Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
America's broadband watchdog has told telcos they cannot use government subsidies to buy any more Huawei or ZTE equipment.
The FCC is also mulling extending this ultimatum to include the continued use of the Chinese manufacturers' gear, meaning cellular and internet providers will have to replace their installed Huawei and ZTE boxes, as well as vow not to purchase any of the kit, if they wish to receive funding from the US government.
Specifically, the five-member commission voted unanimously on Friday to bar US telcos from using cash from the Universal Service Fund to purchase stuff made by either of the Chinese telecoms giants.
The USF is an $8.5bn nationwide fund that subsidizes telcos that provide service in rural and poor areas, schools, and libraries. Even the larger network providers tap into this piggy bank, so the crackdown on Huawei and ZTE purchasing reaches right across the market.
[...] The decision comes on the heels of what was seen as a reprieve of sorts for Huawei when, earlier this week, the FTC granted a third extension on the trade ban on the switch slinger, letting certain US companies continue to do business with the biz. One of those corporations, Microsoft, just announced it was going to be able to continue selling its software to Huawei.
Related Stories
Submitted via IRC for AndyTheAbsurd
The U.S. government is letting American businesses work with Chinese tech giant Huawei for an additional three months, in a third delay to a ban enacted in May for national security reasons.
It is the third time the U.S. has extended a reprieve, which is meant to help ease disruption for Huawei customers. Many Internet and cellphone carriers in rural parts of the U.S. buy networking equipment from Huawei, and the temporary extension means they can keep their networks up to date.
"The Temporary General License extension will allow carriers to continue to service customers in some of the most remote areas of the United States who would otherwise be left in the dark," said Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in a statement.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/12/huawei-sues-fcc-to-stop-ban-on-huawei-gear-in-us-funded-
Huawei has sued the Federal Communications Commission over the agency's order that bans Huawei equipment in certain government-funded telecom projects.
[...] The FCC voted unanimously on November 22 to ban Huawei and ZTE equipment in projects paid for by the commission's Universal Service Fund (USF). The order will affect many small telecom providers that rely on the companies' network gear.
[...] "The US government has never presented real evidence to show that Huawei is a national security threat," Song said. "That's because this evidence does not exist. When pushed for facts, they respond that 'disclosing evidence might also undermine US national security.' This is complete nonsense."
[...] "We've built networks in places where other vendors would not go. They were too remote, or the terrain was difficult, or there just wasn't a big enough population," he said. "In the US, we sell equipment to 40 small wireless and wireline operators. They connect schools, hospitals, farms, homes, community colleges, and emergency services."
Hoftstra University law professor Julian Ku said that "even a small [Huawei] victory in the case, one that makes the FCC go and start the process over again, would be a huge victory for them," according to The New York Times. But it may be a difficult case for Huawei to win because US courts usually give federal agencies "a tremendous amount of deference," Ku said.
Previously:
Huawei Funds $56M in Academic Research in Canada. That Has Some Experts Concerned
How China Is Building A World-Beating Phone Network
FCC Tells US Telcos: Buy Chinese Kit And You Won't See Another Dime From Us
American Giants Get 90 Days To Wrap Up Deals With 'Dangerous' Huawei
Huawei's First Google-Free Phone Stripped And Searched: Repair Not Too Painful... Once You're In
U.S. Chief Technology Officer Urges Europe to Take a Stand Against Huawei
Microsoft President Says US Government Isn't Being Open About Huawei Ban
Huawei: ARM Cortex-A77 Cores Would Shorten Battery Life
Huawei Might Put its IOT OS on Mobile Phones After All
Huawei Announces HarmonyOS, a Smartphone OS and Android Alternative
Huawei Doesn't See Open Source as the Fix for Spying Accusations (but They Should)
Huawei Reportedly Helped North Korea Build Out 3G Network in Secret
Huawei's Android Alternative Lives on... for IoT
What Huawei To Go: Hundreds Of Chinese Tech Giant's US Workers To Get Pink Slip
Trump Administration Will Loosen Restrictions Against Huawei
Huawei Soldiers on, Announces Nova 5 and Kirin 810
Huawei Blacklisting Predicted to Cause DRAM Prices to Drop 15%
NSA Spied on Chinese Government and Huawei
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 24 2019, @04:17AM
"Coolpad Group Limited formerly known as China Wireless Technologies Limited is a Caymans-incorporated holding company."
Coolpad is a Caymans company, see, and Caymans is not China. Gimme FCC moneys.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by captain normal on Sunday November 24 2019, @04:21AM (1 child)
The big Tel-Cos are just pocketing the USF money without providing the services called for. ATT, Verzion, T-Moblie etc all really don't need the extra cash as they are already rich from sucking the blood from consumers, so they don't really need any taxpayer money. Plus they can just use any equipment they want and tell the FCC to bugger off.
The Musk/Trump interview appears to have been hacked, but not a DDOS hack...more like A Distributed Denial of Reality.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 24 2019, @04:30AM
Stick it to the big four by using a dirt cheap MVNO instead. That way you still get phone service which one of the telcos is obligated to provide you but you're not paying directly into their bloated advertising budget.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by krishnoid on Sunday November 24 2019, @05:08AM (14 children)
Letting my mind drift a little. FCC Tells US Telcos: You Won't See Another Dime From Us Until ...
I think it's possible, but it's probably just the bourbon at the bottom of this oversized Reese's peanut butter cups mug talking.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by anubi on Sunday November 24 2019, @05:37AM
Whatever happened to that $10 dry loop DSL internet that was in that spectrum takeover deal?
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 24 2019, @05:40AM (4 children)
This is America, where we believe in killing the poor. Our human interest news is filled with stories of the mentally ill homeless freezing to death under bridges. Any telco that puts a lifeline link on its main homepage will be boycotted and driven to bankruptcy within a month.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by coolgopher on Sunday November 24 2019, @06:17AM (3 children)
What if you told the NRA that people would be able to buy more guns online if they could actually get online (and have money left over to spend on the guns)?
(Score: 4, Touché) by dry on Monday November 25 2019, @03:24AM (2 children)
Does the NRA want the really poor to own guns? I thought the whole idea was for the citizenry to protect the tyrants and other assorted rich by shooting the poor and left wingers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 25 2019, @05:36PM (1 child)
Go ahead and keep believing that, and pushing that narrative. That is how they keep so much of their power. Their opponents drastically mis-characterize them.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by dry on Tuesday November 26 2019, @12:22AM
Well there's lots of talk of right wing Americans raising their arms to protect Trump, who claims to be a billionaire and definitely has authoritarian tendencies.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Sunday November 24 2019, @04:28PM (6 children)
well said.
You might like this thing I made yesterday, I think it is pretty clear our inability to get 8 billion dollars worth of better internet is indicative of a certain pattern we are seeing all over.
https://archive.is/bRCdQ [archive.is]
This is also a sign that thesesystemsarefailing.net
(like we are not arguing over if we want the 5g or whether it is a worthwhile use of our efforts right now, what with the rising tides, we are arguing over which dastardly foreign company gets to install it, like, american made 5g is not even fathomable unless i am missing something, even if it made any sense to users in a sane cost/benefit analysis)
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 24 2019, @08:03PM (2 children)
I find it humorous that I got an "ERR_CONNECTION_CLOSED" for your first link and an "ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID" on the other domain name. These systems are failing, indeed.
(Score: 2) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Monday November 25 2019, @01:12PM (1 child)
I just tested them both and they are fine.
Archive.is is as plain jane as you can get, that problem is not on my side.
Maybe you are being censored?
Here is the recent snapshot of systems failing project:
https://archive.is/kM3t9 [archive.is]
The dns/hosting for my domains is 301 forwarding that in some browsers/configs is having issues, that I am right now discussing with the admin team at the company. This is all because I literally cannot afford it.
If you can't connect to archive.is though, I would say that is a pretty big problem.
But if you are looking for a reason not to consider my ideas, then I just threw this standard response together:
https://archive.is/IZsOB [archive.is]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 26 2019, @05:41AM
The problem with archive.is was probably transient and I wouldn't even have pointed it out if it wasn't for the other one giving me an error as well. Juxtaposed with your domain name, the irony was too much to bear. Speaking of the second problem, you can see that it still doesn't work here https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=thesesystemsarefailing.net&hideResults=on [ssllabs.com]
Also, good on you for attacking me for "leaving half-assed negative commentary calling people names like crazy or antisemitic." I had no idea that such were the connotation pointing out the technological failures attempting that occured when trying to connect to two websites. Next time SN has an outage, I'll be sure to donate to the Jewish Federations of North America as reparations when I complain about it to martyb.</sarcasm>
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Sunday November 24 2019, @10:43PM (2 children)
You're either crazy, or maybe not loony enough [engadget.com].
(Score: 2) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Monday November 25 2019, @01:15PM
I don't like the word crazy, neither does my good pal philosoraptor
https://archive.is/BGPJK [archive.is]
I have heard a ton of slurs against me, but no attempts to refute what I am saying.
90% of responses to my posts on this allegedly reputable site are turd flinging designed to prevent people from considering my work, at all, and appear to be concerted well-poisoning tactics.
The other 10% of the responses are frequently awesome.
And did you see this one?
https://archive.is/SDcbq [archive.is]
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Monday November 25 2019, @04:57PM
I did read your link, but I was referring to Google's "Loon" project providing speedily-provisioned, ostensibly reasonable-quality Internet availability in undeveloped areas via an (apparently) whiffed pun.
I read through most of the image text, which was a little tricky to read; is the free text available? Maybe it's my browser.
(Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Saturday December 07 2019, @06:41PM
"Letting my mind drift a little."
That's not drifting. That's setting full sail for Neverland......
Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ilPapa on Sunday November 24 2019, @05:15AM (16 children)
The funny part of this is if the Chinese would just agree to give Trump a win on a trade deal, this whole concern about Huawei and security would simply disappear.
None of this is about keeping us safe. It's all theater.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 24 2019, @05:20AM
I'm pretty sure you won't see Huawei kit at the Pentagon anytime soon. Except for their equivalent TAO unit where they hack the stuff.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 25 2019, @05:30AM (14 children)
I think there's something much bigger going on. I know most of us read the headlines that China became the world's largest economy back quite some years back, but the numbers [wikipedia.org] are very surprising. China has not only overcome the US, but is now trillions of dollars, about 30%, ahead of us. But the interesting thing about that figure is that most of China is still extremely impoverished. The implications of that is that they still have an immense amount of room to grow, while our growth has seemingly plateaued. For instance this year China, in part due to the trade wars, saw unexpectedly slow growth of "only" 6% while US saw higher than expected growth of 2%. And due to the magic of compounding gains they are advancing far faster than 4% per year. The EU saw a growth rate of 1.3%.
Think about what this means in the longrun. China may* eventually become a larger economy than the rest of the world, combined. The reason this is relevant is because the primary source of the US power now a days is economic. It's the primary source of our international clout. Even our military is little more than a function of our economy. But as China continues to develop we're going to see more of what we're already seeing: corporations and countries increasingly pandering or "defecting" to China. This phenomena, in a global world, results in the rich getting richer which means we can expect to see the Chinese economy grow. Ultimately I think what we're seeing is the decline of American domination on the world scene, and we're trying really really hard to fight against this. But the problem is a fundamental one: a nation of 330 million people cannot compete against a nation of 1.4 billion. Even if you simply add Europe's population to the US, we're not even close - even less so if you subtract the population of countries such as Russia/Turkey which are not only 100% headed towards China in lieu of the west but are also the 1st/3rd most populous countries in Europe. And you don't need any particular insight to know who the Mideast will align with as US power wanes.
I think this realization makes many of the events happening in the world right now fit into a much more coherent picture. For instance we couldn't care less about protests for a better tomorrow - there are half a dozen happening around the world at this very minute. The reason for the focus, and now overt support, of Hong Kong is a desperate effort to try to inflict economic damage on China. Another thing you might notice from the DNC debates. The candidates are quick to try to spin the "trade wars" into an attack on Trump, but not a single one has said they'd actually get rid of the tariffs and duties. Because they won't. I also think this even relates to our decision to dump the INF nuclear treaty. While that treaty was with Russia, the issue is that China has been increasingly stockpiling mid to long range nuclear capable missiles. Interestingly the final [failed] Russian-US negotiations over that treaty were held in... Beijing!
---
* - The reason for "may" there is not because of the US/Europe ever catching up, but because of the possibility of nations like India starting to emulate China's development and progress. Once again as western economics start to see plateauing growth, growth starts to become a function of population. And India is another 1.4 billion people. And a developed India is, in my opinion, much more likely to either aim to behave as an independent order or to align itself with China, than to align itself with the Western bloc.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 25 2019, @10:00AM (13 children)
Why? It's not that much smaller.
That illustrates the dangers of extrapolation. History indicates everything is going as it has before. Every developed world country went through a period of high economic growth at the same places that we're seeing with China now, and is growing at a much slower rate now. So it's reasonable to expect China to slow down as it achieves developed world status for the same reasons the rest slowed down. Growing a developed world country's economy is hard, particularly, when there are all sorts of other things (such as social safety nets, defense spending, rent seeking, etc) to distract from that goal. But growing a developing world country's economy is easy for governments to do. They already know what works, it mostly just involves staying out of the way and implementing basic economic and legal reforms to improve private sector activity and reduce government corruption.
My take is that in the end game when almost everyone, including Africa, is developed world, China will have a share of the economy crudely proportional to its population at the time, which will probably be about an eighth to a tenth. But the countries that will stand out will be the ones with better technological, legal, and cultural infrastructure. The US could be (but not necessarily will be) competitive with China in that future despite a modestly lower population.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Monday November 25 2019, @03:37PM (8 children)
Maybe someone here who has a background in mathematics could explain to khallow how much bigger 1.4 billion is than 330 million.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 25 2019, @04:41PM (7 children)
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Tuesday November 26 2019, @03:34AM (1 child)
Not if we keep anti-immigration as an official policy it won't be.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 26 2019, @01:14PM
How anti-immigration is that official policy?
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Wednesday November 27 2019, @05:52AM (4 children)
I thought of your comment when I saw this story today:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/27/us/us-birth-fertility-rate.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimes [nytimes.com]
(Note: The story is about how the US fertility rate has been in decline for 4 years and has hit a new low.)
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday November 27 2019, @02:39PM (3 children)
Sounds like Chinese fertility has hit a "new low" too and that low is lower than the US one. On this Wikipedia list [wikipedia.org], US fertility is 1.8 births per woman, Chinese fertility is 1.6 births per woman.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Wednesday November 27 2019, @03:16PM (2 children)
Good point. At that rate, China will only have three times as many people as the US as soon as say, the year 2400.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday November 28 2019, @12:07AM (1 child)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday November 28 2019, @12:17AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 25 2019, @06:35PM (3 children)
424% is not a small difference, nor is China becoming defacto the world economy a particularly big extrapolation. They currently make up about 19% of the world economy, and are at a fraction of their potential. You will find in every single projection (e.g. - IMF data) that China is going to be increasingly dominant in the world economy. The only question is how dominant, and that's largely going to be determined by India. Such a peculiar future!
Also, you cannot understate China's growth. About 50 years ago as we were putting a man on the moon, Chinese were starving to death by the tens of millions. This [wikipedia.org] is a table providing historical economic estimates from the IMF. Even in 1980, China was the second poorest nation in the world with any estimated value. Even India's economy was nearly twice as large. Now just 40 years later, that's all changed. China is now the largest overall economy in the world, and rapidly advancing in per capita wealth. And this is only in 40 years, the blink of an eye on a historical scale. If what China was doing was so easily replicable, every single country in this world would be doing it.
As for what comes next, we live in an era of mass media, mass manipulation, political corporations with revenues greater than most nations, a population that is likely becoming literally [wikipedia.org] dumber (so far as IQ can measure), and political positions becoming ever more radicalized and mutually exclusive (probably due to a mixture of the other reasons). I'm not sure the systems that worked in the past can still work so well in this present.
While bordering on heresy, it might not be inconceivable to consider that the Chinese are indeed doing some things right. One of the reasons that Jinping has gained effectively ubiquitous support in the country is because he clamped down on corruption with an iron fist. Probably going to be tough to ever see any progress once we've normalized the ideas of e.g. presidents granting extremely favorable treatment to corporations and then running around accepting tens of millions of dollars in "speaking fees" after their presidency ends. Hopefully Bloomberg doesn't get Bernied. He may end up bought, but it's not going to be with money. We'll never make any progress putting people into office whose price is lower than what corporations can offer, which is immensely high.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 26 2019, @03:01AM (2 children)
So is most of the rest of the world. Currently, China makes up 20% of the world's population. That will decline significantly by 2100.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 26 2019, @06:57AM (1 child)
Two things.
1) Economic potential and realized economic gains are not the same thing. There is 0 indication for now that Africa will ever become a major world player. Presumably it will at some point (since not long ago the same could be said of China) but there is no imperative forcing people to positively progress. It could be 40 years from now, or 400 years from now, or indeed perhaps never. See, for instance, Liberia. It's a beautiful, bountiful, and resource rich land that was not only founded by former US slaves and provided extensive support and funding, but also adopted a near identical political system to that which the US had at the time (~1850). Suffice to say it's development took a rather different path from 1850 than the US did.
2) Our population projections rely on a variety of correlations that are increasing. Education, secularism, income, liberalism, etc correlate strongly with reduced fertility. The data for this argument are compelling. For instance this [statista.com] is a list of fertility in the US by income. Those who are poor are pumping out children at a rate about 50% faster than those who are wealthy with adisconcertingly smooth inverse relationship between fertility and poverty. You also see similarly compelling relationships between religion, education, and even politics. [thecut.com]
So it seems the correlation is accurate. But correlation is not causation. Just go back several decades and all of these correlations completely collapse. So why might this correlation exist today? What happened over the past several decades? The answer seems self evident. Look at cultures that are likely to negatively affect fertility: feminism, identity politics, gender-bending, etc. Which group(s) of people are most actively embracing these ideologies? It's the exact same: liberal, educated, wealthy, secular, etc. China's population decline was caused by government mandate. It's now reversing, all be it slowly. The western population decline has been caused by cultural issues, and those issues are only becoming more severe.
Something population projections also seemingly do not consider is demographic replacement and inflection points. Groups adopting views that negatively affect fertility will naturally trend towards extinction. Groups adopting views that positively affect fertility will naturally trend towards domination. E.g. - Sweden saw it's national fertility average increase something like 20% (relative to what it was before) from 1998 to 2008. Of course nothing really changed. It's just that Swedes named Lucas, Erik, Anna, and Elsa who still have the same low fertility became a relatively smaller chunk of the national population than Swedes named Mohammed, Aisha, Azim, and Saladin who have a higher fertility. And as time progresses, the latter group will become an ever large part of the population while the former group will become an ever smaller part. The global implication of this is that we're not currently seeing sustained population decline, but rather approaching an inflection point. Low fertility groups will die off while high fertility groups will reproduce. As the former are dying faster than the latter are growing, we will decline. Then we reach an inflection point and growth returns, just with a very different distribution of groups. الله أكبر
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 26 2019, @01:21PM
Except, of course, that they're following the same trajectory as all the countries that eventually did become developed world - increasing wealth and infrastructure, empowerment of women, etc.
There doesn't have to be such an imperative. It's a natural consequence of the dynamics pioneered in the last few centuries.
No, they do not. My take is that this holds all the way back to prehistory.
Fails when enough of the next generation fails to adopt those views.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Some call me Tim on Sunday November 24 2019, @06:44AM (2 children)
I worked for McDonnell Douglass / Boeing back in the old days. There were parts of the plant in Huntington Beach where we weren't allowed to go due to the Chinese employees. They stole everything they could get their hands on down to the paint colors. Take a look at the green paint on their towers and compare it to the paint on Boeing umbilical towers for Delta II. The same shade of green is evident. President Clinton gave them our guidance technology for the Iridium constellation.
Questioning science is how you do science!
(Score: 3, Informative) by qzm on Sunday November 24 2019, @07:08AM (1 child)
These days if they want Boeing software they will just need to undercut the Indian sweatshop programmers to get the offshore development program to write it, and keep a copy..
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 24 2019, @07:27PM
Or they could just fly their planes directly into the ground and avoid the middleman...
(Score: 2) by Tokolosh on Sunday November 24 2019, @02:50PM (1 child)
FCC Tells US Telcos: Buy Chinese Kit And You Won't See Another Dime From Us
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=19/11/23/0349215 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Tokolosh on Sunday November 24 2019, @02:53PM
Moscow Bans Sale of Gadgets Without Russian-Made Software
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=19/11/23/0349215 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 24 2019, @05:53PM
and stop spending extorted tax money on closed source US shit too. public money should have to go to public tech or stop stealing.