Bell, Telus to use Nokia and Ericsson, not Huawei, in building their 5G networks

Post by billfruit » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 4:06 PM UTC

throwaway2048 wrote: post #186

billfruit wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

West's hands are not clean, perhaps even more blatantly smeared on doing state sponsored disruption of infrastructure: Remember stuxnet and the problems they created in Venezuelas national oil company. In the case of China/Huawei the hostile posturing has been largely coming from US/West and not from China. I see much anti China rhetoric emenating from US, but comparatively less the other way round.

It's irrelevant if the west's hands are clean, we are talking about a decision that effects western nations themselves. Even if they preformed economic espionage, why in the world would they allow themselves to be put into a position where it can easily be done to them?

Post by mthoms » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 4:36 PM UTC

Lammy wrote: post #138

mthoms wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple answer, once again, is we choose our experts based on evidence . By default, the experts in any particular area are the people who have proven they are (based on evidence of education and work experience). The fun fact is, anyone can challenge an expert opinion. Just present compelling evidence that supports your claim. It's okay to have alternate opinions, but don't try and argue they are valid just becau…

I think my reasoning seems circular because we're talking about different things, but I doubt there's one single fact that all 8 billion of us would agree on. Let's try moving our focus of value away from the contents of peoples' beliefs and toward the knowledge that people sincerely believe them and we value the people. I agree that some beliefs (e.g. the vaccine stuff) are actively harmful, but from where I'm sitti…

Post by mthoms » Wed, Jun 03, 2020, 7:36 PM UTC

mthoms wrote: post #101

supernova87a wrote: post #37

I would love to know whether the fundamental objection over security vulnerabilities in the hardware and software of Huawei is resolved with this decision. Or if Nokia and Ericsson are just as susceptible and it was just political posturing.

It's not vulnerabilities they're worried about. The Chinese Communist Party effectively controls Huawei. For obvious reasons this is much more risky than sourcing equipment from ideological/political allies in Europe.

Post by saltedonion » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 6:05 AM UTC

Scoundreller wrote: post #43

saltedonion wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

-Canadian telecom policy still revolves around "facilities-based competition", where it's believed that new entrants should build out a new network. Didn’t CRTC force the incumbents to sell wholesale network access to new players like Freedom Mobile?

It was at punitive pricing, to the point where you feared going off network. For example, Wind (Freedom's name at the time) charged 5c/mb for data ($50/gb). And Wind absolutely would not let you connect to the incumbents network if you were in the "Home" zone. I think the voice pricing out-of-network was okay, but the incumbents definitely cooked the books on their costs on data. They once had a plan for $39 with 6gb…

Post by kortilla » Mon, Jun 08, 2020, 9:13 AM UTC

piiswrong wrote: post #115

kortilla wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada generally shares the same views on democracy as the US; and, more importantly, is part of the same intelligence alliance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

> and, more importantly, is part of the same intelligence alliance that's exactly why you shouldn't use American network equipment. The Canadian government cannot spy on Canadian citizens due to legal restriction. So instead it tells the CIA to spy on you and then share what they learnt through the intelligence alliance.