4 ms·
By far the most egregious overreach of Federal authority in recent memory. Noting about this is reasonable. Its 100% the act of a desperate and weak minded desp
by 12xo 6y ago
By far the most egregious overreach of Federal authority in recent memory. Noting about this is reasonable. Its 100% the act of a desperate and weak minded despot who knows nothing about technology but acts out of ignorance and pettiness. A truly illegal and Anti-American act.
- conception 6y agoIf you view this from the perspective of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics - it’s perfectly rational. Creating tensions between China and the US is a tremendous win for Russia.
- YarickR2 6y agoOMG could you please stop quoting this bullshit .It's on the same level as Dulles plan of CIA fame https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dulles%27_Plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dulles%27_Plan
- mrits 6y agoI get what you are saying but I wouldn't refer to the judge as a despot
- snazz 6y agoAre you referring to Trump's ban or the judge's injunction? Edit: that’s what I thought (and I agree with you), but I wanted to make sure since some other commenters sensed the ambiguity.
- pcbro141 6y agoTrump. The proposed ban was obviously not the work of the judge.
- gwright 6y agoIf you read the Executive Order (https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-addressing-threat-posed-wechat/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-or...) you'll see that this is yet another aspect of Trump's overall policy of confronting China's growing influence. You may disagree with that policy but I think it is a mistake to attribute these actions to "ignorance and pettiness".
- 12xo 6y agoIn this case its hard not to... These two entities, not the thousands of other Chinese and foreign entities that do business in our country, are being targeted by what is effectively an authoritarian action. There is no national security issue here, at least none that has been disclosed nor processed by our national security teams or Congressional members. Instead, it - like most of Trump's actions, are done for personal gain and spite. And as a result is the most overreaching act by any POTUS in modern history.
- gwright 6y agoI think it is a fools errand to try to rank executive overreach, but how would you compare this to Obama’s drone strike policy and targeted killings including American citizens?
- lowiqengineer 6y agoIgnorance and pettiness describes this administration quite succinctly I think
- frankharv 6y agoJust because some Magistrate Judge declares this a First Amendment violation does not mean it will stand up. My guess is it goes to a Federal Judge who overturns it. Presidents are allowed wide latitude in National Security matters. I expect the sanctioning of WeChat will happen eventually.
- dehrmann 6y agoIt's definitely executive overreach, but looking at how reasonable it is is the wrong approach. Trump regularly makes overreaching, token executive actions because they excite his base and distract the media from a larger scandal.
- lumost 6y agoTreating foreign businesses on equal footing to domestic ones is a recent phenomena. Historically the US has leveraged trade policy to block foreign enterprise through the use of tariffs during periods of instability ( reconstruction ) and to protect early industries ( Pennsylvania steel industry in the mid-1800s ). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff_in_United_States_history#1860%E2%80%931912 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff_in_United_States_histor... In the event that a country lacks a comparative advantage sufficient to balance trade and maintain local employment and economic growth; Then some degree of trade restriction is useful to ensure both stability and future growth. At 15-20% local unemployment, losing the perceived future growth engine(s) of the economy to foreign competition would not be politically acceptable to a majority of Americans. How this plays out in the digital age is interesting. Tariffs are largely ineffective due to the nature of services. China has successfully grown a domestic tech industry from 0 - FANG equivalent by blocking all foreign competitors. It will be interesting if the EU seeks a similar strategy to grow its tech sector.
- Droobfest 6y ago> It will be interesting if the EU seeks a similar strategy to grow its tech sector. The EU is indeed slowly taking that direction: https://www.ft.com/content/7738fdd8-e0c3-4090-8cc9-7d4b53ff3afb https://www.ft.com/content/7738fdd8-e0c3-4090-8cc9-7d4b53ff3...
- mindslight 6y agoI agree with where you're coming from, but really the underlying feeling is basically a rational response to the growing problem of surveillance capitalism. The rest of the world has just been a frog slowly boiling while USG siphons more and more of their citizens' information, but now there is a significant non-US player. The right response would be something like a US GDPR, allowing US persons to opt out of surveillance foreign and domestic. But that would upset the Silicon Valley gravy train, so instead we get a ham-fisted response that deflects concern onto a tiny slice of the overall problem.
- dang 6y agoPlease don't post political flamewar rants to HN, regardless of how right you are or feel you are. It leads to more predictable and usually nastier discussion. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html