4 ms·

Am I the only one who doesn’t like anything about this one bit? Usually, the POTUS can’t tell private companies what to do.

by 1f60c 6y ago

mantap 6y ago
Only the smallest companies in PRC can really be described as "private". Everything else is by some means or another connected with the communist party.
- knolax 6y ago
  In this thread we have on one side a public example of the state ordering a private corporation to do something, and on the other vague blanket accusations of state collusion that get parroted by HNers but never substantiated with any examples. How long can you keep up the cognitive dissonance?
  - lenkite 6y ago
    How many examples do you need ? Will you be satisfied by a dozen or a hundred ? Just asking in advance before compiling. I am afraid that your assertion of cognitive dissonance should be directed at yourself. Frankly, this research can be done by anyone who hasn't closed their minds to the matter. In China, all corporate decisions involve the CCP. http://archive.is/JpWSU http://archive.is/JpWSU https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/25/china-business-xi-jinping-communist-party-state-private-enterprise-huawei https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/25/china-business...
    - codedokode 6y ago
      What's wrong with Chinese company obeying Chinese laws?
      - frequentnapper 6y ago
        Nothing, as long as they only operate in China.
    - knolax 6y ago
      > In China, all corporate decisions involve the CCP. A ridiculously broad claim that your links do not back at all. Your Guardian article was interesting because despite it's lengthy tangents on Xi's past or Jack Ma being "forced" to step down, the only thing of substance it could provide was: > The law states that “any organisation and citizen” shall “support and cooperate in national intelligence work”. What do you think gag orders and subpoenas are? I find it hard to believe that you would willingly ignore the widespread practice of warrant canaries. Of course that detracts from the greater point that even after asking for specific examples, you could not find anything nearly as explicit as the TFW, only vague interpretations of foreign laws, and only a promise to "compile" more examples in the future. I'll one up you, and give an example of the US ordering a Chinese company to do their bidding. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/zte-corporation-agrees-plead-guilty-and-pay-over-4304-million-violating-us-sanctions-sending https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/zte-corporation-agrees-plead-... > requires ZTE to submit to a three-year period of corporate probation, during which time an independent corporate compliance monitor will review and report on ZTE’s export compliance program. ZTE is also required to cooperate fully with the Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding any criminal investigation by U.S. law enforcement authorities. Of course this "independent" compliance team will conveniently be made up of Americans. What was their crime? Violating Sanctions, or if we weren't using newspeak, engaging in Free Trade. If you reply with "whataboutism" please try to find out if you were lobotomized recently.
      - lenkite 6y ago
        Sir, may I request you to read the intelligence law in depth before you comment? Didn't ZTE deliberately violate known Iran sanctions and hide their involvement? They were also judged guilty in a court of law. There isn't even a need for any court or judge - any security and state official may do the below and not just to Chinese citizens or corporations. The Intelligence Law, by contrast, repeatedly obliges individuals, organizations, and institutions to assist Public Security and State Security officials in carrying out a wide array of “intelligence” work. Article Seven stipulates that “any organization or citizen shall support, assist, and cooperate with state intelligence work according to law.” Article 14, in turn, grants intelligence agencies authority to insist on this support: “state intelligence work organs, when legally carrying forth intelligence work, may demand that concerned organs, organizations, or citizens provide needed support, assistance, and cooperation.” Organizations and citizens must also protect the secrecy of “any state intelligence work secrets of which they are aware.” These clauses do not stipulate that only Chinese “organizations” are subject to these requirements.
  - nawgz 6y ago
    Why is astroturfing still a thing on HN? We all can keep up this "cognitive dissonance" for arbitrary amounts of time because there is none.
    - knolax 6y ago
      Nice response. Just keep calling it astroturfing whenever you see an opinion you disagree with. Real enlightened thinker you are. EDIT: the irony of a 14 day old account accusing me of astroturfing.
  - mantap 6y ago
    You can't separate the state and private enterprise in China because China is a communist country. That is not a conspiracy theory, that is how the country officially works. What is really a cognitive dissonance are the projections free market capitalism onto China when China itself takes great pains to emphasise that it doesn't have that kind of system (through phrases such as "socialism with chinese characteristics").
    - knolax 6y ago
      See you're doing the same thing every other replier is doing. You appeal to de jure definitions and argue over semantics but you still can't provide a single specific example of them this blatantly ordering their companies around. At this point I think you're doing it on purpose. It can't be that hard can it?
      - mantap 6y ago
        Your position is that even though China claims to be a communist country, somehow through the back door they have introduced a free market but they keep it on the down-low? You cannot run a large company in China without being a member of CCP.
- codedokode 6y ago
  What's wrong with being connected with communist party? In Western countries IT companies like Google, Dropbox or Facebook also cooperate with governments and even give high-paid jobs to government officials. I think that TikTok better not to sell a profitable business, or at least should not sell it cheaply.

Am I the only one who doesn’t like anything about this one bit? Usually, the POTUS can’t tell private companies what to do.

by 1f60c 6y ago

Am I the only one who doesn’t like anything about this one bit? Usually, the POTUS can’t tell private companies what to do.

mantap 6y ago

Only the smallest companies in PRC can really be described as "private". Everything else is by some means or another connected with the communist party.

knolax 6y ago
In this thread we have on one side a public example of the state ordering a private corporation to do something, and on the other vague blanket accusations of state collusion that get parroted by HNers but never substantiated with any examples. How long can you keep up the cognitive dissonance?
- lenkite 6y ago
  How many examples do you need ? Will you be satisfied by a dozen or a hundred ? Just asking in advance before compiling. I am afraid that your assertion of cognitive dissonance should be directed at yourself. Frankly, this research can be done by anyone who hasn't closed their minds to the matter. In China, all corporate decisions involve the CCP. http://archive.is/JpWSU http://archive.is/JpWSU https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/25/china-business-xi-jinping-communist-party-state-private-enterprise-huawei https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/25/china-business...
  - codedokode 6y ago
    What's wrong with Chinese company obeying Chinese laws?
    - frequentnapper 6y ago
      Nothing, as long as they only operate in China.
  - knolax 6y ago
    > In China, all corporate decisions involve the CCP. A ridiculously broad claim that your links do not back at all. Your Guardian article was interesting because despite it's lengthy tangents on Xi's past or Jack Ma being "forced" to step down, the only thing of substance it could provide was: > The law states that “any organisation and citizen” shall “support and cooperate in national intelligence work”. What do you think gag orders and subpoenas are? I find it hard to believe that you would willingly ignore the widespread practice of warrant canaries. Of course that detracts from the greater point that even after asking for specific examples, you could not find anything nearly as explicit as the TFW, only vague interpretations of foreign laws, and only a promise to "compile" more examples in the future. I'll one up you, and give an example of the US ordering a Chinese company to do their bidding. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/zte-corporation-agrees-plead-guilty-and-pay-over-4304-million-violating-us-sanctions-sending https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/zte-corporation-agrees-plead-... > requires ZTE to submit to a three-year period of corporate probation, during which time an independent corporate compliance monitor will review and report on ZTE’s export compliance program. ZTE is also required to cooperate fully with the Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding any criminal investigation by U.S. law enforcement authorities. Of course this "independent" compliance team will conveniently be made up of Americans. What was their crime? Violating Sanctions, or if we weren't using newspeak, engaging in Free Trade. If you reply with "whataboutism" please try to find out if you were lobotomized recently.
    - lenkite 6y ago
      Sir, may I request you to read the intelligence law in depth before you comment? Didn't ZTE deliberately violate known Iran sanctions and hide their involvement? They were also judged guilty in a court of law. There isn't even a need for any court or judge - any security and state official may do the below and not just to Chinese citizens or corporations. The Intelligence Law, by contrast, repeatedly obliges individuals, organizations, and institutions to assist Public Security and State Security officials in carrying out a wide array of “intelligence” work. Article Seven stipulates that “any organization or citizen shall support, assist, and cooperate with state intelligence work according to law.” Article 14, in turn, grants intelligence agencies authority to insist on this support: “state intelligence work organs, when legally carrying forth intelligence work, may demand that concerned organs, organizations, or citizens provide needed support, assistance, and cooperation.” Organizations and citizens must also protect the secrecy of “any state intelligence work secrets of which they are aware.” These clauses do not stipulate that only Chinese “organizations” are subject to these requirements.
- nawgz 6y ago
  Why is astroturfing still a thing on HN? We all can keep up this "cognitive dissonance" for arbitrary amounts of time because there is none.
  - knolax 6y ago
    Nice response. Just keep calling it astroturfing whenever you see an opinion you disagree with. Real enlightened thinker you are. EDIT: the irony of a 14 day old account accusing me of astroturfing.
- mantap 6y ago
  You can't separate the state and private enterprise in China because China is a communist country. That is not a conspiracy theory, that is how the country officially works. What is really a cognitive dissonance are the projections free market capitalism onto China when China itself takes great pains to emphasise that it doesn't have that kind of system (through phrases such as "socialism with chinese characteristics").
  - knolax 6y ago
    See you're doing the same thing every other replier is doing. You appeal to de jure definitions and argue over semantics but you still can't provide a single specific example of them this blatantly ordering their companies around. At this point I think you're doing it on purpose. It can't be that hard can it?
    - mantap 6y ago
      Your position is that even though China claims to be a communist country, somehow through the back door they have introduced a free market but they keep it on the down-low? You cannot run a large company in China without being a member of CCP.
codedokode 6y ago
What's wrong with being connected with communist party? In Western countries IT companies like Google, Dropbox or Facebook also cooperate with governments and even give high-paid jobs to government officials. I think that TikTok better not to sell a profitable business, or at least should not sell it cheaply.