Live data from Hacker News

China warns India of 'reverse sanctions' if Huawei is blocked

reuters.com

121–130 of 151 posts

Re: China warns India of 'reverse sanctions' if Huawei is blocked

#121
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First and foremost, every country looks out for themselves, and who can fault one for doing that? All this shows is that the US isn't the only country that has asymmetric foreign policies and treaties. The "me no like China" chest-thumping is purely based on emotions, unless someone has actually found an actual backdoor in the 5g chips that are being considered for purchase here.

Actually no country does that. From Africian to American to Antarctican to Asian.. no one demands ip, shuts out all foreign companies, demands to be partners and than kicks you using some version of a legal system.

That is just a simplistic caricature of what actually happens. Any company has to first accept the tax breaks and business incentives (land resources, loans, no red-tape, easier access to market etc) that the Chinese government employs to attract foreign businesses in specific markets. China has structured those incentives to benefit them - which include setting up a joint venture with a Chinese company. If the company is a state owned enterprise, your benefits might increase even further. You have to obviously transfer the IP for the factory to actually make the thing you want. China, with its communist past has their own understanding of property rights. I believe even its citizens cannot own land - everything belongs to the government. I'm not an IP law expert, so I don't know what international laws China is or isn't violating, but I don't expect China to respect US laws, without a treaty.

Re: China warns India of 'reverse sanctions' if Huawei is blocked

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also have cooperated with GCHQ and the NSA.

It's better to risk being spied on by a country where you have lots of expats working in their tech industry. Having those expats greatly increases the likelihood of someone whistleblowing in your country's favor and someone objecting to abuses in your country's favor. There are thousands upon thousands of first and second generation Indians working in the US and UK tech industries. There are hardly any working in th…

The CEO of Nokia Rajeev Suri is an India-born Singaporean citizen.

Re: China warns India of 'reverse sanctions' if Huawei is blocked

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was not the US that perpetrated the violence after it toppled Saddam. It was the radical elements within Iraq. They're the ones that bear responsibility.

..so what exactly are we supposed to be telling the Kurds? That the US isn't responsible for the indirect effects of occupations that were started on lies to begin with?

We wouldn't need to tell them, they know. The radical elements in Iraq who actually perpetrated the violence in pursuit of extremism are responsible for the violence.

There is a reason why Kurdistan is one of the most peaceful and developed regions in the Middle East: they act the way you must act to be a prosperous modern people. The violent radicals who squandered the post-Saddam opportunity to build a modern Iraq are to blame for the killing and the chaos.

Re: China warns India of 'reverse sanctions' if Huawei is blocked

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the first hundred years of their existence there was an autocratic monarchy, a civil war and a dictatorial republic. Then restoration of the monarchy and the Glorious Revolution at the end of the 17th century that actually established the principle of parliamentary government and sovereignty. Not so much absolving as didn't yet exist... The company was far more a relic of the earlier age - when the sovereign gave…

So even accepting your argument at face value (for the purposes of this argument), the British government has no blame for a company consisting of its citizens and based in it's capital starting wars for two centuries with military support from said government?

I might blame the monarch (Elizabeth I) for handing them the monopoly of some then unknown far flung region or spice trade at their inception in 1600. The first attempt at regulation was 1773, which would turn out to be the first of many prior to their enforced dissolution. As that Act recognised the already existing political aspects of the company, that's where I do indeed start to blame the government. They weren't conducting wars for 2 centuries with support of government, but quite independently of government until those first attempts at restriction. It still gets to be part of British history, so we can't disown it, if you follow me.

The history is incredibly complex, worthy of many books, but for the period of roughly 1600-1800 the EIC was closer to the independent Nassau privateers turned pirate than to a regulated, and at least somewhat controlled, London plc. At some point early in their existence they remodelled themselves on the VOC (Dutch EIC) model to become more state-like as the VOC was so successful. The VOC was more independent nation state until the very late 18th century too.

They both fielded armies and navies independently and distinct from Britain or the Netherlands, made and enforced treaties in their own, not national, interests, had their own systems of justice etc. Being amongst the very first stock based institutions there were no systems of oversight and control. Stocks were still traded in coffee and tea shops, despite the recently established Royal Exchange - where stockbrokers weren't allowed. It was one of those coffee shops that would eventually became the London Stock Exchange. Any regulation came much later, and slowly, and ultimately led to the disestablishment of the EIC, and the wide range of corporate and stock law.

I might also blame government for not seeking to constrain the company earlier than they did... I can't really blame them for not regulating something that was new and unknown, just as in the current era bitcoin has seen regulation start to come long after its success. Or the talk of regulating Facebook, or no end of others...

Re: China warns India of 'reverse sanctions' if Huawei is blocked

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's better to risk being spied on by a country where you have lots of expats working in their tech industry. Having those expats greatly increases the likelihood of someone whistleblowing in your country's favor and someone objecting to abuses in your country's favor. There are thousands upon thousands of first and second generation Indians working in the US and UK tech industries. There are hardly any working in th…

The CEO of Nokia Rajeev Suri is an India-born Singaporean citizen.

Oh, I wasn't arguing against either Nokia or Ericsson. I just think buying from Huawei/China is a terrible idea if you care about your sovereignty.

Re: China warns India of 'reverse sanctions' if Huawei is blocked

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also have cooperated with GCHQ and the NSA.

Personally I think "the devil you know" mentality is better when considering that any Telecom tech could be compromised. Yeah everybody is probably spying, so you should get your gear from your strongest allies. Would you rather have a friend or an enemy spying on you? That appears to be the only options now that technology has thoroughly penetrated every day life. Another point not mentioned enough is that societies…

> Would you rather have a friend or an enemy spying on you?

A better decision rationale would be; which of the two is more likely to use their spy-data against you?

And the answer to that is without doubt; your own local spy agency, not the one operating in another country.

Re: China warns India of 'reverse sanctions' if Huawei is blocked

#127
post #24

Tit-for-tat. From my scarce knowledge of game-theory and world-politics it is generally accepted as the default move in these types of situations. But well, if India sees Huawei as security threat, shouldn't they have a quite good justification for blocking them? It's not that they are outright punishing Huawei for just existing, but that there is, in their opinion, a real cause for them to fear Huawei of spying thei…

Works well on games.

Only problem is trade isn’t a game.

Or, to put it another way, you have no idea when your opponent will stop playing this game and start playing another one.

Re: China warns India of 'reverse sanctions' if Huawei is blocked

#128
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Nokia has ever been accused or guilty of spying Which Nokia timeline are you talking about? The current Nokia HMD which outsources to China and was found to have Chinese botnet in them ?

You seem to misremember what that scandal was about, or maybe you read a particularly hysterical article that misrepresented the situation. Nokia had accidentally enabled an option intended for phones sold in China with a China Telecom contract. To verify that they were eligible for use with the contract, the phones would connect to China Telecom servers on first use. For the phones that had that option incorrectly e…

>Sorry we sent your private data, we did not mean it. Can we still be friends?

Re: China warns India of 'reverse sanctions' if Huawei is blocked

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I think "the devil you know" mentality is better when considering that any Telecom tech could be compromised. Yeah everybody is probably spying, so you should get your gear from your strongest allies. Would you rather have a friend or an enemy spying on you? That appears to be the only options now that technology has thoroughly penetrated every day life. Another point not mentioned enough is that societies…

> Would you rather have a friend or an enemy spying on you? A better decision rationale would be; which of the two is more likely to use their spy-data against you? And the answer to that is without doubt; your own local spy agency, not the one operating in another country.

In the long term, I'd not want my country's national security compromised by a morally bankrupt govt not subject to democracy.

Re: China warns India of 'reverse sanctions' if Huawei is blocked

#130
post #24

Tit-for-tat. From my scarce knowledge of game-theory and world-politics it is generally accepted as the default move in these types of situations. But well, if India sees Huawei as security threat, shouldn't they have a quite good justification for blocking them? It's not that they are outright punishing Huawei for just existing, but that there is, in their opinion, a real cause for them to fear Huawei of spying thei…

Works well on games. Only problem is trade isn’t a game. Or, to put it another way, you have no idea when your opponent will stop playing this game and start playing another one.

I think "game theory" applies to more situations than the name might imply..
Post reply on HN