6 ms·

I bet there's some secret info that we don't get to know that would make this bizarre move make more sense. Maybe China is using this computer to crack military

I bet there's some secret info that we don't get to know that would make this bizarre move make more sense. Maybe China is using this computer to crack military servers or something.

jeffbush 12y ago
I'm not willing to give the government the benefit of the doubt anymore. I can't recall any instance historically where they have turned out to have been right based on some secret information, even though they often intimate that they have some.
- Kalium 12y ago
  It happens quite a lot. The catch is that the whole thing end-to-end is secret, with the result being that you don't hear about it at all. All we really hear about on the outside is the screwups. The successes are silent.
  - emn13 12y ago
    This kind of ban was never going to be silent, so I don't think it's reasonable to a serious selection bias here.
    - Kalium 12y ago
      I read jeffbush's comment as a broad one, rather than narrowly about trade restrictions. The government is often right based on secret information, but selection biases are strong.
      - jeffbush 12y ago
        I agree about selection bias, although the magnitude of the screwups have been pretty enormous, so it's kinda hard not to.
  - pedrocr 12y ago
    > "It happens quite a lot. The catch is that the whole thing end-to-end is secret, with the result being that you don't hear about it at all." That's not a catch, that's an unfalsifiable statement. Here's another way to end your comment for which there is a lot more evidence: All we really hear about on the outside are the big screwups. All the normal screwups and marginal successes are silent. Here's a great article on just how crappy the record of these secret organizations is: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/3662a707-0af9-3149-963f-47bea720b460 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/3662a707-0af9-...
  - tomjen3 12y ago
    Usually though most things are declassified eventually. Even Really Big Secrets like Enigma, CIA memos on the bay of pigs or similar eventually gets released - so you would think that we would know their old successes.
    - Kalium 12y ago
      Many intelligence successes throughout history are known. Most of them are small, undramatic events like a particular military move being successfully anticipated and countered. Few of them are large, dramatic events.
- ethanbond 12y ago
  Uh, all of the cryptographic efforts of World War II?
  - jeffbush 12y ago
    Haha. Fair enough. :)
    - jeffbush 12y ago
      I probably should have defined that more narrowly to foreign policy. The military is generally fairly effective with battlefield intelligence in times of war. Congress and the president seem to be a different story.
unreal37 12y ago
I bet the Chinese government is on Alibaba right now buying $1 billion worth of counterfeit Xeon chips.

I bet there's some secret info that we don't get to know that would make this bizarre move make more sense. Maybe China is using this computer to crack military servers or something.

jeffbush 12y ago

I'm not willing to give the government the benefit of the doubt anymore. I can't recall any instance historically where they have turned out to have been right based on some secret information, even though they often intimate that they have some.

Kalium 12y ago
It happens quite a lot. The catch is that the whole thing end-to-end is secret, with the result being that you don't hear about it at all. All we really hear about on the outside is the screwups. The successes are silent.
- emn13 12y ago
  This kind of ban was never going to be silent, so I don't think it's reasonable to a serious selection bias here.
  - Kalium 12y ago
    I read jeffbush's comment as a broad one, rather than narrowly about trade restrictions. The government is often right based on secret information, but selection biases are strong.
    - jeffbush 12y ago
      I agree about selection bias, although the magnitude of the screwups have been pretty enormous, so it's kinda hard not to.
- pedrocr 12y ago
  > "It happens quite a lot. The catch is that the whole thing end-to-end is secret, with the result being that you don't hear about it at all." That's not a catch, that's an unfalsifiable statement. Here's another way to end your comment for which there is a lot more evidence: All we really hear about on the outside are the big screwups. All the normal screwups and marginal successes are silent. Here's a great article on just how crappy the record of these secret organizations is: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/3662a707-0af9-3149-963f-47bea720b460 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/3662a707-0af9-...
- tomjen3 12y ago
  Usually though most things are declassified eventually. Even Really Big Secrets like Enigma, CIA memos on the bay of pigs or similar eventually gets released - so you would think that we would know their old successes.
  - Kalium 12y ago
    Many intelligence successes throughout history are known. Most of them are small, undramatic events like a particular military move being successfully anticipated and countered. Few of them are large, dramatic events.
ethanbond 12y ago
Uh, all of the cryptographic efforts of World War II?
- jeffbush 12y ago
  Haha. Fair enough. :)
  - jeffbush 12y ago
    I probably should have defined that more narrowly to foreign policy. The military is generally fairly effective with battlefield intelligence in times of war. Congress and the president seem to be a different story.

unreal37 12y ago

I bet the Chinese government is on Alibaba right now buying $1 billion worth of counterfeit Xeon chips.