Comment by palata

Comment by palata 4 days ago

53 replies

Totally. I find it very interesting that we tend to criticize China for their protectionism, but as soon as something out-competes US companies, it gets banned: Huawei, DJI, TikTok.

Of course it cannot be said like this, because "free speech" and "democracy", so the official reason is "national security".

rwarfield 4 days ago

This claim is incompatible with the reality that the U.S. runs an enormous bilateral trade deficit with China.

tonyhart7 4 days ago

well china does it too with google,fb etc back then, and other nation do it too

albeit not outright banned it all together but sometimes they prefer homegrown company/technology

  • TulliusCicero 4 days ago

    > albeit not outright banned it all together

    No they absolutely do just ban them.

    It's not just that Google or FB can't operate Chinese-specific sites as a business within China, from within China you can't even get to the foreign/international versions of those sites, because they're blocked by China's firewall. Wikipedia has a whole list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_ma...

  • palata 4 days ago

    Sure. I just noted the irony that the US discourse has sounded a lot like "we are better than China, we are more free" for decades.

    • infecto 4 days ago

      But we are, there is no irony. China has the great wall and massive corporate espionage games to steal state and corporate secrets. The US and its various federal intelligence agencies have certainly done nefarious things but never quite as documented at the level as China's. They actively monitor all of their Social Media, block most foreign social media. I can easily go to any Chinese social media/website from the US.

    • lenerdenator 4 days ago

      In some ways, this is still true, even surrounding this decision.

      Do you think there were many people standing outside of government buildings in Beijing protesting the potential ban of Facebook and Google while politicians of different political parties were debating the ban in the country's primary legislative body? Do you think you could launch a campaign for office on repealing said ban in China?

      • antifa 3 days ago

        I think they could, and fundamentally won't because they can be accessed via VPN, but ultimately aren't necessary because those companies are not exactly interesting for any purpose but talking to Americans or studying Americans.

        • lenerdenator 3 days ago

          That wasn't the case in the late 00s when those hacks happened.

    • shlant 4 days ago

      > "we are better than China, we are more free"

      Anyone who disagrees with this is either not being honest or is not aware of what extent China restricts it's citizens.

      • palata 4 days ago

        But wouldn't you say that there is some irony there, still?

        I see multiple comments saying "shut up, we're not China!", but that's not what I meant :-). I just meant that there is some irony here.

        And that next time we criticize China's protectionism, we may take a step back and think that we do it too, sometimes.

  • lenerdenator 4 days ago

    I mean, let's be clear: Facebook and Google are very much banned in Mainland China.

corimaith 4 days ago

Mercantalism begets Mercantalism. If their mercantalist policies become successfull then unfortunately we'll need to also assume similar policies to protect ourselves, aka Beggar Thy Neighbour, and everyone loses in an arms race of tariffs and subsidies.

That's exactly why free trade proponets oppose those policies, but the CCP didn't want to reform so we'll go the opposite way.

pessimizer 4 days ago

It's important to say that the US had TikTok with Vine, but is so corrupt that it let Facebook buy it to shut it down.

iforgot22 3 days ago

Huawei has been caught stealing more than enough trade secrets to justify a ban. I'd be happy if they banned a lot more Chinese firms for that, or just in response to China's own bans. But TikTok seems to be uniquely about censorship.

  • palata 2 days ago

    > But TikTok seems to be uniquely about censorship.

    Censorship, or protectionism because TikTok is eating the lunch of the big US social media?

infecto 4 days ago

I cannot argue on the TikTok as strongly but I can see strong arguments on why Huawei and DJI are national security risks. Some of this is more educated guesses so not defensible with numbers. We know most major companies in the Chinese market have extremely close ties to the CCP. No doubt historically the US has gotten companies to put in backdoors or other mechanisms but I believe the CCP takes it to a next level. We know for a fact that the CCP and chinese entities play extremely hardball when it comes to corporate espionage. Some of the stories we have seen almost read like a spy novel. Certainly Huawei and DJI make some incredible products but when you have drones being used to survey the electric grid or other major pieces of infrastructure, I do believe it warrants major concern for national security.

I think you are proposing a much more extreme conspiracy compared to the easier explanation, China is a fairly crafty bad actor in a lot of cases. 99% of the imported products from China are not getting blocked, just the ones that have very significant national security risks.

  • suraci 4 days ago

    > 99% of the imported products from China are not getting blocked

    because it's impossible.

    the US offloaded low-added-value manufacturing to China, exchanging paper dollars for cheap industrial goods. When China tries to upgrade to high-added-value industries, like chips, guess what? National security risks!

    just enjoy cheap goods and nature resources from 3rd world...

    • infecto 4 days ago

      I am not sure I follow your point. There have been both National Security risks as well as protectionist economic policy enforced against china that benefits domestic players. In a lot of those protectionist cases, there is either a case of China flooding the market or there are cases where the government makes a choice that its beneficial to keep domestic manufacturers alive.

      In the above provided examples its quite clear that there are possible national security risks involved with China being involved in US infrastructure and technology. If DJI was from the EU there would not even be a discussion.

      If you have better example beyond hyperbole I am all ears.

      • suraci 4 days ago

        > If DJI was from the EU there would not even be a discussion.

        1. of course there'll be no 'national security risks' because EU is an ally, and the US is spying on it

        2. even though, troubles come to US's allies sometimes, like what Alstom and ASML met

        3. EU products are mostly less compatible, overall, it cannot challenge the position where the US holds in the global value chain, so pose less of threat

      • palata 4 days ago

        > If DJI was from the EU there would not even be a discussion.

        If DJI was from the EU, the US would manage to buy it.

  • amrocha 4 days ago

    Read some of the many stories out there about the NSA, please. They have backdoors into internet infrastructure. If any country is a threat to information security, it’s the USA.

    • infecto 4 days ago

      Did you read my comment? I explicitly called out backdoors, you should read comments closer. It most definitely happens within the US but the ties between the US government and corporate entities are no where as perversely intertwined as they are in China.

      • palata 4 days ago

        So you would say for sure that the NSA has definitely never been used to give advantages to US companies? I could totally imagine Boeing receiving information in order to win a contract against Airbus.

        After all, we know for a fact that the US have been spying on European politicians.

      • amrocha 4 days ago

        I think you’re biased if you don’t believe the USA is also doing domestic corporate espionage. Cisco probably has multiple NSA sleeper agents silently inserting backdoors into their routers.

  • palata 4 days ago

    > I think you are proposing a much more extreme conspiracy

    I am not proposing a conspiracy, I am merely noting some irony in the fact that the US are doing protectionism here.

    > No doubt historically the US has gotten companies to put in backdoors or other mechanisms

    Well, most of the Western Internet goes through the US, and we know for a fact that the US try to extract as much as they can from whatever they can (remember Snowden?). Also the US are very fine with US companies owning all the data of a big part of the world, and they would be really pissed if some country started banning them "for national security reasons".

    > but when you have drones being used to survey the electric grid or other major pieces of infrastructure

    You don't need to connect the drone to the Internet. Technical solutions would most definitely exist, I am convinced of that. The reason DJI is being banned is because DJI is 7 years ahead of anyone else, and the gap is getting bigger every year. It really, really sounds like the US drone companies have been lobbying a ton because they just can't compete.

swed420 4 days ago

Yup. China has been kicking Silicon Valley's butt for some time now, and I don't see any signs of that changing any time soon.

This drives the point home:

AI Superpowers: China, Silicon Valley, and the New World Order by Kai-Fu Lee https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/38242135-ai-superpowers