Trump Signs Law Banning Use of Federal Funds To Purchase Huawei Equipment (thehill.com) 50
President Trump on Thursday signed into law a bill banning the use of federal funds to purchase equipment from telecom companies deemed a national security threat, such as Chinese telecom group Huawei. From a report: The Secure and Trusted Communications Act, which the Senate passed in February and the House approved last year, will also require the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to establish a $1 billion fund to help small telecom groups remove existing equipment that is deemed to be a threat. "Securing our networks from malicious foreign interference is critical to America's wireless future, especially as some communications providers rely on equipment from companies like Huawei that pose an immense threat to America's national and economic security," the bill's House sponsors, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.), ranking member Greg Walden (R-Ore.), and Reps. Doris Matsui (D-Calif.) and Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), said in a statement.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Re: Coming soon, SOVIET cellphone network (Score:2, Interesting)
Maoism isn't Marxism. PRC stopped being Maoist when they rewrote theier constitution in 1978. Democracy is obviously different from autocracy. And as right-wingers love to point out, democracy is different from a republic.
Can you take a term like Democratic Socialist and decompose the meaning from it's constituent words alone? Or does it mean something subtly different from simply saying Bernie is a socialist?
Re: (Score:2)
Can you take a term like Democratic Socialist and decompose the meaning from it's constituent words alone? Or does it mean something subtly different from simply saying Bernie is a socialist?
Democratic Socialism is just like socialism, except you get a vote on who your oppressors are going to be.
Re: (Score:2)
The PRC is the *Communist Republic of China* - The Peoples Republic run *only* by the Communist Party - That's Marxist Communism.
Bernie (had/does publicly) advocate(s) nationalizing most major industries, higher education, healthcare, and utilities including the Internet - That's Marxist Socialism.
So, how can you support Bernie with a straight face while decrying the bad China ?
Answer - you can't really. But, it's easier on your consceince that accepting that despite its evils, Capitalism is better th
Re: (Score:1)
The PRC is the *Communist Republic of China* - The Peoples Republic run *only* by the Communist Party - That's Marxist Communism.
Sounds a bit like Leninism to me.
Bernie (had/does publicly) advocate(s) nationalizing most major industries, higher education, healthcare, and utilities including the Internet - That's Marxist Socialism.
Nationalizing everything can also be fascism. It can also be a monarchy. Not sure how you picked Marxism specifically?
For what it's worth I suspect you're misrepresenting something Sanders proposed that was modeled instead on a Mixed economy, which is contrary to much of what Marx proposed. But without any reference in your paraphrasing I can't really be certain what instance you're referring to.
Re: (Score:2)
Social democrats are left-of-left. You'll have to explain how those socialist policies don't necessarily lead to communism because they historically have always done that. Socialism is always the promise, communism is always the result because in order to implement socialism you need a communist dictatorship. Also, point out countries where pure 'democratic socialism' has worked, even what Bernie tries to deflect sometimes, Denmark, Sweden etc. are rapidly decreasing their tax rates and socialist programs b
Re: (Score:1)
Social democrats are left-of-left.
No they are not.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you manage to reconcile your confident assertions about politics while clearly getting most of your information about politics from TP USA social media images?
Re: (Score:2)
Also please vote for Bernie, Communism will work this time!
Honest question:
Why do you guys always stampede to COMMUNISM. You just look and sound like idiots.
Why are you NEVER willing to look at Denmark / Sweden / Norway or other countries where the people are happier, healthier and safer than Americans - And where the economies are strong?
Is it simply because it breaks your narrative, or is there some other reason?
Re: (Score:2)
Demark / Sweden / Norway are not like the USA. They're more like Vermont. Socialism might work in Vermont.
Also, all of those countries are very capitalist, they have very low corporate tax rates, they have implemented massive deregulation for most business. Taxes on workers supply a robust social safety net, with very basic healthcare generally supplemented by private insurance policies.
Bernie's policy proposals are actually VERY different from those countries (not to mention the comparison to USA and those
Sure... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sure... (Score:4, Insightful)
"who potentially has access to your data"
Access to your data is your responsibility. As long as you are aware that without secure encryption, everything you transmit over a public network is as secure as a postcard, it's a non-issue. Otherwise, communicate with trusted servers and other known clients using academically vetted, open source cryptography and use as large a key as your resources will allow.
It won't be safe forever but it will assure there will be a major delay in an adversaries ability to see the data. No need for a tinfoil hat once you understand that everything you transmit is archived somewhere, by someone.
Re: (Score:3)
Access to your data is your responsibility. As long as you are aware that without secure encryption, everything you transmit over a public network is as secure as a postcard, it's a non-issue.
You're only addressing data as a sent message, private papers as adoption of Constitutional intent.
Otherwise, communicate with trusted servers and other known clients using academically vetted, open source cryptography and use as large a key as your resources will allow.
You're achieving a tone of big pharma to Consult Your Doctor. Following an assertion about personal responsibility and a list of highly technical specifications. I mean, If you're advocating for a new class of privacy MDs...okay, but parading your expertise as a simple matter of what everyone should do is a cliche of tech support twenty years passed.
It won't be safe forever but it will assure there will be a major delay in an adversaries ability to see the data.
Blithely offering information of a general character only a
Re: (Score:2)
At some point in the stream, your data is unencrypted (eg behind the SSL proxy). You don't want Huawei sitting there. There is also a ton of information that can be gleaned from the data streams themselves. And then there is the capacity of a router/switch acting like any other server on the network, eg. a login page.
Re: Sure... (Score:2)
A postcard would be a good comparison if you held it up to your postman while they transcribed it onto a new paper, and that relay was repeated many times on the way to your destination. That is a packet switched network.
Re: (Score:3)
Anyone who isn't treating ANY telecommunications or data network (mobile, wireless, satellite, landline, cable, fiber or whatever else) that they don't own and control as potentially hostile (and encrypting anything even remotely sensitive that is being sent over those networks) deserves to have that information stolen or compromised.
Doesn't matter who owns the network or what equipment is being used, it should all be treated as potentially unsafe.
Re: (Score:2)
Domestic surveillance has proven to be largely worthless. Billions of crimes committed and almost nothing to show for it.
The other big problem is that this will end up hurting you more than it hurts them. China has accelerated its efforts to replace US technology with its own, and is now years ahead in some areas like 5G. You can try to persuade other countries not to buy Chinese tech but many of them will anyway (e.g. the UK, you supposed best buddies).
Turns out trade wars are neither good nor easy to win.
Re: (Score:2)
Reads Like Melville (Score:2)
VP Pence: "irresponsible rhetoric"
To the last I grapple with thee. From hell's heart I stab at thee. For hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee.
US in autarky (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
No, he's telling the world "Other dictators get away with this so I can as well."
Not realizing how many dictators the U.S. have gotten out of the way with the help of the citizens in those same countries.
Re: US in autarky (Score:1)
Dictators are more of a Euro-peon thing. We've got plenty of problems, but that isn't one of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Trump has made it clear he is a fan of Mussolini and has quoted him several times.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
lol, if that's how you justify it to yourself sure.
Meanwhile, you have a guy who was put into power despite losing the popular vote by 3 million ballots, has the power to override your elected representatives, and can even stack the judiciary in his favour or let his criminal friends out of jail at will.
Whilst in Europe proportional representation is common, the judiciary is independent, there's no grand dictator who controls is all, the most you have is a prime minister who serves parliaments, rather than
Re: (Score:2)
Who upmodded that trash. The U.S. has separation of powers, as defined by our constitutional form of government. The states, as in United States of America, elect the president and not the popular vote. You may also have noticed our legislative branch recently voting on removing the Chief Executive.
Meanwhile the UK breaks off from the tyranny that is the EU. Let's hope the European court of Human Rights doesn't rule that offending the feelings [coe.int] of your political elite isn't also a crime.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
China is now literally blaming the US for the outbreak and threatening to cut off supplies of medicine to the rest of the world if it doesn't get what it wants.
Unbridled globalism has failed and is now coming back to bite. The US has very little remaining production capacity for key industries, a requirement which was instituted after WWII by Eisenhower and lasted until the fall of the Berlin wall, then dismantled. This localism of jobs and self-sufficiency during a time of uncertainty was the primary cause
How long will this last? (Score:1)
Last time Trump banned something chinese it lasted 3 weeks. I predicted a month, I think, maybe two. Let's see how long this lasts. This time I say about a week or untill people from alternative technology providers realise huawei owns a few crucial 5g patents.
Re: How long will this last? (Score:2)
Patents are irrelevant if the state chooses not to enforce them on the basis of national security.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, and that's a slippery slope all around. If China ignored patents the way they ignore copyright the whole world is going to be in a world of hurt.
Re: (Score:2)
China does ignore patents and copyright. Hence why they have a state-sponsored tech company like Huawei. Their switches are copies of yesteryears Cisco Catalyst platform and Cisco let them do it in the hopes of getting a foothold in their market.
What these companies that let China roam free for the last few decades didn't (want to) realize, is that, like the Soviet Union, China controls the means of production, their market and by extension, their population - trade internal to China require fealty to the l
Re: How long will this last? (Score:2)
"On July 11, 1986, Bosack and Lougheed were forced to resign from Stanford and the university contemplated filing criminal complaints against Cisco and its founders for the theft of its software, hardware designs, and other intellectual properties."
Right.
Re: (Score:2)
China ignores our patents. We should ignore theirs.
Just network equipment?` (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Theory: U.S. intelligence found out about Huawei's backdoor and said, "Hey, we know you're doing this so we'll keep quiet about it if you'll let us use it too."
The answer was no. The rest is history.
Still not broad enough. (Score:2)
Chinese suppliers should not even be considered by any level of government seeking bids. Including nominally American businesses with Chinese owners or that has all i
Re: (Score:2)