6 ms·
Bunny’s stance would have been reasonable if someone like Jiang Zemin or Hu Jintao was in power, but Xi is different. Not only has Xi blocked the West from acc
by chaostheory 3y ago
Bunny’s stance would have been reasonable if someone like Jiang Zemin or Hu Jintao was in power, but Xi is different.
Not only has Xi blocked the West from accessing China’s domestic market, but Xi has essentially helped end globalism and started decoupling with his foolish wolf warrior diplomatic policy and the belligerent nine dash line. Let’s also not forget about Xi’s invasion plans for Taiwan ie we’re likely headed for war https://youtu.be/plHRRFHZ_f0 https://youtu.be/plHRRFHZ_f0
You cannot ignore those issues if you want people to take your position seriously.
- xtian 3y agoHow are western companies blocked from accessing China’s domestic market? Because they are obligated to follow local laws? That’s like saying GDPR blocks American companies from operating in Europe.
- chaostheory 3y agoThis isn’t a new subject. For instance, both Google and Facebook are not allowed in China despite their past attempts to comply with mercurial and vague CCP laws. https://www.businessinsider.com/major-us-tech-companies-blocked-from-operating-in-china-2019-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/major-us-tech-companies-bloc... I’m sure there are more US companies and industries that are not allowed to compete in China’s domestic market. The GDPR is protectionist legislation for EU companies, but it doesn’t prevent US companies from doing business in the EU. It’s a terrible comparison to the CCP’s outright ban on many US companies.
- xtian 3y agoSo how does Microsoft manage it? Bing and other Microsoft properties are accessible in China.
- chaostheory 3y agoMost likely because China relies on Windows? I don’t know and it’s a moot point. All I know is that there has been a large swath of US and other Western companies that are barred from doing business in China. That’s a fact. As to why, it’s likely protectionism for local mainland companies who wouldn’t have been able to compete.
- throw382747 3y agoThe "why" is because Microsoft and Apple follow Chinese laws. Just like Tesla, Ford, and GM follow Chinese laws and can operate in China. The other companies refused to follow Chinese laws, so they aren't allowed to do business in China.
- chaostheory 3y agoAs I’ve already mentioned multiple times, other companies tried to comply with CCP laws but they were blocked out anyways.
- xtian 3y agoWhat’s a specific example?
- chaostheory 3y agoI’ve already listed one news article with specific examples. One can find more over the past decade. I don’t have the burden of proof. That’s on you since this is common knowledge in the West
- xtian 3y agoBurden of proof would fall upon the person making the claim. Appealing to the cultivated state of general ignorance in the West does not absolve you of this. In fact, the article you reference supports my position since it cites “restrictive laws and regulations” as the reason these companies do not operate in China.
- jakobson14 3y agoThey cut a deal. Just like how apple partners with a chinese firm to store chinese users' data in china.
- xtian 3y ago“Cut a deal” or maybe they followed local laws
- ImPostingOnHN 3y agoObviously it may or may not be like that, depending on the specific laws, parties involved, and possible consequences
- zoobab 3y ago"GDPR blocks American companies from operating in Europe." Actually it does, because of extraterritoriality of US laws.
- jakobson14 3y agoBlocked or not blocked from china's market, hindering US companies from developing and becoming leaders in emerging new technologies will not help the US stay ahead. China wants to catch up, and they will with or without US help. The only question is whether the USA will work to remain competitive by mastering new domains, or whether it will sit back on it's laurels and the technology it's already mastered. The development of cheap and ubiquitous RISC-V processors has major implications for the economics of putting software into devices. When modern military and civilian tech relies on doing that? This is one of the areas you need to be pushing into to stay competitive.
- chaostheory 3y agoWhy do we have to work on helping China with new tech in order to remain competitive? Why should we help China develop their own chip foundries when we’re about to get into a hot kinetic war with them in the South China Sea? Again, you can’t ignore that issue if you want a strong argument.
- jakobson14 3y agoBecause you can't have your cake and eat it too. That much should be obvious to ANYONE with even a PASSING understanding of how open source works. In their report, the US gov wants open source collaboration on RISC-V between the US and it's allies.....while also excluding china. Sorry, not fucking possible. You can either have open colaboration where anyone can participate, and yeah, that means somebody might secretly be working for the PRC, or you have no open colaboration at all. There is NO middle ground, and any attempt to create one will simply kill the open colaboration. Kill the open collaboration in the USA, and the USA falls behind. All the other countries in the world will continue to collaborate on RISC-V, in the EU, in china, japan, austrailia, canada, and wherever else, and none of that will translate into increased experience or capability for the US. The USA becomes a pure consumer of other people's tech, never contributing anything back for fear that it might find it's way to someone in china either directly or by way of someone else engaging in open colaboration.
- 3y ago