98 karma · joined May 30, 2021
This synthesis, the emotional synthesis of experience, then aids decisions. And is a key component probably of the biological OODA learning loop.
Emotions may be necessary for AGI. Or at least help us get there.
Mass population is moved by fear, but is that how concordance is manufactured across the executives of a set of countries: a few terrifying top-secret presentations, and IC has successfully reputation-assassinated a foreign company? Why would these countries agree if there was no breach and a cheaper price? What offer or threat besides a more expensive but more secure infra? I suppose if you view telcoinfra as defense assets then it's a no-brainer, but was this the calculus? Blackmail/Mafioso-tactics would be a good one, maybe: You have to buy from us, or we will reveal/do such-and-such horrible thing.
But if it's true this is economic, not security, and also that Huawei has superior value for money, then is it not just these countries accelerating their already decaying infrastructure, for the sake of pride?
"The phones are down." "Yeah, whaddayagonnado? At least we're not paying the Chinese to make them work."
Replace phones with other critical things China makes better for a better price, and the future of these countries may look like the past of the former-Soviet ones: a whole bunch of weird anachronistic tech resulting from an (in this case self-imposed) embargo. But at least it will be 100% built by subjects of approved countries. I suppose that is one strategy to fight back against the dominance of Chinese industry: just outlaw it.
The hilarious thing is, probably all these "approved suppliers" will have to purchase significant inventory from what is essentially Huawei's supply chain anyway. Seems much more like the tail wagging the dog, with corporate dishonesty dictating so-called natsec policy. Could it really be so twisted?
The "support" failure is actually just a symptom of a "compliance cancer". Almost a cost of doing business in the financial sector since 9/11.
Sure they have mistakes, like the failures in this article and many others, but to claim they are in general harmful to US interests...I think it probably just appears that way.
Because I think they probably serve the capitalist and mercantilist interests of the US, which probably differ in appearance from the more symbolic or mythological appearances of what the US is. So on the outside, the idea of patriotism is quite sentimental, perhaps on the inside it's all about capital and mercantile power.
So things which seem to violate the more sentimental and mythological idea of the US and patriotism, perhaps are actually wins from a mercantile or capitalist perspective....or maybe they are just failing on that mission as well I don't know.