Can the US Stop China From Controlling the Next Internet Age? (nytimes.com)

Tech executives worry China will turn to tit-for-tat arrests of Americans in response to the detention of Meng Wanzhou. And the worries don't stop there. Kara Swisher, writing at The New York Times: Imagine, if you will (and you should), a big American tech executive being detained over unspecified charges while on a trip to Beijing. That is exactly what a number of Silicon Valley executives told me they are concerned about after the arrest this week of Meng Wanzhou, the chief financial officer of the Chinese telecom company Huawei, in Canada at the behest of United States officials. "It's worrisome, because it's an escalation we did not need," one executive said, referring to the already tense trade talks between the two countries. "What China will do, given all the existing tensions, is anyone's guess."

No one I spoke to would talk on the record, out of fear of antagonizing either side and also because no one knows exactly what is happening. But many expressed worry about the possibility of tit-for-tat arrests. While everyone focuses on the drama of the arrest -- Ms. Meng was grabbed while changing planes at the airport -- and its effect on the trade talks and stock prices, to my mind there is a much more important fight brewing, and it is about tech hegemony. Specifically, who will control the next internet age, and by whose rules will it be run?

Until recently, that answer was clearly the United States, from which the Internet sprang, wiring the world together and, in the process, resulting in the greatest creation of power and wealth in history. While China has always had a strong technology sector, in recent years it has significantly escalated its investment, expertise and innovation, with major support from the government. That hand-in-glove relationship creates obvious issues, and the Trump administration is right to stop pretending that China does not present a threat both from security and innovation perspectives. Further reading: China summons U.S. ambassador, warns Canada of 'grave consequences' if Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou is not released.

Comments

That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Does not even work for that company. Fake news. The Chinese government would never detain Americans over a business problem. The Chinese government has plenty of important things to keep it busy. They didnâ(TM)t switch to capitalism because they wanted to not be capitalist you know. Geez who posts this nonsense? Desperate idiots hoping to scare Americans?

Re:That woman

[Rick Schumann]

What makes you think they 'switched to capitalism'? Just because they want a bigger economy doesn't mean they abandon their 'political philosophy'. They hate the West and all it stands for just like they always have, and want to destroy us and everything we're about, make the Earth one big Communist state full of good little obedient Communist automatons that don't question the Party, don't complain about anything, and don't seek to better themselves or make a better life for their one State-allowed child. They play our games only for their own ends.

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Good thing Google is helping them with Dragonfly. Google is upset that there are leakers spilling beans about all these wonderful things they do in China.

Go Google! Go China!

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks you US Drone 4662797, you have swallowed the US propaganda whole.

Is China "good", no, but then neither is the USA.

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

You done yet?

Re:That woman

[phantomfive]

What makes you think they 'switched to capitalism'?

Ensuring private property rights and allowing capitalists to join the party were huge milestones in the switch to capitalism. The only vestiges of Communism now in China are the name, and publicly placed guards in museums, who often look very bored.

They hate the West and all it stands for just like they always have, and want to destroy us and everything we're about, make the Earth one big Communist state full of good little obedient Communist automatons that don't question the Party, don't complain about anything,

What are you even talking about here? Your comments are informed by ignorance. Not only Rare communism/capitalism economic systems and not a government systems, but the best way to understand the Chinese government these days is to think of it as an extension of the old Imperial system. Of course, if you don't know what the imperial system was like, that won't help you.

make a better life for their one State-allowed child.

Showing your ignorance again. The one-child policy ended years ago.

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd call BS on that. I worked as a consultant for a startup where the president and VP were abroad to ink a deal, hoping to expand. The VP got arrested for some vague "sedition" charges upon landing in China. Well, after the deal was written which was very generous to the Chinese, which went beyond the 51% control of any venture on their soil, to having all IP be handed over to the Chinese partner, the VP that was arrested was freed.

Stuff like this does happen.

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

China is a bad actor on the world stage. The US is a slightly, imperceptibly better actor in terms of advocating for freedoms around the world. This is a well-measured fact.

If the US disappears over 1 million of its inhabitants for being of a certain ethnicity or religion alone, and no other offense, then we can talk about parity.

Get the fuck out of here with your dogeater equivocations, fuck you Chinoids.

Re:That woman

[Rick Schumann]

Wow, you've really swallowed the China-supplied Kool-Aid in one gulp haven't you? Or are you ignoring everything else in the news about China?
..or are you a China shill? Paid? Foreign national operative perhaps, astroturfing China to the West? Not as crazy as it sounds. Bugger off, I know better.

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Republican, am I right? You certainly sound like one -- a somewhat crazy, ill-informed person. You need some medicine, or perhaps you've forgotten to take it.

Re:That woman

[phantomfive]

Wow, you've really swallowed the China-supplied Kool-Aid in one gulp haven't you? Or are you ignoring everything else in the news about China? ..or are you a China shill? Paid? Foreign national operative perhaps, astroturfing China to the West? Not as crazy as it sounds.

I want to point out that you are incapable of responding to a single factual point in my comment, so you resorted to insults. Good job.

I know better.

Clearly you don't.

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit, the US advocates for their view of the world.

When democratic decisions get made that the USA does not like, its not "Hey thats democracy" its "How do we punish them".

How about the millions starving in Yemen where the US gladly supply someone else with the weapons to do the dirty work. How about the US being the main funder for the IRA, or how the CIA and others have bankrolled terrorists groups because the US did not like the current leadership of a country.

Lets also look at the forced labour camps in the USA (Called prisons).

The USA is a long long way from being clean.

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, no, double bullshit on you. I didn't say "the US is clean" at all, you're illiterate and in denial. The fact is China has 1-party rule, and no free and fair elections. They can't even compare their President with Pooh, it's illegal.

The US support of Saudi war in Yemen is obviously a massive mistake, as were several wars, coups, CIA operations, other things... I don't deny any of that happened.

I'm saying even with all that, China is provably worse. This is true locally there, and even on the ocean where China attempts to stop freedom of navigation which is international law.

China is a pariah state hold-over from Communist Authoritarianism. Anyone who pretends otherwise is a willful moron, and it doesn't even matter where you're saying it from.

Once again, nobody said the US was entirely clean. You're just a propagandist liar.

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

You're pretending China has more than 1 party rule. They do not. You're pretending China has free and fair elections, they do not. You're pretending they have an equal egalitarian society, they do not.

China is an imperialist authoritarian state without respect or heed of any international law or norm. Which isn't to say the US or Europe, etc, are blameless or completely innocent, they are not.

But your dishonest equivocations just don't pan out, sorry. China has over 1 million ethnic uighurs in prisons for no other reason than not being Han Chinese.

Anyone who defends them deserves to end up in one.

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, okay, then convince me, with credible-source facts: Show me China's free and open elections, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, unfettered access to the global Internet, respect for basic human rights, respect for civil rights, respect for due process, respect for a citizens desire to emigrate from China to another country, and so on, and so on, and so on. All rhetorical because China has none of those things. What they do have is treating their people like garbage, threatening their lives and the lives of their family and friends if they do not do as they are told (regardless of whether what they're told is right or wrong), military expansionism, likely supporting terrorist organizations that hate the West, and so on, and so on, and so on.

You're just a troll or a paid China shill. Fuck the fuck off, you're not for real, conversation over.

Re:That woman

[Hognoxious]

Not only Rare communism/capitalism economic systems and not a government systems

I'd run this thorough google translate, but I don't know what language it's supposed to be.

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah and the US didn't fund the IRA. You are inferring that the US government did that. That is not, and has never been true. Individuals in the US of Irish decent did that. Just as those of Arab decent support groups all over the Middle East, like say Hezbollah? Does that now mean that the US supports Hez? No, that isn't how things work.

Re:That woman

[Aighearach]

That's silly, what if they were never actually Communist, but Confucian Autocrats?

Westerns don't realize this, but Chinese and Korea societies are deeply Confucian, and the Confucian system is all about meritocracy; with the understanding that different types of merit exist. So they have traditional ways to make different types of governments based on the same underlying philosophy. For example in North Korea they are a Confucian Dictatorship, not any sort of "Communism." Merit in this case is believed to be inherent merit of the original ruler which he passed to his offspring. Very different than the European idea of kings being placed by God; instead they would presume that whatever natural powers they believe in endowed the leader with extra talents and skills for leadership, and his right to rule comes merely from ending up with more merit for the task.

China is an Authoritarian Confucian Bureaucratic state. Not communist, not capitalist. There is only one party because it is not representative; merely being alive is enough to be presumed to have equal merit in choosing leaders. Instead, people with more Merit rise through the bureaucratic system and get additional access to decision-making.

Of course they made room for the rich, by definition they've either proven their merit in actual practice, or used criminal acts to get there. If you're starting from the understanding that it is Confucianism wearing a Communist uniform then that was obvious all along.

One child policy was replaced once they got better at tracking the merit of individuals, and to gain data about what sort of tax structure would merely limit additional children to those with more merit.

You can't understand China with a view that only goes back to the Age of Empire, their system is a lot deeper than you think. And it isn't about the uniform that they wear so that foreigners can place them on an international team.

None of the different ideas about how to implement Confucian meritocracy involve being anti-business. None of them. They all assume that merit leads to prosperity; money, nice things, power, personal freedom, happiness, etc. But they have very different theories about which types of government lead to merit for a nation; eg, what leads to prosperity. They're always going to be pro-business, and they're always going to view unity as essential; once you figure out which system you're using, everybody needs to use that system.

None of their systems contain the western idea that open competition has more merit in government than purposeful unity. But that doesn't imply that they're against trade competition, or against individual economic freedom. They like individual economic freedom. They just consider political "freedom" to be anti-social and without merit; the thrashing of people without enough merit to participate in the decisions.

But that doesn't mean you should have that economic freedom as some sort of "right." You're expected to have enough merit to achieve it.

Re:That woman

[Aighearach]

I did English->Spanish->Bulgarian->German->English and it tells me that it means,

Not just unusual communist / capitalist economies, no systems of government

I think he's saying that if you don't understand anything at all about systems of government, you'd end up thinking China is in the Age of Empire.

Re:That woman

[dk20]

Let me guess. Yet another person on the internet spewing whatever nonsense they want about China?

My predictions about you:
- Probably do not have a passport, if you do, it has limited usage
- you do not have a chinese entrance stamp on your passport.

Can you provide a few examples of china trying to "destory the west"? Want some examples of the west trying to destroy China? (hint, this article and many posts abou thte US tring to 'contain' china).

"they hate us" OMG.. are you serious?

one State-allowed child

You know they ended that rule a while ago, right? but why let facts get in the way of your nonsense.

PS.. they may have had a "one child" policy, but you had a forced sterilization program.. Seems the two programs are roughly equal?

"
The United States during the Progressive era, ca. 1890 to 1920, was the first country to concertedly undertake compulsory sterilization programs for the purpose of eugenics.[72] Thomas C. Leonard, professor at Princeton University, describes American eugenics and sterilization as ultimately rooted in economic arguments and further as a central element of Progressivism alongside wage controls, restricted immigration, and the introduction of pension programs.[73] The heads of the programs were avid proponents of eugenics and frequently argued for their programs which achieved some success nationwide mainly in the first half of the 20th Century.
"

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

The main difference between America and China is who wears the boots. The US government got smart and contracted out the oppression to the private sector.

We Americans love to preach about freedoms, until people start acting free and then all of the sudden "I don't like it..." magically becomes "You have no right to..." Just look at how our law enforcement acts towards citizens...

America figured out the right amount of bread and circuses required to keep the plebs content and then they added the illusion of choice to government. So now Americans blame each other AND foreigners for all our problems.

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

"and no free and fair elections. "

They have elections, you get to select your comunist party representitive.

Re:That woman

[dk20]

How about Iran-Contra? This story is about iran trade violations... what about the US gvt violating its own embargo?

Re: That woman

[GarySalter]

Sounds about right.....I worked for some Asians (here in Canada),....merit is rewarded...I think that the crowd that shouts (USA, USA, we are the best, everybody envies us etc) need to take off the rose colored glasses, reality is that the oligarchs like trump and the political machines like the Republicans and the (Republican lite: corporate Democrats) do find that the authority centered countries like China can get things done and after all, world companies function better when there is less political turmoil (except for blackwater type companies and of course the war machine military complex (world wide).

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Iran-Contra happened. Halliburton even traded with Iran directly. Both were crimes. Both were not prosecuted sufficiently. But they were acknowledged as crimes and big deals, they got attention, things changed.

I would have liked to have seen those criminals prosecuted more fully also. Certainly however in both cases people went to jail for a period. Not long enough.
Just because the US committed crimes historically isn't exactly a real logical pass for ongoing crimes by any party, is it?

In the case of Huawei there is compelling evidence and the defendant has been made aware even prior to her arrest that she was going to have to answer for it.
She chose to travel through the jurisdiction knowing that. The arrest and extradition is no different than anyone else. Just because she's the daughter? She's the CFO. That's an OFFICER.

Absolutely fair game to arrest, face a trial confronted by accusers and evidence in public, a chance to rebut and offer ... a powerpoint defense in this case...
Compared to just disappearing her for 20 years, which do you think is more respective of law and human rights? China's outrage is weak sauce on this.

All of the crimes the US committed are serious and bear revisiting even if admittedly once swept under the politico-legal rug. You won't get such a sentiment in Beijing though, not in a million years.

And if you tried, you'd be gone.

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Id china is a one party system then the US is a tribal two party system. A vote for third party is a wasted vote. So in reality the American people don't really have much choice.

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually US taxpayer funded institutions funded the IRA. And a number of well known senators backed and hosted Sinn Fein an many occasions, especially the Kennedys. Also many of the registered 'charities' who sent money to the IRA were only able to exist thanks to US government approval. You cannot start a registered charity in the US with out goverment approval. This wasn't really clamped down on until after 9/11

Re:That woman

[phantomfive]

I meant:

Not only are commmunism/capitalism economic systems (and not government systems)......

Sorry about that, I don't know where the R came from.

Re:That woman

[phantomfive]

You can't understand China with a view that only goes back to the Age of Empire, their system is a lot deeper than you think.

Confucianism is younger than the empire system in China.

China is an Authoritarian Confucian Bureaucratic state. Not communist, not capitalist.

Communism and capitalism aren't states, they are economic systems. Democracy, authoritarianism, anarchism, utopianism, and monarchy are all types of governments (not always plausible).

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

He went back to China!

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

And how many people are in American prisons on minor drug related offenses... making the prisons billions of dollars. They're just not as picky about who they lock up, as long as they keep the place stocked. And free and fair elections in America are a complete illusion as well. The most heavily gerrymandered states in the US are favouring the republicans... and there has almost always been rampant voter suppression. Yeah, China is garbage... but America is probably almost equally bad.

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

then dominance of either is bad. USA is still the dominant one although the lead has been narrowing down for a while. Multipolar world is the best solution, but only without warmongering USA or China. So far, China hasn't been the one warmongering.

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

There are no clean actors. There are just actors that are furthering their interests to allow themselves to have more money and more power and more bitches than the other guys. You belief that there is some inherant good in the world is pathological.

Nazi Germany, communist Russia, and The USA all have a common belief that they are in fact the good guys.

There are no good or bad guys. There are just strong and weak guys. The lefts self hatred will mean the West will die out like the sick old man that it is. It will be replaced with Chinese and Mexicans who embody every patriarchal instinct that the left says they hate in the old white males that stole the continent from the Indians. Get your shoes ready. You have a long trail of tears ahead of you.

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

He may have got the details wrong but his point remains. It is not about who is more communistic or who has the most freedom. Point is there is in human nature a need to have an enemy.
The Chin hate the USA and vice versa. Nothing will ever change that unless there is a new enemy to hate.

My problem with the West is it activly hates itself. My theory is a lot of Chinese and Russian billionaire pay CNN and Fox lots of money to constantly run stories about white privilege and welfare fraud to cause the citizens to hate themselves, while we pay 1/3 of out taxes in interest to China and fight an endless war on a military tactic, China is laughing their ass off.

Maybe if we kidnap more Chinese they will stop laughing

Re: That woman

[phantomfive]

Point is there is in human nature a need to have an enemy.

We really don't need an enemy.

Re:That woman

[sit1963nz]

US elections are hardly free and fair either . Voter reregistration Gerrymandering Failure to supply enough working voting booths in ethnic areas Hell even your sex offender president did not get the most votes.

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Youâ(TM)re a worthless scum trying to deceive people. China is outright theiving , and sponsoring that theft. The lowest of the low and piper is calling after several decades. Tripe like this article is meant to deceive. They already lost.

Re:That woman

[WhiplashII]

The thing that concerns me is not that they are evil.

The thing that concerns me is that they clearly do not understand us. They will force us into war, just like Japan did, merely because they think that Trump will not be supported by the rest of the US. Because they think that deep down, we are like them and do not really value individual liberty and freedom. Because (like all other humans), they believe they are right.

They will go too far, it will be war, billions will die.

Re:That woman

[LostMyBeaver]

Hmm... I think you have some serious issues. I mean really, you might want to consider visiting someone that can observably identify whether you're a danger to yourself and/or others.

The one child policy has been relaxed.

You are correct in one sense. The Chinese government is and has been Communist for a long time. Much of what the West sees as competition from the Chinese is completely misconstrued. The Chinese government really doesn't bother with competition... they really don't care who the best is. They focus instead on reaching the goal of a self-sustaining economy.

An example of this has been China's willingness so far to collect and take in much of the world's trash. Not only does it provide China massive amounts of natural resources, it also provides the money required to recycle it. They didn't accept the trash for free you know?

China has systematically focused on three key points
  - Housing
  - Food
  - Energy

They have an incredible effort underway that will completely collapse the world housing market by making it basically free. If you want a house, the Chinese government will be able to provide one to you free of charge. They are simply recycling all our trash into the materials needed to provide them and using our money to recycle the materials.

They have many massive efforts underway to eliminate the need for classical farming. Whether this includes mass scale meat printing or massive underground automated farms able to yield 6-12 crops a year. The Chinese are moving incredibly fast to become 100% independent from the world market with regards to food. And thank goodness they're doing it. I believe this might be one of humanity's most desperate needs.

As for energy, they have the world's largest solar farms, they are taking wind power extremely seriously. They have managed to take control of massive oil interests and if they manage to arrange a "silk road" pipeline to Africa, then they have energy complete sorted out. Of course, I think they'll manage to go almost entirely renewable far faster than most western countries as their government has less bureaucracy involved in such decisions.

You are entirely wrong about China hating us. This is a major shortcoming in most people's understanding. They simply don't see us as anything other than tools to accomplish their goals. They want to achieve one China and are doing extremely well working towards it.

If they can use the world market long enough to become self sufficient, eventually they can simply withdraw from the world market and operate entirely internally. Once they pretty much collapse all the non-Chinese markets by withdrawing, countries like Taiwan will be forced to beg for entry to the One China and China won't make them beg, they'll simply embrace them with open arms and accept them in.

You are right, as designed by Plato so long ago, they will need to have a ruling class and a working class. Chinese Communism has a believe that they've improved on the Republic and hopefully have worked out the serious kinks. It does however require a simple belief.... the government will let you be so long as you don't rock the boat. This means that there will be none of this American style "everyone is the enemy except me and mine" instead, everyone will contribute the best they can and a balance will eventually be struck.

China is not what you think it is. It's actually a lot closer to the American dream than when America offers today. Chinese Communism rewards people looking for the American dream.

But I guess anger and hate is a much easier thing for you to understand?

Re:That woman

[LostMyBeaver]

"Bugger off, I know better"?

I read more positive in the news each day about China than negative. There are some bad actors and we scream it from the tops of our mountains for all to hear. There are also a lot of damn good things going on in China.

Foreign national operatives? I'm choking on this... do you have any idea how many stories I read each year implicating the American government on mass scale spying operations within and without? Do you honestly think this is a one-sided relationship?

The main difference is that no one notices a Chinese person working somewhere in the west anymore... but a white guy in Beijing still stands out.

Like in my earlier statement.... you should see someone. I recommend maybe a proper brain scan as well. I think we have much to learn about serious brain disorders by studying you closely

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, and emperor Xi

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

The shills are frantic tonight.

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

You said Progressives, although you meant Democrats. And back then, we all know the Democrats were the conservative party. Remember, some of us are old enough to vividly remember the Southern Strategy.

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

And they might even have more than 2 candidates!a

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

"we were forced into a war"...yeah

Re:That woman

[jpaine619]

..or are you a China shill? Paid? Foreign national operative perhaps, astroturfing China to the West?

Are you fucking serious? That's the tactic you are going to use? EVERYONE knows you just lost the argument. You couldn't be bothered to expend a couple of calories to state your case, instead you cunted out and attacked his character. That's the last tactic of the lazy liberal left. You're a coward and now you're a public pussy. I hope you don't interact with adults on a daily basis.

Re:That woman

[dk20]

"They will force us into war, just like Japan did,"

Right..

As i posted before, you do realize they are approximatly 13,000 miles away right? If you dont like them, why not just not deal with them?

They have disputed islands (just like the US).. So what does the US do? Sail warships there to "prove a point".. I guess that is being "forced into war"?

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

I did not have sexual relations with

Re:That woman

[LordWabbit2]

Mod up please, I heartily agree with you.

Re: That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Several States in the US have effective one Party rule. Just because it has the patina of free elections doesn't make it so.

There is no functioning Republican Party of California or a functional Democrat one for South Carolina

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're going to talk about the Iran-Contra, you might consider spending 10 minutes reading up on it before spewing things about it. If you'd spent that 10 minutes you'd know it was government officials acting without government approval. What those people did were illegal under US law. But I'm sure you knew that, right?

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Confucianism isn't younger than the imperial system in China. The imperial system started in the Qin dynasty which is 3rd century BCE. Confucius was born sometime in the 6th century BCE.

Re:That woman

[mlyle]

> They have disputed islands (just like the US)..

I must have missed the part where the US is building up military bases on those islands, adding artificial military platforms, and is using them to try and control trade and freedom of navigation of our neighbors (the 9 dash line, as rejected by a UN arbitral tribunal).

Re:That woman

[Anonymous Coward]

We sail warships through there so every other country in that area can sail commercial and cargo without fear of pirates or rogue government harassment. Most countries do not have the power or resources to patrol the high seas as we do. Trust me, without the U.S. Navy out there, it would be a shit show. Go ask anyone from those Islands around there what they want. I bet they will not desire Chinese Naval bases in their ports and harbors. I wish we did not have to be there, but the harsh reality is that it is our duty to shield those nations from harm as long as we can, no matter what. Disclaimer: sailed on a U.S. Naval warship in that area for months at a time, did good work there, rescues and intel for allies to combat pirates and terrorists, and have family in Guam and Philippines.

Re:That woman

[dk20]

Name a country the US doesnt have a military presense in.

I see.. it is is great the US does this, but not other countries?

Re:That woman

[dk20]

War Is A Racket
By Major General Smedley Butler

Good book..

Re:That woman

[dk20]

So will she get a "suspended prison term" Like Mr. North got?

Re:That woman

[Shaitan]

You seem to be mixing up economic and political philosophy.

Re:That woman

[Rick Schumann]

Last thing I'm saying to you: Want to know why I'm not bothering responding to your trolling? Because you're speaking in support of a shit government that treats it's people shitty and there's no excuse for that. You can say "Oh well the U.S. is shitty and corrupt so you have no room to say anything about other countries" but that's complete and utter BULLSHIT, BAD is BAD, the Communist Chinese government is BAD, and I have no use for anyone who supports them for any reason -- and you're supporting them with your words (and your deeds perhaps) therefore all you get is a big fat "FUCK YOU". What's next for you? You going to speak in support of Iran, North Korea, and Bashir al-Assad, too? Vladimir Putin? Donald Trump? Eat shit and die.

Re: That woman

[Shaitan]

The answer isn't a one party system, a two party system, or a many party system. The answer is a zero party system where each candidate has to fight individually.

Re:That woman

[Shaitan]

"But they were acknowledged as crimes and big deals, they got attention,"

Yup

" things changed."

*Scratches head* When? Probably about the same time as net neutrality issues, copyright cartel abuses, and nsa domestic wiretapping. As in, things were passed that claimed to be intended to fix the problems but actually gave legitimacy to the actions instead.

Re:That woman

[phantomfive]

I really wish you would write better comments.

Re:That woman

[cheesybagel]

What you are referring to as Confucianism is basically the Chinese version of Legalism with a thin veneer of Confucianism on top to keep the masses happy. In the Qin Dinasty China placed everyone under a class system with 10 classes which was supposed to be meritocratic. As Confucianism became more adopted the regime became increasingly bureaucratic and the 'merit' basically consisted of written exams in which you basically reflected on ancient Chinese texts. Do that over and over a couple of hundred years and you stifle all creativity in society.

Re:That woman

[cheesybagel]

Oh and a lot of people basically passed the tests by bribery as you can expect of a regime like that.

Re:That woman

[cheesybagel]

He might have been but in Qin China Confucianism was not widely adopted by the state. That only happened much later. Back then they had a major Taoist bent. Which might be pseudo-scientific crap but at least they tried to understand the universe around them somehow. A lot of Taoist 'theory' if you can call it that is basically their equivalent of a blend of our Western Society's Greek schools of thought. It's like if you mix up Heraclitus with the Five Elements and a bunch of other crap. The difference is while we did lose a lot of knowledge about the Greek schools of thought, we never lost quite as much as the Chinese thanks to the Qin's "burial of the scholars" and the Han's burning of the Qin's Imperial Library. The Chinese basically lost technology in the transition from Zhou to Qin to Han. Plus because of the imperial exam system in the later periods all philosophical development was basically stalled.

Re:That woman

[Aighearach]

And likewise in the West, even the parts of culture that came from the Greeks weren't necessarily adopted by everybody at that time. And indeed culture existed before the Greeks.

A bureaucratic state is one where there are lots of employees in the government who wield power granted by some sort of multilayer bureaucracy with its own rules and levers of power that are largely not operated directly by a ruler. It is an aspect of government that can, and usually does, exist combined with some other aspect of government. Perhaps department heads are hereditary, or perhaps they are elected, or perhaps even appointed by an elected head of State. It differs from "autocratic," which also still leaves attributes undefined. (Machiavelli warned that in a traditional bureaucracy, if the Prince gains enough power and replaces the bureaucrats with magistrates, the ruling classes will revolt whenever the Prince is weak, and the new Magistrates will understand that their position is reliant on the Prince and will seek to stab him in the back at the earliest sign of trouble in order to gain the forgiveness of the rest of the ruling class.)

Communism, if the pedants were even correct, would exactly mean the government, the ability to regulate, the ownership, not the economic part which is described as Socialism. And to some extent Capitalism is an economic system, in that it is the economic system that exists when you have a government that is not involved in business and regulated markets in the way described in Wealth of Nations to create a level playing field for new capital. But it is a bit obtuse to claim it is somehow not a matter of governance.

Re:That woman

[Aighearach]

Right, but attempts to get pedantic about the etymology entirely miss the point, which is about the way that people in a large part of East Asia see their governments now, and what the public viewpoints are that the governments try to pander to. Just like, people in the west refer to the Greeks as the founders of western culture without even knowing who the Greeks were, who the Minoans were, what any of the culture actually was, or how it differed from other ideas in different parts of Europe. None of that matters, people still presume some sort of common connection, and whatever the modern mythology is, that is what modern people base their cultural understanding on.

If China, North Korea, South Korea, and Taiwan were all on TV engaged in Battle Virtue Signaling, they'd all be trying to show the same virtues, they'd all be fighting over their version of who is the True Scotsman, but it would be who is the Truly Meritorious Confucian.

I just wish western governments would understand that, and try sometimes to position our squabbles so that we appear more Meritorious. Instead we perhaps appear pedantic and strident, like a strong person with some sour grapes who didn't learn to check them in the market. It hobbles diplomacy.

Re:That woman

[Aighearach]

In Thailand they used to convert your merit to a number, and you had to wear the number on your shirt to be allowed to go in public.

The numbers could be added to or subtracted from at the whim of local magistrates.

Abolishing that system is also referred to as "freeing the slaves."

Re: That woman

[phantomfive]

There are communist groups even in democracies. Orderville comes to mind as an especially nice example. OK, so in what way is the Chinese government meritocratic? Did the princelings pass their Confucian exams with flying colors? Did Xi demonstrate his excellent decision making?

Re:That woman

[cheesybagel]

The current Chinese government has leaders well educated in technical sectors for sure. Personally I liked the previous leader (i.e. Hu Jintao) better. I think that government was more focused on actually achievable goals and left much of the rest to take care of itself with minimal interference. This guy takes a much more heavy handed approach to rule. It's like they decided to go back to the imperial regime again.

I can understand why they did it. They probably expected friction with the West and that's why he was granted plenipotentiary powers. They are basically cleaning up their house (remember Stalin's Purges?) before the major event happens.

"China" is a tipping apple cart

[Anonymous Coward]

China as we know it is not going to be around a decade from now. I think the more realistic scenario is some countries will run their own networks under/through the internet that don't follow its centrally-agreed-to rules.

Re:"China" is a tipping apple cart

[Rick Schumann]

We can but hope. I, too, am wondering how long over a billion people will put up with this 'god-emperor' bullshit their current 'leader' is pulling. Also, while I can't say things are all Hearts and Flowers and good-times-for-all here in the West, and despite Chinas' best efforts, the Chinese people know damned well what life is like outside of China, and without a doubt many of them would rather have our lifestyle and our problems than continue living the way they are under the thumb of the Communist Party. Never know, the Horse May Learn to Sing yet.

Re:"China" is a tipping apple cart

[phantomfive]

China as we know it is not going to be around a decade from now.

From my perspective, China seems more stable than it was 20 years ago. Certainly much more stable than in the 80s.

Re: "China" is a tipping apple cart

[Anonymous Coward]

I think youâ(TM)ll be surprised. Mass compliance isnâ(TM)t that hard to achieve when you have pretty good control of education & information.

Re:"China" is a tipping apple cart

[gtall]

The 80's were went China was recovering from that serial fuckup Mao. Now it looks like the current god-king is going down that same road.

Re:"China" is a tipping apple cart

[alvinrod]

They'll put up with it as long as conditions continue to improve. It may not be perfect, but as long as they have a path towards greater personal wealth, there won't be widespread complaints. Perhaps this will change as future generations are born without the knowledge of what China was like prior to economic reforms it enacted, but the people who remember a time when things were far worse will not be so easy to stir up so long as things continue improving. Whether or not the Chinese government can continue to make that happen while maintaining the same level of control that they have historically had is an open question.

China is investing a lot of money in Africa in the same way that the U.S. invested a lot into China, so in some ways it seems as though they are trying to have our lifestyle. Unlike the western world, the Chinese aren't going to feel any guilt over colonialism or the like. Whether they'll be successful or not is another matter, but it's naive to think that the Chinese government is incompetent or incapable of trying to keep itself afloat as China continues to industrialize.

Re:"China" is a tipping apple cart

[Aighearach]

I think the more realistic scenario is some countries will run their own networks under/through the internet that don't follow its centrally-agreed-to rules.

Yeah, they have their firewall, someday we'll install one too. Then people will stop calling the Chinese network "internet."

Re:"China" is a tipping apple cart

[Anonymous Coward]

China is the most successful regime change operation in US history. Starting with Nixon's visit to China in 1972. The US wooed the Chinese leadership with unlimited wealth if they opened their economy to accommodate US business deals. Todays trade imbalance may favor China but US businesses make a ton of money on all the US products exported into China. Those at the top in both countries have made fortunes. The members of the Chinese "Party" have become some of the richest people on the planet. And the "Party" has morphed into a dynastic entity where positions of power are handed down to family members. The US may have a top 1% but China has a 0.0001% and unlike the US no one in China is allowed to question or god forbid criticize this fact.

China has not been a "Communist" country for 30 years but they are an "Authoritarian" country where citizen rights are scarce. The international community is always so busy trying to tell the US what to do that they ignore anything China does. China operates Muslim "re-education" centers filled with Muslims rounded up by the state. And the world is quite. China subsidizes all of their international corporations to create cheaper exports which violates the conditions set down by the WTO and other international trade treaties. China is militarizing international waters which cover the trade routes for 60% of the trade in SE Asia. And can someone tell me what "innovations" China has gifted the world? They are good a creating cheap knock offs where quantity overrides quality. China also faces some enormous challenges. Unlike during the Cold War when the USSR went to great lengths to prevent their citizens from leaving the country China has no such policies. It is now cheaper for a Chinese businessmen to setup shop in the US than it is to do business from China. The US has higher labor costs but those costs are offset by less taxes, cheaper real estate, cheaper energy costs, and shipping costs. The US already has a sizable Chinese population which makes it an attractive destination for those looking to leave China. Visit every US consulate in China and you will see a line of Chinese waiting in long lines for to obtain US visa's. Mean while China is setting up the worlds most intrusive domestic surveillance. Millions of cameras using facial recognition collecting data to "score" every citizen. A good score gets you rewards while a bad score makes it harder to get a job, travel, attend certain schools, and living in certain areas of the country. Their Internet censorship and firewall has been evolving for years and getting better with help for US companies looking to make a dollar. But regardless of everything the US and China have no reason to fear or hate one another. China is one of the countries the US has never attacked and in fact the US offered some help against the Japanese back in the day. The US and China should complement one another instead of looking at each other as an "enemy". China would make a better allie than enemy especially since Europe has been more of a hindrance than supporter of the US for years. Russia is an economic pigmy and on it's way to becoming a 3rd world country with a nuclear arsenal

Re:"China" is a tipping apple cart

[Jane Q. Public]

What the internet needs is to replace the tiered DNS system with a decentralized system.

Perhaps one based on NameCoin, which seems to be the most advanced so far, to the best of my knowledge.

Then we won't have to be so concerned with countries and borders and "authorities" messing things up.

Re:"China" is a tipping apple cart

[Anonymous Coward]

Until the hardware that makes the important part of "the Internet" is under government/large corporate control, there will be no "decentralization". And since this requires investment, a.k.a. money to buy the equipment, and marketing to win and keep market share, it will not happen.

The anarchy of the 90s is gone forever and won't come back.

Re:"China" is a tipping apple cart

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you mean, unlike the western world? USA runs empire and when a comedian makes fun of soldier on tv he is forced to apologize.

You were brainwashed into equating patriotism with militarism.

Re:"China" is a tipping apple cart

[cheesybagel]

A lot of the trade imbalance is plain BS. Just analyze the costs and money flows of iPhone production for example and you'll see the issues. The whole situation was created by the elites in both countries to enrich themselves and blame the other guy.

Re:"China" is a tipping apple cart

[Anonymous Coward]

China is investing a lot of money in Africa in the same way that the U.S. invested a lot into China, so in some ways it seems as though they are trying to have our lifestyle.

The problem with that attempt though, is the following:

1. When the US did it, they were the biggest military force on earth. (Still are.) No-one's going to try to protect a "third-world" country from the world's biggest aggressor. Especially given the fact said aggressor provides their own security.

2. The US at the time was also mostly accepting of the predominant world ideology. The Chinese are not.

3. The US at the time was more stable, and wasn't operating on a platform of "empire building." The Chinese aren't covering that ambition up at all.

So the real question for the rest of the world at this point boils down to this:

1. What ideology do you want dictating the world? (And be expected to adopt yourselves?)

2. What side in the inevitable war do you want to fight on? (The one with a billion men that can overwhelm with numbers? Or the one that pours so much money into their military that they have the best logistics, training, people, and research that money can buy?)

3. Are you willing to allow another superpower to come into existence after it's all said and done? (Africa may be "impoverished" right now, but remember wars make money, and infrastructure important. If China is allowed to colonize Africa they will build it up as an industrial power to take the load off of their own internal factories supporting the war effort, and when the time is right Africa will kick out the Chinese in their own bid for power. (They have every right to. Given how many times they've been used as cheap labor, and had their land taken from them.))

China will stop itself

[Anonymous Coward]

No one else uses China’s internet except China. As long as there is a great firewall, and it’s attendant lack of trust, China’s Internet will remain a separate entity from the world at large.

Re:China will stop itself

[Anonymous Coward]

As opposed to the US where the government wants to hold all of the keys for encryption so they can spy on whom ever they like when ever they like, warrant not required.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/may/12/glenn-greenwald-nsa-tampers-us-internet-routers-snowden

The US is no more trustworthy than China, especially with Captain Covfefe running the place.

Re:China will stop itself

[gtall]

Not entirely, China makes the equipment that makes the internet.

Re:China will stop itself

[Aighearach]

If you can't comprehend the difference between the past simple tense, and the perfect continuous tense, you probably shouldn't worry about routers and technical shit either.

Much less, law.

There was a proposal about 30 years ago for the US Government to hold copies of all the encryption keys, but they were laughed down by all the major and minor political parties in the US.

Re:China will stop itself

[Aighearach]

For small enough values of "makes" to cover "assembles," yes.

Re: China will stop itself

[Anonymous Coward]

China will fracture the internet and wall off the rest of the world. Bush was right, "internets"

Re:China will stop itself

[Vanyle]

+1 to this. China copies all they can but they fail at recreating anything to technical. The problem is with the way they approach these things. They are very rigid on things and it stands in the way of innovation.

Wrong question

[AmiMoJo]

Before asking if the US can stop China, you should ask if it should stop China.

Re: Wrong question

[Anonymous Coward]

2 words: Great Firewall.
1 answer: yeah we should stop that.

Re: Wrong question

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah well we should also stop the US holding the encryption keys.

Their currently strategy has been to bully Australia into getting them so they can be handed over to the USA.

The US is no better than China as far as the rest of the world is concerned, especial with the Orange Gremlin running the show.

Re: Wrong question

[Aighearach]

2 words: Great Firewall.
1 answer: yeah we should stop that.

I would have gone with, no, we don't need to stop it, because it is already contained by their own firewall. We just need to adjust our border protocol settings to prevent leakage.

Re: Wrong question

[dk20]

1 answer: yeah we should stop that.

why? why do you think it is your business what they do? They are 13,000 miles away from you, why do you care so much about their rules/laws?

Have you considered that some Chinese want some form of censorship? Think about hte US prior to wide-spread porn. Was everyone in favour? What about the people who were not in favour, where is their voice? Have you considered your own censorship? Go on TV and say "f*ck".. see what happens.

Try getting yourself a passport, and entrace visa and spend some time there...

Re:Wrong question

[AHuxley]

China has a method of tracking every online user as an ip range in and out of China.
That internet use then adds or takes from their social credit (Social Credit System) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

The Communist party has a fear that people in China will read about:
Democracy
Tiananmen square
Term limits.
Find a cartoon bear funny.
Talk about protests and protesting.

In the USA a person has the freedom to talk online about politics and freedom.
To freedom to petition the Government.
The freedom of the press as a profession. A freedom of religion.

That makes the USA a much better location for publishing and networking political/art/faith/sport/mil content to and from.
All China can offer the USA and EU is the tracking of dissidents and Communist police reporting methods. Not something "internet" freedom needs more of.


The USA offers freedom of speech and freedom after speech.
Something the US internet can use to keep "publishing" and stay fun and interesting.
Who wants an internet controlled by Communist China? The political and publishing laws of a Germany, France, Spain? The UK laws of who and what a website can publish about?

The USA looks great against a list of EU nations police doing investigations and Communist party laws in China.

Re: Wrong question

[Anonymous Coward]

You mention term limits. And yet the US backed Juan Orlando for a second term despite a constitutional one term limit. America likes democracy only when they get can a supportive vote in the UN. Otherwise its time for a US backed coup detat

Re:Wrong question

[AmiMoJo]

The US does business with worse countries than China. Does doing business with Saudi Arabia bring their values to America? Does using Israeli made CPUs (like many of Intel's parts) bring their culture to the US?

Re:Wrong question

[AHuxley]

Import and exports do not stop a person with freedom of speech from publishing and talking.
Communist nations laws stop publications and track users who protest.
Theocracies have powerful blasphemy laws that track users and their comments about faith and wanting to not be part of a faith.
That will stop the freedom of speech.
Spain, Germany and France do not like publication on a wide range of political and historical topics. They will use laws to try and prevent further publication and find out who published.

The USA protects all the freedoms to publish and publish again. For the press to publish. To talk in the open about trade policy. Thats the values of the USA.
In contrast to Communist nations, theocracies and some of the EU nations.

Re: Wrong question

[AHuxley]

AC in the USA you are free to talk about a funny cartoon and term limits. Under a Communist government investigations start when such topics are mentioned.

Re:Wrong question

[AmiMoJo]

Okay but how does Chinese companies holding some of the 5G patents block publications in America? How does using a Huawei router running firmware that was certified at source and binary level independently in the US stop freedom of speech?

Re:Wrong question

[larryjoe]

In the USA a person has the freedom to talk online about politics and freedom.

To freedom to petition the Government.

The freedom of the press as a profession. A freedom of religion.

China nominally also has these same rights. Nominally, as in on paper. On paper, China is the world's largest democracy. However, in the western world, that honor belongs to India because no western country recognizes China as a democracy.

The defining right of free speech that exists in the western world that is completely absent in China is the right to directly, openly, and repeatedly criticize the existing government leaders and to call for their removal. That right is the essence of the American First Amendment. It will never exist in China.

Re:Wrong question

[AHuxley]

The USA has the academic ability to make its own telco equipment.
To seek out advanced EU nations who can make new telco equipment.
In the USA people have the freedom of speech to question all trade policy and seek out other nations to trade with.
The USA has that freedom to "petition the government" part to consider trade.
To talk about not trading with another nation for any reason.

Thats the power of freedom of speech. People do not have to worry about talking about "patents" and "firmware" from Communist nations.
People still have the freedom to seek out and publish ideas about not using telco parts from a Communist nation.

Re: Wrong question

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, you're a fucking idiot. I got 2 passports, full of stamps and visas. Been in China at least once a year for the past 10 years. No Chinese like the GFW. NONE! Stupid motherfucker. Go spread your bullshit elsewhere.

Re: Wrong question

[Anonymous Coward]

> No Chinese like the GFW. NONE!

Thank you for taking the time to interview every single one of the 1.4 billion or so Chinese people. It's dedication like this that makes me proud to be a human.

Re: Wrong question

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly, re-education camps for the Muslims are the same to you shills as selling weapons to an ally who has a hostile foreign power launching rockets from a puppet regime to the south. Oh, your propaganda source didn't tell you that Iran is causing the problem in Yemen, not the Saudis? Sorry.

Re: Wrong question

[dk20]

name calling.. the last resort of a moron.

GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTR SPACE KILL CHINK CHICKS GNAA

[Anonymous Coward]

G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which
gathers G.A.Y N1GGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being G.A.Y N1GGERS.

Are you G.A.Y ?
Are you a N1GGER ?
Are you a G.A.Y N1GGER ?

If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, then G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time G_N_A_A member.
G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing G.A.Y N1GGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of G_N_A_A if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

First, you have to obtain a copy of G.A.Y N1GGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it.

You can watch G.A.Y N1GGERS FROM OUTER SPACE on Youtube.

Second, you need to succeed in posting a G_N_A_A "first post" on slashdot.org , a popular "news for trolls" website

Third, you need to join the official G_N_A_A irc channel #G_N_A_A on EFNet, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

If you are having trouble locating #G_N_A_A, the official G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.easynews.com as one of the EFNet servers.
If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the G_N_A_A Java IRC client by clicking here.

If you have mod points and would like to support G_N_A_A, please moderate this post up.

This post brought to you by Penisbird , a proud member of the G_N_A_A

G_____________________________________naann_______ ________G
N_____________________________nnnaa__nanaaa_______ ________A
A____________________aanana__nannaa_nna_an________ ________Y
A_____________annna_nnnnnan_aan_aa__na__aa________ ________*
G____________nnaana_nnn__nn_aa__nn__na_anaann_MERI CA______N
N___________ana__nn_an___an_aa_anaaannnanaa_______ ________I
A___________aa__ana_nn___nn_nnnnaa___ana__________ ________G
A__________nna__an__na___nn__nnn___SSOCIATION_of__ ________G
G__________ana_naa__an___nnn______________________ ________E
N__________ananan___nn___aan_IGGER________________ ________R
A__________nnna____naa____________________________ ________S
A________nnaa_____anan____________________________ ________*
G________anaannana________________________________ ________A
N________ananaannn_AY_____________________________ ________S
A________ana____nn_________IRC-EFNET-#G_N_A_A________ ________S
A_______nn_____na_________________________________ ________O
*_______aaaan_____________________________________ ________C
Gary Niger gary_niger@G_N_A_A.us G_N_A_A Corporate Headquarters 143 Rolloffle Avenue Tarzana, California 91356
Enid Al-Punjabi enid_al_punjabi@G_N_A_A.us G_N_A_A World Headquarters No.33 Kyutei Bld. 2F, Shinjuku 2-11-7, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan ????????2??11-6
Copyright (c) 2003-2015 G.A.Y N1GGER Association of America

Ich Bindawalross (London) - G_N_A_A (NYSE:

Re:GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTR SPACE KILL CHINK CHICKS G

[Anonymous Coward]

This racism violence and hate is exactly why free speech is obsolete. We need to rewrite the first amendment and state that hate speech is exempt from protection! There is no way civilization can continue if hate speech is allowed.

Re: GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTR SPACE KILL CHINK CHICKS

[Anonymous Coward]

Dumbasses. Do they think they are the hub of the world? What hubris. Does not matter much. Forcible compliance folllows

How about no country

[presidenteloco]

controlling the Internet, which is global.

We really, really need to make a geography-free distributed encrypted storage layer (e.g. IPFS) much more of a reality, so that no country is in control. Preferably with TOR-like obfuscated routing also.

The Internet should become a platform on which we can build global society, economy, and democracy.

Re:How about no country

[Rick Schumann]

That's a nice idea, except for one thing: any 'agreement' like that would only work so long as every country on Earth willingly agreed to go along with it, because just like International Law, it's only enforceable so long as everyone agrees to enforce it -- and accept the enforcement. Similarly, the United Nations can make all the judgements and proclamations it wants, but no country, UN-member or not, is bound to accept it. The only way you could enforce such a global 'net neutrality' agreement is to literally cut off any non-compliant country from the Internet by refusing to route traffic to them, and that would require all other countries to agree 100%. As an example: let's say we decide that Iran should be cut off from the Internet entirely. Russia is an ally of theirs, they would not agree, so they'd still route traffic to Iran. We could possibly get countries to cut off Russia in retaliation, but all it would take is one country sympathetic to Russia and/or Iran, and the 'blockade' fails. Even if it works, what's to stop Russia, in this case, from using operatives stationed in other countries not subject to the blockade, from wreaking havoc on the rest of the Internet from their locations? They could launch attacks against vital infrastructure (i.e. electric, gas, water, air traffic control, etc) in retaliation, essentially all-out cyber-warfare. How do you stop that? By counter-attacking. Things get messy quickly.

The only way such a thing would work is if we had one Global government, and zero dissent. If we, as a species, have reached the point where we can have such a thing and actually live, as a species, globally in peace and harmony, then we wouldn't need such agreements about the Internet (or much of anything else, either). Sadly, we are not socio-politically (or mentally/emotionally, for that matter) evolved enough to accomplish such things. I wish we were.

Re:How about no country

[Rick Schumann]

..also, may I point out to you that no country does control the Internet, globally-speaking? They control it within their own borders, and there's nothing anyone else can do about that.

Re:How about no country

[drinkypoo]

We really, really need to make a geography-free distributed encrypted storage layer (e.g. IPFS) much more of a reality, so that no country is in control. Preferably with TOR-like obfuscated routing also.

We need to think about a network that can survive all-out war of whatever sort, whether it's DDoS or bombs falling on NOCs. What does that look like?

Re:How about no country

[Anonymous Coward]

Countries are happy to require sites Must Comply With X Y Z because their citizens visit it, not because the site is "within their borders".

Re:How about no country

[ranton]

They don't mean control as in ICANN. They mean control as in Google, Amazon, and Alibaba. This has to do with which companies control the most popular browsers, search engines, online retail sites, and enterprise software vendors.

Re: How about no country

[theycallmeB]

The "problem" is that the US and China and Europe all want to try to control the internet globally. The US wants to be able to spy and enforce copyrights, China wants to control what it's people see if they get outside the sandbox (and spy), and Europe seems to want to screw it up until one of their companies figures out how to be relevant again (and spy too). You and I, we just want to read and watch and play and work and buy stuff, but those aren't really any government's top priority.

Re:How about no country

[Anonymous Coward]

The Internet should become a platform on which we can build global society, economy, and democracy.

Markets are the only foundation for society, economy and democracy. The internet is a free market, and must be defended by an open free market protecting government such as we have in the United States.

Re:How about no country

[Anonymous Coward]

> The Internet should become a platform on which we can build global society, economy, and democracy.

> global society... and democracy

> global.... democracy

I, too, believe that whichever culture has the highest birth rate should be able to vote everyone else into servitude.

Re:How about no country

[AmiMoJo]

DNS is the weak point right now. Also global routing could do with better security, so that some Nigerian ISP's screw-up doesn't cause Australian traffic to be routed via Mongolia.

Re:How about no country

[youngone]

...an open free market protecting government such as we have in the United States.

That is hilarious.

Re:How about no country

[Anonymous Coward]

The internet literally came into being for that purpose. The web, did not. The web will die. The network of networks runs just fine.

The ever increasing ignorance of old posters truly is an amazing phenomenon.

Re:How about no country

[Anonymous Coward]

we can build global society, economy, and democracy.

Yea what we have now is working out so well... It's simple really, the more people there are, the less anyone can agree on anything. With smaller societies it is simply easier to get things done, people also feel more able to get things done.

Re:How about no country

[DNS-and-BIND]

You want a global governance and zero dissent? Wow. Just...wow. That would be an inescapable tyranny, and you desire that outcome? Jesus.

Re:How about no country

[Anonymous Coward]

I understand the desire for unity, I'm sure we all do, if we think about it. It's a beautiful thought, in an utopian way. But even the OP acknowledges that such a solution is not viable in our current evolutionary stage. I'm not sure he meant a lack of dissent as something that is enforced, rather that everyone would be so content with the state of affairs that they'd have no reason to disagree. What we can all agree on is that we're currently quite far from that.

Re:How about no country

[Whibla]

Markets are the only foundation for society, economy and democracy.

Rules, and the ability to enforce them, are the foundation of (a successful and civil) society, and everything that follows from it. A stable society is what allows markets to function, and strict property rights are what encourages innovation, investment, and hence the growth of markets.

You have things completely backwards!

Re:How about no country

[Anonymous Coward]

We really, really need to make a geography-free distributed encrypted storage layer (e.g. IPFS) much more of a reality, so that no country is in control. Preferably with TOR-like obfuscated routing also.

We need to think about a network that can survive all-out war of whatever sort, whether it's DDoS or bombs falling on NOCs. What does that look like?

Yes, I'm surprised DARPA isn't working on something like that.

Re:How about no country

[Anonymous Coward]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pcmag.com/article/359339/spacex-says-satellite-broadband-is-the-future-but-its-actu%3famp=1

They could decentralize sats.

Re:How about no country

[drinkypoo]

The internet literally came into being for that purpose.

No shit, sherlock.

The ever increasing ignorance of old posters truly is an amazing phenomenon.

The constant arrogance of cowards is truly a tedious one. Everyone and their mom knows that the Internet was the ARPAnet, and it was designed to be fault-tolerant. The problem is, the internet isn't very fault-tolerant. It's vulnerable to attack by malicious actors at all levels.

Re:How about no country

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be an inescapable tyranny

No. The definition of "tyranny" much like "good" and "evil" are terms relative to person using them. I'm sure the Ferengi in Star Trek view the Federation's rejection of material wealth as an "idiotic" ideology enforced on society by "tyrants." The same conditions would apply here.

If you are a Westerner worried about a world government made of Chinese ideals, you would consider it "bad." The Chinese would consider that a "good" outcome, however that is just one possible future. There are as many potential futures as there are atoms in the universe, and just like those "inescapable tyrannies" you describe are possibilities, so too exist are the futures that you would consider "good." Not every global government would be a dystopia.

Now I will admit that we are quite a ways off from a "utopian" future, based off of my own definitions of such, but that is still just my personal opinion of the state of things, which would be mostly irrelevant to the people living in that time.

Re:How about no country

[Shark]

Be careful what you wish for, that's not a species where the individual exists. Outside of a very lonely and bored hive-mind, I don't think what you describe would work too well.

Re:How about no country

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a downside to that : 100% absolute freedom.
This means child porn, this means terrorist content, cyber-stalking, doxxing, and so on.
How do you deal with that?
I guess you could have some sort of default / opt-in self-censorship system built at the core. A web-of-trust if you will. Extensions like this already exist for web browsers, as well as programs in general that hook in to most browsers at the network level (previously NPAPI) to block "nasty" websites.
But if it is default, who decides what is and isn't illegal? How long before people start the shitflinging to ban religion X, or politics leaning Y? (I give it about 5 minutes after mentioning politics)

Neither USG nor PRC is a friend of Capitalism.

[Anonymous Coward]

The Free World would do well to get rid of both.

Nuke em! Duke Nuke em Now! Yeah! Baby!

[Anonymous Coward]

Shag the chinese, baby!

precedent

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, there is precedent for this: the arrest of Marc Emery, a Canadian citizen, in Canada, for violating US drug laws, but not those of Canada. He was extradited and imprisoned anyway. The War on Drugs, is there anything it can't screw up?

Re:precedent

[Red_Forman]

Virtual +1 informative Also, a link to Wikipedia would have helped: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:precedent

[vux984]

Strictly speaking he broke the laws of Canada too; Canadian authorities just had no real interest in prosecuting him except as a nuisance, especially as wind was already in the air for legalization in Canada. Plus his operation was more a bona fide political movement than as a criminal 'drug dealer'.

Nevertheless at the time, it was still illegal in both jurisdictions, and the treaties in place with the US meant that as a matter of law they could request his arrest and extradition.

I strongly suspect this Meng case is likely entirely legal as well. Canada would not have arrested her and provoked China like this if the legal backing wasn't rock solid.

Re:GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTR SPACE KILL CHINK CHICKS G

[Anonymous Coward]

"Free speech" doesn't actually protect hate speech when it crosses the line into that. It's incitement to violence, a crime. The issue is one of enforcement, which will come in time. Nazis are a dying cult of morons.

What a question

[bagofbeans]

And why should any country "be in control" exactly? USA is as good at controlling the message and attacking inconvenient reporting as any other country.

Re:What a question

[hey!]

Why should any country control the Internet? Because it can. And China will be able to, because its economic clout will soon exceed that of the US. Inevitably, that means its military power will catch up. And at present, US soft power is in the crapper.

Re:What a question

[drinkypoo]

Why should any country control the Internet? Because it can. And China will be able to, because its economic clout will soon exceed that of the US.

That's not how it works. The US has never controlled the internet in other nations, even though it has been the dominant economic power. China can be the dominant economic power on the planet and still not control other nations' internets.

Re:What a question

[rtb61]

Want to know how cunning the American government is, https://www.theglobeandmail.co... and then they sucked in Canada to fucked it all up. What, Canada, you think you can pick up all the lost US exports to China, fuck you Canada, US then ponders let's see what stupid thing we can get Canada to do, as punishment for stealing those exports to China, ohh, I know we will exploit this treaty and get them to fuck themselves up, the US doesn't get the trade, that means Canada the sock puppet doesn't get the trade. Canada should still cop stick, even though it was sucked in, there never ever is a reward for stupidity, just in American movies, not ever in real life.

Re:What a question

[Anonymous Coward]

The US did control the Internet. It has considerably less control today, but this is not from lack of trying.

Not only did the US control the Internet completely in the first decade of its existence, it also controlled until fairly recently the way domain names and IP addresses were allocated, it controls (and snoops on) all traffic that passes through its networks, it develops toolkits to simulate attacks by other people, it even tries to enforce its laws on other countries under the guise of "internet crime"; the shadier service branches of the US government collect bugs and exploits to break in into other people's systems without any of the so-called "oversight", which is ridiculous anyway. The US political and business elite is decidedly anti-privacy, anti-net neutrality, against decentralization and freedom. This isn't an exhaustive list by a long shot, and it isn't a new development.

This aggressive behavior is much different and much more ominous than what China does, because what China does, it only happens within its borders. One day though they'll use the precedents that the US came up with to justify its actions, and the US will have to just sit there and be quiet, because it was US actions that opened the door in the first place.

The US should worry about its own problems

[Anonymous Coward]

Flat broke and drowning in ever increasing debt. Trillions of dollars each year in mandatory spending for Medicare and Social Security.

It's game over, America. The corpse is beginning to rot.

Re: The US should worry about its own problems

[Anonymous Coward]

I am sure there will be a nice letter arriving shortly explaining that their fake claims are redundant, since the extradition program has officially closed its doors, bye! 28

You're still thinking like a peasant

[rsilvergun]

if you're asking this question. The ruling class has long since gone global. The US, at least as far as our ruling class goes, won't be trying to stop anything. They'll be working closely with China's ruling class since their interests (keeping the working class in line) align.

The real question is, will the working class stop letting the ruling class take control of the Internet. If the death of Net Neutrality is anything to go by the answer is 'no'. America's got an Election in two years, so we'll see then. I think if we reelect Trump (who's party is pretty obviously in favor of a corporate takeover of the Internet as a public commons) we'll be pretty much shot to hell.

Re:You're still thinking like a peasant

[Anonymous Coward]

see, there you go again, thinking the US is the internet.

The US is only 4% of the worlds population. Other countries (where the 96% live) have different rules. The USA is NOT the leader, not by any stretch of the imagination.

Re:You're still thinking like a peasant

[phantomfive]

if you're asking this question. The ruling class has long since gone global. The US, at least as far as our ruling class goes, won't be trying to stop anything. They'll be working closely with China's ruling class since their interests (keeping the working class in line) align.

It's kind of weird, when you say it like that, it sounds just like what I've heard from a lot of Trump supporters (nafta superhighway etc)

Re:You're still thinking like a peasant

[Anonymous Coward]

The US is only 4% of the worlds population.

It's more like 10%.

Oh, you were going by number ...
 

Re:You're still thinking like a peasant

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump seems pretty moderate on corporations, especially compared to any given huge pile of Democrats. Sure, you can carefully sort and find a few populists, actual liberals, or left libertarians, but taken as a whole, the Democrats are probably more corporate dicksuck than Republicans right now, though I'll grant it's within the margin of error.

Re:You're still thinking like a peasant

[Anonymous Coward]

We have to go see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what’s happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that Internet up in some way Somebody will say, ‘Oh, freedom of speech, freedom of speech.’ These are foolish people.

- Trump, 2015

Re:You're still thinking like a peasant

[Anonymous Coward]

see, there you go again, thinking the US is the internet.

The US is only 4% of the worlds population. Other countries (where the 96% live) have different rules. The USA is NOT the leader, not by any stretch of the imagination.

OK, if the USA is not leading the Internet, then who is?
Please state your criteria.

Kara Swisher is a corporate shill and hack

[Anonymous Coward]

This has NOTHING to do with tech.

Meng Wenzhou will answer charges that she circumvented sanctions against trade with Iran.

Fears of Chinese retaliation are overblown, not because it's not a risk, but because you are always subject to arbitrary or politically or economically motivated arrest in China, it's not a free or democratic country, and even if you are arrested you can console yourself with the fact that China treats its own citizens even worse.

watching Silicon Valley executives get arrested would fill me with joy, we should be arresting them anyway.

Imagine, if you will (and you should) ....

[Anonymous Coward]

> Imagine, if you will (and you should), a big American tech executive being detained over unspecified charges while on a trip to Beijing.
That's the second to last place any American tech exec should be going, right behind Pyongyang.
Quit trying to break into the Chinese market at the cost of your customers in the free world, assholes.
We don't need Chinese style Internet control, so stay out of China

Re:Imagine, if you will (and you should) ....

[hey!]

Well, that's one solution: convince corporations to act as if liberty is as important as profit. But unfortunately it's an "assume we had a can opener" solution. Business equates profit with liberty because from the position of corporate leadership that actually makes sense.

Another solution would be to get government to regulate business in a way that would protect American values. But that's also an "assume we had a can opener" solution. Government equates corporate profits with American values, because corporate money plays a king maker role in our system.

You know, Marx is starting to look kind of prescient. I don't mean all the stuff that was done in his name over the years, stuff like vanguard bodies and "communist" states. He didn't foresee or advocate any of that. He thought capitalism would annihilate itself, not because of external pressure or force, but through following its own unchecked nature. The only thing is I seriously doubt the aftermath will resemble any kind of worker's paradise.

Re:Imagine, if you will (and you should) ....

[Anonymous Coward]

Marx was always correct. This is readily evident by the reaction of those he has pissed off. Sadly though, there is a LOT of money involved in counter-propaganda, which started with the Nazi and Fascist movements. Any guesses as to why those factions are heavily emboldened nowadays?

To Marx's credit, when he wrote his works the wealthy cabal was not NEARLY as organized as it is today. We now know the wealthy would rather destroy everything they have than let anyone else have it, so the "worker's paradise" of the late 1800's is today's "nuclear wasteland".

Didn't China detain the sons and daughters

[Anonymous Coward]

Of an American businessman? This is a game of tit for tat, an optimal play from game theory strategy.

Re:Didn't China detain the sons and daughters

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure they did, but that's far from the only incident. That sort of thing is a common occurrence in China.

Re:Didn't China detain the sons and daughters

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like they already have someone for a prisoner exchange.

Stupid question, easy answer

[Entrope]

If you are that worried about being arrested on made-up charges when you visit a country, how about DON'T VISIT THAT COUNTRY. If you are worried that said country will make it hard to do business there or persecute your employees if executives stop paying so much attention to it, how about DON'T DO BUSINESS IN THAT COUNTRY.

Sometimes the better business decision is to turn down a prospect.

Re:Stupid question, easy answer

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there really a REAL reason to visit another country to do business with them? In this day of the internet you could just as easily telepresence. Sure people WANT to visit other countries, but there is to reason business couldn't be done without visiting.

Re:Stupid question, easy answer

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess you never heard of suitcases full of untraceable cash? See the Clinton's trip to China as a good example.

Re:Stupid question, easy answer

[rtb61]

Arrogance of Americans is astounding. No tit for tat arrests, all strictly letter of the law arrests, just with the most severe punishment possible being applied. Unlike the US where family has become disposable, family is a big thing in China, really big, especially at the top. This was not the arrest of a Chinese executive, this was the purposeful assault on the child of a leading Chinese business leader, which in Chinese reality, also means a leader in politics (you do not get to be one without the other), in order to extort compliance out of the government of China, else what, the daughter of the Chinese leader will be extradited to the US and what raped in one their prisons because rape is deemed normal in prison.

No accidental event, but a plotted scheme to kidnap the daughter of a leading Chinese business leader to extort compliance out of the government of China, seriously, come on, what do you expect the reaction to be from the Chinese perspective. They can do this to one of the leaders, how about other Chinese children in Canadian schools are they safe. The marketing and PR on this in China will be extremely bad for Canada, grabbing the children of executives to extort compliance to US demands, Canada, idiotically did this and no denying it, they knew in advance and already admitted this.

It is not the Chinese government who will act, it is the Chinese people, with just a bit of prodding from the government of China. Individual police officers in China will act upon their own impetus for this attack upon Chinese families, same as for judges and that means consumers as well, will view Canadians and Canadian product very negatively, depending upon how much they are prompted to by public comments by Chinese officials.

This had nothing to do with justice and everything to do with high level corruption in the US government and apparently in the Canadian government and Canada will be paying by far the greatest penalty, ain't nothing going to stop that. Billions in trade gone, at the consumer level in China, negative diplomatic relations with China for years to come, and likely harsh treatment for Canadians anywhere in China, especially Hong Kong and Macau, again the Chinese police and courts, reacting based upon their own feelings for family and how this event will be be perceived and how it is portrayed in China.

US executives who actually work in China, know how much importance is placed on family and how it was an extraordinarily bad idea to kidnap and abuse the daughter of a Chinese business leader (arrest is abuse and make no mistake) which means they are also a leader in Chinese government, just the way it is in China, this to extort compliance out of China. the message, watch out China, we will be arresting your children overseas (no matter how old still viewed as children), top notch messaging American sure to win life long enemies and Canada, oh so fucking stupid.

Re:Stupid question, easy answer

[Entrope]

"You're so vain / You probably think this [comment] is about you / You're so vain / I'll bet you think this [comment] is about you / Don't you? / Don't you?" - slightly adapted from Carly Simon

A lot of people would take my argument and use it to say that's why they would not visit the United States. I would argue that their concerns about arbitrary arrests are unjustified, but apparently my comment hit an authoritarian nerve -- you instead argued that the Chinese people would live up to all the stereotypes of a totalitarian state.

If China does not want their international-criminal citizens to be arrested and subjected to good-cause hearings to be extradicted for their crimes, maybe they should keep those criminals at home instead of complaining that they are being "kidnapped" when treaties about nuclear sanctions are used.

It's also richly ironic that China complains about a suspected criminal being arrested when they are still holding hostages to lure a fugitive back into their clutches.

Re:Stupid question, easy answer

[Anonymous Coward]

That person didn't visit the US. They were arrested in a country, where the US laws don't hold. Remember that 20 years down the road when your friend's daughter is arrested and anally raped in Egypt on a warrant by Saudi Arabia for not covering her hair while shopping in Dumbfuck, California.

Re:Stupid question, easy answer

[Whibla]

If China does not want their international-criminal citizens to be arrested ...

Pretend I've been asleep for a few years.

Could you please explain to me, in what way is she an international criminal?

Re:Stupid question, easy answer

[dargaud]

the message, watch out China, we will be arresting your children overseas (no matter how old still viewed as children), top notch messaging American sure to win life long enemies and Canada, oh so fucking stupid.

Contrast this with the top french CEO who was recently arrested in Japan for having skimmed a few millions here and there, and the reaction in France is closer to cheering...

Re:Stupid question, easy answer

[Actually, I do RTFA]

The charges against her (which she may be guilty of or not), is that she set up a fraudulent subsidiary of Huawei and defrauded US banks to do business with Iran several years ago when there were UN sanctions against doing business with Iran.

That violates US law, Chinese international agreements and UN resolutions. Further, there were other, related, crimes in other countries. Hence, the charges.

Re:Stupid question, easy answer

[Whibla]

Thanks for the informative reply - although, and this is not intended as a dig at you, the usage of 'fraudulent' and 'defrauded' within the charges strikes me as stretching the definition of fraud somewhat. I had been under the impression that the charges were based on actions taken after Trump had torn up Obama's nuclear deal with Iran, rather than any actions taken prior to that point.

It will be 'interesting' to see how this plays out, both in the US and on the international stage.

What else is new.

[Anonymous Coward]

Corporate representatives sent to China to resolve issues with Chinese partners have always been in danger of being kidnapped, often with the help of corrupt local police.

Fuck China.

Quote the Red Skull... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Quote the Red Skull from Capt. America 1 movie: "I have seen the future Captain - there ARE NO FLAGS!" & I agree w/ him & you...

APK

P.S.=> ... as I believe that's where your beliefs/sentiments lie along w/ RedSkull quoted above... apk

Re:Quote the Red Skull... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Shut-up retard. You add nothing of value to any discussion.

Re:Quote the Red Skull... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Aw did APK beat your ass again lil' unidentifiable anonymous troll who stalks apk all over slashdot because you're butthurt? Yes.

Much deflection

[Anonymous Coward]

It's pretty obvious that politicians should look to problems in their own country first. Any problem that China may have with it's consumer goods, the same problems exist in products sourced in other countries. It's well known the efforts western governments have gone to weaken security in consumer products. Does it make a difference? Better we look at our own problems, especially when a lot of noise is being made pointedly away from where it matters to consumers.

I saw a movie about that

[slashdice]

I think it had that gerbil guy it it. Richard Gere. He was an American business man in China but he was arrested for something (NOT sticking a gerbil up his ass).

But this is all hypothetical. What's happening in Japan to Carlos Ghosn is much worse.

Why did you bring any of that up?

[SuperKendall]

Show me China's free and open elections, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, unfettered access to the global Internet, respect for basic human rights, respect for civil rights, respect for due process, respect for a citizens desire to emigrate from China to another country, and so on, and so on, and so on. All rhetorical because China has none of those things.

He didn't say it HAD any of those things. He said it had capitalism (true), and imperial rule (which actually implies all of the things you just started).

I guess that's why you posted AC!

Re:Why did you bring any of that up?

[Anonymous Coward]

China has capitalism (sort of). If you really dig in to it, you see that though private ownership is allowed, it comes with some pretty big conditions. For starters, the government can take a stake of any company it sees fit to. If the government sees it fit, it can also completely seize a company. It's one of the big risks for western companies operating in China, the government may come in and claim ownership of that multi-billion dollar fab at the drop of the hat. Part of why US companies tend to not run stuff like that there. Also, when you look in to it, you see that all major companies usually have a stake held by the government and leaders of the major companies also tend to be members of the communist party.

So really, in China, private ownership is allowed so long as the government allows it. If you own a coffee shop, you're probably fine. Alibaba or Tencent, well..... The CEO of Alibaba is a member of the communist party, as is the founder of Tencent, we'll just say that.

Net Neutrality

[Anonymous Coward]

With the Republicans siding with corporations over citizens, does it really matter between governments or corporations?

Free and open would win, but we are not being given THAT choice.

NAZI PROPAGANDIST KEN DOLL THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES

[Anonymous Coward]

THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR LIES AND SUPPORT OF NAZIS FAGGOT KEN DOLL FOR YOUR ENTIRE FAMILY

Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

The US needs to learn it has jurisdictional bounds

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the sort of thing that leads to war and really pisses me off. Countries all over the world from Europe to the United States need to stop forcing there own jurisdictional boundaries beyond there boarder. The United States in particular should start respecting others jurisdictional boundaries.

It's sad and pathetic that other countries are so eager to appease the American authorities. It's even more pathetic that they are willingly surrendering citizens to be prosecuted under other countries laws when the people being extradited have never even stepped foot (more often than not) in the United States and are fully capable of prosecuting citizens within should they have actually committed a crime within the jurisdiction that they are acting from within.

This situation is particularly egregious given that a foreign entity and its executive thereof are not bound by American law and should not be persecuted under American laws for actions taken abroad that were not crimes in there own countries where they operated.

NYT writers are idiots

[Anonymous Coward]

There already are multiple American CEO's already under arrest in China. FML these idiots at NYT need to do some research, but then again they would rather create fake news.

Extraterritorial reach

[the_povinator]

It seems to me the bigger deal here is that the US is prosecuting her for violations of *US* sanctions agains Iran. Point is: the USA unilaterally applies sanctions to Iran and it expects third parties to comply. She violated US law, but (and I haven't read the details) I'm going to assume her crimes were all third-party stuff, i.e. deals between China and Iran, which international law doesn't give the US a right to have any say in. American law has all kinds of ways of asserting extraterritorial reach e.g.-- and I'm guessing here-- they may be claiming that Huawei did transactions in US dollars and therefore became subject to some kind of American law. If China or Russia were to take the same attitude, you can bet that American hackles would be raised.

The Chinese attitude, I expect, is, "Who died and made you the boss?"

Re:Extraterritorial reach

[_Sharp'r_]

I'm going to assume her crimes were all third-party stuff, i.e. deals between China and Iran, which international law doesn't give the US a right to have any say in. [...] and I'm guessing here-- they may be claiming that Huawei did transactions in US dollars and therefore became subject to some kind of American law.

Your guesses and assumption would be wrong. Skycom is a subsidiary of Huawei. Because of that, she's on the board of Skycom and was directly involved in the prohibited transactions reselling HP equipment to Iran.

Reuters reported in 2013 that Ms. Meng served on the board of Hong Kong-based Skycom Tech Co. Ltd. that later attempted to sell embargoed Hewlett Packard computer equipment to Iran’s largest mobile-phone operator.

At least 13 pages of the Skycom proposal were marked “Huawei confidential” and carried Huawei’s logo. Huawei has said neither it nor Skycom provided the HP equipment; HP said it prohibits the sale of its products to Iran.

From the various details which are available publicly, Huawei bought prohibited products from a U.S. company and then resold them to Iran as a way around the U.S. sanctions prohibiting a direct sale. Their CFO (the arrestee) used her control of a subsidiary (Skycom) to try and hide the transactions.

When prohibited technology equipment made by a U.S. company magically showed up in use in Iran, it probably didn't take a rocket scientist at the FBI to realize something was wrong and start tracking the equipment back through how it got there, which resulted in the arrest warrant for one of the people directly responsible for circumventing the sanctions.

tax fraud?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ghosn got ratted out for tax fraud. Even CEOs get locked up for tax fraud just about anywhere. Even, occasionally, in the USA.

Quote the Red Skull... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Quote the Red Skull from Capt. America 1 movie: "I have seen the future Captain - there ARE NO FLAGS!" & I agree w/ him & you...

APK

P.S.=> ... as I believe that's where your beliefs/sentiments lie along w/ RedSkull quoted above ... apk

Re:markets

[presidenteloco]

Except for the following market failures:
1) Inability to slow down and stop anthropogenic global warming (and ocean acidification) due to fossil fuel use
2) Inability to stop worldwide rapid ecosystem and biodiversity destruction (terrestrial, oceanic)
3) Inability to stop the rapid reduction of clean freshwater resources worldwide
4) Inability to use sustainable agricultural practices, leading to worldwide soil degradation.
5) Inability to prevent unsustainable increasing rates of consumption of non-renewable resources
6) Near future inability to distribute wealth to rapidly increasing unemployed percentage of population due to automation and AI

and I would be a little cautious about holding up US government as a shining example, being as how it is led by a cartoon character and serves the interests of large corporations over the interests of people.

#DeleteSlashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

The same spammer responsible for these posts is almost certainly responsible for harassing raymorris, too. Yesterday, that spammer posted at least two death threats, one directed at raymorris.

I am certain both threats were reported to Slashdot because I reported them myself. Nothing has happened. Not a thing. They haven't even been modded to -1, let alone deleted.

Slashdot continues to allow this harassment and is permitting violent threats to continue. This has been ongoing for weeks, and I've been reporting them for weeks. It's not clear that reporting posts does anything at all. The Slashdot administration doesn't seem to care, even about death threats posted in the comments.

If Slashdot won't do the right thing, it's time to #DeleteSlashdot. You can email feedback@slashdot.org and/or privacy@slashdot.org and request that your account be deleted. Be sure to tell them it's because of the spam, harassment, and violent threats that they continue to tolerate.

To whipslash and the other Slashdot admins: SHAME ON YOU. You know better than to tolerate this. I hope you face legal consequences for knowingly allowing death threats to be hosted on your website. You should be embarrassed. Hopefully when enough users leave, you'll fix your errors. It's unfortunate that it's come to this at all. If deleting Slashdot is the only way you'll notice, then that's what I'll encourage users to do.

#DeleteSlashdot

Re:#DeleteSlashdot

[jpaine619]

The GP is a moron who accuses everyone of being a Nazi. You, however, are an even larger moron and a threat to democracy. Instead of being happy when assholes expose themselves, you want to force them into the dark corners where they won't be discovered. You've decided that there are limits to speech. Who decides these limits? You? You're both idiots.

Begin Rope is hardly a valid physical threat. It's a vague general threat against an unspecified somebody. Nobody was actually targeted, not in the singular sense. The "threat" barely even qualifies against a group. Anyone of any common sense knows this asshole is just blowing hot air. He probably lives in a basement and jerks it to tranny porn, no doubt imagining himself as the bottom.

Grow a thicker skin.. Jesus Christ.... Your complaints and whining remind me of a 6 year old girl who isn't getting her way.

I know this may seem obvious

[HangingChad]

a big American tech executive being detained over unspecified charges while on a trip to Beijing.

Then don't travel to Beijing.

Re:debt - do remember

[presidenteloco]

that the country (or person) that dies with the most debt is the winner!

having debt means other people trust you.

#NAZI NEEDS SAFE SPACE FOR NAZIS

[Anonymous Coward]

Kendall.exe AUTOEXEC ECHO OFF ;//////*Begin transmission of AIDS.... COMPLETE. Welcome. You have AIDS. Accessing Kendall.... Password: AIDS. Ass-abcess granted. Kendall Complete.

A: Nazi faggot shit.
B: Lies about climate.
C: False dichotomies
D: Non facts
E: Gayass joke file - must use doppelganger accounts for mod

Selection: > Lie in defense of a Traitor

Error : NAZI FAGGOTS NOT ALLOWED IN THIS WORLD

BEGIN ROPE

Reminds me of the Japan worries a few years back

[Anonymous Coward]

They were going to take over cars, electronics, computers. Big long range plans. Didn't turn out so well for them. Of course this time is always so so different I hear.

Bad precedent

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with Canadian authorities detaining someone on behalf of the US without any proof shown is that it sets a precedent for say, France detaining you on behalf of Saudi Arabia because you said something online that doesn't adhere to Sharia Law and the Koran.

Un. Fucking. Believable.

[jenningsthecat]

I'm a Canadian, and I'm sick and tired of my government rolling over and being America's bitch. First the recent 'NAFTA' re-negotiations, and now this. Sure, Huawei probably bakes report-to-Chinese-goverment functionality into everything they make. And sure, America, and everyone else, has a right to be pissed off. But this arrest comes dangerously close to being an act of war - the US should never have done it, and my government sure as fuck should never have let it happen on Canadian soil. It's necessary to take China's plans for world domination seriously, and to make plans to counter them. But being irresponsible butthurt fucktards isn't the way to go about it.

Re:Un. Fucking. Believable.

[Anonymous Coward]

She broke a law that she signed an argreement to follow.

Were you so passionate last may when US citizens were arrested in China for a crime one of their relatives might have done? They sit in a Chinese prison without charge to this day.

With the US, break the law and go to jail. With China, know someone who broke the law and go to jail. Take your pick and stop being such a "butthurt fucktard."

Re:Un. Fucking. Believable.

[Anonymous Coward]

Allegedly.

Re:Un. Fucking. Believable.

[Vanyle]

Why didn't Canada refuse the request?

Re:Un. Fucking. Believable.

[Anonymous Coward]

my government sure as fuck should never have let it happen on Canadian soil

"Your government" has no business interfering with the Court of Law. What are you, a sino-canadian?

Re:Un. Fucking. Believable.

[DNS-and-BIND]

You realize how incredibly good Canada has it, bring America's hat? How many countries would trade places with you in an instant? In exchange for the tremendous benefits Canada receives, once in a while Uncle Sam needs a favor. You can't even do that? Jesus that is a European level of entitlement and ingratitude.

Re:Un. Fucking. Believable.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a Canadian, and I'm sick and tired of my government rolling over and being America's bitch. First the recent 'NAFTA' re-negotiations, and now this. Sure, Huawei probably bakes report-to-Chinese-goverment functionality into everything they make. And sure, America, and everyone else, has a right to be pissed off. But this arrest comes dangerously close to being an act of war - the US should never have done it, and my government sure as fuck should never have let it happen on Canadian soil. It's necessary to take China's plans for world domination seriously, and to make plans to counter them. But being irresponsible butthurt fucktards isn't the way to go about it.

Sadly ALOT of european countries are ALSO America's bitches (Scandinavia, UK etc...).... And yes, I do not like it either...

Re:Un. Fucking. Believable.

[thegarbz]

Yeah but your government has abs so it gets a tick in my book.

Re:Un. Fucking. Believable.

[Anonymous Coward]

Canada has become that aggressive girlfriend and talks shit and gets you into fights knowing that she herself will suffer little consequence. You can pick all the fights you want but don't expect the US to fight your battles.

Re:Un. Fucking. Believable.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like you want a global government with no dissent allowed-as long as the USA's on top. Entitlement indeed.

Re:Un. Fucking. Believable.

[Anonymous Coward]

... this arrest comes dangerously close to being an act of war - the US should never have done it, and my government sure as fuck should never have let it happen on Canadian soil.

You seem to be unclear. US government did not do this on Canadian soil. Canadian government did this on their own soil.

#DeleteSlashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

The rope comment is a reference to hanging people, which is a threat you've made elsewhere. You've just implied yet another death threat. Shame on Slashdot for allowing you to continue this.

You're not opposing Nazism. Your objections to SuperKendall are either incredibly vague or have nothing to do with Nazism. You are doing nothing to actually oppose Nazism. You are, however, breaking the law by posting violent threats. You are also actively disrupting Slashdot discussions with your spam.

Shame on you. You belong in prison for your harassment and violent threats. Shame on Slashdot for allowing this.

I will continue to encourage Slashdot users to #DeleteSlashdot and will continue to report your posts until Slashdot puts an end to your bad behavior.

I am also going to encourage users to notify Slashdot's advertisers when their products ads appear on the same pages with your threats. I can't imagine advertisers want their products promoted alongside harassment and violent threats. Perhaps when advertisers start leaving Slashdot, the admins might be more motivated to curtail your awful behavior.

Shame on you. Shame on Slashdot.

#DeleteSlashdot

Re:NAZI PROPAGANDIST KEN DOLL THERE ARE CONSEQUENC

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, we will have to fight them now or later. That is inevitable. We're too stubborn.

Allow me to get this straight

[Anonymous Coward]

For now, Canada arrested someone, but China didn't.

Re:markets

[Anonymous Coward]

A Free Market does not have "failures". There is by definition no such thing. There are market outcomes which result from continual competition, innovation, disruption and entrepreneurship.
When the market value of these topics becomes apparent, private companies will move to provide solutions which people are prepared to pay for. That's show markets work and that's what our democracy is based on. The interests of corporations are the life blood of the interests of the people.

Re:debt - do remember

[Anonymous Coward]

China should get rid of that debt quickly, like Russia did. It's likely US will choose to default on those bonds first, if total debt becomes unserviceable.

Calling American Internet services...

[Anonymous Coward]

The greatest production of wealth is also one of the biggest intellectual scams since Intellectual Property became a thing. There was no wealth created by the introduction of the internet, although there was a lot of wealth REDIRECTED because of the internet, namely through a combination of lack of regulations/enforcement in the early days, inflation and stock manipulation thanks to large investors manipulating the markets upon tech sector's on-paper success to value all tech companies using traditional industry valuation calculations which caused them to appear much more profitable, on paper, than they actually were before the lack of real income potential caused the majority of them to collapse, leaving mostly common folk holding the bag.

Today the aftermath of that has been felt: Physical businesses were bought up or collapsed by underregulated online businesses who often avoided paying taxes as a result of their out of state status, allowing them to undercut prices and avoid fair market labor wages in many regions, enhancing their profitability in ways that allowed them to gobble up or collapse sales of the competition. The final nails in the outsourcing coffin saw the majority of all kinds of white collar tech production skip right past Japan and head straight into the heart of China, leading even American citizens to set up shop *IN* China because shipping the whole or majority of the product over was cheaper and safer than having the parts shipped over and taxed in the US or elsewhere. Given the imbalance in ownership laws between China and most US/Euro countries, the 51 percent ownership and property ownership laws gave the disadvantage of Chinese being able to buy up swaths of foreign property while China was able to retain full ownership of its own domestic assets in ways more egotistical nations did not understand the dangers of, with the large quantities of capital and manpower of china allowing them to rapidly gain economic footholds all over the world. Combine all this with 'progressive' western countries following in chinas footsteps with behavior quelling free speech and data security on the internet and what do we have left but a bunch of half rate authoritarians losing to the authoritarians with the 7000+ year history of conquest, political and social manipulation, and deceit against their adjoining nations until economic and eventually political hegemony and annexation results?

Now, in the end, it is all coming home to roost. The internet as envisioned by the hackers, nerds, developers, anti-establishmentarians, and academics is going to die. Not all at once, but as a result of both us not banding together, and giving up control of it to the common folk, thanks in large part to the greed and hubris that brought venture capitalists, then MBAs, and finally thanks in large part to the 'tech bros', the government.

Short of a political revolution or exodus the internet will not be coming back. The Chinese hegemony WILL gain power, followed closely by the Indians. And after that, who knows. Maybe the ~1 billion euros will find themselves serving their Asian masters as what is left of their fiscal independence is slowly leeched away into the countries that put rampant capitalism above all. They didn't develop it, they just too it to its logical conclusion.

As to Tor and other services like I2P: They have been technically compromised for quite some time, but lack the 'out of foundation' money and scrutiny for anyone to prove that fact and have a voice over and above their official mouthpieces, both of which are too busy sucking up funding into their administrative staff to actually produce secure software, even if they wanted to, which I question if they do.

As a short term solution, we need a p2p 'numbers station' random number generator to be established for countries like Australia, where un-compromised encryption is becoming illegal, with the eventual goal of applications who can push real packets into the datastream not altogether dissimilar from what OBFS tries to do, but

Exactly

[WindBourne]

I thought it was strange that we grabbed this woman and pointed out that we had NO rights to do so. Yet, trump's ppl are doing it.

While Trump is right to go after China for their economic war on us, either directly or indirectly grabbing a CFO (who has NO say on who the company sells to), makes zero sense.

Re:Exactly

[_Sharp'r_]

grabbing a CFO (who has NO say on who the company sells to)

You mean the CFO who was directly involved in the sale and runs the subsidiary company used to try and minimally hide the sale? That CFO? Yeah, no idea why anyone would think she was involved in her own actions...

Re:Exactly

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean the CFO who was directly involved in the sale and runs the subsidiary company used to try and minimally hide the sale?

Even if true, all these action happened OUTSIDE of America. Since when did the US have the right to arrest non-US citizens who violated US crime outside of US? The most US could have done is sanction the company and any US company who traded with them.

How would YOU like it if China start arresting families of US executives because their companies were involved in selling arms to Taiwan? Or violated some obscure Chinese law?

Re:Exactly

[_Sharp'r_]

You obviously aren't very familiar with international law which China has agreed to (mostly) follow.

The violation of U.S. law happened in the U.S. when the purchase was made from HP with the intention of violating the terms of the purchase and the law by reselling the equipment to Iran.

Here's an obvious case to illustrate how this works:
If someone sitting in China programs a computer in the U.S. controlling a plan to crash it and kill 200 people on board, they're still going to be charged with murder in the U.S. and the U.S. is going to issue an international warrant asking other countries to extradite them, even though they were physically in China at the time they killed all those people.

Just because someone is living in another country doesn't mean they can't violate U.S. law by doing things like buying something illegally in the U.S. from a U.S. company (as in this case).

As for your example, yes, if a U.S. executive bought arms in China, agreeing with the Chinese company and the Chinese government that those arms wouldn't be exported to Taiwan, then turned around and deceived them by using a subsidiary company they control to sell those arms to Taiwan, then they should indeed be responsible to Chinese law and the U.S. itself (because we tend to respect International law and the letter of treaties more than China does) is likely to extradite them to China for breaking that Chinese law.

Hopefully you can see the key distinction there between that and selling arms they made (or weren't purchased in China and are legal to sell) to Taiwan.

Re:Exactly

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly where's the proof that it was a subsidiary company? You need to pierce the corporate veil, which has yet to happen.

Re:Exactly

[_Sharp'r_]

The CFO in question was on the board of Skycom. That's publicly available information. "At least 13 pages of the Skycom proposal were marked “Huawei confidential” and carried Huawei’s logo." according to the Canadian Globe and Mail. This isn't difficult detective work.

How about:

Another director of Skycom, Ms Hu Mei, appeared to have a Huawei e-mail address and was listed in that company's employee directory, Reuters reported.

Former employees of Skycom have stated that it was not distinct from Huawei, and that Skycom employees had Huawei e-mail addresses and badges, according to a Canadian court filing.
[...]
Documents obtained through an investigation by the US authorities show that multiple Skycom bank accounts were controlled by Huawei employees, the filing said.

Just because you haven't paid attention to what's going on doesn't mean that there is no information out there about it.

Re:Exactly

[Anonymous Coward]

Simply being on the same board or that some Skycom proposals had Huawei logo on them is some evidence, but would not be enough to pierce the corporate veil. What exactly were the proposals and where did they come from, in what way were the logos being used, etc.? Depending on the jurisdiction, you often need much more information than that to pierce a corporate veil. You would need to show e.g. that Skycom didn't have a separate bank account, and that there was a commingling of funds with Huawei. Basically what you need to show that Skycom and Huawei were the same entity, and there was absolutely no difference between the two.

Re:Exactly

[Uberbah]

The violation of U.S. law happened in the U.S. when the purchase was made from HP with the intention of violating the terms of the purchase and the law by reselling the equipment to Iran.

Yeah, because international shipping isn't a thing, and because the CFO was personally carrying the components back after purchasing them in the United States. /inserteyerollemoji here

Re:Exactly

[DNS-and-BIND]

Trump had nothing to do with it. The official was grabbed during his audience with Xi, as a deliberate fuck you and an attempt to sabotage Trump's deal. Whole swathes of the US government despise him, won't take orders from him, run their departments without any input from the elected government, and work behind the scenes to sabotage anything he does.

Re:Exactly

[_Sharp'r_]

Yeah, because in today's day and age, you can't purchase something without being physically present?

It doesn't matter where the CFO was, it matters where the purchase was made, from whom, under what laws. The officers of a corporation are responsible for their actions and their orders. I suppose you'd rather throw in jail the poor sap who physically loaded stuff up instead? That's not who is being paid to be responsible for following all applicable laws.

Re:Exactly

[_Sharp'r_]

Yeah, it's almost like we should have a court case in front of a judge and have the prosecutor present evidence of the crime and then see if there is enough for her to be extradited.

Oh wait, that's exactly what is happening! You say:

You would need to show e.g. that Skycom didn't have a separate bank account, and that there was a commingling of funds with Huawei.

in response to a description of the court filing:

Documents obtained through an investigation by the US authorities show that multiple Skycom bank accounts were controlled by Huawei employees, the filing said.

Documents like that are exactly what you'd use to show that Huawei was in control of Skycom's funds, aren't they?

Re:Exactly

[Uberbah]

Yeah, because in today's day and age, you can't purchase something without being physically present?

Congratulations on getting the point, Sherlock.

It doesn't matter where the CFO was, it matters where the purchase was made, from whom, under what laws.

Of course it does. Action didn't occur in the United States, it's not subject to US laws. Just think of the Pandora's Box you are opening here: throughout the course of this day, you've no doubt violated some laws in China, Saudi Arabia, Bumbfuckistan, wherever. Without being present on those country's soil to do so. You really thing your should be subject to arbitrary arrest and extradition for violating those laws?

Re:Exactly

[_Sharp'r_]

Action didn't occur in the United States, it's not subject to US laws.

You have no idea what you're talking about. The illegal action (exporting prohibited technology to Iran from HP) occurred in the United States and it's subject to US laws. If you have an actual legal argument otherwise, then I suggest you bring it to the attention of her defense attorneys, I'm sure they'll thank you profusely and the judge will be very impressed with you.

And I bet that if someone in China convinces your bank to wire funds out of your account and into theirs, you'll be calling for their arrest, despite the fact that they weren't present on U.S. soil when they did it. Or are you just going to say, "Ooops, they don't have to follow U.S. law, since they're physically not in the U.S. They get to keep all my money!"

Re:Exactly

[Anonymous Coward]

Well laid out points. But correct me -China *hasn't* agreed to US sanctions on Iran - just about the only country who has is the US. Others (like the EU) are now following those sanctions - under compulsion. In this area, the US has demonstrated that it is the US Empire, controlling a vast amount of the world by force - not by agreement. Most US people seem to be blithely unaware that the US is here exercising its imperial power more nakedly than ever before - because surely they are always the "good guys" and only altruistically acting as world policeman (right). In general, this is true, and the egocentricity of Americans in this and other political areas is staggering. Now in particular, right here, it may be that China has agreed to some US sanctions as you suggest - but where? China is surely still doing business with Iran. In that case, the seizure of this Chinese executive is extraordinarily high handed.

Re:Exactly

[Anonymous Coward]

PS The question seems to be whether Huawei and China genuinely agreed to US sanctions on Iran several years ago. If they did, then the US has a case, except that prosecuting it at the same time as Trump and XI have come to a supposedly cordial agreement, is mafioso style behaviour, hardly calculated to engender trust in any nation.

Re:Exactly

[thegarbz]

Trump had nothing to do with it. The official was grabbed during his audience with Xi

Error . Error . Does not compute.

Re:Exactly

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you being intentionally obtuse or are you actually this stupid? So are you saying if I set up some artillery on the Canadian border and start shelling them from the US, I'm not committing any sort of crime in Canada? Crimes are committed in other countries all the time, the only question is if the country chooses to prosecute it.

Re:Exactly

[Anonymous Coward]

No proof has been provided. All you have is just a bunch of documents that suggest such and such, and who knows if they have been doctored. . Also being controlled by Huawei employees doesn't necessarily mean commingling of funds. You can have two separate companies, run by the same person, controlled by the same person, yet those companies would be considered two separate legal entities.

There was no proof as of yet provided. You say that she was directly involved in sales, etc., but all we have are allegations. No one has verified any of the allegations as true.

Re:Exactly

[Uberbah]

Are you being intentionally obtuse or are you actually this stupid? So are you saying if I set up some artillery on the Canadian border and start shelling them from the US,

lulz. You yelling at the nearest mirror there sparky? Because it took a powerful level of dumbfuckery to equate a military attack with allegedly violating a trade agreement, which would be a civil matter.

Re:Exactly

[_Sharp'r_]

all we have are allegations. No one has verified any of the allegations as true.

That's why they're planning to have a trial, right? The first part of having the trial is where the defendant is required to show up and put on her defense. There's plenty of evidence just mentioned in the news media to justify the arrest. Once a judge rules on the evidence submitted for the extradition, that will tell us if there was enough evidence for that and once a judge or jury gives there verdict after an actual trial, then we'll know if there was enough evidence for a conviction.

Suggesting the news media needs to be given all evidence in a case to let you decide if you think an arrest should happen or not just isn't how things work. We try people for crimes in court, not in the court of public opinion. If you really care, then go over to the court and ask for a copy of the evidence filed in the extradition case.

Re:markets

[Anonymous Coward]

Fortunately, no one died and made you the dictator of the world.

Just because your preferences for using government to make people poor are what you think should happen isn't a "market failure". The preferences of the actual participants in the market are actually what happens. That's market success.

Really, "inability to distribute wealth"? "Rapidly increasing unemployed percentage"? Do you look outside occasionally or consider how stupid you sound compared to reality?

Citing non-existent scares to try and tell people how to live their lives may make you feel better about yourself, but most people got wise to the tactic a long time ago. Are you a convenient dupe of a true believer, or just another cynical power grabber who doesn't actually act in his own life like what he says is true?

Well, you're using supposedly "precious non-renewable resources" to post on /., so I guess we know the answer there...

Re:The US needs to learn it has jurisdictional bou

[Anonymous Coward]

Actions taken abroad? You mean, purchasing prohibited equipment in the U.S. from a U.S. company and then using a subsidiary they control to (barely, because they didn't even bother to take their name off the sales proposals) hide that they are bypassing sanctions to sell that equipment to Iran?

If the law prohibits X selling to Y, then someone buying from X (with clear terms agreeing not to sell it to Y) to sell to Y doesn't magically make it legal. The lawmakers are generally pretty stupid, but their staff (or the regulators with nothing better to do than create more bureaucracy) at least is usually competent enough to account for the most obvious ways to circumvent the rules.

lolwut?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can China control the next internet age when they cut themselves off from the internet?

We will deserve it...

[Berkyjay]

...if we continue to sell our souls in the name of profit. Time and time again, we ignore the Chinese governments abuses and atrocities just so we can get access to their vast population. It's a literal deal with the devil.

Re:We will deserve it...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a literal deal with the devil.

Only if you think China is the devil.

Re:We will deserve it...

[Anonymous Coward]

the US is the devil in this deal correct?

They don't dare to retaliate

[Anonymous Coward]

Guess what will happen next if China detains one of the US tech execs? It'll hasten the move of capital investment elsewhere (that's already happening). Next step: China implodes.

So long as Trump is in charge we have a chance.

[Anonymous Coward]

If we let democrat party impeach the best, strongest president in our history than the Chinese will destroy us.

Hypocrisy

[Anonymous Coward]

For the US to arrest a company executive for corporate crimes is pure hypocrisy. We don't do that to US company executive - How many Wells Fargo et al executives have gone to jail? The company just get a slap on the wrist fine, just a cost of doing business - much less than thee illegal activities netted.

Sorry... but I disagree

[King_TJ]

If you've read the history of Huawei in America, it's been clear for some time that they only wanted a foot-hold in the USA in order to spy and infiltrate things.

Some years back, they appointed an American citizen as the president of their U.S. operations, and picked a guy who lived out in the midwest. He didn't look anything like the type you'd expect was in charge of a telecom business at all, and I'm pretty certain he was just selected because he was happy to get paid big money to go along with whatever he was told.

As long as the company kept cranking out super low-cost "pay as you go" Android smartphones, I guess most people didn't care? But I'll bet everything they make has back doors in it for spying on something or other.

Re:Sorry... but I disagree

[Anonymous Coward]

But I'll bet everything they make has back doors in it for spying on something or other.

So exactly the same as America then?

China arrests blo-jobbing USA Quislings

[Anonymous Coward]

Please chi.com slants ... arrest some traitorous blojobbing USA biz-sluts. Lock them away forever ... never let those IP & job-thieving bastards return to America ... oh the pain ...

Technically illiterate politicians are to blame

[Targon]

The USA has a huge problem, and that is that there are areas in this country where people are against the idea of higher education, and they prize stupidity and ignorance. Look at entertainment, and you see reality shows all over the place that actually elevate people who don't have much education and they embrace ignorance and stupidity. The bottom of the barrel are given a lot of money, and in turn, we see those people continually. The Kardashians are idiots who have money, look at the cast of Jersey Shore....and they won't go away!

You have anti-education politicians and those who are technically clueless in charge, which is how you had problems with Hillary Clinton and a private e-mail server, with no improvement out of the Trump administration. Yes, Trump tweets nonstop nonsense, but his actual understanding of anything relating to technology is actually below zero, he throws out things that are WRONG. How do you get technology to thrive when you have people with zero understanding of technology placed in charge of education? How do you get improvements when the politicians put more money into the military than on anything else?

Re:markets

[thegarbz]

No the GP was right for everything except (as usual) the use of the term "free market". The "perfect market" is what he GP is referring to. The internet *was* a perfect market early in it's life.

People often confuse the terms and freak out at the idea of regulation. The reality is for their "perfect market" to exist regulation is a must as the "perfect market" is a "free market" at it's most unstable point. A free market on the other hand will tend towards monopoly and consolidation of power, and the natural endgame of the free market doesn't solve any problems in a way that benefits society.

Short answer: No

[prefec2]

No. Like most western countries, the US has decided to dump engineering and science and logical thinking. We prepare to become more stupefied than ever. And we all do that willingly or because we are manipulated in that direction. Mostly because we are lazy.

Sorry, for being negative today, but just had some "great news" from the political domain as input and read university correspondence.

Possible causes

[prefec2]

Technical illiterate, scared, and indoctrinated people elect politicians who are themselves technical illiterate. They do so for three reasons: (a) they understand what theses politicians are saying. Of course it is bullshit, but it conforms with the people's opinion. (b) these politicians get more funding by lobbyists and interest groups. (c) adverts and political indoctrination via "news outlets" specifically, local news, Fox News, favorite Youtube rubbish. Furthermore, the "other side" in media follows the old style of "we only report" and "let's hear both sides argument" practice.

The people are illiterate, because the education system is broken. This is not only the case in the USA, but also in many other western countries.

The US has not controlled the Internet

[jd]

In the early days, it had no significant international capacity. International links were supplied by International Packet Switch Stream.

Yes, the US forged TCP/IP, but authentication and security were taken from CCITT standards.

Yes, the US held the root DNS, the IANA and ICANN, but that's by convention. In the 90s, I always cloned the DNS servers of sites I connected to, because DNS was so unreliable and slow. I used my own independent DNS tree first, theirs as backup.

Control is tenuous, power is a phantom, in a cooperative market/federation like the Internet. If China, or the UN, wanted to take the Internet from the US, all they'd need is something better and sufficient mindshare.

There are no owners, outside the physical, and no loyalty to any self-proclaimed elite.

Let me think

[GrumpySteen]

Would these would be the same US executives who have given us some the worst broadband access in any first world country while charging us more than virtually every other country?

Would they be the same executives who have actively opposed any regulations that would help the consumer and then forced consumers into one-sided arbitration agreements to take away their ability to even sue the companies?

Would they be the same executives who load up hidden fees on contracts, making any advertised price you see a complete joke?

Would they be the same executives who forced data caps down the customers' throats?

Would they be the same executives who have been using data caps and speed throttling to make using competing streaming services while allowing their own streaming services to be unhindered?

I could go on, but I think I've made up my mind. Fuck those executives. Every goddamn one of them can rot and die in a Chinese prison. The rest of us will be better off without them.

My imagination presumes he's guilty

[Anonymous Coward]

Imagine, if you will (and you should), a big American tech executive being detained over unspecified charges while on a trip to Beijing.

Gotta admit, my very first impression upon hearing something like that, is that it sounds shady from an American perspective. WTF was a tech executive doing in Beijing? Sure, might be totally above-board. It might be. Presumed guilty, though. My first guess would be that the executive was there for the purpose of committing a crime, and then was arrested because he decided to refuse to do it.

Re:markets

[liquid_schwartz]

...and I would be a little cautious about holding up US government as a shining example, being as how it is led by a cartoon character and serves the interests of large corporations over the interests of people.

You probably didn't notice but at least the past 6, and probably more, administrations have served the interests of large corporations over the interests of people. If you think that voting for one of the two big parties is the solution you haven't been paying attention. If you regard the middle class as a barometer it's been falling since the 70's, during both D and R administrations.

Re:The US needs to learn it has jurisdictional bou

[Actually, I do RTFA]

This situation is particularly egregious given that a foreign entity and its executive thereof are not bound by American law

Except that the actions she was arrested for took place in NYC, NY, USA. So, you know, that tends to fall under US jurisdiction.

It was a New York City crime

[Actually, I do RTFA]

She's being arrested for things she (allegedly) did in NYC, and the US requested an extradition for that. Are the charges made up? Probably not. But the Canadian government is giving her a chance to demonstrate it's BS before they extradite her. That's pretty much how extradition works.

Re:Reminds me of the Japan worries a few years bac

[cheesybagel]

They did take over cars. Ever heard of Toyota and Honda?

They failed with the electronics segment because the South Koreans undercut them to it. Still most of the segment moved out of the USA. Guess who is the world's largest electronics company in the world today? Samsung. There are parts of the sector still remaining in the USA, yes, but that slice of the pie keeps shrinking and shrinking in terms of number of devices.

Reply from a Chinese

[Anonymous Coward]

Westerns don't realize this, but Chinese and Korea societies are deeply Confucian, and the Confucian system is all about meritocracy; with the understanding that different types of merit exist. So they have traditional ways to make different types of governments based on the same underlying philosophy.

China is an Authoritarian Confucian Bureaucratic state. Not communist, not capitalist.

You can't understand China with a view that only goes back to the Age of Empire, their system is a lot deeper than you think.

None of the different ideas about how to implement Confucian meritocracy involve being anti-business. None of them. They all assume that merit leads to prosperity; money, nice things, power, personal freedom, happiness, etc. But they have very different theories about which types of government lead to merit for a nation; eg, what leads to prosperity. They're always going to be pro-business, and they're always going to view unity as essential; once you figure out which system you're using, everybody needs to use that system.

None of their systems contain the western idea that open competition has more merit in government than purposeful unity. But that doesn't imply that they're against trade competition, or against individual economic freedom. They like individual economic freedom. They just consider political "freedom" to be anti-social and without merit; the thrashing of people without enough merit to participate in the decisions.

But that doesn't mean you should have that economic freedom as some sort of "right." You're expected to have enough merit to achieve it.

As a Chinese reading this, I have to say, Very Well Done, Sir, for you do have a deep understanding of "Tao".

It's the "Tao", instead of 'Confucianism', which predated all Chinese dynasties, as "Tao" had already deeply ingrained itself within the proto-Chinese mindshare, way before the emergence of the Xia Dynasty ( c. 2070 BC -- c. 1600 BC ) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Again Sir, WELL DONE !!

Re:markets

[max99ted]

The interests of corporations are the life blood of the interests of the people

ahahahahahahha

Thanks for the laugh