3 ms·

He's not ignoring that? He's pointing out the laws are stricter when dealing with private companies. You are talking about two completely orthogonal laws or sta

• manigandham 8y ago
  It's connected to their other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17158209 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17158209 The laws are not stricter (they arent even laws yet), and they are meaningless in those areas because the government itself already defies them.
  • kadenshep 8y ago
    >they are meaningless in those areas because the government itself already defies them. That doesn't make laws meaningless.
    • KirinDave 8y ago
      In this more specific case, it's very difficult to judge China's policies with an even tilt because private Chinese companies are ad hoc lifted to "public status" when they're convenient for the government to leverage. But China grants legal exemptions without especially good or consistent oversight over those countries. The net result is an awful lot of folks who get a legal exemption for a specific aspect of their business and then tend to run roughshod in other less scrutinized areas.
      • kadenshep 8y ago
        >very difficult to judge China's policies with an even tilt because private Chinese companies are ad hoc lifted to "public status" when they're convenient for the government to leverage. How is this different from any other western government?
        • KirinDave 8y ago
          Having worked at a high profile government contractor, my observation is that you don't get the same kind of leverage other folks report. Also, the bidding process is cuthroat and subject to public scrutiny here. Now if you're taking about security contractors, that's different and the same the whole world over I guess.