President Trump rolls back Huawei ban, kind of

Bubbajim

TechSpot Staff
Staff member

World leaders are currently gathered for the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan where heads of state ostensibly look for solutions to some of the major issues facing the international community. But on the sidelines, discussions happen that focus more on bilateral problems. In the case of the US and China, the two countries are attempting to navigate the ongoing trade war they are engaged in.

President Trump said that the US would not be lifting existing tariffs or adding any new ones for the time being, but interestingly he added that American companies would once again be able to do business with embattled tech giant Huawei, effectively overturning a ban put in place last month by the Department of Commerce.

During a press conference, President Trump said that “US companies can sell their equipment to Huawei. I’m talking about equipment where there’s no great national emergency problem with it.” He continued, “We have a lot of great companies in Silicon Valley and based in different parts of the country, that make extremely complex equipment – we’re letting them sell to Huawei.”

This is interesting for a number of reasons. First, it says nothing about US companies being able to buy from Huawei, as the President has only commented on trade happening in one direction. But more importantly, Washington has said in the past that Huawei is a threat to national security, so once again Trump may be making decisions that go against advice given by his own administration.

While it’s unclear whether or not this is a full reversal of the Department of Commerce ban, if it is, this will be a fairly massive concession from the US to China in the context of the ongoing trade dispute between the two nations.

For now, there’s no real detail of how this will work in practice, but we’ll be sure to follow developments as they come.

Permalink to story.

 

treetops

TS Evangelist
"During a press conference, President Trump said that “US companies can sell their equipment to Huawei. I’m talking about equipment where there’s no great national emergency problem with it.” He continued, “We have a lot of great companies in Silicon Valley and based in different parts of the country, that make extremely complex equipment – we’re letting them sell to Huawei.”"

I guess he's not worried about them stealing our secrets.

"I’m talking about equipment where there’s no great national emergency problem with it.”
lol I'd like to see how he decides what is what, guessing this sentence exists to save face and has no real meaning at all.
 

treetops

TS Evangelist
"American companies had begun complying with the Entity List prohibition, but Intel, Qualcomm, and other chip suppliers have lobbied the Trump administration to ease the ban on Huawei, which American officials believe poses a threat to American national security"
So legal bribes win again. Good ol lobbying, I feel sorry for people who actually thought this was about anything else.
https://news.yahoo.com/osaka-trump-bows-xi-jinpings-124731647.html

p.s.s. I had a comment deleted for saying an article should be deleted. I didn't like that they were advising people to update their bios for no reason other then it might help performance\security. Evidently they don't like that kind of demand. I just wanted to point this out to any paranoid people who think it's all about some "agenda".

also profanity is a sure way to get deleted
 
Last edited:

wiyosaya

TS Evangelist
Personally, I don't see anything biased about this article. The article tells it like it is. And one way trade to China is clearly, "Kind of".

There are a lot of "great companies" in Silicon Valley - right - and many of them are defense and aerospace companies. So, now CA, er, um Silicon Valley has a lot of great companies. :facepalm:

Also, I don't see any opinions in the article - on the other hand, I'll offer one. I think its questionable to allow trade to China from high-tech companies - whether or not that involves potentially sensitive technology. After all, stealing tech such as this is how China got to where they are. So now, we are willing to, once again, help them out. :facepalm:
 

psycros

TS Evangelist
Personally, I don't see anything biased about this article. The article tells it like it is. And one way trade to China is clearly, "Kind of".

There are a lot of "great companies" in Silicon Valley - right - and many of them are defense and aerospace companies. So, now CA, er, um Silicon Valley has a lot of great companies. :facepalm:

Also, I don't see any opinions in the article - on the other hand, I'll offer one. I think its questionable to allow trade to China from high-tech companies - whether or not that involves potentially sensitive technology. After all, stealing tech such as this is how China got to where they are. So now, we are willing to, once again, help them out. :facepalm:
Yeah, I'm rather peeved by this. I realize that even a loose cannon like Trump can only withstand so much pressure from his corporate-funded fellows in both parties but its clear that SellACon Valley has learned nothing about dealing with China. I guess the appeal of slave labor is so strong that their STILL willing to give away the farm to Chinese reverse engineers as long as it boosts the bottom line. The fat cats on Wall Street are probably already planning how they'll transition Intel and the rest of the American tech giants to Chinese majority ownership.
 

captaincranky

TechSpot Addict
...[ ]....also profanity is a sure way to get deleted
Not so much. Profanity directed at a member involved with the dialog, is a sure way to get a post deleted.

"Ad hominem" tactics, (name calling), which could run the gamut from (pick an obscenity, or foul adjective), right on down to the (perhaps or seemingly to some) less offensive , "you're pathetic", is a sure way to get a post pulled.

When it comes right down to it neither you, nor the other very vocal wunderkind involved in this discussion, have any say in what the Techspot's editorial content is. @Julio Franco gets the final say.

How about if we forgo all the butt hurt whimpering when a post gets pulled, and try to find a more acceptable way of making your point, after the spanking.

Now, I've had dozens if not hundreds of posts pulled. I don't malinger or brood about it. I review what would have been acceptable forum comment, against what I've said to cause the post's removal. I've also discussed the idea of editing posts by the mods. It all comes back to the fact, that there's only so many hours in the day, and staff isn't responsible for recreating your content. In other words, if one word has to go, the post falls prey to the axe.

As for my personal position here, I"m not staff, but I've worked with them long enough to respect the fact that, "the decision of the judges is final".

As far as the influx of new members who make 2 or 3 posts then deem themselves worthy of telling the staff how Techspot should be run, what they should be allowed to say, .who they should be allowed to hate for the sake of hating, I'd ban you outright.

As far as the clowns who join to make their first posts about how much you hate the US, and how the US is "built on stolen land", I'd ban you on the spot, simply by virtue of the fact there isn't any topic here that you can meld with those spiteful sentiments. You have to put them in cold, completely out of context, and it warrants (IMO), a ban for doing it.

Now instead of concerning yourselves what should be printed and what shouldn't, shut up, and vote with your mouse, just don't click on the article. If you find it's not to you're liking, go do something else, like help a noob build a computer.

Both your and my value to the site are limited to nil, if all we're here for is to be laboring under the extreme hubris that we're omniscient, infallible pundits. (Whose egos have clearly outgrown their grasp of wisdom and social bearing).

CODA @treetops While I quoted you for this post, it's clearly intended for all the participants in this thread.
 
Last edited:

captaincranky

TechSpot Addict
I guess the appeal of slave labor is so strong that their STILL willing to give away the farm to Chinese reverse engineers as long as it boosts the bottom line. The fat cats on Wall Street are probably already planning how they'll transition Intel and the rest of the American tech giants to Chinese majority ownership.
What's also clear, is that most likely neither you, nor I, nor anyone in this thread, would be willing to pay the $2,000.00 it would cost for an iPhone made with all American parts and labor.

And while it is axiomatic that "sh!t rolls downhill", that average person's complaints about price, want, need, greed, and availability bounce around those silicon mountain tops as if they came from an army of Swiss yodelers.

I get it, you want to have your cake and eat it to, as do we all.

So, the moral of the story is, the Chinese built iPhone is already way overpriced, and trade tariffs would come out of your pockets, the turd that is Trump wants to get himself reelected, and you think you can have it all ways. By which I mean, the iPhone cheaper than it is now, made in America, and under a Democratic president just, well, because, you're entitled,.

As always, good luck with that..
 
Last edited:

captaincranky

TechSpot Addict
So, he goes against the advise of his intelligence services all because ...... he wants to make nice? I think John Kelly was right, Trump is a M o r o n
No, because he knows his reelection is far from assured, and $1500.00 iPhones will come back to haunt him egregiously, Dickensonian justice would prevail, from the ghosts of prices past, prices present, and prices future.

He is a m0r0n, but he's also a rat smart enough to jump ship while the pier is still in sight.
 

captaincranky

TechSpot Addict
Nothing can beat that moronic Obama-Care.
Norway is a "Socialist Democracy". I believe even at lower income brackets they pay tax rates of up to 50%. They're as happy as clams, ready, willing, and able to do it.

It costs them something like $70.00 to have a baby.

This is completely out of context, but you should get y point. It answers this search question......"how much does a cardiac ultrasound cost?"

"Testing has become to the United States’ medical system what liquor is to the hospitality industry: a profit center with large and often arbitrary markups”
 
Last edited:

wiyosaya

TS Evangelist
No, because he knows his reelection is far from assured, and $1500.00 iPhones will come back to haunt him egregiously, Dickensonian justice would prevail, from the ghosts of prices past, prices present, and prices future.

He is a m0r0n, but he's also a rat smart enough to jump ship while the pier is still in sight.
Seems like he could be trying to appeal to the dems, or perhaps the sillycon valley, maybe I should say silly putty, crowd, with this. The only trouble is, he is looking like Casper - transparent! :laughing:

He promised more jobs instead, the auto industry is laying off - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-27/ford-to-eliminate-20-of-european-workforce-in-sweeping-overhaul
https://www.mlive.com/news/2019/01/ford-to-close-transmission-plant-cut-thousands-of-jobs-in-europe-in-2019.html
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/michigan-town-prepares-auto-plant-close-democratic-candidates-debate-labor-n1024376
I am still waiting for him to run around naked on the WH lawn and hear the droves of people praising him for his new clothes! :laughing:

He is doing some interesting, if buffoonish, stuff with the July 4th celebration this year - https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/trump-plans-ticketed-access-area-for-vips-friends-and-family-at-july-4-celebration/2019/06/28/005fd56a-99a4-11e9-8d0a-5edd7e2025b1_story.html
 
Last edited:

treetops

TS Evangelist
And then there were those who said that they would heal Obama care. They lied!
What's funny is that Obama care touted to the dems, who are of younger age supported it. While it actually helps the rep base, which is older. I didn't really understand it for a long time. But making everyone pay, lowers the cost of health care for people who need it. Primarily the elderly.

When Trump went to kill it, by that time the republican old timers realized how bad they would be getting screwed without it. Luckily for them rep politicians listened and stopped it from being banned. But not entirely, from what I understand next tax season or so there will be no penalty for not having health insurance? And maybe Trump realized it too idk.

Personally my uneducated opinion is that we should all have free health care. Yes I know taxes will pay for it, it won't be "free". And no it won't benefit me hopefully for another 20+ years. People who are retiring have crazy medical bills, that can render them bound to a state ran home. People who get into an accident, despite having health insurance can rack up 300k+ medical bills in a hospital in less then a month.

There are cases of hospitals charging 200$ for tylenol. If the government ran the health care system they would probably stomp down on such actions since no one is profiting\lobbying off of it.

I'll try not to soap box to much, we are a first world country. Let's take care of our elderly, vets and disabled people. Canada does it, I won't even look up the stats but yeah we are much richer then Canada.

Another point to consider, people with no income or wealth blah can't think of the word. Like owning a house etc. Already get free health care, why not extend it to everyone else? Then you could actually use that 401k or saving and ss without worry. At the moment you might be better off lighting your savings on fire and living off the government so you qualify for free health care.

Yeah way off subject, mmm maybe I should get a blog lol
 

captaincranky

TechSpot Addict
I am still waiting for him to run around naked on the WH lawn and hear the droves of people praising him for his new clothes! :laughing:...[ ]....
But yet I'm not the slightest bit curious to find out if he's a real red head. In fact, I'm repulsed and appalled by the fact I even mentioned that. I need to have my mind washed out with soap.
...[ ]....He is doing a lot of intensely self-aggrandizing and buffoonish stuff, with the July 4th celebration this year - l
FIXED!

(Not to mention the comma was in the wrong place, behind "buffoonish", (the adjective), instead of "stuff", (the noun). ;):laughing: (I wish I had the strength of character to just let that go. Sadly, I simply don't). :blush: (Although I removed the conditional conjunction, "if", from the statement, which did impact the syntax and comma placement a bit). So maybe, "my bad"?
 
Last edited:

ET3D

TechSpot Paladin
So miraculously it is not a security issue anymore?
This man is full of surprises. I wonder what he heard from China that he calmed down a bit.
It's simple: A Huawei product sold in the US has the potential to spy on Americans, or whatnot. A US designed component sold to Huawei isn't a problem by itself if it's not sold back to Americans, and it brings money to the US.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MilwaukeeMike

captaincranky

TechSpot Addict
What's funny is that Obama care touted to the dems, who are of younger age supported it. While it actually helps the rep base, which is older. I didn't really understand it for a long time. But making everyone pay, lowers the cost of health care for people who need it. Primarily the elderly.

When Trump went to kill it, by that time the republican old timers realized how bad they would be getting screwed without it. Luckily for them rep politicians listened and stopped it from being banned. But not entirely, from what I understand next tax season or so there will be no penalty for not having health insurance? And maybe Trump realized it too idk.

Personally my uneducated opinion is that we should all have free health care. Yes I know taxes will pay for it, it won't be "free". And no it won't benefit me hopefully for another 20+ years. People who are retiring have crazy medical bills, that can render them bound to a state ran home. People who get into an accident, despite having health insurance can rack up 300k+ medical bills in a hospital in less then a month.

There are cases of hospitals charging 200$ for tylenol. If the government ran the health care system they would probably stomp down on such actions since no one is profiting\lobbying off of it.

I'll try not to soap box to much, we are a first world country. Let's take care of our elderly, vets and disabled people. Canada does it, I won't even look up the stats but yeah we are much richer then Canada.

Another point to consider, people with no income or wealth blah can't think of the word. Like owning a house etc. Already get free health care, why not extend it to everyone else? Then you could actually use that 401k or saving and ss without worry. At the moment you might be better off lighting your savings on fire and living off the government so you qualify for free health care.

Yeah way off subject, mmm maybe I should get a blog lol
A society's views and opinions get truly bizarre and extreme, when it's members have too much time on their hands, or too much of a personal, religious, or racial agenda. (Or in the case of the modern SJW too much of all the foregoing, without any skin, in any of the games..

"Capitalism", is merely economic Darwinism. A fight to the economic ruin, of the lesser opponent. Which hopefully, (in the view of the parents), will lead to offspring which will be even more successful at gathering wealth, wildly beyond any tangible or potential need. "Survival of the greediest", a shallow but enticing end game.

You've laid out some of the obvious failings of our current health care system, but neglected to place blame, or mention the cause of our problems, which is capitalism. In point of fact, the health care providers, be it doctors, hospitals, or big pharma, run the government, it isn't the other way around.

My doctor is still a staunch Trump supporter, despite the fact it is becoming more obvious on an almost daily basis, he is naught but an egomaniac, a criminal, a tax evader, and a pathological liar. (as I've been saying, (or if you will, "diagnosing"), for months on end), and which Bernie Sanders finally introduced as a concept at the recent debate.

One of the strangest outbursts in the recent debacle, (Sorry, I meant "debate"), was from Julian Castro, from Texas. He proudly announced, if elected, "I would decriminalize border crossing".

Here's the thing, with the surname "Castro", it's tough to figure out whose side he's actually on. As you you may know, we gained a lot of our territory in a war with Mexico. I often joke from time to time, that, "the Mexicans are trying to take back our south west, one overcrowded trailer park or apartment house at a time. So now, a supposedly "American" politician, wants to throw the gates open to any and all persons from Mexico with no restrictions. If I didn't know it wasn't possible that anybody other than a white man could be racist, I'd categorize his remarks as, "racist and treasonous"..That's your whole platform? Really?

Scarier than that, if you have imbeciles like him campaigning under the banner of the Democratic party, you'll solidify Trump's base to the point where he'll more than likely win a second term. In fact, if this A-hole ever became the the Democratic nominee, I'd vote for Trump, possibly up to and including a 4th term..

Gee, maybe we both should have a blog.
 
Last edited:

MilwaukeeMike

TS Evangelist
Personally, I don't see anything biased about this article. The article tells it like it is. And one way trade to China is clearly, "Kind of".
This is the opinion...

This is interesting for a number of reasons. First, it says nothing about US companies being able to buy from Huawei, as the President has only commented on trade happening in one direction. But more importantly, Washington has said in the past that Huawei is a threat to national security, so once again Trump may be making decisions that go against advice given by his own administration.

Real news stories don't put a paragraph like this at the end. 'May be making decisions against his own administration?' This author was not in the room when this stuff was discussed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cliffordcooley

cliffordcooley

TS Redneck
Even if Trump didn't listen to his advisors. What would be the point in putting someone in a presidential position. If all they do is tally the votes of all the advisors under them. Under that scenario they could be replaced with a voting board.