6 ms·

You obviously don't have much experience with China. China is an authoritarian state and all companies are subject to secret control by the state, essentially b

You obviously don't have much experience with China. China is an authoritarian state and all companies are subject to secret control by the state, essentially branches of the military. There is no legal recourse or protection from such intervention. The government can mandate spy code be inserted and any data they want. You're well intended here, but ignorant of how China operates. There is literally no way to enforce what you suggest.

justicezyx 6y ago
> China is an authoritarian state and all companies are subject to secret control by the state, essentially branches of the military. Jumping from authoritarian state, to "all companies are subject to secrete control by the state", that is already a quantum leap. If you believe what Soviet Union's state controlled economy collapsed, because it's impossible for state to control that much of details of the economy, then you must be having a great faith in Mr. Xijinping being a literal Super human, who can control "all companies". Then to "branches of the military"?! Now you are saying that Mr. Xi Jingping is just a puppet of the military?! And Chinese military is so brilliant that they not even developed a powerful military force second only to US & Russian, and meanwhile, they actually runs "all companies"?! I just cannot see any logic in this short statement...
- biggestdecision 6y ago
  Companies in China have Party Committees, appointed by the government. These committees have oversight over how the company operates, and how the board is appointed. The Chinese government has a strong direct influence inside Chinese businesses, that isn't present in the rest of the world.
  - justicezyx 6y ago
    Please give me a link, I haven't heard of such organization recently... Edit: Note that CCP does ensure private firms provide support for employees who are also party member to organize relevant activity. State-owned company obviously has party committee, and except great control on personnel, like kind of a board.
    - throwaway189262 6y ago
      Dude please don't play dumb like this on HN. If people don't give you a link it's because you can find it on the first page of Google.
    - onetimemanytime 6y ago
      They're called Commissars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commissar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commissar imagine one standing over as you code and reminding yo what the Party expects...and if x feature is complaint with Party ideals or not.
      - pmachinery 6y ago
        That link makes absolutely no reference to China in any way.
        pmachinery 6y ago
        It's pretty sad when human beings are reduced to the level of downvoting objective facts.
  - DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
    Party Committees aren't appointed by the government, and they don't have anywhere near the power you're asserting they do.
- jldugger 6y ago
  > If you believe what Soviet Union's state controlled economy collapsed, because it's impossible for state to control that much of details of the economy, then you must be having a great faith in Mr. Xijinping being a literal Super human, who can control "all companies". China has discarded many of the Communist philosophies which held the USSR back. It is somewhat difficult to organize an economy when you intend to abolish money. And even harder when you refuse to optimize for profit! The PLA is under no such restrictions. > And Chinese military is so brilliant that they not even developed a powerful military force second only to US & Russian, and meanwhile, they actually runs "all companies"?! Then you haven't been paying attention, because yes, the People's Liberation Army owns and runs many businesses, with active duty officers serving as executives. State-owned enterprise is basically the only part of the whole Communism thing left. I don't think anyone said Xi Jingping was a puppet other than you, but he remains president in part because the military supports the idea. Selling off their toys and firing officers from their side gigs risks losing that support.
  - justicezyx 6y ago
    Please be remindful that the statement is that "all companies are branch of military"... And to be precise, "People's Liberation Army owns and runs many businesses" this is almost certainly a misunderstanding of the organizing structure. Mr Deng Xiaoping deliberately not disallowing military involving business activities [1], in part it's because the military is starved from support and resources, and they need some form of self-sustaining to maintain the basic infrastructure, especially ensure the continuation of the talent development relevant to high-end military capability. That was banned in Jiang Zeming's rule [2]. In part, just like the purge done by Xi, was because military with its own finanical sources will become a plitical risk to the party head. Today, there isn't any military owned business, officially. There are state-owned military equipment companies and research institutes. But their relationship with military is not too different from Locke-martin & US government & US military. (I mean, US system works better, right? Then CCP will happy to copy...) Of course, there could be grey areas, and exceptions. But it should be common sense, here I repeat, military personnel cannot have financial support in their own control, that threatens the political leaders' authority. If you can name one "active duty officers serving as executives", I'll be very surprised... [1] http://congressionalresearch.com/98-197/document.php?study=chinas+military-owned+businesses http://congressionalresearch.com/98-197/document.php?study=c... [2] http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/981596.shtml http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/981596.shtml [3] https://www.businessinsider.com/xi-tells-chinas-military-to-stop-running-kindergartens-and-learn-to-fight-2018-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/xi-tells-chinas-military-to-...
thinkloop 6y ago
Why do countries, including China, mandate companies use their servers in various cases?
- dijit 6y ago
  "Their servers" implies that it's something they own. In fact it's more about ensuring that data is living inside their legislative boundaries. The servers are not owned by China/EU/US states; they're still owned by the companies that operate them, just the data isn't exfiltrated to be outside the reach of the police.
  - bagacrap 6y ago
    arguably sovereign property doesn't exist in China
graton 6y ago
The person you are replying to is Chinese and lives in China. Or at least their post history says so.
- perryizgr8 6y ago
  Then their comment becomes even more suspect.
  - pmachinery 6y ago
    Why do you believe simply being Chinese is "suspect"?
    - mantap 6y ago
      You can't really blame people for considering that. We know that China does participate in online misinformation (as does the UK and Russia to be fair). Additionally, people in China don't have a lot of freedom of speech to criticise the government. So unfortunately it does put a certain gloss on it when someone in mainland China writes something that the Chinese government would approve of. Because of the chilling effect, you start to wonder if you are only getting one half of the picture.
      - pmachinery 6y ago
        You aren't getting only one half of the picture, you're getting an additional half. Denouncing people who provide that other half as "suspect" is itself an attempt to ensure only one half of the picture is heard/accepted.
        mantap 6y ago
        For someone in China to criticise the central government is for them to risk their liberty. It's not a good life to be dissident in China. Freedom of speech affects freedom of thought. If you can't say something then nobody else will hear it. And if you can't hear a certain viewpoint then you are less likely to consider it. So you have to imagine the missing comments from China, firstly the person who wanted to criticise the government but was too afraid to say it, and secondly the person who never had a chance to consider criticising the government because they live in a place where that criticism is taboo.
dencodev 6y ago
Worth noting that companies in the United States are subject to secret and forced surveillance by the US government (NSLs), and enforcing that surveillance also requires a degree of forced control as well. There is legal recourse for NSLs but it's ineffective and basically never works. >The government can mandate spy code be inserted and any data they want. Essentially true for US government with US companies too

justicezyx 6y ago

> China is an authoritarian state and all companies are subject to secret control by the state, essentially branches of the military. Jumping from authoritarian state, to "all companies are subject to secrete control by the state", that is already a quantum leap. If you believe what Soviet Union's state controlled economy collapsed, because it's impossible for state to control that much of details of the economy, then you must be having a great faith in Mr. Xijinping being a literal Super human, who can control "all companies". Then to "branches of the military"?! Now you are saying that Mr. Xi Jingping is just a puppet of the military?! And Chinese military is so brilliant that they not even developed a powerful military force second only to US & Russian, and meanwhile, they actually runs "all companies"?! I just cannot see any logic in this short statement...

biggestdecision 6y ago
Companies in China have Party Committees, appointed by the government. These committees have oversight over how the company operates, and how the board is appointed. The Chinese government has a strong direct influence inside Chinese businesses, that isn't present in the rest of the world.
- justicezyx 6y ago
  Please give me a link, I haven't heard of such organization recently... Edit: Note that CCP does ensure private firms provide support for employees who are also party member to organize relevant activity. State-owned company obviously has party committee, and except great control on personnel, like kind of a board.
  - throwaway189262 6y ago
    Dude please don't play dumb like this on HN. If people don't give you a link it's because you can find it on the first page of Google.
  - onetimemanytime 6y ago
    They're called Commissars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commissar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commissar imagine one standing over as you code and reminding yo what the Party expects...and if x feature is complaint with Party ideals or not.
    - pmachinery 6y ago
      That link makes absolutely no reference to China in any way.
      - pmachinery 6y ago
        It's pretty sad when human beings are reduced to the level of downvoting objective facts.
- DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
  Party Committees aren't appointed by the government, and they don't have anywhere near the power you're asserting they do.
jldugger 6y ago
> If you believe what Soviet Union's state controlled economy collapsed, because it's impossible for state to control that much of details of the economy, then you must be having a great faith in Mr. Xijinping being a literal Super human, who can control "all companies". China has discarded many of the Communist philosophies which held the USSR back. It is somewhat difficult to organize an economy when you intend to abolish money. And even harder when you refuse to optimize for profit! The PLA is under no such restrictions. > And Chinese military is so brilliant that they not even developed a powerful military force second only to US & Russian, and meanwhile, they actually runs "all companies"?! Then you haven't been paying attention, because yes, the People's Liberation Army owns and runs many businesses, with active duty officers serving as executives. State-owned enterprise is basically the only part of the whole Communism thing left. I don't think anyone said Xi Jingping was a puppet other than you, but he remains president in part because the military supports the idea. Selling off their toys and firing officers from their side gigs risks losing that support.
- justicezyx 6y ago
  Please be remindful that the statement is that "all companies are branch of military"... And to be precise, "People's Liberation Army owns and runs many businesses" this is almost certainly a misunderstanding of the organizing structure. Mr Deng Xiaoping deliberately not disallowing military involving business activities [1], in part it's because the military is starved from support and resources, and they need some form of self-sustaining to maintain the basic infrastructure, especially ensure the continuation of the talent development relevant to high-end military capability. That was banned in Jiang Zeming's rule [2]. In part, just like the purge done by Xi, was because military with its own finanical sources will become a plitical risk to the party head. Today, there isn't any military owned business, officially. There are state-owned military equipment companies and research institutes. But their relationship with military is not too different from Locke-martin & US government & US military. (I mean, US system works better, right? Then CCP will happy to copy...) Of course, there could be grey areas, and exceptions. But it should be common sense, here I repeat, military personnel cannot have financial support in their own control, that threatens the political leaders' authority. If you can name one "active duty officers serving as executives", I'll be very surprised... [1] http://congressionalresearch.com/98-197/document.php?study=chinas+military-owned+businesses http://congressionalresearch.com/98-197/document.php?study=c... [2] http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/981596.shtml http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/981596.shtml [3] https://www.businessinsider.com/xi-tells-chinas-military-to-stop-running-kindergartens-and-learn-to-fight-2018-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/xi-tells-chinas-military-to-...

thinkloop 6y ago

Why do countries, including China, mandate companies use their servers in various cases?

dijit 6y ago
"Their servers" implies that it's something they own. In fact it's more about ensuring that data is living inside their legislative boundaries. The servers are not owned by China/EU/US states; they're still owned by the companies that operate them, just the data isn't exfiltrated to be outside the reach of the police.
- bagacrap 6y ago
  arguably sovereign property doesn't exist in China

graton 6y ago

The person you are replying to is Chinese and lives in China. Or at least their post history says so.

perryizgr8 6y ago
Then their comment becomes even more suspect.
- pmachinery 6y ago
  Why do you believe simply being Chinese is "suspect"?
  - mantap 6y ago
    You can't really blame people for considering that. We know that China does participate in online misinformation (as does the UK and Russia to be fair). Additionally, people in China don't have a lot of freedom of speech to criticise the government. So unfortunately it does put a certain gloss on it when someone in mainland China writes something that the Chinese government would approve of. Because of the chilling effect, you start to wonder if you are only getting one half of the picture.
    - pmachinery 6y ago
      You aren't getting only one half of the picture, you're getting an additional half. Denouncing people who provide that other half as "suspect" is itself an attempt to ensure only one half of the picture is heard/accepted.
      - mantap 6y ago
        For someone in China to criticise the central government is for them to risk their liberty. It's not a good life to be dissident in China. Freedom of speech affects freedom of thought. If you can't say something then nobody else will hear it. And if you can't hear a certain viewpoint then you are less likely to consider it. So you have to imagine the missing comments from China, firstly the person who wanted to criticise the government but was too afraid to say it, and secondly the person who never had a chance to consider criticising the government because they live in a place where that criticism is taboo.

dencodev 6y ago

Worth noting that companies in the United States are subject to secret and forced surveillance by the US government (NSLs), and enforcing that surveillance also requires a degree of forced control as well. There is legal recourse for NSLs but it's ineffective and basically never works. >The government can mandate spy code be inserted and any data they want. Essentially true for US government with US companies too