Readit News logoReadit News
generic_user commented on Google confirms Play store will continue to function for existing Huawei phones   scmp.com/tech/big-tech/ar... · Posted by u/jmsflknr
gonvaled · 6 years ago
The US has pretty much withdrawn from all international organizations (or is simply ignoring them, see WTO). The US is not abiding by any international order.

The US is economically terrorizing the world by aggressively pushing the dominance of the US dollar. It has (successfully, to date) prevented the Iranian Oil Bourse (in €, 2008).

It interferes in the sovereignty of nations: for example, it has enforced the Iran embargo (against the will of the EU, which has been powerless to prevent it).

The world trade order is tilted in favor of the US, as are IP rules (favoring the incumbent power, with a head start of several decades), making the rest of the world subservient to the US, and forcing us to finance the life style of a minority of the planet's population (to be correct: to finance the lifestyle of a very small minority of the US population, since lots of Americans are also struggling)

The US has built its industrial and technological supremacy by industrial espionage during the late 19th and early 20th century, from the leading powers of the time (Europe).

The US has engaged in price dumping of agricultural products for ages, by illegally subsidizing farmers.

The US has interfered militarily, politically and economically around the world, often with devastating consequences in terms of life and property, creating power vacuums which have caused catastrophic consequences.

This is going on as we speak. The list is very long too.

I for one support the Chinese in this conflict, if for nothing else, simply for the possibility of putting some restraint on the out-of-control Hegemon.

I understand that US citizens will be siding with the US president on this one, and you may even feel you are being fair here.

You are not, and the rest of the world is pretty much not in agreement with the US.

generic_user · 6 years ago
> The world trade order is tilted in favor of the US, as are IP rules (favoring the incumbent power, with a head start of several decades).

This is not a US only issue.

the only incentive to create IP whether its scientific, technology, or the arts is that the creator can monetize there creation through copyright, patents etc. IP is the foundation of growth for this century for the entire industrialized world. I doubt the EU or anyone else supports Chinas IP theft, it has ill effects on all IP holders including EU companies.

> I for one support the Chinese in this conflict, if for nothing else, simply for the possibility of putting some restraint on the out-of-control Hegemon.

your entitled to your opinion. but I don't support the tariffs and other measures because I support the President of the US. I think the strategy behind China 2025 if implemented would lead to a destabilization of the global economy. that could very quickly lead to a serious war.

> You are not, and the rest of the world is pretty much not in agreement with the US

On some of your points Iran etc, sure there is a lot of the world that disagrees with the US position. including many US citizens. but on the issues of China's trade abuses and the Huawei ban I think most of the the world including those in the EU, UK, Japan etc, want to see China move away from there current ambitions.

generic_user commented on Google confirms Play store will continue to function for existing Huawei phones   scmp.com/tech/big-tech/ar... · Posted by u/jmsflknr
gonvaled · 6 years ago
> The fundamental issues surrounding China 2025

What are those issues? Why is the goal of advancing your local industries frown upon?

Why is the US in the business of telling sovereign countries what they should produce, buy or sell?

generic_user · 6 years ago
> What are those issues?

The issue is certainly not that China wants to advance there local industries. The US has spent the last 40 years+ helping china develop its industry and technology.

The Issue is that China was obligated to develop reciprocal free trade like the rest of the WTO members. Over the last 20 years they have been moving farther away from that into a state socialist mercantilist expansionist power.

A few of the issues includes the Theft of intellectual property, Industrial espionage, Lack of market access and state monopoly domination of there internal markets. Dumping of steel and other commodities. Currency manipulation, etc.

there is a very long list.

the EU has had been putting tariffs on Chinese steel for years due to aggressive dumping of steel which has harmed EU industry and distorted prices.

I think that this confrontation has been building for a long time. and now there is a consensus, a global consensus among the liberal democracies including the EU members that China 2025 is step to far away from the normalized reciprocal free trade system.

generic_user commented on Google confirms Play store will continue to function for existing Huawei phones   scmp.com/tech/big-tech/ar... · Posted by u/jmsflknr
bad_user · 6 years ago
And this is the danger of having so much power concentrated in a single country.

Google might not want to do this, but they might need to, because they are a US company.

Unfortunately this affects everyone. Why should Europeans care about US’s trade wars?

And don’t get me wrong, I would never buy Huawei devices because they are made by a company owned by a communist party, but that’s my choice to make, not that of some random US government that will be remembered as one of the worst ones yet.

generic_user · 6 years ago
The fundamental issues surrounding China 2025 which has prompted a shift in trade posture between the United States and China affect every other developed manufacturing nation in the world. Including Germany and the rest of the EU Nations.

Just because the EU has not gotten publicly involved does not mean that they are not involved privatively in negotiations. Europe along with Japan, Korea etc have the luxury to stay quiet because the US is taking a very public and direct strategy.

The US is the only Nation that can take that very public role.

generic_user commented on Google suspends some business with Huawei   reuters.com/article/us-hu... · Posted by u/samsonradu
yding · 6 years ago
There are many reasons, but there are two fundamental ones: Projections that the Chinese economy will overtake the US and Made in China 2025.

The first is easy to explain. The US likes being number 1, and if anyone else, whether the Chinese or the Japanese or the Indians looks like they're going to be number 1, the US doesn't like it.

The second is this: for the last 40-50 years, the US and China have been in a hugely mutually beneficial relationship, at least on the corporate level. American companies outsourced many of its lower wage lower skilled manufacturing to China and China has saved those companies a ton of money and made their owners a lot more profit. In order for China's economy to keep growing though, the Chinese believed, correctly, that they needed to move up the food chain since their labor is not as cheap as it once was. So they identified 10 "industries of the future" where they want their companies to dominate. American companies are, once again correctly, worried that since these are the industries that we would also like to dominate, that the Chinese, if they are successful, will literally eat our lunch.

There's a bunch of other stuff relating to the South China Sea, Taiwan, forced IP transfer, hacking, trade subsidies, etc. that are also causing tensions, but those two are probably the biggest ones.

generic_user · 6 years ago
thats a good summation, it's important to note that the "Made in China 2025" is the explicit Official policy issued by Chinese Premier Li Keqiang. So this is not interpretation or exaggeration. The official policy of The Peoples Republic of China is to raise the domestic sourcing of essentially all high-tech high-value goods to 75% domestic production. And also export these goods into other markets.

They may not state it publicly but I think all the industrialied producer economies Fron the US to Europe and Asia are scared to death of the implications China 2025 has for there own high-tech high-value industries.

generic_user commented on Is Vertical Farming Really the Future of Agriculture?   eater.com/2018/7/3/175311... · Posted by u/lxm
lighthazard · 7 years ago
I agree with all your points. However, I believe there are additional costs to land farming like insects, weather damage, etc. So, yes, the sun is free but that comes with the caveats of the elements. Not sure how much crop is lost due to insects/drought/other factors but perhaps this helps.
generic_user · 7 years ago
Commercial farms generally have some form of Crop insurance along with equipment insurance etc.

I don't think very small one man farms that sell directly at farmers markets are eligible for most of the programs. But most of those people grow in residential areas not properly zoned for agriculture.

Vertical could be interesting to try in those micro backyard farms.

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

generic_user commented on Harvard University is fighting to keep its admissions process under wraps   marketwatch.com/story/har... · Posted by u/Jerry2
intended · 7 years ago
What sucks is that bias and racism is also baked into many “objective” criteria.

Take test scores - just having the right parents will push your sores up on average.

Having better performance regular ties into wealth and upbringing. No surprise then that the dominant economic group will hold an advantage is such tests.

The damned intertwined nature of all these issues is what makes it hard to set up an actual objective measure. Which then brings us back to subjective decision making.

generic_user · 7 years ago
Its not objective criteria that is the problem. Its the interpretation and misrepresentation by ideologues that is inadequate.

'just having the right parents will push your sores up on average'

That has little to do with the objectivity or subjectivity of the test. There can be a wide variation of social development between racial groups, economic classes, religious communities, geographic regions etc. Not to mention individual IQ and ability.

A standardized test in say, mathematics is objective. The same tests that demonstrate competency are administered all over the world in every country and culture in the world. You can objectively determine the level of ability of any given student regardless of race or culture.

To simply say that because disparity exist we should therefor abandon standards and objective criteria in favor of a set of morphological corrective fictions that look good on paper but do nothing to fix the disparity is diminishing for everyone.

The problems are simply much harder and more complicated then peoples egos will let them admit. Its very easy to propose a grand theory that fixes all the problem of the world quickly and completely.

generic_user commented on Harvard University is fighting to keep its admissions process under wraps   marketwatch.com/story/har... · Posted by u/Jerry2
sonnyblarney · 7 years ago
Discrimination against Jews was far more than systematic, it was institutional and not really a secret. Moreover, an overall overrepresentation of Asians are admitted, which us completely a different kind of 'bias' than simply not admitting them at all.

Though I'd disagree with the whole if it, if they went 'strictly SAT' or something, and suppose 50% of every class was Asian-American, whereupon Asian-Americans only make up 5% of the overall population of the US thereby meaning a 10x overrepresentation ... well - that's a problem by any social measure.

So it's far more complicated than simply 'they don't like some people and don't want them there'.

generic_user · 7 years ago
The idea of 'Over representation' of a certain racial group based on there percentage of the population is entirely subjective and racist.

At Cal Tech Asians are roughly 50% of students. Cal Tech does not consider race in admissions. Those students rightfully earned there places base on merit and objective criteria.

To make the suggestion that they should be systematically denied those positions because of there race and percentage of population is regressive. Who gets to decide what percentage of what race is a good percentage?

Harvard is desperately trying to cover there criteria because it more then likely runs contrary to the 1964 Civil Rights Act and they are going to louse this law suite if it goes to trial.

Lets see the exact formula that Harvard is using for race vs percentage of the population so we can apply the same formula to all races they admit. Lets compare European, Jewish, Asian student percentages based on the same formula.

I think that administration at Harvard is scared to death of that type of scrutiny but that is exactly what they are going to get. And it could seriously stigmatize the school for decades. And set some significant legal presented so Schools can not use these sort of behind closed doors racist regressive policies any more.

generic_user commented on Harvard University is fighting to keep its admissions process under wraps   marketwatch.com/story/har... · Posted by u/Jerry2
tomcam · 7 years ago
I cannot wait for the legal discovery process commences. It’s going to be a bloodbath, because Harvard has discriminated against Asians far more subtly and systematically than they did with Jews.
generic_user · 7 years ago
I think this is going to be a watershed case that shows that race based admissions and affirmative action programs no matter the intent are socially and morally regressive. They inevitably lead to racist polices and race based favoritism of one for or another.

"The court documents, filed in federal court in Boston, also showed that Harvard conducted an internal investigation into its admissions policies in 2013 and found a bias against Asian-American applicants. But Harvard never made the findings public or acted on them."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/harvard-asian-enrollme...

generic_user commented on Harvard University is fighting to keep its admissions process under wraps   marketwatch.com/story/har... · Posted by u/Jerry2
announcerman · 7 years ago
Why would they keep it secret? To stop others from gaming the system or because the system can't be gamed since its biased from the start?
generic_user · 7 years ago
Harvard is being sued for racial discrimination against Asian Americans in there admissions policies.

They created set of personality criteria for admissions. The criteria was entirely subjective, things like 'positive personality', and 'likability'. Then gave Asians consistently low scores on theses subjective criteria. And then weighed the criteria high enough to knock them out of positions which they would have otherwise qualified for if the admissions was based on standard academic criteria.

Bias and racism is predictable when you choose to abandon Meritocracy based on objective measurable criteria.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/harvard-asian-enrollme...

u/generic_user

KarmaCake day887May 18, 2013View Original