[Atlantis]

No mass snooping, coercion or backdoors: China pokes US in the eye with global digital rules proposal

Beijing wants the world community to adopt a set of rules for developing the digital economy, which would endorse national sovereignty over data and oppose mass electronic surveillance in foreign cyberspace.

The code of conduct, dubbed the ‘Global Initiative on Data Security’, was presented on Tuesday by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi at a conference in Beijing. While the name ‘United States’ was never mentioned in his speech, the official left no doubt that Washington’s recent attacks on the Chinese tech sector prompted the proposal.

“Bent on unilateral acts, a certain country keeps making groundless accusations against others in the name of ‘clean’ network and used security as a pretext to prey on enterprises of other countries who have a competitive edge,” he said.

The Trump administration last month announced its ‘Clean Network Initiative’, aimed at pushing “untrusted” Chinese telecom companies and apps out of the US market and protecting undersea communication cables from eavesdropping.

Wang, who also holds the powerful office of state councilor, blasted the US approach as politicization of security issues and protectionism that stifle innovation, and outlined China’s own vision for the digital future. Beijing believes national governments have a legitimate claim on data generated under their sovereignty and should respect each other’s laws on its handling.

Among other things, it means that countries should not “conduct mass surveillance [on foreign soil] or engage in unauthorized collection of personal information of other states,” he said. Governments likewise should not pressure domestic companies into storing foreign data on their territory.

The companies themselves must not install backdoors in their products to gain illegal access to user data or take abusive advantage of the dependence on their products, he added.

The US push against Chinese companies like telecom producer Huawei, digital giant Tencent, and TikTok owner ByteDance is justified by a concern for user data and intellectual property. Washington claims that Chinese companies are subservient to Beijing and act as government agents harvesting the information of their foreign clients.

Beijing denies the allegations, and Wong reiterated that China pledges to adhere to the principles it proposes.

“We have not and will not ask Chinese companies to transfer data overseas to the government in breach of other countries’ laws,” he told the gathering.

He said the Chinese digital economy already accounts for more than one-third of the country’s GDP, with over 900 million internet users, including 88 million 5G subscribers, located in the country. Beijing believes its initiative would drive global digital growth.

Wait, no more backdoors to gain illegal access to our data, no more stealing of our data, no more stealing of our intellectual property, no more mass observation on foreign soil, no more forced repatriation of data ... how is the Yankee empire going to survive?

[JohnRawls]

No mass snooping, coercion or backdoors: China pokes US in the eye with global digital rules proposal



Wait, no more backdoors to gain illegal access to our data, no more stealing of our data, no more stealing of our intellectual property, no more mass observation on foreign soil, no more forced repatriation of data ... how is the Yankee empire going to survive?

Aren't you the gullible one. China can't be trusted so we can't sign any details with China. Sanction them to oblivion.

You will dispute this but think back on their Covid response as an example. What they do is mostly PR and not actual action in most cases.

[Rancid]

China... no backdoors... right...

Anyway, I'm all for regulation the protection of individual data. Doubtful any government actually cares about that though. Especially not the US and China. Anything either nation claims is largely political and driven at trying to one up each other.

Individuals don't really matter to either size.

[late]

Some of those comments were China complaining about what we did, and implicitly, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

While we need to deal with the problem, we don't want to split the cybersphere in two. It's already clear we wouldn't win.

Republicans need to stop being dickheads and invest in R&D, and in developing technologies. We had the lead in solar panels, and we let China steal our lunch.

Doesn't get much dumber than that.

[Atlantis]

@JohnRawls, @late, @Rancid, we don't know that the Chinese spy on us. They probably will if they get half a chance. That's why we have to take precautions.

What we know with absolutely certainty is that the Americans are spying on us and they have no intention of stopping.

Does that mean we should reject the Chinese and depend entirely on the Americans?

No, most certainly not. Our best bet is by not excluding anybody and by letting competition solve the problem. Let us take the Chinese at their word and make a fool-prove agreement that'll bind them. The Japanese differentiate between honne and tatemae. You can take somebody's tatemae and oblige him to treat it as a honne. We can make market access conditional on technology transfer and total transparency. In other words, we can take them at their word and make them comply with the leverage of market access even if they originally had not intention of complying. If the Chinese want market access, they should disclose all their codes. Once the Chinese agree, we can get the Americans to do likewise.

That would work to our advantage. A one-sided dependence on the Americans would be foolish.

[Rugoz]

Of course ze Germans knew absolutely nothing about the NSA's spying programs and do nothing alike themselves.

[Unthinking Majority]

Aren't you the gullible one. China can't be trusted so we can't sign any details with China. Sanction them to oblivion.

You will dispute this but think back on their Covid response as an example. What they do is mostly PR and not actual action in most cases.

China loves rule-based agreements because they know they won't play by the rules while the other suckers will, giving China the advantage.

[Unthinking Majority]

@JohnRawls, @late, @Rancid, we don't know that the Chinese spy on us.

Let us take the Chinese at their word...

Also, nice link in the OP from RT, a Russian gov media site.

[Patrickov]

Does that mean we should reject the Chinese and depend entirely on the Americans?

No, most certainly not. Our best bet is by not excluding anybody and by letting competition solve the problem.

Seriously, in terms of digital technology there must be enough alternatives that make us free to reject China but don't have to depend on the United States either. Europe, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, India...

[Godstud]

Also, nice link in the OP from RT, a Russian gov media site.

So Russia's version of Fox News.

[Atlantis]

Seriously, in terms of digital technology there must be enough alternatives that make us free to reject China but don't have to depend on the United States either. Europe, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, India...

That's not the problem. There is a lot of technology in Europe. The problem is the economics of scale. The Chinese have a huge domestic market and the Americans control the world market with their monopoly capitalism. There are simply no European companies big enough to compete against the likes of Google.

And as I explained to @QatzelOk in another thread, the US financial empire is sucking the riches of the World into Wall Street, from where it benefits primarily US-listed companies.

It's all about monopoly capitalism and imperialism and not about fair competition.

When Europeans start a promising enterprise, the Yanks come and simply buy it up. They control the global financial markets and if you want to access the big money, you need to be listed in a US stock market, which means you come under political control of Washington.

We won't have any sovereignty until we can establish the Euro as an international currency on parity with the dollar. The Yanks will try to prevent that at any and all costs.

[QatzelOk]

And as I explained to @QatzelOk in another thread, the US financial empire is sucking the riches of the World into Wall Street, from where it benefits primarily US-listed companies.

It's all about monopoly capitalism and imperialism and not about fair competition.

In the last 20 years, it has become obvious that capitalism has nothing to do with "improving the supply of useful things made in the most sustainable way possible."

Instead, capitalism is all about destroying the competition through semi-illegal ways that are a demonstration of lack of empathy for other people - and not about "a success oriented and healthy attitude towards work and business."

Hillary Clinton can't compete with Trump, so her party sues Trump non-stop to try to bring him down with lies and hate speech.

Same with Rafael Correa, leading in the polls as vice-president, he is now ruled "illegal" as a candidate, by "competitors" who can't possibly win by playing by the rules.

Walmart, when it has a hard time competing in a local market, will open a dozen branches in all corners of the zone, take a net loss by offering prices no locals can compete with, and then - when all the local stores are dead - closes half its stores and raises prices on shitty merchandise. This is called "category killer" and its the same strategy at every level of our rabid economic and social institutions under "competitive capitalism."

And while big-box retail is failing now, the newest category killers are companies like AMAZON. This company offers nothing that the Post Office couldn't offer, but got its monopoly by being connected enough to the powers-that-be (corruption) to ensure that the post office would be destroyed in order to enrich Amazon (at the expense of social programs for 350 million Americans, and low-paying jobs instead of well-paying jobs with the Post Office).

Killing your competitors is NOT AT ALL the same as "offering better products to people." And our lack of ability to think holistically about our economy allows these aggresive totalitarian entities to do their damage to our societies.

[Atlantis]

In the last 20 years, it has become obvious that capitalism has nothing to do with "improving the supply of useful things made in the most sustainable way possible."

The "free market", IF it is properly regulated by the State, does indeed improve the livelihood of the people. Without the competition of the market, you are going to drown in corruption. That is inevitable. US-monopoly capitalism does of course not fulfill that requirement because it is not the State, as the representative of the people, that regulates but powerful oligarchs, who are at liberty to manipulate the democratic process.

That's the difference between Common Law countries (the Anglosphere) and Civil Law countries (continental Europe, etc.). Civil Law countries recognize the supremacy of the State while Common Law countries rely on private/commercial arbitration.

Neither Socialist Command economies nor Anglo-style capitalist economies have reached the degree of social justice and prosperity typical of the European social market economies.

By designating as "capitalist" everything that isn't socialist, you don't only oversimplify, but you also falsify the debate. The problem is not the "market economy", the problem is Anglo-imperialism which will use any means, foul or fair, to bend the market rules in its favor.

Instead of replying to the gist of what I keep on explaining, you keep on avoiding the debate by going off on a tangent.

[Unthinking Majority]

So Russia's version of Fox News.

No, more like the CBC.

[QatzelOk]

The "free market", IF it is properly regulated by the State, does indeed improve the livelihood of the people. Without the competition of the market, you are going to drown in corruption. That is inevitable. US-monopoly capitalism does of course not fulfill that requirement because it is not the State, as the representative of the people, that regulates but powerful oligarchs, who are at liberty to manipulate the democratic process.

And it is the economies that are like the USA and UK that have dominated the world system throughout the modern age, ensuring that a "free market" doesn't exist.

So, in reality, a free market can't exist because those who grow rich off of it then remove the freedom of competition from it.

This a pattern that capitalist-supporters refuse to acknowlege, thus condemning themselves to recommending something that has never and will never exist.

In Canada, by the 70s, we had a mixed socialist-capitalist economy like the European social democracies you pretend are best.

But in a mixed economy, the capitalists eventually destroy the social programs in order to tap "a new market." Every time, this will happen. Stop pretending that sticking the word "free" onto words like "market" makes this system of empowering wealthy and mentally-deformed elites fair, peaceful, sustainable, or functional.

[Atlantis]

And it is the economies that are like the USA and UK that have dominated the world system throughout the modern age, ensuring that a "free market" doesn't exist.

So, in reality, a free market can't exist because those who grow rich off of it then remove the freedom of competition from it.

This a pattern that capitalist-supporters refuse to acknowlege, thus condemning themselves to recommending something that has never and will never exist.[/i]

It takes a special kind of hubris to believe that all prosperity derives from US imperialism. This is quite indicative of where you really stand.

The US has sucked brains and wealth from those you pretend depend on it for their wealth for almost 100 years. That, and only that, is the source of US riches. You are adding insult upon injury.

The American pseudo left is ridiculous.

[wat0n]

By "sucking brains" you mean those European Nobel Prize laureates who arrived to the US fleeing Europe over the tendency of European societies to engage in total warfare to solve their problems during the first half of the 20th century?

[Atlantis]

By "sucking brains" you mean those European Nobel Prize laureates who arrived to the US fleeing Europe over the tendency of European societies to engage in total warfare to solve their problems during the first half of the 20th century?

The brain-drain accelerated after the war. You even had to hire Nazi criminals to put a man on the moon.

[Rugoz]

That's not the problem. There is a lot of technology in Europe. The problem is the economics of scale. The Chinese have a huge domestic market and the Americans control the world market with their monopoly capitalism. There are simply no European companies big enough to compete against the likes of Google.

And as I explained to @QatzelOk in another thread, the US financial empire is sucking the riches of the World into Wall Street, from where it benefits primarily US-listed companies.

It's all about monopoly capitalism and imperialism and not about fair competition.

When Europeans start a promising enterprise, the Yanks come and simply buy it up. They control the global financial markets and if you want to access the big money, you need to be listed in a US stock market, which means you come under political control of Washington.

We won't have any sovereignty until we can establish the Euro as an international currency on parity with the dollar. The Yanks will try to prevent that at any and all costs.

So many silly clichées in this post.

[blackjack21]

We had the lead in solar panels, and we let China steal our lunch.

Doesn't get much dumber than that.

We let China have steel, shoes, textiles, apparel, computers, electronics, televisions, most of the drug supply chain, most healthcare PPE, and utterly countless other examples. So you are wrong, late. It does get dumber than that. A lot dumber.

@JohnRawls, @late, @Rancid, we don't know that the Chinese spy on us. They probably will if they get half a chance. That's why we have to take precautions.

We don't know, or you don't know? The Chinese try to hack my servers all the time. A simple trace route proves that.

What we know with absolutely certainty is that the Americans are spying on us and they have no intention of stopping.

Oh, it was a rhetorical device. I see now. Yes, China is spying on you. So is Russia. So is America.

Let us take the Chinese at their word and make a fool-prove agreement that'll bind them.

You do that. Hope that goes well for you.

Once the Chinese agree, we can get the Americans to do likewise.

It's already done. OpenStack, OpenVSwitch, OpenShift, etc. are already open source solutions for telco for example, and they are used by telcos the world over.

That's not the problem. There is a lot of technology in Europe. The problem is the economics of scale. The Chinese have a huge domestic market and the Americans control the world market with their monopoly capitalism. There are simply no European companies big enough to compete against the likes of Google.

Building a search engine isn't exactly rocket science anymore. Just ban Google from Europe and build your own search engine.

The "free market", IF it is properly regulated by the State, does indeed improve the livelihood of the people.

Isn't that a contradiction in terms? If it's regulated, is it still free?