9 ms·
Ah! 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 a
by b112 2y ago
Ah! 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?
- ffgjgf1 2y agoWhich isn’t necessarily that great when that judicial system is throughly and entirely openly corrupt even at the very top
- wakawaka28 2y agoI didn't say that the government followed the law or even did the right thing always. But in many countries you have absolutely no recourse. In the US you can talk about it, file lawsuits, etc.
- wildzzz 2y agoAnd other countries are free to ban the sale of American network devices that they suspect are spying for the US government.
- hypeatei 2y agoMaybe countries that are completely outside the US sphere of influence (e.g. China or Russia) but anything that legitimately threatens the intelligence apparatus will not be allowed. See the ousting of Australias prime minister (first ever in history) by their governor general influenced by the CIA: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_CIA_involvement_in_the_Whitlam_dismissal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_CIA_involvement_in_t...
- rightbyte 2y ago> And other countries are free to ban the sale of American network devices No they are not. You need to mandate domestic network devices or introduce some silly standard to fly under the radar. The risk is too high Washington will destabilize your country and you might end up in a bloody mess.
- hcfman 2y ago"destroy Western democratic principles" ? No need, the West is doing that to itself all by itself.