5 ms·

You realise that’s how the rest of the world views the US? The US spies on the rest of the world; Cisco etc install back doors. The US was spying on Angela Merk

You realise that’s how the rest of the world views the US? The US spies on the rest of the world; Cisco etc install back doors. The US was spying on Angela Merkel. For the emerging world, this is good, there’s finally a counterbalance to the NSA and US tech companies mass surveillance. The US isn’t the world’s largest economy anymore (PPP adjusted, soon to be in nominal terms as well.) so this idea that the rules of the game don’t apply to the US is past it’s sell by date. To someone with privilege, equality seems like oppression.

whatshisface 8y ago
>there’s finally a counterbalance to the NSA and US tech companies mass surveillance. Pardon my analogy, but that sounds like one kick in the shins being counterbalanced by a second kick in the shins.
toasterlovin 8y ago
Whether or not other countries should US suppliers isn’t relevant to our own decision making process.
wnevets 8y ago
Huh, what is the point you're trying to make by bringing up proof that companies can and have been influence by their host governments to spy and steal on their behalf? China would be crazy to let US controlled companies access to their critical infrastructural. US would be crazy to let Chinese controlled companies access to their critical infrastructural. Welcome to geopolitics.
- crispinb 8y ago
  Exactly - this is why none of the most significant problems facing our world, all of which are fundamentally international in nature, can be solved. The sclerotic institution of the nation state renders solutions, even when entirely obvious, impossible to implement. The current global quasi-civilisation will collapse, as all civilisations eventually do. It will happen this century, leaving behind a comprehensively wasted landscape less hospitable to subsequent large-scale human organisation than earlier collapses. Homo sapiens was a failed evolutionary experiment. Perhaps some on other planets do rise to the challenge of planetary organisation, but obviously we don't possess the necessary capacities.
jjeaff 8y ago
Oh, since you put it that way... We should just invite all the world's spies right into the country unimpeeded.
- behringer 8y ago
  Perhaps we've banned Huawei because they don't allow their phones to be hacked by the US? Nothing the US claims can be relied on, so we should continue looking critically at why the US government wants to block their use rather than take the US' claims at face value.
  - ericd 8y ago
    The face value reason is a good enough reason not to allow a rival power’s equipment into the telecom backbone, though.
  - jjeaff 8y ago
    It's irrelevant whether they are doing it or not right now. Because they could obviously start doing it at any point. And this is a country that makes the US's record on surveillance and human rights look like nothing.
Cacti 8y ago
How does that have anything to do with how the US decides to deal with Huawei or China for that matter?
jonnybgood 8y ago
It seems you’re going on the assumption only the US spies and no one including its allies spies on the US back. The rules of the game have always applied to the US. You just only hear about what the US is doing.
threeseed 8y ago
This false equivalence is just ridiculous. The US may spy on other countries. Sure. Every country does. But it's what they do with the data that is important. Does the US have a social credit system ? Do they have a mass "re-education" program for people who have said anything critical of the government ? Do they do what they want without any checks and balances (journalism, courts, laws) etc ? China, I would remind you, is a dictatorship not a democracy. And the only way it remains that way is by using data to stamp out dissension. It's a completely differently situation to the US or frankly every other Western country. For example look at what happens to Australian citizens in China based on what they say about the government: https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/detention-of-an-australian-in-china-is-canberra-s-worst-nightmare-20190123-p50t3f.html https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/detention-of-an-australian...
- baddox 8y ago
  True, but it seems to me like a difference in scale rather than kind.
- colordrops 8y ago
  The terms "false equivalence" and "whataboutism" and "ridiculous" are just labels and devoid of facts or reasoning. The truth is that the US is far more imperialistic and murderous than any other nation on earth, including China. Assuming you live in the US, you are blinded by living in the belly of the beast. edit: Also, if you don't think the US uses data to stamp out dissent, you are simply ignorant. Just look up COINTELPRO, which is just one of many official anti-dissent programs. You could almost say it's the FBI's job to stamp out dissent. And that's not getting into covert information techniques, such as CIA operatives at most major news outlets, and in modern times, social media manipulation. See: https://theintercept.com/2018/01/03/my-life-as-a-new-york-times-reporter-in-the-shadow-of-the-war-on-terror/ https://theintercept.com/2018/01/03/my-life-as-a-new-york-ti...
  - ztratar 8y ago
    During US superpower hegemony, the world has seen the least amount of violence in its entire history.
creato 8y ago
I'd expect any country that has the ability to do so to source such key infrastructure from those they trust, whether it be locally or allies they expect to have for the long term. It's up to the rest of the world to decide what that means for themselves. Now personally, I think that you are making a bit of a false equivalence, but like I said in my first post, the bar for decision making here is lower than what we can prove to each other. If we can't agree on this point, so be it. If you think your country's interests are better served by building up your communications networks with Huawei and not Cisco, or Ericsson, or whoever, that's up to you(r country). I'd like to think that most Western liberal democracies would not come to that conclusion though.
coconut_crab 8y ago
China deemed anything can be weaponized, and everything should, be it Huawei or construction companies building Belt and road initiative. They will use every means possible to retake their position as the centre of the world. Check 'Unrestricted warfare' for an example of that mindset. Just like in doing business with them, they will cheat if they think that won't be found out (I know this sounds racist, but my experience working with them give me that vibe).
- crispinb 8y ago
  > they will cheat if they think that won't be found out That seems to me just like a plain description of 'business'. Of course as rule of law becomes more effective, the chances of being found out increases, and cheating/corruption declines. But it's in the very nature of business everywhere to do these things where they are able.
fipple 8y ago
Is that relevant? Even a serial killer wouldn’t want to pick up a hitchhiker who he knows is also a serial killer.
alephx 8y ago
Hey, as a Mexican I am offended that you think this is good for the emerging world. I prefer to live in a world dominated by the US (as my country's has been almost since our independence) than one dominated by China (or the EU or Russia for that matter). In any case, I think they have a right to mistreat Huawei as they wish since we are talking about their own country. Then again, if we are to talk equality, who is the US and who is China? Who benefits from Huawei getting a free pass? The Chinese masters (Deng and his cronies) or the average Chinese?

whatshisface 8y ago

>there’s finally a counterbalance to the NSA and US tech companies mass surveillance. Pardon my analogy, but that sounds like one kick in the shins being counterbalanced by a second kick in the shins.

toasterlovin 8y ago

Whether or not other countries should US suppliers isn’t relevant to our own decision making process.

wnevets 8y ago

Huh, what is the point you're trying to make by bringing up proof that companies can and have been influence by their host governments to spy and steal on their behalf? China would be crazy to let US controlled companies access to their critical infrastructural. US would be crazy to let Chinese controlled companies access to their critical infrastructural. Welcome to geopolitics.

crispinb 8y ago
Exactly - this is why none of the most significant problems facing our world, all of which are fundamentally international in nature, can be solved. The sclerotic institution of the nation state renders solutions, even when entirely obvious, impossible to implement. The current global quasi-civilisation will collapse, as all civilisations eventually do. It will happen this century, leaving behind a comprehensively wasted landscape less hospitable to subsequent large-scale human organisation than earlier collapses. Homo sapiens was a failed evolutionary experiment. Perhaps some on other planets do rise to the challenge of planetary organisation, but obviously we don't possess the necessary capacities.

jjeaff 8y ago

Oh, since you put it that way... We should just invite all the world's spies right into the country unimpeeded.

behringer 8y ago
Perhaps we've banned Huawei because they don't allow their phones to be hacked by the US? Nothing the US claims can be relied on, so we should continue looking critically at why the US government wants to block their use rather than take the US' claims at face value.
- ericd 8y ago
  The face value reason is a good enough reason not to allow a rival power’s equipment into the telecom backbone, though.
- jjeaff 8y ago
  It's irrelevant whether they are doing it or not right now. Because they could obviously start doing it at any point. And this is a country that makes the US's record on surveillance and human rights look like nothing.

Cacti 8y ago

How does that have anything to do with how the US decides to deal with Huawei or China for that matter?

jonnybgood 8y ago

It seems you’re going on the assumption only the US spies and no one including its allies spies on the US back. The rules of the game have always applied to the US. You just only hear about what the US is doing.

threeseed 8y ago

This false equivalence is just ridiculous. The US may spy on other countries. Sure. Every country does. But it's what they do with the data that is important. Does the US have a social credit system ? Do they have a mass "re-education" program for people who have said anything critical of the government ? Do they do what they want without any checks and balances (journalism, courts, laws) etc ? China, I would remind you, is a dictatorship not a democracy. And the only way it remains that way is by using data to stamp out dissension. It's a completely differently situation to the US or frankly every other Western country. For example look at what happens to Australian citizens in China based on what they say about the government: https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/detention-of-an-australian-in-china-is-canberra-s-worst-nightmare-20190123-p50t3f.html https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/detention-of-an-australian...

baddox 8y ago
True, but it seems to me like a difference in scale rather than kind.
colordrops 8y ago
The terms "false equivalence" and "whataboutism" and "ridiculous" are just labels and devoid of facts or reasoning. The truth is that the US is far more imperialistic and murderous than any other nation on earth, including China. Assuming you live in the US, you are blinded by living in the belly of the beast. edit: Also, if you don't think the US uses data to stamp out dissent, you are simply ignorant. Just look up COINTELPRO, which is just one of many official anti-dissent programs. You could almost say it's the FBI's job to stamp out dissent. And that's not getting into covert information techniques, such as CIA operatives at most major news outlets, and in modern times, social media manipulation. See: https://theintercept.com/2018/01/03/my-life-as-a-new-york-times-reporter-in-the-shadow-of-the-war-on-terror/ https://theintercept.com/2018/01/03/my-life-as-a-new-york-ti...
- ztratar 8y ago
  During US superpower hegemony, the world has seen the least amount of violence in its entire history.

creato 8y ago

I'd expect any country that has the ability to do so to source such key infrastructure from those they trust, whether it be locally or allies they expect to have for the long term. It's up to the rest of the world to decide what that means for themselves. Now personally, I think that you are making a bit of a false equivalence, but like I said in my first post, the bar for decision making here is lower than what we can prove to each other. If we can't agree on this point, so be it. If you think your country's interests are better served by building up your communications networks with Huawei and not Cisco, or Ericsson, or whoever, that's up to you(r country). I'd like to think that most Western liberal democracies would not come to that conclusion though.

coconut_crab 8y ago

China deemed anything can be weaponized, and everything should, be it Huawei or construction companies building Belt and road initiative. They will use every means possible to retake their position as the centre of the world. Check 'Unrestricted warfare' for an example of that mindset. Just like in doing business with them, they will cheat if they think that won't be found out (I know this sounds racist, but my experience working with them give me that vibe).

crispinb 8y ago
> they will cheat if they think that won't be found out That seems to me just like a plain description of 'business'. Of course as rule of law becomes more effective, the chances of being found out increases, and cheating/corruption declines. But it's in the very nature of business everywhere to do these things where they are able.

fipple 8y ago

Is that relevant? Even a serial killer wouldn’t want to pick up a hitchhiker who he knows is also a serial killer.

alephx 8y ago

Hey, as a Mexican I am offended that you think this is good for the emerging world. I prefer to live in a world dominated by the US (as my country's has been almost since our independence) than one dominated by China (or the EU or Russia for that matter). In any case, I think they have a right to mistreat Huawei as they wish since we are talking about their own country. Then again, if we are to talk equality, who is the US and who is China? Who benefits from Huawei getting a free pass? The Chinese masters (Deng and his cronies) or the average Chinese?