351–360 of 497 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I retain my second citizenship in hope of a brighter future, not out of any sense of duty to my country.
While I applaud your optimism, your hope for a brighter future is not a scalable solution for securing trade secrets at tech companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In software engineering you get access to the repos on day one Some repositories needed to do your work, sure. Not necessarily all, and the more interesting work may not be available to just anyone who joins. If it's a company like Google, you may not even end up at the group you interviewed for.
I would be very careful doing that at Google. Even if just about anything is accessible, I imagine most access is logged. If you are downloading everything not related to your job it could raise some alarms!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is literally presumption of guilt based on where someone was born. Not where someone is born, but whom they owe allegiance to. If you do not discriminate based on someone's allegiances, then on what basis would you expect it to be appropriate to discriminate? The idea that all discrimination is immoral or unethical is not only suspect, it's clearly foolhardy. China is an enemy to everyone who is not China, the…
Your entire argument is based off the propagandized idea that "China is our mortal enemy". Should we cut off all tourism/business travel between China and the Wests? Cease all commercial activities? Declare war? Wait we should ask China to close the 9000 Starbucks in their country first. Your opinion, while fairly popular amongst propagandized Americans, is not supported by hard facts.. And your argument of "all Chin…
It is possible, and logically consistent, to both recognize someone is your enemy and to have respect for their position and no ill regard for their existence. It is possible, and logically consistent, to have respect for someone's position and yet identify the foolishness of providing them employment, succor, or otherwise helping them to achieve their aims, aims that are to your own detriment. Just as China is primarily acting out of rational self-interest, so too should the West. The West is far too willing to cut off its own toes just to signal some virtue which has no bearing or relation to reality. Reality always wins, and I'm merely recognizing reality.
And what is peace, if not being willing to agree to disagree? I disagree with China's aims, but agree that their aims are beneficial to China. I am not obligated to assist them in their aims, nor does refusing to do so obligate me to go to war with them. Nor does it obligate anyone else in the West to assist them or to battle them, we can merely refuse to help those who are openly our enemies and let them go their own way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would be very careful doing that at Google. Even if just about anything is accessible, I imagine most access is logged. If you are downloading everything not related to your job it could raise some alarms!
Didn't stop Anthony Levandowski
If any of you get this far down, one thing that caught my eye is that Google said they had analyzed this guy’s network traffic after locking his laptop, confirming various things. If you work at a large company like Google, every packet on their employee access network is recorded and indexed for forensic purposes. This is not something Google would talk about publicly, but it’s standard practice in any company that…
It's SOP in all companies, not just those facing sophisticated threat actors - there's a reason EDRs like Crowdstrike and SentinelOne are massive players now.
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.
I’ve had a security clearance in the past and there’s no way a foreign national passes. I got questioned significantly about a family member who was a citizen of another country.
I wonder if it’s just a matter of time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think if someone actually had government handlers asking them to do this, most of those people wouldn't blab about it to their school chums. But there's a subset of people with grandiose delusions / general behavior problems who feel a compulsion to tell everyone about their grand plans/machinations to become rich and powerful.
Reminds me of that scene from Silicon Valley where Jian Yang has a bunch of new startup ideas on his whiteboard
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny that you mention France when the USA is #1 in the world for corporate spying. Having been involved in western Europe for deal where US competitor were given "advantage", USA spying was always number one concern over all other countries (and this is how counter spying agencies brief companies) as it had more direct economic damage and is more difficult to identify than Chinese spying. Few examples just for Airbu…
The American government will spy, but will not explicitly spy to provide IP directly to a private company like Boeing or Lockheed, as this enters felony level corruption territory due to the Procurement Integrity Act, Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act, and the Federal Acquisition Regulation. The main difference is DGSE would explicitly attempt to steal American IP and then provide it to Thales or Dassault.
And if you don't like that, you can sue them in the special intelligence court where the evidence cannot be revealed, the proceedings are secret, and the judges are very unbiased.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I applaud your optimism, your hope for a brighter future is not a scalable solution for securing trade secrets at tech companies.
If your company elects not to hire people on account of them being Chinese, they will rightfully get the pants sued off of them.
Ethnically, yes, this would be immoral. On the basis of nationality, it's absolutely not immoral. In fact, in the US, it's /required by law/ to discriminate in this way if your company works on technology related to national security. It is illegal to discriminate on the basis of national origin, someone's birthplace, but not on the basis of nationality, their citizenship, in the case of national security. Only US citizens, including those who are naturalized, may work on technology related to national security within the US.
What is prudent is another matter besides that which is legal. That which is moral is another matter besides that which is legal. I've made my opinion known, you're welcome to form your own.