Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by Fnord666 on Thursday June 25 2020, @06:55PM   Printer-friendly
from the bad-company dept.

Huawei on List of 20 Chinese Companies That Pentagon Says Are Controlled by People’s Liberation Army:

The Pentagon put Huawei Technologies and Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology on a list of 20 companies it says are owned or controlled by China's military, opening them up to potential additional U.S. sanctions.

In letters to lawmakers dated June 24, the Pentagon said it was providing a list of "Communist Chinese military companies operating in the United States." The list was first requested in the fiscal 1999 defense policy law.

This list includes "entities owned by, controlled by, or affiliated with China's government, military, or defense industry," Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said in a statement.

[...] The companies on the list are:

Aviation Industry Corporation of China
China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation
China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation
China Electronics Technology Group Corporation
China South Industries Group Corporation
China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation
China State Shipbuilding Corporation
China North Industries Group Corporation
Huawei Technologies Co.
Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Co.
Inspur Group; Aero Engine Corporation of China
China Railway Construction Corporation
CRRC Corp.; Panda Electronics Group
Dawning Information Industry Co.
China Mobile Communications Group
China General Nuclear Power Corp.
China National Nuclear Power Corp.
China Telecommunications Corp.

Given how inter-connected the world is, how practical would it be to avoid all such Chinese companies?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday June 25 2020, @09:37PM (7 children)

    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Thursday June 25 2020, @09:37PM (#1012638) Journal

    The problem on the list is mining. Various minerals are in short supply, and depend on international trade.

    OTOH, I think this should be worked around, and mining within the US be taxed rather than supported. That way the minerals will be there later when the need is greater. And if it doesn't exist within the US, then the government should stockpile it (**slowly**) against future need.

    The problem is, to do this properly we need both long term planning, and to deal with corruption. And it's possible that the corruption is an even bigger problem than the lack of long term planning. (5 year plan nothing. We need a 50 or 100 year plan. But in broad brush strokes, and only governing actions of the government, not of individuals or companies.)

    --
    Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by deimtee on Friday June 26 2020, @02:20AM (6 children)

    by deimtee (3272) on Friday June 26 2020, @02:20AM (#1012747) Journal

    The problem on the list is mining. Various minerals are in short supply, and depend on international trade.

    The poster child for this is the rare earth metals, but the USA actually had mines for those. (In California I think) They were shut down because China produced them much more cheaply, by ignoring the pollution. They are not really rare just difficult to refine.

    Lithium can be extracted from sea-water for about twice the current market price and that supply is effectively unlimited.

    It would be expensive, but I wonder if a viable combined facility could be built to de-salinate sea-water for domestic/agricultural use, and to extract ALL the metals from the remaining brine.

    --
    If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
    • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday June 26 2020, @03:23AM (5 children)

      by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Friday June 26 2020, @03:23AM (#1012771) Journal

      Possibly after heating the water while cooling a nuclear power plant...though that would be tricky, as sea water is corrosive, and you also don't want to expose it directly to much radiation.

      --
      Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 27 2020, @12:18AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 27 2020, @12:18AM (#1013048)

        Pfffft. Really?? You get lithium from heating sea water using nuclear power, blah blah. I get -my- lithium from CVS.

      • (Score: 2) by PocketSizeSUn on Sunday June 28 2020, @06:35PM (3 children)

        by PocketSizeSUn (5340) on Sunday June 28 2020, @06:35PM (#1013778)

        Gee ... how do nuclear subs work again?

        • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Sunday June 28 2020, @08:26PM (2 children)

          by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Sunday June 28 2020, @08:26PM (#1013815) Journal

          Nuclear subs are highly specialized, and use approaches that you wouldn't want to attempt on land. They also have extremely cost insensitive components and manufacturing. There are a few other reasons why that's not a good argument about it being difficult...which doesn't mean it wouldn't be a good idea, just that you want to approach it differently.

          --
          Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
          • (Score: 2) by PocketSizeSUn on Saturday July 11 2020, @06:51PM (1 child)

            by PocketSizeSUn (5340) on Saturday July 11 2020, @06:51PM (#1019629)

            You have no idea what you are talking about. You just think nuclear powered navy ships are 'crazy complicated' and 'totally different' from the nuclear power plants built in the '70s based on the navy nuclear powered ships.
            Your knee-jerk reaction is ... utterly wrong.

            And my point was that there is absolutely nothing special about using heat to distill water that is then used in the heat exchange system to drive a turbine. The only trivial difference here is that you want an excessive amount of sea water distillation in comparison to subs which spend a lot of effort on steam re-capture.

            • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Saturday July 11 2020, @07:54PM

              by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Saturday July 11 2020, @07:54PM (#1019643) Journal

              The navy ships were run under a tight command structure that ensured maintenance was a very high priority. The same design wouldn't work at all well with a loose command structure and maintenance often a deferred expense. For that you want something with a lot better "fail-safe" design. Also, at sea there is always plenty of sea water to act as a heat transfer medium. On land this is a lot less true, though I admit sometimes you want to run subs at low power to minimize chance of detection.

              --
              Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.