
Chinese hi-tech researchers ‘told not to travel to US unless it’s essential’ - smaili
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/2177703/chinese-hi-tech-researchers-told-not-travel-us-unless-its
======
jhowell
It's essential. From my reading of the news it seems the Chinese want access
to US universities, tech and financial service companies for a variety of
reasons. I'd imagine that access to these resources is impossible without
coming to the US.

------
stevenjohns
I've taken similar advice from HN -- not to travel to the US unless it's
essential -- and I've heeded that quite closely. It's unsurprising that people
significantly more important than me are being advised the same in more formal
situations.

~~~
kasey_junk
The US has had travel advisories for specific people against China in effect
since Jan 2018:

[https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/...](https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories/china-
travel-advisory.html)

I've worked for years at companies that had corporate policy to either wash or
destroy phones/computers taken into China.

That is to say, it's unsurprising that _any_ 2 countries engaged in a trade
war (hot or cold) would take these precautions against each other.

------
eganist
Surprising amount of support for IP theft here today.

The US got away with it because countries like the UK couldn't police it
during the industrial revolution. Whoops.

The Chinese got away with it because the US couldn't police it on the global
stage. Whoops.

\---

But the US might've found a way to police it effectively now... soooo why
would we not? Why would we permit it because others historically got away with
it? Without civility, you only own what you can defend.

~~~
forkandwait
A lot of us don't really think intellectual property is actually property and
thar the notion of IP is, well, bullshit.

~~~
kickopotomus
If that is the case, then how do you propose that any private organization
(especially small ones) should operate?

~~~
incognition
There's still trade secrets. That's what you do when you can't patent
something or don't think it provides sufficient protection.

That naturally asks how to keep trade secrets better? Manufacture
domestically, air gapped servers, better pentesting etc. etc.

------
EGreg
USA’s main exports are IP and Dollars. They have engaged in petrodollar
warfare and international treaties to protect the demand for their export and
intimidate those (like Kim Dotcom) who threaten it in other countries. Just
like Russia has done for natural gas, for instance.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar_warfare](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar_warfare)

[https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-
agreements/tran...](https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-
agreements/transatlantic-trade-and-investment-partnership-t-tip/t-tip-10)

~~~
pavel_lishin
> _There 's only four things we [Americans] do better than anyone else: music,
> movies, microcode (software), and high speed pizza delivery_

Neal Stephenson, Snow Crash

------
ConfusedDog
It's like a cold war on technology advancement here... wait. that's just the
cold war, except this time more politics, fewer submarines.

~~~
mc32
Kind of opposite of the Cold War, where despite (geo)political differences, we
tried to cooperate in the sciences, where possible/prudent...

~~~
vkou
And unlike the Cold War, both sides' economies are completely tied to trade
with the other.

Before anyone feels too complacent about that fact - trade doesn't have a
great track record of preventing actual wars. WWI was considered unthinkable,
because of how tightly the two sides were entangled in trade.

~~~
lettergram
It's also why several of the countries had issues feeding their populations
during the war(s). I think it's fair to say, that what exasperated WWI was the
secret (and not so secret), alliances everyone had made. Such that when
Austria decided to invade Serbia, France had to declare war on the Ottoman
Empire... (traditionally an enemy of Austria)

------
Gonzih
This is a thing not just in China based organizations. A lot of hi-tech
companies around the world have clause in a contract that does not allow any
employees to traves to US while carrying anything containing IP of a company
or discourage employees from traveling to US altogether.

------
ggm
The cold war experience of tit-for-tat has two lessons:

Firstly, somebody has to make a move either at parity which is respected or
below, and the "you blinked first" message has to be ignored.

Secondly, there are always collateral damages. You can't afford to expel
Russian diplomatic staff so you expel east Germans. You don't want to risk
core staff so you send friendly nations into harm's way.

Canada was thrown into harm's way to avoid a bigger problem. The question is:
who is willing to de scale the tit-for-tat response first?

~~~
bilbo0s
Can't fight a trade war like a cold war. I actually think Trump is doing it
right. I mean, if you're going to fight a trade war, you have to do the kinds
of things he's doing. Now the problem is... economic reality. If the other guy
just has the bigger market long term, especially if they can grow their market
without you, you're just at a disadvantage. I think we can get some short term
wins, but in the long term, we would have to prosecute this trade war
_flawlessly_ to come out on top.

That's just the reality of large markets looking to de-link themselves from
global carbon energy resources. Long term, if we're all intent on ending the
age of oil and coal, there's just nothing to keep everyone cooperating with
each other.

~~~
ggm
This trade war is not being prosecuted flawlessly, and as Ike or somebody like
him said, no plan survives first engagement with the enemy.

Trump does not have a unified national intent behind him. I don't agree with
him or his policies, in this or any other regard but trying to think
dispassionately, I think appointing Bolton to signal strength of will demands
having somebody more flexible to negotiate the real outcome.

For example, Trump is probably going to lose the trade war over Iran. They
need Boeing spares but if he continues to blackball Iranian trade the future
air fleet will be Airbus with loans from Germany and France.

Trump is going to lose a trade war in China because China holds far more US
debt than Americans hold Chinese debt and China has far more market reach into
emerging markets in Africa since the decision to decouple trade and local
politics was made clear: you can trade with China and continue to repress your
own people or trade with America and have to clean up your act.

~~~
ArchTypical
> Trump is probably going to lose the trade war over Iran

Who cares what "Trump" loses? This is about the USA and Trump will be long
gone before any of these situations are measured. The USA is not starting a
trade war with Iran (first time I've ever heard sanctions called a trade war),
the US is enacting sanctions to hurt Iran without scaring allies like Saudi
Arabia.

> China holds far more US debt than Americans hold Chinese debt

That's intentional and good for the US. If you don't understand this, I really
think you need to understand why we sell it to foreign powers at all.

> China has far more market reach into emerging markets in Africa

That's a real problem which the USA is losing out on potentially. It won't be
apparent for some time, since people who are industrialized enough to get out
of self-oppressive warlord control will not handle foreign occupation very
well either. The US answer is always to enable the counter-revolutionaries
anyway until the US has someone they want to deal with.

~~~
ggm
_The USA is not starting a trade war with Iran (first time I 've ever heard
sanctions called a trade war), the US is enacting sanctions to hurt Iran
without scaring allies like Saudi Arabia_

The trade war is with the EU and Russia. Iran is a huge potential future
market, alongside the rest of the non saudi aligned Middle East. After Iraq
the contracts for rebuild and repair went to classic US interested parties in
trade retaliation for prior diplomatic posture in the m.e. by France and
Germany.

Please explain to me what I don't understand about china holding US debt,and
what it means tactically regarding the trade war.

------
Havoc
I kind feel the same about the US. The majority of the horror stories about
people being forced to spit out password and getting devices taken away for
copying...straight out of the country that spends all its time exporting
"freedom".

Pretty happy in Europe. China, Russia and America all seem dodgy AF lately.
Overtly so...I shudder to think what happens behind the scenes.

~~~
NotAmazin
You might be right, but perhaps countries with something to lose might be
better places to live because of opportunity. I understand you give up some
rights in exchange for 'freedom' but the opportunities are better. Sometimes
you just have to live blissfully aware.

------
Tsubasachan
Good advice that we should all take into consideration. Were it not that New
York is part of the United States. Whose idea was...oh wait

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Breda_(1667)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Breda_\(1667\))

Mea culpa.

------
stevefan1999
After Meng's case, I think not only Chinese Hi-Tech company would avoid US, so
would Chinese entrepreneurs. I guess one of the side effect would be less VCs
in China in 2019 - Until the trade war is sorted out.

------
forapurpose
Remember that this is not an accident or byproduct, but a goal of nationalists
in the U.S. government (and probably in China too). They seek division and a
breakdown of international relations and activities.

------
thrillgore
Smart thinking. Similarly, I would not travel to China if I am big into
research or am C-level. In case they want to respond in kind.

------
pytyper2
Because they are likely working for institutions that are committing IP theft,
in this case it's better to keep them honest, they don't have a culture that
respects the rules and customs of other cultures (common law, contract law).

~~~
DennisP
Which is also what the U.S. did for its first century or so.

A lot of us think U.S. IP law has seriously overextended itself these days.
I'm not sure I entirely blame China for not going along with it.

~~~
polartx
Ah yes, because Samuel Slater smuggled cotton spinner trade secrets out of
England in 1789, China is justified committing IP theft today.

Sound logic

~~~
coldtea
The logic is "if you've used it to become the richest nation on earth don't
knock out others using it to become rich".

And those that still benefit from the heads-tart due to their
country/ancestors having done so, shouldn't play it holier than thou either.

Not to mention the whole hypocrisy, since the US has used corporate espionage
and actual spying on supposed "allies" corporations since forever and still
does, plus using their military and diplomatic might to ensure cheap
resources, control of trade routes, use of its currently, and bending "banana
republics" to its will and installing friendly lackeys to the detriment of
their peoples. Case in point, this vintage gem posted today:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18683073](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18683073)

~~~
zxcvvcxz
>The logic is "if you've used it to become the richest nation on earth don't
knock out others using it to become rich".

Cool, so you have no issues with China, India, Africa accelerating their use
of fossil fuels.

~~~
coldtea
No, I don't. Especially since those pointing the finger still have the most
carbon- and materials-expensive lifestyle, and have refused to sign
environmental agreements for decades...

