Stop buying Chinese goods.
Stop buying American goods.
Stop buying goods.
Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims
91–100 of 241 posts
Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The US needs access to China's goods to be viable. No, it really isn't. The thing the US is indeed does very little for an economy of its size. Washington can slam fist on the table, and US industry will be out of China by tomorrow, without much impact at home besides no iToys this season, and few percents off its stock market. Lack of consumer goods would of course be upsetting, but people wouldn't die from lack o…
> Lack of consumer goods would of course be upsetting, but people wouldn't die from lack of them. Lack of consumer goods means lack of jobs for people who transport, warehouse, and sell consumer goods. Lack of jobs means lack of money to pay for things like food, shelter, medical care, etc, only some of which the US has adequate safety nets for. People will, indeed, die from lack of consumer goods.
Equivocation. Gp means lack of specific consumer goods, for a set time.
Your comment makes it seem like this would lead to catastrophe or collapse.
It would more likely lead to industry rotation and employment change.
Yes, you can reduce any macro factor to a death count, but those are always trading off in all directions. It's meaningless to categorically single out a particular scenario of swapping production as more deadly than the others.
Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The US needs access to China's goods to be viable. No, it really isn't. The thing the US is indeed does very little for an economy of its size. Washington can slam fist on the table, and US industry will be out of China by tomorrow, without much impact at home besides no iToys this season, and few percents off its stock market. Lack of consumer goods would of course be upsetting, but people wouldn't die from lack o…
Yes, it does. Run a political campaign on 'All the stuff you buy? I'm going to make it cost more,' and you will be slaughtered at the polls. People barely making ends meet aren't very interested in those kinds of political statements. You could, of course, try to lie to them about what the consequences of your policies are going to be.
It's a matter of figuring out the process. You can swap sets of things based on how easy it is to achieve similar enough economics elsewhere or elsewise.
This isn't some insurmountable problem. Yes, there are scenarios where you go "too fast" and raise too many prices too quickly and piss people off. Or, you go slower and make it more palatable.
Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims
#94Somewhat recently a head of Microsoft was asked about forgoing access to the Chinese market if it meant protecting American interests in the face of new threats. He unequivocally said, yes. He was willing to forgo their market. I'm not sure Apple and others who either sell product there or have large manufacturing there are as willing to forgo the 'promise market', but it looks more and more we will have to. More or…
So china's aggression in the past few years isn't out of position of strength, it's from a position of extreme weakness. And with Biden continuing Trump's china strategy in economic sanctions/stopping tech transfers/getting companies to move out of china, as well as now forming alliances to combat china, the continuing overall trend for china is decline and withdrawal, and for democratic countries is unity and streng…
You're not wrong about any trends you mention. I don't know if my level of confidence in seeing all these things through is as high as yours (especially wrt democratic unity). But the doom and gloom outlooks have certainly gotten ahead of themselves.
Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
The people of China don't control espionage; the government does. So you'd better think about the government when the topic is espionage, which it is in this discussion.
Agreed, and that's exactly why I hate it when someone hijacks the discussion about the government and espionage by adding the nation to the equation.
"The nation" in this context is the government, no matter how much you keep trying to change the definition.
Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims
#96Somewhat recently a head of Microsoft was asked about forgoing access to the Chinese market if it meant protecting American interests in the face of new threats. He unequivocally said, yes. He was willing to forgo their market. I'm not sure Apple and others who either sell product there or have large manufacturing there are as willing to forgo the 'promise market', but it looks more and more we will have to. More or…
> We'll see how Biden handles this. I'm sure it's a tough call. I don't see how he can. I don't see how the next 2-3 US administrations can. If the current level of China's "scare power" is enough to paralyze the US, you will have less, and less options on the table with each year as you go. Time works against the US, and the West at large.
The proposal was always TPP or some transnational treaty like that.
You know, the one that went over like a lead ballon and likely cost Hillary the 2016 election?
Likelihood that this kind of treaty coming into force now is essentially nil.
Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed, and that's exactly why I hate it when someone hijacks the discussion about the government and espionage by adding the nation to the equation.
"The nation" in this context is the government, no matter how much you keep trying to change the definition.
It's possible you have a custom, non-standard understanding of the term. According to Merriam Webster, it has 5 meanings, and none of them refers to the government.
Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
How are we to trust you're not a paid Putin or CCP propagandist? Arguably Microsoft has far more credibility than you - my point being there are ways people orient for trusting individuals and organizations. If you think the current White House administration and Microsoft aren't on the more trustworthy side of the trust spectrum, then who in your opinion is more trustworthy?
I think Microsoft and the current White House are on the extreme side of untrustworthy. What has MS ever done that was trustworthy? Their entire existence has been based on abusing a monopoly. The US government is also extremely untrustworthy (c.f. the 20th century). The combination of these two entities pushing the same story is a huge red flag. Who would I trust? I’ll start with someone providing some sort of proof…
That's a fantasy burden you've constructed. What would even count as "proof"? Anything that incrementally changes the field of possibility? Or something that definitely proves what happened?
Microsoft has done untrustworthy things. They've also build the most successful (esp. in the longer view) commercial computing ecosystem because it hit the right balance between stability/robustness/usability. Many elements of that include proving some minimum burdens of trustworthiness (not to be confused with earning absolute trust).
The US government... cf the 20th century? You mean the greatest secular advancements in the human condition in history? And as for the age of "American Empire" (post WW2? Post Cold War?)... are you referring to the relatively most peaceful, humane, self-effacing hegemon that has ever been known the planet (not to be confused with a perfectly peaceful and human hegemon)?
This flippant stance combined with absolutely no countervailing context and fantasy burdens of proof... please.
Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He won't. He is just the face of the same old thinking that brought us here. Just like all of his predecessors in last 40 years. And it's a good thing. Only Trump was bold enough to entertain the idea of a commercial war with China. I live in the US, but I don't want that. I want peace and freedom. China and the US are natural allies given the complementarity of the industries. Let's make peace not war.
China needs a new political system before we can talk about anyone being their allies. The CCP have made it clear they are only interested in total power.
How likely is that to happen?
Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
A few speculative ideas/thoughts: - The US needs access to China's goods to be viable. For half a century US companies improved their efficiency/competitiveness by moving their process to China. They now have too many dependencies in the form of Chinese manufacturing and development capabilities and do not have the skills/knowledge/talents/infrastructure in the US. Because of this China can dictate their rules with z…
$1T of US debt sounds like a lot, but it's less than 4% of US debt. It's not an insignificant amount, but they don't own a lot to impact the US economy. Japan owns more ($1.25T) and the UK and Ireland get up to $0.75T. Realistically, what would china do? If you "start massively selling US debt", what does that mean? Someone has to buy it. You're increasing the supply while demand probably stays pretty constant. But r…
You may have a valid point but on a technical note TikTok does not operate in China either because they don't conform with China's content censorship policy.