I prefer not to go too far into politics given that this is a thread on a folding phone but one thing has become clear over the last two years.
The US/Huawei situation has very little to do with security in a tangible sense. It is simply classic protectionism and the US president has basically acknowledged this in his recent tweets.
Things are now coming full circle (or full circus, depending on viewpoint) and we are now seeing that evidence of the US claims simply doesn't exist.
It has been widely reported that several EU governments requested evidence but never received any. Huawei has also not been given any evidence.The US even countered that evidence wasn't necessary.
So, after all the urging, hawking, warning and then outright threats, yesterday, the CEO of Huawei stood on stage in front of the world's top ICT executives (and watching governments) in Barcelona and literally called the US out.
"The US security accusation of our 5G has no evidence. Nothing"
When he put up a slide on trustworthiness and then mentioned Edward Snowden, the audience reacted in agreement. The sad irony was huge.
Now, in a new twist, US politicians are proposing ripping out Huawei smart inverter boards from energy infrastructure in the US.
Of course, the proposal itself is somewhat telling as it defines Huawei as a 'world leader' in inverter boards. Protectionism once again parading under the banner of national security.
So, if there really is something of concern that world governments should be aware of regarding Huawei, it really is about time to plunk it on the table because competition is going to take a hit, prices will go up and technological progress will be slowed down.
One potential market for this phone is of course the US so it would be nice to see Huawei allowed to compete there without protectionist obstacles blocking the way.
The people who know telecoms security better than governments are the manufacturers, industry bodies and the carriers. Not one of them has made the same claims as the US government on Huawei.
AT&T actually had a done deal (US distribution) with Huawei for last year and is a Huawei partner in Mexico.
"All this is a delicate balancing act. As a relatively smart authoritarian with a strong Party apparatus behind him, Xi may well not over-reach too much too soon. He’s shown an ability to tactically withdraw when resistance gets too heated. But the logic of his ambitions mean that he will eventually over-reach and eventually, the money will begin to run out. It is at this point, and it may be in five, ten years time, or further away, that Xi’s character - and what he really thinks of Mao - will matter. And here, its worth returning to John Garnaut, whose scariest point was that the logic of this system requires an enemy. That’s really now everyone who is “Western”, and who is trying “to prevent China’s rise”. With a closed economy, it was hard for Mao to blame foreigners for his disasters. Xi has more room to do just that."
Hence the New Cold War; authoritarian China vs Western Democracies. Make a playdate for the end of the next decade for the Taiwan Straits and the South China Sea.
I think the display when the screen is closed looks amazing. No weird curves or notches, and very thin bezels. If this phablet has dual speakers, this tablet would be GREAT for gaming and videos.
I also don't know how Huawei managed to get a foldable OLED display. As many of you know, Samsung is the god of displays. But Huawei doesn't use their displays.
I think every Apple fans agree that if Apple make a foldable iPhone it will use a different design not just a copycat. And in a couple years Samsung and Huawei will change their foldable to look exactly like Apple's design. Case in point. Apple removed the 3.5 mm jack in iPhone 7. Apple was ridiculed by Google and the media. Now after two years Google Pixel 3, Samsung Galaxy S10s and Fold, Huawei Mate X all removed the 3.5 mm jack. The media ridiculed Apple in order to give the Android copycats time to implement so Apple will not grab bigger pie.
FYI, the Galaxy S10 has not removed the headphone jack.
I prefer not to go too far into politics given that this is a thread on a folding phone but one thing has become clear over the last two years.
The US/Huawei situation has very little to do with security in a tangible sense. It is simply classic protectionism and the US president has basically acknowledged this in his recent tweets.
Things are now coming full circle (or full circus, depending on viewpoint) and we are now seeing that evidence of the US claims simply doesn't exist.
It has been widely reported that several EU governments requested evidence but never received any. Huawei has also not been given any evidence.The US even countered that evidence wasn't necessary.
So, after all the urging, hawking, warning and then outright threats, yesterday, the CEO of Huawei stood on stage in front of the world's top ICT executives (and watching governments) in Barcelona and literally called the US out.
"The US security accusation of our 5G has no evidence. Nothing"
When he put up a slide on trustworthiness and then mentioned Edward Snowden, the audience reacted in agreement. The sad irony was huge.
Now, in a new twist, US politicians are proposing ripping out Huawei smart inverter boards from energy infrastructure in the US.
Of course, the proposal itself is somewhat telling as it defines Huawei as a 'world leader' in inverter boards. Protectionism once again parading under the banner of national security.
So, if there really is something of concern that world governments should be aware of regarding Huawei, it really is about time to plunk it on the table because competition is going to take a hit, prices will go up and technological progress will be slowed down.
One potential market for this phone is of course the US so it would be nice to see Huawei allowed to compete there without protectionist obstacles blocking the way.
The people who know telecoms security better than governments are the manufacturers, industry bodies and the carriers. Not one of them has made the same claims as the US government on Huawei.
AT&T actually had a done deal (US distribution) with Huawei for last year and is a Huawei partner in Mexico.
"All this is a delicate balancing act. As a relatively smart authoritarian with a strong Party apparatus behind him, Xi may well not over-reach too much too soon. He’s shown an ability to tactically withdraw when resistance gets too heated. But the logic of his ambitions mean that he will eventually over-reach and eventually, the money will begin to run out. It is at this point, and it may be in five, ten years time, or further away, that Xi’s character - and what he really thinks of Mao - will matter. And here, its worth returning to John Garnaut, whose scariest point was that the logic of this system requires an enemy. That’s really now everyone who is “Western”, and who is trying “to prevent China’s rise”. With a closed economy, it was hard for Mao to blame foreigners for his disasters. Xi has more room to do just that."
Hence the New Cold War; authoritarian China vs Western Democracies. Make a playdate for the end of the next decade for the Taiwan Straits and the South China Sea.
That assumes that Huawei is controlled or influenced by Xi. There is no more basis for that than to assume Microsoft or Cisco is controlled by Trump.
Sure, the same assumptions are true, because the two systems of government are equivalent. /s
Ideology does not make an argument. Not a legitimate one anyway. Of the two, Xi is the more honest and trustworthy.
You are correct.
At the same time, our batshit crazy President might actually be replaced under existing legal frameworks; do you think that Xi will have any problem holding onto power for life?
Yeah, but more "honest" than Trump isn't really an argument for the two systems of government, nor that either leader has the same control over corporations.
"This doesn’t mean the company was complicit in any theft of data from the AU headquarters. But it does mean it must answer some tough questions in relation to this incident. Why? Because it’s hard to see how—given Huawei’s role in providing equipment and key ICT services to the AU building and specifically to the AU’s data centre—the company could have remained completely unaware of the apparent theft of large amounts of data, every day, for five years.
But if in fact Huawei never discovered what appears to be one of the longest-running thefts of confidential government data that we know about, and if it remained completely unaware of this alleged theft for approximately 1,825 days in a row—what are we left with?"
National Security doesn't rely on "trust" or an adversary leaders "honesty", and this link is yet another case to question Huawei's links to the CCP and the Chinese Government.
With this announcement it is important to realize that not only is Trump walking back his allegations that Huawei is a security concern, but most of Europe is now challenging his claims. In fact, Great Britian's head of intelligence just issued an ultimatum to Trump to "Put up (the evidence) or shut up".
You're confusing the Trump executive administration with the US intelligence community; agencies which Trump does not like.
Did you ever see the evidence that Putin and the Russians hacked the DNC email and meddled in our election? Nope. But you accept that they did.
Good point. Or, it would be if it were applicable. It is not the U.S. intelligence community who made the allegations of spying against Huawei, it was Trump. And, not only is the rest of the world starting to question those allegations, but Trump is starting to walk them back.
Incorrect. Six US intelligence agencies, which debriefed US senators. The same agencies Trump decries for their comments about him. There is no way Trump controls these six agencies and made them fake their conclusions.
“Don’t use Huawei phones, say heads of FBI, CIA, and NSA”
...so if you believed them when they said Russia helped Trump win, I want to know why you choose not to believe them now. Other than confirmation bias, of course.
There is single correct reason they would not tell you or the world. Using Huawei equipment will pose great difficulty for US spy agencies to install back doors.
And using them will pose great opportunity for China to do the same. I’ll go with the democratic republic over the totalitarian regime, thanks.
The US is not a “democratic republic.” The word democracy does not appear in any of our founding documents, and our Founders only used the word democracy in a negative light. We are a Constiutional Representative Republic. Sorry to be nit picky, but it’s annoying that people refer to our government as a democracy when our Founders knew how dangerous it is and specifically set up our government to avoid it.
You're barking up the wrong tree, @redraider11 -- I didn't say we were a "democracy", I specifically said the US is a republic (noun), and used "democratic" as an attributive adjective that further describes the noun. And yes, democratic is an accurate describer of our form of republic government.
With this announcement it is important to realize that not only is Trump walking back his allegations that Huawei is a security concern, but most of Europe is now challenging his claims. In fact, Great Britian's head of intelligence just issued an ultimatum to Trump to "Put up (the evidence) or shut up".
You're confusing the Trump executive administration with the US intelligence community; agencies which Trump does not like.
Did you ever see the evidence that Putin and the Russians hacked the DNC email and meddled in our election? Nope. But you accept that they did.
Good point. Or, it would be if it were applicable. It is not the U.S. intelligence community who made the allegations of spying against Huawei, it was Trump. And, not only is the rest of the world starting to question those allegations, but Trump is starting to walk them back.
Incorrect. Six US intelligence agencies, which debriefed US senators. The same agencies Trump decries for their comments about him. There is no way Trump controls these six agencies and made them fake their conclusions.
“Don’t use Huawei phones, say heads of FBI, CIA, and NSA”
...so if you believed them when they said Russia helped Trump win, I want to know why you choose not to believe them now. Other than confirmation bias, of course.
There is single correct reason they would not tell you or the world. Using Huawei equipment will pose great difficulty for US spy agencies to install back doors.
And using them will pose great opportunity for China to do the same. I’ll go with the democratic republic over the totalitarian regime, thanks.
I cannot argue with delusional person on this issue. ;-)
What's the delusion? China is a totalitarian form of government, which rules by a single party and violence to dissenting voices. The US is a democratic republic of elected representatives and executives. Their make up changes from year to year and decade to decade. One is more dangerous to your health than another.
With this announcement it is important to realize that not only is Trump walking back his allegations that Huawei is a security concern, but most of Europe is now challenging his claims. In fact, Great Britian's head of intelligence just issued an ultimatum to Trump to "Put up (the evidence) or shut up".
You're confusing the Trump executive administration with the US intelligence community; agencies which Trump does not like.
Did you ever see the evidence that Putin and the Russians hacked the DNC email and meddled in our election? Nope. But you accept that they did.
Good point. Or, it would be if it were applicable. It is not the U.S. intelligence community who made the allegations of spying against Huawei, it was Trump. And, not only is the rest of the world starting to question those allegations, but Trump is starting to walk them back.
Incorrect. Six US intelligence agencies, which debriefed US senators. The same agencies Trump decries for their comments about him. There is no way Trump controls these six agencies and made them fake their conclusions.
“Don’t use Huawei phones, say heads of FBI, CIA, and NSA”
...so if you believed them when they said Russia helped Trump win, I want to know why you choose not to believe them now. Other than confirmation bias, of course.
Because it is based on the assumption that all Chinese companies are enemies of the U.S. rather than any set of facts. And, 'a group of U.S. senators' can be found to say most anything -- especially if it's really, really stupid.
The senators said what they did because they were debriefed by the US intelligence agencies. So again -- what evidence do put forth the the US intelligence agencies are all making this up rather than using the same intelligence gathering techniques you trust when they said Russia meddled in the election? Be specific.
With this announcement it is important to realize that not only is Trump walking back his allegations that Huawei is a security concern, but most of Europe is now challenging his claims. In fact, Great Britian's head of intelligence just issued an ultimatum to Trump to "Put up (the evidence) or shut up".
You're confusing the Trump executive administration with the US intelligence community; agencies which Trump does not like.
Did you ever see the evidence that Putin and the Russians hacked the DNC email and meddled in our election? Nope. But you accept that they did.
Good point. Or, it would be if it were applicable. It is not the U.S. intelligence community who made the allegations of spying against Huawei, it was Trump. And, not only is the rest of the world starting to question those allegations, but Trump is starting to walk them back.
Incorrect. Six US intelligence agencies, which debriefed US senators. The same agencies Trump decries for their comments about him. There is no way Trump controls these six agencies and made them fake their conclusions.
“Don’t use Huawei phones, say heads of FBI, CIA, and NSA”
...so if you believed them when they said Russia helped Trump win, I want to know why you choose not to believe them now. Other than confirmation bias, of course.
Because it is based on the assumption that all Chinese companies are enemies of the U.S. rather than any set of facts. And, 'a group of U.S. senators' can be found to say most anything -- especially if it's really, really stupid.
"Our optimism was once again misplaced. The past decade has demonstrated that democratic change is not inevitable, but must be doggedly pursued by free societies. At present, democracies are backsliding the world over, with threats to the rule of law, freedom of the press, and independent civil society growing ever more severe. The unipolar moment of the 1990s has given way to an emboldened Russia headed by Vladimir Putin and an increasingly assertive China led by Xi Jinping, both bent on promoting their own brand of authoritarian rule through a combination of military might, cyber–informational warfare and theft, and the skillful use of economic leverage."
So tell me again why the U.S. must allow Huawei Telecom into it's infrastructure, because I see substantial risk, as do our and other Intelligence services, and as a fact, we have Northern European Democracies that will be happy to provide us 5G buildout. Why should we reward so called "private and independent" companies in China who must in fact answer to the CCP.
Now THAT is a conversation worth having. Unfortunately, it has been drowned out by political rhetoric ("China is an authoritarian government") and chest thumping.
You're nuts - there's nothing political about stating that China is a totalitarian regime where they can imprison or execute dissenters. It's simply a fact.
I prefer not to go too far into politics given that this is a thread on a folding phone but one thing has become clear over the last two years.
The US/Huawei situation has very little to do with security in a tangible sense. It is simply classic protectionism and the US president has basically acknowledged this in his recent tweets.
Things are now coming full circle (or full circus, depending on viewpoint) and we are now seeing that evidence of the US claims simply doesn't exist.
It has been widely reported that several EU governments requested evidence but never received any. Huawei has also not been given any evidence.The US even countered that evidence wasn't necessary.
So, after all the urging, hawking, warning and then outright threats, yesterday, the CEO of Huawei stood on stage in front of the world's top ICT executives (and watching governments) in Barcelona and literally called the US out.
"The US security accusation of our 5G has no evidence. Nothing"
When he put up a slide on trustworthiness and then mentioned Edward Snowden, the audience reacted in agreement. The sad irony was huge.
Now, in a new twist, US politicians are proposing ripping out Huawei smart inverter boards from energy infrastructure in the US.
Of course, the proposal itself is somewhat telling as it defines Huawei as a 'world leader' in inverter boards. Protectionism once again parading under the banner of national security.
So, if there really is something of concern that world governments should be aware of regarding Huawei, it really is about time to plunk it on the table because competition is going to take a hit, prices will go up and technological progress will be slowed down.
One potential market for this phone is of course the US so it would be nice to see Huawei allowed to compete there without protectionist obstacles blocking the way.
The people who know telecoms security better than governments are the manufacturers, industry bodies and the carriers. Not one of them has made the same claims as the US government on Huawei.
AT&T actually had a done deal (US distribution) with Huawei for last year and is a Huawei partner in Mexico.
"All this is a delicate balancing act. As a relatively smart authoritarian with a strong Party apparatus behind him, Xi may well not over-reach too much too soon. He’s shown an ability to tactically withdraw when resistance gets too heated. But the logic of his ambitions mean that he will eventually over-reach and eventually, the money will begin to run out. It is at this point, and it may be in five, ten years time, or further away, that Xi’s character - and what he really thinks of Mao - will matter. And here, its worth returning to John Garnaut, whose scariest point was that the logic of this system requires an enemy. That’s really now everyone who is “Western”, and who is trying “to prevent China’s rise”. With a closed economy, it was hard for Mao to blame foreigners for his disasters. Xi has more room to do just that."
Hence the New Cold War; authoritarian China vs Western Democracies. Make a playdate for the end of the next decade for the Taiwan Straits and the South China Sea.
That assumes that Huawei is controlled or influenced by Xi. There is no more basis for that than to assume Microsoft or Cisco is controlled by Trump.
Not according to the US intelligence communities, and the fact that Chinese companies must do whatever the CPC instructs them to do. I've been to China and have friends from China and Taiwan. You sound very ignorant about how China rules.
I prefer not to go too far into politics given that this is a thread on a folding phone but one thing has become clear over the last two years.
The US/Huawei situation has very little to do with security in a tangible sense. It is simply classic protectionism and the US president has basically acknowledged this in his recent tweets.
Things are now coming full circle (or full circus, depending on viewpoint) and we are now seeing that evidence of the US claims simply doesn't exist.
It has been widely reported that several EU governments requested evidence but never received any. Huawei has also not been given any evidence.The US even countered that evidence wasn't necessary.
So, after all the urging, hawking, warning and then outright threats, yesterday, the CEO of Huawei stood on stage in front of the world's top ICT executives (and watching governments) in Barcelona and literally called the US out.
"The US security accusation of our 5G has no evidence. Nothing"
When he put up a slide on trustworthiness and then mentioned Edward Snowden, the audience reacted in agreement. The sad irony was huge.
Now, in a new twist, US politicians are proposing ripping out Huawei smart inverter boards from energy infrastructure in the US.
Of course, the proposal itself is somewhat telling as it defines Huawei as a 'world leader' in inverter boards. Protectionism once again parading under the banner of national security.
So, if there really is something of concern that world governments should be aware of regarding Huawei, it really is about time to plunk it on the table because competition is going to take a hit, prices will go up and technological progress will be slowed down.
One potential market for this phone is of course the US so it would be nice to see Huawei allowed to compete there without protectionist obstacles blocking the way.
The people who know telecoms security better than governments are the manufacturers, industry bodies and the carriers. Not one of them has made the same claims as the US government on Huawei.
AT&T actually had a done deal (US distribution) with Huawei for last year and is a Huawei partner in Mexico.
"All this is a delicate balancing act. As a relatively smart authoritarian with a strong Party apparatus behind him, Xi may well not over-reach too much too soon. He’s shown an ability to tactically withdraw when resistance gets too heated. But the logic of his ambitions mean that he will eventually over-reach and eventually, the money will begin to run out. It is at this point, and it may be in five, ten years time, or further away, that Xi’s character - and what he really thinks of Mao - will matter. And here, its worth returning to John Garnaut, whose scariest point was that the logic of this system requires an enemy. That’s really now everyone who is “Western”, and who is trying “to prevent China’s rise”. With a closed economy, it was hard for Mao to blame foreigners for his disasters. Xi has more room to do just that."
Hence the New Cold War; authoritarian China vs Western Democracies. Make a playdate for the end of the next decade for the Taiwan Straits and the South China Sea.
That assumes that Huawei is controlled or influenced by Xi. There is no more basis for that than to assume Microsoft or Cisco is controlled by Trump.
Sure, the same assumptions are true, because the two systems of government are equivalent. /s
Ideology does not make an argument. Not a legitimate one anyway. Of the two, Xi is the more honest and trustworthy.
Of the two, one is an elected leader for a term of 4 years in a free democratic republic of multiple parties, branches of government, and checks & balances, while the other has less accountability as the head (possibly for life) of the state's single party, which believes in the use of prison or death for those that speak against the party's objectives.
Hmm. Yeah. Xi is super trustworthy, as demonstrated by his awesome system of government that will kidnap and murder without hesitation or any accountability whatsoever.
I prefer not to go too far into politics given that this is a thread on a folding phone but one thing has become clear over the last two years.
The US/Huawei situation has very little to do with security in a tangible sense. It is simply classic protectionism and the US president has basically acknowledged this in his recent tweets.
Things are now coming full circle (or full circus, depending on viewpoint) and we are now seeing that evidence of the US claims simply doesn't exist.
It has been widely reported that several EU governments requested evidence but never received any. Huawei has also not been given any evidence.The US even countered that evidence wasn't necessary.
So, after all the urging, hawking, warning and then outright threats, yesterday, the CEO of Huawei stood on stage in front of the world's top ICT executives (and watching governments) in Barcelona and literally called the US out.
"The US security accusation of our 5G has no evidence. Nothing"
When he put up a slide on trustworthiness and then mentioned Edward Snowden, the audience reacted in agreement. The sad irony was huge.
Now, in a new twist, US politicians are proposing ripping out Huawei smart inverter boards from energy infrastructure in the US.
Of course, the proposal itself is somewhat telling as it defines Huawei as a 'world leader' in inverter boards. Protectionism once again parading under the banner of national security.
So, if there really is something of concern that world governments should be aware of regarding Huawei, it really is about time to plunk it on the table because competition is going to take a hit, prices will go up and technological progress will be slowed down.
One potential market for this phone is of course the US so it would be nice to see Huawei allowed to compete there without protectionist obstacles blocking the way.
The people who know telecoms security better than governments are the manufacturers, industry bodies and the carriers. Not one of them has made the same claims as the US government on Huawei.
AT&T actually had a done deal (US distribution) with Huawei for last year and is a Huawei partner in Mexico.
"All this is a delicate balancing act. As a relatively smart authoritarian with a strong Party apparatus behind him, Xi may well not over-reach too much too soon. He’s shown an ability to tactically withdraw when resistance gets too heated. But the logic of his ambitions mean that he will eventually over-reach and eventually, the money will begin to run out. It is at this point, and it may be in five, ten years time, or further away, that Xi’s character - and what he really thinks of Mao - will matter. And here, its worth returning to John Garnaut, whose scariest point was that the logic of this system requires an enemy. That’s really now everyone who is “Western”, and who is trying “to prevent China’s rise”. With a closed economy, it was hard for Mao to blame foreigners for his disasters. Xi has more room to do just that."
Hence the New Cold War; authoritarian China vs Western Democracies. Make a playdate for the end of the next decade for the Taiwan Straits and the South China Sea.
That assumes that Huawei is controlled or influenced by Xi. There is no more basis for that than to assume Microsoft or Cisco is controlled by Trump.
Not according to the US intelligence communities, and the fact that Chinese companies must do whatever the CPC instructs them to do. I've been to China and have friends from China and Taiwan. You sound very ignorant about how China rules.
No, U.S. intelligence is not saying that Huawei has ever spied. That's Trump and his protectionist/Nationalism. The rest of the world is telling him to put up or shut up because THEY don't make serious judgements based on political rhetoric -- they base it on fact.
And, because you don't like their form of government doesn't mean that Huawei has ever spied, or is in their control either. That's just more political rhetoric based on an ideology.
With this announcement it is important to realize that not only is Trump walking back his allegations that Huawei is a security concern, but most of Europe is now challenging his claims. In fact, Great Britian's head of intelligence just issued an ultimatum to Trump to "Put up (the evidence) or shut up".
You're confusing the Trump executive administration with the US intelligence community; agencies which Trump does not like.
Did you ever see the evidence that Putin and the Russians hacked the DNC email and meddled in our election? Nope. But you accept that they did.
Good point. Or, it would be if it were applicable. It is not the U.S. intelligence community who made the allegations of spying against Huawei, it was Trump. And, not only is the rest of the world starting to question those allegations, but Trump is starting to walk them back.
Incorrect. Six US intelligence agencies, which debriefed US senators. The same agencies Trump decries for their comments about him. There is no way Trump controls these six agencies and made them fake their conclusions.
“Don’t use Huawei phones, say heads of FBI, CIA, and NSA”
...so if you believed them when they said Russia helped Trump win, I want to know why you choose not to believe them now. Other than confirmation bias, of course.
Because it is based on the assumption that all Chinese companies are enemies of the U.S. rather than any set of facts. And, 'a group of U.S. senators' can be found to say most anything -- especially if it's really, really stupid.
"Our optimism was once again misplaced. The past decade has demonstrated that democratic change is not inevitable, but must be doggedly pursued by free societies. At present, democracies are backsliding the world over, with threats to the rule of law, freedom of the press, and independent civil society growing ever more severe. The unipolar moment of the 1990s has given way to an emboldened Russia headed by Vladimir Putin and an increasingly assertive China led by Xi Jinping, both bent on promoting their own brand of authoritarian rule through a combination of military might, cyber–informational warfare and theft, and the skillful use of economic leverage."
So tell me again why the U.S. must allow Huawei Telecom into it's infrastructure, because I see substantial risk, as do our and other Intelligence services, and as a fact, we have Northern European Democracies that will be happy to provide us 5G buildout. Why should we reward so called "private and independent" companies in China who must in fact answer to the CCP.
Now THAT is a conversation worth having. Unfortunately, it has been drowned out by political rhetoric ("China is an authoritarian government") and chest thumping.
You're nuts - there's nothing political about stating that China is a totalitarian regime where they can imprison or execute dissenters. It's simply a fact.
Perhaps... But then I wasn't addressing your hypothetical ethical problem. I was responding to the question: "So tell me again why the U.S. must allow Huawei Telecom into it's infrastructure, because I see substantial risk"
And there was considerably more to my response that, for some reason, you cut out.
We got your political rhetoric. Go thump your chest.
I prefer not to go too far into politics given that this is a thread on a folding phone but one thing has become clear over the last two years.
The US/Huawei situation has very little to do with security in a tangible sense. It is simply classic protectionism and the US president has basically acknowledged this in his recent tweets.
Things are now coming full circle (or full circus, depending on viewpoint) and we are now seeing that evidence of the US claims simply doesn't exist.
It has been widely reported that several EU governments requested evidence but never received any. Huawei has also not been given any evidence.The US even countered that evidence wasn't necessary.
So, after all the urging, hawking, warning and then outright threats, yesterday, the CEO of Huawei stood on stage in front of the world's top ICT executives (and watching governments) in Barcelona and literally called the US out.
"The US security accusation of our 5G has no evidence. Nothing"
When he put up a slide on trustworthiness and then mentioned Edward Snowden, the audience reacted in agreement. The sad irony was huge.
Now, in a new twist, US politicians are proposing ripping out Huawei smart inverter boards from energy infrastructure in the US.
Of course, the proposal itself is somewhat telling as it defines Huawei as a 'world leader' in inverter boards. Protectionism once again parading under the banner of national security.
So, if there really is something of concern that world governments should be aware of regarding Huawei, it really is about time to plunk it on the table because competition is going to take a hit, prices will go up and technological progress will be slowed down.
One potential market for this phone is of course the US so it would be nice to see Huawei allowed to compete there without protectionist obstacles blocking the way.
The people who know telecoms security better than governments are the manufacturers, industry bodies and the carriers. Not one of them has made the same claims as the US government on Huawei.
AT&T actually had a done deal (US distribution) with Huawei for last year and is a Huawei partner in Mexico.
"All this is a delicate balancing act. As a relatively smart authoritarian with a strong Party apparatus behind him, Xi may well not over-reach too much too soon. He’s shown an ability to tactically withdraw when resistance gets too heated. But the logic of his ambitions mean that he will eventually over-reach and eventually, the money will begin to run out. It is at this point, and it may be in five, ten years time, or further away, that Xi’s character - and what he really thinks of Mao - will matter. And here, its worth returning to John Garnaut, whose scariest point was that the logic of this system requires an enemy. That’s really now everyone who is “Western”, and who is trying “to prevent China’s rise”. With a closed economy, it was hard for Mao to blame foreigners for his disasters. Xi has more room to do just that."
Hence the New Cold War; authoritarian China vs Western Democracies. Make a playdate for the end of the next decade for the Taiwan Straits and the South China Sea.
That assumes that Huawei is controlled or influenced by Xi. There is no more basis for that than to assume Microsoft or Cisco is controlled by Trump.
Sure, the same assumptions are true, because the two systems of government are equivalent. /s
Ideology does not make an argument. Not a legitimate one anyway. Of the two, Xi is the more honest and trustworthy.
You are correct.
At the same time, our batshit crazy President might actually be replaced under existing legal frameworks; do you think that Xi will have any problem holding onto power for life?
Yeah, but more "honest" than Trump isn't really an argument for the two systems of government, nor that either leader has the same control over corporations.
"This doesn’t mean the company was complicit in any theft of data from the AU headquarters. But it does mean it must answer some tough questions in relation to this incident. Why? Because it’s hard to see how—given Huawei’s role in providing equipment and key ICT services to the AU building and specifically to the AU’s data centre—the company could have remained completely unaware of the apparent theft of large amounts of data, every day, for five years.
But if in fact Huawei never discovered what appears to be one of the longest-running thefts of confidential government data that we know about, and if it remained completely unaware of this alleged theft for approximately 1,825 days in a row—what are we left with?"
National Security doesn't rely on "trust" or an adversary leaders "honesty", and this link is yet another case to question Huawei's links to the CCP and the Chinese Government.
I agree, that comparing Trump to Xi has no more relevance than comparing their form of government to ours. I was responding to a point that you made about Xi.
As for a data hack... It might have been done by a "fat guy laying on his bed". And besides, it is the U.S. who leads the world in spying. Our TSA is second to none in that regard.
As for assuming that Huawei is under the control of the Chinese government, that is just an assumption based on ideology rather than fact -- which is why European governments and corporations are asking for a "fact based assessment" in the face of Trump's allegations.
Actually, based on past performance, I would believe Huawei before Trump.
But, even assuming that his allegations are true -- that Huawei is run by the Chinese government (which it isn't), why would they endanger one of their most successful companies for something so easily and commonly done as computer hacking? They have worked hard at growing and fostering their economy -- it has been their primary focus. And, it is their economy rather than their spying which is the biggest threat to the U.S.
I prefer not to go too far into politics given that this is a thread on a folding phone but one thing has become clear over the last two years.
The US/Huawei situation has very little to do with security in a tangible sense. It is simply classic protectionism and the US president has basically acknowledged this in his recent tweets.
Things are now coming full circle (or full circus, depending on viewpoint) and we are now seeing that evidence of the US claims simply doesn't exist.
It has been widely reported that several EU governments requested evidence but never received any. Huawei has also not been given any evidence.The US even countered that evidence wasn't necessary.
So, after all the urging, hawking, warning and then outright threats, yesterday, the CEO of Huawei stood on stage in front of the world's top ICT executives (and watching governments) in Barcelona and literally called the US out.
"The US security accusation of our 5G has no evidence. Nothing"
When he put up a slide on trustworthiness and then mentioned Edward Snowden, the audience reacted in agreement. The sad irony was huge.
Now, in a new twist, US politicians are proposing ripping out Huawei smart inverter boards from energy infrastructure in the US.
Of course, the proposal itself is somewhat telling as it defines Huawei as a 'world leader' in inverter boards. Protectionism once again parading under the banner of national security.
So, if there really is something of concern that world governments should be aware of regarding Huawei, it really is about time to plunk it on the table because competition is going to take a hit, prices will go up and technological progress will be slowed down.
One potential market for this phone is of course the US so it would be nice to see Huawei allowed to compete there without protectionist obstacles blocking the way.
The people who know telecoms security better than governments are the manufacturers, industry bodies and the carriers. Not one of them has made the same claims as the US government on Huawei.
AT&T actually had a done deal (US distribution) with Huawei for last year and is a Huawei partner in Mexico.
"All this is a delicate balancing act. As a relatively smart authoritarian with a strong Party apparatus behind him, Xi may well not over-reach too much too soon. He’s shown an ability to tactically withdraw when resistance gets too heated. But the logic of his ambitions mean that he will eventually over-reach and eventually, the money will begin to run out. It is at this point, and it may be in five, ten years time, or further away, that Xi’s character - and what he really thinks of Mao - will matter. And here, its worth returning to John Garnaut, whose scariest point was that the logic of this system requires an enemy. That’s really now everyone who is “Western”, and who is trying “to prevent China’s rise”. With a closed economy, it was hard for Mao to blame foreigners for his disasters. Xi has more room to do just that."
Hence the New Cold War; authoritarian China vs Western Democracies. Make a playdate for the end of the next decade for the Taiwan Straits and the South China Sea.
That assumes that Huawei is controlled or influenced by Xi. There is no more basis for that than to assume Microsoft or Cisco is controlled by Trump.
Sure, the same assumptions are true, because the two systems of government are equivalent. /s
Ideology does not make an argument. Not a legitimate one anyway. Of the two, Xi is the more honest and trustworthy.
You are correct.
At the same time, our batshit crazy President might actually be replaced under existing legal frameworks; do you think that Xi will have any problem holding onto power for life?
Yeah, but more "honest" than Trump isn't really an argument for the two systems of government, nor that either leader has the same control over corporations.
"This doesn’t mean the company was complicit in any theft of data from the AU headquarters. But it does mean it must answer some tough questions in relation to this incident. Why? Because it’s hard to see how—given Huawei’s role in providing equipment and key ICT services to the AU building and specifically to the AU’s data centre—the company could have remained completely unaware of the apparent theft of large amounts of data, every day, for five years.
But if in fact Huawei never discovered what appears to be one of the longest-running thefts of confidential government data that we know about, and if it remained completely unaware of this alleged theft for approximately 1,825 days in a row—what are we left with?"
National Security doesn't rely on "trust" or an adversary leaders "honesty", and this link is yet another case to question Huawei's links to the CCP and the Chinese Government.
I agree, that comparing Trump to Xi has no more relevance than comparing their form of government to ours. I was responding to a point that you made about Xi.
As for a data hack... It might have been done by a "fat guy laying on his bed". And besides, it is the U.S. who leads the world in spying. Our TSA is second to none in that regard.
As for assuming that Huawei is under the control of the Chinese government, that is just an assumption based on ideology rather than fact -- which is why European governments and corporations are asking for a "fact based assessment" in the face of Trump's allegations.
Actually, based on past performance, I would believe Huawei before Trump.
But, even assuming that his allegations are true -- that Huawei is run by the Chinese government (which it isn't), why would they endanger one of their most successful companies for something so easily and commonly done as computer hacking? They have worked hard at growing and fostering their economy -- it has been their primary focus. And, it is their economy rather than their spying which is the biggest threat to the U.S.
"But, even assuming that his allegations are true -- that Huawei is run by the Chinese government (which it isn't), why would they endanger one of their most successful companies for something so easily and commonly done as computer hacking? They have worked hard at growing and fostering their economy -- it has been their primary focus. And, it is their economy rather than their spying which is the biggest threat to the U.S."
Huawei is run by Communist Party Members. The Communist Party runs China. This isn't that difficult a connection. Perhaps you are biased against the West?
China's immediate goal it to dismember Five Eyes, by prying out Canada, UK, or New Zealand, using trade as leverage. New Zealand has so far been steadfast even against obvious trade leverage by China, as have the U.S. and Australia, but the UK is "undecided" primarily because Brexit has damaged trade, giving China yet more leverage. Five Eyes was a primary reason that the Allies won WWII, along with Stalinist Russia, that consumed the German invasion.
The author also raised the question about Huawei, noting the spying in Poland, and how straightforward it would be to access a 5G network.
As for my notes about conflict, it's a regular occurrence in the South China Sea, just no shooting yet, and the mission of the U.S. Navy and our allies is to protect freedom of navigation for all countries, a necessity for free trade. That China violates UN mandates by building militarized islands in disputed territories of the South China sea is well known. As China's Navy begins missions into the Indian Ocean, and establishes yet more military bases in Africa, the West will be pulled into a larger potential conflict.
Oh, and for the record, the U.S. isn't banning Huawei for competitive reasons. We long ago decided to use other countries 5G technology, the free market in action, just not preferring Huawei for National Security reasons. There's plenty of hardware available from Northern European countries.
China is a police state. That's a fact, and Huawei's technology is deeply embedded in making that happen.
I loved browsing the Nokia site to see their phone designs. All of these were actually on sale! They even had a model that had felt trimmings.
I was very keen on getting the first version of the N-gage. Then the entire fiasco of having to use the phone sideways to make calls, making it look like you had an elephant's ear, put me off.
N-gage as a gaming platform then crashed and burnt soon after v2 was released.
LOL. I bought the original n-gage. It lives in a drawer but still powers up and plays the 6 or 7 games I bought for it. Colour me young and dumb at the time.
At that time, everyone was salivating over polyphonic ring tones and a garbage half megapixel camera in their phones. The n-gage seemed dead set futuristic.
Thank you Apple for the course correction.
And tired of Avon’s blathering BS.
Edit: oh yeah, it looked like you were holding a taco 🌮 up to your head during calls
I prefer not to go too far into politics given that this is a thread on a folding phone but one thing has become clear over the last two years.
The US/Huawei situation has very little to do with security in a tangible sense. It is simply classic protectionism and the US president has basically acknowledged this in his recent tweets.
Things are now coming full circle (or full circus, depending on viewpoint) and we are now seeing that evidence of the US claims simply doesn't exist.
It has been widely reported that several EU governments requested evidence but never received any. Huawei has also not been given any evidence.The US even countered that evidence wasn't necessary.
So, after all the urging, hawking, warning and then outright threats, yesterday, the CEO of Huawei stood on stage in front of the world's top ICT executives (and watching governments) in Barcelona and literally called the US out.
"The US security accusation of our 5G has no evidence. Nothing"
When he put up a slide on trustworthiness and then mentioned Edward Snowden, the audience reacted in agreement. The sad irony was huge.
Now, in a new twist, US politicians are proposing ripping out Huawei smart inverter boards from energy infrastructure in the US.
Of course, the proposal itself is somewhat telling as it defines Huawei as a 'world leader' in inverter boards. Protectionism once again parading under the banner of national security.
So, if there really is something of concern that world governments should be aware of regarding Huawei, it really is about time to plunk it on the table because competition is going to take a hit, prices will go up and technological progress will be slowed down.
One potential market for this phone is of course the US so it would be nice to see Huawei allowed to compete there without protectionist obstacles blocking the way.
The people who know telecoms security better than governments are the manufacturers, industry bodies and the carriers. Not one of them has made the same claims as the US government on Huawei.
AT&T actually had a done deal (US distribution) with Huawei for last year and is a Huawei partner in Mexico.
"All this is a delicate balancing act. As a relatively smart authoritarian with a strong Party apparatus behind him, Xi may well not over-reach too much too soon. He’s shown an ability to tactically withdraw when resistance gets too heated. But the logic of his ambitions mean that he will eventually over-reach and eventually, the money will begin to run out. It is at this point, and it may be in five, ten years time, or further away, that Xi’s character - and what he really thinks of Mao - will matter. And here, its worth returning to John Garnaut, whose scariest point was that the logic of this system requires an enemy. That’s really now everyone who is “Western”, and who is trying “to prevent China’s rise”. With a closed economy, it was hard for Mao to blame foreigners for his disasters. Xi has more room to do just that."
Hence the New Cold War; authoritarian China vs Western Democracies. Make a playdate for the end of the next decade for the Taiwan Straits and the South China Sea.
That assumes that Huawei is controlled or influenced by Xi. There is no more basis for that than to assume Microsoft or Cisco is controlled by Trump.
Sure, the same assumptions are true, because the two systems of government are equivalent. /s
Ideology does not make an argument. Not a legitimate one anyway. Of the two, Xi is the more honest and trustworthy.
You are correct.
At the same time, our batshit crazy President might actually be replaced under existing legal frameworks; do you think that Xi will have any problem holding onto power for life?
Yeah, but more "honest" than Trump isn't really an argument for the two systems of government, nor that either leader has the same control over corporations.
"This doesn’t mean the company was complicit in any theft of data from the AU headquarters. But it does mean it must answer some tough questions in relation to this incident. Why? Because it’s hard to see how—given Huawei’s role in providing equipment and key ICT services to the AU building and specifically to the AU’s data centre—the company could have remained completely unaware of the apparent theft of large amounts of data, every day, for five years.
But if in fact Huawei never discovered what appears to be one of the longest-running thefts of confidential government data that we know about, and if it remained completely unaware of this alleged theft for approximately 1,825 days in a row—what are we left with?"
National Security doesn't rely on "trust" or an adversary leaders "honesty", and this link is yet another case to question Huawei's links to the CCP and the Chinese Government.
I agree, that comparing Trump to Xi has no more relevance than comparing their form of government to ours. I was responding to a point that you made about Xi.
As for a data hack... It might have been done by a "fat guy laying on his bed". And besides, it is the U.S. who leads the world in spying. Our TSA is second to none in that regard.
As for assuming that Huawei is under the control of the Chinese government, that is just an assumption based on ideology rather than fact -- which is why European governments and corporations are asking for a "fact based assessment" in the face of Trump's allegations.
Actually, based on past performance, I would believe Huawei before Trump.
But, even assuming that his allegations are true -- that Huawei is run by the Chinese government (which it isn't), why would they endanger one of their most successful companies for something so easily and commonly done as computer hacking? They have worked hard at growing and fostering their economy -- it has been their primary focus. And, it is their economy rather than their spying which is the biggest threat to the U.S.
"But, even assuming that his allegations are true -- that Huawei is run by the Chinese government (which it isn't), why would they endanger one of their most successful companies for something so easily and commonly done as computer hacking? They have worked hard at growing and fostering their economy -- it has been their primary focus. And, it is their economy rather than their spying which is the biggest threat to the U.S."
Huawei is run by Communist Party Members. The Communist Party runs China. This isn't that difficult a connection. Perhaps you are biased against the West?
China's immediate goal it to dismember Five Eyes, by prying out Canada, UK, or New Zealand, using trade as leverage. New Zealand has so far been steadfast even against obvious trade leverage by China, as have the U.S. and Australia, but the UK is "undecided" primarily because Brexit has damaged trade, giving China yet more leverage. Five Eyes was a primary reason that the Allies won WWII, along with Stalinist Russia, that consumed the German invasion.
The author also raised the question about Huawei, noting the spying in Poland, and how straightforward it would be to access a 5G network.
As for my notes about conflict, it's a regular occurrence in the South China Sea, just no shooting yet, and the mission of the U.S. Navy and our allies is to protect freedom of navigation for all countries, a necessity for free trade. That China violates UN mandates by building militarized islands in disputed territories of the South China sea is well known. As China's Navy begins missions into the Indian Ocean, and establishes yet more military bases in Africa, the West will be pulled into a larger potential conflict.
Oh, and for the record, the U.S. isn't banning Huawei for competitive reasons. We long ago decided to use other countries 5G technology, the free market in action, just not preferring Huawei for National Security reasons. There's plenty of hardware available from Northern European countries.
China is a police state. That's a fact, and Huawei's technology is deeply embedded in making that happen.
Huawei has connections to the communist party? We have a president with connections to the Republican party!
China's goal is to 'dismember 5 eyes"? are there any facts behind that propaganda? Britain is undecided because of Brexit? Not according to its intellegence chief asking Trump to put up his facts or sit down & shut up.
And, sorry. But Trump has a vendetta against China. And with absolutely no proof that they have ever spied, this appears to be part of it.
Your "facts" do not appear to be any more factual than Trump's. That's why European countries & companies have told Trump they want to see facts not more rhetoric.
I prefer not to go too far into politics given that this is a thread on a folding phone but one thing has become clear over the last two years.
The US/Huawei situation has very little to do with security in a tangible sense. It is simply classic protectionism and the US president has basically acknowledged this in his recent tweets.
Things are now coming full circle (or full circus, depending on viewpoint) and we are now seeing that evidence of the US claims simply doesn't exist.
It has been widely reported that several EU governments requested evidence but never received any. Huawei has also not been given any evidence.The US even countered that evidence wasn't necessary.
So, after all the urging, hawking, warning and then outright threats, yesterday, the CEO of Huawei stood on stage in front of the world's top ICT executives (and watching governments) in Barcelona and literally called the US out.
"The US security accusation of our 5G has no evidence. Nothing"
When he put up a slide on trustworthiness and then mentioned Edward Snowden, the audience reacted in agreement. The sad irony was huge.
Now, in a new twist, US politicians are proposing ripping out Huawei smart inverter boards from energy infrastructure in the US.
Of course, the proposal itself is somewhat telling as it defines Huawei as a 'world leader' in inverter boards. Protectionism once again parading under the banner of national security.
So, if there really is something of concern that world governments should be aware of regarding Huawei, it really is about time to plunk it on the table because competition is going to take a hit, prices will go up and technological progress will be slowed down.
One potential market for this phone is of course the US so it would be nice to see Huawei allowed to compete there without protectionist obstacles blocking the way.
The people who know telecoms security better than governments are the manufacturers, industry bodies and the carriers. Not one of them has made the same claims as the US government on Huawei.
AT&T actually had a done deal (US distribution) with Huawei for last year and is a Huawei partner in Mexico.
"All this is a delicate balancing act. As a relatively smart authoritarian with a strong Party apparatus behind him, Xi may well not over-reach too much too soon. He’s shown an ability to tactically withdraw when resistance gets too heated. But the logic of his ambitions mean that he will eventually over-reach and eventually, the money will begin to run out. It is at this point, and it may be in five, ten years time, or further away, that Xi’s character - and what he really thinks of Mao - will matter. And here, its worth returning to John Garnaut, whose scariest point was that the logic of this system requires an enemy. That’s really now everyone who is “Western”, and who is trying “to prevent China’s rise”. With a closed economy, it was hard for Mao to blame foreigners for his disasters. Xi has more room to do just that."
Hence the New Cold War; authoritarian China vs Western Democracies. Make a playdate for the end of the next decade for the Taiwan Straits and the South China Sea.
That assumes that Huawei is controlled or influenced by Xi. There is no more basis for that than to assume Microsoft or Cisco is controlled by Trump.
Sure, the same assumptions are true, because the two systems of government are equivalent. /s
Ideology does not make an argument. Not a legitimate one anyway. Of the two, Xi is the more honest and trustworthy.
You are correct.
At the same time, our batshit crazy President might actually be replaced under existing legal frameworks; do you think that Xi will have any problem holding onto power for life?
Yeah, but more "honest" than Trump isn't really an argument for the two systems of government, nor that either leader has the same control over corporations.
"This doesn’t mean the company was complicit in any theft of data from the AU headquarters. But it does mean it must answer some tough questions in relation to this incident. Why? Because it’s hard to see how—given Huawei’s role in providing equipment and key ICT services to the AU building and specifically to the AU’s data centre—the company could have remained completely unaware of the apparent theft of large amounts of data, every day, for five years.
But if in fact Huawei never discovered what appears to be one of the longest-running thefts of confidential government data that we know about, and if it remained completely unaware of this alleged theft for approximately 1,825 days in a row—what are we left with?"
National Security doesn't rely on "trust" or an adversary leaders "honesty", and this link is yet another case to question Huawei's links to the CCP and the Chinese Government.
I agree, that comparing Trump to Xi has no more relevance than comparing their form of government to ours. I was responding to a point that you made about Xi.
As for a data hack... It might have been done by a "fat guy laying on his bed". And besides, it is the U.S. who leads the world in spying. Our TSA is second to none in that regard.
As for assuming that Huawei is under the control of the Chinese government, that is just an assumption based on ideology rather than fact -- which is why European governments and corporations are asking for a "fact based assessment" in the face of Trump's allegations.
Actually, based on past performance, I would believe Huawei before Trump.
But, even assuming that his allegations are true -- that Huawei is run by the Chinese government (which it isn't), why would they endanger one of their most successful companies for something so easily and commonly done as computer hacking? They have worked hard at growing and fostering their economy -- it has been their primary focus. And, it is their economy rather than their spying which is the biggest threat to the U.S.
"But, even assuming that his allegations are true -- that Huawei is run by the Chinese government (which it isn't), why would they endanger one of their most successful companies for something so easily and commonly done as computer hacking? They have worked hard at growing and fostering their economy -- it has been their primary focus. And, it is their economy rather than their spying which is the biggest threat to the U.S."
Huawei is run by Communist Party Members. The Communist Party runs China. This isn't that difficult a connection. Perhaps you are biased against the West?
China's immediate goal it to dismember Five Eyes, by prying out Canada, UK, or New Zealand, using trade as leverage. New Zealand has so far been steadfast even against obvious trade leverage by China, as have the U.S. and Australia, but the UK is "undecided" primarily because Brexit has damaged trade, giving China yet more leverage. Five Eyes was a primary reason that the Allies won WWII, along with Stalinist Russia, that consumed the German invasion.
The author also raised the question about Huawei, noting the spying in Poland, and how straightforward it would be to access a 5G network.
As for my notes about conflict, it's a regular occurrence in the South China Sea, just no shooting yet, and the mission of the U.S. Navy and our allies is to protect freedom of navigation for all countries, a necessity for free trade. That China violates UN mandates by building militarized islands in disputed territories of the South China sea is well known. As China's Navy begins missions into the Indian Ocean, and establishes yet more military bases in Africa, the West will be pulled into a larger potential conflict.
Oh, and for the record, the U.S. isn't banning Huawei for competitive reasons. We long ago decided to use other countries 5G technology, the free market in action, just not preferring Huawei for National Security reasons. There's plenty of hardware available from Northern European countries.
China is a police state. That's a fact, and Huawei's technology is deeply embedded in making that happen.
Huawei has connections to the communist party? We have a president with connections to the Republican party!
China's goal is to 'dismember 5 eyes"? are there any facts behind that propaganda? Britain is undecided because of Brexit? Not according to its intellegence chief asking Trump to put up his facts or sit down & shut up.
And, sorry. But Trump has a vendetta against China. And with absolutely no proof that they have ever spied, this appears to be part of it.
Your "facts" do not appear to be any more factual than Trump's. That's why European countries & companies have told Trump they want to see facts not more rhetoric.
Comments
At the same time, our batshit crazy President might actually be replaced under existing legal frameworks; do you think that Xi will have any problem holding onto power for life?
Yeah, but more "honest" than Trump isn't really an argument for the two systems of government, nor that either leader has the same control over corporations.
Interesting link;
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/the-african-union-headquarters-hack-and-australias-5g-network/
"This doesn’t mean the company was complicit in any theft of data from the AU headquarters. But it does mean it must answer some tough questions in relation to this incident. Why? Because it’s hard to see how—given Huawei’s role in providing equipment and key ICT services to the AU building and specifically to the AU’s data centre—the company could have remained completely unaware of the apparent theft of large amounts of data, every day, for five years.
But if in fact Huawei never discovered what appears to be one of the longest-running thefts of confidential government data that we know about, and if it remained completely unaware of this alleged theft for approximately 1,825 days in a row—what are we left with?"
National Security doesn't rely on "trust" or an adversary leaders "honesty", and this link is yet another case to question Huawei's links to the CCP and the Chinese Government.
The senators said what they did because they were debriefed by the US intelligence agencies. So again -- what evidence do put forth the the US intelligence agencies are all making this up rather than using the same intelligence gathering techniques you trust when they said Russia meddled in the election? Be specific.
You're nuts - there's nothing political about stating that China is a totalitarian regime where they can imprison or execute dissenters. It's simply a fact.
Not according to the US intelligence communities, and the fact that Chinese companies must do whatever the CPC instructs them to do. I've been to China and have friends from China and Taiwan. You sound very ignorant about how China rules.
Hmm. Yeah. Xi is super trustworthy, as demonstrated by his awesome system of government that will kidnap and murder without hesitation or any accountability whatsoever.
You are seriously high.
"So tell me again why the U.S. must allow Huawei Telecom into it's infrastructure, because I see substantial risk"
As for a data hack... It might have been done by a "fat guy laying on his bed".
And besides, it is the U.S. who leads the world in spying. Our TSA is second to none in that regard.
As for assuming that Huawei is under the control of the Chinese government, that is just an assumption based on ideology rather than fact -- which is why European governments and corporations are asking for a "fact based assessment" in the face of Trump's allegations.
Actually, based on past performance, I would believe Huawei before Trump.
But, even assuming that his allegations are true -- that Huawei is run by the Chinese government (which it isn't), why would they endanger one of their most successful companies for something so easily and commonly done as computer hacking? They have worked hard at growing and fostering their economy -- it has been their primary focus. And, it is their economy rather than their spying which is the biggest threat to the U.S.
Huawei is run by Communist Party Members. The Communist Party runs China. This isn't that difficult a connection. Perhaps you are biased against the West?
China's immediate goal it to dismember Five Eyes, by prying out Canada, UK, or New Zealand, using trade as leverage. New Zealand has so far been steadfast even against obvious trade leverage by China, as have the U.S. and Australia, but the UK is "undecided" primarily because Brexit has damaged trade, giving China yet more leverage. Five Eyes was a primary reason that the Allies won WWII, along with Stalinist Russia, that consumed the German invasion.
There was an article in the WSJ today;
https://www.wsj.com/articles/as-5g-technology-expands-so-do-concerns-over-privacy-11551236460?mod=rss_Technology
The author also raised the question about Huawei, noting the spying in Poland, and how straightforward it would be to access a 5G network.
As for my notes about conflict, it's a regular occurrence in the South China Sea, just no shooting yet, and the mission of the U.S. Navy and our allies is to protect freedom of navigation for all countries, a necessity for free trade. That China violates UN mandates by building militarized islands in disputed territories of the South China sea is well known. As China's Navy begins missions into the Indian Ocean, and establishes yet more military bases in Africa, the West will be pulled into a larger potential conflict.
https://www.cfr.org/blog/top-conflicts-watch-2019-south-china-sea
Oh, and for the record, the U.S. isn't banning Huawei for competitive reasons. We long ago decided to use other countries 5G technology, the free market in action, just not preferring Huawei for National Security reasons. There's plenty of hardware available from Northern European countries.
China is a police state. That's a fact, and Huawei's technology is deeply embedded in making that happen.
At that time, everyone was salivating over polyphonic ring tones and a garbage half megapixel camera in their phones. The n-gage seemed dead set futuristic.
Thank you Apple for the course correction.
And tired of Avon’s blathering BS.
Edit: oh yeah, it looked like you were holding a taco 🌮 up to your head during calls
Britain is undecided because of Brexit? Not according to its intellegence chief asking Trump to put up his facts or sit down & shut up.
And, sorry. But Trump has a vendetta against China. And with absolutely no proof that they have ever spied, this appears to be part of it.
Your "facts" do not appear to be any more factual than Trump's. That's why European countries & companies have told Trump they want to see facts not more rhetoric.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/china-is-blocking-world-bank-report-that-calls-for-state-owned-enterprise-reform/2019/03/01/15607f9a-3b72-11e9-b10b-f05a22e75865_story.html?utm_term=.b38a7137125d
Belies the "low prices' that Huawei gains from subsidies.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/pompeo-promises-intervention-if-philippines-is-attacked-in-south-china-sea-amid-rising-chinese-militarization/2019/02/28/5288768a-3b53-11e9-b10b-f05a22e75865_story.html?utm_term=.e7aa7e463ea8
There have been ongoing conflicts between China, regional power, and global powers.
https://www.devdiscourse.com/article/international/428441-us-senate-wants-confucius-institutes-to-change-or-shut-down
China's propaganda machine in action
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/huawei-president-ren-zhengfei-says-he-would-defy-chinese-law-on-intelligence-gathering/
Sure, when pigs fly...and he could only state that if he had permission from, the CCP,
https://www.gao.gov/mobile/products/gao-19-278
https://www.wsj.com/articles/senate-panel-takes-aim-at-china-funded-education-programs-in-u-s-11551304801
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-08/chinas-foreign-media-push-a-major-threat-to-democracies/10733068
Trade theft;
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1124996/download
Maybe China wants to be an autocratic superpower, and the U.S., et al, are in their way.