5 ms·

> Congress has repeatedly voted to impose new restrictions on Chinese technology and in April voted to require China's ByteDance to divest to sell its TikTok U.

> Congress has repeatedly voted to impose new restrictions on Chinese technology and in April voted to require China's ByteDance to divest to sell its TikTok U.S. assets by Jan. 19. Why are these restrictions happening in the first place? Went looking for reasons beyond "China may/may not be using DJI for spying" but beyond conspiracy theories, is there any factual arguments behind the ban?

lazide 2y ago
China bad, that’s all.
- skhunted 2y ago
  China has been fighting a cyber war against the United States for quite some time. It is appropriate to respond to this.
  - lazide 2y ago
    Then ban their import and use. Oh wait, that’s not going to happen? Weird.
Schiendelman 2y ago
Have you read any of the reporting about these companies? Tiktok and DJI both have significant ties with the CCP, and behave similarly. https://www.nytimes.com/article/tiktok-ban.html https://www.nytimes.com/article/tiktok-ban.html It's definitely thin with actual data, but it's also likely we don't have the data that the Senate/House do. I'd prefer they pass something similar to GDPR requiring all US user data be stored and operated on in the US and not transmitted to other countries.
- CaptainOfCoit 2y ago
  > Have you read any of the reporting about this? https://www.nytimes.com/article/tiktok-ban.html https://www.nytimes.com/article/tiktok-ban.html I've read the reporting about TikTok, yes. Not sure if you linked the wrong article here, it doesn't mention DJI at all it seems. > I'd prefer they pass something similar to GDPR requiring all US user data be stored and operated on in the US and not transmitted to other countries. GDPR doesn't require all EU data to be stored in EU, it requires companies that do store EU data to follow specific guidelines and regulations regarding transit and storage. Before wanting something to be implemented in your country, you'd do yourself a service to read a bit more about it first :)
  - Schiendelman 2y ago
    I know what GDPR does and that it doesn't require storage in country - but I would want the US to require that.
- hombre_fatal 2y ago
  I don’t see what I get out of companies forced to store my data in the US. I don’t want to be treated differently. And having data stored abroad is a feature. KYC for data sounds insane.
asah 2y ago
In war, the "fact" is simply that another nation-state represents a material and growing threat. China in particular has more than met this bar.
- CaptainOfCoit 2y ago
  You mean the "war" where China builds apparently more popular and cheaper products than the US so tariffs were added so the US can improve their own GDP by banning competition?
  - adventured 2y ago
    China has drastic restrictions on the ability of foreign nations to operate within its domestic economy. Those drastic restrictions in various formulations have been in place for essentially eternity. That spans from general context like real-estate, to specific context like social networks or search (eg Google and Facebook), to infrastructure (eg AWS), to Disney not being allowed to own its own parks, to McDonald's not being allowed to operate its own restaurants. In fact it's so bad, it's the exceptionally rare case where a business is allowed to own & operate its business fully in China. When McDonalds can't even operate their restaurants in your country properly, you're blatantly on a particularly bad list of very authoritarian nations. The opposite is overwhelmingly true in the US. You are free, at any time, to set up and fully own a business within the US (as a foreigner). You can even pick the state based on legal structural preferences. Almost anyone on HN can do it whenever they feel like it, it's fairly simple all things considered. The US is a nation that allowed companies like Toyota to come in and hammer the domestic competition. It allowed foreign operators to hammer huge domestic employers in industries such as steel. The US has far more often than not tended to allow very friendly access to its gigantic market. The mistake the US has made for decades is to go too easy on China in regards to how they block access to their domestic market. This is the era of reciprocation, as such China should be increasingly blocked from easy access to foreign markets until they reciprocate and open up access to their economy.
dkasper 2y ago
Obviously there is debate, but reciprocal trade and national security are the reasons.
- CaptainOfCoit 2y ago
  > national security are the reasons How, exactly, is national security even a reason? Ok, so the drone has a camera, but that doesn't mean someone can magically transport the data. Ok, so the drone has a LTE modem, that still has to be connected to US infrastructure once connected somewhere within the US. So how is it supposed to be a national security issue? Sounds as harmful as a calculator.
  - cj 2y ago
    > that doesn't mean someone can magically transport the data. The drone (and controller) needs internet connectivity to download firmware updates. The drone and controller both have wifi and both automatically connect to wifi when it's available. > Sounds as harmful as a calculator. More like a wifi-enabled calculator that self-installs firmware updates, and whose every use is controlled and tracked by a Chinese company who operates at the mercy of the Chinese government.
    - genewitch 2y ago
      Neither of these things are true. You don't have to update firmware, firstly. Secondly, the fact the drone and the controller "use wifi" doesn't mean that they're connecting to arbitrary wifi access points. The drone controller (at least for the two drones i had) is a WAP, itself, a real strong one, and the drone connects to the controller. You don't need a phone to fly a DJI - the phone connected to the controller via USB cable provides telemetry and real time video. If you just want to fly the drone around and maybe capture some cool video, that doesn't require a connected phone. Source: owned a dji mini and own a DJI mini 2, very close friends with people who own the mini 3 and other, more expensive ones (with the video screen built in to the controller). I fly mine and use an old oled android phone as the video/telemetry screen - no sim card or cellular connectivity. I can take the whole setup to the middle of a forest with no connectivity at all and it will connect, fly, and record telemetry and video on the phone and on the SD card in the drone.
soramimo 2y ago
Drones will dominate warfare going forward (see Ukraine). Having production capacity for drones concentrated in your primary geopolitical competitor country is a bad idea. Hence these policies (which make a lot of sense to me and equally apply to other fields like semiconductors).
- CaptainOfCoit 2y ago
  Wouldn't it make more sense to try to develop your own production instead of trying to prevent import of someone else? Even preventing import doesn't stop your geopolitical competitor's production. But you never hear any public politician arguing the drones should be made in-house, only that the ones across the sea might be evil. And since the US supposedly is pro-capitalism and free markets, wouldn't it make sense that someone in the US develops a superior consumer product and "defeats" the evil competitor products that way?
  - soramimo 2y ago
    > Wouldn't it make more sense to try to develop your own production instead of trying to prevent import of someone else? In a nutshell, what's happening here is that China is employing industrial policy strategically [1]. Drones are one example, but there are plenty of others like ship building, EVs, batteries, rare earths and many others [2]. The way this works is that industries are subsidized directly or indirectly to drive competition of the market and get to economies of scale. One sufficient scale is reached, it's very hard to for new companies to out-innovate incumbents (at least in capital intensive industries like manufacturing). Now, to answer your question, protecting your domestic industry against unfair competition is giving local companies chance to innovate and establish domestic production - which in case of military conflict will play a decisive role [3] (noting that it doesn't have to be "domestic", but can be "friendshored" to allied countries, e.g. ship building in Korea and Japan). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_policy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_policy [2] https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/04/11/america-industrialpolicy-china-economics-infliation-manufacturing/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/04/11/america-industrialpolic... [3] https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/were-not-ready-for-the-big-one https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/were-not-ready-for-the-big-one
tzs 2y ago
For TikTok I assume it is protectionism. The Chinese government might be able to use TikTok to get personal information of Americans for free. Ban TikTok and then if China wants personal information of Americans it will have to buy it from American data brokers.

lazide 2y ago

China bad, that’s all.

skhunted 2y ago
China has been fighting a cyber war against the United States for quite some time. It is appropriate to respond to this.
- lazide 2y ago
  Then ban their import and use. Oh wait, that’s not going to happen? Weird.

Schiendelman 2y ago

Have you read any of the reporting about these companies? Tiktok and DJI both have significant ties with the CCP, and behave similarly. https://www.nytimes.com/article/tiktok-ban.html https://www.nytimes.com/article/tiktok-ban.html It's definitely thin with actual data, but it's also likely we don't have the data that the Senate/House do. I'd prefer they pass something similar to GDPR requiring all US user data be stored and operated on in the US and not transmitted to other countries.

CaptainOfCoit 2y ago
> Have you read any of the reporting about this? https://www.nytimes.com/article/tiktok-ban.html https://www.nytimes.com/article/tiktok-ban.html I've read the reporting about TikTok, yes. Not sure if you linked the wrong article here, it doesn't mention DJI at all it seems. > I'd prefer they pass something similar to GDPR requiring all US user data be stored and operated on in the US and not transmitted to other countries. GDPR doesn't require all EU data to be stored in EU, it requires companies that do store EU data to follow specific guidelines and regulations regarding transit and storage. Before wanting something to be implemented in your country, you'd do yourself a service to read a bit more about it first :)
- Schiendelman 2y ago
  I know what GDPR does and that it doesn't require storage in country - but I would want the US to require that.
hombre_fatal 2y ago
I don’t see what I get out of companies forced to store my data in the US. I don’t want to be treated differently. And having data stored abroad is a feature. KYC for data sounds insane.

asah 2y ago

In war, the "fact" is simply that another nation-state represents a material and growing threat. China in particular has more than met this bar.

CaptainOfCoit 2y ago
You mean the "war" where China builds apparently more popular and cheaper products than the US so tariffs were added so the US can improve their own GDP by banning competition?
- adventured 2y ago
  China has drastic restrictions on the ability of foreign nations to operate within its domestic economy. Those drastic restrictions in various formulations have been in place for essentially eternity. That spans from general context like real-estate, to specific context like social networks or search (eg Google and Facebook), to infrastructure (eg AWS), to Disney not being allowed to own its own parks, to McDonald's not being allowed to operate its own restaurants. In fact it's so bad, it's the exceptionally rare case where a business is allowed to own & operate its business fully in China. When McDonalds can't even operate their restaurants in your country properly, you're blatantly on a particularly bad list of very authoritarian nations. The opposite is overwhelmingly true in the US. You are free, at any time, to set up and fully own a business within the US (as a foreigner). You can even pick the state based on legal structural preferences. Almost anyone on HN can do it whenever they feel like it, it's fairly simple all things considered. The US is a nation that allowed companies like Toyota to come in and hammer the domestic competition. It allowed foreign operators to hammer huge domestic employers in industries such as steel. The US has far more often than not tended to allow very friendly access to its gigantic market. The mistake the US has made for decades is to go too easy on China in regards to how they block access to their domestic market. This is the era of reciprocation, as such China should be increasingly blocked from easy access to foreign markets until they reciprocate and open up access to their economy.

dkasper 2y ago

Obviously there is debate, but reciprocal trade and national security are the reasons.

CaptainOfCoit 2y ago
> national security are the reasons How, exactly, is national security even a reason? Ok, so the drone has a camera, but that doesn't mean someone can magically transport the data. Ok, so the drone has a LTE modem, that still has to be connected to US infrastructure once connected somewhere within the US. So how is it supposed to be a national security issue? Sounds as harmful as a calculator.
- cj 2y ago
  > that doesn't mean someone can magically transport the data. The drone (and controller) needs internet connectivity to download firmware updates. The drone and controller both have wifi and both automatically connect to wifi when it's available. > Sounds as harmful as a calculator. More like a wifi-enabled calculator that self-installs firmware updates, and whose every use is controlled and tracked by a Chinese company who operates at the mercy of the Chinese government.
  - genewitch 2y ago
    Neither of these things are true. You don't have to update firmware, firstly. Secondly, the fact the drone and the controller "use wifi" doesn't mean that they're connecting to arbitrary wifi access points. The drone controller (at least for the two drones i had) is a WAP, itself, a real strong one, and the drone connects to the controller. You don't need a phone to fly a DJI - the phone connected to the controller via USB cable provides telemetry and real time video. If you just want to fly the drone around and maybe capture some cool video, that doesn't require a connected phone. Source: owned a dji mini and own a DJI mini 2, very close friends with people who own the mini 3 and other, more expensive ones (with the video screen built in to the controller). I fly mine and use an old oled android phone as the video/telemetry screen - no sim card or cellular connectivity. I can take the whole setup to the middle of a forest with no connectivity at all and it will connect, fly, and record telemetry and video on the phone and on the SD card in the drone.

soramimo 2y ago

Drones will dominate warfare going forward (see Ukraine). Having production capacity for drones concentrated in your primary geopolitical competitor country is a bad idea. Hence these policies (which make a lot of sense to me and equally apply to other fields like semiconductors).

CaptainOfCoit 2y ago
Wouldn't it make more sense to try to develop your own production instead of trying to prevent import of someone else? Even preventing import doesn't stop your geopolitical competitor's production. But you never hear any public politician arguing the drones should be made in-house, only that the ones across the sea might be evil. And since the US supposedly is pro-capitalism and free markets, wouldn't it make sense that someone in the US develops a superior consumer product and "defeats" the evil competitor products that way?
- soramimo 2y ago
  > Wouldn't it make more sense to try to develop your own production instead of trying to prevent import of someone else? In a nutshell, what's happening here is that China is employing industrial policy strategically [1]. Drones are one example, but there are plenty of others like ship building, EVs, batteries, rare earths and many others [2]. The way this works is that industries are subsidized directly or indirectly to drive competition of the market and get to economies of scale. One sufficient scale is reached, it's very hard to for new companies to out-innovate incumbents (at least in capital intensive industries like manufacturing). Now, to answer your question, protecting your domestic industry against unfair competition is giving local companies chance to innovate and establish domestic production - which in case of military conflict will play a decisive role [3] (noting that it doesn't have to be "domestic", but can be "friendshored" to allied countries, e.g. ship building in Korea and Japan). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_policy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_policy [2] https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/04/11/america-industrialpolicy-china-economics-infliation-manufacturing/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/04/11/america-industrialpolic... [3] https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/were-not-ready-for-the-big-one https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/were-not-ready-for-the-big-one

tzs 2y ago

For TikTok I assume it is protectionism. The Chinese government might be able to use TikTok to get personal information of Americans for free. Ban TikTok and then if China wants personal information of Americans it will have to buy it from American data brokers.