philippejara

After it took over and solidified itself as the world leader at it of course there was no need to steal IP anymore, most of it is registered there already and to the benefit of their nation. I'm sure people a hundred years from now will be having similar conversations if china or someone else takes the us's place and naturally starts caring about IP(and the runner ups stop caring).

I assume most americans today are already under the impression their government spies on them and facebook/google will gladly give anything that is asked for, how does the chinese spying on them make any difference for the average citizen? If I was a regular american and had to choose I'd take the foreign spy 10/10 times. What will the chinese do to the regular american citizen compared to what his own contry could do with this information?

If you're diaspora and other smaller interest groups for sure, but the general citizen probably wouldn't care at an individual level. I'd argue that the NSA revelations and how everything just got worse and worse since then killed any chance of the public caring about this kind of stuff.

As popular as the platform is with the younger demographic and the voting preferences of said younger demographic it's political malpractice for democrats to not try to at least salvage some face in this whole ordeal, whether you think the blame is misplaced or not.

Maybe the US and its proxies should lead by example before trying to convince anyone else, given they are the ones who dropped far more bombs than all of those combined.

I find it hard to see a way to run a targeted ad social media company at all if you have to make sure children aren't harmed by your product.

He didn't move to new zealand from the US so I struggle to see how that is relevant, it's not HK or Germany looking to extradite him.

Is that going to be a trial by the laws of the land he resides in and not to a foreign country that the defendant is not a citizen nor a resident nor operates out of and that refuses to guarantee the same protections under the law to a non-citizen compared to a citizen[1]?

This same foreign country who passed laws for invading the hague if they came under trial for crimes in the ICC.

[1]: See assange's bid for first amendment's guarantees when the same foreign country was trying to extradite and "trial" him

The comment he's responding to speculates that he is being paid by russia to post on twitter, as if people couldn't come to their own conclusions based on their own views and their own biases, which are very very strong against the US if you're Kim Dotcom with good reason.

The sanctions in Venezuela are/were very different from the ones in Cuba, there is a prohibition of trade from any US company and its subsidiaries with Cuba with the exception of food, not some specific sectors aimed at supposedly weakening the government.

With that being said it could also be incompetence and/or corruption, but ignoring the embargo completely is just working to weaken your argument.

What historical precedent? Just in the last 3 decades you had afghanistan, iraq, libya and (ongoing) syria in the middle east alone showing how horrific the consequences of this type of meddling are.

These aren't really consequences for being a bad actor on the global stage, these are consequences for being deemed a threat to the interests of the military superpowers and their close allies, this is a very important distinction.

The interests might at times be veiled under a discourse of "rights" or "democracy" or whatever and at times this discourse might even be valid, however the underlying reasoning for it rarely lies there as the kings and his friends are free to do whatever they please.

The flipside of that is companies not bothering to remove it and ceasing the payments to denuvo effectively making the game not exist anymore until someone is able to crack it, and very few people seem to be able to do so. Not that much of a stretch when you look at the amount of abandonware we have.

> How is supporting the military of your adversary not treason?

For a given meaning of adversary it is, for others it isn't, clearly the line in the sand at least for the US is when they are at war, arguably when a trade ban happens if we want to be a bit more relaxed with definitions. If you do disagree and believe the line in the sand encompasses china the real worry should not be a "measly" 3 billion from random VCs but the 1 trillion dollars of the US national debt china holds.

> You don’t ship fentanyl and other synthetic drugs to a country you are friends with.

You ship them to where people are buying them, unless you're saying it's a government operation and not a case of lax export regulations, which I'd be very surprised if it was the case, at least directly.

And so is emacs, but nobody has an issue calling it a text editor.