3 ms·

The US isn't perfect, but the events you're talking about are in no way comparable to imprisoning a million Uighurs in camps. Or executing Falun Gong practition

The US isn't perfect, but the events you're talking about are in no way comparable to imprisoning a million Uighurs in camps. Or executing Falun Gong practitioners and harvesting their organs. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-45474279 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-45474279 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Gong_practitioners_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Go...

iforgotpassword 8y ago
As it stands right now I actually feel the US has a much stronger influence on Europe, which is what I'm concerned with. Not anything those two countries do at home. Considering how there's a backdoor revealed in Cisco products every other day I already know who I don't want to supply our 5G infrastructure.
- leereeves 8y ago
  I'd support any country/region building its own tech infrastructure. Europe should really do that if it wants to be a global power. But if your choice is between being spied on by the US or by China, why would you prefer China?
  - iforgotpassword 8y ago
    I wouldn't. I think they're both a bad choice. It's just that the media seems to exclusively focus on huawei. And I can somewhat understand the American media doing that, but it's no different here. We've had like what, three Cisco backdoors in the last couple weeks, but who besides tech gave a shit? Actually, there isn't anything published yet that would suggest huawei products contain any. Nothing besides "they're evil commies so it must be true" And I mean, we even do have European businesses in that sector but it seems we're not even trying.. Unfortunately.
    - speedplane 8y ago
      The big difference between U.S/Cisco and China/Huawei is that in the U.S., the government broke into Cisco's systems without their help or consent. In contrast, it is largely understood that Huawei freely assists and cooperates with the Chinese government. The combination of a major tech provider with a powerful government provides too much temptation for abuse.
      - iforgotpassword 8y ago
        Both methods succeed. At that point it's just choosing between plague and cholera.
        speedplane 8y ago
        That's a ridiculous equivalence. It's like saying a government backed army and a guy with a gun are the same because they can both shoot people.
        iforgotpassword 8y ago
        > That's a ridiculous equivalence. No, it isn't. > It's like saying a government backed army and a guy with a gun are the same because they can both shoot people. This however qualifies for that title, since you're probably underestimating China if you're comparing them with a single person with a gun.
        speedplane 8y ago
        > > It's like saying a government backed army and a guy with a gun are the same because they can both shoot people. > This however qualifies for that title, since you're probably underestimating China if you're comparing them with a single person with a gun. You totally missed the analogy. Here, China/US are the armies, and Huawei/Cisco are just some folks with guns. When governments intervene, they bring an enormous amount of resources that even large companies cannot compete with.
      - 8y ago
  - izacus 8y ago
    > But if your choice is between being spied on by the US or by China, why would you prefer China? My only argument here would be that choosing China means we're choosing equipment where everyone involved knows that due diligence must be made to keep spying out and communication channels secured. I feel like this is not done enough when using US equipment and has exposed us to too much risk, considering the increasing hostility of current US government and its also increasing push to leverage spying to attack our companies.
izacus 8y ago
It's not, but putting up a moral argument based on "hey, we're SLIGHTLY less evil than China because the scale of same crimes are smaller!" is still a bit wierd. You can argue many other avenues (like having better quality of life if we stay aligned with US vs. China), but doing moral handwringing about Huawei after Snowden's leaks and failings of current US government is a bit hypocritical.

iforgotpassword 8y ago

As it stands right now I actually feel the US has a much stronger influence on Europe, which is what I'm concerned with. Not anything those two countries do at home. Considering how there's a backdoor revealed in Cisco products every other day I already know who I don't want to supply our 5G infrastructure.

leereeves 8y ago
I'd support any country/region building its own tech infrastructure. Europe should really do that if it wants to be a global power. But if your choice is between being spied on by the US or by China, why would you prefer China?
- iforgotpassword 8y ago
  I wouldn't. I think they're both a bad choice. It's just that the media seems to exclusively focus on huawei. And I can somewhat understand the American media doing that, but it's no different here. We've had like what, three Cisco backdoors in the last couple weeks, but who besides tech gave a shit? Actually, there isn't anything published yet that would suggest huawei products contain any. Nothing besides "they're evil commies so it must be true" And I mean, we even do have European businesses in that sector but it seems we're not even trying.. Unfortunately.
  - speedplane 8y ago
    The big difference between U.S/Cisco and China/Huawei is that in the U.S., the government broke into Cisco's systems without their help or consent. In contrast, it is largely understood that Huawei freely assists and cooperates with the Chinese government. The combination of a major tech provider with a powerful government provides too much temptation for abuse.
    - iforgotpassword 8y ago
      Both methods succeed. At that point it's just choosing between plague and cholera.
      - speedplane 8y ago
        That's a ridiculous equivalence. It's like saying a government backed army and a guy with a gun are the same because they can both shoot people.
        iforgotpassword 8y ago
        > That's a ridiculous equivalence. No, it isn't. > It's like saying a government backed army and a guy with a gun are the same because they can both shoot people. This however qualifies for that title, since you're probably underestimating China if you're comparing them with a single person with a gun.
        speedplane 8y ago
        > > It's like saying a government backed army and a guy with a gun are the same because they can both shoot people. > This however qualifies for that title, since you're probably underestimating China if you're comparing them with a single person with a gun. You totally missed the analogy. Here, China/US are the armies, and Huawei/Cisco are just some folks with guns. When governments intervene, they bring an enormous amount of resources that even large companies cannot compete with.
    - 8y ago
- izacus 8y ago
  > But if your choice is between being spied on by the US or by China, why would you prefer China? My only argument here would be that choosing China means we're choosing equipment where everyone involved knows that due diligence must be made to keep spying out and communication channels secured. I feel like this is not done enough when using US equipment and has exposed us to too much risk, considering the increasing hostility of current US government and its also increasing push to leverage spying to attack our companies.

izacus 8y ago

It's not, but putting up a moral argument based on "hey, we're SLIGHTLY less evil than China because the scale of same crimes are smaller!" is still a bit wierd. You can argue many other avenues (like having better quality of life if we stay aligned with US vs. China), but doing moral handwringing about Huawei after Snowden's leaks and failings of current US government is a bit hypocritical.