition

I keep coming back to this idea of a society united by a shared telos that cuts across all racial and religious divides, acting together as a tightly-integrated social organism, a large-scale collective agent. What if this is the next stage of human evolution? Is there a way to embrace integration without stifling the uniqueness of the individual?

There's that fear of a Borg-like outcome, where diversity is annihilated by assimilation into the collective. But I was recently reading "The Phenomenon of Man" by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (originator of the Omega Point[1] concept) and this quote stuck out to me:

"In any domain -- whether it be the cells of a body, the members of a society or the elements of a spiritual synthesis -- union differentiates. In every organized whole, the parts perfect themselves and fulfil themselves."

So perhaps integration doesn't necessarily mean the erasure of the individual. Food for thought.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_Point

Re: Who Owns Huawei?

#156

Post by [deleted] »

roboys wrote: post #144
ma2rten wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Market performance is not the real driver of the company’s decisions. Every company has different stakeholders, who have different interests. The German state of lower saxony has a 20% stake in VW. That doesn't mean that VW does not compete with other car makers.

Also it seems disingenuous to act like boards of US Fortune 500 companies aren't filled with ex-government/intelligence/military staff that play a role in aligning the company's interest with the government's interests. It's soft power that results in similar outcomes. Look at Theranos's board, it's not as unique as people think when compared to other majors...

[deleted]

Re: Who Owns Huawei?

#157

Post by joejerryronnie »

throwaway94857 wrote: post #152
joejerryronnie wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming the centralized "neocortex" model (i.e. communism/socialism) is more effective than the distributed model (i.e. marketplace/capitalism/crowd sourced). Who knows, at this point, but the next decade will be very interesting to watch.

China is not Communist or Socialist though. They are basically fascist, or if you want to be strict about the definition of fascism they represent an entirely new form altogether.

Doesn't communism and socialism eventually lead to fascism though? It's an inherent flaw in these ideologies. They are too optimistic and fail to account for the basic human nature that a show of weakness will immediately be capitalized on by a more aggressive party. It's a cynical take but humans have always been a kill or be killed species, and modern day capitalism has been the most successful system at controlling our worst impulses.

Re: Who Owns Huawei?

#158

Post by jimmydef »

adventured wrote: post #39
avocado4 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TikTok & Snapchat as well. Youths are more prone to getting radicalized too, which would be useful for the Party's geopolitical goals.

No. What's being floated in this thread is an absurd premise. By that premise, Norway controls Microsoft and Apple because they own part of the companies via their sovereign fund. Microsoft by itself of course is worth as much as Norway's entire fund. Snapchat is a publicly traded company, of which institutional money representing primarily US investors controls the dominant position in the company. Reddit is minorit…

The fact that your well reasoned comment is downvoted shows how bad the Chinese hysteria has gotten.

Re: Who Owns Huawei?

#159

Post by waterdownship »

Without a doubt, the executive structure of Huawei is opaque to any outsider and up for speculation. However, it should be easy to verify that Huawei does distribute its wealth to its employee and it does not share its profit to the state. So there is financial interest for the employees, at least. In any case, the company may choose to things that benefit the state, but that does not mean it doesn't benefit the company.

Re: Who Owns Huawei?

#160

Post by sgustard »

tthhuyid wrote: post #125
throw0101a wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... overestimating the authoritarian. Sure: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_re-education_camps

For perspective, there are 2.3 million African Americans in prison.

Absolutely a travesty, but still you're engaging in false equivalency. The difference in being jailed with or without some legal process is significant. Study up at https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-... and acknowledge that the US's score of 86/100 is a far cry from Canada's 99, but worlds ahead of China's 14.
Post reply on HN