4 ms·

One other issue is that China did not just outright ban Google or Facebook or Twitter. The Chinese government gave these companies a chance to stay, as long as

One other issue is that China did not just outright ban Google or Facebook or Twitter. The Chinese government gave these companies a chance to stay, as long as the complied with the censorship laws. Google was going to re-enter the Chinese market again with Project Dragonfly, but they backed out due to bad publicity.

justicezyx 6y ago
The law, if complied, effectively means they forsake their US value. Of cuz, these big corps already forsaken their US values in almost all aspects of their businesses, but they cannot put that under the focus light of China, the forbidden word... Then there are Apple and Microsoft. In the end, we get a living example of why GPT3 questions humans intelligence...
remarkEon 6y ago
>but they backed out due to bad publicity. And if they hadn't, I would hope that this discussion we're having would include what sanctions Google should face for not backing out. I'm having a hard time following how folks in threads related to China are not seeing that this game is being played by two players with completely different understandings of the rules. Player 1 spends an inordinate amount of time with the rule book, complaining to others that player 2 isn't playing fairly. Player 2 continues taking territory knowing that by the time player 1 realizes it's not about following the rules - it's about winning - it'll be too late.
- justicezyx 6y ago
  > what sanctions Google should face for not backing out What are the sanctions? I am not aware of firms doing business to China are punished by any sovereign nations? > this game is being played by two players with completely different understandings of the rules What do you mean by different understanding of the rules? I thought here China and US do have different rules, and firms are facing different rules when they operate at these 2 nations. How and why that leads to different understanding of (the same set of) rules? > Player 1 ... Player 2 Who are these corresponding to China and US? I am fairly exposed to the complexity involves in the sino us relationship both economic and political. There certainly isn't systematic imbalance in terms of one government is playing by rules and the others don't.
  - remarkEon 6y ago
    >What are the sanctions? There are none right now, that's my point. But if PRC is going to co-opt US companies as they implement other strategies to become global hegemon in 10 years time, it's perfectly appropriate to ask questions about whether or not American companies should play party to this - and whether or not the American government should do anything to stop or reverse the trend. >What do you mean by different understanding of the rules? >Who are these corresponding to China and US? I'm not really convinced you're arguing in good faith if your null position is that the US and China are behaving the same way in international markets. There's mountains of evidence to the contrary, going back 30 years.
    - justicezyx 6y ago
      > your null position is that the US and China are behaving the same way in international markets. Of cuz they are not behaving the same way. But the issue is: are they behaving in the framework of law?

justicezyx 6y ago

The law, if complied, effectively means they forsake their US value. Of cuz, these big corps already forsaken their US values in almost all aspects of their businesses, but they cannot put that under the focus light of China, the forbidden word... Then there are Apple and Microsoft. In the end, we get a living example of why GPT3 questions humans intelligence...

remarkEon 6y ago

>but they backed out due to bad publicity. And if they hadn't, I would hope that this discussion we're having would include what sanctions Google should face for not backing out. I'm having a hard time following how folks in threads related to China are not seeing that this game is being played by two players with completely different understandings of the rules. Player 1 spends an inordinate amount of time with the rule book, complaining to others that player 2 isn't playing fairly. Player 2 continues taking territory knowing that by the time player 1 realizes it's not about following the rules - it's about winning - it'll be too late.

justicezyx 6y ago
> what sanctions Google should face for not backing out What are the sanctions? I am not aware of firms doing business to China are punished by any sovereign nations? > this game is being played by two players with completely different understandings of the rules What do you mean by different understanding of the rules? I thought here China and US do have different rules, and firms are facing different rules when they operate at these 2 nations. How and why that leads to different understanding of (the same set of) rules? > Player 1 ... Player 2 Who are these corresponding to China and US? I am fairly exposed to the complexity involves in the sino us relationship both economic and political. There certainly isn't systematic imbalance in terms of one government is playing by rules and the others don't.
- remarkEon 6y ago
  >What are the sanctions? There are none right now, that's my point. But if PRC is going to co-opt US companies as they implement other strategies to become global hegemon in 10 years time, it's perfectly appropriate to ask questions about whether or not American companies should play party to this - and whether or not the American government should do anything to stop or reverse the trend. >What do you mean by different understanding of the rules? >Who are these corresponding to China and US? I'm not really convinced you're arguing in good faith if your null position is that the US and China are behaving the same way in international markets. There's mountains of evidence to the contrary, going back 30 years.
  - justicezyx 6y ago
    > your null position is that the US and China are behaving the same way in international markets. Of cuz they are not behaving the same way. But the issue is: are they behaving in the framework of law?