SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Trump reversed course on Huawei. What happens now?
Six weeks after Huawei was blacklisted by the US government, President Donald Trump had what the Chinese telecom firm described as a "U-turn." Trump said Saturday that "US companies can sell their equipment to Huawei," allowing the transactions won't present a "great, national emergency problem."
Trump's comments at the G20 in Japan came after a widely anticipated meeting with Chinese President Xi Jingping. The two sides met to discuss the impasse in the trade dispute, and Huawei, one of the largest smartphone manufacturers in the world, has become a flash point in the battle.
In May, the US Commerce Department banned sales of American-made goods to Huawei without first obtaining a license. US officials have accused the company of working to undermine US national security and foreign policy interests. Trump said Huawei was still part of the ongoing trade discussions between Washington and Beijing, but for now, he would move to resume allowing US companies to sell parts to the Chinese firm.
Also at Android Authority and Business Insider:
President Trump has said US firms can continue selling to Huawei, apparently contradicting a Commerce Department trade blacklist on the Chinese tech firm.
See also: A China-U.S. Trade Truce Could Enshrine a Global Economic Shift
Previously: New Law Bans U.S. Government from Buying Equipment from Chinese Telecom Giants ZTE and Huawei
Huawei Working on its Own OS to Prepare for "Worst-Case Scenario" of Being Deprived of Android
Google Pulls Huawei's Android License
The Huawei Disaster Reveals Google's Iron Grip On Android
Huawei Calls on U.S. to Adjust its Approach to Tackle Cybersecurity Effectively
Google Doesn't Want Huawei Ban Because It Would Result in an Android Competitor
Huawei Soldiers on, Announces Nova 5 and Kirin 810
Related: U.S. Reaches Deal to Keep China's ZTE in Business: Congressional Aide
US Hits China's ZTE with $1 Billion Penalty
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday July 01 2019, @08:07PM (1 child)
it doesn't feel like majority rule to me.
The options are wide open. The only problem is the voters. People have to speak up if they think the system is "rigged". If they don't, oh well... This is the result. There's no one else to run to. Either people take their own initiative, or they don't.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday July 01 2019, @08:21PM
The problem, as I see it, is that both "sides" are jockeying for maximal power, and they get that by minimizing their majority - the more people you piss off the more power you have (or are exercising), so each side aims to piss off about 49%, and we don't have anything resembling real choice at the ballot box, just two barely differentiated and 49% distasteful choices. That's where it's rigged: no worthwhile candidates make it to the upper levels.
I still like the Arthur C. Clarke approach to government: the draft. I'd make a variation of it where all adults who have taken the basic educational requirements for office, and placed in the upper 1/3 of their classes in ALL important categories, are thrown in a pool and selected at random to serve for terms roughly equivalent to the average terms served by our current representatives. Congressional terms are only 2 years, but most serve multiples, so make the period of service more like 5 years, with a new batch of inductees/retirees every 6 months so that at least 90% of the government has some experience at what they are doing at all times. The key element put forward by Clarke was: anybody actively seeking public office should be immediately/automatically barred from serving.
Whether election or draft, I do believe we need more transparency, and I would be fully in favor of doubling the current size of our government for the singular purpose of installing neutral auditors who do nothing but observe, report, and bring to light any and all malfeasance or the appearance thereof...
🌻🌻 [google.com]