this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)

World News

32310 readers
868 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Glad you agree with my points, even if it took you four reiterations to understand them.

Nobody argued that there should be country level sanctions for private corporate espionage, weird that you keep focusing on arguments nobody has made.

Yes, of course it matters if the theft of military data by a hostile state is malicious. It is of the essence.

And no, victim blaming still won't get you anywhere.

I appreciate your support

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Except that's exactly what you're calling for? You gave evidence of (presumably a Chinese telecom) stealing T-Mobile testing equipment as a reason for the sanctions.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That robot was stolen by Huawei, which is heavily subsidized by the CCP.

But what I have said repeatedly, regardless of your presumptive tangents, is that state level actions make a state responsible, and in the examples I gave, a hostile state has ownership ties to companies stealing energy production data and military data.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But... you don't consider T-Mobile, Apple, Intel, or Microsoft to be American state-sponsored companies despite their hundreds of billions in subsidies and tax incentives?

Odd.

The recent CHIPS act gave Intel what, like $20 billion in subsidies. Guess what? That's what governments do to stimulate economic growth.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Odder that you keep making false arguments and pretending they are my arguments.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Huawei, which is heavily subsidized by the CCP.

This statement is literally irrelevant because, guess what, every reasonable country subsidizes their domestic industries. I've proven that and you're unwilling to accept that state-owned enterprises (which exist, by the way) are different from private companies.

I'll help you out: Intel is a private company. Amtrak is not. Alibaba is a private company, CRRC is not. Huawei is a private company, CNPC is not.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm sure everyone is very proud of you for repeating things that I stated previously in this thread and pretending they are your argument.

Wait right here, I'll find someone who can slow clap for you(I feel like you'll be able to understand the clap better that way).

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So... you don't have an argument? Great!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

An argument against you repeating what I said and agreeing with me?

No, I stand by what I said and you parroted.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

so... you really do have no argument, huh? You claim that taking state subsidies makes a company state-sponsored.

I claim that that's stupid, because it means that Intel and Microsoft would be considered state-sponsored enterprises.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't have an argument against my own argument, no.

Regardless of what you claim I claim, you've already taken my side on all of this.

Thank you for your support!.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

So, you really don't have an argument, huh?