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

U.S. attorney general: Hollywood, tech companies “pawns of Chinese influence”

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 226 posts

Re: U.S. attorney general: Hollywood, tech companies “pawns of Chinese influence”

#171

Post by jerrac »

thephyber wrote: post #163
jerrac wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Virtually every large american company needs clear laws on working with China. I partially agree. Yes, the Federal government should heavily regulate trade with China. But companies don't need to wait on the Government to do what is right. Companies could have ignored any Government push to do business in China. Outsourcing ethics to Government regulation is just plain wrong.

> Outsourcing ethics to Government regulation is just plain wrong. This is a category error. Companies have an existential incentive to chase profits (and their managers can be sued by the shareholders for doing anything less). Their incentive to avoid violating laws, morals, and ethics is far lower. > is just plain wrong What is the consequence? Does anyone in the USA strictly avoid buying anything from any company…

> This is a category error. Companies have an existential incentive to chase profits (and their managers can be sued by the shareholders for doing anything less). Their incentive to avoid violating laws, morals, and ethics is far lower.

Holding firm to a strong sense of ethics and morals is a risky thing to do. Whether you're representing a company, or just acting as an individual. But that risk does not justify NOT holding firm.

So, if you run a company, and you're afraid of getting sued by your shareholders for not pursuing profit at the expense of your ethics and morals, I'd suggest finding a new job. Or, just maybe, your shareholders aren't so blinded by greed that they would not support your company doing what is right.

Re: U.S. attorney general: Hollywood, tech companies “pawns of Chinese influence”

#172

Post by refurb »

tw04 wrote: post #169
refurb wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on your sources and thorough analysis, ok, I’ll take your word on it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/07/15/cia-russia... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/30/trump-putin-ru... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/01/us/politics/trump-putin-g... https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-h... Ignoring the whole Roger Stone + wikileaks, Flynn, Manafort, etc. The list goes on, and on, and on. But you already knew that.

1. Opinion piece

2. Lots of “allegedly”

3. Trump favors Russia in G7, apparently that means our leadership is under Russian influence

4. Trumps denial of influence

Not too convincing so far.

Re: U.S. attorney general: Hollywood, tech companies “pawns of Chinese influence”

#173

Post by dang »

scarface74 wrote: post #125
dang wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't take HN threads further into political flamewar. Where it leads is equal parts predictable, nasty, and dumb. We're trying for better than that here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

It’s a post about the government calling out tech companies for being influenced about China but it is inappropriate to call out the same government’s hypocrisy? A post about the government is going to be political by definition.

Sure, but it doesn't have to be flamebait. We want curious conversation, not denunciatory rhetoric, and those two don't go together.

If you want to read more about how we moderate this sort of thing on HN, I've written lots about it: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu....

Re: U.S. attorney general: Hollywood, tech companies “pawns of Chinese influence”

#176

Post by hkeide »

jerrac wrote: post #171
thephyber wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Outsourcing ethics to Government regulation is just plain wrong. This is a category error. Companies have an existential incentive to chase profits (and their managers can be sued by the shareholders for doing anything less). Their incentive to avoid violating laws, morals, and ethics is far lower. > is just plain wrong What is the consequence? Does anyone in the USA strictly avoid buying anything from any company…

> This is a category error. Companies have an existential incentive to chase profits (and their managers can be sued by the shareholders for doing anything less). Their incentive to avoid violating laws, morals, and ethics is far lower. Holding firm to a strong sense of ethics and morals is a risky thing to do. Whether you're representing a company, or just acting as an individual. But that risk does not justify NOT…

And the people who don't go and find a new job will replace you in the market place. It's natural selection.

Re: U.S. attorney general: Hollywood, tech companies “pawns of Chinese influence”

#177

Post by entropea »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #157
entropea wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You bring up a very good point about Saudi. We're friendly allies and I absolutely never see the rage for them and their human rights violations that I see against China. It's almost as if there's some manufactured consent occurring.

I would recommend watching different sources. The corporate press in the US is basically always going to support the war machine. The major political parties are only nominally against war when they're not in power. Tim Pool and Jimmy Dore come to mind as two news commentators who are consistently anti-war. Tim is center-left and Jimmy is far left. If right wing/extreme libertairan anti-war is more your style, you mi…

I have watched Jimmy Dore before and I enjoy a few of his videos and coverage of more obscure but important events, but he comparatively doesn't have a large audience compared to the corporate press. He's friends with Tiabbi, Greenwald, and others doing great work that you won't see in corporate press and frequently has them on his show for interviews. Big fan of Chris Hedges too and I typically watch those interviews.

Re: U.S. attorney general: Hollywood, tech companies “pawns of Chinese influence”

#178

Post by tw04 »

refurb wrote: post #172
tw04 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/07/15/cia-russia... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/30/trump-putin-ru... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/01/us/politics/trump-putin-g... https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-h... Ignoring the whole Roger Stone + wikileaks, Flynn, Manafort, etc. The list goes on, and on, and on. But you already knew that.

1. Opinion piece 2. Lots of “allegedly” 3. Trump favors Russia in G7, apparently that means our leadership is under Russian influence 4. Trumps denial of influence Not too convincing so far.

Lol, intelligence from CIA sources is an opinion piece? Let me guess, Trump is the best president of your lifetime?

I notice you failed to address manafort, stone, and Flynn. None of which was “allegedly”.

Re: U.S. attorney general: Hollywood, tech companies “pawns of Chinese influence”

#179

Post by spaced-out »

jerrac wrote: post #171
thephyber wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Outsourcing ethics to Government regulation is just plain wrong. This is a category error. Companies have an existential incentive to chase profits (and their managers can be sued by the shareholders for doing anything less). Their incentive to avoid violating laws, morals, and ethics is far lower. > is just plain wrong What is the consequence? Does anyone in the USA strictly avoid buying anything from any company…

> This is a category error. Companies have an existential incentive to chase profits (and their managers can be sued by the shareholders for doing anything less). Their incentive to avoid violating laws, morals, and ethics is far lower. Holding firm to a strong sense of ethics and morals is a risky thing to do. Whether you're representing a company, or just acting as an individual. But that risk does not justify NOT…

>So, if you run a company, and you're afraid of getting sued by your shareholders for not pursuing profit at the expense of your ethics and morals, I'd suggest finding a new job.

Maybe this is what happens, and the people who are left in charge at those companies are the ones who don't care?

Re: U.S. attorney general: Hollywood, tech companies “pawns of Chinese influence”

#180

Post by pnathan »

This has to be considered in a nuanced way. Note that I'm calling "China" the country's leadership as expressed by their official stance, not the individuals or the general population.

- China does pressure operations with other countries.

- China does not have a USA aligned value system

- China is getting quite successful - parity with the US is either here or not far off.

- China is influencing tech companies in a steak-dinner sort of way.

- China does certain things that verge on, or simply are, sleazy.

I would suggest the thing to get excited about, and appropriate boundary setting, would be the sleaze. I look forward to a friendly competition with the Chinese system, where we're both competing to be excellent and trading top places. That seems to be something the AG is concerned about- I don't mind being in second place, if the race is adequately fair. ;)

Post reply on HN