4 ms·

What you say might be going on, but I would not expect this source code sharing to constitute IP transfer. It's an audit or inspection. The government isn't all

by Pyxl101 11y ago

What you say might be going on, but I would not expect this source code sharing to constitute IP transfer. It's an audit or inspection. The government isn't allowed to use the code, and I doubt they intend to or have the ability to. I haven't been involved in government audits of source code, but I have been involved in private audits. We invite the third party into our offices, where we provide them access to a laptop that has the source code loaded onto it. The laptop's network access has been disabled. They're free to examine it for as long as they wish, but they're not allowed to copy it or remove it from the network. These kinds of mitigations are presumably what they're referring to when they say: “Strict procedures are in place within these technology demonstration centers to ensure that no software source code is released, copied or altered in any way.” Note the term technology demonstration center, that is, physical location. This kind of audit is fairly routine when an important customer is considering your product, for a number of reasons. After all of the security events in the news recently, any foreign government would be right to worry about backdoors in technology provided by US firms. Source code access is one way to mitigate those concerns. It's an audit, not a technology transfer. Last but not least: I could imagine a certain kind of software where it could be damaging, and could reveal IP, to allow anyone to see any part of the code. Imagine if I invent a better audio compression algorithm that's twice as good as typical MP3 compressors, while producing MP3 format. Then showing someone even a snippet of code could give away my trade secret of how it works. However, the source code of large software products like IBM's is unlikely to have any especially valuable secret sauce. The value of the IP comes from the whole, not of any one special part. In that circumstance, allowing someone to peruse the code at their leisure doesn't give much away.

vegabook 11y ago
Yes it's true that clients should have a right to inspect code for potential malevolence, especially when geopolitics are at play. However the article is peppered with qualifications: “As everybody knows, there’s a tacit understanding that if you want to do business in China, you need to show them how this stuff works,” "there’s definitely a little bit of: ‘Can we reverse engineer this?’" “For IBM to do this is a little ballsy.” I think in general we're far too willing, far too often, to dismiss Chinese business tactics as benevolent.
- fredkbloggs 11y ago
  > I think in general we're far too willing, far too often, to dismiss Chinese business tactics as benevolent. Who are "we" in this context? I don't really think anyone in the western world seriously believes there is anything benevolent about China, full stop. What's happening here, and what IBM's statements clearly indicate, is that western CEOs think they might be able to goose their quarterly earnings for a year or two by kowtowing to whatever China demands. That means bigger bonuses and maybe more valuable stock for the CEOs, possibly (who are we kidding, certainly) lower profits in the long run as everyone knows China steals everything not bolted down and much of what is. But the CEO has no incentive to care about that.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - vegabook 11y ago
    "We" = the vast majority of people whose short term consumption addiction is being financed by China, which conversely is investing in our long term economic serfdom.
    - fredkbloggs 11y ago
      I see. That's not assumption of benevolence, it's simple greed. The same "I'll be gone, you'll be gone" attitude that created the mortgage implosion and so much else that's gone wrong throughout human history. Xbox buyers don't really think China is benevolent, they just don't care because they figure most of the harm they do will be visited on others.
      - vegabook 11y ago
        The assumption of benevolence is convenient for everyone, consumers and capital alike.

by Pyxl101 11y ago

vegabook 11y ago

Yes it's true that clients should have a right to inspect code for potential malevolence, especially when geopolitics are at play. However the article is peppered with qualifications: “As everybody knows, there’s a tacit understanding that if you want to do business in China, you need to show them how this stuff works,” "there’s definitely a little bit of: ‘Can we reverse engineer this?’" “For IBM to do this is a little ballsy.” I think in general we're far too willing, far too often, to dismiss Chinese business tactics as benevolent.

fredkbloggs 11y ago
> I think in general we're far too willing, far too often, to dismiss Chinese business tactics as benevolent. Who are "we" in this context? I don't really think anyone in the western world seriously believes there is anything benevolent about China, full stop. What's happening here, and what IBM's statements clearly indicate, is that western CEOs think they might be able to goose their quarterly earnings for a year or two by kowtowing to whatever China demands. That means bigger bonuses and maybe more valuable stock for the CEOs, possibly (who are we kidding, certainly) lower profits in the long run as everyone knows China steals everything not bolted down and much of what is. But the CEO has no incentive to care about that.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- vegabook 11y ago
  "We" = the vast majority of people whose short term consumption addiction is being financed by China, which conversely is investing in our long term economic serfdom.
  - fredkbloggs 11y ago
    I see. That's not assumption of benevolence, it's simple greed. The same "I'll be gone, you'll be gone" attitude that created the mortgage implosion and so much else that's gone wrong throughout human history. Xbox buyers don't really think China is benevolent, they just don't care because they figure most of the harm they do will be visited on others.
    - vegabook 11y ago
      The assumption of benevolence is convenient for everyone, consumers and capital alike.