With all due respect to that group of the elderly, so what ?
They will be feeding that back to their MPs when they return to their constituencies this weekend, I expect a big Tory rebellion on this, Tom Tugenhadt and IDS are already co ordinating backbenchers to oppose Huawei being given the 5G contract and of course Trump is also opposed too
People talk about 5G as if it will provide the "backbone of the internet" for the next century, but there's been another generation roughly each decade.
1G was for the 80s. 2G came out in the 90s. 3G came out in the noughties. 4G came out last decade. 5G is coming this decade.
There seems to be a view of finality about this but surely this time next decade we're going to be arguing over 6G?
If we exclude Huawei, we are effectively spending several billion to subsidise European and US manufacturers, while significantly hampering telecoms related development in the UK for a number of years. On the other hand, contributing to Huawei’s market dominance might mean we don’t have realistic alternatives next time around, either. China is able to subsidise the development of whole industries in a manner simply not possible in the west.
It is not a simple decision.
Johnson is facing two big decisions.
Many here are quite sanguine about the prospect of spending something well north of £100 billion building something catering for the travel needs of a small elite that virtually no-one else will need or be able to afford to use, the business case for which was at best marginal when it was being deliberately and in all honesty fraudulently promoted at a third of what has so far been admitted to be its true cost.
So, regarding the other decision, why the angst about spending a few billion in loose change in order not to compromise our state security and fend off a bid for subsidised market dominance by what, behind the sheep's clothing, is still a hostile power?
After the Sacoolas scandal, why not ? We're not part of any Chinese hinterland and there is business to be done.
Johnson would have a broad cross-party consensus for distancing himself from Trump, and American pressure here is distinctly counter-productive. We should make up our minds on the issue alone. So although I don't have the slightest influence on it, I've been trying to decide how I'd vote if I were still in the Commons and the Government bothered to consult it.
As I understand it, Huawei would not be able to able to read the packages which its equipment handled, so the main issue is that they could gradually cripple the network in the event of a confrontation by withdrawing support from it (in theory I suppose they could install switch-off devices into their kit, but I assume that this wouldn't survive inspection).
That doesn't sound a very menacing threat, so without any sneaking affection for China, I don't feel very scared. On the other hand, I've not been clear what the desperate hurry is to implement 5G. For lo-tech people like me, this explanation may be helpful:
The list of advantages seem to me mostly nice to have but not instantly urgent. Unfortunately, kicking the can down the road may not help, since Huawei has a large chunk of the patents on 5G tech. Is there a realistic chance that if we delayed 5G rollout for 2 years, say, we'd then have realistic alternatives?
With all due respect to that group of the elderly, so what ?
They will be feeding that back to their MPs when they return to their constituencies this weekend, I expect a big Tory rebellion on this, Tom Tugenhadt and IDS are already co ordinating backbenchers to oppose Huawei being given the 5G contract and of course Trump is also opposed too
There is not going to be a rebellion with such a healthy majority. Get real.
I could see up to 100 or more Tory MPs rebelling, 80 majority or not Tory backbenchers feel national security is at risk
A deal with China is the only real potential diplomatic win for the UK from Brexit. The UK has turned its back on Europe; deals with the US aren't going anywhere significant. China would, I think, make the UK an offer it doesn't get through the European Union, It will be the only significant offer that gives the UK more than those it already had or would have as a member of the EU.
Strange reaction to Coronavirus over here. I know a LOT of people who say they 'just don't want to know.' My brother is flying through Hong Kong shortly and was cross that everyone is wearing face masks. We have a somewhat peculiar antipathy to masks in this country and the urban myth that 'they don't work' is perpetuated, when they quite clearly have 'some' effect.
I'm scratching my head. I understand the desire not to read bad news and also that we have a habit of overreacting to things.
On the other hand, and at the other end of the spectrum, coronavirus could wipe out 1/10th of the world's population.
Preparing the public with messages about sanitisation, use of face masks and non-essential travel would seem to me to be sensible precautions that don't fall into scaremongering.
This is pretty much my day-job. I’ve been to Huawei HQ in Shenzhen a few times, I know Ericsson, Nokia and Qualcomm very well. The truth is that 5G strategy in Europe and the US is non-existent. We have gifted Huawei leadership because we have done absolutely nothing to help our own companies compete. It is a total failure of collective will and wisdom. Even now the US government is suing Qualcomm, while parts of the Commission (DG Competition, in particular) are looking for an excuse to attack Nokia and Ericsson as patent monopolists. This is all self-inflicted wounds. Huawei has great tech, but it did not have to be like this - and still doesn’t have to be.
How much of Huawei’s advantage is because it’s been hacking and spying (corporate) on Western firms and governments for years, and nicking the emerging tech?
On Huwaei and the excellent posts below, I've long believed that Asia represents the UK's stellar opportunity. Screw the US, because they will screw us. Bugger Europe because they will do likewise. We can be a massive launchpad for Asian trade and tech. Yep, it will come at a price but that's Brexit for you.
I’m impressed with this decision. It shows a sense of realism about Britain’s place in the world that is rare.
Is that Schadenfreude on your part over Brexit, or your sincerely held view?
My sincerely held view. What exactly is the security concern? It presupposes a mental image of Britain bestriding the world. But Britain is on the other side of the globe from China. Its chief interest to China is as a route to US thinking. Britain getting 5G from Huawei is a big problem for the US, which is why they're so annoyed. But if Britain starts thinking of itself as the second tier country it has long been and which Brexit is only going to cement, it can focus its efforts more usefully.
Britain is going to need a 5G network. Britain isn't going to develop its own any time soon. The alternative being touted is vapourware. Go with what's actually available.
I can, however, see why it annoys all the Leavers so much. It's not exactly the worldview they've been sold. Oh well. There's one born every minute and sooner or later the smarter ones are going to realise that they've been duped.
Strange reaction to Coronavirus over here. I know a LOT of people who say they 'just don't want to know.' My brother is flying through Hong Kong shortly and was cross that everyone is wearing face masks. We have a somewhat peculiar antipathy to masks in this country and the urban myth that 'they don't work' is perpetuated, when they quite clearly have 'some' effect.
I'm scratching my head. I understand the desire not to read bad news and also that we have a habit of overreacting to things.
On the other hand, and at the other end of the spectrum, coronavirus could wipe out 1/10th of the world's population.
Preparing the public with messages about sanitisation, use of face masks and non-essential travel would seem to me to be sensible precautions that don't fall into scaremongering.
No, Coronavirus has a mortality of around 3%, predominantly in high risk groups though can be anyone. Even if the entire world caught the current form about 215 million would die. Epidemics uusually peak and the virus mutates into a less virulent form, but we do not know when.
Trading with China should not annoy Leavers. The US was never going to be the sole post-Brexit trading route. And welcoming Huawei does not make us a 2nd tier nation.
As a Remainer I'm getting increasingly irritated with all the moaning from my side. It's pathetic. It's time to put the EU behind us and get on with being a player on the world stage. There will be ups and downs but jumping up and down on the sideline like spoilt children is not going to do us any favours.
I’m impressed with this decision. It shows a sense of realism about Britain’s place in the world that is rare.
Is that Schadenfreude on your part over Brexit, or your sincerely held view?
My sincerely held view. What exactly is the security concern? It presupposes a mental image of Britain bestriding the world. But Britain is on the other side of the globe from China. Its chief interest to China is as a route to US thinking. Britain getting 5G from Huawei is a big problem for the US, which is why they're so annoyed. But if Britain starts thinking of itself as the second tier country it has long been and which Brexit is only going to cement, it can focus its efforts more usefully.
Britain is going to need a 5G network. Britain isn't going to develop its own any time soon. The alternative being touted is vapourware. Go with what's actually available.
I can, however, see why it annoys all the Leavers so much. It's not exactly the worldview they've been sold. Oh well. There's one born every minute and sooner or later the smarter ones are going to realise that they've been duped.
Exactly , time for leavers to realise that the result of Brexit and becoming a second rate small country means they have to lick someones butt, is China any worse than the US who only do us favours for lots of cash.
Trading with China should not annoy Leavers. The US was never going to be the sole post-Brexit trading route. And welcoming Huawei does not make us a 2nd tier nation.
As a Remainer I'm getting increasingly irritated with all the moaning from my side. It's pathetic. It's time to put the EU behind us and get on with being a player on the world stage. There will be ups and downs but jumping up and down on the sideline like spoilt children is not going to do us any favours.
Does that mean engaging with China on its terms and accepting Huawei is a normal multinational company, albeit "with Chinese characteristics" ? Because that seems to be Alastair's point
With all due respect to that group of the elderly, so what ?
They will be feeding that back to their MPs when they return to their constituencies this weekend, I expect a big Tory rebellion on this, Tom Tugenhadt and IDS are already co ordinating backbenchers to oppose Huawei being given the 5G contract and of course Trump is also opposed too
There is not going to be a rebellion with such a healthy majority. Get real.
I could see up to 100 or more Tory MPs rebelling, 80 majority or not Tory backbenchers feel national security is at risk
Governing is making difficult decisions and this is one of them
If the National Security Council endorses the decision then mps need to explain how they have the knowledge to vote against and explain a coherent alternative
Preparing the public with messages about sanitisation, use of face masks and non-essential travel would seem to me to be sensible precautions that don't fall into scaremongering.
Yup, also I have no idea how scared you should be of the coronavirus but the precautions against it seem to be the same as the precautions you'd take against other types of flu, not to mention regular colds. And old people definitely die of the flu while colds definitely ruin your day and lose you productivity. So if everybody's freaking out that seems like a good chance to get people to pick up some good habits about hand-washing or masks or whatever works.
On the basis Of publicised evidence, particularly from the US, perhaps the short term concern (and easily fixed one) should be the human factor. Chinese-ethnicity scientists and technology workers seem remarkably open to pressure from “the home country” whether through emotional ties or indirect pressure through family members still in China. A first step to protecting secrecy might be to exclude those people from sensitive subjects on the basis of a protection principle. Would that really be appropriate behaviour though?
Trading with China should not annoy Leavers. The US was never going to be the sole post-Brexit trading route. And welcoming Huawei does not make us a 2nd tier nation.
As a Remainer I'm getting increasingly irritated with all the moaning from my side. It's pathetic. It's time to put the EU behind us and get on with being a player on the world stage. There will be ups and downs but jumping up and down on the sideline like spoilt children is not going to do us any favours.
The people most annoyed here seem to be people who despise Boris Johnson. Huawei is just a stick.
Can we ask for Hong Kong back as part of the Huawei deal?
Not as a leasehold but in perpetuity.
We could but there'd be an insurrection (even without stirring from the mainland, as in Ukraine). Remember before the handover, it was mooted the reason there was no nationalist terrorism in Hong Kong was that everyone knew the date it would be handed back.
People talk about 5G as if it will provide the "backbone of the internet" for the next century, but there's been another generation roughly each decade.
1G was for the 80s. 2G came out in the 90s. 3G came out in the noughties. 4G came out last decade. 5G is coming this decade.
There seems to be a view of finality about this but surely this time next decade we're going to be arguing over 6G?
Yeah this whole argument is mostly nonsense. The generations are merely labels, there isn't really any distinct technology change as the standards are continuously evolving, 3G for example went from 384 kb/s when first deployed to 84 Mb/s by the end with faster speeds available. Effectively generations of telecoms equipment overlap, and the optional extensions of one generation become mandated in the next standard version (usually annual) which manufacturers slap a generation label on for marketing purposes. Much of what people are getting excited about with 5G was part of 4G, and 4G features were available with 3G too.
How much of Huawei’s advantage is because it’s been hacking and spying (corporate) on Western firms and governments for years, and nicking the emerging tech?
In the early days probably quite a bit, but in more recent years China is doing a lot of R&D in telecoms and the science behind it. A lot of people genuinely think Huawei has the best kit going now, and can you can't really do that just by copying.
This is pretty much my day-job. I’ve been to Huawei HQ in Shenzhen a few times, I know Ericsson, Nokia and Qualcomm very well. The truth is that 5G strategy in Europe and the US is non-existent. We have gifted Huawei leadership because we have done absolutely nothing to help our own companies compete. It is a total failure of collective will and wisdom. Even now the US government is suing Qualcomm, while parts of the Commission (DG Competition, in particular) are looking for an excuse to attack Nokia and Ericsson as patent monopolists. This is all self-inflicted wounds. Huawei has great tech, but it did not have to be like this - and still doesn’t have to be.
I’m impressed with this decision. It shows a sense of realism about Britain’s place in the world that is rare.
Is that Schadenfreude on your part over Brexit, or your sincerely held view?
My sincerely held view. What exactly is the security concern? It presupposes a mental image of Britain bestriding the world. But Britain is on the other side of the globe from China. Its chief interest to China is as a route to US thinking. Britain getting 5G from Huawei is a big problem for the US, which is why they're so annoyed. But if Britain starts thinking of itself as the second tier country it has long been and which Brexit is only going to cement, it can focus its efforts more usefully.
Britain is going to need a 5G network. Britain isn't going to develop its own any time soon. The alternative being touted is vapourware. Go with what's actually available.
I can, however, see why it annoys all the Leavers so much. It's not exactly the worldview they've been sold. Oh well. There's one born every minute and sooner or later the smarter ones are going to realise that they've been duped.
Interesting (apart from the final paragraph, which was unnecessary) - I disagree but thanks for sharing.
Mr. glw, IP theft by Chinese firms helped get them to where they are today. The juicy size of the Chinese market helped lead to a limp response to this by the international community.
Copying can't get you ahead, but it can help you catch up (as the Romans found with Carthaginian ships in the First Punic War).
Trading with China should not annoy Leavers. The US was never going to be the sole post-Brexit trading route. And welcoming Huawei does not make us a 2nd tier nation.
As a Remainer I'm getting increasingly irritated with all the moaning from my side. It's pathetic. It's time to put the EU behind us and get on with being a player on the world stage. There will be ups and downs but jumping up and down on the sideline like spoilt children is not going to do us any favours.
The people most annoyed here seem to be people who despise Boris Johnson. Huawei is just a stick.
Can we ask for Hong Kong back as part of the Huawei deal?
Not as a leasehold but in perpetuity.
Nice, the Chinese must be half regretting taking on Hong Kong at this point, especially with Shanghai getting its financial centre mojo back.
Shanghai was always going to grow, but the financial markets there remain narrow and dependant on intellectual capital from elsewhere. In particular, currency conversion restrictions which are capricious and unpredictable, the aversion to non-bank lending, the desire of policy banks to lend risk-free to SOEs rather than the private sector and a stock market which seems aimed at promoting social stability rather than reflecting risk and profit. There’s a reason that Chinese companies list outside China (or have a dual listing with the China element for political reasons).
As for regretting HK, have a look at the map on Caixin Global and see what China claims as Chinese (look in particular at the South China Sea part, deliberately included).
In my opinion far too much nonsense is being talked about Huawei by far too many who simply do not understand it or are using it as a political instrument
I would suggest there are just a handful of posters on here who have demonstrated a knowledge of the subject and as far as I am concerned I do not know enough about the subject to comment, but if Boris goes with Huawei following the backing of the National Security Counsel then he is making the most of a very difficult decision and opponents would need to explain what the alternatives are that are viable
What the 5G issue shows is the UK's woeful lack of incentives for innovation in this country. And the culture of selling out for a quick buck when we do stumble upon something.
Trading with China should not annoy Leavers. The US was never going to be the sole post-Brexit trading route. And welcoming Huawei does not make us a 2nd tier nation.
As a Remainer I'm getting increasingly irritated with all the moaning from my side. It's pathetic. It's time to put the EU behind us and get on with being a player on the world stage. There will be ups and downs but jumping up and down on the sideline like spoilt children is not going to do us any favours.
The people most annoyed here seem to be people who despise Boris Johnson. Huawei is just a stick.
Quite
You reckon? HYUFD predicting a huge rebellion - you count him as anti-Boris? Me saying I'm not sure and asking for more info - you reckon I'm pro-Boris? Too easy to lump everyone into categories - this is an issue which really shouldn't be about party preference, let alone personal affection.
This is pretty much my day-job. I’ve been to Huawei HQ in Shenzhen a few times, I know Ericsson, Nokia and Qualcomm very well. The truth is that 5G strategy in Europe and the US is non-existent. We have gifted Huawei leadership because we have done absolutely nothing to help our own companies compete. It is a total failure of collective will and wisdom. Even now the US government is suing Qualcomm, while parts of the Commission (DG Competition, in particular) are looking for an excuse to attack Nokia and Ericsson as patent monopolists. This is all self-inflicted wounds. Huawei has great tech, but it did not have to be like this - and still doesn’t have to be.
Excellent post.
It is - but fails to acknowledge that is an almost inevitable result of our economic system. There is no "collective will" regarding industries distributed over several competing free market economies.
Could countries have done more to encourage domestic producers ? Perhaps.
But an effort like China's, to massively support the achievement of technical dominance in a particular industry, is not a simple matter in the west. Look at the arguments over state support in the aerospace industry, which the west does dominate. And the UK does not have a domestic industry in this sector.
I’m impressed with this decision. It shows a sense of realism about Britain’s place in the world that is rare.
Is that Schadenfreude on your part over Brexit, or your sincerely held view?
My sincerely held view. What exactly is the security concern? It presupposes a mental image of Britain bestriding the world. But Britain is on the other side of the globe from China. Its chief interest to China is as a route to US thinking. Britain getting 5G from Huawei is a big problem for the US, which is why they're so annoyed. But if Britain starts thinking of itself as the second tier country it has long been and which Brexit is only going to cement, it can focus its efforts more usefully.
Britain is going to need a 5G network. Britain isn't going to develop its own any time soon. The alternative being touted is vapourware. Go with what's actually available.
I can, however, see why it annoys all the Leavers so much. It's not exactly the worldview they've been sold. Oh well. There's one born every minute and sooner or later the smarter ones are going to realise that they've been duped.
The threat is that of China deliberately disrupting (for whatever reason) a significant part of our national infrastructure. But that argument is being conflated with one about whether we should be supporting western suppliers in an effort to preserve non Chinese sources of such equipment.
What it ignores is just how dependent our economies already are on Chinese manufacturing.
How much of Huawei’s advantage is because it’s been hacking and spying (corporate) on Western firms and governments for years, and nicking the emerging tech?
In the early days probably quite a bit, but in more recent years China is doing a lot of R&D in telecoms and the science behind it. A lot of people genuinely think Huawei has the best kit going now, and can you can't really do that just by copying.
Pb used to have a very wise poster called SeanT who never comes here any more but did used often to post warnings of rising Chinese R&D expenditure and scientific publications, and this at a time when the British government was cutting research.
Mr. NorthWales, both the US and Australia (fellow Five Eyes members) have ruled out Huawei. That does suggest there are genuine concerns.
There are but but they are the two countries most against Huawei and in Trumps case it is more about trade wars and how to beat China
It does seem many countries are considering Huawei including Germany and Canada and it could be Trumps real fear is that if Boris goes with Huawei many counties could well follow
Strange reaction to Coronavirus over here. I know a LOT of people who say they 'just don't want to know.' My brother is flying through Hong Kong shortly and was cross that everyone is wearing face masks. We have a somewhat peculiar antipathy to masks in this country and the urban myth that 'they don't work' is perpetuated, when they quite clearly have 'some' effect.
I'm scratching my head. I understand the desire not to read bad news and also that we have a habit of overreacting to things.
On the other hand, and at the other end of the spectrum, coronavirus could wipe out 1/10th of the world's population.
Preparing the public with messages about sanitisation, use of face masks and non-essential travel would seem to me to be sensible precautions that don't fall into scaremongering.
No, Coronavirus has a mortality of around 3%, predominantly in high risk groups though can be anyone. Even if the entire world caught the current form about 215 million would die. Epidemics uusually peak and the virus mutates into a less virulent form, but we do not know when.
Given those 230,000,000 predicted to die will be the youngest, the oldest and the most infirm - is laying old man Sanders with his recent myocardial infarction a stone cold certainty for the presidency ?
As soon as the US extradite their car crash manslaughterer to the UK.
As was suggested yesterday a straight swop would be perfect
Whilst it is fun being flippant, as far as due pocess is conerned, they are not equivalent. There is (as yet) no legal basis for an extradition of Prince Andrew, whereas the American "car crash manslaughterer" has - as far as I understand it - apologised for causing the death (but wants it to end there).
But yes, in an ideal world they would both face the consequences of their actions. Whatever they might be.
How much of Huawei’s advantage is because it’s been hacking and spying (corporate) on Western firms and governments for years, and nicking the emerging tech?
In the early days probably quite a bit, but in more recent years China is doing a lot of R&D in telecoms and the science behind it. A lot of people genuinely think Huawei has the best kit going now, and can you can't really do that just by copying.
Pb used to have a very wise poster called SeanT who never comes here any more but did used often to post warnings of rising Chinese R&D expenditure and scientific publications, and this at a time when the British government was cutting research.
As soon as the US extradite their car crash manslaughterer to the UK.
As was suggested yesterday a straight swop would be perfect
Whilst it is fun being flippant, as far as due pocess is conerned, they are not equivalent. There is (as yet) no legal basis for an extradition of Prince Andrew, whereas the American "car crash manslaughterer" has - as far as I understand it - apologised for causing the death (but wants it to end there).
But yes, in an ideal world they would both face the consequences of their actions. Whatever they might be.
I am not sure it is flippant. It will be very interesting to see how Prince Andrew evades the US authorities
Strange reaction to Coronavirus over here. I know a LOT of people who say they 'just don't want to know.' My brother is flying through Hong Kong shortly and was cross that everyone is wearing face masks. We have a somewhat peculiar antipathy to masks in this country and the urban myth that 'they don't work' is perpetuated, when they quite clearly have 'some' effect.
I'm scratching my head. I understand the desire not to read bad news and also that we have a habit of overreacting to things.
On the other hand, and at the other end of the spectrum, coronavirus could wipe out 1/10th of the world's population.
Preparing the public with messages about sanitisation, use of face masks and non-essential travel would seem to me to be sensible precautions that don't fall into scaremongering.
No, Coronavirus has a mortality of around 3%, predominantly in high risk groups though can be anyone. Even if the entire world caught the current form about 215 million would die. Epidemics uusually peak and the virus mutates into a less virulent form, but we do not know when.
Given those 230,000,000 predicted to die will be the youngest, the oldest and the most infirm - is laying old man Sanders with his recent myocardial infarction a stone cold certainty for the presidency ?
Just as likely to take out Biden (though perhaps not renowned germaphobe Trump who will avoid pressing the flesh on the stump).
The threat is that of China deliberately disrupting (for whatever reason) a significant part of our national infrastructure. But that argument is being conflated with one about whether we should be supporting western suppliers in an effort to preserve non Chinese sources of such equipment.
What it ignores is just how dependent our economies already are on Chinese manufacturing.
Exactly. If we ripped out all Chinese components from the UK's telecoms and computing infrastructure we would reduced to using pen and paper, and the post office.
This whole argument is a good couple of decades too late, and not just for the UK but the whole world.
Mr. glw, IP theft by Chinese firms helped get them to where they are today. The juicy size of the Chinese market helped lead to a limp response to this by the international community.
Copying can't get you ahead, but it can help you catch up (as the Romans found with Carthaginian ships in the First Punic War).
Strange reaction to Coronavirus over here. I know a LOT of people who say they 'just don't want to know.' My brother is flying through Hong Kong shortly and was cross that everyone is wearing face masks. We have a somewhat peculiar antipathy to masks in this country and the urban myth that 'they don't work' is perpetuated, when they quite clearly have 'some' effect.
I'm scratching my head. I understand the desire not to read bad news and also that we have a habit of overreacting to things.
On the other hand, and at the other end of the spectrum, coronavirus could wipe out 1/10th of the world's population.
Preparing the public with messages about sanitisation, use of face masks and non-essential travel would seem to me to be sensible precautions that don't fall into scaremongering.
No, Coronavirus has a mortality of around 3%, predominantly in high risk groups though can be anyone. Even if the entire world caught the current form about 215 million would die. Epidemics uusually peak and the virus mutates into a less virulent form, but we do not know when.
Given those 230,000,000 predicted to die will be the youngest, the oldest and the most infirm - is laying old man Sanders with his recent myocardial infarction a stone cold certainty for the presidency ?
Just as likely to take out Biden (though perhaps not renowned germaphobe Trump who will avoid pressing the flesh on the stump).
I think Sanders is more likely to be in the 3% than Biden, Bloomberg or Trump due to his heart issues.
Regarding the missing comma on the Brexit 50p coin.
However, Susie Dent, keeper of the Countdown dictionary, said: “I use the Oxford comma and always have done. It clarifies things in a list and so it’s simpler to use it all the time.”
Mr. NorthWales, both the US and Australia (fellow Five Eyes members) have ruled out Huawei. That does suggest there are genuine concerns.
It also shows there are alternatives, albeit a small number (Nokia, potentially Samsung, is there a third?). It’s this feature that is of most concern. It’s the drip drip drip by which Chinese achieves technological dominance by squeezing everyone else out through predatory practices. If you have spent time trying to understand the CCP’s objectives first hand, the casual attitude displayed by many here is frightening.
Because through tech dominance comes military dominance, economic dominance and finally cultural and racial dominance (yes the objective really is that blunt). This won’t happen in the lifetimes of most people posting here but it might in that of your children / grandchildren.
I’m impressed with this decision. It shows a sense of realism about Britain’s place in the world that is rare.
Is that Schadenfreude on your part over Brexit, or your sincerely held view?
My sincerely held view. What exactly is the security concern? It presupposes a mental image of Britain bestriding the world. But Britain is on the other side of the globe from China. Its chief interest to China is as a route to US thinking. Britain getting 5G from Huawei is a big problem for the US, which is why they're so annoyed. But if Britain starts thinking of itself as the second tier country it has long been and which Brexit is only going to cement, it can focus its efforts more usefully.
Britain is going to need a 5G network. Britain isn't going to develop its own any time soon. The alternative being touted is vapourware. Go with what's actually available.
I can, however, see why it annoys all the Leavers so much. It's not exactly the worldview they've been sold. Oh well. There's one born every minute and sooner or later the smarter ones are going to realise that they've been duped.
Exactly , time for leavers to realise that the result of Brexit and becoming a second rate small country means they have to lick someones butt, is China any worse than the US who only do us favours for lots of cash.
From memory we have a lot more access to Huawei than the Americans do (Huawei allow us access to their source code so we can check for obvious issues).
And given that what is left is back door access via exploits and Ericsson and Nokia's software is as likely to have those as we do.
I’m impressed with this decision. It shows a sense of realism about Britain’s place in the world that is rare.
Is that Schadenfreude on your part over Brexit, or your sincerely held view?
My sincerely held view. What exactly is the security concern? It presupposes a mental image of Britain bestriding the world. But Britain is on the other side of the globe from China. Its chief interest to China is as a route to US thinking. Britain getting 5G from Huawei is a big problem for the US, which is why they're so annoyed. But if Britain starts thinking of itself as the second tier country it has long been and which Brexit is only going to cement, it can focus its efforts more usefully.
Britain is going to need a 5G network. Britain isn't going to develop its own any time soon. The alternative being touted is vapourware. Go with what's actually available.
I can, however, see why it annoys all the Leavers so much. It's not exactly the worldview they've been sold. Oh well. There's one born every minute and sooner or later the smarter ones are going to realise that they've been duped.
The threat is that of China deliberately disrupting (for whatever reason) a significant part of our national infrastructure. But that argument is being conflated with one about whether we should be supporting western suppliers in an effort to preserve non Chinese sources of such equipment.
What it ignores is just how dependent our economies already are on Chinese manufacturing.
Virtually everything I buy is stamped with 'Made in China'.
Everything.
In fact, I've gone round the house trying to find something that's not. I can't.
Strange reaction to Coronavirus over here. I know a LOT of people who say they 'just don't want to know.' My brother is flying through Hong Kong shortly and was cross that everyone is wearing face masks. We have a somewhat peculiar antipathy to masks in this country and the urban myth that 'they don't work' is perpetuated, when they quite clearly have 'some' effect.
I'm scratching my head. I understand the desire not to read bad news and also that we have a habit of overreacting to things.
On the other hand, and at the other end of the spectrum, coronavirus could wipe out 1/10th of the world's population.
Preparing the public with messages about sanitisation, use of face masks and non-essential travel would seem to me to be sensible precautions that don't fall into scaremongering.
No, Coronavirus has a mortality of around 3%, predominantly in high risk groups though can be anyone. Even if the entire world caught the current form about 215 million would die. Epidemics uusually peak and the virus mutates into a less virulent form, but we do not know when.
Given those 230,000,000 predicted to die will be the youngest, the oldest and the most infirm - is laying old man Sanders with his recent myocardial infarction a stone cold certainty for the presidency ?
Just as likely to take out Biden (though perhaps not renowned germaphobe Trump who will avoid pressing the flesh on the stump).
I think Sanders is more likely to be in the 3% than Biden, Bloomberg or Trump due to his heart issues.
I'm not sure there's any good medical reason to support such a supposition. He seems to have recovered well, and it's probably more about lung and immune system function ? Any medical experts care to weigh in ?
Mr. Moonshine, the space race will become a telling factor, I think, in the future direction of global co-operation or confrontation. As Obi-wan taught us, the high ground is crucial.
Strange reaction to Coronavirus over here. I know a LOT of people who say they 'just don't want to know.' My brother is flying through Hong Kong shortly and was cross that everyone is wearing face masks. We have a somewhat peculiar antipathy to masks in this country and the urban myth that 'they don't work' is perpetuated, when they quite clearly have 'some' effect.
I'm scratching my head. I understand the desire not to read bad news and also that we have a habit of overreacting to things.
On the other hand, and at the other end of the spectrum, coronavirus could wipe out 1/10th of the world's population.
Preparing the public with messages about sanitisation, use of face masks and non-essential travel would seem to me to be sensible precautions that don't fall into scaremongering.
No, Coronavirus has a mortality of around 3%, predominantly in high risk groups though can be anyone. Even if the entire world caught the current form about 215 million would die. Epidemics uusually peak and the virus mutates into a less virulent form, but we do not know when.
Given those 230,000,000 predicted to die will be the youngest, the oldest and the most infirm - is laying old man Sanders with his recent myocardial infarction a stone cold certainty for the presidency ?
I have a one year old daughter so forgive me if I don't see the lighter side of this.
I’m impressed with this decision. It shows a sense of realism about Britain’s place in the world that is rare.
Is that Schadenfreude on your part over Brexit, or your sincerely held view?
My sincerely held view. What exactly is the security concern? It presupposes a mental image of Britain bestriding the world. But Britain is on the other side of the globe from China. Its chief interest to China is as a route to US thinking. Britain getting 5G from Huawei is a big problem for the US, which is why they're so annoyed. But if Britain starts thinking of itself as the second tier country it has long been and which Brexit is only going to cement, it can focus its efforts more usefully.
Britain is going to need a 5G network. Britain isn't going to develop its own any time soon. The alternative being touted is vapourware. Go with what's actually available.
I can, however, see why it annoys all the Leavers so much. It's not exactly the worldview they've been sold. Oh well. There's one born every minute and sooner or later the smarter ones are going to realise that they've been duped.
The threat is that of China deliberately disrupting (for whatever reason) a significant part of our national infrastructure. But that argument is being conflated with one about whether we should be supporting western suppliers in an effort to preserve non Chinese sources of such equipment.
What it ignores is just how dependent our economies already are on Chinese manufacturing.
Virtually everything I buy is stamped with 'Made in China'. Everything. In fact, I've gone round the house trying to find something that's not. I can't. E.v.e.r.y.t.h.i.n.g. This is not a good thing.
Probably not. We should perhaps be doing something about it - but using that as a basis for this particular decision is an utterly ineffective response,
Mr. Moonshine, the space race will become a telling factor, I think, in the future direction of global co-operation or confrontation. As Obi-wan taught us, the high ground is crucial.
Obi Wan, like Yoda, was a moron.
They didn’t spot the greatest Sith Lord was right in front of them.
How much of Huawei’s advantage is because it’s been hacking and spying (corporate) on Western firms and governments for years, and nicking the emerging tech?
If they've just been nicking emerging tech, why doesn't someone else have it? Who did they they steal it from and why can't we just engage them?
Boris Johnson’s government spent £46m on a “Get Ready for Brexit” campaign in October, but demonstrated little evidence it left the public better prepared, Whitehall’s spending watchdog has found.
The National Audit Office said ministers chose to run a £100m campaign – the most expensive of four options – to tell all UK businesses and individuals how they should prepare for leaving the EU. The campaign was launched as the 31 October deadline for leaving the EU approached.
But the evidence shows that the proportion of UK citizens who reported that they had looked or started to look for information, did not notably change, auditors said.
Strange reaction to Coronavirus over here. I know a LOT of people who say they 'just don't want to know.' My brother is flying through Hong Kong shortly and was cross that everyone is wearing face masks. We have a somewhat peculiar antipathy to masks in this country and the urban myth that 'they don't work' is perpetuated, when they quite clearly have 'some' effect.
I'm scratching my head. I understand the desire not to read bad news and also that we have a habit of overreacting to things.
On the other hand, and at the other end of the spectrum, coronavirus could wipe out 1/10th of the world's population.
Preparing the public with messages about sanitisation, use of face masks and non-essential travel would seem to me to be sensible precautions that don't fall into scaremongering.
No, Coronavirus has a mortality of around 3%, predominantly in high risk groups though can be anyone. Even if the entire world caught the current form about 215 million would die. Epidemics uusually peak and the virus mutates into a less virulent form, but we do not know when.
Given those 230,000,000 predicted to die will be the youngest, the oldest and the most infirm - is laying old man Sanders with his recent myocardial infarction a stone cold certainty for the presidency ?
Just as likely to take out Biden (though perhaps not renowned germaphobe Trump who will avoid pressing the flesh on the stump).
I think Sanders is more likely to be in the 3% than Biden, Bloomberg or Trump due to his heart issues.
I'm not sure there's any good medical reason to support such a supposition. He seems to have recovered well, and it's probably more about lung and immune system function ? Any medical experts care to weigh in ?
The political question is whether a medical problem for one of the oldies will affect the others. Will voters be made more nervous of advanced age?
We're at a hundred deaths now so the model looks on track, but early days yet.
It looks less credible in the final month with the geometric growth.
If it got that bad the whole world economy would shut down, and we'd get more deaths from malnutrition and no medical care than the virus. Quarantine and containment measures should kick in much earlier if it gets that serious.
It feels like peaking at a few thousand fatalities to me, but what do I know.
Mr. NorthWales, both the US and Australia (fellow Five Eyes members) have ruled out Huawei. That does suggest there are genuine concerns.
It also shows there are alternatives, albeit a small number (Nokia, potentially Samsung, is there a third?). It’s this feature that is of most concern. It’s the drip drip drip by which Chinese achieves technological dominance by squeezing everyone else out through predatory practices. If you have spent time trying to understand the CCP’s objectives first hand, the casual attitude displayed by many here is frightening.
Because through tech dominance comes military dominance, economic dominance and finally cultural and racial dominance (yes the objective really is that blunt). This won’t happen in the lifetimes of most people posting here but it might in that of your children / grandchildren.
China leads the world in AI for very obvious reasons. That is actually a lot more frightening than allowing Huawei a bit of our 5G infrastructure action. But I don't think the Chinese are after dominance. They are happy for anyone outside their zone of influence to do as they wish, as long as it does not adversely affect China. The humiliations of the ninteenth and early 20th century are what guide Chinese foreign policy.
Mr. NorthWales, both the US and Australia (fellow Five Eyes members) have ruled out Huawei. That does suggest there are genuine concerns.
It also shows there are alternatives, albeit a small number (Nokia, potentially Samsung, is there a third?). It’s this feature that is of most concern. It’s the drip drip drip by which Chinese achieves technological dominance by squeezing everyone else out through predatory practices. If you have spent time trying to understand the CCP’s objectives first hand, the casual attitude displayed by many here is frightening.
Because through tech dominance comes military dominance, economic dominance and finally cultural and racial dominance (yes the objective really is that blunt). This won’t happen in the lifetimes of most people posting here but it might in that of your children / grandchildren.
China leads the world in AI for very obvious reasons. That is actually a lot more frightening than allowing Huawei a bit of our 5G infrastructure action. But I don't think the Chinese are after dominance. They are happy for anyone outside their zone of influence to do as they wish, as long as it does not adversely affect China. The humiliations of the ninteenth and early 20th century are what guide Chinese foreign policy.
They will ultimately expand their zone of influence (if they can) worldwide to guarantee their fear of the latter point.
That's the realpolitik that guides superpowers, particularly undemocratic ones, unless otherwise constrained.
I wrote yesterday that I don't know what to think about Huawei but my gut says don't trust China. After thinking about it I've come to the following thought train. This is my own logic and I'm not an expert here and not going to argue with anyone but just putting down my thoughts.
1: I've long thought and written here that our most important strategic alliance is not either NATO or the EU, it is Five Eyes. 2: Anything that jeopardises Five Eyes therefore is unacceptable. 3: We don't know from public briefings whether American threats to Five Eyes are serious or not, but I would hope our Prime Minister, security services and GCHQ do know the answer to that question. 4: I don't know whether Huawei can hack or otherwise corrupt the 5G network but again I would hope our security services and GCHQ do know the answer to that question.
Therefore to me if I was Prime Minister I would have access to advice from our security services and GCHQ etc. I would barring other knowledge take that advice and act on it.
If Huawei is a threat and the Americans are serious about shutting down Five Eyes that is unacceptable. Say no to Huawei. If we know the Americans are bluffing about Five Eyes and GCHQ believes the system is safe then this is about trade not security and we should go ahead.
I'm not going to second guess GCHQ and our security services but I assume the Prime Minister will not go ahead if they advise him not to - and I further assume that if we do go ahead it is because even the Americans know the risk is so minimal they are not going to jeopardise Five Eyes.
How much of Huawei’s advantage is because it’s been hacking and spying (corporate) on Western firms and governments for years, and nicking the emerging tech?
If they've just been nicking emerging tech, why doesn't someone else have it? Who did they they steal it from and why can't we just engage them?
Huawei's patents are essential for 5G - 5G is really 4G optimised to the nth degree.
How much of Huawei’s advantage is because it’s been hacking and spying (corporate) on Western firms and governments for years, and nicking the emerging tech?
In the early days probably quite a bit, but in more recent years China is doing a lot of R&D in telecoms and the science behind it. A lot of people genuinely think Huawei has the best kit going now, and can you can't really do that just by copying.
Huawei is very widely seen as having the best kit. It developed much of it by paying higher salaries than its competitors to recruit the very best and most talented engineers and scientists. I wrote this about Huawei last year:
How much of Huawei’s advantage is because it’s been hacking and spying (corporate) on Western firms and governments for years, and nicking the emerging tech?
If they've just been nicking emerging tech, why doesn't someone else have it? Who did they they steal it from and why can't we just engage them?
Huawei's patents are essential for 5G - 5G is really 4G optimised to the nth degree.
Also for seamless 4G to 5G handover, Ericsson and Nokia are having to licence this part of 5G from Huawei.
I was quoting an index you didn't like the make up of - you described the stats as "lies" - lets look at the OECD index you cite in two key devolved areas - education and health:
Health: 4.9/10 - 12th out of 12 regions in the UK. Want to tell your lies about infant mortality again?
Education: 7.9/10 - 4th out of 12 regions in UK. Lets see how this evolves - PISA is heading in the wrong direction unfortunately.
Other areas are strong - eg Access to Services (3/12) - but then with a subsidy from rUK tax payers I should hope so, other areas are worse - such as housing - (10/12 in UK), and Safety (9/12) - the success of Police Scotland just keeps going.....
It's a mixed bag - as are all regions in the UK - but to claim that Health (devolved) is a success is, how should we put it? "A lie"
Mr. NorthWales, both the US and Australia (fellow Five Eyes members) have ruled out Huawei. That does suggest there are genuine concerns.
In the case of the US, it's purely a case of supporting its domestic industry. Which is entirely justifiable, but doesn't really help us.
And in the case of Australia they haven't used Huawei for their 4G so i) have no experience with it and ii) have no sunk cost because 5G is built on top of 4G infrastructure we've already spent billions installing and 3) ScoMo makes Boris look like a statesman
I was quoting an index you didn't like the make up of - you described the stats as "lies" - lets look at the OECD index you cite in two key devolved areas - education and health:
Health: 4.9/10 - 12th out of 12 regions in the UK. Want to tell your lies about infant mortality again?
Education: 7.9/10 - 4th out of 12 regions in UK. Lets see how this evolves - PISA is heading in the wrong direction unfortunately.
Other areas are strong - eg Access to Services (3/12) - but then with a subsidy from rUK tax payers I should hope so, other areas are worse - such as housing - (10/12 in UK), and Safety (9/12) - the success of Police Scotland just keeps going.....
It's a mixed bag - as are all regions in the UK - but to claim that Health (devolved) is a success is, how should we put it? "A lie"
I was quoting an index you didn't like the make up of - you described the stats as "lies" - lets look at the OECD index you cite in two key devolved areas - education and health:
Health: 4.9/10 - 12th out of 12 regions in the UK. Want to tell your lies about infant mortality again?
Education: 7.9/10 - 4th out of 12 regions in UK. Lets see how this evolves - PISA is heading in the wrong direction unfortunately.
Other areas are strong - eg Access to Services (3/12) - but then with a subsidy from rUK tax payers I should hope so, other areas are worse - such as housing - (10/12 in UK), and Safety (9/12) - the success of Police Scotland just keeps going.....
It's a mixed bag - as are all regions in the UK - but to claim that Health (devolved) is a success is, how should we put it? "A lie"
How much of Huawei’s advantage is because it’s been hacking and spying (corporate) on Western firms and governments for years, and nicking the emerging tech?
If they've just been nicking emerging tech, why doesn't someone else have it? Who did they they steal it from and why can't we just engage them?
Huawei's patents are essential for 5G - 5G is really 4G optimised to the nth degree.
Also for seamless 4G to 5G handover, Ericsson and Nokia are having to licence this part of 5G from Huawei.
Companies declare their patents standards essential, there is no independent body that decides whether they are or not. Declaring a patent standards essential means that you are sayimg you will make it available to all-comers on a non-discriminatory basis. The market then decides whether your patent is gebuonely standards essential by either using it or not. Huawei has delcared huge numbers of SEPs, but that does not mean they are. That is a very important point. If you look at the numbers, you'd think Huawei was miles ahead of everyone. But if ypu look at the actual licensing deals being done, you can see that is not the case. With patents, it's quality not quantity that matters.
How much of Huawei’s advantage is because it’s been hacking and spying (corporate) on Western firms and governments for years, and nicking the emerging tech?
If they've just been nicking emerging tech, why doesn't someone else have it? Who did they they steal it from and why can't we just engage them?
Huawei's patents are essential for 5G - 5G is really 4G optimised to the nth degree.
Also for seamless 4G to 5G handover, Ericsson and Nokia are having to licence this part of 5G from Huawei.
Companies declare their patents standards essential, there is no independent body that decides whether they are or not. Declaring a patent standards essential means that you are sayimg you will make it available to all-comers on a non-discriminatory basis. The market then decides whether your patent is gebuonely standards essential by either using it or not. Huawei has delcared huge numbers of SEPs, but that does not mean they are. That is a very important point. If you look at the numbers, you'd think Huawei was miles ahead of everyone. But if ypu look at the actual licensing deals being done, you can see that is not the case. With patents, it's quality not quantity that matters.
The current government needs to appreciate that this is not at heart a good-faith dispute about the precise architecture of the United Kingdom. It is a drag-out fight with movements which have invariably turned every arsenal, treasury, and pulpit ceded them by the devolutionaries against the United Kingdom. Nationalists are not trying to make the country work: they have no interest in your settlement: they wish to make a new country of their own. We should believe them in their ambitions and, if we’re unionists, meet them with some of our own.
The case for the country we have rests on the following premises: that Britain is a legitimate level for political decision-making; that we are better off pooling and sharing not only money but wisdom and experience in our united Parliament; and that Her Majesty’s Government is ultimately the government of all of its people, both in every individual home nation, and the one they make together.
China 5G: Not one of my Hot Topics (either for knowledge or interest) but I gather a decision to green light this one goes against what the Trump administration want us to do. So it's a tick from me as far as that is concerned. Perhaps "Boris", like me, knows Trump is going down to chinatown in November and therefore does not need to be taken too seriously these days.
The current government needs to appreciate that this is not at heart a good-faith dispute about the precise architecture of the United Kingdom. It is a drag-out fight with movements which have invariably turned every arsenal, treasury, and pulpit ceded them by the devolutionaries against the United Kingdom. Nationalists are not trying to make the country work: they have no interest in your settlement: they wish to make a new country of their own. We should believe them in their ambitions and, if we’re unionists, meet them with some of our own.
The case for the country we have rests on the following premises: that Britain is a legitimate level for political decision-making; that we are better off pooling and sharing not only money but wisdom and experience in our united Parliament; and that Her Majesty’s Government is ultimately the government of all of its people, both in every individual home nation, and the one they make together.
We're at a hundred deaths now so the model looks on track, but early days yet.
Simple extrapolation does breakdown at higher coverage as the percentage of unaffected people goes down, but at this stage of an outbreak it is very hard to predict the peak.
In the Spanish Flu of 1918-22 there were 3 waves of infection as the virus mutated. On the other hand Ebola was contained, so time will tell.
Last night my hospital had 34 patients on Trolleys waiting for beds overnight, so a real outbreak would swamp the system very quickly.
I am not a biologist or a doctor so my opinion on this is probably pretty worthless, but surely there are so many variables on this that it is impossible to do that sort of extrapolation.
Possible further mutations/additional understanding of the virus/quarantined and control methods/possible latent immunity in some individuals etc etc etc.
It’s been a good few months since the media had a novel new disease to shriek about. Of course any new disease is potentially the “big one” but I don’t think I’ll start to be concerned until we see it establish itself firmly.
Mr. NorthWales, both the US and Australia (fellow Five Eyes members) have ruled out Huawei. That does suggest there are genuine concerns.
In the case of the US, it's purely a case of supporting its domestic industry. Which is entirely justifiable, but doesn't really help us.
And in the case of Australia they haven't used Huawei for their 4G so i) have no experience with it and ii) have no sunk cost because 5G is built on top of 4G infrastructure we've already spent billions installing and 3) ScoMo makes Boris look like a statesman
In a 10-minute gap between meetings yesterday, I did some back-of-an-envelope calculations and I came up with 243 million deaths worldwide and 1.6 million deaths in the UK.
Time for a little perspective, the world's population has already increased by 6 million this year and approaching 100,000 today.
Massive variables in all this - can we presume healthier stronger populations will see lower mortality rates then those with poorer health? Would the death rate in Uganda be the same as in the UK? Who knows?
The worry for me is the extent to which we can rely on the figures coming out of China - the Chinese State has a history of providing some interesting statistics. I saw a report where a nurse claimed 90,000 had been infected which is far in advance of the numbers being reported.
In a 10-minute gap between meetings yesterday, I did some back-of-an-envelope calculations and I came up with 243 million deaths worldwide and 1.6 million deaths in the UK.
Time for a little perspective, the world's population has already increased by 6 million this year and approaching 100,000 today.
Massive variables in all this - can we presume healthier stronger populations will see lower mortality rates then those with poorer health? Would the death rate in Uganda be the same as in the UK? Who knows?
The worry for me is the extent to which we can rely on the figures coming out of China - the Chinese State has a history of providing some interesting statistics. I saw a report where a nurse claimed 90,000 had been infected which is far in advance of the numbers being reported.
Mr. Stodge, whilst wariness on figures may be justified a discrepancy on infection/reported numbers could be due to incubation/people not coming forward.
Even when trying to compile statistics entirely honestly, it's not always easy.
Comments
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/john-bolton-wont-give-anything-away-free/605614/
What happens next with the impeachment process will be interesting.
stories on it were jsut lies.
https://macalbasite.wordpress.com/2020/01/27/wellbeing-index-the-truth-they-wont-tell-you/
1G was for the 80s.
2G came out in the 90s.
3G came out in the noughties.
4G came out last decade.
5G is coming this decade.
There seems to be a view of finality about this but surely this time next decade we're going to be arguing over 6G?
Many here are quite sanguine about the prospect of spending something well north of £100 billion building something catering for the travel needs of a small elite that virtually no-one else will need or be able to afford to use, the business case for which was at best marginal when it was being deliberately and in all honesty fraudulently promoted at a third of what has so far been admitted to be its true cost.
So, regarding the other decision, why the angst about spending a few billion in loose change in order not to compromise our state security and fend off a bid for subsidised market dominance by what, behind the sheep's clothing, is still a hostile power?
As I understand it, Huawei would not be able to able to read the packages which its equipment handled, so the main issue is that they could gradually cripple the network in the event of a confrontation by withdrawing support from it (in theory I suppose they could install switch-off devices into their kit, but I assume that this wouldn't survive inspection).
That doesn't sound a very menacing threat, so without any sneaking affection for China, I don't feel very scared. On the other hand, I've not been clear what the desperate hurry is to implement 5G. For lo-tech people like me, this explanation may be helpful:
https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/what-is-5g/
The list of advantages seem to me mostly nice to have but not instantly urgent. Unfortunately, kicking the can down the road may not help, since Huawei has a large chunk of the patents on 5G tech. Is there a realistic chance that if we delayed 5G rollout for 2 years, say, we'd then have realistic alternatives?
Will the Brexit government take it?
I'm scratching my head. I understand the desire not to read bad news and also that we have a habit of overreacting to things.
On the other hand, and at the other end of the spectrum, coronavirus could wipe out 1/10th of the world's population.
Preparing the public with messages about sanitisation, use of face masks and non-essential travel would seem to me to be sensible precautions that don't fall into scaremongering.
Britain is going to need a 5G network. Britain isn't going to develop its own any time soon. The alternative being touted is vapourware. Go with what's actually available.
I can, however, see why it annoys all the Leavers so much. It's not exactly the worldview they've been sold. Oh well. There's one born every minute and sooner or later the smarter ones are going to realise that they've been duped.
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1221808614878433280?s=19
Trading with China should not annoy Leavers. The US was never going to be the sole post-Brexit trading route. And welcoming Huawei does not make us a 2nd tier nation.
As a Remainer I'm getting increasingly irritated with all the moaning from my side. It's pathetic. It's time to put the EU behind us and get on with being a player on the world stage. There will be ups and downs but jumping up and down on the sideline like spoilt children is not going to do us any favours.
If the National Security Council endorses the decision then mps need to explain how they have the knowledge to vote against and explain a coherent alternative
Not as a leasehold but in perpetuity.
Copying can't get you ahead, but it can help you catch up (as the Romans found with Carthaginian ships in the First Punic War).
As for regretting HK, have a look at the map on Caixin Global and see what China claims as Chinese (look in particular at the South China Sea part, deliberately included).
I would suggest there are just a handful of posters on here who have demonstrated a knowledge of the subject and as far as I am concerned I do not know enough about the subject to comment, but if Boris goes with Huawei following the backing of the National Security Counsel then he is making the most of a very difficult decision and opponents would need to explain what the alternatives are that are viable
Could countries have done more to encourage domestic producers ? Perhaps.
But an effort like China's, to massively support the achievement of technical dominance in a particular industry, is not a simple matter in the west.
Look at the arguments over state support in the aerospace industry, which the west does dominate.
And the UK does not have a domestic industry in this sector.
What it ignores is just how dependent our economies already are on Chinese manufacturing.
Nature's annual ranking of countries by scientific research publications has China a clear second only to the United States.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01921-0
Coupled with the reported Huawei decision is there any surprise a man named Boris is siding with the Commies?
It does seem many countries are considering Huawei including Germany and Canada and it could be Trumps real fear is that if Boris goes with Huawei many counties could well follow
But yes, in an ideal world they would both face the consequences of their actions. Whatever they might be.
This whole argument is a good couple of decades too late, and not just for the UK but the whole world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Invincible_(1747)
However, Susie Dent, keeper of the Countdown dictionary, said: “I use the Oxford comma and always have done. It clarifies things in a list and so it’s simpler to use it all the time.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/brexit-50p-philip-pullman-leads-pedants-revolt-nznvcr39d
Because through tech dominance comes military dominance, economic dominance and finally cultural and racial dominance (yes the objective really is that blunt). This won’t happen in the lifetimes of most people posting here but it might in that of your children / grandchildren.
And given that what is left is back door access via exploits and Ericsson and Nokia's software is as likely to have those as we do.
Everything.
In fact, I've gone round the house trying to find something that's not. I can't.
E.v.e.r.y.t.h.i.n.g.
This is not a good thing.
Any medical experts care to weigh in ?
We should perhaps be doing something about it - but using that as a basis for this particular decision is an utterly ineffective response,
They didn’t spot the greatest Sith Lord was right in front of them.
The National Audit Office said ministers chose to run a £100m campaign – the most expensive of four options – to tell all UK businesses and individuals how they should prepare for leaving the EU. The campaign was launched as the 31 October deadline for leaving the EU approached.
But the evidence shows that the proportion of UK citizens who reported that they had looked or started to look for information, did not notably change, auditors said.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jan/28/get-ready-for-brexit-campaign-had-little-effect-says-watchdog?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
If it got that bad the whole world economy would shut down, and we'd get more deaths from malnutrition and no medical care than the virus. Quarantine and containment measures should kick in much earlier if it gets that serious.
It feels like peaking at a few thousand fatalities to me, but what do I know.
That's the realpolitik that guides superpowers, particularly undemocratic ones, unless otherwise constrained.
1: I've long thought and written here that our most important strategic alliance is not either NATO or the EU, it is Five Eyes.
2: Anything that jeopardises Five Eyes therefore is unacceptable.
3: We don't know from public briefings whether American threats to Five Eyes are serious or not, but I would hope our Prime Minister, security services and GCHQ do know the answer to that question.
4: I don't know whether Huawei can hack or otherwise corrupt the 5G network but again I would hope our security services and GCHQ do know the answer to that question.
Therefore to me if I was Prime Minister I would have access to advice from our security services and GCHQ etc. I would barring other knowledge take that advice and act on it.
If Huawei is a threat and the Americans are serious about shutting down Five Eyes that is unacceptable. Say no to Huawei.
If we know the Americans are bluffing about Five Eyes and GCHQ believes the system is safe then this is about trade not security and we should go ahead.
I'm not going to second guess GCHQ and our security services but I assume the Prime Minister will not go ahead if they advise him not to - and I further assume that if we do go ahead it is because even the Americans know the risk is so minimal they are not going to jeopardise Five Eyes.
I hope that logic is right.
https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6
https://twitter.com/SolankeSanjay/status/1221807294926614528/photo/1
https://www.iam-media.com/finance/huawei-owns-future-and-thats-why-its-here-stay
Health: 4.9/10 - 12th out of 12 regions in the UK. Want to tell your lies about infant mortality again?
Education: 7.9/10 - 4th out of 12 regions in UK. Lets see how this evolves - PISA is heading in the wrong direction unfortunately.
Other areas are strong - eg Access to Services (3/12) - but then with a subsidy from rUK tax payers I should hope so, other areas are worse - such as housing - (10/12 in UK), and Safety (9/12) - the success of Police Scotland just keeps going.....
It's a mixed bag - as are all regions in the UK - but to claim that Health (devolved) is a success is, how should we put it? "A lie"
https://www.oecdregionalwellbeing.org/UKM.html
Spin current from sub-terahertz-generated antiferromagnetic magnons
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-1950-4
The case for the country we have rests on the following premises: that Britain is a legitimate level for political decision-making; that we are better off pooling and sharing not only money but wisdom and experience in our united Parliament; and that Her Majesty’s Government is ultimately the government of all of its people, both in every individual home nation, and the one they make together.
https://thecritic.co.uk/the-state-of-the-unionists/
In the Spanish Flu of 1918-22 there were 3 waves of infection as the virus mutated. On the other hand Ebola was contained, so time will tell.
Last night my hospital had 34 patients on Trolleys waiting for beds overnight, so a real outbreak would swamp the system very quickly.
Possible further mutations/additional understanding of the virus/quarantined and control methods/possible latent immunity in some individuals etc etc etc.
It’s been a good few months since the media had a novel new disease to shriek about. Of course any new disease is potentially the “big one” but I don’t think I’ll start to be concerned until we see it establish itself firmly.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1222097829201686530
Closing in on the magical 50%
Time for a little perspective, the world's population has already increased by 6 million this year and approaching 100,000 today.
Massive variables in all this - can we presume healthier stronger populations will see lower mortality rates then those with poorer health? Would the death rate in Uganda be the same as in the UK? Who knows?
The worry for me is the extent to which we can rely on the figures coming out of China - the Chinese State has a history of providing some interesting statistics. I saw a report where a nurse claimed 90,000 had been infected which is far in advance of the numbers being reported.
Even when trying to compile statistics entirely honestly, it's not always easy.
The actual current British population is 67.5 million so the death toll would be 1.8 million.
NEW THREAD