5 ms·

Erm, the US, EU, China and others do this exact same thing. I guess it can be construed as a shakedown, but it's pretty normal globally. The context you conven

by Sakos 2y ago

Erm, the US, EU, China and others do this exact same thing. I guess it can be construed as a shakedown, but it's pretty normal globally. The context you conveniently left out: > Earlier this month, the minister had already indicated that the iPhone 16 could not be sold in the country due to the pending TKDN certification, which requires that 40 percent of a product’s content be sourced locally. This certification is crucial for Apple as it is linked to the company’s commitment to establish research and development facilities in Indonesia, known as the Apple Academy

threatofrain 2y ago
What is the leading example of the US banning consumers from owning a product unless you invest? This isn't just banning someone from selling, this is asking you to report your neighbor if you see them owning an iPhone.
- talldayo 2y ago
  > What is the leading example of the US banning consumers from owning a product unless you invest? DJI, Chinese electric cars/phones, mass-produced solar and battery tech and firearms manufactured abroad to name a few. All of which are being considered for bans under the pretense that they're not domestic enough to trust and import. Indonesia is right to take a strong approach here; Apple is a documented tax dodger in the EU and would have likely ignored lesser action.
  - threatofrain 2y ago
    > DJI, Chinese electric cars/phones, mass-produced solar and battery tech and firearms manufactured abroad to name a few. All of which are being considered for bans under the pretense that they're not domestic enough to trust and import. Consumers can own all these things without fear of being reported. I work with an official DJI reseller and I automate DJI gear for government. What is the leading example of the US banning consumers from owning a product unless you invest?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - earnesti 2y ago
      US is crazy rich and powerful Country that has plenty of tools to pressure companies to do what they want. Indonesia is a poor ass country that has to resort to cheap tricks like this one.
    - elzbardico 2y ago
      Cuban Cigars.
      - threatofrain 2y ago
        It's legal for citizens to own and use Cuban cigars, and Cuba is not going to invest its way into getting cigars into the US.
  - lesuorac 2y ago
    That's not an example of the US banning a company for not investing into the US. USG is banning (only passed House) [1] DJI because Chinese law requires DJI to hand over data and USG is not a fan. This may be a bit like calling the kettle black because of various US laws but again it's not an example of the US banning a company for not investing. [1]: https://www.commercialuavnews.com/us-house-approves-dji-drone-ban-bill https://www.commercialuavnews.com/us-house-approves-dji-dron...
    - no_wizard 2y ago
      I don’t understand why the US doesn’t have a data sovereignty law as a requisite for doing business here. If you sell to Americans the data needs to be specifically live only in US data centers and no where else, and access must be based on US soil. A few Europeans countries have this, or something like it, if I recall correctly
      - elzbardico 2y ago
        Because this idea obviously is not on the interest of american business. We don't live in 1950 anymore where the US alone was half world's GDP.
      - coliveira 2y ago
        This is not in the interests of certain countries, Israel being the main one.
  - mschuster91 2y ago
    > DJI, Chinese electric cars/phones, mass-produced solar and battery tech and firearms manufactured abroad to name a few. In the US, if such a thing already is in the country, you can continue to use it as a private citizen or as a company (unless it involves anything government owned). And at least for now, you can buy any DJI drone you want in the US, there's more than enough firearms imports from places such as Germany or Austria [1], no one gives a fuck where your solar panels and batteries come from (other than import duties). Cars just as well, once the car is in the US you can drive utter junk on the streets as long as it is somewhat road legal in the state it is registered in. This ban in Indonesia however affects everyone, no matter how or when they acquired their iPhones: > Agus Gumiwang Kartasasmita, the country’s Industry Minister, declared that any iPhone 16 found in the hands of consumers will be deemed illegal. [1] https://www.dw.com/en/german-weapons-firms-find-lucrative-market-in-united-states/a-40804568 https://www.dw.com/en/german-weapons-firms-find-lucrative-ma...
- 0xbadcafebee 2y ago
  There are many examples, but the most famous is TikTok. They had to either sell part of their company [to an American company] or be banned in the US. They didn't sell so now they're being banned. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_TikTok_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_TikTok_in_the_... Much more common than an outright ban is simply egregious tariffs. (Which didn't do anything to stave off foreign competition or increase local competition, but it did line our pockets)
  - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
    You are still leaving out that using TikTok still won't be illegal in the USA, it won't be blocked either, just that TikTok won't be able to do businesses in the US (i.e. sell ads), or having other companies do business with it (so no app on the iPhone). It is not like the states are going to block TikTok with a GFW that doesn't exist. Of course, the inability for TikTok to make money in the USA is going to be a huge hit that the company probably can't get out of.
  - max51 2y ago
    > but the most famous is TikTok Are they proposing to arrest people who have TikTok on their phone and encouraging you snitch to the police of you see people using tiktok? what Indonesia is doing is on a completely different level.
  - BlueTemplar 2y ago
    Weren't egregious tariffs what allowed the USA to develop its own industry, instead of being smothered by the much bigger British industries ?
- no_wizard 2y ago
  That’s not what the US does. The US has bigger infrastructure, and typically more pull in the financial sphere. They’ll usually seize funds directly if they really need to, and they have, or pressure governments in numerous other ways. Different ballgame altogether The only real exceptions have been chips and electronics from China particularly regarding wireless infrastructure and computing. TikTok also comes to mind
  - threatofrain 2y ago
    The US fears Chinese military and economic capability. TikTok cannot invest its way out; there is a smell of conflict in the air. TikTok selling or leaving is the same as leaving or leaving.
    - transcriptase 2y ago
      “The US fears Chinese military capability” is one of the funniest things I’ve read in ages. There’s a limit to how capable the leadership of a military can be without any real world experience aside from harassing the ships and aircraft of other nations with dangerous interception maneuvers.
      - BlueTemplar 2y ago
        Well, it's true in the sense that a direct military attack in unimaginable either way because of nuclear weapons. Before them, Great Powers didn't shy from directly attacking each other !
        talldayo 2y ago
        But ICBMs don't do anything besides launch nukes. The parent comment has a point - China can "harass" the United States with their materiel across thousands of miles of seawater, but America generally doesn't care. There is no Chinese threat to American airspace when both countries are thousands of miles away from each other. The Pacific ocean itself is so large that preemptive long-range shipping attacks are considered to be technologically impossible too. And I'll even go a further step to argue that China copied the United States' nuclear scheme to be deterrent rather than aggressive. Their ICBMs are clustered in uninhabited lands in the northwest of the country, forcing potential aggressors to either nuke China's nukes or strike fast enough that China can't respond. The goal of China's nuclear program, it would seem, is not to enable a panoply of tactical effects like the US or USSR, but just to remind the world not to attack their soil.
- elzbardico 2y ago
  The US has the pull to make foreing companies not sell their products to countries sanctioned by the US. TSMC can't sell a lot of products to China, neither ASML. You can't fly to Cuba directly from the US, neither can import their Cigars. Venezuela, Iran and Russia along other's can't access their international reserves deposited in American Banks. It is just a different scale and for completely different reasons. If anything, other countries are learning to play by the same playbook for their particular reasons.
  - jepler 2y ago
    https://www.flightconnections.com/flights-from-iah-to-hav https://www.flightconnections.com/flights-from-iah-to-hav there are direct flights from USA to Cuba these days
  - coliveira 2y ago
    US sanctions are basically an illegal scheme. They're not supported by any kind of foreign law or treaty, unless such a sanction has been agreed by the UN. In general, the US just takes that out their own *ss and shove into other peoples throat. No wonder other countries are banding together to avoid these criminal practices altogether.
    - phatfish 2y ago
      If something has to be approved by the UN it will never happen. Especially any action against Russia. The UN secretary-general was recently bowing to Putin at the BRICS get together. Putin has an ICC arrest warrant issued for the invasion of Ukraine. I believe the UN endorses the ICC, at least it used to.
      - coliveira 2y ago
        > If something has to be approved by the UN it will never happen Include there any action against Israel for killing thousands of children and starving millions, and against the US for supplying these weapons. Prosecutors in the international war crimes court asked for Netaniahoo to be arrested for crimes against humanity.
- pverghese 2y ago
  Tiktok huawei...so many more
  - theshrike79 2y ago
    So the government said you can't use your Huawei phone even in private anymore? When?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
uh_uh 2y ago
Apple has invested $95M, and missing $14.75M. So they have reached 86% of the 40% target. Based on this logic, 34% of the iPhone 16 was sourced from Indonesia? Not trying to be snarky, I'm probably misunderstanding this. Sidenote: this website is unreadable on a mobile browser due to popups, auto-playing videos, etc.

by Sakos 2y ago

threatofrain 2y ago

What is the leading example of the US banning consumers from owning a product unless you invest? This isn't just banning someone from selling, this is asking you to report your neighbor if you see them owning an iPhone.

talldayo 2y ago
> What is the leading example of the US banning consumers from owning a product unless you invest? DJI, Chinese electric cars/phones, mass-produced solar and battery tech and firearms manufactured abroad to name a few. All of which are being considered for bans under the pretense that they're not domestic enough to trust and import. Indonesia is right to take a strong approach here; Apple is a documented tax dodger in the EU and would have likely ignored lesser action.
- threatofrain 2y ago
  > DJI, Chinese electric cars/phones, mass-produced solar and battery tech and firearms manufactured abroad to name a few. All of which are being considered for bans under the pretense that they're not domestic enough to trust and import. Consumers can own all these things without fear of being reported. I work with an official DJI reseller and I automate DJI gear for government. What is the leading example of the US banning consumers from owning a product unless you invest?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - earnesti 2y ago
    US is crazy rich and powerful Country that has plenty of tools to pressure companies to do what they want. Indonesia is a poor ass country that has to resort to cheap tricks like this one.
  - elzbardico 2y ago
    Cuban Cigars.
    - threatofrain 2y ago
      It's legal for citizens to own and use Cuban cigars, and Cuba is not going to invest its way into getting cigars into the US.
- lesuorac 2y ago
  That's not an example of the US banning a company for not investing into the US. USG is banning (only passed House) [1] DJI because Chinese law requires DJI to hand over data and USG is not a fan. This may be a bit like calling the kettle black because of various US laws but again it's not an example of the US banning a company for not investing. [1]: https://www.commercialuavnews.com/us-house-approves-dji-drone-ban-bill https://www.commercialuavnews.com/us-house-approves-dji-dron...
  - no_wizard 2y ago
    I don’t understand why the US doesn’t have a data sovereignty law as a requisite for doing business here. If you sell to Americans the data needs to be specifically live only in US data centers and no where else, and access must be based on US soil. A few Europeans countries have this, or something like it, if I recall correctly
    - elzbardico 2y ago
      Because this idea obviously is not on the interest of american business. We don't live in 1950 anymore where the US alone was half world's GDP.
    - coliveira 2y ago
      This is not in the interests of certain countries, Israel being the main one.
- mschuster91 2y ago
  > DJI, Chinese electric cars/phones, mass-produced solar and battery tech and firearms manufactured abroad to name a few. In the US, if such a thing already is in the country, you can continue to use it as a private citizen or as a company (unless it involves anything government owned). And at least for now, you can buy any DJI drone you want in the US, there's more than enough firearms imports from places such as Germany or Austria [1], no one gives a fuck where your solar panels and batteries come from (other than import duties). Cars just as well, once the car is in the US you can drive utter junk on the streets as long as it is somewhat road legal in the state it is registered in. This ban in Indonesia however affects everyone, no matter how or when they acquired their iPhones: > Agus Gumiwang Kartasasmita, the country’s Industry Minister, declared that any iPhone 16 found in the hands of consumers will be deemed illegal. [1] https://www.dw.com/en/german-weapons-firms-find-lucrative-market-in-united-states/a-40804568 https://www.dw.com/en/german-weapons-firms-find-lucrative-ma...
0xbadcafebee 2y ago
There are many examples, but the most famous is TikTok. They had to either sell part of their company [to an American company] or be banned in the US. They didn't sell so now they're being banned. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_TikTok_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_TikTok_in_the_... Much more common than an outright ban is simply egregious tariffs. (Which didn't do anything to stave off foreign competition or increase local competition, but it did line our pockets)
- seanmcdirmid 2y ago
  You are still leaving out that using TikTok still won't be illegal in the USA, it won't be blocked either, just that TikTok won't be able to do businesses in the US (i.e. sell ads), or having other companies do business with it (so no app on the iPhone). It is not like the states are going to block TikTok with a GFW that doesn't exist. Of course, the inability for TikTok to make money in the USA is going to be a huge hit that the company probably can't get out of.
- max51 2y ago
  > but the most famous is TikTok Are they proposing to arrest people who have TikTok on their phone and encouraging you snitch to the police of you see people using tiktok? what Indonesia is doing is on a completely different level.
- BlueTemplar 2y ago
  Weren't egregious tariffs what allowed the USA to develop its own industry, instead of being smothered by the much bigger British industries ?
no_wizard 2y ago
That’s not what the US does. The US has bigger infrastructure, and typically more pull in the financial sphere. They’ll usually seize funds directly if they really need to, and they have, or pressure governments in numerous other ways. Different ballgame altogether The only real exceptions have been chips and electronics from China particularly regarding wireless infrastructure and computing. TikTok also comes to mind
- threatofrain 2y ago
  The US fears Chinese military and economic capability. TikTok cannot invest its way out; there is a smell of conflict in the air. TikTok selling or leaving is the same as leaving or leaving.
  - transcriptase 2y ago
    “The US fears Chinese military capability” is one of the funniest things I’ve read in ages. There’s a limit to how capable the leadership of a military can be without any real world experience aside from harassing the ships and aircraft of other nations with dangerous interception maneuvers.
    - BlueTemplar 2y ago
      Well, it's true in the sense that a direct military attack in unimaginable either way because of nuclear weapons. Before them, Great Powers didn't shy from directly attacking each other !
      - talldayo 2y ago
        But ICBMs don't do anything besides launch nukes. The parent comment has a point - China can "harass" the United States with their materiel across thousands of miles of seawater, but America generally doesn't care. There is no Chinese threat to American airspace when both countries are thousands of miles away from each other. The Pacific ocean itself is so large that preemptive long-range shipping attacks are considered to be technologically impossible too. And I'll even go a further step to argue that China copied the United States' nuclear scheme to be deterrent rather than aggressive. Their ICBMs are clustered in uninhabited lands in the northwest of the country, forcing potential aggressors to either nuke China's nukes or strike fast enough that China can't respond. The goal of China's nuclear program, it would seem, is not to enable a panoply of tactical effects like the US or USSR, but just to remind the world not to attack their soil.
elzbardico 2y ago
The US has the pull to make foreing companies not sell their products to countries sanctioned by the US. TSMC can't sell a lot of products to China, neither ASML. You can't fly to Cuba directly from the US, neither can import their Cigars. Venezuela, Iran and Russia along other's can't access their international reserves deposited in American Banks. It is just a different scale and for completely different reasons. If anything, other countries are learning to play by the same playbook for their particular reasons.
- jepler 2y ago
  https://www.flightconnections.com/flights-from-iah-to-hav https://www.flightconnections.com/flights-from-iah-to-hav there are direct flights from USA to Cuba these days
- coliveira 2y ago
  US sanctions are basically an illegal scheme. They're not supported by any kind of foreign law or treaty, unless such a sanction has been agreed by the UN. In general, the US just takes that out their own *ss and shove into other peoples throat. No wonder other countries are banding together to avoid these criminal practices altogether.
  - phatfish 2y ago
    If something has to be approved by the UN it will never happen. Especially any action against Russia. The UN secretary-general was recently bowing to Putin at the BRICS get together. Putin has an ICC arrest warrant issued for the invasion of Ukraine. I believe the UN endorses the ICC, at least it used to.
    - coliveira 2y ago
      > If something has to be approved by the UN it will never happen Include there any action against Israel for killing thousands of children and starving millions, and against the US for supplying these weapons. Prosecutors in the international war crimes court asked for Netaniahoo to be arrested for crimes against humanity.
pverghese 2y ago
Tiktok huawei...so many more
- theshrike79 2y ago
  So the government said you can't use your Huawei phone even in private anymore? When?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

uh_uh 2y ago

Apple has invested $95M, and missing $14.75M. So they have reached 86% of the 40% target. Based on this logic, 34% of the iPhone 16 was sourced from Indonesia? Not trying to be snarky, I'm probably misunderstanding this. Sidenote: this website is unreadable on a mobile browser due to popups, auto-playing videos, etc.