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

TikTok CEO Kevin Mayer to leave the company

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 242 posts

Re: TikTok CEO Kevin Mayer to leave the company

#201

Post by readarticle »

koonsolo wrote: post #197
readarticle wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The president’s actions, granted on behalf of congress, are already being challenged in court. Religion has nothing to do with it, besides indicating a familiarity with US politics being mistaken as understanding.

> Religion has nothing to do with it, besides indicating a familiarity with US politics being mistaken as understanding. It was just another example how US blurs things that should be separated. In most European countries this would be a big NO for government to express a certain religion. You have it literally printed on your money.

Reddit block quotes don’t work on HN, try asterisks.

This once again has very little to do with the situation at hand though I’m afraid, if you’d like more information as to why a president can seemingly tell a specific corporation what to do on a whim, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_on_Foreign_Investmen...

Re: TikTok CEO Kevin Mayer to leave the company

#202

Post by readarticle »

bdjsjsbdb wrote: post #200
readarticle wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The president’s actions, granted on behalf of congress, are already being challenged in court. Religion has nothing to do with it, besides indicating a familiarity with US politics being mistaken as understanding.

I think it's reasonable to say that the modern trend of expansive executive power going unchecked is comparable to the mixing of religion in American politics. In both instances they're the result of the Constitution being so old and sacrosanct that you can no longer amend it in a meaningful way. You simply change the norms, stack the courts, and you've knocked out the leg of the stool that was supposed to uphold the…

That’s an interesting take and far more reasonable than pointing to words on currency and the concept of a pardon, it goes down especially well with the “American Religion” inherent in the near worship of the founding fathers and biblical constitution too!

Re: TikTok CEO Kevin Mayer to leave the company

#203

Post by tssva »

koonsolo wrote: post #199
37r6ehehediud wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why it should probably be the President initially is a much longer answer, but as far as only targeting specific businesses the answer boils down to not every Chinese businesses being viewed as a problem. If you only view certain companies or industries as strategically significant at the moment then why would you want to ban the rest? That just drives prices for imported goods higher while accomplishing nothing of v…

Ok no problem. If you want to live in a country where the emperor decides on this, it's not my problem.

The emperor isn't deciding this. The president is using authority which is granted to him by law. In this case a law which includes a means for Congress to overrule his decision if it wishes.

Re: TikTok CEO Kevin Mayer to leave the company

#204

Post by blackrock »

jld89 wrote: post #123

What I still don't understand is why European governments haven't made tit for tat measures against China in corporate law. Why do we allow free market access to chinese companies when they don't? Are we crazy? Why not give the keys to our factories/companies while we are at it?

Do you really? Let’s see.

European side:

1. Automotive: BMW, Mercedes Benz, Volkswagen, all German companies, have complete access to the Chinese automotive market. Volkswagen would be dead, because of the diesel-gate scandal, if it weren’t for the Chinese market saving their sorry asses. BMW probably makes more money from the Chinese market, than any other market worldwide. And these German companies have almost 100 years of manufacturing knowledge, that the Chinese side did not have. Is this fair? You decide.

2. Airplanes: Europe has Airbus, which has some 50% of the Chinese aviation market. This looks like a monopoly here in favor of the Europeans and Americans. Will the Europeans allow Comac to compete fairly when they get their passenger planes airworthy? That is debatable.

3. Luxury products: European brands have a captive market in China. Louis Vuitton is French. Other Italian brands, etc, they all have free access to the Chinese market. Do you see any Chinese luxury products in Europe? Zero. Is this fair? You decide.

4. Software: Europe has SAP, Siemens, also German companies. These companies can freely sell in the Chinese market. Is there a similar Chinese company that can sell into the European market? I can’t even think of one. Is this fair? You decide.

Chinese side:

1. 5G: The Chinese finally create a new technology that they have full intellectual property rights to, the 5G internet, and what happens? They are now banned from every single European country. The reason? The potential for spying. LOL. How convenient of an excuse from the Europeans.

2. China has WeChat, but this appears to be irrelevant in Europe.

3. China has Alibaba, but this is also irrelevant in Europe.

4. China has mobile phone makers, but all are Android. And guess where the majority profits go to? The United States companies, Google, Qualcomm, etc.

It appears that the European side makes the lions share of the profits. They earn more from branding and royalties. Whereas it seems the Chinese side makes peanuts in comparison, and they must fight for the scraps in volume, to earn a decent profit. Is that fair? You decide.

This is obviously not fully conclusive, but each side plays to their own strengths.

Re: TikTok CEO Kevin Mayer to leave the company

#205

Post by 0xfaded »

jld89 wrote: post #117
0xfaded wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sentiment in Europe right now is fear over Chinese money purchasing European companies piecemeal. European valuations are kept artificially low by, well, it seems just by being in Europe. With companies struggling from covid, the usual lack of European leadership on any sort of stimulus, and the US not in a position to bail the European economy out again a la 2008, there are a lot of buying opportunities. Current…

> and the US not in a position to bail the European economy out again a la 2008, there are a lot of buying opportunities. This is new to me, do you have a source? To me the US was in big trouble at the time, no resources to bail out anyone really...

This is essentially the austerity that was pushed onto Southern Europe because the ECB didn't have any mandate to engage in monetary policy until 2012, when the ECB started to rely on more creative readings. By this time it was QE from the US Fed that was driving the recovery, but the ECB did eventually engage in similar practices, if only to bail out assets owned by the northern banks.

Re: TikTok CEO Kevin Mayer to leave the company

#206

Post by phatfish »

op00to wrote: post #186
tom-_- wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to forget that China is still a developing nation (~$10k gdp/capita) and protectionist policy is designed to allow developing nations to strengthen domestic industries. If "free access" were permitted, these Chinese companies would surely be absolutely crushed by their US counterparts and its citizens would forever be consumers of US goods while forever providing the cheap labor to produce them. To build se…

Build domestic industries by stealing IP from foreign competitors? that’s not super cool to do.

Exporting US centric laws to the world and ensuring that preferable conditions for the US are "legal" is not cool either.

China has only recently become a big enough economy in their own right to say "nice try but no thanks" to US driven international law.

Re: TikTok CEO Kevin Mayer to leave the company

#207

Post by yorwba »

rorykoehler wrote: post #181
tom-_- wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to forget that China is still a developing nation (~$10k gdp/capita) and protectionist policy is designed to allow developing nations to strengthen domestic industries. If "free access" were permitted, these Chinese companies would surely be absolutely crushed by their US counterparts and its citizens would forever be consumers of US goods while forever providing the cheap labor to produce them. To build se…

That's not really our problem though. They've shown they have no intention of opening up regardless of how rich they get.

Have you perhaps heard of "reform and opening up"? It started being a thing in the 1970s and every Chinese government since then has opened up more and more, because that's how they're getting rich.

The latest big move in that direction was the new Foreign Investment Law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Investment_Law_of_the_... that went into effect this year, which introduced a bunch of big changes, such as switching from the previous system of "everything is off-limits to foreign investment unless explicitly allowed" to "everything is open to foreign investment unless explicitly forbidden". That list of restrictions http://images.mofcom.gov.cn/wzs/202006/20200624143734575.pdf already includes provisions for further opening in the future, such as removing the last restrictions on manufacturing passenger cars by 2022. (Special-purpose vehicles, electric cars and commercial vehicles are already exempt.)

If that doesn't demonstrate "intention of opening up", I don't know what would.

The only thing about China that hasn't changed seems to be Western commentators' knowledge of it.

Re: TikTok CEO Kevin Mayer to leave the company

#208

Post by claudiawerner »

michannne wrote: post #172
claudiawerner wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>My point is you have to be very far removed from society to believe that no one has ever talked in a vulgar fashion, especially in a country as sexualized as ours. Using vulgar phraseology is not the issue here. I'm not sure how you came away with that impression.

Yet it is, but for the sake of fast-forwarding the disagreement, let's assume for now that Drake, or any other male rapper celebrity, or any other celebrity period, or any semi-famous man has never in private conversation talked about how easy it is for them to take advantage of their celebrity status to get what they want from women. When you assume that, then the president looks quite like the rare unique case, wou…

At the very best then, it'd be the way he said it (so, the phrasing) combined with the fact he's the president (or was running to be), a role which we expect not only the highest levels of decorum but also humility and respect for the citizens, and combined with the fact that just because Drake might do it, it doesn't mean it's an OK thing to do. I don't know about other people, but I'd definitely criticize anyone for not only using their status to grope people, but then to brag about it. To brag about it betrays a certain mindset and characteristic of disrespect for people, and in this case, women.

In other words, I'd think lesser of my friend for saying something like that to me, or overhearing him in another conversation. The same goes doubly for the leader of the most powerful nation on the planet.

Re: TikTok CEO Kevin Mayer to leave the company

#209

Post by yorwba »

blackrock wrote: post #204
jld89 wrote: post #123

What I still don't understand is why European governments haven't made tit for tat measures against China in corporate law. Why do we allow free market access to chinese companies when they don't? Are we crazy? Why not give the keys to our factories/companies while we are at it?

Do you really? Let’s see. European side: 1. Automotive: BMW, Mercedes Benz, Volkswagen, all German companies, have complete access to the Chinese automotive market. Volkswagen would be dead, because of the diesel-gate scandal, if it weren’t for the Chinese market saving their sorry asses. BMW probably makes more money from the Chinese market, than any other market worldwide. And these German companies have almost 100…

> 1. 5G: The Chinese finally create a new technology that they have full intellectual property rights to,

Chinese companies may own a significant share of 5G-related patents, but other companies (like Samsung, Ericsson, Qualcomm) weren't just idly sitting by, so the intellectual property rights are distributed piecemeal across multinational companies. https://www.iam-media.com/who-leading-5g-patent-race

> the 5G internet, and what happens? They are now banned from every single European country.

Has any European country besides the UK even taken steps in the direction of banning Huawei or other Chinese companies? And I thought even the UK hasn't implemented a ban yet?

Re: TikTok CEO Kevin Mayer to leave the company

#210

Post by jld89 »

zorked wrote: post #179
jld89 wrote: post #123

What I still don't understand is why European governments haven't made tit for tat measures against China in corporate law. Why do we allow free market access to chinese companies when they don't? Are we crazy? Why not give the keys to our factories/companies while we are at it?

The World Trade Organization allows for asymmetrical relations like that for developing countries. Same reason why we don't demand a level playing field between sheep and wolves... China is a poor, third-world country.

So you put China and Burundi on the same category? Really?
Post reply on HN