Kamis, 05 Desember 2019

China gives little indication US trade talks are progressing - CNBC

Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesman Gao Feng speaks at a press conference in Beijing, days ahead of an imminent US-China trade war, on July 5, 2018.

Greg Baker | AFP | Getty Images

BEIJING — China's official spokespeople are keeping quiet on trade talks with the U.S. amid growing uncertainty on when even a phase-one agreement can be reached.

"China believes if both sides reach a phase-one agreement, relevant tariffs must be lowered," Gao Feng, Ministry of Commerce spokesman, said Thursday, according to a CNBC translation of his Mandarin-language remarks.

The comments reiterated the position Beijing has expressed in the last few weeks, since both countries indicated a rollback of tariffs would be part of a so-called phase-one agreement.

On Thursday, Gao noted both trade delegations remain in communication, but disclosed few additional details about the negotiations.

He did not provide a direct response when asked about China's view on additional U.S. tariffs, which are set to take effect Dec. 15. Gao also did not provide details on the unreliable entities list. The commerce ministry raised the threat of such a designation in late May, shortly after U.S. President Donald Trump's administration put Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei on a blacklist that effectively prevents it from buying from American suppliers.

Trade tensions between the world's two largest economies have persisted for more than a year, with each country applying tariffs to billions of dollars' worth of goods from the other.

Both sides appeared close to reaching a phased agreement by the end of this year, but earlier this week, Trump said it might be better to wait until after the November 2020 U.S. presidential election to strike a trade deal with China.

"We do not set a deadline for reaching an agreement or not," Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokeswoman Hua Chunying said in response on Wednesday during a daily press conference, according to an official transcript.

"Our attitude has always been clear, that is, consultations must be based on equality and mutual respect, and that the outcome must be mutually beneficial and acceptable to both sides," she said. "We hope that some people in the U.S. will earnestly heed the call of its people."

In the last two weeks, frictions between the U.S. and China intensified after the U.S. government pushed ahead with legislation supporting protesters against the central government in Hong Kong, and the Uighur minority in Xinjiang. Chinese state media and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs have made firm statements against what Beijing considers U.S. interference in "internal" affairs, and suspended review of requests by U.S. military ships and aircraft to visit Hong Kong.

When asked Thursday whether the unreliable entities list is part of China's threatened retaliation to these developments, Commerce Ministry's Gao referred reporters to comments from the relevant department.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiYWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmNuYmMuY29tLzIwMTkvMTIvMDUvY2hpbmEtZ2l2ZXMtbGl0dGxlLWluZGljYXRpb24tdXMtdHJhZGUtdGFsa3MtYXJlLXByb2dyZXNzaW5nLmh0bWzSAWVodHRwczovL3d3dy5jbmJjLmNvbS9hbXAvMjAxOS8xMi8wNS9jaGluYS1naXZlcy1saXR0bGUtaW5kaWNhdGlvbi11cy10cmFkZS10YWxrcy1hcmUtcHJvZ3Jlc3NpbmcuaHRtbA?oc=5

2019-12-05 08:35:00Z
52780455211231

Caver Unsworth testifies he felt ‘dirtied’ by Musk’s ‘pedo guy’ tweet - The Verge

People, including my editors, keep asking me who “won the day.” I have been thinking about other things, like whether the marble behind the Honorable Stephen Wilson is an actual slab, or just a veneer over particle board, and whether I will get kicked out of the courtroom if I go check it out before court is in session.

But mostly, I have been thinking about insults. The main point of contention has been whether “pedo guy” qualifies as an insult or a statement of fact. As Ken White, the lawyer and pundit, points out, insults — like hyperbole, shit-talking, and “other expressions not reasonably taken literally as assertions of fact” — are not defamation, which is why John Oliver can perform the song at the end of this Last Week Tonight segment with confidence. In White’s view, Elon Musk has a defensible case, though this is not the same thing as a winning case.

Insults are the kind of thing one might want to call a linguist to discuss, you know, as an expert witness. The core of the case — to me, at least — seems to rest there. For instance, say someone calls me an asshole. This is both an opinion and insulting; possibly it is also true. In any event, it’s not defamation.

“Pedo guy” is way less clear-cut as an insult than “asshole.” The relevant parts of Musk’s testimony today largely centered on his view that it was an insult. Unfortunately, I also heard a great deal of testimony that doesn’t seem remotely relevant to this question, from Musk and others.

By the end of the day, though, the plaintiff Vernon Unsworth gave compelling testimony about how Musk’s words had affected him. Unsworth indicated he’d taken Musk’s words as an accusation, not an insult, and felt “dirtied” by them.

“Rude and contemptuous”

Alex Spiro, Musk’s counsel, had more nervous energy than yesterday — he was practically vibrating. He began by asking Musk how he became involved in the Thailand cave rescue in the first place. Several emails were introduced into evidence, including with Rick Stanton, the head of the rescue operations, showing that Musk’s help was indeed welcomed. There was a great deal of detail I did not care about regarding the specs on the minisub. We were shown a video of the minisub in a pool. We were then treated to a series of Musk’s tweets where he said nice things about rescuers and noted that his team hasn’t done anything directly useful to the effort. Musk said that after he left for his Shanghai meeting, 20 to 25 engineers stayed behind.

Eventually, Musk testified that he was upset because Unsworth denigrated the efforts of Musk’s team of engineers and because Unsworth falsely said Musk was thrown out of the cave; he also did not appreciate the “rude and contemptuous” tone of the interview. (Musk is something of an expert in rude and contemptuous: there was that time on a quarterly conference call with analysts, Musk cut someone off with, “Next. Boring bonehead questions are not cool.”)

The tweets at the center of the defamation case were “obviously a very off-the-cuff response,” Musk testified. He also said the tweets were deleted “within hours of publishing,” partly as a result of media attention and because “a lot of people said you probably shouldn’t write that.” Musk also said that he did not know when he tweeted that Unsworth was central to the rescue. “I thought he was some random ex-pat guy.” Musk also said, accurately, that lots of people are mean to him online and he is frequently criticized.

We are then shown the tweets in question again. Musk explains that “obv” means “obviously,” that “no problemo” is “a phrase Bart Simpson uses — the Simpsons used to be cool,” and “really did ask for it” refers to what Musk views as an “unprovoked attack on my team and me, with a bunch of false statements.”

As for Musk’s follow-up statements: “Bet you a signed dollar,” Musk explained, is a low-stakes wager meaning “it’s not impossible.” He then said: “It’s possible that if someone goes to Colorado a lot, they’re going for weed.” Musk paused. “Not if they’re coming from California though.”

Musk’s Twitter usage was particularly high-volume last year. Musk sent an estimated 100 to 200 tweets per month, he testified. He also said that he views it as a mitigating factor that he didn’t name Unsworth in the tweets. According to Musk, the first time anyone asked him if “pedo guy” meant “pedophile” was at the deposition. This seems unlikely; at least one journalist surely asked Musk about this.

Spiro got out a large calendar for demonstrative purposes. “The jury is familiar, hopefully, with the month of July,” Spiro said. Spiro then began asking Musk questions about the private investigator he retained to look into Unsworth — an investigator who turned out to be a con man. Musk said that before he sent the “strange that he hasn’t sued me” tweet, the con man P.I. had passed false information to an employee (Jared Birchall, who we hear from later) who told Musk about it.

The email to Ryan Mac at Buzzfeed was brought up again; he must be getting sick of it. We are treated to a discussion of what “off the record” means — according to Musk, that means not for publication. (I see several journalists make faces; most of us understand “off the record” as a mutual agreement. A source cannot demand it unilaterally, which is ultimately why Mac published his story.) A second email is pulled up with “on background” at the top. Musk explains that he believes “on background” means the information can be used, but not attributed to him. (In my experience, every source has a different notion about what “on background” means, and this has to be negotiated every time, which is a goddamn nightmare.)

“If I write something on Twitter, it will get reported”

L. Lin Wood, Unsworth’s attorney, was up next for the re-cross; thankfully, he had dropped the bumbling manner from yesterday. Wood said Unsworth doesn’t have a Twitter account, and wondered how Unsworth was supposed to know Musk had apologized. “Most things I say on Twitter get press,” Musk said. “If I write something on Twitter, it will get reported.” Musk adds that it seemed appropriate to him that the apology was on the same medium as the insult.

Wood then pulled up just an absolute fuckload of Musk’s tweets, and asked Musk if they belong to him. “I don’t remember every tweet,” Musk said. This did not seem to be the point, as procedurally Wood was trying to get the tweets entered into evidence. Many of them are about the minisub — which is referred to variously as a minisub, a pod, or a tube, but which I will continue calling a minisub for consistency’s sake. Musk said he was soliciting feedback from the public. “I tweet a lot, in general,” Musk said, accurately.

It looked to me like Wood was trying to suggest the volume of minisub tweets smacked of a PR stunt, particularly after Musk testified that he knows his tweets will be reported on. Musk insisted he was soliciting feedback. “There are some pretty smart people out there,” Musk said. Tesla vehicle design, in particular, is something he cites as having incorporated a lot of Twitter feedback.

Wood switched tacks to language. He and Musk discussed pedophilia, which may refer to thought (a sexual attraction to children) or action (statutory rape). Musk said that if an adult were to marry a 12-year-old, that is probably pedophilia. “Pedo guy,” however, is more flippant, Musk said. “Mother-effer doesn’t literally mean incest,” Musk said, because he apparently did not want to say “fuck” in court.

As this discussion of the meaning of “pedo,” “pedo guy,” and “pedophile” was happening, Unsworth began to look progressively more unhappy. He puffed out his cheeks. His mouth worked. I couldn’t see Unsworth yesterday — he was obscured by a poster board — but today I didn’t see him look at Musk once. Unsworth appeared to be upset by the discussion, but his back was to the jury.

“All the press I read, including the British press, viewed this as an insult,” Musk testified. He also said he remembered the coverage as being negative about him. Wood began asking about specific countries’ press, which is how I discovered Musk doesn’t read news from Scandinavia, the Netherlands, or Belgium. Judge Wilson interjected to ask what languages Musk does know, since the judge thought that might be faster. Musk said he spoke a little Spanish, French, and German. Judge Wilson tells Wood that he will allow inquiries about news from South America, the Carribean, and German-speaking Switzerland.

The jurors are then sent away for recess while the lawyers argue about whether a Google alert can be introduced to the court. Whatever Wood wanted to introduce has a headline from Vox — a media outlet that unfortunately Judge Wilson is not familiar with, and which he spells aloud — that uses “pedophile.” Ultimately the exhibit was excluded from the proceedings.

When everyone returned from their brief break, Wood asked Musk if anyone at Tesla had pointed out that his tweet had tanked the stock. Musk said that he got concerned notes from shareholders, but since Tesla is publicly traded, anyone can see its price at any time. Wood asked Musk to give a current estimate of Musk’s net worth. Musk hedged: he has stock and debt against that stock; the stock value fluctuates. Wood asked for a range. Musk said he didn’t know. Wood then reads from Musk’s deposition, where the estimate is about $20 billion. Musk said that with SpaceX and Tesla stock combined, yes, that sounds right. There is no mention of how much debt Musk has outstanding against the stock.

Musk was then dismissed. As he exited the courtroom, he turned back to the jury, waved, and then left.

He’s a Brick… house

The next witness was Jared Birchall, also known as James Brickhouse. Birchall, in contrast to every other witness today, did not wear a jacket; instead he was wearing a white shirt with blue checks. Birchall said he was 17 or 18 years into a career in finance and was hired by Musk to run Musk’s family office.

Wood asked Birchall a series of questions that established, mainly, that Musk is Birchall’s boss. It didn’t sound like Musk micromanages Birchall, however. Wood displayed a non-disclosure agreement that Birchall entered into with James Howard, a con man who purported to be a private investigator. Howard had attempted to contact Musk, saying that he had dirt on Unsworth.

It emerged that Birchall had dealt with Howard largely under a pseudonym, James Brickhouse. I was somewhat disappointed that Birchall didn’t think up something more fun, like Pierce Inverarity. Birchall said he came up with the name himself and that Musk hadn’t known about it. He’d used the Brickhouse pseudonym before, to book travel and buy domain names.

Birchall couldn’t sign the NDA under the pseudonym, though, as that would render the contract unenforceable, so he swapped out his email display name to “Jared Birchall for James Brickhouse.” Every other communication, however, took place under the pseudonym, except one, when Birchall accidentally sent an email under his own name.

According to Birchall, Howard had cited Paul Allen and George Soros as previous employers. Birchall did not, however, try to contact anyone to determine if this was true. So here’s a valuable hiring lesson for everyone: call the references.

Wood displayed another email from Birchall to Howard. “We would like you to immediately move forward with ‘leaking’ this information to the UK press,” the email reads. Bullet points follow, containing false information about Unsworth that I am not especially interested in repeating. Birchall said the email was meant to “encourage investigative journalism.” In the email, Birchall pointed to a line where he wrote “share the facts,” and said he understood the bullet points to be facts and he wanted to make sure the press was given correct information.

Then it was time for lunch.

Justballs.com

When we returned, Michael Lifrak, another of Musk’s lawyers, began asking Birchall questions. Birchall was aware of Musk’s Unsworth tweets but said he did not discuss them with Musk. Lifrak asks if Musk would harm Unsworth in any way. “He would never do that,” Birchall said.

When Birchall received the referral for Howard, the con man PI, Musk had clearly expressed that he expected litigation. Lifrak displayed a Birchall email to Howard: “We believe there are planned attacks in the media and/or a lawsuit that are imminent. With that said, we aren’t looking to frame anyone.” Lifrak asked if anything was published with the false information Howard supplied. Birchall said no.

We then move back to the Brickhouse pseudonym, which I find easier to remember than Birchall’s actual name. Birchall said that working with a public figure means trying to maintain that person’s privacy and described that as the core of what he does.

At this point an email is displayed wherein “James Brickhouse” is trying to buy the domain name justballs.com. If you are frightened to click the URL, please know I have done that for you and its contents are (1) “This page is under construction — coming soon!” and (2) related searches, virtually all of which have to do with baseball. There was no testimony about why Birchall would be buying justballs.com on Musk’s behalf or what Musk was planning to do with it.

The reason Birchall used his pseudonym in this transaction, he explained, was because if people knew Musk were involved, they’d likely raise the price. In any event, Birchall did not succeed in purchasing justballs.com.

Birchall then said that when he relayed Howard’s information from Musk, “as human nature would have it, the most alarming things were what I had shared.” Referring to Musk’s email to Buzzfeed, Birchall said the language was harsher than he would have used but the content was what he understood Howard’s investigation to have unearthed. At the time, Birchall did not know Musk had emailed Buzzfeed. I imagine he rather quickly found out. Lifrak rested.

“Leaking to press is a PR stunt, isn’t it?” Wood asked on recross. Birchall repeated that he wanted to encourage investigative journalism. Musk had gotten a significant amount of negative publicity from the “pedo guy” tweet. Leaking, then, would be a way to “balance” the coverage. Wood said that meant Howard’s hiring wasn’t a litigation defense strategy; it was a PR strategy.

This led to a grouchy exchange about what phrases Birchall used with Musk when he gave Musk the phony information, leading to a series of sustained objections to Wood. Wood appeared to be growing frustrated.

A great deal of irritating cross-talk

The next witness, Rick Stanton, was the one who bewildered me the most today. He was the leader of the cave divers who rescued the Thai soccer team and their coach, and he sat very upright in the witness stand, like a clean-shaven Jason Statham. Stanton, a retired firefighter, has been involved in rescues around the world and has done cave diving for most of his adult life, he said.

Unsworth cracked a smile when Stanton referred to “spelunking, as you say.” Apparently this is more commonly called “caving” in the UK. Stanton testified that Unsworth got him involved in the rescue, and that within 6 hours of Unsworth passing Stanton’s name to the authorities, Stanton was on a plane to Thailand.

Matt Wood, son of L. Lin Wood, conducted the direct examination, and to minimize confusion, I will be calling him by his first name and will continue referring to his father by their (shared) last name. Anyway, Matt began asking questions about the rescue and conditions in the cave. Judge Wilson broke in: “Clearly the witness did something heroic, but that’s not what this case is about.” The judge instructed Matt to get back to what’s more relevant.

Stanton obviously thinks highly of Unsworth; his testimony about Unsworth was glowing. During the two weeks Stanton was in Thailand, he was in “constant contact” with Unsworth, he testified. Stanton confirmed he was also in contact with Musk, and that he had instructed Musk on the minisub. At the time Musk and Stanton corresponded, the method the divers used to rescue the soccer team was a totally untested technique, Stanton said. Musk was a possible plan B.

Matt began asking Stanton questions about the minisub. Spiro, Musk’s counsel, objected. Judge Wilson sustained the objection; the question of whether the minisub worked was not relevant to the defamation claim, the judge ruled.

Spiro rose to conduct his cross-examination. He asked how many people were involved in the exploration and rescue; Stanton responded that six to eight people laid the guide line under water in the caves. Stanton again credited Unsworth with giving the team advice and creating a map. There was then a tedious discussion about maps I am going to elide because I don’t see what it has to do with defamation.

Then, Spiro asked if there was a rule against speaking to the press. No, Stanton said. “A rule is enforceable.” There were guidelines against speaking to the media. Unsworth didn’t ask if he could speak to the media, but it also wasn’t Stanton’s decision. Stanton became aware “after the event” that Unsworth had spoken to CNN.

Spiro hauled out his giant calendar again, and began asking Stanton questions about a conspiracy theory that the divers had purposely not rescued the boys. This got Stanton’s hackles up. Spiro attempted to clarify that he personally didn’t believe it was true. There was then a great deal of irritating cross talk between Spiro, Judge Wilson and Wood; I was unable to write quickly enough to keep up with it. Several jurors glanced longingly at the clock.

Spiro displayed a WhatsApp chat between Stanton and Unsworth dated August 6th, 2018. Unsworth asked Stanton if Stanton had saved his emails with Elon Musk. Stanton said yes. Unsworth asked Stanton to find them and forward them. Stanton testified that he gave Unsworth the emails without knowing why Unsworth wanted them. There were no further questions for Stanton and we all took a break.

I kept wondering why Stanton was there — to establish what we all knew already, that Unsworth was a hero? To establish the minisub wouldn’t work? I couldn’t see the relevance of either of those things to the defamation claim. His testimony about the emails wasn’t necessary — as Unsworth, who took the stand next — would also speak to them.

“I still feel dirtied”

When we came back, Vernon Unsworth took the stand, wearing a blue suit with a pale pink shirt and more saturated pink tie; like Stanton, his hair was cropped close. Stanton had stayed for Unsworth’s testimony and was seated in front of me.

Unsworth said he had been a financial consultant since 1987 and splits time between London and Thailand, about three months in each place. He had first visited Thailand in 2011, with his companion, and first explored the cave system in 2012. Unsworth estimated he’d spent hundreds of hours on solo trips through the cave.

Unsworth said that he’d actually planned to enter the cave the same day the soccer team did, but realized he needed to renew his visa. He first became aware of the missing children and their coach when his companion awoke to an awful lot of missed calls, including from her father. Unsworth was asked to help locate the people because he knew the cave system so well. When he arrived at the cave, he discovered water in a crucial section. He tried to stop the water getting in, using sandbags and digging equipment, but couldn’t do it — and had become concerned that more water would cut off him and the other rescuers.

At this point, Taylor Wilson, the lawyer who was conducting Unsworth’s examination, was scolded by Judge Wilson about his questioning style. Unsworth was providing narration, Judge Wilson said. Wilson-plaintiff’s-lawyer was encouraged by Judge Wilson — presumably no relation — to ask questions differently.

Then we came to the CNN interview. Unsworth explained that based on the video he’d seen of Musk’s minisub, he determined it was unworkable. As for his untrue statement that Musk had been asked to leave, Unsworth was essentially repeating gossip. “It’s what I heard generally around the cave rescue area on the day of the 10th,” he said. There’d been an order that the only people to go into the cave on the rescue days were the rescuers.

Unsworth testified that he doesn’t use Twitter, which makes him wiser than me. His companion showed him Musk’s tweets — he doesn’t recall when, or in what medium, specifically. His lawyer Wilson asked him what he took the tweets to mean. “I took it to mean I was being branded a pedophile,” Unsworth said. “It’s disgusting.”

Wilson, the lawyer, asked about the emotional impact. There was a long pause. Unsworth was visibly upset. “Feels very raw. Feel humiliated, ashamed, dirtied.” Unsworth’s voice broke. “I was given a life sentence without parole. At times I feel very vulnerable. It hurts to talk about it.” Unsworth said he felt very isolated and had tried to deal with the shame he felt on his own.

“I was obviously aware of the media coverage,” Unsworth said. He wasn’t sure how many times it was repeated. The media coverage was “very hurtful. I find it disgusting. I find it hard to read the words, never mind talk about it.” Unsworth said he’d lost self-confidence, though he had good and bad days. Wilson, the lawyer, asked if Unsworth still felt humiliated, and Unsworth said yes. “I still feel dirtied.”

The jury appeared rapt.

Unsworth has received awards for his participation in the rescue, but they haven’t changed his feelings about Musk. Unsworth said he nearly didn’t attend the ceremony to be accepted as a Member of the Order of the British Empire; he went only for his mother, niece, and companion. When he looked at the press coverage, though, he saw a comment about the “pedo guy” tweet, which sank his spirits. Wilson asked him how he felt about the MBE. “I enjoyed it as much as I could,” he said.

Since his role in the rescue, Unsworth has been a consultant for three books and two documentaries, both for National Geographic. He has made about $3,000 for his work. He’s also given pro bono presentations in Thailand about the experience.

Bill Pryce, one of Musk’s lawyers who had the general air of a middle school principal, rose for the cross. He displayed the WhatsApp chat between Unsworth and Stanton, noting that the date was August 8, the same date that L. Lin Wood had sent Musk a letter explaining he was preparing a civil complaint. Unsworth said the date was a coincidence; he just wanted to inform himself about the correspondence.

Pryce then pulled up text messages Unsworth had sent to a friend. Unsworth had, in the texts, described the Navy Seals as having “given up” as of July 5, before the rescue took place. Unsworth explained he didn’t mean that literally. Pryce pounced, and began asking Unsworth about other colloquialisms Unsworth had used, such as “lost the plot” and “tetchy.” I was not super clear on the point here.

The emails between Stanton and Musk that Stanton had forwarded to Unsworth were then forwarded to Unsworth’s lawyers. Pryce displayed another email of Unsworth’s, in which details Stanton sent to Unsworth about the cave system were forwarded by Unsworth to Jonathan Head of the BBC. “For your eyes only and not to be reported on!!!” Unsworth wrote in the email. “Hopefully you will understand why Elon Musk’s submarine would not have worked.” Another text from Unsworth was displayed, where he’d sent a request for the measurements of the minisub.

The cross was difficult to watch. It seemed clear Pryce was trying to establish that Unsworth was pursuing his argument with Musk; part of the defense’s argument between men strategy. But given how Unsworth behaved when Musk was testifying — while he was facing away from the jury, who couldn’t see him and thus won’t consider his expressions — I am convinced that Unsworth does feel humiliated, dirtied, and ashamed.

What remains in question is whether “pedo guy” should be counted as an insult or a statement of fact. Though Musk gave testimony that he felt it was an insult, Unsworth gave testimony he felt it was an accusation. I don’t know who the jury will find more believable.

One thing, however, seems true, though it is not testimony and I don’t know if the jury will consider it: this entire process has been more grueling for Unsworth than Musk. Unsworth has been in the court for the entire trial, listening to testimony he clearly finds hard to bear; Musk showed up for his testimony and vanished.

The trial will resume tomorrow at 9AM PT.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMic2h0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnRoZXZlcmdlLmNvbS8yMDE5LzEyLzUvMjA5OTY2ODAvZWxvbi1tdXNrLXRlc3RpbW9ueS12ZXJub24tdW5zd29ydGgtdHdlZXQtaHVtaWxpYXRlZC1kaXJ0aWVkLWRlZmFtYXRpb27SAYABaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cudGhldmVyZ2UuY29tL3BsYXRmb3JtL2FtcC8yMDE5LzEyLzUvMjA5OTY2ODAvZWxvbi1tdXNrLXRlc3RpbW9ueS12ZXJub24tdW5zd29ydGgtdHdlZXQtaHVtaWxpYXRlZC1kaXJ0aWVkLWRlZmFtYXRpb24?oc=5

2019-12-05 07:40:58Z
52780460410583

Huawei launches new legal challenge against US ban - BBC News

Chinese telecoms giant Huawei has launched a legal challenge to a decision by US regulators to classify it as a national security threat.

It comes after the US Federal Communications Commission put curbs on rural mobile providers using a $8.5bn (£6.5bn) government fund to buy Huawei equipment.

The firm said evidence that it was a threat to security "does not exist".

The move is the latest in a series of challenges between Huawei and the US.

The company has asked the US Court of Appeal to overturn the decision.

Speaking at a news conference at Huawei's headquarters in Shenzhen, the company's chief legal officer, Song Liuping, said: "The US government has never presented real evidence to show that Huawei is a national security threat. That's because this evidence does not exist."

This is the second legal challenge this year by the company as it fights back against the Trump administration's policies.

Huawei launched similar legal action in May, challenging a decision to ban US government agencies from buying its equipment.

The company has been drawn into the disputes against the backdrop of the bitter trade war between the world's two biggest economies.

It has a leading role in manufacturing and selling key technology for next generation 5G telecoms infrastructure.

Meanwhile, Washington has been pressuring other nations to not allow Huawei to build their critical 5G telecoms infrastructure.

At the Nato summit in the UK on Wednesday, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the decision on whether to allow Huawei a role in building Britain's 5G networks would be based on ensuring continued co-operation with the US over intelligence sharing.

"On Huawei and 5G, I don't want this country to be unnecessarily hostile to investment from overseas," Mr Johnson said.

"On the other hand, we cannot prejudice our vital national security. Nor can we prejudice our ability to co-operate with other vital... security partners - and that will be the key criteria that informs our decision about Huawei."

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiKmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy9idXNpbmVzcy01MDY2NzU5NtIBLmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy9hbXAvYnVzaW5lc3MtNTA2Njc1OTY?oc=5

2019-12-05 08:25:47Z
52780460321752

Rabu, 04 Desember 2019

Dow Jones Futures: China Trade Deal Hopes Set To Buoy Stock Market Rally; Alphabet CEO Larry Page Exits With Google Stock A Buy - Investor's Business Daily

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

  1. Dow Jones Futures: China Trade Deal Hopes Set To Buoy Stock Market Rally; Alphabet CEO Larry Page Exits With Google Stock A Buy  Investor's Business Daily
  2. Stock futures point to a rebound for Wall Street with renewed optimism over U.S.-China trade talks  MarketWatch
  3. Dow tumbles on Trump's China remarks  NHK WORLD
  4. Dow Jones Today: Stocks Sell Off On Trump Trade Comments, Biotech Stocks Stage Stealth Rally  Investor's Business Daily
  5. Dow Jones, S&P 500, Nasdaq 100: Weakness Brings Support into Play  DailyFX
  6. View full coverage on Google News

https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiiAFodHRwczovL3d3dy5pbnZlc3RvcnMuY29tL21hcmtldC10cmVuZC9zdG9jay1tYXJrZXQtdG9kYXkvZG93LWpvbmVzLWZ1dHVyZXMtY2hpbmEtdHJhZGUtZGVhbC1zdG9jay1tYXJrZXQtcmFsbHktYWxwaGFiZXQtY2VvLWxhcnJ5LXBhZ2Uv0gEA?oc=5

2019-12-04 12:49:00Z
52780457415318

Dow Jones Futures: China Trade Deal Hopes Set To Buoy Stock Market Rally; Alphabet CEO Larry Page Exits With Google Stock A Buy - Investor's Business Daily

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

  1. Dow Jones Futures: China Trade Deal Hopes Set To Buoy Stock Market Rally; Alphabet CEO Larry Page Exits With Google Stock A Buy  Investor's Business Daily
  2. Futures Rebound, Jobs, Salesforce, Marvell, Alphabet - 5 Things You Must Know  TheStreet.com
  3. Dow Jones, S&P 500, Nasdaq 100: Weakness Brings Support into Play  DailyFX
  4. Dow Jones Today: Stocks Sell Off On Trump Trade Comments, Biotech Stocks Stage Stealth Rally  Investor's Business Daily
  5. Dow tumbles on Trump's China remarks  NHK WORLD
  6. View full coverage on Google News

https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiiAFodHRwczovL3d3dy5pbnZlc3RvcnMuY29tL21hcmtldC10cmVuZC9zdG9jay1tYXJrZXQtdG9kYXkvZG93LWpvbmVzLWZ1dHVyZXMtY2hpbmEtdHJhZGUtZGVhbC1zdG9jay1tYXJrZXQtcmFsbHktYWxwaGFiZXQtY2VvLWxhcnJ5LXBhZ2Uv0gEA?oc=5

2019-12-04 11:48:00Z
52780457415318

Larry Page is the tech world’s Dr. Manhattan - The Verge

You never forget the first time you see Sergey Brin. This is because he is wearing Crocs, and while you have read profiles that take great pains to point out that the billionaire Google co-founder is wearing cheap plastic shoes, they still come as a surprise when you find yourself face to foot with them.

For me this experience came four years ago, when Google invited me and a bunch of other reporters down to Mountain View to get an update on its self-driving car. Brin made a surprise appearance at the event, took a handful of questions, and then went back to doing whatever Brin did during the day. (It often seemed to involve a Segway.)

Larry Page, on the other hand, you never saw at all. Brin at least seemed to be of this world — I later bumped into him at a restaurant in San Francisco, where he was attending some sort of party for the Google Glass team, wearing a pair on his face — but Page was a phantom. You might hear his voice on an earnings call every once in a while, but for the better part of the decade everyone had the same question about Larry Page: where in the world was he?

On Tuesday, we got the answer: he’s gone, and so is Brin. The co-founders wrote in a surprise farewell blog post:

If the company was a person, it would be a young adult of 21 and it would be time to leave the roost. While it has been a tremendous privilege to be deeply involved in the day-to-day management of the company for so long, we believe it’s time to assume the role of proud parents—offering advice and love, but not daily nagging!

Sundar Pichai is now CEO of Google and its holding company, Alphabet. And just like that, one of the founding stories of the modern-day internet — the two graduate students in their garage, devising a radically better search engine than the world had ever seen — has come to an abrupt close.

Of course, some observers wondered whether it had come to a close at all. Page and Brin remain on Google’s board and are not selling off their founder stock, which gives them ultimate control over the company’s fate. “Nothing in the Page/Brin announcement says anything about a divestiture or relinquishing of the voting control,” tweeted Luther Lowe, the Yelp lobbyist and professional Alphabet antagonist. “The fact remains: Larry Page and Sergey Brin are the most powerful and least accountable humans on the planet.”

Kara Swisher echoed those sentiments, pointing out that the founders had “essentially gone AWOL” years ago. That was backed up by Googlers I heard from. “By my reckoning, they had checked out since about the time of the transition to Alphabet in 2015/2016.”

OK, sure. But to the extent that they are leaving — why now?

One popular theory was that they are fleeing — something. Some speculated that they are fleeing a board investigation into Google’s troubling history of inappropriate relationships between Google’s mostly male C-suite and their subordinates. (If you don’t know the name Amanda Rosenberg, you should.) Or maybe they are fleeing a period of historic worker unrest at Google. Others told me they must be leaving because of the ongoing antitrust investigations into the company.

Still others wondered if they were simply trying to get out of the Google media holiday party Tuesday. (That’s a joke; they never came!) Then there was Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff, who tweeted “How about Page/Brin 2020?” ... to absolute crickets.

Perhaps one of these theories will prove to be true in time. In the meantime, I’m left thinking of the superb HBO series Watchmen, which is now late into its first season. It’s a superhero show where only one character has actual superhero powers: a godlike enigma named Dr. Manhattan, who began life as an ordinary scientist before being transformed into an all-powerful titan on accident.

Eventually Dr. Manhattan grows to be so powerful that he loses all interest in the affairs of ordinary humans, and goes to live by himself on Mars. People call a hotline and leave him voicemails begging for his intervention in their affairs, and he ignores them all. His time among mortals is simply done.

It’s hard not to look at Larry Page’s life and see a little Dr. Manhattan in him. A young scientist becomes a titan of industry in an accidental collision of technology and timing, sending him into such rarefied air that he all but loses interest in his former world. The rest of us shout questions at him forever, but we’re just shouting into the void.

(I don’t know who the Brin analogue would be in the Watchmen universe. Suggestions welcome!)

Page and Brin’s Google was a historical triumph. But there’s little that feels triumphant about their sudden departure. The heat turned up on Google, and they decided to head for the exits. Google’s outsized success will dominate stories about their legacy. But the way they left — bored and mostly absent in a time of crisis — is part of their legacy, too.

The Ratio

Today in news that could affect public perception of the big tech platforms.

Trending up: Facebook is expanding its efforts against ad discrimination, following a settlement with the ACLU earlier this year. Its searchable ad library will now include housing ads targeted at people in the US.

Trending down: Four former Google engineers are filing unfair labor practice charges against the company for allegedly firing them due to workplace organizing efforts.

Trending down: Amazon’s on-site medical care puts workers in danger, a new investigation from The Intercept reports. The company sometimes fails to provide adequate care and discourages workers from going to the hospital, even in serious situations.

Trending up: Apple CEO Tim Cook signed a renewed commitment to the Paris Agreement, saying “humanity has never faced a greater or more urgent threat than climate change.” Microsoft’s Satya Nadella, Tesla’s Elon Musk, and Google’s Sundar Pichai all co-signed the agreement as well.

Governing

Facebook moderators are suing the company in Europe, saying they suffered psychological trauma as a result of poor working conditions. These contractors, who work for CPL Resources in Dublin, say they lacked proper training to prepare for viewing horrific content. David Gilbert from Vice explains why this lawsuit poses a particular risk:

Facebook is already facing a lawsuit in California, brought by two former moderators who are seeking class-action status, but the lawsuit being filed in Dublin this week poses a much bigger risk for the company.

Not only are Europe’s workplace-safety rules much stricter than California’s, but among the dozen Dublin plaintiffs is one of Facebook’s own highly-paid employees.

The Facebook employee, who is seeking to remain anonymous during the court proceedings, worked on content flagged by moderators working for CPL and says that even their limited exposure to harrowing material has resulted in being diagnosed with Type 2 PTSD, which can result in symptoms ranging from irritability and panic attacks to suicidal feelings.

Fighting fake news isn’t just a job for tech companies and governments. This guide teaches you how to identify when something could be fake or taken out of its proper context — and fact-check to make sure it’s legit. Print this out and share it with your families! (Adi Robertson / The Verge)

The leak of classified trade documents between the UK and the United States resembles a Russian disinformation campaign, according to some experts. They say it could point to foreign interference in Britain’s election. (Jack Stubbs / Reuters)

Rating news sources could help limit the spread of misinformation, a new study shows. The ratings are most effective when they come from experts, rather than regular users. (Antino Kim, Alan R. Dennis, Patricia L. Moravec and Randall K. Minas / The Conversation)

The man who wrote the Facebook post that triggered the first correction under Singapore’s new fake news law is happy with how the tech company responded. “Facebook did a great job,” he said. “They didn’t say that this post contains a falsehood.” (Cameron Wilson / BuzzFeed)

Congress is split over your right to sue Facebook. Democrats have widely backed a provision that would ensure big tech companies are held liable for the data scandals they create. Republicans disagree, suggesting that it would create a storm of frivolous lawsuits that would negatively impact small businesses. (Makena Kelly / The Verge)

Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg has spent nearly $1 million on Google ads since the company said it would restrict political ads in the 2020 campaign. The company said that while the new policies don’t go into effect until January, Bloomberg’s ads are already in compliance. (Alex Kantrowitz / BuzzFeed)

Should social media companies be legally responsible for misinformation and hate speech? Right now, they’re shielded by Section 230 of The Communications Decency Act, but some politicians are looking to change that. Vox surveyed the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates to weigh in. (Rani Molla and Emily Stewart / Vox)

The Trump administration says a new French tax aimed at big tech companies discriminates against the United States. The announcement could lead to retaliatory tariffs as high as 100 percent on French wines. (Jim Tankersley and Ana Swanson / The New York Times)

A California college student is suing TikTok for illegally harvesting user data and sending it to China. She says the company neglected its duty to handle user data with care and knowingly violated a slew of statutes governing data gathering and the right to privacy. (Blake Montgomery / Daily Beast)

Schools in the United States are implementing pricey surveillance systems, ostensibly to keep kids safe. The technology monitors what students write in emails, chats and shared documents — some even track what they say on social media. (Lois Beckett / The Guardian)

Chinese scientists are using DNA samples from Uighurs and other predominantly Muslim minority groups to create images of peoples’ faces. The technology is also being developed in the US. (Sui-Lee Wee and Paul Mozur / The New York Times)

A Chinese diplomat is going after the US on Twitter, calling out the government’s hypocrisy in condemning China’s human rights abuses and saying American officials are scared of his country’s rise. (Ben Smith / BuzzFeed)

Russia passed a new law that will require manufacturers of smartphones, computers, and smart TVs to pre-install Russian-made software on their devices. The bill was approved earlier this year and officially signed into law on Monday. (Jon Porter / The Verge)

The FBI is treating any mobile app that comes out of Russia as a “potential counterintelligence threat,” according to a letter the law enforcement agency sent to Congress. Since 2015, Russia has required tech companies to store data on Russian users on servers inside the country, and hand it over if the government demands. (Ben Brody / Bloomberg)

Industry

Facebook created a chatbot to help employees navigate difficult conversations over the holidays. The “Liam Bot” teaches them what to say if someone wants to know how the tech giant handles hate speech, for example. Sheera Frenkel and Mike Isaac from The New York Times explain why this might be necessary:

Facebook’s reputation has been shredded by a string of scandals — including how the site spreads disinformation and can be used to meddle in elections — in recent years. In October, Mr. Zuckerberg was grilled by lawmakers for hours over everything from political advertising to work-force diversity.

For Facebook employees, that has sometimes led to questions from family and friends about why they would work for the Silicon Valley company. This year, Facebook fell to seventh place from the top spot when people were asked where they most wanted to work, according to a survey by Glassdoor, the employee reviews site.

Facebook announced the Liam Bot in a message to employees, the company said. In past years, Facebook provided employees with guidance for the holiday season by sharing news releases in internal groups, or directly with those who asked for advice. The company said it wanted to create a more efficient way to answer employee questions this year.

Google Photos added a new feature for fast messaging. With this release, Google has satisfied its legal requirement to release a new messaging product at random at least once a year. (Nick Statt / The Verge)

As Facebook expands into commerce, payments, and hardware, it’s still going to largely rely on ads as the cornerstone of its business. Other companies are pushing to diversify their businesses with subscriptions and licensing. (Sara Fischer / Axios)

Twitter is updating its global privacy policy to give users more information about what data is sent to advertisers. It’s also launching a site to share how it protects user data. (Elizabeth Culliford / Reuters)

A new YouTube policy will allow creators who produce gaming content to upload videos that contain simulated violence without worrying about being automatically hit by age-restriction gates. The new policy doesn’t apply to advertisement guidelines — if a video is considered too violent for marketers, it still runs the risk of being demonetized. (Julia Alexander / The Verge)

In the wake of recent reporting regarding how registered sex offenders use dating apps like Tinder, some people are suggesting these apps start doing background checks on users. That could change the culture of online dating, however, by limiting how freely users are willing to talk about their sexual preferences. (Ashley Carman / The Verge)

TikTok swiped one of Instagram’s senior European executives, Trevor Johnson, to head up the company’s UK and EMEA operations. The video-sharing platform has been on an aggressive hiring spree in the US and Europe. (Omar Oakes / Campaign)

Inside Twitch’s wildest talk show, a livestreamed reality TV series with 13 of the platforms more controversial personalities. (Cecilia D’Anastasio / Kotaku)

Investors and founders are starting to explore a new generation of social products that leverage the physical world, focus on content moderation and truth, or invent new content formats. (Sam Lessin / The Information)

And finally...

Standing ovation to the (anonymous, I think?) class clown who built a fake Liam bot for our enjoyment, simulating the chatbot Facebook employees are using to talk with family members over the holidays:

Aunt: What are you planning to do to lose the baby weight?

Robot: We’re committed to protecting people’s privacy.

It’s spectacular.

Talk to us

Send us tips, comments, questions, and your Larry Page / Watchmen fan fiction: casey@theverge.com and zoe@theverge.com.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMigAFodHRwczovL3d3dy50aGV2ZXJnZS5jb20vaW50ZXJmYWNlLzIwMTkvMTIvNC8yMDk5MzYzMy9sYXJyeS1wYWdlLXNlcmdleS1icmluLXF1aXQtZ29vZ2xlLWRyLW1hbmhhdHRhbi13YXRjaG1lbi1zdHJhaW5lZC1tZXRhcGhvctIBjQFodHRwczovL3d3dy50aGV2ZXJnZS5jb20vcGxhdGZvcm0vYW1wL2ludGVyZmFjZS8yMDE5LzEyLzQvMjA5OTM2MzMvbGFycnktcGFnZS1zZXJnZXktYnJpbi1xdWl0LWdvb2dsZS1kci1tYW5oYXR0YW4td2F0Y2htZW4tc3RyYWluZWQtbWV0YXBob3I?oc=5

2019-12-04 11:00:00Z
52780457571104

Read the email Sundar Pichai sent Google employees after founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page announced they were stepping down - Business Insider

Sundar PichaiSundar Pichai is now CEO of both Google and its parent company Alphabet.REUTERS/Brandon Wade/File Photo

  • Google cofounders Larry Page and Sergey Brin announced Tuesday they were stepping down from Google's parent company Alphabet.
  • Google CEO Sundar Pichai will now become CEO of both Google and Alphabet.
  • Pichai sent an email to employees on Tuesday outlining how his role will (and won't) change.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Tuesday marked the end of an era for Silicon Valley.

Larry Page and Sergey Brin, who founded Google in a garage in 1998, announced they were stepping down from Google's parent company Alphabet.

Their successor is Sundar Pichai, Google's CEO of four years. Pichai will be retain his role as CEO of Google as well as becoming CEO of Alphabet.

Pichai circulated an email to employees after Page and Brin put up a blog post announcing their departure on Tuesday, outlining what the change would mean for the company. 

In the email Pichai says that Google is a company of "continuous evolution," but that his accession won't affect Alphabet's structure or the day-to-day work of Googlers.

Here is the email in full:

Hi everyone,

When I was visiting Googlers in Tokyo a few weeks ago I talked about how Google has changed over the years. In fact, in my 15+ years with Google, the only constant I've seen is change. This process of continuous evolution — which the founders often refer to as "uncomfortably exciting" – is part of who we are. That statement will feel particularly true today as you read the news Larry and Sergey have just posted to our blog.

The key message Larry and Sergey shared is this:

While it has been a tremendous privilege to be deeply involved in the day-to-day management of the company for so long, we believe it's time to assume the role of proud parents — offering advice and love, but not daily nagging!

With Alphabet now well-established, and Google and the Other Bets operating effectively as independent companies, it's the natural time to simplify our management structure. We've never been ones to hold on to management roles when we think there's a better way to run the company. And Alphabet and Google no longer need two CEOs and a President. Going forward, Sundar will be the CEO of both Google and Alphabet. He will be the executive responsible and accountable for leading Google, and managing Alphabet's investment in our portfolio of Other Bets. We are deeply committed to Google and Alphabet for the long term, and will remain actively involved as Board members, shareholders and co-founders. In addition, we plan to continue talking with Sundar regularly, especially on topics we're passionate about!

I first met Larry and Sergey back in 2004 and have been benefiting from their guidance and insights ever since. The good news is I'll continue to work with them — although in different roles for them and me. They'll still be around to advise as board members and co-founders.

I want to be clear that this transition won't affect the Alphabet structure or the work we do day to day. I will continue to be very focused on Google and the deep work we're doing to push the boundaries of computing and build a more helpful Google for everyone. At the same time, I'm excited about Alphabet and its long term focus on tackling big challenges through technology.

The founders have given all of us an incredible chance to have an impact on the world. Thanks to them, we have a timeless mission, enduring values, and a culture of collaboration and exploration that makes it exciting to come to work every day. It's a strong foundation on which we will continue to build. Can't wait to see where we go next and look forward to continuing the journey with all of you.

— Sundar

Although Pichai emphasises that power in the two companies will be consolidated under him, it's important to note that since Page and Brin control over half of Google's shares, they will still have voting control over the company. In their goodbye blog post the pair said they would remain "actively involved" board members and shareholders.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiamh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJ1c2luZXNzaW5zaWRlci5jb20vcmVhZC1lbWFpbC1zdW5kYXItcGljaGFpLWdvb2dsZS1lbXBsb3llZXMtY29mb3VuZGVycy1zdGVwcGluZy1kb3duLTIwMTktMTLSAWpodHRwczovL2FtcC5idXNpbmVzc2luc2lkZXIuY29tL3JlYWQtZW1haWwtc3VuZGFyLXBpY2hhaS1nb29nbGUtZW1wbG95ZWVzLWNvZm91bmRlcnMtc3RlcHBpbmctZG93bi0yMDE5LTEy?oc=5

2019-12-04 10:04:11Z
52780457571104