human rights abuses by the Chinese government
Thank G*d we don't rely on China to build any other computer stuff.
The US government is continuing its crusade against Huawei, with economic undersecretary Keith Krach visiting Berlin to pressure the German government to reconsider banning the company’s kit from its 5G network. Krach reportedly told Angela Merkel and her advisers that including Huawei equipment in its next-generation networks …
We just sell them pork. ...... harmjschoonhoven
Which is akin to them being loaded with dollar$ to spend with dollars already spent and ready for recycling/alternate investment in a homegrown native home programs, harmjschoonhoven?
Which would as a Quantitative Easing on a Mega Politically Correct Meta Data Social Scale of Expansive and Rightly Expensive Marshall Type Plans of Truly Epic Proportions.
Jump into the Markets Pouring/Pimping and Pumping the Practical Foundations of that Engaging Virtual Megalith, and Win Win is No Longer a Highly Attractive and Almightily Addictive Stranger to Satisfy with Perfect Command of Immaculate Controls ....... for a Quite Magical Universal Leverage with AI and IT Systems Hosting SCADA Executive Office Administrations.
Which is touted and offered as being practically instantly available in/for Wondrous Solutions to Grounded Earth Problems ....... which in essence only require the Great Painting of a Future Moving Picture with Scripts to Follow Uncovering All that is Available to See, and Ideally, Peacefully Realise and Present to a Flabbergasted Humanity, for more than just a few Thomases would be doubting that Surprisingly Simply Possible with just the slightest and deftest of Immaculate Leverage Touches .... :-) Heavenly Passes with Passionate Kisses So Devilish Beguiling of the Almightily Addictive Stranger to Satisfy with Perfect Command of Immaculate Controls.
First In, Last Out Engagements are the True Representative Hall Marks of Successive Programs there.
Wow, I appear to have gone off on something of a Novel Tangent there ....... and very Musky it is too, and scouting/phishing in Virgin territory too. And that's only referencing a popularised brace of entrepreneur types au fait with the Wild Wacky West style of Universal Business Machines doing Universal Machine Business.
The East is something and somewhere else completely different to woo and win win with such super goodies and entrepreneurship is boom booming and blooming and bursting out everywhere there. 'Tis a Right Embarrassment of Exotic Erotic Riches to Behold and Savour and Favour and Flavour with Rapturous Attention Displaying the Release of Relief Due Servering Fervent Ardour Almost Perfectly ..... thus to encourage further engagements with added improvements seeking the Elusive Perfections in Absolute Treats/Heavenly Delights which be AI Programmed Development Goals in another Novel Beta ProgramMING Development Program. ...... Mining IntelAIgent Networking Games ...... Almighty Deep See Phishing for Future Viable Views ...... Mass Multi Media Enabled Presentation for Virtual Realisation ...... Universal Sharing.
What do you use AI and IT Systems for? Anything at all similar, or something else different, but also on such a comparable grand scale?
If you know of such things, please share them freely here for live beta ProgramMING testing and appreciation of available services and complimentary complementary assets/honey trapping agent nuggets.:-) It is nice to surrender and submit to mutually assured satisfactory desire for have you any idea where to and what is leading who and whom there and what they can then do?
Yeah, it sticks in the American's craw that Canada won't officially ban the big bad Chinese company on their say-so, either, but insists on doing their own analysis.
This is all about the optics of the Americans, and the Americans alone. Trump just does not "get" international trade and mutual benefit. He thinks that for it to be a "good deal", the Americans have to be taking the lions share of the proceeds. Just look at all the trade wars he launched in only 4 years, most of which hurt the American consumer through increased prices far more than it did the targets of his ire.
You can argue about "the optics of the Americans" but it largely comes down to the EU's willingness to support Ericsson and Nokia.
The risk of Huawei on current security grounds is largely theoretical. While there maybe software security flaws, they are unlikely to differ significantly from their competitors and the larger physical/logical network designs limits the risk, at least for large telco's.
The risk of Huawei/ZTE when Nokia/Ericsson no longer make mobile equipment because they can't compete on price and can't afford the R&D is very real. Just look at how the number of mobile vendors has shrunk over the last 20 years if you don''t believe me.
There's no risk from the kit. We're all professionals here so we should all know what we're talking about. There's a big difference between hardware supplier and telecom provider; the only way people could justtify fingering the hardware supplier with incorporating secret malware is if its firmware is a godawful mess which is both inpenertable and full of explotable bugs (like a well-known 'operating system'). Telecom equipment needs to be designed, built and tested to much higher standards than desktop computers.
The problem withj Huawei is that we let Bell Labs, Western Electric and their successors fall by the wayside because it wasn't making enough of a RoI for Wall Street. Huawei came along and filled the gap. The smart move would be to build on from Huawei's kit -- leverage their IP to make a competing industry in the US -- but that's too complex for the simple minded real estate moguls of this world.
The problem is, apart from Nokia and Siemens, there aren't really any competitors left in the West.
From the 70s on, a lot of production was off-shored out of the USA and, especially, the UK. That means that for several generations coming through education, there has been no training for the manufacturing of a lot of stuff.
Just look at Gung Ho, from Ron Howard in 1986. At least some car manufacturing has remained in the USA and even the likes of BMW have built factories over there for some of their more US-oriented vehicles. But electronics was pretty much sold out and little is left in the USA, other than initial design.
The UK is even worse off, having sold industry down the river to re-invent itself as a services provider, only now that Brexit has come along, they suddenly notice that they don't actually make much of any value and what they do have, they have sold off to foreign companies anyway.
apart from Nokia and Siemens
And that is what I'm trying to say: When the west signed their "future" away, all the technical and manufacturing jobs evaporated. Schools and universities stopped teaching them because there is no demand.
And this always brings back when Steve Jobs told Obama "US jobs are not coming back".
"You need a thousand rubber gaskets? That’s the factory next door. You need a million screws? That factory is a block away. You need that screw made a little bit different? It will take three hours." (Steve Jobs never uttered these exact words but it was implied.)
>What western-based manufacturing jobs are left if the west keeps on buying Huawei 5G kit?
Currently we don't have much choice. Huawei dominates 5G because it owns most of the patents needed to implement it. But there's not only a huge amount of derivatie products that need to be designed, developed and sold but also opportunities that we haven't envisaged or grasped yet.
We have in the US made the same mistakes as the UK made a generation before and we've made them for the same reasons. Once companies are entirely driven by the numbers then the focus of the company shifts entirely from making product to making money. Many larger corporations became financial services companies, originally to service their customer base but then expanding until the finance arms became more lucrative than the actual business of the company. (No overhead.....) Under these circumstances its natural for corporate boards to want to outsource or offload the 'underperforming' part of the company. So the layoffs and economies begin and in the process a lot of expertise is flushed out of the economy. This not only represents oportunity to others but it leaves us short should we want to build the industry back up -- like the UK we can't staff up these industries in the short term even if we wanted to.
Angela Merkel, although not perfect has done a pretty good job in Germany and is proving that she has then balls to stick to fingers up to Trump.
This contrasts with Johnson, a puppet of Cummins, both with the eyes firmly off any sort of ball whilst they figure out how much money they can redirect from the tax payer into their cronies bank accounts. Top of that list is all the US pharmaceutical and healthcare providers that must be wetting themselves with excitement at the prospect of getting all the NHS money.
Even if Trump loses I cannot see much in the way of radical change here as Johnson is utterly clueless. The trouble is that once you have transitioned from public to private providers it is very difficult to get it back.
The only possibilities are that there is a leadership challenge because the Tory MPs have had enough or, heaven forbid, a vote of no confidence in the Government because they are so incompetent that even their own back benchers side with Labour.
Utterly wrong way to deal with Germany. Menacing and blackmailing won't work well. Chinese companies do pose a risk - but with allies you would need to try to persuade them, especially after you did one mistake after another in any field (Bad NATO member! Bad German cars!!!)
But with US government people hired through "The Apprentice", they all believe deals are made by those who shout louder.
I really don't think we need to threaten Germany over whether they do business with Huawei, especially considering how politicized the (possibly accurate) accusations against Huawei have become.
Defense against who or what?
I grew up with the Iron Curtain with us -- NATO -- on one side and the Warsaw Pact on the other. Living on what used to be known as the 'unsinkable aircraft carrier', an island covered with US bases, none of which were actually defensive (perhaps you young 'uns might want to look at the civil defence preparations for the UK's population in the 1960s and 70s). Anyway, that all went away 30+ years ago and it rather left NATO out of a job, except as we all know they'll always find something to do, something to be a threat and generally invent (or cause) problems to keep their funding going.
Mind you, we do need the EU to step up defense finding. Our (US) aerospace firms need the business.
"Anyway, that all went away 30+ years ago"
The Litvinenko and Skripal families might disagree. ...... Anonymous Coward
Hmmm? I think martinusher is shining a different light on another possible and not incredible probable source of those operations, AC, and at least for all the reasons mentioned. Such actions are certainly well within the perverse nature of the corrupting game. ........
Anyway, that all went away 30+ years ago and it rather left NATO out of a job, except as we all know they'll always find something to do, something to be a threat and generally invent (or cause) problems to keep their funding going. .... martinusher
....... and within the bigger schema of things, great value for next to no money, which may be unpleasantly brutal and cold hearted but it is definitely not nonsensical and unthinkable.
Hey, if Europe decides they no longer want U.S. help in defending the continent, nobody will be happier than I. I don't see why the U.S. should arguably be worrying more about the defense of wealthy European nations than those wealthy European nations worry about it themselves. However, I think a lot of the powers-that-be in European capitals would ultimately shy from having Uncle Sam go home.
It is part of the different attitudes to economics.
In Germany for the last 2 decades, they have been on course to cut out debt. That means all internal funding and also internation funding, like NATO, has to come out of the surplus. One of the reasons why Germany has managed relatively well in the current crisis and could take on new debt.
The US has been overspending for decades and faced Government shutdowns in the last decade, because it ran out of money and they had to argue over taking on more debt and devaluing the dollar even further in the process.
The US needs new conflicts to keep the Military Industrial Complex busy and making a profit for Wall Street, through military spending, while Europe wants to avoid conflicts to get their economies back in the black.
This is also reflected in the populations and language. Living in debt (living on credit) is pretty normal in the US and the UK, whilst "debt" in German is the same word as guilt and has been frowned upon until the last generation or so.
Threats, Bullying, Sanctions and Wars is sadly all that the USA has to offer the world these sorry days.
It probably comes from them beliving that having won the cold war, they no longer have to offer any more incentives for countries to adopt their "winning world view" rather than that of the USSR. China is still a bit too far away culturally, but, we are making progress, money makes friends :p
Diplomacy from the EU/Merkel- side is obvously concerned with keeping the USA in the Threatening- and Bullying- modes while working something out along the way. Hoping against reason that this will all pass with Donald Trump.
I.M.O, This is nothing new, Donald Trump and his thuggish cronies just made the nature of the USA visible to all, not only to those people unfortunatly living in designated droning or "regime" areas.
Not that old rubbish again. Everybody knows, including China, that: The FED both can and it totally will buy up all of Chinas "big chunk" in about 200 milliseconds with money it can create an infinite amount off whenever the need arises.
Compared to the amount of "assets" the FED already has "under it's management", dumping China's Big Chunk into "The Market" all at once will be like a single drop falling into an olympic size swimming pool.
They are only going to be worth less if there is a real alternative to using USD for trade. There isn't at the moment and won't be for a long while. It is what it is.
One can look up how much the Chinese are sitting on, which amounts to just about 1 Trillion USD (https://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt). The national debt of the USA currently amount to about 28 Trillion USD (courtesy of "Wolf Street" https://wolfstreet.com/2020/09/17/who-bought-the-3-3-trillion-piled-on-the-incredibly-spiking-us-national-debt-since-march/).
Between March 2020 and September 2020, the Treasury piled on another 3.3 Trillion up to 27 Trillion, meaning that soaking up Everything that China has amounts to about 2 months of "Business as Usual"!
Debt doesn't matter if you're an issuer of sovereign fiat currency - read up on Modern Monetary Theory. ...... Uncle Slacky
Oh yes it does matter if you're an issuer of sovereign fiat currency when the credit one is given is realised by the masses as debt used to enslave rather than release vulnerable and ignorant punters to further feed the system with a whole series of future payments normally with interest in excess of the original cost price added to bills ........ with that interest payment rate being a quite arbitrarily derived at figure decided by a surprisingly small group of minions/lackeys/Monetary Policy Committee members?
Such a situation can very easily and very quickly become life threatening. Does Modern Monetary Theory advise of/on that?
Absolutely Not Always. Think a bit more about the situation.
What if the debt can never be collected? What if you can get others to pay for it? What if by borrowing more than anyone else, the growth exponents of your investments will be larger than the competition and culturally you are a fervent believer in the world as a Zero-Sum Game?
The utility of being debt free kinda reverses then!
The USA can (and does) use the debt it assumes to monopolise key ressources like Oil, Intellectual Property, Land, Water, Minerals, Agriculture, Political power, et.cetera. Sure the USD is dropping slowly in value over the years, but, that could from the American perspective be seen as a "Trade Tax" that everyone using USD for transactions must pay. It is not really a problem for the issuer of the USD, they can always issue MORE currency to cover the gap.
Bidding up ressources and talent with printed money, that The Competition must first work hard to aquire, will certainly harm them and favour yourself. Which is Win-Win, USA-Style.
Competiton from China, the EU and the global push for renewable energi (reducing the need for USD to buy Oil with) is eroding the importance of aquiring USD and thus the American power base. So of course the USA is going to fight all of those existential threats tooth-and-nail to keep the shenanigans going. Regardless of who the puppet in the White House is.
Eventually the USA will default like Russia did and since there is nothing anyone can actually do about it, most of the show will go on in the end. Maybe with a different reserve currency or maybe a basket of individual currencies. "They" will cook something up, like always.
"- Buying European would be better for Europeans"
For protectionist reasons maybe (as with the US buying US)
"- NATO is at risk mainly because of Trump"
Not at all. NATO has mostly been the US with a couple of countries meeting their obligations. Trump doesnt see why the US should pay to secure the US and Europe when Europe refuses to contribute to its own defence. The final straw seemed to be the EU pissing money on their own GPS and wanting to make their own army.
"- US should be careful when attacking a country that holds a big chunk of its debts."
For all the debt held by the Chinese the US creates value magnitudes greater.
"Maybe if the US stopped pissing everyone off and starting pointless wars, then a 1% for NATO would be plenty."
Maybe. But since NATO is about having a military capacity to defend Europe you would think Europe would have a vested interest in actually doing so. Instead they expect Americans to pay for it.
This post has been deleted by its author
"Yes, I mean HOW DARE THEY want reduce thier dependancy on the Amercian military industrial complex."
The point being they can afford to piss money up the wall on their own GPS and maybe an EU army but are unwilling to pay toward their own defence. Germany couldnt even get planes and pilots to Iraq, the only one arriving was the war minister. This is the same Germany who then claimed they wouldnt know how to spend so much on their military.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020