Miscellaneous News

[Eventine]

The so called "platform ban" on Huawei is a non-existence, it is a conceptual wrong understanding. Google apps and its app store are NOT part of Android OS. They are part of Google customization on top of Android, no difference from Samsung or Huawei's customization and apps.

Despite the "platform ban" on Huawei, Chinese harmonyOs users have no problem of installing apps that are simultaneously available through Google app store.

Despite other Chinese phones such as Oppo running on Android, google store isn't available in China and people have no problem in installing apps.

The impact of so called "platform ban" is zero as far as Chinese market and users are concerned. Douyin is exactly this case, no impact.

Even for Huawei, the ban meant nothing even outside of China, such as in Europe. The ban only means that google apps are not officially installed on Huawei phones sold in Europe. Huawei has no problem using Android code base when it wants to because Google does not own Android but AOS community does.

I have just bought a Huawei watch in Europe through EU shop. It runs on HamonyOS which is a shell on top of Android with Huawei appGallery installed. This is in the same way as Samsung's watch.

First of all, I appreciate all the information in regards to how Android is used in China. I did have a knowledge gap on how Chinese mobile companies used AOSP. And indeed, from the sound of it, losing access to AOSP in a technological sense, is not really a threat.

But I still need to insist on a detail - open source is not equivalent to "no license." Open source software is governed by an open source license (typically some variation of Apache or GPL) granted to users. Like any other license, it can be revoked. If you lose access to the license, then you become subject to copy right infringement claims upon cloning the code. While it means little in countries where the US has no jurisdiction, it means a lot in countries where the US does.

Would companies like Xiaomi, Oppo, etc. risk getting shut out of the US, Europe, etc. in violation of a platform ban on Byte Dance software? Judging by past actions, if the US sanctions Byte Dance, *any* company that does business with it (and which uses any US technology, including chips and other licensed software) can be subject to similar sanctions for violating US export control.

This includes companies that only host the application in China.

This is why having ANY dependency on US software - including open source software - is risky. Of course, you could make the argument that if the US wanted to target a company, it can come up with any reason - or no reason at all - to ban it across all friendly countries. Indeed, the US could create new laws just for that purpose, like with the RESTRICT act. But as the laws stand today, it is the use of US technology that puts you at risk of export control sanctions internationally.

 

[Feima]

But I still need to insist on a detail - open source is not equivalent to "no license." Open source software is governed by an open source license (typically some variation of Apache or GPL) granted to users. Like any other license, it can be revoked. If you lose access to the license, then you become subject to copy right infringement claims upon cloning the code. While it means little in countries where the US has no jurisdiction, it means a lot in countries where the US does.

License changes are not retroactive. Code published before a license change remains under old license. People and organizations who don't like the new license can continue using and evolving code under the old license.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Wonder who Zuckerberg had to pimp in order to bring the best traffic generator his website has ever seen.

 

[vincent]

First of all, I appreciate all the information in regards to how Android is used in China. I did have a knowledge gap on how Chinese mobile companies used AOSP. And indeed, from the sound of it, losing access to AOSP in a technological sense, is not really a threat.

But I still need to insist on a detail - open source is not equivalent to "no license." Open source software is governed by an open source license (typically some variation of Apache or GPL) granted to users. Like any other license, it can be revoked. If you lose access to the license, then you become subject to copy right infringement claims upon cloning the code. While it means little in countries where the US has no jurisdiction, it means a lot in countries where the US does.

Would companies like Xiaomi, Oppo, etc. risk getting shut out of the US, Europe, etc. in violation of a platform ban on Byte Dance software? Judging by past actions, if the US sanctions Byte Dance, *any* company that does business with it (and which uses any US technology, including chips and other licensed software) can be subject to similar sanctions for violating US export control.

This includes companies that only host the application in China.

This is why having ANY dependency on US software - including open source software - is risky. Of course, you could make the argument that if the US wanted to target a company, it can come up with any reason - or no reason at all - to ban it across all friendly countries. Indeed, the US could create new laws just for that purpose, like with the RESTRICT act. But as the laws stand today, it is the use of US technology that puts you at risk of export control sanctions internationally.

You can fork the code before the change of license.

 

[AssassinsMace]

I saw Congressman Ro Khanna being interviewed on CNN and he's upset that Xi is going to meet Putin in Russia after he's been charged by the International Criminal Court for war crimes that the US doesn't recognize themselves...

 

[daifo]

First of all, I appreciate all the information in regards to how Android is used in China. I did have a knowledge gap on how Chinese mobile companies used AOSP. And indeed, from the sound of it, losing access to AOSP in a technological sense, is not really a threat.

But I still need to insist on a detail - open source is not equivalent to "no license." Open source software is governed by an open source license (typically some variation of Apache or GPL) granted to users. Like any other license, it can be revoked. If you lose access to the license, then you become subject to copy right infringement claims upon cloning the code. While it means little in countries where the US has no jurisdiction, it means a lot in countries where the US does.

Would companies like Xiaomi, Oppo, etc. risk getting shut out of the US, Europe, etc. in violation of a platform ban on Byte Dance software? Judging by past actions, if the US sanctions Byte Dance, *any* company that does business with it (and which uses any US technology, including chips and other licensed software) can be subject to similar sanctions for violating US export control.

This includes companies that only host the application in China.

This is why having ANY dependency on US software - including open source software - is risky. Of course, you could make the argument that if the US wanted to target a company, it can come up with any reason - or no reason at all - to ban it across all friendly countries. Indeed, the US could create new laws just for that purpose, like with the RESTRICT act. But as the laws stand today, it is the use of US technology that puts you at risk of export control sanctions internationally.

The US can make any and pass any crazy anti-china laws these days. There is no point to think what is lawful or unlawful. America can claim anything is national security and by claiming that , they can applied Authoritarian rule. ByteDance should just pull out of the US market and let American lawmakers deal with the blow back as Americans think even less of their goverment.

 

[siegecrossbow]

I saw Congressman Ro Khanna being interviewed on CNN and he's upset that Xi is going to meet Putin in Russia after he's been charged by the International Criminal Court for war crimes that the US doesn't recognize themselves...

Lucky I've got this handy. Have a feeling that I'd be using this a lot in the near future.

 

[taxiya]

First of all, I appreciate all the information in regards to how Android is used in China. I did have a knowledge gap on how Chinese mobile companies used AOSP. And indeed, from the sound of it, losing access to AOSP in a technological sense, is not really a threat.

But I still need to insist on a detail - open source is not equivalent to "no license." Open source software is governed by an open source license (typically some variation of Apache or GPL) granted to users. Like any other license, it can be revoked. If you lose access to the license, then you become subject to copy right infringement claims upon cloning the code. While it means little in countries where the US has no jurisdiction, it means a lot in countries where the US does.

Would companies like Xiaomi, Oppo, etc. risk getting shut out of the US, Europe, etc. in violation of a platform ban on Byte Dance software? Judging by past actions, if the US sanctions Byte Dance, *any* company that does business with it (and which uses any US technology, including chips and other licensed software) can be subject to similar sanctions for violating US export control.

This includes companies that only host the application in China.

This is why having ANY dependency on US software - including open source software - is risky. Of course, you could make the argument that if the US wanted to target a company, it can come up with any reason - or no reason at all - to ban it across all friendly countries. Indeed, the US could create new laws just for that purpose, like with the RESTRICT act. But as the laws stand today, it is the use of US technology that puts you at risk of export control sanctions internationally.

Huawei has full access to AOSP, it is open source project. Huawei lost the right to pre-install Google owned apps for its phones. Google does not own AOSP, it is one of many contributors who gives its source code for free that US sanction can't be enforced upon.

Open source is still a license, but can not be revoked by a single contributor on the ground of a national government's order so long as Huawei abide by the license agreement. The agreement is signed among the contributors, the US government has no role or legal place in it. Google revoking Huawei's right is violation of its own commitment, regardless the US order. By violating its side of obligation, Google is relieving Huawei from respecting Google's revocation. In the end, Huawei will just use the code so long as it can physically access it. Then we are talking about the collapse of the whole open source framework. If this happens, you will see US jurisdiction shrink to only North America, just like US control of world oil price is lost when it tried to cap Russian oil but got SA (therefor GCC and OPEC) to walk away as well, now US has no control on anyone but itself.

Again and again, the Dollar and the oil price have shown that the US sanction is only a weapon useful before put into action, but toothless once put into action on equal adversaries. Open source software isn't going to make any difference.

 

[supercat]

These retards just can't give it a rest.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Maybe they should sue raccoon dogs.

The Strongest Evidence Yet That an Animal Started the Pandemic​

A new analysis of genetic samples from China appears to link the pandemic’s origin to raccoon dogs.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The West is worried about a China-brokered cease-fire in Ukraine.

US and other Western nations wary of Xi’s trip to Moscow​

• The Chinese might promote a ceasefire in Ukraine and ‘try to couch themselves as peacemakers’, a White House official says
• Britain says it will continue to press Beijing to call ‘on Putin to withdraw his troops’

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[siegecrossbow]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

瑞士是一个保持对话和开放的国家——正是这些帮助它建立起强大而持久的国际关系，特别是与中国的关系。瑞士联邦外交部亚太事务助理国秘史伦博昨天在

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

“瑞士对亚洲外交政策”的讲座中说：在文明的冲突中我们一无所获，但通过对话让彼此的文化更加接近并相互理解，我们便能收获很多。详情参见：

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

For those of you bananas who don't know enough Chinese to understand, here is a translation:

"President Xi, me so horny. Me so good at sucky sucky. Me love you very long time".