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

MIT cuts ties with Chinese tech firms Huawei, ZTE

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 216 posts

Re: MIT cuts ties with Chinese tech firms Huawei, ZTE

#131

Post by chrischen »

penagwin wrote: post #39
gruez wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would this work? A monthly ZTE surcharge? The consumer already bought the phone. Retroactively punishing them when they already gave money to ZTE isn't the right solution. Just ban new phones from joining the networks.

ZTE is super popular amount the more "budget" carriers like boost, cricket, metro, etc. Not to mention their parent companies like Tmobile and Sprint which I'd still consider semi-budget carriers. Source: Work in phone repair. We don't repair phones that cost 100USD new and have a non-existant parts market.

What is a “premium” carrier and what are they offering for the extra price?

Re: MIT cuts ties with Chinese tech firms Huawei, ZTE

#133

Post by chrischen »

Palptine wrote: post #121
tasuki wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there evidence they are? I don't trust Huawei all that much, rather I think whatever alternatives might also be whoever's operatives.

It's written in their "anti-espionage law", where all companies based in China have the duty to actively comply with spying requests when asked.

Sounds like Australia, except it extends to all citizens so it’s worse.

Re: MIT cuts ties with Chinese tech firms Huawei, ZTE

#134

Post by chrischen »

throwaway29875 wrote: post #104
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a matter of government policy, all Chinese companies are government operatives. The Communist Party claims "overall leadership over all areas of endeavour in every part of the country".

So it's like a National Security Letter on steroids?

Or just a national security letter, not even on steroids.

Re: MIT cuts ties with Chinese tech firms Huawei, ZTE

#135

Post by chrischen »

rfwhyte wrote: post #59
farresito wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an European, I would rather get spied on by the US than by China.

As a Canadian I would tend to agree. My take on things is that while both countries spy, the reasons they do it are what matters. Broadly speaking the US spies to prevent terrorism and violence, where as China spies to steal IP, control their international diaspora for political purposes at home and abroad, and to destabilize democracies. The CCP worldview is incredibly cynical.

US did, and still tries to destabilize countries. See Iraq, covert CIA operations. It’s well within the norm.

I think what you mean is that The US is Canada’s ally so being spied on by the US is less of a risk.

Re: MIT cuts ties with Chinese tech firms Huawei, ZTE

#136

Post by novaRom »

visarga wrote: post #72
varjag wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chinese tech is impotent, so there's a fair chance for America.

In regard to AI, Chinese researchers can efficiency apply everything that has been published and can even make valuable original research, though not at the same volume and level as US.

>> though not at the same volume and level as US

for now

Re: MIT cuts ties with Chinese tech firms Huawei, ZTE

#138

Post by balabaster »

gnu8 wrote: post #99
eob wrote: post #61

I was a PhD student at MIT CSAIL a few years ago and recall an incident where a visiting scholar from a corporation who had donated money had to be asked to leave because he essentially scraped every piece of internal data and code in the lab and sent it back home. What was amazing to me was that he was allowed to return a few months later with the explanation “it was just a cultural misunderstanding” I want to be ca…

By home, do you mean their personal network, their employer, or their country?

One would assume to the corporation donating the money. I wouldn't naturally assume it was to his Mom or "China." I think a fair number of corporations assume that if they're paying you to do research, that they're entitled to the research and any results you obtain from it.

If I were sending data "back home" I wouldn't be sending it to "England." I'll be honest, I wouldn't have the first clue who to contact, unless MI6 had contacted me and asked me for the information, which I doubt they would - I'd be honestly astonished if I'd ever done anything in my life interesting enough for them to even notice who I am, and I wouldn't have the first clue who to send it to unless they came to me. I doubt forqueenandcountry@mi6.org is a valid place to send file dumps. The only "back home" that would be relevant to me would be my employer.

Re: MIT cuts ties with Chinese tech firms Huawei, ZTE

#139

Post by chrischen »

whatshisface wrote: post #111
thereare5lights wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is not an imperialist power? Are you kidding me? We have military bases and troops all over the world. Our black ops interferes in the internal affairs of any country it wants with virtually no oversight. We use our economic might to twist arms and bend other countries to our will. We have a ridiculous treaty with Cuba that cedes use of Guantanamo Bay to us in perpetuity for $2000 a year. We pretty much invade…

> We pretty much invaded Iraq for the oil. I have heard that before, but did we ever get any oil out of it? Was there ever any chance of getting any oil out of it?

By securing the region they almost definitely factored in the control of the oil.

Obviously they couldn’t factor in the eventual shit show and complete destabilization of the region that spawned Daesh/ISIS.

Re: MIT cuts ties with Chinese tech firms Huawei, ZTE

#140

Post by chrischen »

hangonhn wrote: post #54
thaumasiotes wrote: post #12

It could be argued that if the news needs to introduce you as "an elite US school", you aren't really an elite school. That's an odd conclusion to draw about MIT though. Who's the target audience here? MIT really is internationally known.

It may surprise some of you but the idea of "elite school" is unknown to a good percent, possibly the majority, of people even in the US. I went to an "elite school" and my GF didn't think much of it. She just thought that it's a school where a lot of politicians and rich people send their kids but didn't infer any special status or qualifications from that observation. In some ways, she's absolutely right but cultur…

Regardless of the semantics of elite and what she thought it meant, she knew that you went to a school associated with kids of politicians and rich people.

That’s consistent with the general definition of elite. Maybe what she and you were thinking of was “smart.”

Post reply on HN