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

US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days

asia.nikkei.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

951–960 of 1001 posts

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

#951

Post by hungryhobo »

fragmede wrote: post #930
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #891

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> China doesn’t allow many western companies to operate in China. This is simply false, yet it gets repeated on every discussion about China. Western companies are everywhere in China, and they make massive revenues there. The presence of Chinese companies in the West is tiny by comparison (if you want proof, just look at FDI figures in each direction). Anyone who's spent time in both places can see this. It's very d…

Two companies that are blocked in China, and are particularly relevant to this conversation, are Google and Facebook.

facebook and google are given conditions that, if satisfied, would allow them to operate in china. the same cannot be said about tik tok and the us market

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

#952

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

kazinator wrote: post #936
Cookingboy wrote: post #934

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>For years China has banned systems and applications from other parts of the world. That statement is a lie. Not a single one of those companies are banned in China, they voluntarily choose to not operate there, mostly due to them not wanting to comply to draconian Chinese laws. In Netflix's case they simply don't want to compete against the local streaming market. Apple, Microsoft, IBM, Oracle, Intel, AMD, Cisco, et…

You're not banned from my house, but if you come to visit, you're required to beat my children.

Cisco: "Don't mind if I do!"

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

#953

Post by xster »

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #950
xster wrote: post #942

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think too much brain-cells are devoted to debating this point based on non-factual premises. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/tiktok-china-state-medi... According to Lee Kai-Fu who launched Google in China: "Chinese laws are clear about what foreign companies can do to operate in China. In TikTok's case, though, the company was left no choice but to consider a forced sale." China doesn't not allow western compa…

The Chinese government forces foreign companies to do business with a domestic company, which they then use to raid the foreign company's intellectual property, develop a localized state-backed clone product, which they then allow to "compete" and inevitably crush the foreign company's product. It's not as straightforward as outright "abdication of ownership to a domestic company," but the end-result is similar, and…

Ya that's another very common frustration against an imaginary premise.

Western companies that enter joint ventures in China with IP transfers are proactively done with executives who explicitly weigh the cost benefit of gaining the Chinese market and choose to do so.

An equivalent here would be for ByteDance to choose to enter the US market knowing they need to oxymoronically abdicate ownership once they do.

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

#954

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #950
xster wrote: post #942

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think too much brain-cells are devoted to debating this point based on non-factual premises. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/tiktok-china-state-medi... According to Lee Kai-Fu who launched Google in China: "Chinese laws are clear about what foreign companies can do to operate in China. In TikTok's case, though, the company was left no choice but to consider a forced sale." China doesn't not allow western compa…

The Chinese government forces foreign companies to do business with a domestic company, which they then use to raid the foreign company's intellectual property, develop a localized state-backed clone product, which they then allow to "compete" and inevitably crush the foreign company's product. It's not as straightforward as outright "abdication of ownership to a domestic company," but the end-result is similar, and…

You're referencing joint-venture requirements. They've been phased out in most industries over the past three decades, and they're not as onerous as you're depicting them.

Plenty of Western manufacturers did fine over decades with junior partners. VW never lost its technological edge to a Chinese competitor, despite being in a joint venture since 1984.

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

#955

Post by xhinker »

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #950
xster wrote: post #942

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think too much brain-cells are devoted to debating this point based on non-factual premises. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/tiktok-china-state-medi... According to Lee Kai-Fu who launched Google in China: "Chinese laws are clear about what foreign companies can do to operate in China. In TikTok's case, though, the company was left no choice but to consider a forced sale." China doesn't not allow western compa…

The Chinese government forces foreign companies to do business with a domestic company, which they then use to raid the foreign company's intellectual property, develop a localized state-backed clone product, which they then allow to "compete" and inevitably crush the foreign company's product. It's not as straightforward as outright "abdication of ownership to a domestic company," but the end-result is similar, and…

Em... how to force. punish you if you don't run a business?

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

#956

Post by njarboe »

woopwoop wrote: post #887
njarboe wrote: post #872

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tit-for-tat has been found to be the most effective strategy in prisoner dilemma type situations. If China lets us into their markets then we will let them into ours. This was the whole point of letting China join the WTO, but China has completely ignored any rulings against it by the WTO courts. It not playing fairly. These individual trade sanctions by the US are the only way to make China keep up its end of the de…

Trade is basically the opposite of a prisoner's dilemma, though. Cooperation dominates defection.

I think the main idea in the prisoner's dilemma is that in the defect/no defect case the defector has great gains and the non-defector has great losses. Who gains and who loses is the key and that is what China has been doing to the West since entering the WTO in 2001. Tit-for-tat quickly eliminates the gains for the defector.

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

#957

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

dumbfoundded wrote: post #931
tensor wrote: post #829

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TikTok has only recently had any competitors from the west, and WeChat is still far and beyond any chat platform the west has offered. I have extreme doubt the western companies would at all be able to compete in China. They don't get the culture, they have inferior features and inferior user experience. In fact, if the west weren't so racist I suspect WeChat would dominate just like TikTok is dominating in the west.

That's the thing is that WeChat can exist in the US. In fact it does. It just doesn't get any traction except with Chinese Nationals communicating with their families. It's kind of absurd to think that platforms that literally dominate every single country in the world like Google and Facebook wouldn't similarly dominate in China if they were just allowed. TikTok is the first Chinese social app that's had any success…

> It's absolutely crazy that Chinese companies can compete fairly in Western markets yet the Chinese government can close their markets to Western companies.

The actual state of affairs is that Western companies do much more business in China than vice versa. It's been that way ever since China began opening up in the 1980s.

There are more theoretical barriers to trade in China than in most developed countries, but that doesn't change the fact that there's more actual Western investment in China than vice versa. Whether China's protectionist measures (which have lessened over time) are acceptable depends on your ideas about economic development. There's a very respectable economic tradition (stretching back to Alexander Hamilton) that says that developing countries should enact certain protectionist measures. Most developed countries got where they are today using some level of protectionist policies (the US, Japan and South Korea are a few prominent examples).

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

#958

Post by mam2 »

cwhiz wrote: post #685
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…

China doesn’t allow many western companies to operate in China. Why should the US allow Chinese companies to operate in the US?? This is an outrage that we should not allow. They steal our intellectual property, create state funded companies that are given monopoly access to their markets, and then unleash their stolen products on the world market. And if American or other western companies try to compete on the grou…

Or there is actual national security issues at play they dont want to tell

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

#959

Post by [deleted] »

cwhiz wrote: post #685
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…

China doesn’t allow many western companies to operate in China. Why should the US allow Chinese companies to operate in the US?? This is an outrage that we should not allow. They steal our intellectual property, create state funded companies that are given monopoly access to their markets, and then unleash their stolen products on the world market. And if American or other western companies try to compete on the grou…

[deleted]

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

#960

Post by [deleted] »

godtoldmetodoit wrote: post #847
jdietrich wrote: post #804

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why should the US allow Chinese companies to operate in the US? The US gains very substantial economic benefits from being an attractive place for international companies to do business. Foreign investors know that when they invest in America, they're getting a stable regulatory environment and a reasonably trustworthy civil legal system. If America decides to undermine that trust for short-term gain, there will be…

I highly doubt China has more levers then the US when it comes to a trade war. China can't feed itself past subsistence level without imports. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-feeding-china/ China runs on oil just like every other modern economy, and they have pitiful amounts locally. They are the largest importer in the world and they absolutely need it to keep flowing. https://www.forbes.com/sites/judeclemen…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN