Anarcho-capitalist libertarianism

[Ranjr]

I have worked many times over the years for a company owned by the employee.  It's not all it's cracked up to be.

[Aegon]

I was interested to learn recently that electronics giant Huawei is socialist -- it is wholly owned by its employees. Its founder has only a 1.7% share. 

This is one of the reasons the US has been working to block them through unfair trade practices -- for example imprisoning their CFO on bogus charges. It's because the US doesn't like it when the workers make the profits, rather than Wall Street investment types.

The other reason is that the US spy agencies want back door access to all electronic communications (as Edward Snowden revealed) and Huawei doesn't play along.

This might be true to an extent, but it is most definitely not the primary reason they're looking to regulate them in the US. Huawei devices are essentially Chinese spyware, and anyone who is using one of their devices has their information compromised. Nobody with a security clearance can have a Huawei device or have a TikTok account for a reason.

[Pat Mustard]

Why are you equating 'socialistic societies' with 'less free countries'? Socialism does not - and never has - necessarily entailed a diminishment of personal freedom.

Boru

I thought capitalism is essentially defined as economic freedom.

Freedom for the owners of capital, and nobody else. Hence why the USSR embodied the purest form of capitalism yet seen.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Why are you equating 'socialistic societies' with 'less free countries'? Socialism does not - and never has - necessarily entailed a diminishment of personal freedom.

Boru

I thought capitalism is essentially defined as economic freedom.

You thought that, did you? Tell me this: how much economic freedom is enjoyed by a single mum who works two jobs at poverty wages just to keep the lights on, has no access to healthcare, has to decide between groceries and medication, can’t get paid time off when her kid is ill, and hasn’t had a pay rise in three years?

As GUBU said, in capitalistic societies, economic freedom is only experience by the owners of capital, not by the people who actually do the work which generates that capital.

Boru

[The Architect Of Fate]

I thought capitalism is essentially defined as economic freedom.

Capitalism has nothing to do with economic freedom at least not for the majority of the population.

[FlatAssembler]

I was interested to learn recently that electronics giant Huawei is socialist -- it is wholly owned by its employees. Its founder has only a 1.7% share. 

This is one of the reasons the US has been working to block them through unfair trade practices -- for example imprisoning their CFO on bogus charges. It's because the US doesn't like it when the workers make the profits, rather than Wall Street investment types.

The other reason is that the US spy agencies want back door access to all electronic communications (as Edward Snowden revealed) and Huawei doesn't play along.

This might be true to an extent, but it is most definitely not the primary reason they're looking to regulate them in the US. Huawei devices are essentially Chinese spyware, and anyone who is using one of their devices has their information compromised. Nobody with a security clearance can have a Huawei device or have a TikTok account for a reason.

To me, as a third-year computer science student, the conspiracy theory that Intel is spying on us makes way more sense than the conspiracy theory that Huawei is spying on us. Intel puts a chip called Intel Management Engine (Intel ME or IME) on every single motherboard since 2008, and that chip is perfectly capable on spying on us. It is widely agreed to run MINIX, a full-fledged operating system, and is therefore perfectly capable of accessing the Internet. Intel is very secretive about it, and it tells us it has to be because that chip does a lot of Digital Rights Management (DRM). DRM makes it easy to hide a backdoor. There is, as far as I know, nothing comparable to that in Huawei products.

[Anomalocaris]

I was interested to learn recently that electronics giant Huawei is socialist -- it is wholly owned by its employees. Its founder has only a 1.7% share. 

This is one of the reasons the US has been working to block them through unfair trade practices -- for example imprisoning their CFO on bogus charges. It's because the US doesn't like it when the workers make the profits, rather than Wall Street investment types.

The other reason is that the US spy agencies want back door access to all electronic communications (as Edward Snowden revealed) and Huawei doesn't play along.

This might be true to an extent, but it is most definitely not the primary reason they're looking to regulate them in the US. Huawei devices are essentially Chinese spyware, and anyone who is using one of their devices has their information compromised. Nobody with a security clearance can have a Huawei device or have a TikTok account for a reason.

The notion that every piece of Huaiwai hardware is spyware demand suspension of disbelief on par with believing genesis, since no western analyst has yet managed to identify any feature on any huaiwei hardware or firmware that clearly consititute any specific risk.     It may be possible that in some very high end hardware, such as routers or switchers, the firmware is so labyrinthine that spyware functionality can survive undetected for some time against the closest scrutiny.   But to imagine Huaiwei is so good that they can hide spyware everywhere across all their gadgets, including low end consumer gadgets such as smart phones,  and not even the best analysts in the west can find any of them is plainly ridiculous.    In any case, even if they are that good, this kind of skill can only work for so long before general state of security analysis catches up.   So the ideal that they can hide them everywhere and not only can no one find them when they first came out, but no one can find them years later is even more ridiculous, if indeed there is room for more.

[Jehanne]

Use Signal over Tor if you are concerned about privacy.

[FlatAssembler]

I thought capitalism is essentially defined as economic freedom.

You thought that, did you? Tell me this: how much economic freedom is enjoyed by a single mum who works two jobs at poverty wages just to keep the lights on, has no access to healthcare, has to decide between groceries and medication, can’t get paid time off when her kid is ill, and hasn’t had a pay rise in three years?

As GUBU said, in capitalistic societies, economic freedom is only experience by the owners of capital, not by the people who actually do the work which generates that capital.

Boru

Economic freedom is essentially defined as the "rule of law", that is, that there are no rulers above the law. Read up about it on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

You thought that, did you? Tell me this: how much economic freedom is enjoyed by a single mum who works two jobs at poverty wages just to keep the lights on, has no access to healthcare, has to decide between groceries and medication, can’t get paid time off when her kid is ill, and hasn’t had a pay rise in three years?

As GUBU said, in capitalistic societies, economic freedom is only experience by the owners of capital, not by the people who actually do the work which generates that capital.

Boru

Economic freedom is essentially defined as the "rule of law", that is, that there are no rulers above the law. Read up about it on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom

 No one has EVER defined economic freedom as the ‘rule of law’.

Boru