6 ms·
Even The Pentagon can't freeze Huawei out of its operations
- hypeatei 2y ago> companies like Huawei that American officials say could be used as a spying tool by the Chinese government Remember, spying is ONLY okay when the good guys™ are doing it.
- IncreasePosts 2y agoYes, and literally everyone thinks they're the good guys.
- bilbo0s 2y agoWell, those two statements pretty much sum up how things work. What can I say? Just like all others in the world, we don’t want other people spying on us. (And just like all others, we want to spy on everyone else.)
- antishatter 2y agoNobody thinks ccp is the good guys
- b112 2y agoAh! Excellent. So you fully admit Huawei is using its infra to steal corporate and state secrets worldwide, giving that info to domestic Chinese firms which are not bound by worldwide IP legalities? And using that info to subvert and destroy Western democratic principles? Thanks for the confirm on that.
- hypeatei 2y agoNo, I never said any of that. I just find it funny the U.S. government postures like this when they are probably the worst offenders when it comes to violating privacy of people around the world and their own citizens, too.
- wakawaka28 2y agoAre there any countries out there with a better privacy record, and an equivalent of the Fourth Amendment where there is actual legal action that can be pursued in case of violations? I am well aware of the violations of the US, but I am of the opinion that all countries spy when they are able to and can get away with it, and I'd rather have the US spying on me than anyone else.
- hypeatei 2y ago> there is actual legal action that can be pursued in case of violations I suggest you research the Patriot Act and FISA courts and tell me that our government is operating in a constitutional matter. Secret courts used to surveil foreign and American citizens. That isn't to mention the unfettered access to data they have through backdoors and the five eyes alliance.
- threeseed 2y agoPatriot Act and FISA courts have been ruled by the Supreme Court to be constitutional. And the independent judiciary is an integral part of them i.e. they decide if cases can be tried in them.
- hypeatei 2y agoGiven how powerful the three letter agencies are (especially the CIA), I'm not surprised the judiciary branch of the U.S. government agrees its constitutional. The ACLU and many legal professionals think FISA is unconstitutional. There are roadblocks when trying to challenge FISA because of the secrecy, see: https://www.npr.org/2013/02/26/172998760/supreme-court-makes-it-harder-to-challenge-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act https://www.npr.org/2013/02/26/172998760/supreme-court-makes...
- cowboylowrez 2y agoyeah but I think folks are thinking relatively, for instance, can we in both countries chat about "democratic rule" with the same comfy web tools?
- hcfman 2y ago"destroy Western democratic principles" ? No need, the West is doing that to itself all by itself.
- tivert 2y ago>> companies like Huawei that American officials say could be used as a spying tool by the Chinese government > Remember, spying is ONLY okay when the good guys™ are doing it. So I take it you're totally OK with an adversary of yours spying on you, then? Because the law is totally about particular entity avoiding being spied upon by it's adversary. It's not some kind of universal statement on what kind of spying is good and what kind is bad that you're twisting it into. There's no universal there, it's all contextual.
- hypeatei 2y agoI understand what this law is meant to do because China is the bad guy here, I get it. I'm merely pointing out that the U.S. does not have a leg to stand on when they'll turn around do the exact same thing. I find all the hypocrisy and posturing very tiring.
- tivert 2y ago> I'm merely pointing out that the U.S. does not have a leg to stand on when they'll turn around do the exact same thing. > I find all the hypocrisy and posturing very tiring. I'm merely pointing out that you're severely misunderstanding this. As I said before: there's no universal there, it's all contextual. The US is trying to take action to protect itself, end of story. It's like a soldier hiding from enemy fire in a foxhole and telling his buddies to do the same. If you wander onto the battlefield and tell him you find his "hypocrisy and posturing very tiring," because he shoots back at his enemy, he'd look at you like you're mad, and he'd be right because you don't get what's going on in a pretty fundamental way.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- paulddraper 2y agoYes. This is military, not Blues Clues.
- ASalazarMX 2y agoSo dumber and more double-faced? Blue always worked for a good cause.
- paulddraper 2y agoMeaning there's an inherently asymmetric objective
- Eddy_Viscosity2 2y agoThis is like saying "it's only robbery if the people who don't own the stuff take it". Like, yeah.
- ziggyzecat 2y agoSpying should fight and kill corruption. Period.
- hcfman 2y agoSo you are asking the spys to kill themselves then?
- ziggyzecat 2y agoYou have to elaborate. Spying serves a goal, which, in my opinion, should be fighting and ending/killing corruption. When that goal is reached, these guys should and can pivot, without having to kill themselves. Spies are not implicitly corrupt, if that is what you are implying.
- user3939382 2y agoDC spends 40 years liquidating our middle class, sending our entire industrial base oversees at the behest of their corporate masters then has shocked pikachu face when we have no supply chain control.