& cplSiteName &
Comments
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
brooks7
brooks7
2/8/2019 | 6:30:28 PM
But....
 

 

 

Would it be good for Lightreading?

seven

 
mrblobby
mrblobby
2/9/2019 | 1:51:39 AM
Undeclared interest
For completeness, you should have stated the fact that Huawei is a major customer of this site, spending a lot of dosh on marketing. It is understandable that you would want to hang onto that source of income, but I would have preferred not to have to make that point myself.
maverickzz
maverickzz
2/9/2019 | 5:44:25 AM
Oxymoron?
"I would imagine that, even more quickly, it would lead to a greater volume of cyber attacks on the US from the Far East. I am guessing here, but it's not hard to imagine that some digital retribution would be sought, either by independent agents looking for an excuse to attack US institutions or by more organized groups. A Trump order would invite efforts to try and breach US cyber defenses -- that is frighteningly obvious, right? And it could result in serious disruption, cost and interference. Which is sad." It IS sad indeed. Just read that paragraph again while reversing roles - Imagine China banning Google or Cisco or whatever US company (which they partially or totally do in some cases) and the US government or its various agents or so retaliate by cyber attacking Chinese government or companies??!! What would you induce about the independence of said companies from the US government?? It's shameful to see such poor logic on Lightreading.
tojofay
tojofay
2/10/2019 | 5:32:58 PM
What backdraft?
Buy Infinera gear and other allied companies gear. Ray, get off the tit will ya?
Phil Harvey
Phil Harvey
2/11/2019 | 12:28:19 AM
Re: But....
A stable, growing, highly competitive telecom market is best for Light Reading.  

Also, Huawei is an advertiser and so are all of the companies that benefit from it leaving the U.S. market. It's a bit silly to think we'd hitch our editorial wagon to any one single advertiser's agenda and, by doing so, alienate the majority of the firms that spend money on our site.

-ph
Ray@LR
[email protected]
2/11/2019 | 4:47:11 AM
Re: Oxymoron?
maverickzz

I feel we are going to disagree here. In my opinion, if an influential company from Country A is 'attacked' by the federal authorities of Country B, then Country B is likely to experience a greater volume of cyberattacks from the agents and supporters of Country A. This isn't anything about the independence of the company from the government of its home country -- this is about a reaction to a perceived 'attack' on a company that is part of Country A's fabric.... because it drives business, employs citizens etc 

And tehse 'agents' could be anyone, from an affronted individual to an independent anti-US hacking group to a government-associated group to, let's face it, groups associated with other countries that will take the opportunity to launch an attack on US systems so that it looks like it is coming from Chinese agents... the point is, such a move (with an executive order) has no percievable gain but could have a negative impact. There are lots of groups that would look for any excuse/reason to attack the US while hoping they will not be identified as the culprit.

Huawei is an international powerhouse and is a Chinese company that is important to the Chinese economy.

Cisco is an international powerhouse and is a US company that is important to the US economy.

 

You say:

"Imagine China banning Google or Cisco or whatever US company (which they partially or totally do in some cases) and the US government or its various agents or so retaliate by cyber attacking Chinese government or companies??!! What would you induce about the independence of said companies from the US government??"

In this instance, I would totally expect China, including Chinese companies, to experience enhanced cybersecurity threats from US agents and supporters in this instance. And this wouldn't mean that Cisco is an agent of the US government -- I don't think that explicit connection between company and government needs to be there for resulting action to take place. You do. So we disagree. You think it's poor logic, I think this would be totally expected due to human behavior. 

And as I pointed out, I think that anti-Chinese groups, in this instance, would take the opportunity to attack China or Chinese interests under the guise of retaliation. It's my, perhaps cynical, belief that this is how the world works. And that is what is sad.

 
Ray@LR
[email protected]
2/11/2019 | 5:09:56 AM
Re: What backdraft?
Um... what?

Which US operator is going to buy Infinera gear that already isn't doing so? 

My point (once again) is that such an executive order would make no difference to the buying patters of the major US operators -- it would only have mutiple negative impacts in the short, medium and long term on US interests. 

As for 'get off the tit' -- I'm glad to say that we don't need to suck up to any company. Doing so would be bad for our business.

The reason I wrote this opinion piece is that I believe that enacting such an executive order would be bad for the US, which would not be a great move for the US president, especially one who wears a 'make America great again' badge. I am hoping that Trump will conider the implications, just as he did with the ZTE situation:

https://www.lightreading.com/components/optical-components/trump-tweets-on-zte-and-gives-the-chinese-vendor-a-lifeline!/d/d-id/743043

 

I know that people questioned his decision to rescind the supply ban on ZTE, saying that it was unpatriotic and throwing a bone to the Chinese, but, in my view, it was a move that was positive for the US because it saved thousands of US jobs. That move was good for the US, even if it didn't appear so at a quick glance -- the same applies here, IMHO. 
Ray@LR
[email protected]
2/11/2019 | 5:13:43 AM
Re: But....
'Would it be good for Lightreading?'

 

That is not a factor - not a consideration. My commentary here is that such an order would represent political posturing that has only downsides for the US.

Would such an executive order have any impact on Light Reading's business? I can't see how it would make any difference. 
Ray@LR
[email protected]
2/11/2019 | 5:28:20 AM
Re: Undeclared interest
"For completeness, you should have stated the fact that Huawei is a major customer of this site, spending a lot of dosh on marketing. It is understandable that you would want to hang onto that source of income, but I would have preferred not to have to make that point myself."

I would ask you to read the article again.

This is not an article defending or supporting Huawei, which you seem to believe it is.

This is an article pointing out how, in  my opinion, such an executive order would have no real impact on Huawei -- it would make no difference to its business prospects in the US market -- but have negative implications for the US and US companies.

Maybe I should have declared, to be totally transparent, that Light Reading does lots of business with US companies... because, ultimately, I think such an order could only be negative for their interests.

 

While we are at it.... I am very glad to say that our editorial independence, whereby we treat every company as Company X in our reporting, is not only the 'right' thing to do but is also good for business. We will always be criticized, but that is healthy. The day that no one is complaining is when things have gone awry.  
brooks7
brooks7
2/11/2019 | 10:07:38 AM
Re: But....
So you guys are saying that controversial policies that generate news is not good for a news site?

seven
Page 1 / 2   >   >>


Featured Video
Upcoming Live Events
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
March 16-18, 2020, Embassy Suites, Denver, Colorado
May 18-20, 2020, Irving Convention Center, Dallas, TX
All Upcoming Live Events