4 ms·

As much as you can (rightly) criticize the US, particularly the current administration, the US still has the rule of law to a degree far larger than almost all

by cletus 8y ago

As much as you can (rightly) criticize the US, particularly the current administration, the US still has the rule of law to a degree far larger than almost all of the rest of the world. While there are failures (eg holding anyone accountable for the subprime mortgage fiasco) there are also positives (eg it seems the US is the only developed nation that goes after the banks that enable tax evasion; see all the actions and settlements with Swiss banks as examples). The US has a largely independent judiciary that isn't afraid to say no to the administration (eg all the injunctions against the travel ban from Muslim countries). It's also true that the US government spies on its own citizens to a degree that's debated in the post-Snowden era. So I certainly believe all phone call (and probably email) metadata is spied upon (and no doubt a sampling of the content for each). And NSLs and pen registers are obviously a thing. I certainly don't believe the tinfoil hats who think that a significant portion of Internet traffic of the tech giants is eavesdropped upon however just based on how much data that is. Contrast this to China. Questionable rule of law. Chinese companies and their leaders are certainly complicit with the Chinese government and intelligence agencies. There have been recent stories about how the Muslim population is spied upon and/or put in "re-education" camps (this has also happened with other groups like Falun Gong). China continues a policy of erasing Tibet. Xi Jinping is largely installed himself as a Putinesque dictator (eg term limits for the presidency were recently abolished). Given a choice between the US spying on me and China, it wouldn't even be close. The US "wins" hands down. At least I have some faith that there are limits to what the US can and will do and that the government can be held accountable to some degree (at least a far larger degree than in China). China has aggressively pursued an agenda to further its national interest that includes the arguable exploitation of developing nations (through loans for capital programs), intellectual property theft from the developed world (through forced "partnerships" as well as repatriating Chinese nationals and outright hacking eg Google). As largely tech people here we all know something about security. To me it's obvious that ceding control of your network (with all the potential harm that could do) to a foreign government is a national security issue. Huawei (and others eg ZTE) have been caught here as bad actors and not actors I personally would trust if I had anything worth protecting. China plays favourites with its own companies. It has clearly decided that it doesn't want a foreign company to control a local market, any local market, which is why you have the likes of Baidu, Alibaba and Tencent instead of Google, Amazon and Facebook. And no it's not because foreign companies don't understand the Chinese market. It's because the Chinese government wills it. Access to China's 1B citizens has been dangled as a carrot to the developed world for years. It should be clear that the game is rigged. So, if China has decided not to relinquish control of domestic markets to foreign companies, why shouldn't the US respond in kind?

jgome 8y ago
> As much as you can (rightly) criticize the US, particularly the current administration, the US still has the rule of law to a degree far larger than almost all of the rest of the world And, conveniently, there are ad-hoc courts (FISA) for when you have to "legalize" massive surveillance. > see all the actions and settlements with Swiss banks as examples Meanwhile, banks at home apparently have no problem with this... As long as it benefits american corporations, of course. > Contrast this to China. Questionable rule of law. Chinese companies and their leaders are certainly complicit with the Chinese government and intelligence agencies Oh, I'm sure the NSA didn't have their support...: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-collection-documents/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-... http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-infiltrates-links-to-yahoo-google-data-centers-worldwide-snowden-documents-say/2013/10/30/e51d661e-4166-11e3-8b74-d89d714ca4dd_story.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-in... > There have been recent stories about how the Muslim population is spied upon and/or put in "re-education" camps Meanwhile in your country, 2% of your population is imprisoned (more than any other country in the world), and illegal immigrants are being detained FOR YEARS. Talk about "re-education camps" > Xi Jinping is largely installed himself as a Putinesque dictator (eg term limits for the presidency were recently abolished). The Clintons have been in power for how many years? What about the Bush family, Bolton and friends? Also, have you ever questioned the amount of power US corporations have? Apparently not... > Given a choice between the US spying on me and China, it wouldn't even be close. The US "wins" hands down. I'm sure the US "wins" too, they can spy on you freely, and are said to be able to collect practically all your phone calls and 10% of all internet traffic (i.e., all data, excluding videos and other irrelevant stuff). > China has aggressively pursued an agenda to further its national interest that includes the arguable exploitation of developing nations They are literally copying what the US and Western powers have taught them. At least they don't bomb random countries thousands of miles away from their homeland under the argument of "freeing" them and "defending democracy", unlike US & EU neocolonial powers. > As largely tech people here we all know something about security. To me it's obvious that ceding control of your network And that includes trusting your own govt., right? People who "know something about security" should know that you simply can't do anything against governments... Much less against the most powerful govt. on this planet. > Huawei (and others eg ZTE) have been caught here as bad actors and not actors I personally would trust if I had anything worth protecting. Unlike those "accidental" backdoors in Cisco equipment, which your ISP probably trusts 100%? > China plays favourites with its own companies Exactly what the US govt. does when it talks about "national interests". Or, do you think your government is there to defend YOUR interests? > It has clearly decided that it doesn't want a foreign company to control a local market, any local market, which is why you have the likes of Baidu, Alibaba and Tencent instead of Google, Amazon and Facebook. And no it's not because foreign companies don't understand the Chinese market. It's because the Chinese government wills it And they are right to do so. Why would they let a government that is known to play dirty control of their population? Obama, the democrat, a Nobel peace prize, bombarded 8 countries, even more than Bush Jr., yet people still believe he was a "good leader" and "better than Bush". It doesn't take much intelligence to notice the brainwashing... > Access to China's 1B citizens has been dangled as a carrot to the developed world for years. The US has been doing that for decades. And anyone who dares disobey gets a coup d'etat or destroyed. > It should be clear that the game is rigged. Indeed... It is rigged by the US (govt and corporations), against anyone who wants to compete fairly. > So, if China has decided not to relinquish control of domestic markets to foreign companies, why shouldn't the US respond in kind? Yeah, the US should mind its own business, leave China AND the rest of the world alone, and not play world police, stop cheating, stop imposing its ideology, and so on. Seriously, go read some history books.

by cletus 8y ago

jgome 8y ago

> As much as you can (rightly) criticize the US, particularly the current administration, the US still has the rule of law to a degree far larger than almost all of the rest of the world And, conveniently, there are ad-hoc courts (FISA) for when you have to "legalize" massive surveillance. > see all the actions and settlements with Swiss banks as examples Meanwhile, banks at home apparently have no problem with this... As long as it benefits american corporations, of course. > Contrast this to China. Questionable rule of law. Chinese companies and their leaders are certainly complicit with the Chinese government and intelligence agencies Oh, I'm sure the NSA didn't have their support...: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-collection-documents/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-... http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-infiltrates-links-to-yahoo-google-data-centers-worldwide-snowden-documents-say/2013/10/30/e51d661e-4166-11e3-8b74-d89d714ca4dd_story.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-in... > There have been recent stories about how the Muslim population is spied upon and/or put in "re-education" camps Meanwhile in your country, 2% of your population is imprisoned (more than any other country in the world), and illegal immigrants are being detained FOR YEARS. Talk about "re-education camps" > Xi Jinping is largely installed himself as a Putinesque dictator (eg term limits for the presidency were recently abolished). The Clintons have been in power for how many years? What about the Bush family, Bolton and friends? Also, have you ever questioned the amount of power US corporations have? Apparently not... > Given a choice between the US spying on me and China, it wouldn't even be close. The US "wins" hands down. I'm sure the US "wins" too, they can spy on you freely, and are said to be able to collect practically all your phone calls and 10% of all internet traffic (i.e., all data, excluding videos and other irrelevant stuff). > China has aggressively pursued an agenda to further its national interest that includes the arguable exploitation of developing nations They are literally copying what the US and Western powers have taught them. At least they don't bomb random countries thousands of miles away from their homeland under the argument of "freeing" them and "defending democracy", unlike US & EU neocolonial powers. > As largely tech people here we all know something about security. To me it's obvious that ceding control of your network And that includes trusting your own govt., right? People who "know something about security" should know that you simply can't do anything against governments... Much less against the most powerful govt. on this planet. > Huawei (and others eg ZTE) have been caught here as bad actors and not actors I personally would trust if I had anything worth protecting. Unlike those "accidental" backdoors in Cisco equipment, which your ISP probably trusts 100%? > China plays favourites with its own companies Exactly what the US govt. does when it talks about "national interests". Or, do you think your government is there to defend YOUR interests? > It has clearly decided that it doesn't want a foreign company to control a local market, any local market, which is why you have the likes of Baidu, Alibaba and Tencent instead of Google, Amazon and Facebook. And no it's not because foreign companies don't understand the Chinese market. It's because the Chinese government wills it And they are right to do so. Why would they let a government that is known to play dirty control of their population? Obama, the democrat, a Nobel peace prize, bombarded 8 countries, even more than Bush Jr., yet people still believe he was a "good leader" and "better than Bush". It doesn't take much intelligence to notice the brainwashing... > Access to China's 1B citizens has been dangled as a carrot to the developed world for years. The US has been doing that for decades. And anyone who dares disobey gets a coup d'etat or destroyed. > It should be clear that the game is rigged. Indeed... It is rigged by the US (govt and corporations), against anyone who wants to compete fairly. > So, if China has decided not to relinquish control of domestic markets to foreign companies, why shouldn't the US respond in kind? Yeah, the US should mind its own business, leave China AND the rest of the world alone, and not play world police, stop cheating, stop imposing its ideology, and so on. Seriously, go read some history books.