First of, your articles are about telco hardware, not smartphones software.
The german case basically boils down to Germany wanting independence in their critical infrastructure. At least officially this is so China can’t affect them by for example stopping exports of repair components. Basically your source is clickbait but without the release. »German governments information security branch says no evidence of Huawei spying … they say the boycott happened because of strategic resource independence in networking technology«
The space of classical newspaper articles is not in a good state, basically it’s almost entirely propagandized to death. So you need to know your sources, please don’t be the one throwing around a phys.org article on politics like it’s credible information.
source on the Germany thingI could clear up this case because I happen to know that “die Zeit” (German for “the Time”) is one of the few remaining relatively independent sources for stuff relating to Germany (they are biased to follow German politics in coverage but not content, currently). I also track them closely for any changes to that status, basically if they fall to anyones propaganda, the first ones to bring that to light and point it out will be the opposing propaganda. Here is their article, for your translators pleasure: zeit.de/…/5g-ausbau-bundesregierung-verbot-huawei
your source kinda goes into that direction at the end at least
But some observers raised eyebrows at the BSI’s apparent dismissal of cyber security risks concerning Huawei.
“I believe it’s wrong to suggest that the concerns about Chinese espionage are unfounded and easy to detect,” telecom security expert Ronja Kniep told AFP.
“Even if Huawei has no official relationship with the Chinese government, that doesn’t mean Chinese services aren’t using the company and its technology as vehicles for espionage.”
All three of Germany’s main mobile network operators use infrastructure provided by Huawei, Spiegel pointed out.
So apparently the opinion of “the BSI” here is wildly out of line with Germany’s government’s general opinion at the time.
but wait there’s more
So apparently in Germany there is this “BSI-gate” of sorts, around the incompetence and potential Russian and Chinese relations of “Germany’s Federal Office for Information Security (BSI), Arne Schoenbohm” (as he is quoted in your source).
So either way this person was extremely untrustworthy in this matter here.
So now to the other source. Reuters is at least well known, and the article has an author, so that’s nice.
I looked into the matter somewhat. Around the same date as your article, the BBC wrote
To monitor the company, the UK set up the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre, which comes under the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC).
In March 2019, it said it hadn’t found evidence of malicious Chinese state activity, but it did identify some serious defects in Huawei’s software engineering and cyber-security competence.
Seems they harshened their stance after US influence around 2020 to me too, but it’s not like they where entirely unsuspicious before that influence either.
And they occasionally need to be debated anyway.
Like with conspiracies and religious cults, not debating them allows them to pull people in, while debating them both gives those vulnerable the ability to see the issues with them, and it allows those already believing a pathway to exit.
I have seen plenty of independent hate, and my hown hate has certainly developed independently too.
Even in politics other countries have come to the same conclusion, some of which even against US influence, while certainly others where pulled along by them.
Also did you notice that you jsut assumed I was completely influenced by the US, as in that you hold the innate belief that everyone who disagrees on this must obviously be doing so because they fell victim to their propaganda?
I didn’t actually bring google into this at all.
I’d trust a Huawei phone less than I would a Google phone. Much less.
So you are saying that Huawei is better than Google, because Huawei has less suspicion about it than the US government, because we should not conflate a company from a country with the government og that country?
While you are conflating Google and the US government without even so much as acknowledging that?
If we are being fair, we must accept both the USA and China have the means to get data out of their companies, and have done so frequently. If we thus compare either Google and Huawei or USA and China, in both cases we can make out the shinier turd of the two clearly.
The EU is doing all they can here. They require EU citizens need a way to have their data deleted, within 1 month or after a response with specific reasons within 3 months.
This ofc makes companies act like this for accounts located inside the EU. Then further, every EU citizen outside the EU has a right to this too, so if a company chooses to geolock the deletion feature, all those outside citizens act as a minefield and strain on the system until they stop geolocking the feature.
This then means everyone (EU citizens or not) can manually contact support, both straining their system and making them look into making this process as difficult as possible. This will inevitably lead to them blocking actual EU citizens outside the EU, who can then sue them until they stop locking the feature and make it available to everyone. The company can’t just ask for some legal document proving citizenship either, since that itself would be a gdpr violation. So the end state has to be a system that everyone can use - EU citizen or not.
The EU can’t demand anything about non-citizens, so as I see it this is the best they can do, by demanding certain rights only to their citizens. The downside is it may take years and a few court battles, but the final state should be the law applying for all users.
I switched to Wayland and it makes a huge difference. Pulling a window over to my higher dpi monitor makes it go … clearer. It looks just like how you’d want it to look.
I like it so much I refuse to accept my status as chaotic good and want an exception for chaotic good wayland users with correct dpi compensation to be categorized as chaotic neutrals and lawfuls
You need to guide a government reform to fix the disfunctional state of roman governance that allowed Caesar to rise.
You will change nothing if enough people still believe a dictatorship would be favourable over their current government.
On a different note, given that christianity was born from the times of disruption following the change in governance in rome, you might also stop a religion like it from forming if you keep rome stable.