Huawei Files Suit In its Fight Against US Ban

[ThePD]

14 hours ago, mr moose said:

For as much as I don't trust Huewiaeyeu, the reality is these bans are illegal and no country can call themselves a free democracy when they engage in such behaviour.  

The United States is not a democracy, it is a democratic republic. Two very different forms of government.

[GoldenLag]

1 hour ago, ThePD said:

The United States is not a democracy, it is a democratic republic. Two very different forms of government.

Democracy is not a specific type of goverment. Its an unbrella term for ways to govern through democratic principles. 

 

And yes, this makes the US a democracy. 

[ThePD]

13 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Democracy is not a specific type of goverment. Its an unbrella term for ways to govern through democratic principles. 

 

And yes, this makes the US a democracy. 

Republic: "A state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives..."
Democracy: "A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives."

We elect representatives that then hold the power to create laws. We are neither a pure Democracy nor a Republic as our system of government in the US takes on aspects of both a Republic and a Democracy.

[GoldenLag]

12 minutes ago, ThePD said:

We elect representatives that then hold the power to create laws.

thats what a democracy entails............ or one of the many ways of implementing it

12 minutes ago, ThePD said:

We are neither a pure Democracy nor a Republic as our system of government in the US takes on aspects of both a Republic and a Democracy.

so its a democracy. thank you. i still dont understand what so difficult to understand.

13 minutes ago, ThePD said:

Republic: "A state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives..."

so people democratically elect people to govern them. that is what a democracy is........

14 minutes ago, ThePD said:

Democracy: "A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives."

do you see how it matches up? no? i would suggest looking again. 

 

wiki:

Quote

Democracy (Greek: δημοκρατία dēmokratía, literally "rule by people") is a system of government where the citizens exercise power by voting.

the US is a democracy, wether you like it or not. 

[harryk]

1 hour ago, GoldenLag said:

wiki:

Quote

Democracy (Greek: δημοκρατία dēmokratía, literally "rule by people") is a system of government where the citizens exercise power by voting.

 

the US is a democracy, wether you like it or not. 

A true democracy does not involve any elected representatives; everyone votes on every issue. The US is a far throw from a true democracy. Like @ThePD said, we are neither a true democracy nor a true republic but somewhere in between. I say that currently we are much closer to a republic than a democracy. Our elected representative are often acting on their own political opinions rather than doing what their constituents tell them.

[Bramimond]

I don't get why it's a big deal when China (allegedly) does it. Snowden revelations were met with shoulder shrugging internationally. At this point, getting spied on comes with owning any device that can connect to the Internet and was made after 2010 or so. It's baked directly into the CPUs. No one seems to care. Before Snowden people at least put the effort in to tell you that you're a conspiracy nutjob, but these days it's just generally apathy and eyes rolling. The kind of reaction you get from telling fat people to eat healthy.

[GoldenLag]

26 minutes ago, harryk said:

A true democracy does not involve any elected representatives

"true". that there is a direct democracy. 

26 minutes ago, harryk said:

The US is a far throw from a true democracy.

doesnt make the US any less of a democracy. democracy is an umbrella term for many ways of implementing the voice of the people. 

27 minutes ago, harryk said:

Like @ThePD said, we are neither a true democracy nor a true republic but somewhere in between

no you are very much a democracy. you can say perhaps its not a very representative democracy, but that is a whole other issue. 

29 minutes ago, harryk said:

Our elected representative

im seeing a trend here, they are elected. the US organize themselves as a republic, but its still a democracy (since being a republic does not affect wether or not the country is democratic). you can create a democratic monarchy. still democratic and also a monarchy. 

32 minutes ago, harryk said:

representative are often acting on their own political opinions rather than doing what their constituents tell them

well there is this thing in this republic of yours that is called democracy, meaning you can vote them out. now idk about you but it does seem like democracy is a seperate thing from organizing a goverment. either it being a monarchy, republic or emperium. 

[leadeater]

42 minutes ago, harryk said:

A true democracy does not involve any elected representatives; everyone votes on every issue. The US is a far throw from a true democracy. Like @ThePD said, we are neither a true democracy nor a true republic but somewhere in between. I say that currently we are much closer to a republic than a democracy. Our elected representative are often acting on their own political opinions rather than doing what their constituents tell them.

Name a country that is a 'true democracy'. There are none, or I can name nor think of one. Getting every eligible voter to vote on every legislation is simply completely impractical which is why we elect representatives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_system_of_government

 

The USA is a democratic country, there are many different forms of government but since there is no such thing as a democracy form of government or no country that uses it it's pretty unreasonable to confine it's usage to such a narrow meaning when in reality it refers to any country where the citizens get to vote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy

 

There are many different forms of governments that are democratic and few are exactly the same, even when they are the same government type.

 

Democracy isn't a (used) form of government, a representative republic falls within it as does constitutional monarchies etc.

 

Edit:

Fun fact, China calls themselves a Democratic Republic.

[Sauron]

23 hours ago, DogeOfTech said:

What do I think? Huawei is right.

Yes they are - this is literally trial by legislature.

19 hours ago, Commodus said:

I think we should want the truth to win this, whether that's Huawei or the US government.  The problem, of course, is that the US hasn't provided any evidence (not publicly, anyway) that would support its claims.  Huawei has done some sketchy things in its past, but if we don't know whether spying was a part of it, we don't know if they deserve a ban on this level.

Even if spying was a part of it, why a trade ban instead of a fine or an ultimatum to comply? After proper investigation and trial of course.

[harryk]

1 hour ago, GoldenLag said:

doesnt make the US any less of a democracy. democracy is an umbrella term for many ways of implementing the voice of the people. 

You're not wrong. Just thought I'd point out that there is something called true/pure/direct democracy which some might refer to as democracy in a literal sense if they are talking about forms of government. Its all words.

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Name a country that is a 'true democracy'. There are none, or I can name nor think of one. Getting every eligible voter to vote on every legislation is simply completely impractical which is why we elect representatives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_system_of_government

Just because its impractical doesn't mean we can't define it or imagine it. Also there many are instances of direct democracy in history, including the US, albeit on small scales.

37 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Yes they are - this is literally trial by legislature.

Even if spying was a part of it, why a trade ban instead of a fine or an ultimatum to comply? After proper investigation and trial of course.

I think this is the post-ultimatum. As I and others have posted on this forum, Huawei is far from innocent being already convicted of numerous crimes. Fines rarely result in changed behavior.

[leadeater]

20 minutes ago, harryk said:

Just because its impractical doesn't mean we can't define it or imagine it. Also there many are instances of direct democracy in history, including the US, albeit on small scales.

Well since we are talking present day then no, not even Switzerland. There are some elements that still exhibit direct democracy but the government itself is not, which is "Federal semi-direct democracy under a multi-party parliamentary directorial republic".

 

This is why when anyone, today, talks about a country being a democracy they are not using the classical term but rather the current modern day definition. 

[Sauron]

1 hour ago, harryk said:

I think this is the post-ultimatum. As I and others have posted on this forum, Huawei is far from innocent being already convicted of numerous crimes. Fines rarely result in changed behavior.

Hardly an excuse for applying such extreme double standards - there are plenty of other corporations that have been found doing some pretty bad stuff, none of them were targeted like this. Apple and Microsoft, for instance, are also guilty of "numerous crimes".

[harryk]

 

15 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Hardly an excuse for applying such extreme double standards - there are plenty of other corporations that have been found doing some pretty bad stuff, none of them were targeted like this. Apple and Microsoft, for instance, are also guilty of "numerous crimes".

Links?

Double standard or not, Huawei is a bad player caught in the midst of a trade war, sometimes life isn't fair

 

21 hours ago, Lurick said:

 The first article lists charges laid against Huawei as of Jan 2019

The second is a list of IP theft cases against the company as well

https://qz.com/1535995/the-full-list-of-crimes-huawei-is-accused-of-committing-by-the-us/

https://phoneradar.com/top-9-evidence-of-huaweis-backdoor-ip-theft-alleged-hacking-reports/

 

On 5/23/2019 at 9:24 PM, harryk said:

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/29/689663720/a-robot-named-tappy-huawei-conspired-to-steal-t-mobile-s-trade-secrets-says-doj

 

 

[Sauron]

1 minute ago, harryk said:

Links?

Links to what? Laws broken by MS or Apple?

 

There are literally dedicated wikipedia pages about this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation

https://bgr.com/2016/08/30/apple-tax-evasion-ireland-eu-explained-penalty-fine/

see for yourself which lawsuits they lost - off the top of my head both got slammed by antitrust ~15 years ago and Apple has been found evading taxes for billions.

8 minutes ago, harryk said:

Double standard or not, Huawei is a bad player caught in the midst of a trade war, sometimes life isn't fair

Oh ok, so I guess the US Government gets to do whatever idiotic and dictatorial thing they feel like and get away with it because "life isn't fair". In fact, why have laws at all? Life isn't fair, if you get robbed or kidnapped get over it - life isn't fair.

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Oh ok, so I guess the US Government gets to do whatever idiotic and dictatorial thing they feel like and get away with it because "life isn't fair". In fact, why have laws at all? Life isn't fair, if you get robbed or kidnapped get over it - life isn't fair.

If they confined to making a mess in their own back yard a lot less people would care.

[Sauron]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

If they confined to making a mess in their own back yard a lot less people would care.

True, though I would still care in the same way I care when China or NK do something dystopian do their respective citizens; perhaps more so because the US still has some semblance of democracy so if I can get some US citizens to see why this is bad it won't be wasted effort.

[Taf the Ghost]

As a proper historical note, the Athenian "pure" democracy devolved into duly elected dictators (because Pericles was just that good at convincing people) until it then collapsed into warring factions that couldn't agree on anything before basically falling apart and losing wars. The lesson everyone took from the situation is that it really doesn't work, but it does displace blame really well. This is why when the New World opened up and large amounts of wealth started flowing into European countries that the rise of "representative" forms of government came about. Someone still needs to keep the trains running on time, but you occasionally need to change who's doing that.

 

Modern forms of governance really just split along cultural lines for where within a pretty tight set of understandings a country falls into for its governance form. Too far one way or the other and you end up with civil wars pretty quickly.

 

@leadeater any of the Communism derivatives are ideologically of the "Big Lie" approaches. The leadership all knows it's a lie but they enforce the propaganda on everyone. As a result, it creates people that love hypocrisy. Which normally means they'll take a practice or good idea, kill it, skin it and wear the corpse as a robe. It's the same reason they had "elections" in the USSR.

[leadeater]

10 minutes ago, Sauron said:

True, though I would still care in the same way I care when China or NK do something dystopian do their respective citizens; perhaps more so because the US still has some semblance of democracy so if I can get some US citizens to see why this is bad it won't be wasted effort.

For this I have to care more than most, were I work we use Huawei network equipment, quite a few million dollars worth and the replacement project is still ongoing. Regardless of whether I would have picked them myself it's what we went with and because we are still in the middle of that project and purchasing equipment this meddling could cause me much pain and extra work. It hasn't yet and I don't particularly expect it to but the possibility is there and if it does I wholly wish China immediately calls upon all US debts to be paid in full and tank their economy, fuck it let it all burn at that point. 

[harryk]

15 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Links to what? Laws broken by MS or Apple?

 

There are literally dedicated wikipedia pages about this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation

https://bgr.com/2016/08/30/apple-tax-evasion-ireland-eu-explained-penalty-fine/

see for yourself which lawsuits they lost - off the top of my head both got slammed by antitrust ~15 years ago and Apple has been found evading taxes for billions.

Those are almost entirely lawsuits company v company. And when both companies are in the US they go to court and argue over the laws and eventually reach a settlement with or without the decision of a judge. 

 

The government can't really take sides when both companies are domestic. But if one company is foreign then its an entirely different story. You can sue a foreign company but you have to choose which jurisdiction to file in. If that company (Huawei) is not based in that jurisdiction then the government (US) can't exactly force them to do anything. They can however ban that company doing trade in their country. 

 

Think of the US government as a big brother (lol bad reference I know), he's not going to stop his two younger brothers from fighting each other but he will beat up any outsider who is bullying his younger brother. Traditionally a nation is responsible for protecting its companies against foreign competition.

 

Quote

Oh ok, so I guess the US Government gets to do whatever idiotic and dictatorial thing they feel like and get away with it because "life isn't fair". In fact, why have laws at all? Life isn't fair, if you get robbed or kidnapped get over it - life isn't fair.

Pretty much yeah

[mr moose]

8 hours ago, ThePD said:

The United States is not a democracy, it is a democratic republic. Two very different forms of government.

Playing semantics doesn't change what I said.  But if you insist,   I'll reiterate it for you:

 

The people of north Korea also don't get presented with evidence.   For as much as I don't trust Huewiaeyeu, the reality is these bans are illegal and no country can call themselves a free democratic republic when they engage in such behaviour.  

 

 

 

2 hours ago, harryk said:

You're not wrong. Just thought I'd point out that there is something called true/pure/direct democracy which some might refer to as democracy in a literal sense if they are talking about forms of government. Its all words.

Just because its impractical doesn't mean we can't define it or imagine it. Also there many are instances of direct democracy in history, including the US, albeit on small scales.

 

 

Impractical or not, the whole debate about whether it's a democracy or not came into being because I dared to insinuate that they were behaving like a communist dictatorship and nothing like a free country (in any of it's descriptors).   I believe the term democracy comes a lot closer to describing a supposed "democratic republic" than communist regime does.

 

 

[Taf the Ghost]

52 minutes ago, leadeater said:

For this I have to care more than most, were I work we use Huawei network equipment, quite a few million dollars worth and the replacement project is still ongoing. Regardless of whether I would have picked them myself it's what we went with and because we are still in the middle of that project and purchasing equipment this meddling could cause me much pain and extra work. It hasn't yet and I don't particularly expect it to but the possibility is there and if it does I wholly wish China immediately calls upon all US debts to be paid in full and tank their economy, fuck it let it all burn at that point. 

The Fed would be happy if China was that stupid. I'm not joking, either. China is economically and military weak, so they're only response is a combination of sniping at the edges and complaining. Only reason China is doing what they are is that, because they have nukes, their ports can't be blockaded. 

 

Though, as I've mentioned before, the only reason we're in this situation is that the Chinese ganged up with certain Western factions to capture manufacturing capacity over the last several decades. They did most of the voting blocs in the West a lot of damage. No one should have any sympathy for them, nor should blame be put on the US Government finally doing its damn job for the first time in two decades. 

 

Decisions long ago cause messes with ugly solutions today. That's always been the case.

[leadeater]

26 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

The Fed would be happy if China was that stupid.

They don't have the money to do that, not without printing currency and massively devaluing your currency. But I guess they could but it would have the intended effect I'd want it to have. Oh and I don't just mean US government debt, I mean all US debt.

 

26 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

No one should have any sympathy for them, nor should blame be put on the US Government finally doing its damn job for the first time in two decades. 

Placing sanctions on a private Chinese company to protect US global trade and technology supremacy is not finally doing it's job either. That's being petty and causing global instability. Like I said before, if you want to make a mess keep in your back yard. Governments preventing private companies from working with each other over things not proven is disgraceful political interfering.

[Sauron]

50 minutes ago, harryk said:

Those are almost entirely lawsuits company v company. And when both companies are in the US they go to court and argue over the laws and eventually reach a settlement with or without the decision of a judge.

As opposed to being nuked from orbit with no trial.

51 minutes ago, harryk said:

The government can't really take sides when both companies are domestic. But if one company is foreign then its an entirely different story. You can sue a foreign company but you have to choose which jurisdiction to file in. If that company (Huawei) is not based in that jurisdiction then the government (US) can't exactly force them to do anything. They can however ban that company doing trade in their country.

There are SOOOOOOOOOOO many other things they could have done that 1) wouldn't screw with the rest of western society and 2) would be in line with what has been done against either domestic or foreign companies in the past, you're just grasping at straws here.

54 minutes ago, harryk said:

Think of the US government as a big brother (lol bad reference I know)

No, it's a perfect reference considering you followed this up with a statement that the US government is a dictatorship.

55 minutes ago, harryk said:

he's not going to stop his two younger brothers from fighting each other but he will beat up any outsider who is bullying his younger brother.

More like he'll beat up his brother's best running competitor right before a race in exchange for his brother's pocket money.

57 minutes ago, harryk said:

Traditionally a nation is responsible for protecting its companies against foreign competition.

Uh, no. There's a word for that and it's "protectionism". It's not a good thing and it's typically associated with fascism and dictatorships in general. It's playing dirty even within the "rules" of capitalism, which is already a pretty cutthroat system to begin with. If every country did this we'd have literal feudalism; why would it stop at countries after all? Following this reasoning every city could heavily disadvantage external companies and give huge benefits to local ones.

1 hour ago, harryk said:

Pretty much yeah

Ok, if you're ok with dictatorships and fascism I guess I've nothing more to add - there's nothing more to have you concede. I rest my case.

[Taf the Ghost]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

They don't have the money to do that, not without printing currency and massively devaluing your currency. But I guess they could but it would have the intended effect I'd want it to have. Oh and I don't just mean US government debt, I mean all US debt.

It isn't 1994 anymore. The circuit breakers would kick in instantly, and while things would drop in the initial phase, there would be a rush of buying right after. Especially of US Treasuries. That in-rush of buying would more than offset any down moves in the USD with the movement of money in, especially as the sharper institutions would know they're about to make 5-10% in really rapid order on the moves.

 

A move to unwind all of the USD holdings and return them to CNY wouldn't really do all that much too interesting. Daily volume through the USD in foreign exchange is somewhere in the 3-4 Trillion range. Whatever minor annoyances it caused for the US Economy wouldn't matter, but it'd give politicians and certain factions a lot of room to do far more damage to China.

 

Without going into the full strategic analysis on China, but they're a net Food & Energy importer. For as large as the economy is, they don't have the military means to protect those inflows. That makes them economically weak. Or "fragile", if you prefer. If the Chinese hadn't spent the 90s bribing the Clinton Administration, we'd have none of these issues.

[leadeater]

5 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

It isn't 1994 anymore. The circuit breakers would kick in instantly, and while things would drop in the initial phase, there would be a rush of buying right after. Especially of US Treasuries. That in-rush of buying would more than offset any down moves in the USD with the movement of money in, especially as the sharper institutions would know they're about to make 5-10% in really rapid order on the moves.

 

A move to unwind all of the USD holdings and return them to CNY wouldn't really do all that much too interesting. Daily volume through the USD in foreign exchange is somewhere in the 3-4 Trillion range. Whatever minor annoyances it caused for the US Economy wouldn't matter, but it'd give politicians and certain factions a lot of room to do far more damage to China.

 

Without going into the full strategic analysis on China, but they're a net Food & Energy importer. For as large as the economy is, they don't have the military means to protect those inflows. That makes them economically weak. Or "fragile", if you prefer. If the Chinese hadn't spent the 90s bribing the Clinton Administration, we'd have none of these issues.

If you think all the US companies could survive an immediate requirement to pay all debts then I welcome you to try it. Ability to actually pay debts is not that simple, in a quick manor. Everything would tank exactly like in 2008, the protections just are not there.

 

Quote

China would not call in its debt all at once. If it did, the demand for the dollar would plummet. This dollar collapse would disrupt international markets even more than the 2008 financial crisis. China's economy would suffer along with everyone else's.

But if you make them they might.