Uncle Sam to tighten chip export chokehold on China... again The US is set to update its export restrictions on semiconductor tech to China, tightening loopholes on chipmaking tools as well as chips used in AI, according to reports. However, analysts still expect China to grow its share of the semiconductor market over the next several years. It has been almost a year since export …
It's my belief that the very real Achilles Heel is the US dependence on all manner of manufactured products, with the exception of a few very advanced products.
The US, and the West in general, can't even keep up with producing the basic arms that Ukraine is using.
China's immense mass production infrastructure can turned to mass munitions product, and gives it a huge advantage in any extended conflict.
It would be much more effective to put up tariffs of 100% on all consumer goods from China (imported directly or indirectly) than it is restricting exports which earn money for US companies.
Chatbots won't decide even a single battle. The former would force the US economy to act on the supply chain risk and address it BEFORE Taiwan "happens". Which won't be long judging by practice flights and propaganda.
Yes - totally agree here - I believe given the long term safety and security of the US is under threat, that a pre-emptive military strike (possibly nuclear in nature) must take place against the Chinese too - to ensure American safety and security.
I mean - US military intervention has worked so well everywhere else in the world, why not China?
You/The US needs to decide how far they are willing to go to preserve the safety and security of the US.
You do not need to have worked in mainland China for that - you just need to love the US and want the best for it - after all that's why you're proposing for 100% tarrif on everything from China right? Why stop there? Make it 1000% - more money for the Government.
It's like if you're trying to stop plastic bag use - making bags 10c each isn't going to do anything - make them 100 USD each and single usage will plummit
Not sure why I've been downvoted for my comment - I mean - a 100% tarrif is pretty much the same as 10000000% tarrif right? It's the consumers (American) who pay and it's the (American) government who gets the money - hang on a minute!!!!!!!!!!!
Personally I'm glad China is now not the number 1 importer of goods to the US - the sooner the US gets away from complaining about "cheap/low quality Chinese tat" the better - China makes a lot of high quality stuff - but American importers don't make the same profit margins importing the expensive stuff that they do with the cheap tat - and cue all the complaints ....
Now you can complain about cheap tat from your new number 1 importer instead
The American government will get zero money from imposing 10000000% "tarrif[sic]" on any good.
Because there will be no importer willing to pay that levy. With 100%, it's a totally different story.
You have never computed an optimal go-to-market price lifecycle.
Downvote amply justified.
It would be much more effective to put up tariffs of 100% on all consumer goods from China (imported directly or indirectly) than it is restricting exports which earn money for US companies. ..... Anonymous Coward
If all consumer goods from China had to be bought with yuan rather than with the myriad fiat currencies of importer nations/colluding and not really cointerdependent bank systems, who/what would benefit and who/what would suffer ..... with that requirement to buy imported goods in the currency of the exporter, in order to be particularly fair rather than peculiarly favourable, being the default novel global goldless standard?
Would there be a fiat currency and private banking system collapse? And would that be trumpeted as virtually an ACT of war against enemies of global states?
This rant is difficult to understand.
As long as buyer and seller home main currencies are different, there has to be conversion operation at some point - immediate, delayed or anticipated.
Not clear what the difference does it make whether this conversion happens on buyer or seller side.
As soon as you introduce the concept of conversion, the target currency becomes an object of trading of its own. With demand and offer, and all what comes with trading and market mechanisms.
Hardly a rant, AC .... whenever just a short series of awkward questions with many an uncomfortable revealing answer possible to ponder on and wonder at.
And is it a smart defence or catastrophic vulnerability for exploit and export that has a universal banking project inventing so many roles and IOUs for itself, proposing it is with a greater other second and third party belief and thoughtless acceptance, absolutely vital for elite executive officer administration systems survival generating a paper tiger wealth economy ?
"Washington has already given China early warning of the coming changes to the restrictions, Reuters claimed, in an attempt to avoid souring relations with Beijing as much as possible."
Could it be that this is the equivalent of a bully saying they're going to punch someone in the face, and therefore the victim shouldn't complain too much if it hurts?
The more I read the above statement, the moronic I think America is - how else is the other party supposed to take it "Oh America loves me"?????????
I also seem to recall America being at pains to stress to China that they didn't want a war/mean any bad intentions at a previous point in time too - it's so stupid it's actually funny
Country A embargos/sanctions/imposes tarrifs etc on Country B, but says to Country B - don't worry - we're still friends
...has consistently broken WTO rules.
First in a low profile way, and then increasingly assertively.
Who's the bully again?
Now let's take a look at the outcome:
- Which economy is in tatters?
- Which currency is on the back foot?
- Do wealthy American rush to stash their assets in China or the other way around?
Lesson to be learned:
Competition is fine and healthy. "Revenge" is childish and counterproductive.
Ok - you're right - let's be pedantic - why is the US complaining when China then decides to implement the requirements for licences to be given in order to export raw materials useful in the manufacture of silicon/integrated circuits.
Is that good enough for you or would you like to get more detailed?
If you understand the question, can you then answer the question? Or is the answer simply - cause it's 'murica and anything they say must be adhered to?
- that most rare earth are not rare at all. They are relatively abundant but in low concentration, which makes extraction environmentally costly.
- that the only reason why China is the main exporter of some of these is because they don't give a damn about polluting their own country.
In any case, you can source inert ores from other countries, but you can't extract smart techniques from mining the ground.
It's like Neanderthal refusing to sell flints to a guy with a lighter.
Here's something to think about AC - in the prelude to WW2, one of the techniques of AH's rise to power was to use the concept of an "outsider" group to be the source of all the pain and woes of the great country of Germany ... which helped unite the people against a common enemy and to galvanise opinion/action.
It helped him rise to power - maybe - just maybe - the technique may have been used by the US?
BTW - you made mention in another thread of troubles with China's financial system - yes - it's pretty bad isn't it? You could say it's almost as bad as the $30.93 T (2022) that the US owes - oh wait - let's make it worse by just IMAGINING money into existance when required for any deal that we want to do ...
Well - I'm sure you'll agree with me is that one theme in human history from the dawn of civilisation is that humans don't learn - hence there are always repeated stories/issues
I feel very strongly that if America envisages China being that much of a threat, it should immediately launch all of its nuclear arsenal that it can spare at China and convince all allies to do the same.
Why would you allow your enemy to survive?
Wrong. Suspicions on Huawei's gear were already aired officially around 2009.
Here is a BBC article from 2012.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-20579477
"""However the BBC's security correspondent Gordon Corera says the UK's Intelligence and Security Committee, chaired by former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind, is currently looking at Huawei to try and understand what the risks might be and assess what measures have been taken to deal with them.
"The UK's relationship with Huawei has been a sensitive issue for a number of years," he said."""
That was already back in 2012. At that time, Huawei was not important enough to motivate "protectionist" measures.
I'm not even mentioning all the cyber espionage and hacker groups. Probably another figment of Trump's imagination. Right?
Rest your case, peshman. You're only making it worse.
First iPhone is 2007.
First HW smartphone was 2010.
First Backdoor allegations were 2009.
How could smartphone market share be a reason for discriminating against HW when HW had not even launched their first smartphone?
Your bias (and ignorance) are ever more conspicuous.
Try harder.
Therefore, if HW had not entered the smartphones market at the time, and considering that Apple has NEVER entered the network equipment market, then it is nonsense to argue that HW started being discriminated against because it was threatening Apple market share in 2011.
There was zero overlap, at the time between HW and Apple market segments at the time.
You are conspicuously making things up as we go.
Oh boy!
""""However the BBC's security correspondent Gordon Corera says the UK's Intelligence and Security Committee, chaired by former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind, is currently looking at Huawei to try and understand what the risks might be and assess what measures have been taken to deal with them.
"The UK's relationship with Huawei has been a sensitive issue for a number of years," he said."""
That was already back in 2012. At that time, Huawei was not important enough to motivate "protectionist" measures.
I'm not even mentioning all the cyber espionage and hacker groups. Probably another figment of Trump's imagination. Right?
Rest your case, peshman. You're only making it worse."
Do you not see the idiocy of your statement?
Someone accused somebody of doing something. When the accused said that they are open to scrutiny to prove to you that they haven't done anything of the sort that you're accusing them of you still lie about them having done whatever you imagined they did.
Are you really so far down your rabbit hole that you're still willing to look like a fool and hide behind your AC status
I say you're a lying coward. Prove me wrong. Show me some EVIDENCE of Huawei being nefarious. I'll show you plenty of the US being an arse though.
You're not focusing.
The reason why I'm citing this timeline is to debunk the narrative that the spying accusations are motivated by Huawei's dominant position in the smartphone market or in the 5G gear market.
At the time (2009):
- Huawei had not produced a single smart phone. So Apple's position was not challenged.
- 4G/LTE had just been introduced as the new technology and Huawei was a challenger vendor. This is 10 years before 5G. 14 years from now.
The rest of your rant is irrelevant to the argument.
Therefore, dear anonymous Peshman, please rest your case: irrespective of whether the accusations are founded or not, the current narrative is invalid.
Your affectionate AC.
"Therefore, dear anonymous Peshman, please rest your case: irrespective of whether the accusations are founded or not, the current narrative is invalid."
Anonymous? I think you'll find that you can actually search for any post I've made. Peshman is actually my nickname that friends and colleagues have always known me as. You truly are an anonymous coward and are looking more and more of an idiot every time you post.
Now, where's your proof of any nefarious acts carried out by Huawei in answer to my last post.
Still no links or credible evidence for your claims? I only asked for one.
You are a liar and you think you can announce the !Big Steal!... but you, AC are not clever enough to be Trump.
Nobody believes your bullshit.
This post has been deleted by its author
Thanks for admitting that peshman is a pseudo, and that, therefore, you are also anonymous.
As long as you are not uniquely identifiable as a human being, you're anonymous.
As long as this pseudo doesn't provide any information about your country (bias), your professional occupation (and abilities), your stackoverflow points and status (credibility and expertise), you can call yourself abc123 and that makes no difference to anyone.
If I were to use a C++ language metaphor, &peshman would be a pointer pointing to an un-allocated memory address. Not more useful than a null pointer like AC.
The reason why I'm posting under AC cover is that I've learned, at my own expense, that there are a number of butt-hurt contributors around here, who blanket down-vote many of your posts when they want to take revenge on just one of them and seem to believe that one single down-vote does not suffice to quench their thirst for retribution.
I've noticed that this is especially true when dealing with topics related to China and Russia. Probably a coincidence, Right?
I'm no more and no less anonymous than you are, &peshman-abc.
Regarding, proofs of Huawei's backdoor in the backdoor, I don't think this is the place where one can disclose what one has learned over the years.
Suffice it to mention that Huawei often sell managed services (offshore or right-shore) together with their gear and that critical point totally voids the "counter-proof" that Huawei's spying allegation are unfounded.
So, please feel free to keep on exposing your own bias by rabidly supporting Huawei's purported innocence with what can only be, at best, gut feelings.
It seems you have learned nothing over the years! Whatever useless statement you just made. Why is this not the place to air whatever you learned? At least Ed Snowden had the balls to publicly announce what he knows. Are you now comparing your cowardly bullshit to Snowden now?
Again. If you have any evidence of your bullshit claims of Huawei being nafariuos then let's see it.
Do I really have to call you a liar so many times without you being able to refute my statement?
I think I'm being played by an Internet Troll.
I cannot discuss information gathered by the industry but one of the sources you cannot discount is Huawei themselves.
You might be able to come across some material shared by Huawei themselves during their own public presentations.
One of the most "candid" presentation was performed on 14th of Feb 2012 in Dubai JW Mariott during ISS World MEA (Intelligence Support System) which is the main conference in the world of Lawful Interception.
If you get hold of the material, if you understand such things as DPI, traffic mirroring, X2 (not the eNodeB X2), X3, CC, MDF3, you will understand that backdoors can have backdoors.
Especially when the vendor is also selling managed services and can create and use undocumented admin accounts "for maintenance and security purposes".
FFS! "I cannot discuss information gathered by the industry but one of the sources you cannot discount is Huawei themselves."
That's up there with asking for proof that God exists! "I can't show you but I have evidence. I just can't show you because...You'll just have to take my word for it that there is."
Any more bullshit you want to make up?
How grossly disingenuous of you (and yet predictable).
Stealthy responding days after days. and, moreover, misquoting me.
Yes, I cannot disclose confidential industry findings BUT I DID GIVE YOU SOME PUBLIC SOURCES (FROM HUAWEI THEMSELVES!!!) THAT YOU CAN COME BY ON YOUR OWN.
Did you at least try, Anonymous Peshman?
As much as you'd like to believe it, I don't hang on your every post and have better things to do with my time than read El Reg all day. Apologies if I've kept you waiting. So, now you've changed your bullshit story from "Here's a bunch if links from accusations made by the BBC by way of proving my lies" to "I can't give you proof of the evidence I have because I'm so important that I will just make shit up and you'll just have to believe that Dominion rigged the election?"
As for my anonymity, I registered my username with a valid email account, just like everyone else who has a valid username! DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
So no, my posting as my pseudonym is nothing like your cowardly AC posting.
Finally, YOU STILL HAVEN'T POSTED ANY EVIDENCE OF YOUR LIES THAT HUAWEI HAVE ANY BACKDOORS IN THEIR KIT!
I'm still waiting. Strangely, there have been NO leaks on any media sources to prove or substantiate your claims in any way.
I gave you the pointers to public sources from Huawei themselves.
I your world, do you think there is a github repository somewhere with some huawei code and some backdoor code with a huge comment /* Back door here */???
Apparently you will never concede until given the line number in that imaginary repo.
Or maybe you perfectly know that there isn't such a repo and you will keep asking for it ad nauseam to defend your position.
Maybe that's news to you, but every one who has an account here, needs to provide a valid email address.
Whether that makes them less anonymous is, of course, doubtful. Using a pseudo does not make you less anonymous than the AC default posting identity.
FINALLY, you still don't manage to admit, after countless technical explanations, that the backdoor is the lawful interception software platform and PoIs and is perfectly legal in itself.
What is not legal is the fact that the "backdoor" can be used by Huawei themselves instead of being exclusively reserved to the use of the law enforcement agencies (LEAs) for which it is designed.
I've written that in plain English several times.
Your stalwart attitude of demanding proofs and then ignoring them, conspicuously demonstrates your intimate conviction that I'm probably right and that you thus have to raise the bar higher, so that you won't have to concede the plausibility of the counter-spying agency claims.
All of this in a world yielding new proofs of Chinese spying every day and in all dimensions.
Poor defense indeed.
Anonymous Coward - when you put it like that you're totally right
It's nothing to do with China and America should be left to do what it wants unchecked right? Because America stands for truth, democracy, freedom and the rule of law right? Globally? Where was that for Iraq? Sorry - I forgot - none of anyone's business
Yes - that was a war - and Iraq was defending itself - but looking at it in another light it could be an invasion by the US possibly, but no one should get involved as it was just the British, Candians, Germans, Americans and a load of other countries against Iraq. None of China's business - got it
So I also get that America has to involve itself between Taiwan and China - because America said it would help Taiwan in case of any issues - and I get America has to get involved in Ukraine because they said that they'd help out the Ukrainians but then surely you get to the stage of Quis custodiet ipsos custodes - although surely this could never happen to America right, because America is the land of the free and the brave?
I meant the US itself was founded upon insurrection from the British right? Are you willing to come back under the subjecation of your superiors and admit the error of your ways?
On a related note - of all the claims of security issues with Huawei products - nothing has been found even after several security reviews done by intelligence agencies of Allied countries - maybe poor programming practices but nothing along the lines of malicious code - so why is there a persistent undercurrent that Huawei - and largely now - anything Chinese is bad? Could it be to do with protectionism and ensuring that America retains its global dominance? No surely not because America is magnanimous in sharing its wealth and largesse with the world right?
I could go on, but to be fair I don't think anything I'll say will have much effect on an anonymous coward
Oh - and shall we talk about Libya - Gaddafi not only killed but his son too ... and why was that I wonder - maybe because Libya was looking to be one of the first countries to settle a petro-chemical trade in a non USD currency?
No No No! Of course this was all done because Gadaffi was a bad person - and it's none of China's business now as well - so they should steer clear of it - I forgot about that bit!
Well now you come to mention it - the US's treatment of the Native Americans has been rather admirable don't you think? Same kind of treatment the Native Australians received at the hands of the invading foreigners ... now is there any commonality there perchance?
I'll leave your anti-West rants for a day when I have more time. They just reveal a soul in pain.
Truth is, I was miles away from imagining that "several security reviews done by intelligence agencies of Allied countries" were in your possession.
I'm glad I eventually came across a trustworthy source on the matter.
Do you mind sharing your cybersec credentials, your telecom credentials, and these documents Mr anonymous In[ve]stigator?
In case you do, I'll review them in light of my own skills in these domains and possibly compare with my current elements of information.
In case you can't, I'll file your unsupported claims in the same drawer as all the other pro-Chinese propaganda I already came across. There's still a bit of room for you.
Trust me - I'm in no pain.
Also - for the record - I'm not anti West or pro China (or any other country) - we're all human - we all eat and we all s*** - and no-one's s** smells of roses.
All countries do bad stuff - ALL COUNTRIES - "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - remember that line by any chance?
You want me to say China's a bad country and does bad stuff? Sure China's a bad country and does bad stuff - guaranteed - now are you willing to say the same about the US and other Western countries?
I am willing to bet quite a lot of money your blind loyalty to a concept of the US which has long since died that you will not be able/willing to join/agree with me in the sentiment that every country (including the fabled US) does bad stuff
.. and it appears as if I've been proved right ... history does indeed repeat itself ... the most you can impotently do is downvote posts which cut a bit too close to the quick for you, yet you can't bear to bring yourself to criticise what you know to be broken ...
You make a good drone sir - know your condition - as this is your condition you keep with yourself every day when you wake - you really do live up to your username - congratulations on that
LOL. Like "TheInstigator" is not anonymous.
The most I can actually do is publicly debunk crackpot theories, expose biases and lacks of understanding of the subject matter.
I'm still waiting for a technical post regarding the plausibility of Chinese semiconductor firms to go pass 7nm with a decent yield and without EUV, near perfect optical and AI.
But maybe that's... Chinese to you.
> LOL. Like "TheInstigator" is not anonymous.
A lot less anonymous that AC
> The most I can actually do is publicly debunk crackpot theories, expose biases and lacks of understanding of the subject matter.
Not true - you could join me in agreeing that all countries do dodgy s*** - but you won't ;)
> I'm still waiting for a technical post regarding the plausibility of Chinese semiconductor firms to go pass 7nm with a decent yield and without EUV, near perfect optical and AI.
"still"? This is the first time you raised the point - I have no idea how they did it - that is not my area of expertise - but I'm sure a well planned raid by SEAL Team 6 and a few nuclear bombs will probably clear that mystery up for you PDQ hey? All you need to do is convince 'murica to press the button ...
Out of interest, do you know how they did it?
> But maybe that's... Chinese to you.
Not sure what this is really meant to mean apart from demonising THE ENEMY THAT MUST BE HATED!
So - we're all agreed then AC? America is the land of hope and glory and all things goood and the rest of the world is bad? Or is it just China that is bad? Or is it just Russia? Or is it just Syria? Or is it just Iraq? Or is it just Afghanistan? Or is it Libya? Or is it just Germany? (why did you feel you had to spy on the mobile phone belonging to the leader of an Allied country?), Or is it just North Korea? Or is it the UK because they won't get rid of the NHS and let all the American health care companies in (cause what a great system the American health care is!), Or is it just any other country that disagrees or goes against what the US wants?
Just for you I left one out which I'll include here for you - or it is 1940s Germany? ;) (I thought you'd enjoy that one)
You have a good day now and eat that peanut butter sandwich of yours - I hope you don't have a nut allergy you don't know about
Just a few corrections higgledy-piggledy.
- What difference does it make if I choose "Anonymous Coward" as a pseudo? Is it more anonymous than a silly pseudo?
- Chinese haven't passed 7nm. Try to follow. This is El Reg, not your favourite Dazibao.
- It's not countries that do bad things. It's people.
- Land of Hope and Glory is a British song. Nothing to do with the US. Ever been to the Prom in the Royal Albert Hall?
- I did not spy on any phone. And before you ask, I did not fly Enola gay.
The rest is not worth commenting.
So you're worse than I thought - you're only loyal to the US when it suits you.
You stand behind America when it suits you, then you're an individual person when it suits you.
Here's a fact for you - a country is defined by many people - it's what's called a one to many relationship.
As I've always said - all countries do dodgy s*** - all countries have jails - and those jails have ALL different nationalities in - did you know that AC?
As to your point:
> - Chinese haven't passed 7nm. Try to follow. This is El Reg, not your favourite Dazibao.
I didn't say they had - I frankly don't care if they have or haven't - it makes 0 difference to me - you care because you want to ensure the US continues its domination of another country - I don't care because .... I don't care and have no vested interest one way or another. There are many things in the world that happen which I have 0 ability to influence and are sufficiently out of my ability to influence that I need not worry abotu them - this is just another one of those things.
> - Land of Hope and Glory is a British song. Nothing to do with the US. Ever been to the Prom in the Royal Albert Hall?
So you know some history then! Yes indeed it is - as I mentioned earlier the history of actions towards the Native Americans and Native Australians (essentially the British) are quite telling within themselves .. although I know now they happened a very long time ago and therefor we should just conveniently forget about them as they don't fit the current narrative. However the point I was trying to make was to lump all the Allies in together ... as we all know the UK happily (at least politically happily) followed America into the illegal invasion of Iraq - oh - sorry - I forgot that we weren't supposed to mention that as well ...
To end with the same point I began with (disloyalty) - in the words of Denzel Washington in Training Day - "You disloyal m****** *******"
- I don't stand behind anyone. I just don't like wumaos.
Or the kind of nincompoops who side with dictatorial regimes because they can't cope with the remaining shortcomings of our still imperfect democracies.
Taking side for China under Xi is as smart as diving in the swimming pool to avoid the moist of the fog. Nothing to brag about.
- You did ask me how the Chinese went pass the 7nm milestone. Remember? So implicitly, you thought they did. More renegading.
Just en passant this is all what this article, you are commenting under, is about. The possible effects of the restrictions. Thanks for confirming, you don't care "abotu" the subject matter.
- No need to explain the "points you're trying to make". They are totally transparent, predictable and, tbh, over-simplistic.
- You did ask me how the Chinese went pass the 7nm milestone. Remember? So implicitly, you thought they did. More renegading.
I would like to refer you to YOUR comment in a previous post:
- I'm still waiting for a technical post regarding the plausibility of Chinese semiconductor firms to go pass 7nm with a decent yield and without EUV, near perfect optical and AI.
So YOU asked me if I knew - I said I didn't and I asked YOU if YOU knew - but let's not talk about that as it doesn't fit your narrative.
- Taking side for China under Xi is as smart as diving in the swimming pool to avoid the moist of the fog. Nothing to brag about.
I actually said all countries are s*** and do bad things - repeatedly - i.e. not just once - I said China does bad things and I invited you to the concept that America (being another country) has probably done some bad s*** as well ... to which you have not responded.
So a hypocrite along with being an AC.
I take offence to bullies as a whole - regardless of whose "side" they're on - and on this particular occasion it is my opinion that the US is being the bully - but as bullies do they don't come out and own it - they weasel and blame other factors and reasons - "security" etc - in fact pretty much the same noises that the US made years ago when Japan started to make LCDs - so the US has form in this regard ...
My exact statement is "I'm still waiting for a technical post regarding the plausibility of Chinese semiconductor firms to go pass 7nm with a decent yield and without EUV, near perfect optical and AI."
It does not imply the Chinese did "go pass" the 7nm milestone,
In plain everybody's English plausibility also applies to the future: wiz "how plausible is it that Chinese foundries will be able to go beyond the 7nm process with no EUV scanner (e.g. to 5nm)". This is a matter of debate among specialists today, if you follow the news, which you should if you comment here. I genuinely thought it was clear to everyone, since no 6nm chip coming from Chinese foundries has been noticed yet.
In any case, there is no hint of a passed event, either in my sentence or in the word plausibility. Sorry for the embarrassing English lesson, now.
> You put country in jail? Laughable.
Try not to be deliberately obtuse dear chap - you're countering your own argument - No - you hold the leader of the country to account - you know the way that the Allies are doing to Putin now? Yeah - that kind of thing but holding the countries that took part in Iraq's invasion need to be held to account - and every day that doesn't happen it emboldens the participants to push far beyond their boundaries.
I can't be bothered to dissect the rest of your post - it's quite clear that neither of us will change our point of view and both of us think we're correct. However what is decidedly incorrect is how you think I am siding with China - I've quite clearly NOT done that - but you haven't agreed that the US has done some dodgy s*** as well - and that - is just hypocritical and something which I can't abide or condone so I choose not to interact with you any further.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
