6 ms·

When AT&T has so willingly handed over call data to the U.S. intelligence agencies for decades, even assisting in the analysis of said data, I have to question

When AT&T has so willingly handed over call data to the U.S. intelligence agencies for decades, even assisting in the analysis of said data, I have to question the assault on Huawei by U.S. media.

ancorevard 8y ago
If you equate AT&T's said practices with Huawei's practices, then you just answered your own question. The Chinese Communist Party is not friend of freedom, nor of free journalism.
- algoritmi 8y ago
  Nor is the US, If you think otherwise, think about what happend to Assange.
  - ancorevard 8y ago
    We need a larger time frame to put our world in its proper perspective. Freedom, including freedom of the press, is an anomaly in the history of the human race. That it came about is pretty much a miracle, there is nothing natural about it. And there is nothing natural about keeping it. You have to fight hard not to loose it. The US in this perspective has been a large force for freedom in the world. But that can change any moment. There are forces within US that wish the Constitution would just go away. That said, the US government is still a far far cry from being the totalitarian dictator the Chinese Communist Party currently is in China.
- pulse7 8y ago
  Regarding the "free journalism": we will see if the US lives up to the First Amendment in the Julian Assange case... 25 years ago the US was supporter of "free journalism", but today things are changing rapidly...
  - spectramax 8y ago
    What about blasting President Trump on front page of NYTimes, almost every day since he was elected? US has a tremendous sense of free press, you can't pick and choose. Do you see any negative press about Xi Jingpin in China?
- Iv 8y ago
  I agree that we can't really compare the human rights violations of US vs the ones of China. The criticism here is that we can't just has "handles its data to the local government" as a criterion to judge a company unacceptable as the practice is, sadly, common over the globe.
- charlescearl 8y ago
  I do. You have two governments that tell respective large telecoms to “hand it over or else”. Back doors, trade secrets, what have you. The rest seems like splitting hairs. Private communication and the separation of the pipe/hardware vendor and the government has become an illusion in both instances.
brandonmenc 8y ago
Because one is a not totally un-hostile foreign government, and the other is not.
- thepangolino 8y ago
  Funny how this works. There exist a whole range of actions for which I'd much more be willing to be spied upon by an openly hostile foreign power rather than my, ever so slightly friendlier, own government.
  - bad_user 8y ago
    That’s very shortsighted. First of all the spying that your own government does has to be lawful, whereas in the eyes of a foreign government you have no rights. Also in your own country you have legal ways to fight the spying conducted by your government, whereas you can do absolutely nothing to a foreign government. I’m an EU citizen and this is precisely why I got mad about the Snowden revelations. Because under US legislation as a non-US citizen I have no rights above whatever the trade agreements between the US and the EU are saying. And once that data gets collected, it will get abused sooner or later. And let me tell you, being born in an ex-communist state from the Warsaw Pact, the thought that another communist state is watching me is freaking me out ;-)
    - blotter_paper 8y ago
      >That’s very shortsighted. First of all the spying that your own government does has to be lawful, whereas in the eyes of a foreign government you have no rights. Do you think the Snowden leaks showed clear violations of the 4th amendment to the US constitution? If so, this whole argument is null and void. Believing that a surveillance state will follow it's own laws is just plain silly, that's not how the world works.
      - bad_user 8y ago
        >> "Do you think the Snowden leaks showed clear violations of the 4th amendment" Yes, they showed a clear violation. >> "If so, this whole argument is null and void. Believing that a surveillance state will follow it's own laws is just plain silly." Sorry, but your conclusion does not follow. Yes, I do believe that in a country with the rule of law my rights are reasonably well protected. Yes, some state agencies can break that law, that's why you've got the checks and balances system. Countries like China fall short in all departments. And the Snowden leaks couldn't have happened in China, so presenting it as proof that Western countries are as bad is what's silly. >> "that's not how the world works" Compared with most people here, I was actually born under a communist regime that took surveillance and suppression of speech to a whole new level (that 1984 novel was actually more realistic than what happened under the Iron Curtain), so I probably know how the world works better than you ;-)
AlexB138 8y ago
While both are reprehensible behavior, supply information to the US government and being fundamentally linked with the Chinese Communist government aren't even close. It's like comparing a school yard bully to a serial killer. Political dissenters don't disappear when AT&T shares information with the FBI. We really need to question how so many Westerners have gotten to a point that they some how see an equivalence.
- theNextEpisode 8y ago
  America have committed plenty of atrocities. Just because you're on their side doesn't make them blameless.
  - ta531531531 8y ago
    "not blameless" != "equally bad"
  - AlexB138 8y ago
    Where did I say they were blameless? There are varying degrees of bad behavior, and while the US Government has a whole host of actions they can be validly criticized for, they're not even in the same ball park as the PRC. As I said, we really need to consider how so many Westerners have become so blind to that fact that this weak whataboutism can we depended on when any mention of China is made.
    - dis-sys 8y ago
      > There are varying degrees of bad behavior As a Chinese citizen, my tax money has never been used by the CCP to launch foreign wars killing innocent civilians. You have blood on your hand every time when you pay your tax $ to fund those wars. Take that and reconsider your "whataboutism" comment.
  - zarkov99 8y ago
    Nobody is blameless, but some nations have better track records than others, and America's, all things considered, is pretty good for a superpower.
SpicyLemonZest 8y ago
The argument in this article is not that Huawei is handing over data, or anything else AT&T has been accused of. It's that Huawei is secretly a front for the Chinese government.
- burtonator 8y ago
  So basically the exact same thing as AT&T ... AT&T worked with the US government to spy on Americans and foreign nationals and then when they were bused the US government gave them retroactive immunity. BTW.. Retroactive immunity is illegal for criminal cases but it's perfectly ok for civil cases. Ex post facto... This was a complete miscarriage of justice.
  - SpicyLemonZest 8y ago
    No, cooperating with the government isn't exactly the same thing as being owned by the government.
drharby 8y ago
Because huawei is chinese. It would make sense from a media perspective as they are trying to drive attention and thus eyeballs, and xenophobia sells page views
deogeo 8y ago
You're looking at it from a 'justice' perspective. It's much easier to explain the attitudes from an 'us-vs-them' perspective: US spying is used to give the US an advantage. Chinese spying is to give China an advantage. It's a lot like complaining about armed Chinese soldiers stationed in the US, only to be met by "Well our own soldiers are also armed".
- blotter_paper 8y ago
  I think you're describing the real politic situation between the US and China correctly, but as somebody who is in a country controlled by armed US soldiers I'm more concerned about being spied on by the US than China. If you don't identify with the corrupt government you live under the us-vs-them division seems fairly meaningless. It's not like the NSA is looking out for my best interests, or else they'd be patching vulnerabilities instead of exploiting them.
  - deogeo 8y ago
    Do you believe the situation would be improved if China had greater influence, in the US and globally? Edit: To clarify, by 'the situation', I mean general quality of life/effective freedom, not necessarily limited to surveillance.
    - luckylion 8y ago
      Personally, I believe so, yes. When you have two competing powers, neither can abuse their power as much. Ideally, it wouldn't be just two, but two are better than one. If the EU could emancipate itself from the US, that would be a very welcome addition, but I don't see that happening anytime soon because the EU is made up of many interests and has no single government (and I'd love to have less EU, but for other reasons) so it's not able to compete at the same level. When the soviets were still a credible threat, the West needed to give their lower classes a piece of the pie because of the sweet promises the soviets spoke of (it doesn't matter whether they ever fulfilled them). Now that that's gone, they don't, and my country hasn't seen net wage increases for workers for multiple decades despite huge increases in productivity. We have seen a drop on corporate taxes and more tax evasion for the ultra rich, though.
ajross 8y ago
You should absolutely question the US intelligence community and its relationship with the business community. And I'm sure you do. You should also be suspicious of China, for exactly the same reason. And the fact that you explicitly refuse to (and get upvoted to the top of the topic by the HN community!) is... well, it's fucking horrifying. Seriously folks? You're so pissed at the NSA that the PRC is a "good guy" to you now and you need to defend them on the internet and cast aspersions against the "assault" on them by the media?
- luckylion 8y ago
  Let me try to give you my personal perspective. Not a fan of the PRC (though strangely fascinated), I'm from western Europe. China has little to no influence here, the US has gigantic influence. China hasn't been wholesale spying on us, or hasn't been caught doing that yet. The US has, and probably still does. Chinese companies don't practically have monopolies here, US companies do. From my perspective, China might become a threat at some point, the US is a giant threat right now. I have a feeling that I'm not alone with that, and it might explain why you get a more nuanced reaction from Non-Americans to the China/US-conflict.
  - ajross 8y ago
    Some us care more about the threat posted by the PRC to its own people, FWIW. I mean, look, if you want to argue from a position of Euro-centric parochialism... I don't live there, so I don't need to care about that logic, right?
    - luckylion 8y ago
      Possibly, but that might also just be a rationalization for protecting your interests which are generally aligned with those of your country. There are many variables, but I don't think that "China mistreats it's people" isn't high on the list for "We need to keep Huawei out and rely on US technology only". Technological and economic influence/power are much more important, Realpolitik wins every time.
beepboopbeep 8y ago
But is the assault not called for? Has huawei not don't weird/shady/illegal things? I'm not questioning your statement on AT&T, I happen to agree, but is the topic at hand not the actions and history of Huawei?

When AT&T has so willingly handed over call data to the U.S. intelligence agencies for decades, even assisting in the analysis of said data, I have to question the assault on Huawei by U.S. media.

ancorevard 8y ago

If you equate AT&T's said practices with Huawei's practices, then you just answered your own question. The Chinese Communist Party is not friend of freedom, nor of free journalism.

algoritmi 8y ago
Nor is the US, If you think otherwise, think about what happend to Assange.
- ancorevard 8y ago
  We need a larger time frame to put our world in its proper perspective. Freedom, including freedom of the press, is an anomaly in the history of the human race. That it came about is pretty much a miracle, there is nothing natural about it. And there is nothing natural about keeping it. You have to fight hard not to loose it. The US in this perspective has been a large force for freedom in the world. But that can change any moment. There are forces within US that wish the Constitution would just go away. That said, the US government is still a far far cry from being the totalitarian dictator the Chinese Communist Party currently is in China.
pulse7 8y ago
Regarding the "free journalism": we will see if the US lives up to the First Amendment in the Julian Assange case... 25 years ago the US was supporter of "free journalism", but today things are changing rapidly...
- spectramax 8y ago
  What about blasting President Trump on front page of NYTimes, almost every day since he was elected? US has a tremendous sense of free press, you can't pick and choose. Do you see any negative press about Xi Jingpin in China?
Iv 8y ago
I agree that we can't really compare the human rights violations of US vs the ones of China. The criticism here is that we can't just has "handles its data to the local government" as a criterion to judge a company unacceptable as the practice is, sadly, common over the globe.
charlescearl 8y ago
I do. You have two governments that tell respective large telecoms to “hand it over or else”. Back doors, trade secrets, what have you. The rest seems like splitting hairs. Private communication and the separation of the pipe/hardware vendor and the government has become an illusion in both instances.

brandonmenc 8y ago

Because one is a not totally un-hostile foreign government, and the other is not.

thepangolino 8y ago
Funny how this works. There exist a whole range of actions for which I'd much more be willing to be spied upon by an openly hostile foreign power rather than my, ever so slightly friendlier, own government.
- bad_user 8y ago
  That’s very shortsighted. First of all the spying that your own government does has to be lawful, whereas in the eyes of a foreign government you have no rights. Also in your own country you have legal ways to fight the spying conducted by your government, whereas you can do absolutely nothing to a foreign government. I’m an EU citizen and this is precisely why I got mad about the Snowden revelations. Because under US legislation as a non-US citizen I have no rights above whatever the trade agreements between the US and the EU are saying. And once that data gets collected, it will get abused sooner or later. And let me tell you, being born in an ex-communist state from the Warsaw Pact, the thought that another communist state is watching me is freaking me out ;-)
  - blotter_paper 8y ago
    >That’s very shortsighted. First of all the spying that your own government does has to be lawful, whereas in the eyes of a foreign government you have no rights. Do you think the Snowden leaks showed clear violations of the 4th amendment to the US constitution? If so, this whole argument is null and void. Believing that a surveillance state will follow it's own laws is just plain silly, that's not how the world works.
    - bad_user 8y ago
      >> "Do you think the Snowden leaks showed clear violations of the 4th amendment" Yes, they showed a clear violation. >> "If so, this whole argument is null and void. Believing that a surveillance state will follow it's own laws is just plain silly." Sorry, but your conclusion does not follow. Yes, I do believe that in a country with the rule of law my rights are reasonably well protected. Yes, some state agencies can break that law, that's why you've got the checks and balances system. Countries like China fall short in all departments. And the Snowden leaks couldn't have happened in China, so presenting it as proof that Western countries are as bad is what's silly. >> "that's not how the world works" Compared with most people here, I was actually born under a communist regime that took surveillance and suppression of speech to a whole new level (that 1984 novel was actually more realistic than what happened under the Iron Curtain), so I probably know how the world works better than you ;-)

AlexB138 8y ago

While both are reprehensible behavior, supply information to the US government and being fundamentally linked with the Chinese Communist government aren't even close. It's like comparing a school yard bully to a serial killer. Political dissenters don't disappear when AT&T shares information with the FBI. We really need to question how so many Westerners have gotten to a point that they some how see an equivalence.

theNextEpisode 8y ago
America have committed plenty of atrocities. Just because you're on their side doesn't make them blameless.
- ta531531531 8y ago
  "not blameless" != "equally bad"
- AlexB138 8y ago
  Where did I say they were blameless? There are varying degrees of bad behavior, and while the US Government has a whole host of actions they can be validly criticized for, they're not even in the same ball park as the PRC. As I said, we really need to consider how so many Westerners have become so blind to that fact that this weak whataboutism can we depended on when any mention of China is made.
  - dis-sys 8y ago
    > There are varying degrees of bad behavior As a Chinese citizen, my tax money has never been used by the CCP to launch foreign wars killing innocent civilians. You have blood on your hand every time when you pay your tax $ to fund those wars. Take that and reconsider your "whataboutism" comment.
- zarkov99 8y ago
  Nobody is blameless, but some nations have better track records than others, and America's, all things considered, is pretty good for a superpower.

SpicyLemonZest 8y ago

The argument in this article is not that Huawei is handing over data, or anything else AT&T has been accused of. It's that Huawei is secretly a front for the Chinese government.

burtonator 8y ago
So basically the exact same thing as AT&T ... AT&T worked with the US government to spy on Americans and foreign nationals and then when they were bused the US government gave them retroactive immunity. BTW.. Retroactive immunity is illegal for criminal cases but it's perfectly ok for civil cases. Ex post facto... This was a complete miscarriage of justice.
- SpicyLemonZest 8y ago
  No, cooperating with the government isn't exactly the same thing as being owned by the government.

drharby 8y ago

Because huawei is chinese. It would make sense from a media perspective as they are trying to drive attention and thus eyeballs, and xenophobia sells page views

deogeo 8y ago

You're looking at it from a 'justice' perspective. It's much easier to explain the attitudes from an 'us-vs-them' perspective: US spying is used to give the US an advantage. Chinese spying is to give China an advantage. It's a lot like complaining about armed Chinese soldiers stationed in the US, only to be met by "Well our own soldiers are also armed".

blotter_paper 8y ago
I think you're describing the real politic situation between the US and China correctly, but as somebody who is in a country controlled by armed US soldiers I'm more concerned about being spied on by the US than China. If you don't identify with the corrupt government you live under the us-vs-them division seems fairly meaningless. It's not like the NSA is looking out for my best interests, or else they'd be patching vulnerabilities instead of exploiting them.
- deogeo 8y ago
  Do you believe the situation would be improved if China had greater influence, in the US and globally? Edit: To clarify, by 'the situation', I mean general quality of life/effective freedom, not necessarily limited to surveillance.
  - luckylion 8y ago
    Personally, I believe so, yes. When you have two competing powers, neither can abuse their power as much. Ideally, it wouldn't be just two, but two are better than one. If the EU could emancipate itself from the US, that would be a very welcome addition, but I don't see that happening anytime soon because the EU is made up of many interests and has no single government (and I'd love to have less EU, but for other reasons) so it's not able to compete at the same level. When the soviets were still a credible threat, the West needed to give their lower classes a piece of the pie because of the sweet promises the soviets spoke of (it doesn't matter whether they ever fulfilled them). Now that that's gone, they don't, and my country hasn't seen net wage increases for workers for multiple decades despite huge increases in productivity. We have seen a drop on corporate taxes and more tax evasion for the ultra rich, though.

ajross 8y ago

You should absolutely question the US intelligence community and its relationship with the business community. And I'm sure you do. You should also be suspicious of China, for exactly the same reason. And the fact that you explicitly refuse to (and get upvoted to the top of the topic by the HN community!) is... well, it's fucking horrifying. Seriously folks? You're so pissed at the NSA that the PRC is a "good guy" to you now and you need to defend them on the internet and cast aspersions against the "assault" on them by the media?

luckylion 8y ago
Let me try to give you my personal perspective. Not a fan of the PRC (though strangely fascinated), I'm from western Europe. China has little to no influence here, the US has gigantic influence. China hasn't been wholesale spying on us, or hasn't been caught doing that yet. The US has, and probably still does. Chinese companies don't practically have monopolies here, US companies do. From my perspective, China might become a threat at some point, the US is a giant threat right now. I have a feeling that I'm not alone with that, and it might explain why you get a more nuanced reaction from Non-Americans to the China/US-conflict.
- ajross 8y ago
  Some us care more about the threat posted by the PRC to its own people, FWIW. I mean, look, if you want to argue from a position of Euro-centric parochialism... I don't live there, so I don't need to care about that logic, right?
  - luckylion 8y ago
    Possibly, but that might also just be a rationalization for protecting your interests which are generally aligned with those of your country. There are many variables, but I don't think that "China mistreats it's people" isn't high on the list for "We need to keep Huawei out and rely on US technology only". Technological and economic influence/power are much more important, Realpolitik wins every time.

beepboopbeep 8y ago

But is the assault not called for? Has huawei not don't weird/shady/illegal things? I'm not questioning your statement on AT&T, I happen to agree, but is the topic at hand not the actions and history of Huawei?