3 ms·

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.economist.com/briefing/2018/05/31/china-has-turned-xinjiang-into-a-police-state-like-no-other https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.

by sho_hn 8y ago

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.economist.com/briefing/2018/05/31/china-has-turned-xinjiang-into-a-police-state-like-no-other https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.economist.com/briefing/2018... Huawei makes a lot of the equipment for installations like this. How do you reconcile that?

cbzry 8y ago
Not everybody disagrees with that, and even if they do they may not care enough not to buy Huawei equipment.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
jdietrich 8y ago
Plenty of American companies facilitate surveillance and censorship. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/424584/new-evidence-that-cisco-enables-surveillance-and-control-of-chinas-citizens/ https://www.technologyreview.com/s/424584/new-evidence-that-... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/surveillance-and-censorship-inside-syrias-internet/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/surveillance-and-censorship-ins...
- sho_hn 8y ago
  Of course. There's also the famous case of IBM supplying the Nazi party. How does this address Huawei ...?
icelancer 8y ago
The very site you linked to (Google's butchering of the web via AMP) supported Project Maven explicitly and then implicitly by laundering their work through a contractor. Save your outrage.
GordonS 8y ago
Huawei is a huge organisation, so it's fair to say that not everyone who works there is involved in mass surveillance, and not everyone is hell-bent on creating an Orwellian nightmare. Furthermore, many western companies (e.g. Cisco) have been called out for being involved with "dodgy" things like mass surveillance in countries in the Middle East and Asia - but also in western countries too. IMO it makes to sense to boycott Huawei any more than it makes sense to boycott Cisco. And if you meant in a "red danger" sense, as opposed to just Huawei, then I think it's safe to say the west is well on its way down the slippery slope to mass surveillance and over-reaching powers - the press likes to make a big deal of how evil China is, but completely ignores what goes on at home.
- sho_hn 8y ago
  "Other companies do bad things, too" is whataboutism and doesn't really address this one, though.

by sho_hn 8y ago

cbzry 8y ago

Not everybody disagrees with that, and even if they do they may not care enough not to buy Huawei equipment.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

jdietrich 8y ago

Plenty of American companies facilitate surveillance and censorship. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/424584/new-evidence-that-cisco-enables-surveillance-and-control-of-chinas-citizens/ https://www.technologyreview.com/s/424584/new-evidence-that-... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/surveillance-and-censorship-inside-syrias-internet/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/surveillance-and-censorship-ins...

sho_hn 8y ago
Of course. There's also the famous case of IBM supplying the Nazi party. How does this address Huawei ...?

icelancer 8y ago

The very site you linked to (Google's butchering of the web via AMP) supported Project Maven explicitly and then implicitly by laundering their work through a contractor. Save your outrage.

GordonS 8y ago

Huawei is a huge organisation, so it's fair to say that not everyone who works there is involved in mass surveillance, and not everyone is hell-bent on creating an Orwellian nightmare. Furthermore, many western companies (e.g. Cisco) have been called out for being involved with "dodgy" things like mass surveillance in countries in the Middle East and Asia - but also in western countries too. IMO it makes to sense to boycott Huawei any more than it makes sense to boycott Cisco. And if you meant in a "red danger" sense, as opposed to just Huawei, then I think it's safe to say the west is well on its way down the slippery slope to mass surveillance and over-reaching powers - the press likes to make a big deal of how evil China is, but completely ignores what goes on at home.

sho_hn 8y ago
"Other companies do bad things, too" is whataboutism and doesn't really address this one, though.