4 ms·

> Not everyone spies on everyone to the same extent. Because they don't have the capacity. And NSA doesn't steal Huawei IP on behalf of Cisco, quite the opposi

by seppin 6y ago

> Not everyone spies on everyone to the same extent. Because they don't have the capacity. And NSA doesn't steal Huawei IP on behalf of Cisco, quite the opposite.

thereare5lights 6y ago
> behalf of Cisco Cisco is not part of the military industrial complex. Boeing or Lockheed Martin on the other hand, I'd be extremely surprised if our intelligence agencies didn't give them stolen tech.
- caycep 6y ago
  https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/industries/government/us-government-solutions-services/resources/government-contracts-funding-vehicles/federal-contracts.html https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/industries/governmen... it's hard not to be part of the MIC...
- jonnybgood 6y ago
  > Boeing or Lockheed Martin on the other hand, I'd be extremely surprised if our intelligence agencies didn't give them stolen tech. Assuming we’re talking about military tech. Why should they? What tech is the military and defense industry lacking in that would provide a battlefield advantage that other countries have? There’s only a handful of non-US weapon systems that can potentially compete with US weapon systems.
  - bigbubba 6y ago
    I think the scope of your consideration is a bit narrow. Lockheed Martin probably isn't very interested in stealing technology from Sukhoi to clone and put in their own jets. However it seems quite likely that Lockheed has an interest in the particulars of Sukhoi jets, their weapon systems, radars and EW systems, and airframe capabilities, so that Lockheed may better design systems meant to counter those systems. Certainly the design of effective stealth aircraft required knowledge of opposition radar systems. As for the American military being top dog by a long mile... that seems true, but you don't stay that way by being complacent.
    - seppin 6y ago
      You also don't ever stay on top by stealing/copying from others. By definition that always puts you (at least) 1 generation behind.
      - bigbubba 6y ago
        In simple scenarios with two actors perhaps, but I don't think that holds true for complex scenarios with multiple participants. Somebody who steals the best from everybody and is always one generation behind the state of the art in every regard may still prevail against all others because they are a Jack of all trades, master of none.
        seppin 6y ago
        I'm not saying there isn't use for knowing your adversary's capabilities (especially in designing your own offense/defensive systems) but very little of that knowledge informs the core of future arms programs.
        seppin 6y ago
        ..unless you are China
- seppin 6y ago
  > I'd be extremely surprised if our intelligence agencies didn't give them stolen tech. I'd be extremely surprised if any tech that is stolen is better than what they have / are working on. There is lots to criticize about America, their funding and continuous innovation in war tech is not one of those things.

by seppin 6y ago

> Not everyone spies on everyone to the same extent. Because they don't have the capacity. And NSA doesn't steal Huawei IP on behalf of Cisco, quite the opposite.

thereare5lights 6y ago

> behalf of Cisco Cisco is not part of the military industrial complex. Boeing or Lockheed Martin on the other hand, I'd be extremely surprised if our intelligence agencies didn't give them stolen tech.

caycep 6y ago
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/industries/government/us-government-solutions-services/resources/government-contracts-funding-vehicles/federal-contracts.html https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/industries/governmen... it's hard not to be part of the MIC...
jonnybgood 6y ago
> Boeing or Lockheed Martin on the other hand, I'd be extremely surprised if our intelligence agencies didn't give them stolen tech. Assuming we’re talking about military tech. Why should they? What tech is the military and defense industry lacking in that would provide a battlefield advantage that other countries have? There’s only a handful of non-US weapon systems that can potentially compete with US weapon systems.
- bigbubba 6y ago
  I think the scope of your consideration is a bit narrow. Lockheed Martin probably isn't very interested in stealing technology from Sukhoi to clone and put in their own jets. However it seems quite likely that Lockheed has an interest in the particulars of Sukhoi jets, their weapon systems, radars and EW systems, and airframe capabilities, so that Lockheed may better design systems meant to counter those systems. Certainly the design of effective stealth aircraft required knowledge of opposition radar systems. As for the American military being top dog by a long mile... that seems true, but you don't stay that way by being complacent.
  - seppin 6y ago
    You also don't ever stay on top by stealing/copying from others. By definition that always puts you (at least) 1 generation behind.
    - bigbubba 6y ago
      In simple scenarios with two actors perhaps, but I don't think that holds true for complex scenarios with multiple participants. Somebody who steals the best from everybody and is always one generation behind the state of the art in every regard may still prevail against all others because they are a Jack of all trades, master of none.
      - seppin 6y ago
        I'm not saying there isn't use for knowing your adversary's capabilities (especially in designing your own offense/defensive systems) but very little of that knowledge informs the core of future arms programs.
        seppin 6y ago
        ..unless you are China
seppin 6y ago
> I'd be extremely surprised if our intelligence agencies didn't give them stolen tech. I'd be extremely surprised if any tech that is stolen is better than what they have / are working on. There is lots to criticize about America, their funding and continuous innovation in war tech is not one of those things.