181–190 of 332 posts
In a small town in Israel, called Hod Hasharon there was a company named "Toga Networks". This company was paying as twice as you currenly earn, if you work at Cisco or Juniper. Just like that, as twice as, just ocme work with us. One year went by, and it turned out that Toga Network is no other than Huawei. So I do not know about stealing source code, but I know they looked after its IP which is in people's mind.
> The DoJ alleges that Huawei and a number of its affiliates used confidential agreements with American companies over the past two decades to access the trade secrets of those companies, only to then misappropriate that intellectual property and use it to fund Huawei’s business. These American companies thought they could build their products for a fraction of the price in China and increase margins. They didn't sto…
> It's hard to feel too sorry for these companies. It's not exactly a secret that this is how China operates You mean every developing nation? Just look at U.S. industrial espionage in Europe during the 18th-19th century when it was developing. Pretending this is somehow how China specifically operates is disingenuous.
You are answering criticism with criticism:
Here’s the DOJ statement: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunications-co... Also here's Huawei Technologies Chief Security Officer Andy Purdy talking to Maria Bartiromo: https://youtu.be/iPczYamcruo
As much as I assume that Huawei and co have backdoors in foreign electronics, I can't get over the racism and hatred for China shared by her and the comment section.
Are the comments real? Everyone is claiming that he's a traitor, a "Clinton friend", a liar, a commie, and that he should rot in hell. And the videos already got 80k views and a near perfect like/dislike ratio. Am I crazy for thinking this a bad interview, or does half the United States really feel this way?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see this as a win-win, too, but in a different way. Early on, the US companies cut their costs: good for them, and likely their customers. In the long term, China developed the expertise needed to contribute to the development of advanced technologies: good for them, and for humanity's aggregate progress. There's a lot of acrimony over how to divide the surplus, but this shouldn't overshadow the technological and e…
I love the fact that the PEOPLE of China have been able to benefit economically from this. However, less than 9% of China's population are members of the CCP. The other 91% of China's people are locked out of any form of government representation. This is a recipe for tyranny, and the elites of the CCP have oppressed the good citizens of China by developing tech for suppression of speech, identification and targeting…
I have no reason to believe that this was necessary for progress.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. Here's one on a potential free trade agreement between the US and Malaysia[1] (which is another TPP nation) that calculates direct changes: As shown, following a free trade, the Malaysia’s export to the USA would increase by USD 30984 million or 7 percent and the US export to Malaysia would increase by USD 16051 million(22 percent). The substantial increase in the volume of export between two countries is due t…
Thanks! I'm still looking for an analysis on how this would impact the Asia region in general, and China specifically. For example, from the paper, the net result export impact outside the US-Malaysia trade relationship would be a decline: "Further, the export of Malaysia and the US to the world is expected to decline by 0.8 percent and 0.1 percent respectively." But it doesn't break out "rest of world" into groups,…
I'd also argue that most analysis is likely to be incorrect given that the rapid growth and specifically industrial expansion of China into new industries is unprecedented.
Having said that, all analysis is incorrect at some level, but some is still useful.
(Also, someone is going an downvoting all my comments on this thread! I'm not sure why - I'm not making an argument for or against TPP, just trying to explain how it aimed to contain China. Someone even downvoted my comment pointing out that China is TPP participant Australia's biggest trading partner, so it was never designed to cut off all trade to China, just make the region less dependant on it. It's pretty annoying really)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The irony of this comment is that this intellectual property theft is what America did in the 1700-1800s to get ahead. And America eventually eclipsed the British that they were stealing from, so don't expect China to be "punished" too much.
And how everyone developed their own nukes... the moral of the story is that if someone copied your product and can beat you, then your product is not defensible in the first place.
Can anyone really develop new technology, bring it to market, have it immediately brought by a competitor with zero R&D investment, and expect to compete? Is there something that is supposed to be magical about US technology that this scenario does not apply?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a tiring trope. It’s like how the music industry kept saying that people would no longer sing and make songs, because piracy would prevent them from doing so. As if there was no money to be made, and money was the only point of singing. As if piracy ever stopped people from singing for the past 10,000 years. Well, artists do make money from songs, by having concerts. They are selling the service and the exper…
People will keep singing and dancing and making music like they have always done. Most didn't make money from it. Sheet music changed that briefly, tapes/records/cds. Music = Copyright = money is a modern thing. Getting billions invested in anything won't happen without a return. If a company is limited to a short window before everyone can copy means less funding and more valueless throwaway products.
Everything is derivative.
Even the latest generation of CPU technology pushing faster clock rates and adding more cores. It’s still derivative of the initial idea of the transistor.
You build value by building a moat. You make your business more valuable by making it harder for others to get into, almost like a natural monopoly.
Like consumer automobiles, which require a huge investment in societal knowledge and capability. Only a few countries can mass produce cars at a commercial level. Or commercial airplanes, where only a few companies can really make a profit. Or even Tesla, by changing the paradigm, from internal combustion engines, to fully electric drivetrains.
My initial comment was only to rebut the idea that you can’t do anything without massive amounts of patents and copyrights. Which in itself, has gone too far.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The text of the TPP basically ensured a "special trade relationship" between signers that outside, non-singers, would not be able to compete with. I would re-read the text of the TPP and see for yourself. It was basically a group trade agreement that guaranteed favorable exchanges. It's not that technically, they wouldn't be able to trade with China, but practically speaking, there was little chance.
I did read the text of TPP and it still isn't clear how it would have guaranteed that signers would not continue trading in large part with China. What I'm looking for is an actual economic analysis showing that TPP would have made it so that not trading with China carried a significant cost benefit in comparison to utilizing its market efficiencies and lower costs. I've yet to see such an analysis from a credible so…
I think the dependency argument is more that if there is more trade between countries within the TPP system, it would have given China less policy strength because countries aren't as dependent on it.
If a country makes a large amount of their export income from a single source they are very vulnerable to policy blackmail by that country.
> The DoJ alleges that Huawei and a number of its affiliates used confidential agreements with American companies over the past two decades to access the trade secrets of those companies, only to then misappropriate that intellectual property and use it to fund Huawei’s business. These American companies thought they could build their products for a fraction of the price in China and increase margins. They didn't sto…
> It's hard to feel too sorry for these companies. It's not exactly a secret that this is how China operates You mean every developing nation? Just look at U.S. industrial espionage in Europe during the 18th-19th century when it was developing. Pretending this is somehow how China specifically operates is disingenuous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The irony of this comment is that this intellectual property theft is what America did in the 1700-1800s to get ahead. And America eventually eclipsed the British that they were stealing from, so don't expect China to be "punished" too much.
And how everyone developed their own nukes... the moral of the story is that if someone copied your product and can beat you, then your product is not defensible in the first place.