deepVoid

Exactly. :) Those bureaucrats are holding back the 1.4 billion lovely people. We need to differentiate the people from the CCP. The people love the US and freedom. I am proud of the people in Hong Kong. They are fighting for their own freedom harder than ever.

> US relations with China began in the 1970s during the Nixon administration.

US started diplomatic relationship with China, in order to fight USSR, not to put a bet. USSR was by far the bigger threat and the US and China had a common enemy.

> If Xi can create a system to surveil and restrict the free speech of 1.4 billion people in less than 10 years.

Have you not learned a thing in your whole life? Changing 1.4 billion people's ideology is way way way harder than building a surveillance system.

> 50 years ago?

Can you provide any link or evidence that you made the specific bet 50 years ago?

> Sure, and if you give a monkey with a typewriter infinite time, he'll eventually write Shakespeare.

Only impatient and ignorant monkeys think it takes several years to change 1.4 billion people.

The gamble has not failed. It just takes longer. Democracy and market economy are definitely gaining on the Chinese people. More people are studying aboard and wanting China to be more like the West, although some bureaucrats are stubborn and holding China back. Take Hong Kong as an example, nobody would image such pro-democracy would happen at such a massive scale. Hong Kong people have done it. The Hong Kong people demand democracy more than ever. I am very very proud of them.

Well, the share of coal in China's primary energy mix has declined to a new low[1]. Basically, China has been trying to close down small, inefficient coal plants and build renewable power stations. Resuming massive construction of coal plants does comply with what they have been doing.

[1] https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/c...

Bloomberg has lost my trust as a reliable source of information since the invented story about China Chip hack[1]. Contrary to the article, China is the leading investor in renewable energy[2][3].

[1]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-04/the-big-h...

[2]https://www.forbes.com/sites/dominicdudley/2019/01/11/china-...

[3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China

Freedom to speak out against the employer? There are definitely consequences. It can apparently get you fired quickly [1][2][3][4].

[1] https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qvgn9q/do-not-discuss-the...

[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/15/facebook-employee-i-was-fire...

[3] https://digg.com/video/qin-chen-facebook-employee-suicide

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google%27s_Ideological_Echo_Ch...

It is different in the sense that TikTok does not create any content. It is a platform for other young people to post videos. It is like Youtube where people post and share videos. Yes, people can post political videos and spread disinformation on Youtube, just like on other platform as well. Singling out TikTok for this smells more like protectionism. Facebook has more than 2 billion users worldwide and the US has a population of less than 400 million. The majority of the users come from other nations. According to your theory, Facebook posts severe national security risk to all other countries where Facebook operates because Facebook is a foreign funded and controlled company to other countries.

An app used by young people to post silly videos definitely poses a severe national security risk[1][2].

[1]https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/340216

[2]https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2019/10/24/tiktok-most-popul...

Here is how the Chinese people were treated by America[1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act

Counterparts of concentration camps[1][2].

[1] https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a27813648/concentratio...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_Japanese_America...

It seems that Oracle was prepared to have two co-CEOs at the same time. When an emergency like this happens, the other co-CEO can take over any any time.

The China chip hacking story was an invented story by Bloomberg. Everyone else denied it including Apple as the customer, US government, the supplier of the chip etc. Bloomberg fabricated the story. Ever since, I do not trust Bloomberg as a reliable source of information.

Or kowtow to American censors [1][2]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[2]https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/9jjpph/re...

Smoking and Juul hurt public health more than anything else. Not only the smokers themselves get lunge disease or even die, but also other innocent second-hand smokers get hurt. I do not want my little kids' lungs to absorb smoke just because they are playing in public. Smoking and Juul are universally bad with little or no benefits. They should be banned from any public space for good.

That's nonsense. Huawei has never proven to be connected with China government either. It is a private company owned by its founder and employees. There is ZERO evidence whatsoever that Huawei has spied for China government.

Google, Amazon, Microsoft, etc. are all extended branch of the Trump government as well. They collaborated with NSA to spy on other nations and its own people. It is a well-known fact. Google is working with the US military to weaponize AI. Amazon and Microsoft work with the military to weaponize cloud technologies.

It is not fascinating. It is sad, unfortunate, and unfair to Li and his hard work.

> When Chinese students step outside of China to study, they are struggling to adapt to a new education system, and are frequently confronted — in class, in daily life, and online — with assumptions that they have been “brainwashed by the Chinese government.” It makes some feel attacked and reaffirms what they were taught in China: The West is biased and hostile.

Many Chinese people in the West still read the same propaganda, hang out with the Chinese people. It is difficult for them to be un-brainwashed.

I am thrilled Keanu Reeves is back with Matrix. It was such a thought-provoking movie with a great actor.

CCP has not decided not to extend "one country, two systems" either. 50 years is in the agreement with the UK when Hong Kong was returned to China. CCP has not said that they would not extend it either. I don't see why they would not if it works well for Hong Kong and CCP.

It is incompatible with CCP's views for sure. However, I don't think their long-term goal for Hong Kong is to turn it into another Chinese province though. Hong Kong has been doing well and prosperous under the current system. Hong Kong people enjoy more freedom, better quality of life. It does not really benefit CCP to turn it into a province which is less prosperous in many ways.

Exactly. It is not really a dilemma. If the Hong Kong people want to protest, let them be. It's their own problem. Mainland may help them if they appreciate it (clearly they don't). If they want freedom, let them be. If you truly love and care about Hong Kong, give it freedom and leave Hong Kong alone. There will be absolutely no forces needed in Hong Kong.

Every company is "state directed when needed", to some degree. For instance, Google is not allowed to provide Android to Huawei (it is withheld now), even if there is no clear evidence that Huawei threatens national security. Admittedly, it would be harder for Huawei to push back on government directions. However, that still does not make Huawei "state-owned" or "state-directed" in the common sense.

It is not true that all major Chinese companies began as state-owned enterprises. Alibaba, Tencent, Baidu etc. are all private. They were started by their founders and funded by VC money. For instance, Alibaba was started by Jack Ma and 17 others. It is privately-owned by shareholders, none of which is state or government[1]. For some other industries such as banks, railway, oil etc., it is different. They are mostly state-owned. But tech is not one of them.

[1] https://www.marketscreener.com/ALIBABA-GROUP-HOLDING-1791667...

> We know nothing about the internal governance procedures of the trade union committee.

> We do not know who the committee members or other trade union leaders are, or how they are selected.

> Given the public nature of trade unions in China, if the ownership stake of the trade union committee is genuine, and if the trade union and its committee function as trade unions generally function in China, then Huawei may be deemed effectively state-owned.

There are lots of unknowns and many if's. It is far-fetched at best that Huawei is state-owned.

It is not hard at all if they are willing to pay big bucks. They want to game the visa system, suppress the wage, and get cheap labor. Just take a look at all the profits Apple, Google, Microsoft make every year. And yet, they still collude together in order to suppress wage, given the high housing prices in the bay area [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...

Keanu Reeves is a genuinely nice guy. He gave away 50 million to the unsung heroes of The Maxtrix. In addition, he donated millions to cancer research as well. I am glad that he is everywhere.

https://www.hellomagazine.com/celebrities/200305283652/keanu...

Iranian scientists are not alone. Many Chinese-born scientists are targeted as well. Scientific research has been politicized to another level lately.

https://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/long-reads/arti...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/17/technology/sherry-chen-na...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-06-13/the-u-s-i...

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/chinese-scientists-fbi-nih...

In the US, my phone is on Wifi pretty much most of time during the day. When I am at work, my phone is on Wifi. When I get home, it is on Wifi as well. When I go to Starbucks, my phone connects to Wifi automatically. India has very limited wifi access. The overall data usage is still a lot higher in the US than in India.