It's interesting to me that in a world where the popularity of programming language is surging like crazy, there is still so much distrust, particularly across international borders around privacy, information security, trade secrets. It seems almost paradoxical that American society is simultaneously working toward a more seamless, globalized world, while the international world is growing suspicious of our companies (*ahem* Google *ahem*), and we seem to be retaliating by retreating from planned endeavours (*ahchoo* Huawei).
I guess the argument in the Google case is that this directly affects the fair competition of the search engine market in Europe (if it is true that Google is really redirecting customers away from other places). Yes, the European Commission needs to act, but I can't help but wonder what the effects of action will be. After all the trouble that Google has had earlier this year with China, it's kind of a miracle that Google still wants to fight these battles at all. On the other hand, one can't help but wonder if it's just that everyone wants to pick on the biggest kid in class. So, fair, let's put this one on hold for now.
Then there's the Symantec story. It goes a little something like this: Symantec, long known for its computer security software shenanigans is now planning on selling its 49% stake in the joint venture of Symantec and Huawei technologies that is currently based in Mountain View, CA. Their comment was that they, "had achieved the objectives we set four years ago" and that they would "exit the joint venture with a good return on our investment".
So, like a rejected girl on prom night, let me translate what Symantec meant when they very publicly broke up with Huawei. (They even shipped Huawei's people out of the Mountain View office! That's akin to giving someone back that favorite ratty sweatshirt, I'm pretty sure.) Translation: "We don't want to tell you why we are leaving, but technically we've covered our butts with everything that we promised we'd do four years ago, so this seems like as good of a time as any to run away as fast as we can with a somewhat valid excuse before people begin to ask questions. We made a little bit of money but the honeymoon is OVER."
The Symantec case is particularly interesting because it coincidentally coincides with a time that the U.S. government has agreed to start sharing additional information on cyber-threats and cyber-terrorism with the private sector. Analysts agree that this move by Symantec is probably somewhat related to the fact that they a.) don't want the U.S. government to hold back information that they should/could have because of their ties with one of the riskiest cyber-terrorism regions (China) and b.) Symantec is worried about any potential leakage of the information the government provides. (Though, if private, highly sensitive data like this was going to be leaked, wouldn't a security company be the first to benefit? I'm just sayin'. Not the point, I realize, but just sayin'.
I don't think that Huawei is about to give up though. In 2008, Huawei abandoned a bid for 3Com, which makes antihacking software for the U.S. military (among other products). It was abandoned after a government panel raised concerns about national security. Later, in 2010, Huawei lost a big to supply mobile telecom equipment to Sprint after lawmakers pulled the national security card again. Although I'm sure this is not the last time we will hear of them, I think we need to begin to ask ourselves whether or not the ends justify the means. Blocking huge, (comparatively) low-cost hardware manufacturers like Huawei from our economy could result in more harm than good in the long run. We just need to figure out a happy medium between protecting ourselves and allowing for a beneficial partnership.
No comments:
Post a Comment