Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
I get the impression you're not including yourself in the many who don't understand the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision.
I do not have the knowledge but I am able to listen to experts and trust the National Security Counsel to make the right call
I'm sure a whole lot of persuading was needed to get you on board with BJ and Dominic Raab.
And I'm sure even less was required to get you giving the decision a kicking.....
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
I get the impression you're not including yourself in the many who don't understand the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision.
I do not have the knowledge but I am able to listen to experts and trust the National Security Counsel to make the right call
I'm sure a whole lot of persuading was needed to get you on board with BJ and Dominic Raab.
Boris and Raab are following the National Security Counsel. Their endorsement is good enough for me
Aren’t the National Security Counsel deep state remaniacs though? They’re probably doing this to spite the country. Would be typical of them. Bloody remainers.
In Switzerland but with 30 UK companies involved in the supply chain, 15 local in the north east and 100 jobs at the South Gosforth depot to maintain the fleet
The company manufactures trains in Liverpool
I doubt those are new jobs. The South Gosforth depot already exists. Typical of this government though of course.
What would you have done? None of the competitors are British companies.
In Switzerland but with 30 UK companies involved in the supply chain, 15 local in the north east and 100 jobs at the South Gosforth depot to maintain the fleet
The company manufactures trains in Liverpool
I doubt those are new jobs. The South Gosforth depot already exists. Typical of this government though of course.
What would you have done? None of the competitors are British companies.
I’m happy with the decision. The new trains can’t come quick enough.
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
I get the impression you're not including yourself in the many who don't understand the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision.
I do not have the knowledge but I am able to listen to experts and trust the National Security Counsel to make the right call
I'm sure a whole lot of persuading was needed to get you on board with BJ and Dominic Raab.
Boris and Raab are following the National Security Counsel. Their endorsement is good enough for me
Aren’t the National Security Counsel deep state remaniacs though? They’re probably doing this to spite the country. Would be typical of them. Bloody remainers.
I'm losing track with the politics of HS2. Will Boris be playing a blinder if he does or doesn't scrap it?
The ‘correct’ HS2 decision is to agree to proceed with the project, but to fire the current management company HS2 Ltd, who clearly don’t have a clue what they’re doing.
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
I get the impression you're not including yourself in the many who don't understand the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision.
I do not have the knowledge but I am able to listen to experts and trust the National Security Counsel to make the right call
I'm sure a whole lot of persuading was needed to get you on board with BJ and Dominic Raab.
Boris and Raab are following the National Security Counsel. Their endorsement is good enough for me
Aren’t the National Security Counsel deep state remaniacs though? They’re probably doing this to spite the country. Would be typical of them. Bloody remainers.
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
I get the impression you're not including yourself in the many who don't understand the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision.
I do not have the knowledge but I am able to listen to experts and trust the National Security Counsel to make the right call
I'm sure a whole lot of persuading was needed to get you on board with BJ and Dominic Raab.
Boris and Raab are following the National Security Counsel. Their endorsement is good enough for me
Council, I think, Big_G...
"Our recommendation was based on the brief given, asking us to provide a justification for the approval the purchase of at least some Huawei products..."
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
I get the impression you're not including yourself in the many who don't understand the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision.
I do not have the knowledge but I am able to listen to experts and trust the National Security Counsel to make the right call
I'm sure a whole lot of persuading was needed to get you on board with BJ and Dominic Raab.
Boris and Raab are following the National Security Counsel. Their endorsement is good enough for me
Council, I think, Big_G...
"Our recommendation was based on the brief given, asking us to provide a justification for the approval the purchase of at least some Huawei products..."
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
I get the impression you're not including yourself in the many who don't understand the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision.
I do not have the knowledge but I am able to listen to experts and trust the National Security Counsel to make the right call
I'm sure a whole lot of persuading was needed to get you on board with BJ and Dominic Raab.
Boris and Raab are following the National Security Counsel. Their endorsement is good enough for me
Aren’t the National Security Counsel deep state remaniacs though? They’re probably doing this to spite the country. Would be typical of them. Bloody remainers.
You really do have a problem debating sensibly
Where’s your sense of humour today?
It is fine but constant whinging on every HMG decision or Brexit does test it
Elk - Cervus canadensis - have never existed in Britain. They are from North America and Eastern Asia.
Moose - Alces alces - did once live in the British Isles. We refer to them in Britain as Elk.
So either they are asking about reintroducing a species that never existed in the British Isles (Cervus canadensis) or they are asking about introducing the same species (Alces alces) twice.
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
I get the impression you're not including yourself in the many who don't understand the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision.
I do not have the knowledge but I am able to listen to experts and trust the National Security Counsel to make the right call
I'm sure a whole lot of persuading was needed to get you on board with BJ and Dominic Raab.
And I'm sure even less was required to get you giving the decision a kicking.....
You appear to have missed that I haven't given a view on the decision, my point was more about all you good doggies with your tongues hanging out for whichever decisions BJ makes, with in this case the intellectual heft of Raab to reinforce it.
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
I get the impression you're not including yourself in the many who don't understand the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision.
I do not have the knowledge but I am able to listen to experts and trust the National Security Counsel to make the right call
I'm sure a whole lot of persuading was needed to get you on board with BJ and Dominic Raab.
Boris and Raab are following the National Security Counsel. Their endorsement is good enough for me
Aren’t the National Security Counsel deep state remaniacs though? They’re probably doing this to spite the country. Would be typical of them. Bloody remainers.
You really do have a problem debating sensibly
Where’s your sense of humour today?
It is fine but constant whinging on every HMG decision or Brexit does test it
I’m not whinging about anything today. I’m happy with the order finally being placed for new Metro rolling stock and I don’t really care about Huawei to be honest.
Just need Ashley to announce that he’s sold the Toon to Saudi Arabia and that will top it off.
I'm losing track with the politics of HS2. Will Boris be playing a blinder if he does or doesn't scrap it?
The ‘correct’ HS2 decision is to agree to proceed with the project, but to fire the current management company HS2 Ltd, who clearly don’t have a clue what they’re doing.
He should scrap the bit between London and the North. But keep the stuff between Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds etc. That way he can be seen to be respecting the promise to improve capacity in the North without the idiocy of the pointless London link.
In good, albeit personal, news, I've been signed off by the prostate cancer people for another 6 months. Testosterone levels are up, so I might well get argumentative!
This is also quite informative: https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-allows-huawei-to-build-parts-of-uk-5g-network/ ...Government officials and former ministers who have worked with the prime minister, and his top adviser Dominic Cummings, say modern tech infrastructure is much more important to the pair's vision for the U.K.'s future economy than trade with the U.S., welcome as a quick deal would be... ...U.K. authorities launched a review of telecom supply chains, first reported by POLITICO, in September 2018. The government said Tuesday it would seek to attract new vendors, promising to review and potentially lower the restrictions on the proportion of the network "high-risk vendors" can provide once new competitors were in the market. ...The move to allow Huawei limited market access also helps operators that have already tested 5G networks with the Chinese company. "If Huawei was taken away as an option, this whole process — including testing — would have to be started all over again," Jimmy Jones, an expert at the telecom penetration testing company Positive Technologies, said in an emailed comment.
I think that is absolutely right. We get far mroe from having a world-leading 5G infrastructure than we do from a trade deal with the US. However, the next part of that is we will need a lot of services-related deals - and agreements on data.
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
I get the impression you're not including yourself in the many who don't understand the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision.
I do not have the knowledge but I am able to listen to experts and trust the National Security Counsel to make the right call
I'm sure a whole lot of persuading was needed to get you on board with BJ and Dominic Raab.
Boris and Raab are following the National Security Counsel. Their endorsement is good enough for me
Aren’t the National Security Counsel deep state remaniacs though? They’re probably doing this to spite the country. Would be typical of them. Bloody remainers.
You really do have a problem debating sensibly
Where’s your sense of humour today?
It is fine but constant whinging on every HMG decision or Brexit does test it
I’m not whinging about anything today. I’m happy with the order finally being placed for new Metro rolling stock and I don’t really care about Huawei to be honest.
Just need Ashley to announce that he’s sold the Toon to Saudi Arabia and that will top it off.
In good, albeit personal, news, I've been signed off by the prostate cancer people for another 6 months. Testosterone levels are up, so I might well get argumentative!
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
I get the impression you're not including yourself in the many who don't understand the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision.
I do not have the knowledge but I am able to listen to experts and trust the National Security Counsel to make the right call
I'm sure a whole lot of persuading was needed to get you on board with BJ and Dominic Raab.
Boris and Raab are following the National Security Counsel. Their endorsement is good enough for me
Aren’t the National Security Counsel deep state remaniacs though? They’re probably doing this to spite the country. Would be typical of them. Bloody remainers.
You really do have a problem debating sensibly
Where’s your sense of humour today?
It is fine but constant whinging on every HMG decision or Brexit does test it
I’m not whinging about anything today. I’m happy with the order finally being placed for new Metro rolling stock and I don’t really care about Huawei to be honest.
Just need Ashley to announce that he’s sold the Toon to Saudi Arabia and that will top it off.
Funnily enough, in spite of all the stuff being discussed on here, the Government decision that has made most impact on my FB page today and has received the most positive response including from left wing friends is that of halving business rates for small and medium music venues.
In good, albeit personal, news, I've been signed off by the prostate cancer people for another 6 months. Testosterone levels are up, so I might well get argumentative!
In good, albeit personal, news, I've been signed off by the prostate cancer people for another 6 months. Testosterone levels are up, so I might well get argumentative!
In Switzerland but with 30 UK companies involved in the supply chain, 15 local in the north east and 100 jobs at the South Gosforth depot to maintain the fleet
The company manufactures trains in Liverpool
I doubt those are new jobs. The South Gosforth depot already exists. Typical of this government though of course.
I'm losing track with the politics of HS2. Will Boris be playing a blinder if he does or doesn't scrap it?
The ‘correct’ HS2 decision is to agree to proceed with the project, but to fire the current management company HS2 Ltd, who clearly don’t have a clue what they’re doing.
He should scrap the bit between London and the North. But keep the stuff between Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds etc. That way he can be seen to be respecting the promise to improve capacity in the North without the idiocy of the pointless London link.
The London link isn't pointless if it connected properly to St Pancras and thus HS1 and the continent.
In Switzerland but with 30 UK companies involved in the supply chain, 15 local in the north east and 100 jobs at the South Gosforth depot to maintain the fleet
The company manufactures trains in Liverpool
I doubt those are new jobs. The South Gosforth depot already exists. Typical of this government though of course.
Typical of single market procurement rules....
If the Swiss trains are better then who cares? In 5 years time no one is going to care where they were made.
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
I get the impression you're not including yourself in the many who don't understand the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision.
I do not have the knowledge but I am able to listen to experts and trust the National Security Counsel to make the right call
I'm sure a whole lot of persuading was needed to get you on board with BJ and Dominic Raab.
Boris and Raab are following the National Security Counsel. Their endorsement is good enough for me
Aren’t the National Security Counsel deep state remaniacs though? They’re probably doing this to spite the country. Would be typical of them. Bloody remainers.
You really do have a problem debating sensibly
Where’s your sense of humour today?
It is fine but constant whinging on every HMG decision or Brexit does test it
I think that comment was aimed at some of the more vehement opponents of the decision, rather than the decision itself.
But probably not a bad one in the circumstances. (& I am very far from a Johnson fan.)
I tend to agree.
That being said... does the 35% refer to all 5G infrastructure (including switching, routing, wireless backhaul, etc.), or is it refering to the air interface portion?
If the former, then the 35% is pretty much irrelevant, and the entire air interface portion could end up being Huawei.
In Switzerland but with 30 UK companies involved in the supply chain, 15 local in the north east and 100 jobs at the South Gosforth depot to maintain the fleet
The company manufactures trains in Liverpool
I doubt those are new jobs. The South Gosforth depot already exists. Typical of this government though of course.
Typical of single market procurement rules....
If the Swiss trains are better then who cares? In 5 years time no one is going to care where they were made.
Yes, I doubt the Austin Allegro school of Brexit is going to be a riproaring success.
It is the future that is more interesting. The fact that Huawei has a lead and there are not enough rival suppliers is not a situation that the purchasers of this kit are happy with. They have been working together as an industry via the OpenRAN project to produce open source software to run on generic hardware. They are just not there now for 5G. If the RoW does not want China kit then they need to make sure that OpenRAN is ready for 6G.
Hence the 35% limit, which those most exercised by the decision seem to be overlooking.
I didn't vote for this government, and I don't like it at all, but the decision is at the very least defensible.
The 35% limit is also subject to review.
So the message to those supplying the 65% is: get your arse in gear and you can have the rest too.....
But if the 65% isn't there, how does that work?
And if the 65% is there - which is the working assumption as China only gets awarded 35% - then why can't they have 100%?
Confused.......
Presumably, the rule is that - by 2024 - you have to have no more than 35% of your kit from Huawei. Which means that you need to dual source with Ericsson, and have a deal where Huawei gets 100% of year one business, but nothing in years two and three.
Of course, the first 5G to be installed will be in the locations where it is most economically beneficial. Later installs will be on the periphery. So (thinking cynically), if Huawei wanted to bring down the UK's 5G network, they'd be able to bring down the most economically important part of it.
In Switzerland but with 30 UK companies involved in the supply chain, 15 local in the north east and 100 jobs at the South Gosforth depot to maintain the fleet
The company manufactures trains in Liverpool
I doubt those are new jobs. The South Gosforth depot already exists. Typical of this government though of course.
Typical of single market procurement rules....
If the Swiss trains are better then who cares? In 5 years time no one is going to care where they were made.
What infrastructure is missing that is needed to roll 5G out more widely ?
The US operators all use a mix of Nokia, Ericsson and Samsung for their 5G infrastructure. It is far from impossible to build out a 5G network today without Huawei.
I love how the Trump loathing commentariat are suddenly complaining we;ve sold our fine american allies down the swannee.
They did the same with Boris not going to Davos. If he went and met with Trump, it would have been all about him being the presidents lapdog, him not going meant in fact we were turning inwards and ignoring our greatest allies.
I love how the Trump loathing commentariat are suddenly complaining we;ve sold our fine american allies down the swannee.
Well, it's not as if there is a US supplier anymore. The biggest US telecoms equipment company (Lucent) was bought by Alcatel which was then bought by Nokia.
Is it really the case that the acquiescence of the UK security services on a potential Huawei backdoor through 5G is based on Occam’s razor?
I.e. there are other easier routes for the Chinese government to hack into the UK than this one, so they’ll use those instead, and therefore we shouldn’t worry too much about this one?
Personally I can not believe that the combined IT expertise of the western world plus friendly nations in Asia would not find any backdoor that Huawei put in. The worry was based on the fact that these pieces of kit can have the software updated remotely by the vendor. Remove that functionality and only allow the operator to send out the updates gets around that.
Could be too late by the time they find it e.g.
The attack by Chinese spies reached almost 30 U.S. companies, including Amazon and Apple, by compromising America’s technology supply chain
That story is bullshit. Because not a single one of these "grains of rice" chips has been found by a single corporate, government or security researcher.
In good, albeit personal, news, I've been signed off by the prostate cancer people for another 6 months. Testosterone levels are up, so I might well get argumentative!
I love how the Trump loathing commentariat are suddenly complaining we;ve sold our fine american allies down the swannee.
Well, it's not as if there is a US supplier anymore. The biggest US telecoms equipment company (Lucent) was bought by Alcatel which was then bought by Nokia.
My understanding is what is being marketed as 5G in the US at the moment isn't really full fat 5G that this decision is all about building out, and that it is unlikely the US really be up and running until 2025.
I'm losing track with the politics of HS2. Will Boris be playing a blinder if he does or doesn't scrap it?
The ‘correct’ HS2 decision is to agree to proceed with the project, but to fire the current management company HS2 Ltd, who clearly don’t have a clue what they’re doing.
He should scrap the bit between London and the North. But keep the stuff between Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds etc. That way he can be seen to be respecting the promise to improve capacity in the North without the idiocy of the pointless London link.
That improves the speed of rail connections in the North (which is a good thing), but does nothing to increase the capacity between London and the North West. During peak times, those services are completely full, despite sky high prices.
It also means that (because of the high revenue routes between Manchester, etc. and London) local services are forced off the tracks because they don't make as much money.
What infrastructure is missing that is needed to roll 5G out more widely ?
The US operators all use a mix of Nokia, Ericsson and Samsung for their 5G infrastructure. It is far from impossible to build out a 5G network today without Huawei.
Thanks to all the Good Wishers.
The Huawei decision surely demonstrates the interlinked nature of the world today. A nation has to be in a VERY big group. Standing alone on some... quite a lot ..... of modern developments really isn't an option.
I love how the Trump loathing commentariat are suddenly complaining we;ve sold our fine american allies down the swannee.
Well, it's not as if there is a US supplier anymore. The biggest US telecoms equipment company (Lucent) was bought by Alcatel which was then bought by Nokia.
My understanding is what is being marketed as 5G in the US at the moment isn't really full fat 5G that this decision is all about building out, and that it is unlikely the US really be up and running until 2025.
Yes but... that's true of almost all networks of every generation. And then things iterate.
In good, albeit personal, news, I've been signed off by the prostate cancer people for another 6 months. Testosterone levels are up, so I might well get argumentative!
Wahay! Old Spice and hit the town.
I can (just) remember thinking (wrongly) that Old Spice was the ultimate aphrodisiac.
The u. a. in the North East was the scent of brown ale. Allegedly.
Tom Newton Dunn suggesting the strength of tory MP feeling on Huawei is such that a commons defeat is not out of the question, as all opposition parties are anti.
I`m pondering the Labour leadership betting again. Assuming that only Starmer, RLB and Nandy get on the ballot, assuming no-one gets 50%+, and assuming that Nandy comes third, does anyone have a strong feeling as to where Nandy second prefs are likely to go?
First of all I thought Starmer, but then again ... maybe RLB as a northern female?
Tom Newton Dunn suggesting the strength of tory MP feeling on Huawei is such that a commons defeat is not out of the question, as all opposition parties are anti.
I don't see how it goes to a vote.
I'm sure Dominic Grieve and Oliver Letwi...
A National Security Council decision goes to a vote? Pretty sure that'll be a first.
In good, albeit personal, news, I've been signed off by the prostate cancer people for another 6 months. Testosterone levels are up, so I might well get argumentative!
What infrastructure is missing that is needed to roll 5G out more widely ?
The US operators all use a mix of Nokia, Ericsson and Samsung for their 5G infrastructure. It is far from impossible to build out a 5G network today without Huawei.
Except to do so in our case would hold us up for a considerable time, and cost quite a bit of money. We'll end up using a mix of all four, probably.
Is it really the case that the acquiescence of the UK security services on a potential Huawei backdoor through 5G is based on Occam’s razor?
I.e. there are other easier routes for the Chinese government to hack into the UK than this one, so they’ll use those instead, and therefore we shouldn’t worry too much about this one?
Personally I can not believe that the combined IT expertise of the western world plus friendly nations in Asia would not find any backdoor that Huawei put in. The worry was based on the fact that these pieces of kit can have the software updated remotely by the vendor. Remove that functionality and only allow the operator to send out the updates gets around that.
Could be too late by the time they find it e.g.
The attack by Chinese spies reached almost 30 U.S. companies, including Amazon and Apple, by compromising America’s technology supply chain
That story is bullshit. Because not a single one of these "grains of rice" chips has been found by a single corporate, government or security researcher.
A lie is halfway around the world before the truth has got its socks on.
How is it that Bloomberg have published such absurd fake news and not retracted it or corrected it? Bloomberg are meant to be a serious news agency, what's going on?
In good, albeit personal, news, I've been signed off by the prostate cancer people for another 6 months. Testosterone levels are up, so I might well get argumentative!
Fuck you!
Ah now that's something I don't think I can do. Quote from the Keeler programme. 'Like trying to get a slug through a letter box.'
Is it really the case that the acquiescence of the UK security services on a potential Huawei backdoor through 5G is based on Occam’s razor?
I.e. there are other easier routes for the Chinese government to hack into the UK than this one, so they’ll use those instead, and therefore we shouldn’t worry too much about this one?
Personally I can not believe that the combined IT expertise of the western world plus friendly nations in Asia would not find any backdoor that Huawei put in. The worry was based on the fact that these pieces of kit can have the software updated remotely by the vendor. Remove that functionality and only allow the operator to send out the updates gets around that.
It would be very difficult for Huawei to spy using these devices. They couldn't promiscuously send every packet back to China (or network traffic analysis would reveal it immediately), and there's no way you could build in something that looked inside the datastream without adding a massive bunch of complexity to the hardware that would probably be pretty obvious. "So, Huawei, why does your base station require three times as many chips as Ericsson's, and use four times the power?"
On the other hand, a "kill switch" would be trivially easy to implement. (And, indeed, telecoms equipment hardware sold to third world operators without... ummm... good history of paying bills often has such things included to make sure that money is recieved.) So, really the question is:
do we want a situation where a company owned by the Chinese Red Army* has the ability to turn off a portion (or perhaps substantially all) of the UK's 5G network?
In good, albeit personal, news, I've been signed off by the prostate cancer people for another 6 months. Testosterone levels are up, so I might well get argumentative!
Fuck you!
Ah now that's something I don't think I can do. Quote from the Keeler programme. 'Like trying to get a slug through a letter box.'
It is the future that is more interesting. The fact that Huawei has a lead and there are not enough rival suppliers is not a situation that the purchasers of this kit are happy with. They have been working together as an industry via the OpenRAN project to produce open source software to run on generic hardware. They are just not there now for 5G. If the RoW does not want China kit then they need to make sure that OpenRAN is ready for 6G.
Hence the 35% limit, which those most exercised by the decision seem to be overlooking.
I didn't vote for this government, and I don't like it at all, but the decision is at the very least defensible.
The 35% limit is also subject to review.
So the message to those supplying the 65% is: get your arse in gear and you can have the rest too.....
But if the 65% isn't there, how does that work?
And if the 65% is there - which is the working assumption as China only gets awarded 35% - then why can't they have 100%?
Confused.......
Presumably, the rule is that - by 2024 - you have to have no more than 35% of your kit from Huawei. Which means that you need to dual source with Ericsson, and have a deal where Huawei gets 100% of year one business, but nothing in years two and three.
Of course, the first 5G to be installed will be in the locations where it is most economically beneficial. Later installs will be on the periphery. So (thinking cynically), if Huawei wanted to bring down the UK's 5G network, they'd be able to bring down the most economically important part of it.
If I’d read it right, that’s basically the fudge: Huawei for now (no choice) but the UK will work with the US to develop alternatives to further mitigate the risks in the years to come.
I guess the civil servants/security services figured that way would ensure the UK doesn’t fall behind on 4IR by delaying 5G but it does gradually phase out its dependence on Huawei as the programme* evolves and keeps its allies happy, which perhaps could include swap & replace retrofitting of Huawei kit as things evolve.
(*I don’t know enough about the sector to comment on how commercially practical that is, but regretfully I do know enough about HMG’s programme management capabilities.)
I can (just) remember thinking (wrongly) that Old Spice was the ultimate aphrodisiac.
The u. a. in the North East was the scent of brown ale. Allegedly.
"The Mark of a Man" - that was the SP. I used to drench myself in it (not brown ale, Old Spice) and I still would if I had any left - although in these more complicated days I would say to people that I was wearing it "ironically".
Is it really the case that the acquiescence of the UK security services on a potential Huawei backdoor through 5G is based on Occam’s razor?
I.e. there are other easier routes for the Chinese government to hack into the UK than this one, so they’ll use those instead, and therefore we shouldn’t worry too much about this one?
Personally I can not believe that the combined IT expertise of the western world plus friendly nations in Asia would not find any backdoor that Huawei put in. The worry was based on the fact that these pieces of kit can have the software updated remotely by the vendor. Remove that functionality and only allow the operator to send out the updates gets around that.
Could be too late by the time they find it e.g.
The attack by Chinese spies reached almost 30 U.S. companies, including Amazon and Apple, by compromising America’s technology supply chain
That story is bullshit. Because not a single one of these "grains of rice" chips has been found by a single corporate, government or security researcher.
A lie is halfway around the world before the truth has got its socks on.
How is it that Bloomberg have published such absurd fake news and not retracted it or corrected it? Bloomberg are meant to be a serious news agency, what's going on?
I think Bloomberg is very good at financial news. But tech news? It's non-core, and I suspect they let a few journalists run with it with little supervision.
In good, albeit personal, news, I've been signed off by the prostate cancer people for another 6 months. Testosterone levels are up, so I might well get argumentative!
Fuck you!
Ah now that's something I don't think I can do. Quote from the Keeler programme. 'Like trying to get a slug through a letter box.'
I need to watch that.
In all seriousness though, that’s terrific news and must be a real relief.
Re 5G, how many competing networks are going to be built?
Because it's not like EE, Three, Vodafone and O2 have four completely separate 4G networks. (IIRC, Vod and O2 have a tower sharing arrangement, while in parts of the country EE and Three share all infrastructure.)
My understanding is that Vod and O2 would build one 5G network between them. Does anyone know what Three and EE are doing?
Is it really the case that the acquiescence of the UK security services on a potential Huawei backdoor through 5G is based on Occam’s razor?
I.e. there are other easier routes for the Chinese government to hack into the UK than this one, so they’ll use those instead, and therefore we shouldn’t worry too much about this one?
Personally I can not believe that the combined IT expertise of the western world plus friendly nations in Asia would not find any backdoor that Huawei put in. The worry was based on the fact that these pieces of kit can have the software updated remotely by the vendor. Remove that functionality and only allow the operator to send out the updates gets around that.
Could be too late by the time they find it e.g.
The attack by Chinese spies reached almost 30 U.S. companies, including Amazon and Apple, by compromising America’s technology supply chain
That story is bullshit. Because not a single one of these "grains of rice" chips has been found by a single corporate, government or security researcher.
A lie is halfway around the world before the truth has got its socks on.
How is it that Bloomberg have published such absurd fake news and not retracted it or corrected it? Bloomberg are meant to be a serious news agency, what's going on?
I think Bloomberg is very good at financial news. But tech news? It's non-core, and I suspect they let a few journalists run with it with little supervision.
Makes sense but for the sake of their credibility when it becomes clear this article is bullshit [which I didn't realise until it was explained here yesterday to be honest] then they should surely issue a correction? They've still got the article up without anything for Pete's sake.
Is everyone against the Huawei decision 100% sure that the US desire to determine who gets to be involved in our 5G setup isn't motivated by a top-down NSA order to make sure they can track our communications (or whatever) if they have to?
It is the future that is more interesting. The fact that Huawei has a lead and there are not enough rival suppliers is not a situation that the purchasers of this kit are happy with. They have been working together as an industry via the OpenRAN project to produce open source software to run on generic hardware. They are just not there now for 5G. If the RoW does not want China kit then they need to make sure that OpenRAN is ready for 6G.
Hence the 35% limit, which those most exercised by the decision seem to be overlooking.
I didn't vote for this government, and I don't like it at all, but the decision is at the very least defensible.
The 35% limit is also subject to review.
So the message to those supplying the 65% is: get your arse in gear and you can have the rest too.....
But if the 65% isn't there, how does that work?
And if the 65% is there - which is the working assumption as China only gets awarded 35% - then why can't they have 100%?
Confused.......
Presumably, the rule is that - by 2024 - you have to have no more than 35% of your kit from Huawei. Which means that you need to dual source with Ericsson, and have a deal where Huawei gets 100% of year one business, but nothing in years two and three.
Of course, the first 5G to be installed will be in the locations where it is most economically beneficial. Later installs will be on the periphery. So (thinking cynically), if Huawei wanted to bring down the UK's 5G network, they'd be able to bring down the most economically important part of it.
If I’d read it right, that’s basically the fudge: Huawei for now (no choice) but the UK will work with the US to develop alternatives to further mitigate the risks in the years to come.
I guess the civil servants/security services figured that way would ensure the UK doesn’t fall behind on 4IR by delaying 5G but it does gradually phase out its dependence on Huawei as the programme* evolves and keeps its allies happy, which perhaps could include swap & replace retrofitting of Huawei kit as things evolve.
(*I don’t know enough about the sector to comment on how commercially practical that is, but regretfully I do know enough about HMG’s programme management capabilities.)
If the definition of 5G network includes backhaul, switching, routing, filters, antennae etc., then Huawei could end up providing 100% of the air interface.
The UK operators care about their bottom line, and will do anything they can to subvert the government's directives if it makes them money. If the definition of 5G network is drawn too wide, then the operators will just laugh and the 35% limit will be irrelevant.
Re 5G, how many competing networks are going to be built?
Because it's not like EE, Three, Vodafone and O2 have four completely separate 4G networks. (IIRC, Vod and O2 have a tower sharing arrangement, while in parts of the country EE and Three share all infrastructure.)
My understanding is that Vod and O2 would build one 5G network between them. Does anyone know what Three and EE are doing?
EE had a major headstart with 4G due to their merger of Orange and T-Mobile meaning they had more spectrum than anyone else. Is that still the case and will they be using that for 5G?
Is it really the case that the acquiescence of the UK security services on a potential Huawei backdoor through 5G is based on Occam’s razor?
I.e. there are other easier routes for the Chinese government to hack into the UK than this one, so they’ll use those instead, and therefore we shouldn’t worry too much about this one?
Personally I can not believe that the combined IT expertise of the western world plus friendly nations in Asia would not find any backdoor that Huawei put in. The worry was based on the fact that these pieces of kit can have the software updated remotely by the vendor. Remove that functionality and only allow the operator to send out the updates gets around that.
Could be too late by the time they find it e.g.
The attack by Chinese spies reached almost 30 U.S. companies, including Amazon and Apple, by compromising America’s technology supply chain
That story is bullshit. Because not a single one of these "grains of rice" chips has been found by a single corporate, government or security researcher.
A lie is halfway around the world before the truth has got its socks on.
How is it that Bloomberg have published such absurd fake news and not retracted it or corrected it? Bloomberg are meant to be a serious news agency, what's going on?
I think Bloomberg is very good at financial news. But tech news? It's non-core, and I suspect they let a few journalists run with it with little supervision.
Makes sense but for the sake of their credibility when it becomes clear this article is bullshit [which I didn't realise until it was explained here yesterday to be honest] then they should surely issue a correction? They've still got the article up without anything for Pete's sake.
I agree 100%. It's shameful that a major news outlet still has a story up that has less truth in it than Pizzagate.
Regardless of the rights and wrong's of the Huawai decision, one bit of good news today - we clearly now for the first time in years have a government that is both willing and able to make tough decision and decide to go ahead with projects rather than kicking the can down the road.
Re 5G, how many competing networks are going to be built?
Because it's not like EE, Three, Vodafone and O2 have four completely separate 4G networks. (IIRC, Vod and O2 have a tower sharing arrangement, while in parts of the country EE and Three share all infrastructure.)
My understanding is that Vod and O2 would build one 5G network between them. Does anyone know what Three and EE are doing?
It is the law, isn't it? Didn't the US telco Verizon lobby the EU against the requirement to share infrastructure on a common carrier basis?
In good, albeit personal, news, I've been signed off by the prostate cancer people for another 6 months. Testosterone levels are up, so I might well get argumentative!
Fuck you!
Ah now that's something I don't think I can do. Quote from the Keeler programme. 'Like trying to get a slug through a letter box.'
I need to watch that.
In all seriousness though, that’s terrific news and must be a real relief.
Well done.
Thanks.
The quote was about the Russian Naval Attache. Apparently his wife left him after 'The Matter' became public/
In good, albeit personal, news, I've been signed off by the prostate cancer people for another 6 months. Testosterone levels are up, so I might well get argumentative!
Fuck you!
Ah now that's something I don't think I can do. Quote from the Keeler programme. 'Like trying to get a slug through a letter box.'
Is it really the case that the acquiescence of the UK security services on a potential Huawei backdoor through 5G is based on Occam’s razor?
I.e. there are other easier routes for the Chinese government to hack into the UK than this one, so they’ll use those instead, and therefore we shouldn’t worry too much about this one?
Personally I can not believe that the combined IT expertise of the western world plus friendly nations in Asia would not find any backdoor that Huawei put in. The worry was based on the fact that these pieces of kit can have the software updated remotely by the vendor. Remove that functionality and only allow the operator to send out the updates gets around that.
It would be very difficult for Huawei to spy using these devices. They couldn't promiscuously send every packet back to China (or network traffic analysis would reveal it immediately), and there's no way you could build in something that looked inside the datastream without adding a massive bunch of complexity to the hardware that would probably be pretty obvious. "So, Huawei, why does your base station require three times as many chips as Ericsson's, and use four times the power?"
On the other hand, a "kill switch" would be trivially easy to implement. (And, indeed, telecoms equipment hardware sold to third world operators without... ummm... good history of paying bills often has such things included to make sure that money is recieved.) So, really the question is:
do we want a situation where a company owned by the Chinese Red Army* has the ability to turn off a portion (or perhaps substantially all) of the UK's 5G network?
* yes, that is the direct ownership structure
You can be sure that our technical experts have considered this and ways to mitigate it. If it's non-core it would only have local effects but would have enormous commercial repercussions to China's disadvantage.
I support Johnson in basing his decision on UK technical expertise rather than sweeping emotional appeals about China's evil intent. I'm also glad he's standing up against Trump.
I hope it undermines the prospects of a US/UK trade deal which would be massively in favour of the US. I get the feeling that Johnson is inching away from such a deal.
The budget will be interesting. Will it include the revenue tax on Amazon et al that Trump is angry about? If it does, it's another sign of an independent UK and distancing us from the US as well as the EU. Exciting times. Hurrah for Cummings.
Personally I can not believe that the combined IT expertise of the western world plus friendly nations in Asia would not find any backdoor that Huawei put in. The worry was based on the fact that these pieces of kit can have the software updated remotely by the vendor. Remove that functionality and only allow the operator to send out the updates gets around that.
It would be very difficult for Huawei to spy using these devices. They couldn't promiscuously send every packet back to China (or network traffic analysis would reveal it immediately), and there's no way you could build in something that looked inside the datastream without adding a massive bunch of complexity to the hardware that would probably be pretty obvious. "So, Huawei, why does your base station require three times as many chips as Ericsson's, and use four times the power?"
On the other hand, a "kill switch" would be trivially easy to implement. (And, indeed, telecoms equipment hardware sold to third world operators without... ummm... good history of paying bills often has such things included to make sure that money is recieved.) So, really the question is:
do we want a situation where a company owned by the Chinese Red Army* has the ability to turn off a portion (or perhaps substantially all) of the UK's 5G network?
* yes, that is the direct ownership structure
You can be sure that our technical experts have considered this and ways to mitigate it. If it's non-core it would only have local effects but would have enormous commercial repercussions to China's disadvantage.
I support Johnson in basing his decision on UK technical expertise rather than sweeping emotional appeals about China's evil intent. I'm also glad he's standing up against Trump.
I hope it undermines the prospects of a US/UK trade deal which would be massively in favour of the US. I get the feeling that Johnson is inching away from such a deal.
The budget will be interesting. Will it include the revenue tax on Amazon et al that Trump is angry about? If it does, it's another sign of an independent UK and distancing us from the US as well as the EU. Exciting times. Hurrah for Cummings.
I have far fewer problems allowing ZTE to supply 5G equipment than Huawei. ZTE is a public company, listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange, and with proper corporate governance. Its goal is simple: make money.
But Huawei is owned, not by public shareholders or even the Chinese state, by by the Chinese Red Army. Isn't that just a teensy bit weird?
I`m pondering the Labour leadership betting again. Assuming that only Starmer, RLB and Nandy get on the ballot, assuming no-one gets 50%+, and assuming that Nandy comes third, does anyone have a strong feeling as to where Nandy second prefs are likely to go?
First of all I thought Starmer, but then again ... maybe RLB as a northern female?
OK, sample of one, but my second pref will go to Starmer.
Regardless of the rights and wrong's of the Huawai decision, one bit of good news today - we clearly now for the first time in years have a government that is both willing and able to make tough decision and decide to go ahead with projects rather than kicking the can down the road.
That can only be good news.
5G would have become 6G for May would have made a decision.
In Switzerland but with 30 UK companies involved in the supply chain, 15 local in the north east and 100 jobs at the South Gosforth depot to maintain the fleet
The company manufactures trains in Liverpool
I doubt those are new jobs. The South Gosforth depot already exists. Typical of this government though of course.
What would you have done? None of the competitors are British companies.
I’m happy with the decision. The new trains can’t come quick enough.
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
Yes - object OR support it without having the requisite understanding.
But could one not say the same about so many things? Brexit? HS2? Heathrow expansion? Where we are on the Laffer Curve?
If people can get over their "democracy" fetish there is much to be said for government by dispassionate, unaligned experts. A technocracy.
Personally I can not believe that the combined IT expertise of the western world plus friendly nations in Asia would not find any backdoor that Huawei put in. The worry was based on the fact that these pieces of kit can have the software updated remotely by the vendor. Remove that functionality and only allow the operator to send out the updates gets around that.
On the other hand, a "kill switch" would be trivially easy to implement. (And, indeed, telecoms equipment hardware sold to third world operators without... ummm... good history of paying bills often has such things included to make sure that money is recieved.) So, really the question is:
do we want a situation where a company owned by the Chinese Red Army* has the ability to turn off a portion (or perhaps substantially all) of the UK's 5G network?
* yes, that is the direct ownership structure
You can be sure that our technical experts have considered this and ways to mitigate it. If it's non-core it would only have local effects but would have enormous commercial repercussions to China's disadvantage.
I support Johnson in basing his decision on UK technical expertise rather than sweeping emotional appeals about China's evil intent. I'm also glad he's standing up against Trump.
I hope it undermines the prospects of a US/UK trade deal which would be massively in favour of the US. I get the feeling that Johnson is inching away from such a deal.
The budget will be interesting. Will it include the revenue tax on Amazon et al that Trump is angry about? If it does, it's another sign of an independent UK and distancing us from the US as well as the EU. Exciting times. Hurrah for Cummings.
I have far fewer problems allowing ZTE to supply 5G equipment than Huawei. ZTE is a public company, listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange, and with proper corporate governance. Its goal is simple: make money.
But Huawei is owned, not by public shareholders or even the Chinese state, by by the Chinese Red Army. Isn't that just a teensy bit weird?
Listening to Rabb in the HOC re Huawei this subject is so complex, and so many object to it without understanding the depth of detail needed to take the correct decision
Yes - object OR support it without having the requisite understanding.
But could one not say the same about so many things? Brexit? HS2? Heathrow expansion? Where we are on the Laffer Curve?
If people can get over their "democracy" fetish there is much to be said for government by dispassionate, unaligned experts. A technocracy.
Everyone who posts on pb.com is fully appraised of both sides of the argument and in a position to give their informed consent/objection to any matters of importance of the day.
Everyone who posts on pb.com is fully appraised of both sides of the argument and in a position to give their informed consent/objection to any matters of importance of the day.
(Or so we like to think!)
Hmm. Like me. I support this call by "Boris" purely because it goes against Trump.
It would have to be OTHER custodiet. But who then? ... etc etc.
Yes, problem.
Still, the main point of voting is to get good government, so if there were a way to get it without the whole "elections" rigmarole - and it is a rigmarole, let's face it - then that might be worth a closer look.
This is also quite informative: https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-allows-huawei-to-build-parts-of-uk-5g-network/ ...Government officials and former ministers who have worked with the prime minister, and his top adviser Dominic Cummings, say modern tech infrastructure is much more important to the pair's vision for the U.K.'s future economy than trade with the U.S., welcome as a quick deal would be...
Good - because long term, infrastructure is much more important - and education. If we make stuff the world wants to buy, they will, "trade deals" or no.
Why make things like this a priority? would nationalised water provide a more reliable service? it already is pretty reliable, would it be cheaper?
Mail was only privatised a few years ago, has anybody noticed any difference? in a declining industry with intense competition on the profitable parcels side, how would a nationalised Royal Mail provide a better or cheaper service?
People over 50 will remember how terrible the former British Rail was, who wants to go back to that again?
This is just to appease unions who want cosy subsidised jobs for their members. I thought Labour was supposed to be learning lessons from their defeat last month!
The latest missive from Farage and Tice. I`ll be there for the gigglez. Any novel ideas as to how to display my "patriotic display of pride" would be most appreciated.
Funny that I seem to remember Farage saying that Boris`s deal isn`t really Brexit?!
"Dear Supporter,
There are just three days to go until Brexit! The plans for our Brexit Celebration event in Parliament Square on January 31st are set. It is a once-in-a-lifetime party and we want it to go as smoothly as possible.
You do not need to have registered your interest to attend as anyone can come along and join in this joyful occasion. All are welcome to join us in marking this constitutional milestone in friendship and unity.
The festivities start at 9pm and end at 11pm. Whilst the event is free, we hope that those who can make a donation (recommended minimum of £10) will do so.
Click Here to Donate The speakers will include:
1. Tim Martin 2. Julia Hartley-Brewer 3. Ann Widdecombe 4. Michelle Dewberry 5. Richard Tice 6. Nigel Farage
We would also like to ask everyone come in good voice to sing some patriotic songs and bring along as many Union flags as they can, to wave in a patriotic display of pride. Finally, we want to make you aware that Westminster is a 'Controlled Drinking Zone' so it is advisable that you do not bring alcohol along.
We look forward to seeing you all there. Let's make it a night to remember! "
The latest missive from Farage and Tice. I`ll be there for the gigglez. Any novel ideas as to how to display my "patriotic display of pride" would be most appreciated.
Funny that I seem to remember Farage saying that Boris`s deal isn`t really Brexit?!
"Dear Supporter,
There are just three days to go until Brexit! The plans for our Brexit Celebration event in Parliament Square on January 31st are set. It is a once-in-a-lifetime party and we want it to go as smoothly as possible.
You do not need to have registered your interest to attend as anyone can come along and join in this joyful occasion. All are welcome to join us in marking this constitutional milestone in friendship and unity.
The festivities start at 9pm and end at 11pm. Whilst the event is free, we hope that those who can make a donation (recommended minimum of £10) will do so.
Click Here to Donate The speakers will include:
1. Tim Martin 2. Julia Hartley-Brewer 3. Ann Widdecombe 4. Michelle Dewberry 5. Richard Tice 6. Nigel Farage
We would also like to ask everyone come in good voice to sing some patriotic songs and bring along as many Union flags as they can, to wave in a patriotic display of pride. Finally, we want to make you aware that Westminster is a 'Controlled Drinking Zone' so it is advisable that you do not bring alcohol along.
We look forward to seeing you all there. Let's make it a night to remember! "
Bloody booze laws preventing them from specifically banning French and German muck, it's political correctness gone mad!
The latest missive from Farage and Tice. I`ll be there for the gigglez. Any novel ideas as to how to display my "patriotic display of pride" would be most appreciated.
Funny that I seem to remember Farage saying that Boris`s deal isn`t really Brexit?!
"Dear Supporter,
There are just three days to go until Brexit! The plans for our Brexit Celebration event in Parliament Square on January 31st are set. It is a once-in-a-lifetime party and we want it to go as smoothly as possible.
You do not need to have registered your interest to attend as anyone can come along and join in this joyful occasion. All are welcome to join us in marking this constitutional milestone in friendship and unity.
The festivities start at 9pm and end at 11pm. Whilst the event is free, we hope that those who can make a donation (recommended minimum of £10) will do so.
Click Here to Donate The speakers will include:
1. Tim Martin 2. Julia Hartley-Brewer 3. Ann Widdecombe 4. Michelle Dewberry 5. Richard Tice 6. Nigel Farage
We would also like to ask everyone come in good voice to sing some patriotic songs and bring along as many Union flags as they can, to wave in a patriotic display of pride. Finally, we want to make you aware that Westminster is a 'Controlled Drinking Zone' so it is advisable that you do not bring alcohol along.
We look forward to seeing you all there. Let's make it a night to remember! "
Take along a 50p piece and write on it your own message with a Sharpie and no commas.
If she's jumped, it meaningfully increases the chances that Murkowski, Romney and Gardner do too.
I thought Romney already had or is he still at the thinking it over stage?
Trump is not popular in Utah. And Romney is pretty independent minded.
Two down... two to go. Gardner's Senate seat (Colorado) is super marginal. If he's not being Primaried, then he's going to want to demonstrate his independence, because he can't win without some Democrat votes.
Murkowski, on the other hand... she's in a very Red state. But she's personally very popular. A few years ago, she lost the Republican Primary but then won as a write-in candidate.
If witnesses - including Bolton - are called, it could begin to cause President Trump some serious problems.
I guess it implies a 27% base for the Tories next year though?
High water mark I'd say, the SCons have been explicitly Leave for a couple of years and it hasn't done them much good. There was polling somewhere that suggested that SNP Leavers tend to stick with the SNP.
Tories only got 25% in Scotland at the general election so still 2% more to squeeze
Comments
"Our recommendation was based on the brief given, asking us to provide a justification for the approval the purchase of at least some Huawei products..."
Elk - Cervus canadensis - have never existed in Britain. They are from North America and Eastern Asia.
Moose - Alces alces - did once live in the British Isles. We refer to them in Britain as Elk.
So either they are asking about reintroducing a species that never existed in the British Isles (Cervus canadensis) or they are asking about introducing the same species (Alces alces) twice.
Dominic Raab.
I'll just leave that there for the laffs.
Just need Ashley to announce that he’s sold the Toon to Saudi Arabia and that will top it off.
That being said... does the 35% refer to all 5G infrastructure (including switching, routing, wireless backhaul, etc.), or is it refering to the air interface portion?
If the former, then the 35% is pretty much irrelevant, and the entire air interface portion could end up being Huawei.
Of course, the first 5G to be installed will be in the locations where it is most economically beneficial. Later installs will be on the periphery. So (thinking cynically), if Huawei wanted to bring down the UK's 5G network, they'd be able to bring down the most economically important part of it.
It also means that (because of the high revenue routes between Manchester, etc. and London) local services are forced off the tracks because they don't make as much money.
The Huawei decision surely demonstrates the interlinked nature of the world today. A nation has to be in a VERY big group. Standing alone on some... quite a lot ..... of modern developments really isn't an option.
Edited for FFS.
The u. a. in the North East was the scent of brown ale. Allegedly.
Actually it seem to be the Trump lovers who are most vehemently against this deal.
First of all I thought Starmer, but then again ... maybe RLB as a northern female?
We'll end up using a mix of all four, probably.
How is it that Bloomberg have published such absurd fake news and not retracted it or corrected it? Bloomberg are meant to be a serious news agency, what's going on?
On the other hand, a "kill switch" would be trivially easy to implement. (And, indeed, telecoms equipment hardware sold to third world operators without... ummm... good history of paying bills often has such things included to make sure that money is recieved.) So, really the question is:
do we want a situation where a company owned by the Chinese Red Army* has the ability to turn off a portion (or perhaps substantially all) of the UK's 5G network?
* yes, that is the direct ownership structure
I guess the civil servants/security services figured that way would ensure the UK doesn’t fall behind on 4IR by delaying 5G but it does gradually phase out its dependence on Huawei as the programme* evolves and keeps its allies happy, which perhaps could include swap & replace retrofitting of Huawei kit as things evolve.
(*I don’t know enough about the sector to comment on how commercially practical that is, but regretfully I do know enough about HMG’s programme management capabilities.)
In all seriousness though, that’s terrific news and must be a real relief.
Well done.
Because it's not like EE, Three, Vodafone and O2 have four completely separate 4G networks. (IIRC, Vod and O2 have a tower sharing arrangement, while in parts of the country EE and Three share all infrastructure.)
My understanding is that Vod and O2 would build one 5G network between them. Does anyone know what Three and EE are doing?
The UK operators care about their bottom line, and will do anything they can to subvert the government's directives if it makes them money. If the definition of 5G network is drawn too wide, then the operators will just laugh and the 35% limit will be irrelevant.
https://twitter.com/mrneilforsyth/status/1222188762295361537?s=20
That can only be good news.
The quote was about the Russian Naval Attache. Apparently his wife left him after 'The Matter' became public/
Comment is superfluous!
Says something about all concerned!
I support Johnson in basing his decision on UK technical expertise rather than sweeping emotional appeals about China's evil intent. I'm also glad he's standing up against Trump.
I hope it undermines the prospects of a US/UK trade deal which would be massively in favour of the US. I get the feeling that Johnson is inching away from such a deal.
The budget will be interesting. Will it include the revenue tax on Amazon et al that Trump is angry about? If it does, it's another sign of an independent UK and distancing us from the US as well as the EU. Exciting times. Hurrah for Cummings.
But Huawei is owned, not by public shareholders or even the Chinese state, by by the Chinese Red Army. Isn't that just a teensy bit weird?
https://twitter.com/Gabriel_Pogrund/status/1222191658260992000
Never mind the losses in Stoke, Bolsover, Blyth, Leigh and the worst General Election defeat since 1935.
I imagine BJO will have RLB as his second pref.
But could one not say the same about so many things? Brexit? HS2? Heathrow expansion? Where we are on the Laffer Curve?
If people can get over their "democracy" fetish there is much to be said for government by dispassionate, unaligned experts. A technocracy.
"Companies involved in the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower knew a planned cladding system would fail in the event of a fire, emails suggest."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51279906
The PLA answers to Xi as the Pentagon answers to Trump.
The US has the Military-Industry-Complex. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military–industrial_complex
The Chinese system is not identical to the West's but it is recognisable and not weird.
EDIT There is no reference to PLA ownership here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huawei
NB Red Army doesn't exist anymore.
(Or so we like to think!)
Perfectly good reason, that, isn't it?
Yes, problem.
Still, the main point of voting is to get good government, so if there were a way to get it without the whole "elections" rigmarole - and it is a rigmarole, let's face it - then that might be worth a closer look.
Mail was only privatised a few years ago, has anybody noticed any difference? in a declining industry with intense competition on the profitable parcels side, how would a nationalised Royal Mail provide a better or cheaper service?
People over 50 will remember how terrible the former British Rail was, who wants to go back to that again?
This is just to appease unions who want cosy subsidised jobs for their members.
I thought Labour was supposed to be learning lessons from their defeat last month!
Funny that I seem to remember Farage saying that Boris`s deal isn`t really Brexit?!
"Dear Supporter,
There are just three days to go until Brexit! The plans for our Brexit Celebration event in Parliament Square on January 31st are set. It is a once-in-a-lifetime party and we want it to go as smoothly as possible.
You do not need to have registered your interest to attend as anyone can come along and join in this joyful occasion. All are welcome to join us in marking this constitutional milestone in friendship and unity.
The festivities start at 9pm and end at 11pm. Whilst the event is free, we hope that those who can make a donation (recommended minimum of £10) will do so.
Click Here to Donate
The speakers will include:
1. Tim Martin
2. Julia Hartley-Brewer
3. Ann Widdecombe
4. Michelle Dewberry
5. Richard Tice
6. Nigel Farage
We would also like to ask everyone come in good voice to sing some patriotic songs and bring along as many Union flags as they can, to wave in a patriotic display of pride. Finally, we want to make you aware that Westminster is a 'Controlled Drinking Zone' so it is advisable that you do not bring alcohol along.
We look forward to seeing you all there. Let's make it a night to remember! "
https://twitter.com/SenatorCollins/status/1221822472292634625
If she's jumped, it meaningfully increases the chances that Murkowski, Romney and Gardner do too.
Two down... two to go. Gardner's Senate seat (Colorado) is super marginal. If he's not being Primaried, then he's going to want to demonstrate his independence, because he can't win without some Democrat votes.
Murkowski, on the other hand... she's in a very Red state. But she's personally very popular. A few years ago, she lost the Republican Primary but then won as a write-in candidate.
If witnesses - including Bolton - are called, it could begin to cause President Trump some serious problems.