Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
Since 2015, China has reportedly outspent the US by $24 billion in 5G
infrastructure. In the same period, according to media reports, the US
built fewer than 30,000 new cell sites, while the corresponding number
in China was more than 10 times higher.
But, that is probably the biggest reason Apple needs to roll out a 5G phone as quickly as possible -- simply to stay competitive. We can't look at Keokuk, Iowa or Hillbilly, WV and use that as the basis for whether we need 5G phones of not.
I always have to laugh at you throwing out such numbers from China, and especially, as if China is all that far along in 5G operation;
That link suggests that China wouldn't have any Commerciall 5G until October of this year, which was behind the U.S., among others. Apple shipping iPhones in volume next September with mmwave 5G capabilities will still be far ahead of most of the 5G infrastructure yet to occur by any country or telecom.
And here's another couple of links to Chinese spying and influence;
The security problem for Huawei in the West is that China and the CCP controls Huawei, so why would any country allow Huawei into critical telecom infrastructure?
Of course, China is threatening Germany with trade reprisals.
No, sorry, but 5G is already up and running in China and expanding rapidly.
And, no, despite a plethora of right wing conspiracy theories, Huawei is not controlled by the Chinese government or the CCP.
And, while there are always some paranoid right wing conspiracy theorists having hissy fits, even the Trump administration has backed off their claims that there is any evidence Huawei has ever spied on anybody. That nonsense is just propaganda to support Trump's failing Trade War.
It's quite humorous that you never post any links to support your POV or arguments wrt China, yet are happy to post, twice, "right wing conspiracy theory" as if I didn't actually post factual links.
Posting links? You and Trump can make it up faster than I can disprove it. It would be an exercise in futility. I'll just stick to reality.
One person posts supporting evidence. The other just makes claims without any support. Why should anyone believe you?
We have seen from far left & far right politics how listing "facts" is a great way to tell a lie because, when one starts with the conclusion and then backs into whatever facts support that conclusion the result is still bull no matter how many "Facts" they roll out.
As I said, I'll stick to reality. You can believe it or not. That's up to you.
So your argument is that giving a conclusion based on facts is the same as making your conclusion first and cherry picking facts to support it, but since you don’t use any facts at all, you must be right!
I have to admit, it’s a great way to debate. Not being burdened by annoying facts opens up so many possibilities!
Did you read what I said?
Yes, did you? after I pointed out that you are not supporting your position you posted how people use 'facts' to tell a lie and their conclusion is bull, then proceeded to say you're sticking to reality but don't give any facts at all.
I don't deny that people may ignore facts that don't support their position, but to use that as an augment for not needing to support your position is, in your words, bull. Your logic needs some work.
LOL... You might try a reading comprehension course then.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
Your link wasn't very convincing, but at least you posted a link, which George mostly does not.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
You don't seem to comprehend that the U.S. has no telecom industry, just carriers, and so by definition it isn't protectionism, it's National Security.
As for the U.S. encouraging countries to ban Huawei for National Security reasons, that seems even better advice today than it was even this summer. China isn't even pretending that it isn't an authoritarian state, and it is in the West's best interests to support telecom companies that are not in fact resident in authoritarian countries, as Huawei is.
In the meantime, as I stated and linked, Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung are making huge investments in 5G, now that major Western countries have or will ban Huawei for their 5G core systems. All of the Five Eyes countries currently have Huawei 5G bans in place, but only the U.S. and Australia have permanent bans.
Huawei has nothing to do with security. It's just a pawn in Trump's trade war. Similarly the trade war has nothing to do with trade -- it's all about opening up China to the Wall Street Banksters. It's just how the Conman operates.
That's an opinion, but considering that Australia is the country that first notified the world of the security ramifications, it doesn't hold up to fact. There will be no Huawei telecom in the U.S., trade agreement or no, and that is because it has already been decided and legislated by Congress.
I'll be darned! I thought it was Trump pushing that conspiracy theory!
But you are right that the Huawei conspiracy theory may not die with the Trade War -- Trump needs a fake enemy to distract from the real one working to keep him in the White House and out of the Big House: the Russian Oligarch's.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
You have a legitimate point about depending on other nations controlling our economy and infrastructure.
But, we fought that battle -- and lost it -- 3 or 4 decades ago when Japan decimated our electronics, steel and auto industries (our basic industry). Now, we are dependent on other countries for all but finance and currency -- but Trump is leveraging and endangering even those things while he tilts at windmills.
And you are, I think, also right that Trump could care less about human rights / Hong Kong. But less correct about the assumption that China is an existential threat to the U.S. Their only threat is that they make things better, cheaper and faster than we do. They beat us at our own game. But that does not mean that they have any intent to depose us. Quite the opposite really: They need us as much as we need them. For the past 20 years it has been a symbiotic relationship -- until Trump decided to use them as "the enemy" in his political battles.
Yes, there have been disputes and complaints -- they are just part of the process. Every relationship has them. But, intelligent leaders seek to correct those problems rather than just blowing everything up.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
Just an example of the long term ramifications to Trump's go-it-alone America First policy. He can sell that nonsense to his FauxNews brainwashed cult -- but not to the real world. The result is most likely a migration of technology and jobs not into the U.S. but away from the U.S.
U.S.-based chip-tech group moving to Switzerland over trade curb fears
“There is a message for the government. The message is, if you clamp
down on things too tightly this is what is going to happen. In a global
supply chain world, companies have choices, and one choice is to go
overseas,”
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
"Huawei is not China". Keep believing that.
Corporate ownership would be easy to prove anywhere but in China, where there is little to no transparency about business.
Yeah, I posted on that some time ago, but from an American Fulbright Professor teaching in Viet Nam who came to the same conclusion that Huawei was almost entirely state owned and controlled. You ignored it. His name is Christopher Balding, and he is looking forward to the notoriety of being sued by Huawei.
Suing might be a bad idea for Huawei. Huawei will have to be able to prove that the "expert" is wrong. Good luck on that.
Funny how they waited 11 months to start the suit.
Meanwhile, backlash to China's authoritarianism grows...
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
All true -- but the one sentence: I doubt that Trump & thugs will ever reveal their hand. They will simply continue spouting false hoods, trash talk and conspiracy theories regardless of being exposed as con artists an liars. We have seen that over and over, their strategy is from Cohn: "When caught: Never apologize, just double down on the attacks".
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies PAWNS in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies PAWNS in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
...
Fixed that for you!
You obviously don't give a shit about the War in the Pacific that was fought by those same allies, especially the Australians and New Zealanders, with us, in a long grueling and costly battle.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies PAWNS in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
...
Fixed that for you!
You obviously don't give a shit about the War in the Pacific that was fought by those same allies, especially the Australians and New Zealanders, with us, in a long grueling and costly battle.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies PAWNS in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
...
Fixed that for you!
You obviously don't give a shit about the War in the Pacific that was fought by those same allies, especially the Australians and New Zealanders, with us, in a long grueling and costly battle.
Huh?
So those "allies" of ours are "pawns", even as a Chinese Agent has applied for asylum, giving a huge payload of counterintelligence to Australia:
It was the Australians that blew the whistle on Huawei, not the U.S., but since the U.S., Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are all partners in Five Eyes, the intelligence gathering organization formed in 1941, then that information is shared.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
Uh, no.
I'm self employed. I had some stuff to do.
Yeah, Germany's Economy Minister is concerned of the backlash that will occur with the "banning" of Huawei, and as Germany has significant trade with China, that's a problem. On the other hand, Merkel's Christian Democrat Party, along with Germany's Military, and Intelligence operators, are all for the banning of Huawei. Given that the German Parliament is voting on this, it looks very bad for Merkel and Huawei.
Even for that, there enough that's come out about the brutality of the Chinese Authorities in the Xinjiang providence, and as well how Mainland China handled the protests in Hong Kong, and its elections yesterday, and of all things, organ harvesting, that the growing backlash is leading to some countries in the West as a minimum boycotting the next Winter Olympics. China's Authoritarianism, as well as its United Front operations in other countries, are absolutely fueling the West's disengaging with China, and at best, there will be a minor Trade Deal with the U.S.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
Now I could link to all of that, but you two are so imbedded in your views that it would be a waste of time.
"While the issue of Mr Wang is still to play out, the separate and more compelling revelations that China tried to plant a Liberal MP in federal parliament are more sobering. Especially given that he turned up dead after telling Australian authorities of the approach."
Comments
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
U.S.-based chip-tech group moving to Switzerland over trade curb fears
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
For a slice of geopolitics, read this:
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/cybersecurity-and-geopolitics-why-southeast-asia-is-wary-of-a-huawei-ban/
As for Australia and the Huawei ban, here is another take you obviously missed!
https://www.itwire.com/open-sauce/real-reason-for-australia-s-huawei-ban-is-now-out-in-the-open.html
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
https://www.theage.com.au/national/defecting-chinese-spy-offers-information-trove-to-australian-government-20191122-p53d1l.html
Gee, if China wasn't so set on expanding its Authoritarianism into the rest of the world...
https://www.smh.com.au/national/peter-hartcher-on-china-s-infiltration-of-australia-20191118-p53bly.html
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Ouch!
https://news.yahoo.com/german-economy-minister-defends-huawei-090234170.html
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
"Huawei is not China". Keep believing that.
Corporate ownership would be easy to prove anywhere but in China, where there is little to no transparency about business.
Yeah, I posted on that some time ago, but from an American Fulbright Professor teaching in Viet Nam who came to the same conclusion that Huawei was almost entirely state owned and controlled. You ignored it. His name is Christopher Balding, and he is looking forward to the notoriety of being sued by Huawei.
Suing might be a bad idea for Huawei. Huawei will have to be able to prove that the "expert" is wrong. Good luck on that.
Funny how they waited 11 months to start the suit.
Meanwhile, backlash to China's authoritarianism grows...
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-23/merkel-s-cdu-party-calls-for-huawei-restriction-from-5g-network
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
You obviously don't give a shit about the War in the Pacific that was fought by those same allies, especially the Australians and New Zealanders, with us, in a long grueling and costly battle.
https://www.theage.com.au/national/defecting-chinese-spy-offers-information-trove-to-australian-government-20191122-p53d1l.html
You are some kind of fucked up.
It was the Australians that blew the whistle on Huawei, not the U.S., but since the U.S., Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are all partners in Five Eyes, the intelligence gathering organization formed in 1941, then that information is shared.
I'm self employed. I had some stuff to do.
Yeah, Germany's Economy Minister is concerned of the backlash that will occur with the "banning" of Huawei, and as Germany has significant trade with China, that's a problem. On the other hand, Merkel's Christian Democrat Party, along with Germany's Military, and Intelligence operators, are all for the banning of Huawei. Given that the German Parliament is voting on this, it looks very bad for Merkel and Huawei.
Even for that, there enough that's come out about the brutality of the Chinese Authorities in the Xinjiang providence, and as well how Mainland China handled the protests in Hong Kong, and its elections yesterday, and of all things, organ harvesting, that the growing backlash is leading to some countries in the West as a minimum boycotting the next Winter Olympics. China's Authoritarianism, as well as its United Front operations in other countries, are absolutely fueling the West's disengaging with China, and at best, there will be a minor Trade Deal with the U.S.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
Now I could link to all of that, but you two are so imbedded in your views that it would be a waste of time.
But then again, there's this;
https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/scepticism-or-not-the-chinese-threat-is-real-20191125-p53dp0
"While the issue of Mr Wang is still to play out, the separate and more compelling revelations that China tried to plant a Liberal MP in federal parliament are more sobering. Especially given that he turned up dead after telling Australian authorities of the approach."
https://www.smh.com.au/national/peter-hartcher-on-china-s-infiltration-of-australia-20191118-p53bly.html