Thread: US warning allies to ditch Huawei, Chinese "spying" equipment

well the news just gets better for them

Huawei: ARM memo tells staff to stop working with China’s tech giant
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-48363772

UK-based chip designer ARM has told staff it must suspend business with Huawei, according to internal documents obtained by the BBC.

ARM instructed employees to halt "all active contracts, support entitlements, and any pending engagements” with Huawei and its subsidiaries to comply with a recent US trade clampdown.

ARM's designs form the basis of most mobile device processors worldwide.

In a company memo, it said its designs contained “US origin technology”.

As a consequence, it believes it is affected by the Trump administration's ban.

One analyst described the move, if it became long-term, as an “insurmountable” blow to Huawei’s business.

He said it would greatly affect the firm's ability to develop its own chips, many of which are currently built with ARM’s underlying technology, for which it pays a licence.

Cambridge-headquartered ARM had been described as the UK's largest tech firm until its takeover by a Japanese fund. It employs 6,000 workers and lists eight offices in the US.

Just what the UK economy needs in these troubled times.

I guess US economy trumps UK economy.

It's a huge issue for the US based retailers who have been selling Huawei devices, once Google remove their functionality all of a sudden their products are not as described and not fit for purpose ....so the retailer picks up the tab on the returns.

Huawei on the other hand have already made the sale and can easily find other outlets.

Well, the Chinese will use their existing ARM blueprints and copycat it 1000 times better for cheaper alternatives

ARM will die a slow death when everyone will go for the cheap Chinese ARM alternative

Good job Trump, fucking the English in the arse

^Exactly right ....Arm, Google and any other western tech company that follows Trump's lead will suddenly find their market share under attack from the unstoppable industrial monolith that is China.

The doomsday clock says one minute to midnight.

Originally Posted by OhOh

to avoid doing business with US

No problem for USA, the POTUS will have to take the blame.
That's why the POTUS is for...

Originally Posted by foobar

^Exactly right ....Arm, Google and any other western tech company that follows Trump's lead will suddenly find their market share under attack from the unstoppable industrial monolith that is China.

The doomsday clock says one minute to midnight.

Baldy orange cunto just hasn't thought it through. The company that's benefiting the most is Samsung.

Originally Posted by foobar

^Exactly right ....Arm, Google and any other western tech company that follows Trump's lead will suddenly find their market share under attack from the unstoppable industrial monolith that is China.

The doomsday clock says one minute to midnight.

next stop, full UNSC embargo against the Chinese

US unwise to enlist Google in Huawei attack




"Now that Google has joined the trade dispute between the United States and China, it seems Washington is more concerned about who would dominate the telecommunications and high-tech sectors rather than global growth.

Google claims it is executing the White House's executive order, which has blacklisted Huawei, to deny the Chinese 5G technology giant security updates and technical support. As a result, new Huawei devices would not have apps such as YouTube and maps.

Certain issues in the Sino-US trade dispute center on Huawei because the Chinese enterprise is a leader in 5G technology and the US feels it is losing the tech battle to China.

That Google has joined the US administration's campaign against Huawei shows building a win-win partnership in global free trade has become even more difficult. Given the monopolistic ownership of advanced technologies and the entry barriers to international market, only a handful of telecom equipment makers and search engines dominate the global market.

And since the ownership of technologies is vital to any country's economic development, neither China nor the US are expected to sacrifice their interests. For instance, China cannot become a truly prosperous country without becoming a big tech power and consumer market. But the US seems determined to prevent China from achieving that goal.

The current technology "cold war" is disturbing for people who love quality products and want to see technological advancement that benefits everyone regardless of their nationality. But political symbolism is increasingly becoming the language of choice for the White House to communicate with the world, especially with China.

Still, Google should not have joined the Sino-US dispute, because US and Chinese companies need each other to advance their businesses globally. The two enterprises can still work together to find out how to include more Google services on Huawei's smartphones.

Besides, Huawei can help Google to gain a bigger market share for its Play Store, as it is the third-largest smartphone vendor worldwide－Huawei increased its global smartphone market share to 14.7 percent last year against Apple's 14.9 percent and Samsung's 20.9 percent, according to a report by the International Data Corporation, a US market research and analysis company that specializes in information technology and telecommunications, in January 2019.

So, if Google wants to grab a share of the Chinese market, it would do better to partner the Chinese company. After all, Huawei has a strong presence in many markets and Google wants to bring as many consumers as possible under its fold.

Huawei also has major stakes in many countries' wireless network industries, and provides equipment for many major carriers across the globe. Even after the US has alleged that Huawei equipment could be used to spy on other countries and their companies, the Chinese company continues to have a strong presence in many markets.

Google has launched Project Fi, a phone plan. And Huawei can help it to expand the reach of internet further, by providing higher speed and better services to consumers. So Google will only harm itself by severing ties with Huawei, because the latter has the equipment, expertise and the patents that it needs to fulfill its goals.

Huawei has taken the lead in developing 5G technology, which has the potential to revolutionize the global economy.

On the other hand, the US has been indifferent to the intensifying calls for building infrastructure facilities to promote 5G technology, which shows the once undisputed global tech leader is trailing in the race to capitalize on advanced technologies. It also shows that Asian tech companies such as Huawei have established a lead in advanced technology despite the US' mudslinging campaign against them."

US unwise to enlist Google in Huawei attack - Opinion - Chinadaily.com.cnGiving away the global market to any newcomer is, as I suggested previously, an idiotic strategy.


A 6 months hiccup to the manufacturers.

An inconvenient delay, in purchasing a new phone, to the global user community.

But a disaster, losing 50+ % of the global market, to the current ameristani sector leaders.



Another wall announced, but will it be delivered by the failing, shoot themselves in the foot, burnt out black star?

Buy or sell your company shares as the privileged 0.001% and insider politicians do and accumulate the dirty, shrivelling green paper.

U.S. lawmakers want to help rural telecoms replace Huawei, ZTE equipment

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers introduced legislation on Wednesday to provide about $700 million in grants to help U.S. telecommunications providers with the cost of removing Huawei equipment from their networks.


The bill also moves to block the use of equipment or services from Chinese telecoms firms Huawei and ZTE in next-generation 5G networks, according to a statement by the senators.


The United States has accused ZTE Corp and Huawei Technologies Co Ltd of working for the Chinese government and has expressed concern their equipment could be used to spy on Americans, allegations the Chinese government and the companies say are baseless.


“With so much at stake, our communications infrastructure must be protected from threats posed by foreign governments and companies like Huawei,” Tom Cotton, a Republican senator co-sponsoring the bill, said in a statement.


Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, and Roger Wicker, Democratic chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, are also backing the bill.


While large U.S. wireless companies have severed ties with Huawei, small rural carriers have leaned on Huawei and ZTE switches and equipment because they are often less expensive.


The Rural Wireless Association, which represents carriers with fewer than 100,000 subscribers, estimates that 25 percent of its members have Huawei and ZTE in their networks, and have said it would cost $800 million to $1 billion to replace it.


The move goes further than steps taken so far by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration, even as it has hardened its stance on Huawei.


Last August, Trump signed a bill barring the U.S. government itself from using Huawei and ZTE equipment.
Then, last week, the U.S. Commerce Department blacklisted Huawei and 70 affiliates, barring the company from buying parts or components from U.S. companies without U.S. government approval.


Five days later, the U.S. government temporarily eased trade restrictions, allowing the Chinese firm to buy American-made goods to maintain existing networks and provide software updates to existing Huawei headsets"

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-h...KCN1ST052?il=0


Politicians, with no financial investment and no intentions of joining the companies advocate providing citizens funds to domestic companies.

Huawei curbs may have 'bad' ripple effect: expert



"Silicon Valley observers wonder if ‘blacklist’ may be about something other than security

As the US government orders its tech companies to cut ties with China's Huawei, experts in Silicon Valley are concerned about the deeper effects, beyond trade and tariff tensions, that the move could have to the detriment of the world.

Late last week, the Trump administration put Huawei and 68 other foreign entities on an export blacklist, which makes it almost impossible for a company on the list to purchase US-made goods.


The US Commerce Department on Monday eased the restriction, allowing US mobile-phone companies and internet broadband providers to work with Huawei until Aug 19.


Huawei, the world's largest telecom-equipment manufacturer and the second-largest smartphone maker, spent $70 billion buying components in 2018. Some $11 billion went to US firms for products including Qualcomm chips, Microsoft software and Google Andriod operating systems.


Google has acted on the government's order, saying it would cut ties with Huawei, but after Monday's temporary exemption, the company said it would work with Huawei over the next 90 days.


"Google technology software is going to be disrupted, so the 25 percent tariff is one kind of disruption, but it's not a disruption involving the flow of technology," said Mark Cohen, a senior fellow at the Asia IP Law Project at the University of California, Berkeley. "This is in a way a little deeper and affects a different sector because we are also dealing with how we collaborate with each other, not only in hard goods but also in soft things."


As for the US government's national security concerns, Cohen warns of "the potential intrusiveness" into commercial transactions, into people's lives and export controls.


"Now we have Huawei as a target. And of course, a lot of us wonder: Is this about Huawei's back door that hasn't been identified? Or is this about 5G and the threat posed by 5G, or is this something else?" Cohen said.


"I'm concerned about this being something else; this is no longer trade negotiations. If it was a trade negotiation, you'd reap what you have accomplished thus far, and perhaps you put off some other issues to another day," he said.


"But if you look at the subsequent reactions, you look at how the security issues are wrapped up in it, you have to wonder whether this is probably no longer about IP," he added. "It may no longer even be about trade deficits. It may be something much bigger that's in the minds of the folks in Washington."


In response to the Trump administration's temporarily eased restrictions, Huawei's founder and CEO Ren Zhengfei said on Tuesday that the US government's move affected the company's low-end products but not high-end ones, especially 5G.


He said Huawei will buy US products as long as the US government allows tech companies to export components. He also said that US companies are trying to lobby the administration to relax restrictions on Huawei.


The US move against Huawei reminded Victor Wang, founding and managing partner of Silicon Valley-based CEG Ventures, of Chinese telecommunications company ZTE, which underwent a US export ban last year. The ban was lifted after the US made a deal with the company.


"I think after the ZTE event, the Chinese government has already made up their mind: We need to develop our entire ecosystem all the way from the chips to the electronic design software," said Wang.


He said that China can persuade some Asian and European countries to adopt the system, but that is not to the benefit of anybody, he said.

Both Wang and Cohen attended a panel discussion hosted by the Asia Society and the Committee of 100 in San Francisco on Monday to share their views on technology and trade involved in US-China relations.


Cohen echoed Wang's view, saying there's a big incentive for China to develop its own system. "This is what people keep talking about — 'decoupling'. When you start saying you can't use our software and chips, then they start developing their own software and chips," he said.

It would ultimately create a situation where there's less interconnectivity, said Cohen. "The ability we have now to take our cellphone and travel around the world, plug in a USB cord and have access to spectrum — all that can be compromised when countries start developing their own system. That's bad for the world, frankly," he said."

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20190...2260bd331.html

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20190...2260bd447.html

Panasonic 'suspends transactions' with Huawei after US ban
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-48375411

Japan's Panasonic said it was halting business with Huawei to comply with US restrictions, dealing a fresh blow to the Chinese telecoms firm.

Last week the US put Huawei on a list of companies that American firms cannot trade with unless they have a licence.

The ban applies to goods having 25% or more of US-originated materials, according to reports.

The restrictions mark an escalation in US efforts to block Huawei, which it says poses a security risk.

"Panasonic announced in [an] internal notification that it should suspend transactions with Huawei and its 68 affiliates that were banned by the US government," the firm said in a statement.

Last week the Trump administration added Huawei - the world's second largest smartphone maker - to its "entity list" which bans the company from acquiring technology from US firms without government approval.

Originally Posted by OhOh

US unwise to enlist Google in Huawei attack

Says CHINASTAN DAILY, a Chinky propaganda site.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Huawei curbs may have 'bad' ripple effect: expert - Chinadaily.com.cn

Sources: Tech giant to launch own OS this year - Chinadaily.com.cn

Brah Brah Brah

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Says CHINASTAN DAILY, a Chinky propaganda site.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Brah Brah Brah

Try reading the article, rather than the source.

The actual, significant, words appear to be written by a ameristani citizen.

Originally Posted by OhOh

"Google technology software is going to be disrupted, so the 25 percent tariff is one kind of disruption, but it's not a disruption involving the flow of technology," said Mark Cohen, a senior fellow at the Asia IP Law Project at the University of California, Berkeley.

https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/f...rk%20Cohen.pdf

https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/f...rk%20Cohen.pdf

In short a pro chinese ambulance chaser.

Originally Posted by foobar

It's a huge issue for the US based retailers who have been selling Huawei devices, once Google remove their functionality all of a sudden their products are not as described and not fit for purpose ....so the retailer picks up the tab on the returns.

Huawei on the other hand have already made the sale and can easily find other outlets.

On the bright side, it means you'll soon be able to pick up a really cheap mobile camera for peanuts.

Harry don't read outside his authorized literature, like a scared little schoolboy

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/f...rk%20Cohen.pdf

In short a pro chinese ambulance chaser.

Yes, I'm sure there is some nice "faculty funding" that comes his way from the Chinkies.

Originally Posted by OhOh

The actual, significant, words appear to be written by a ameristani citizen.

I think you're the only one that finds anything significant in that waffle.

Interesting piece from FP about how the chinkies could use Rare Earth to put the shits up baldy.

But also how using it as a bargaining tool would probably make not just the US, but others look twice at depending on the chinkies to supply it.

The US would probably turn to Brazil, although surprisingly Vietnam has the third largest reserves in the world, which no doubt the chinkies have already got their beady eyes on if they are not already digging the fuck out of it while they pretend to grow bananas.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/05/21...ef%20Plus%20OC

The US-China conflict challenges the world

Martin Wolf: US allies need to work together and uphold a multilateral trading system

Tue, May 21, 2019, 17:21
Martin Wolf

"Where does deepening economic conflict between the US and China leave the rest of the world, especially historic allies of the US? In normal circumstances, the latter would stand beside it. The EU, after all, shares many of its concerns about Chinese behaviour. Yet these are not normal circumstances. Under Donald Trump, the US has become a rogue superpower, hostile, among many other things, to the fundamental norms of a trading system based on multilateral agreement and binding rules. Indeed, US allies, too, are a target of the wave of bilateral bullying.So what are American allies to do as the US and China battle? This is not just about Mr Trump. His focus on bilateral trade balances may even be relatively manageable. Worse, a large proportion of Americans shares a deepening hostility not just to China’s behaviour, but to the fact of a rising China.

We are also seeing a big shift in conservative thinking. In 2005, Robert Zoellick, deputy secretary of state, argued that China should “become a responsible stakeholder” in the international system. Recently, Mike Pompeo, secretary of state, has indicated a different perspective. Foreign affairs specialist Walter Russell Mead describes Mr Pompeo’s animating idea as follows: “Where liberal internationalists believe the goal of American global engagement should be to promote the emergence of a world order in which international institutions increasingly supplant nation-states as the chief actors in global politics, conservative internationalists believe American engagement should be guided by a narrower focus on specific US interests.” In brief, the US no longer sees why it should be a “responsible stakeholder” in the international system. Its concept is, instead, that of 19th century power politics, in which the strong dictate to the weak.

This is relevant to trade, too. It is a canard that the trading system was based on the notion that international institutions should supplant nation states. The system was built on the twin ideas that states should make multilateral agreements with one another and that confidence in such agreements should be reinforced by a binding dispute settlement system. This would bring stability to the conditions of trade, on which international businesses rely.

All this is now at risk. The spread of the tariff war and the decision to limit the access to US technology of Huawei, China’s only world-leading advanced technology manufacturer, seem aimed at keeping China in permanent inferiority. That is certainly how the Chinese view it.

Protectionist US

The trade war is also turning the US into a significantly protectionist country, with weighted-average tariffs possibly soon higher than India’s. A paper from the Peterson Institute for International Economics states, that “Trump is . . . threatening tariffs on China that are not far from the average level of duties the United States imposed with the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930.”

Tariffs may even stay this high, because the US’s negotiating demands are too humiliating for China to accept. These levies will also lead to diversion to other suppliers. Tariffs may then spread to the latter, too: bilateralism is often a contagious disease. Contrary to Mr Trump’s protestations, the costs are also being borne by Americans, especially consumers and farm exporters. Ironically, many of the worst hit counties are in Republican control. (See charts.)

Some might conclude that the high costs mean that the conflict cannot be sustained, particularly if stock markets are disrupted. An alternative and more plausible outcome is that Mr Trump and China’s Xi Jinping are “strongmen” leaders who cannot be seen to yield. The conflict will then either remain frozen or, more likely, worsen as relations between the two superpowers become increasingly poisoned.

Where does this leave US allies? They should not support American attempts to thwart China’s rise: that would be unconscionable. They should indicate where they agree with US objectives on trade and technology and, if possible, sustain a common position on these issues, notably between the EU and Japan. They should uphold the principles of a multilateral trading system, under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation. If the US succeeds in rendering the dispute system inquorate, the other members could agree to abide by an informal mechanism instead.

Most significantly, it should be possible to sustain liberal trade, at the expense of the US and China. Anne Krueger, former first deputy managing director of the IMF, notes in a column that, by its own foolish decision to reject the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the US suffers from WTO legal discrimination against its exports to members of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, which replaced TPP. The EU also has free trade agreements with Canada and Japan.

Go further

This is good. But they can go further. Countries that see the benefits of a strong trading order should turn such FTAs into a “global FTA of the willing”, in which any country willing to accept the commitments could participate. One might even envisage a future in which participants in such a global FTA would defend its members against illegal trade assaults from non-members, via co-ordinated retaliation.

Hostility between the US and China is a threat to global peace and prosperity. Outsiders cannot halt this conflict. But they are not helpless. If the big powers stand outside the multilateral trading system, others can step in. They are, in aggregate, huge players. They should dare to act as such. – "

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2019

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/...orld-1.3899823

Wonder how Sabang and foobars Huawei phones are going. Probably anticipating the great new Chinese O.S. complete with free pictures of uncle Xi