US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days • Hacker News Board

Re: US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days

#461

Post by himinlomax » Fri, Aug 07, 2020, 9:14 AM UTC

Silhouette wrote: post #400

ludston wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure that having dash cam footage is analogous to having access to private conversations to the degree of a social media company.

In some ways, it is worse. At least the participants in a social media chat are volunteers. Cameras everywhere in cars with uploads to a central facility could be used to spy on the general public without their knowledge or consent. Some people will probably argue at this point that there is no right to privacy in a public place. I disagree on both moral and pragmatic grounds with such an absolute statement in light…

Dashcams are already regulated in Germany and Austria. People have been ticketed for always on dash cams; only those that are triggered activated (button pushed or shock detected) are allowed. (And yes, I know they use a buffer)

And even without that, there are other laws that would make it illegal for Tesla to just download cam footage without solid reasons. Hell even GDPR would apply, as it would contain personal information (license plates), and the penalties are severe ("€10 million, or 2% of the firm’s worldwide annual revenue from the preceding financial year, whichever amount is higher").

Re: US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days

#462

Post by baybal2 » Fri, Aug 07, 2020, 9:14 AM UTC

tannhaeuser wrote: post #324

I don't get it. It's US companies standing to loose their stronghold (near monopoly) on social, advertisement, and other forms of monetizing the web if the US creates a precedent for "national security" in this way, as in "we're welcoming social networks and free speech as long as it benefits the US and can be searched without warrant." Quite predictably, governments all over the world will be pressurized to question…

> and other forms of monetizing the web if the US creates a precedent for "national security"

By far not a precedent. USA has been doing this even with its Western European "allies" for as long as NATO existed.

As for Chinese cos. Forced sales at firesale prices are not unprecedented too: Sany

Re: US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days

#463

Post by pjc50 » Fri, Aug 07, 2020, 9:15 AM UTC

readme wrote: post #387

krn wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if the US creates a precedent for "national security" in this way It can be a real threat to national security[1]: > Thursday's order alleges that TikTok "automatically captures vast swaths of information from its users," such as location data and browsing and search histories, which "threatens to allow the Chinese Communist Party access to Americans' personal and proprietary information -- potentially allowing Chi…

bingo not a lot of people are indoctrinated into the world of national security, and because of that they just balk at it there's a lot going on in the world, and it's not a big happy place where everyone are friends, to put it bluntly china has other motives, I think a quick google should at least clue one in their corporate espionage activities

> indoctrinated

This is not normally a word with positive connotations.

Because the US is a free speech country, people can be aware that quite a lot of stuff done in the name of national security, especially since 9/11, is highly questionable. And the current administration has its own national security questions to answer relating to Russia.

Re: US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days

#464

Post by ejanus » Fri, Aug 07, 2020, 9:15 AM UTC

fqye wrote: post #451

ejanus wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong! How come same companies you mentioned are doing well every other place except in China? Don't you see this as odd?

No. China's internet market has always been extremely competitive. And there were some debates about why China could produce some big internet players and eventually it was generally accepted that for one China has a big, or is THE biggest single language market and the other one was because in the early 90s or 200s China's authorities, who were mostly older guys in their 40s or 50s and didn't know anything of intern…

Your last statement re-echoes my statement.

Re: US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days

#465

Post by thaumasiotes » Fri, Aug 07, 2020, 9:15 AM UTC

Markoff wrote: post #262

alexmingoia wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two wrongs don’t make a right. US companies don’t have to trade with China. But the US banning trade with China is nothing but an attack on Americans and my freedom to trade and communicate.

they don't, but WeChat is also huge security risk spying on people abroad with access to photos etc., tool used to tax evasion payments within the app etc. for instance you go to chinese restaurant - you can choose to pay legally with card or cash money they have to tax or undocumented untaxed income through wechat

> for instance you go to chinese restaurant - you can choose to pay legally with card or cash money they have to tax or undocumented untaxed income through wechat

This sounds like the exact opposite of the truth. Payment through wechat generates records. Payment in cash doesn't.

Re: US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days

#466

Post by em500 » Fri, Aug 07, 2020, 9:15 AM UTC

babesh wrote: post #167

This is obviously just a tactic by the Trump administration to distract people from the US economy tanking because of the mishandling of covid-19. If you haven't noticed, the US has much bigger problems. How about covid-19, the economy, lack of universal healthcare, weak education system, huge deficits, etc? I am not blaming the mishandling of covid-19 solely on the Trump administration. I am just pointing out their…

Stoking animosity towards outsiders is a time honored tactic of all bad regimes (including that of the PRC) to distract citizens from their own failings. Time honored because it works almost every time.

Re: US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days

#467

Post by Thorrez » Fri, Aug 07, 2020, 9:17 AM UTC

hintymad wrote: post #381

tannhaeuser wrote: post #324

I don't get it. It's US companies standing to loose their stronghold (near monopoly) on social, advertisement, and other forms of monetizing the web if the US creates a precedent for "national security" in this way, as in "we're welcoming social networks and free speech as long as it benefits the US and can be searched without warrant." Quite predictably, governments all over the world will be pressurized to question…

Isn't this just reciprocity? China banned a long list of media companies: FB, Google, YouTube, Twitter, Netflix, and every traditional media. Now the US is banning two apps made in China.

Reciprocity doesn't justify repressing human rights. The pursuit of happiness is a human right. Some people pursue happiness by making dancing mobile apps and earning money with them. If China decides to limit that right it doesn't justify the US also limiting that right.

Of course this is tiny compared to the much more extreme human rights violations we see in China, the US, and elsewhere. But we should uphold rights and rule of law in all cases.

Re: US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days

#468

Post by mikechen233 » Fri, Aug 07, 2020, 9:17 AM UTC

karterk wrote: post #84

thewarrior wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China says if you want to set up a factory in China you need to transfer IP. They aren't forcing western companies to invest. Most companies invested voluntarily. And this was seen as mostly OK when the rivalry wasn't as heated.

It was tolerated in the hope that over time China would open up. But that did not happen. When facts change, time to change your strategy.

China enacted a new foriegn investment law. It no longer require joint venture, IP transfers. Tesla is able to use this law to built an wholly owned subsidiary and factory in China. A lot of big autos in China are now buying back their ownership in joint venture, previously they were 50% 50%. BMW now fully owns all their operations in China. Also for 50% 50% joint venture, it actually has benefits for foreign companies because it reduced their capital expenditure and split the risks when Chinese market was not a known factor during the early 2000s. For IP transfers, they would most likely be evaluated against the risk and rewards. It's basically buying market access with IP. Companies don't transfers their best IP, but an outdated version. But for Chinese at that time it's still valuable.

Re: US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days

#469

Post by fulafel » Fri, Aug 07, 2020, 9:17 AM UTC

puranjay wrote: post #328

tannhaeuser wrote: post #324

I don't get it. It's US companies standing to loose their stronghold (near monopoly) on social, advertisement, and other forms of monetizing the web if the US creates a precedent for "national security" in this way, as in "we're welcoming social networks and free speech as long as it benefits the US and can be searched without warrant." Quite predictably, governments all over the world will be pressurized to question…

What's stopping Volkswagen from lobbying Germany to ban Teslas because all the cameras in it pose a "national security risk"? This is, by all account, a shortsighted move

I think a better comparison/scenario is the PI data hoovering cadre of US SM companies.

Re: US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days

#470

Post by dirtyid » Fri, Aug 07, 2020, 9:18 AM UTC

hintymad wrote: post #381

tannhaeuser wrote: post #324

I don't get it. It's US companies standing to loose their stronghold (near monopoly) on social, advertisement, and other forms of monetizing the web if the US creates a precedent for "national security" in this way, as in "we're welcoming social networks and free speech as long as it benefits the US and can be searched without warrant." Quite predictably, governments all over the world will be pressurized to question…

Isn't this just reciprocity? China banned a long list of media companies: FB, Google, YouTube, Twitter, Netflix, and every traditional media. Now the US is banning two apps made in China.

Nothing is banned, you follow domestic censorship laws you get to play. Every domestic companies has to, it's onerous, and level playing fields. FB, Google still sell billions in ads to China, they were engineering compliant services to return.

Legal reciprocity is China following US laws, which it does. Functional reciprocity is forcing Chinese companies to enter JV and tech transfer - while providing Chinese companies massive land and tax subsidies. I'm sure TikTok would love that compared to forced sales.

But just to be clear, while I shit on US a lot, there's rational grounds for banning Chinese media companies only because there's such structural asymmetry, i.e. even if twitter was legal, it can't be weaponized to undermine Chinese interests because it must comply to Chinese censorship laws. But this EO is just a dumb way to do it because it opens US interests to much more global blowback. US is pissed at these companies domestically, the international resentment is even greater.