121–130 of 497 posts
[flagged]
> Hiring a Chinese national and giving them access to trade secrets To be fair, this would have been prohibited if we subjected AI to ITAR restrictions. That said, do we know Ding was a Chinese national?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Serious question: Can we presume he knew he was doing something wrong?
I've had an intern uploading code to his G Drive and after talking to him I concluded he was not malicious, just dumb. That said you can't claim innocence for not knowing some law, plus any half serious company makes you sign cyber security / IP stuff during the hiring process (ofc one is entitled to sign contracts without reading them).
[flagged]
Yah, so there is a problem here in that many of these "homeland nationalistic" folks who send stuff back to "their governments" are in many instances, citizens of the country they are betraying. Since these two[1][2] incidents, I wondered deeply for a while, what is going to happen here as it seems the CCP is getting more and more brazen. I don't believe it would be legal for "enhanced background checks" on someone i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What is Article 7 of the Chinese Intelligence law? > Article seven says in part that “All organizations and citizens shall support, assist, and cooperate with national intelligence efforts in accordance with law, and shall protect national intelligence work secrets they are aware of. And that's just a nice wording to make it official, russians don't have anything similar yet they keep bribing small and big people a…
They can't "give up their nationality". Chinese government's position is that once Chinese always Chinese, and emmigrating doesn't affect that. They will still come after your family on mainland. Or use their "local police" forces stationed in most western countries to harass you in your new location.
Totally under appreciated point. It’s not “over there” anymore, the CCP have a strong and growing presence in the Bay Area now. Penetration into the FBI will take longer than google or local law enforcement but it is inevitable.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's legal is not constant in space and time. I bet the only thing he thought he didn't do right is not get out of the US in time. Then it would have been both legal and moral for him.
If he felt that he had to "get out in time," then he knew he did something "wrong" in the sense that my parent is (presumably) asking about. That's the only question I'm answering. You seem intent on drawing me into a debate about subtleties of moral and legal ethics, but I'm sorry to say I'm not interested right now.
[flagged]
It didn't work out for them that well. They couldn't last more than 6 months at any one company and I think eventually gave up and went back home.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a parody account. That’s a joke. The next Tweet in the timeline is a joke that the person hasn’t been at standup for a couple days and she doesn’t know why. I’m amazed that this obvious satire is the top voted comment for so long.
It's currently a 11 minute old comment, for what it's worth. HN doesn't have the traffic of something like Reddit, it takes a bit longer to change. But I'm not sure the account is a parody - it's certainly very trolly, but it does seem to be this person's real account based on LinkedIn, her Instagram, her website www.anamostarac.com, and others. Seems like a real person and their real account but according to other i…
The content is very clearly parody. Not only this Tweet, but other Tweets. It doesn’t matter if it’s a real person or not, the content is obviously parody.
It’s alarming that such obvious satire/parody is not only going undetected, but that people are continuing to debate it after it has been pointed out to be obvious parody content.
Does not bode well for the future of online information wars when something this simple is generating so much debate. The comment doesn’t even offer an excuse, it’s a joke about circulating private company content with government officials of another country. Even if you take it to be true, it’s not even an alternate explanation! I’m perplexed that this is causing so much confusion among this comment section.
So he was already CEO/CTO of 2 China companies while still working in google. And these information are publicly available right after he registering them. Seems a management disaster of google.
You expect Google to scan the database of companies in every country continuously to see if employees are executives of them? How would this handle different people who have the same name? Disclosure: I work at Google.