[HN Gopher] Germany to ban Huawei from future 6G network
___________________________________________________________________
Germany to ban Huawei from future 6G network
Author : teleforce
Score : 164 points
Date : 2025-11-14 17:19 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bloomberg.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bloomberg.com)
| jusonce56789 wrote:
| Well, people will buy Huawei routers at home anyway.
| wnevets wrote:
| Is that commonplace in Germany?
| mschuster91 wrote:
| Sadly yes, cheap crap tends to be Huawei. Everyone with a
| modicum of technical understanding goes for a Fritzbox
| though.
| looofooo0 wrote:
| I do Openwrt on my HP
| hopelite wrote:
| I'm not familiar with the Huawei matter because it's
| similar not something I have to concern myself with, but
| can you point to something specific or a place where I
| could get some facts on why Huawei is justifiably frowned
| upon?
|
| I have never seen anything but the various broad claims in
| the news and by politicians that seem to always just kind
| of come down to "China bad" as evidence. Maybe I just
| didn't care enough to notice, but I would have thought that
| if there was something real to how Huawei hardware will
| make the sky fall, the powers that be would have surely
| made that case with clear and irrefutable proof.
|
| Thanks for providing anything you might be able to point me
| towards that goes beyond "China bad", regardless of how
| anyone feels about China.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > I'm not familiar with the Huawei matter because it's
| similar not something I have to concern myself with, but
| can you point to something specific or a place where I
| could get some facts on why Huawei is justifiably frowned
| upon?
|
| Try to use their routers as someone with needs greater
| than "get into the internet". Their UI is horribly slow
| and clunky, you'll need to reboot them every few months
| because something hangs itself and about every year or
| two they manage to get 0wned by a wormable exploit. On
| top of that, analyses have shown their firmware to be
| utterly rancid [1], although I do admit that this
| analysis is six years old.
|
| > Maybe I just didn't care enough to notice, but I would
| have thought that if there was something real to how
| Huawei hardware will make the sky fall, the powers that
| be would have surely made that case with clear and
| irrefutable proof.
|
| The thing Western politicians are afraid of is running
| into another scenario like in the early days of the
| Russian invasion of Ukraine, where Viasat was hacked by
| the Russians leading to serious outages [2], or that the
| equipment - particularly anything with radios attached -
| can be "remote bricked" similar to how Israel detonated
| Hezbollah's pagers. It's bad enough we can't be sure that
| _our own_ equipment is reasonably secure from cyber
| attacks, but Huawei is a complete blackbox. We need to
| prepare for a war scenario with China, either directly
| (the worst case), but at the very least as a side effect
| of an invasion of Taiwan. In either case I expect the CCP
| to behave like Mossad, cripple us piece by piece.
|
| Even if the CCP never decides to invade Taiwan, it still
| makes sense to refuse their companies entry into our
| markets as long as our companies aren't welcome in
| theirs. I am a big friend of reciprocity and China hasn't
| given us much.
|
| On top of that, Huawei was under fire for alleged
| sanctions violations and IP theft [3].
|
| [1] https://www.securityweek.com/many-potential-
| backdoors-found-...
|
| [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viasat_hack
|
| [3] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/13/hu
| awei-ne...
| heinternets wrote:
| Look at the Wikipedia article "criticism of Huawei" for a
| massive list of IP theft, espionage, backdoors and more,
| including references.
| MangoToupe wrote:
| None of this really backs up the idea of "cheap crap",
| though, or really concerns me as a consumer. Hell, if
| anything "IP theft" sounds like "competitive product" to
| my ear. May we all live to see an explosion of IP
| "theft".
| vasac wrote:
| They even manage to steal IP before the original inventor
| actually invents it. Imagine that.
| iso1631 wrote:
| I've only encountered a fritzbox in Germany, it's amazing
| how ubiquitous they are in Germany, yet so unknown
| elsewhere in Europe let alone elsewhere.
| pelasaco wrote:
| TBH the solar stack from Huawei, Slim modular batteries and
| Inverter are pretty solid.
| https://solar.huawei.com/en/products/luna2000-5-10-15-s0/
| juliusceasar wrote:
| Better late than never.
|
| China has so many anti-Foreigner laws for doing business in
| China.
|
| West has made China rich and powerful in exchange for cheap
| labour.
| NoiseBert69 wrote:
| I'd more say: they made clear rules if you want to play
| business in China.
|
| Europe never set any boundaries. Honestly our fault.
| lazyeye wrote:
| Our leaders in the West have been very naive. Also the
| Chinese "elite capture" program has been very effective.
| croes wrote:
| You mean old we-don't-care-bout-human-and-environmental-
| rights trick?
|
| Let's face it, nobody would care if China just would be a
| subordinate receiver of orders.
|
| As soon they became a competitor there was a problem
| jajuuka wrote:
| And that is the core contention for the anti-China
| rhetoric. That they are a competitor. There are a billion
| and one reasons people say they don't like China, but the
| core issue is competition.
| dragonelite wrote:
| China was suppose to become a giant sweatshop which would
| be allowed to gain subsistence wealth. Just enough to
| produce and consume western product but not wealthy
| enough to ever outgrow their station in the world.
| like_any_other wrote:
| > As soon they became a competitor there was a problem
|
| Was there? It seems to me trade and offshoring continued
| even after they became a competitor. And then continued
| after they strong-armed Western corporations to invest in
| China [1], destroyed Western corporations through
| espionage [2,3], or through subsidy-enabled dumping
| prices and preferential treatment [4,4.1], after they
| extracted groveling apologies from Western firms [5], and
| after they started operating literal police stations on
| Western soil [6], while turning Western countries into
| subordinate receivers of orders [7,8].
|
| I guess you were hoping your framing would guilt people
| into not seeing the threat?
|
| [1] _Apple CEO Tim Cook "secretly" signed an agreement
| worth more than $275 billion with Chinese officials,
| promising that Apple would help to develop China's
| economy and technological capabilities_ -
| https://www.macrumors.com/2021/12/07/apple-ceo-tim-cook-
| secr...
|
| [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33758673
|
| [3] https://globalnews.ca/news/7275588/inside-the-
| chinese-milita...
|
| [4] https://www.dw.com/en/from-solar-to-evs-how-china-is-
| overpro...
|
| [4.1] _EU: Anti-dumping probe into China solar panels_ -
| https://apnews.com/general-
| news-e16007adf4bd468d9acf849734d2...
|
| [5] _Mercedes-Benz apologizes to Chinese for quoting
| Dalai Lama_ - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-
| mercedes-benz-china-gaffe...
|
| [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_police_overseas
| _servic...
|
| [7] _FIPA agreement with China: What 's really in it for
| Canada?_ - https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/fipa-agreement-
| with-china-wha...
|
| [8] _Posters depicting Hong Kong protests removed by
| Massey University within 12 hours_ -
| https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/116723925/posters-
| depicting...
| tharne wrote:
| The only rule the Chinese play by is, "It's only immoral if
| you get caught".
| coliveira wrote:
| I thought this law was invented by American business.
| earthnail wrote:
| The Germans invented that too. That's why the label Made
| In Germany exists:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Made_in_Germany
| amelius wrote:
| American business has this law:
|
| "if your business practices are not immoral, then you're
| not doing it right!"
| ta12653421 wrote:
| Well, as European, i have to clearly state - unfortunately -
| this is only because of what happened in the 20th century:
| WWII. This "event" changed somehow the psychology, not
| allowing the EU to "stand up straight with our shoulders
| back".
|
| Unfortunately. With around 500m customers, we could be
| powerful. But we arent: Stumbling upon our own feeds.
| earthnail wrote:
| The countries that comprise the EU had been among the
| biggest warmongers for centuries. The EU is the most
| successful peace project the continent has ever seen. And
| the reason for that is that every country refrained from
| trying to be a superpower on the continent.
|
| The European mentality has real, tangible upsides for its
| continent. Unfortunately, it doesn't work well in a larger
| world where other actors don't share the same experience
| and values.
|
| Just wanted to put that into perspective.
| juliusceasar wrote:
| Now EU is making clear rules against China. EU should apply
| exactly the same laws against Chinese like Chinese do against
| foreigners.
|
| China shouldn't complain, especially don't bitch about
| racism.
| echelon wrote:
| > especially don't bitch about racism.
|
| The "most racist" places are typically the most diverse and
| most multicultural. They have more exposed tissue than
| places where minorities make up single digit percentage
| points, so you see injustices more often in these places.
| And it follows that it gets reported on at volume.
|
| By that same coin, these places also have more friendly
| interactions by volume than places without diverse racial
| makeups. You just don't see that reported because it's not
| news.
|
| America, "racist", simply has a very diverse population.
|
| The American South, "racist against Black people", simply
| has the nation's largest population of Black people almost
| to the point the racial makeup is bimodal.
|
| Texas, "racist against Latinos", - same thing.
|
| You see the bad apples, but you don't see the overwhelming
| degree to which society works with people together in a
| melting pot.
|
| I grew up in the South, where every second person is Black.
| I fly to SF where there are barely any Black people at all
| and have dinner conversations with people calling my region
| racist. Sometimes the people saying these things grew up in
| all-white cities in New England. I have to laugh inside.
| izacus wrote:
| That's the same emotional dumb thought process that is
| sending US economy into tailspin with traiffs.
| like_any_other wrote:
| > they made clear rules if you want to play business in
| China.
|
| Not really:
|
| https://www.hudson.org/technology/china-ignores-rule-of-
| law-...
|
| _Apple CEO Tim Cook "secretly" signed an agreement worth
| more than $275 billion with Chinese officials, promising that
| Apple would help to develop China's economy and technological
| capabilities_ - https://www.macrumors.com/2021/12/07/apple-
| ceo-tim-cook-secr...
| anonporridge wrote:
| The rise of China has done a lot to destroy the neoliberal,
| globalist dream.
|
| Letting them cheat the globalist system (e.g. violating IP
| laws, human rights violations, Uyghur/Tibetan genocide) may
| have been fine when they were desperately poor, but there was
| always an implicit assumption that they would eventually start
| playing by the rules and culturally liberalize. But they're
| not. How can we hold onto ideals like "diversity is our
| strength" and open borders are good when China is kicking ass
| and threatening the balance of power as an insular ethnostate
| with one of the lowest rates of immigrants on the planet?
|
| And now they're growing to a power level that threatens to
| rival the US and its authority to police this global system
| we've created. That isn't stable, and the west would be insane
| to not shut China out and take a step back from our open,
| globalist ideals until we sort out this geopolitical game of
| thrones.
| jquery wrote:
| No, just no. I get where you're coming from, but I disagree
| in the strongest terms that copying China is the way forward.
| Closed, centralized models can scale quickly, as China did,
| but open models generate more frontier innovation and
| resilience. Iirc, nearly half of our unicorns have immigrant
| founders.
|
| Sure, let's harden IP and other trade laws, and punish China
| for violations (start treating them as an adult, a nation
| peer, instead of a rowdy child). But giving up our strategic
| advantage because China was able to semi-copy-us without
| having that advantage would be a huge mistake imo. I'm not
| saying America doesn't need major changes, but I don't think
| the way forward is to close our borders to global talent.
| Instead, let's take advantage of our superpower status to
| implement UHC and UBI, to make our nation even more
| attractive to talented immigrants.
| ta12653421 wrote:
| this is what most WEIRD people do not understand: (Western-
| Educated-Industrial-Rich-Democratic) - by today it looks
| like that the Chinese system may proof to be more
| "performant" on most/several (all?) levels. Its hard to
| accept for libertarian minds, i guess.
|
| Once here on HN someone wrote like: "democratic systems
| seems to be too slow to adapt in world changing at our
| current speed".
|
| China did some vey wise decisions from their perspective;
| think about this joint-venture thingy that foreign
| companies need to have a JV partner which always holds at
| least 50.1% - very clever! Why did no western state do
| this? Its one of the by far smartest decision that you
| could do.
| filloooo wrote:
| This JV obssession is weird, China basically admitted
| that they can never compete on ICE cars and bet on EVs
| instead, either this JV model doesn't actually work or
| what was transferred do not have much value.
|
| Now people claim they stole their IPs through JVs and
| that's why they are good at making EVs, this theory
| doesn't add up.
|
| Also, what China offered is a vast untapped market, no
| one forced these companies to go to China to set up JVs
| and start picking up gold down the street, this was way
| before WTO and China was not at all obligated to open
| it's market, let alone for free.
|
| Now ask one question, what the EU has to offer to "force"
| China to set up JVs? Guaranteed billion dollars profit?
|
| EU car market is crowded and full of incumbents, Chinese
| cars represent a low single digit market share despite
| the weekly "China is taking over the EU car market" news
| article.
| ta12653421 wrote:
| As said: They made clever decissions while the greedy
| western company went into their trap :-)
| CMay wrote:
| China bet on EVs because of national security. China has
| less reliable access to oil than many other countries and
| the US can choke off delivery of oil to China through
| bottlenecks if it comes to war. Investing in solar, wind
| and nuclear makes sense in their predicament. "Green
| energy" and "saving the planet" are secondary and mostly
| marketing by comparison.
|
| Countries hitting their industrialization stride have a
| bloom of real world applicable talent that they can
| direct to these things in a way that is a little harder
| for others. Especially when you have a huge population.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| It isn't just the US, Russia has oil and shares a land
| border with China. However, Russia isn't always friendly
| with China, nor is the middle east, and anyways, it just
| seems like a headache to deal with them + the petro
| dollar when they have plenty of energy to tap at home.
|
| Air pollution was also a huge problem, aside from
| national security. China's empahsis on STEM and the fact
| that they've been a huge source of
| engineering/science/tech talent meant China could just
| tap its own human resources rather than making them go
| abroad for decent jobs. The fact that they also know how
| to build things and have set up all the infra for that is
| just another bonus.
|
| China is willing to play ball in less developed
| countries, and the deals they setup is not just Chinese
| companies coming in and dominating the market, they are
| also partnering with and trying to raise local companies
| as well. That won't work in Europe or the US, at least
| for now.
| Zigurd wrote:
| Remember 10 foot tall Ivan? Apart from eugenics
| experiments on the basketball court, neither are the
| Chinese. In light of gross over-spending on showcase
| infrastructure projects, and overbuilding housing where
| people don't want to live, over-praising the CCP's system
| for training and promoting leaders is not going to make
| assessments of China more accurate.
| jquery wrote:
| I agree that our system (America's, specifically) is too
| slow, but it's not inherent to democracy, it's the fact
| we only have elections every few years, because these
| rules were written in the 1700s when holding an election
| / voting in an election was difficult. No snap elections
| when the government is about to shut down (would've
| prevented all the nonsense of the last month and a half).
|
| This isn't cope. China has virtually no cultural exports
| of note compared to its size, except some gacha games
| (that are still mainly voiced in Japanese, which does
| have cultural exports). Every time I visit, I have to
| accept that my internet is going to be ridiculously
| unreliable and throttled and flaky.
|
| I'm not saying China is "wrong", but it's not the obvious
| winner to me. Nor is it to my Chinese-born spouse who
| moved here for the greater opportunities and freedom.
| ta12653421 wrote:
| >>China has virtually no cultural exports of note
| compared to its size,
|
| ++1
| coliveira wrote:
| So this shows how much the West considers liberalism and open
| markets to be its "values" when they throw that completely
| away when they're economically threatened. This tells me that
| in hardship is when people show their true colors. The money
| is the true "value", everything else is just a side show.
| anonporridge wrote:
| No, it's just game theory.
|
| When you're playing prisoner's dilemma games, and your co-
| player is consistently defecting, you can only play
| cooperate for so long. Tit for tat is the only way you
| don't get majorly screwed by the defector over time.
| dragonelite wrote:
| Its quiet easy to understand, you can be liberal and free
| so long as wealth keeps flowing into your part of the
| world. What are you going to do make fun of becoming more
| wealthier.
|
| The liberalism and freedom stops once too much money flows
| out of your part of the world, hence companies like
| palantir popping up like mushrooms. No one likes to be made
| fun of when they are in a declining trajectory.
| croes wrote:
| > Letting them cheat the globalist system
|
| They didn't cheat, we did.
|
| China didn't force the west to make them their workbench.
|
| China isn't the first authoritarian country the western
| industry loved as workforce.
|
| No human wasn't a negative, it was one of the main selling
| points.
| roenxi wrote:
| But the IP laws are visibly stupid, their role in the system
| is prevent success stories like China where some plucky
| upstart vaults to the forefront of the industrial world and
| drags a billion people out of poverty. The response to China
| achieving such success by ignoring IP laws should be to
| recognise the laws have been disasters and then to release
| the limits worst of the limits they impose on Western
| innovators.
|
| A huge part of the software industry is there because of
| explicit GPL-style agreements defang the intent of IP laws
| while working inside the legal requirements they impose. The
| west should allow good ideas to be deployed in its own
| industrial processes.
| avipars wrote:
| https://archive.li/18QJs
| daneel_w wrote:
| Good. Don't forget their incredibly affordable and attractive
| smartphones and the fact that they have almost completely
| captured the market for cellular transceiver chips used in USB
| mobile modems, both of which are excellent products for espionage
| and weaponization just like their cellular network equipment.
| immibis wrote:
| If secure phones were legal, we'd be treating the modem chip as
| part of the hostile network - the application processor would
| encrypt all data before sending it.
| RobotToaster wrote:
| And use American Cisco equipment with definitely no NSA backdoors
| instead?
| RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote:
| That is called being on the other side of an airtight hatch
| (h/t Raymond Chen)
|
| The US has troops, tanks, aircraft, even nuclear weapons
| stationed in German.
|
| Sovereignty vis-a-vis the United States is not something on the
| table.
| daneel_w wrote:
| It's an east vs west thing.
| qwertox wrote:
| At the current rate the US will become an "even further
| east".
| jabron wrote:
| What does this even mean?
| exasperaited wrote:
| What it means is that in the future Europe will have to
| consider a Trumpist USA to be like a 21st Century version
| of a totalitarian Eastern Bloc or Soviet country:
| Orbanism, absurd projectionism, dangerous allies, the
| state demanding a share of businesses and directing sales
| and mergers, openly describing the EU (and now the UK) as
| not friends or even as enemies, trumped up prosecutions
| of political enemies, assuming that foreign surveillance
| is built into its products, etc.
|
| Some of these things are already here.
| dragonelite wrote:
| More like west vs rest of the world. Its cold war round 2 but
| this time its the west that is starting to hide behind a
| iron/cyber wall.
| neko_ranger wrote:
| lmao China is already in a cyber wall. What's wrong with
| building defenses if your opponent already has? What have
| they built the defenses for?
| ojl wrote:
| I guess they will use Ericsson and Nokia equipment instead.
| izacus wrote:
| More expensive US Cisco equipment, at least Trump will be happy
| for it.
| culi wrote:
| The article states that they're pushing for independence from
| American tech as well
| jiehong wrote:
| Which company will design and make 6G telco hardware in Germany?
|
| I guess it will be 3/4/5G for a while, until they can someday
| cover the country just barely, and then 6G a decade and half
| later than everyone else (or is it by giving up sovereignty by
| buying US stuff instead?)
|
| Sorry for being hopeless, but Germany has been very good at
| proving its inability to fix telco issues (or its train
| issues...).
| sabjut wrote:
| Both Nokia (Finland) and Ericsson (Sweden) are great european
| alternatives. There is no need to reinvent the wheel in every
| EU country.
| PeterStuer wrote:
| Both Nokia and Ericsson have substantial Blackrock and
| Vanguard investment.
| nemomarx wrote:
| blackrock and vanguard do index funds, yeah? They have
| substantial investments in everything on the market that's
| doing well enough to get on indexes. I don't see how you
| can avoid that?
| coliveira wrote:
| Of course, that's the whole plan. The thing about index
| funds people don't see is they're giving away the voting
| rights to institutions controlled by who knows...
| culi wrote:
| Both Nokia and Ericson are owned over 10% by
| Blackrock+Vanguard
| filloooo wrote:
| This is retaliation for China recently phasing out European
| gears, which should be expected after Europe already banned
| Chinese gears in effect.
|
| China for years has been allocating a share of the market to
| European gears, considering their domestic offerings are much
| cheaper, this was basically a reciprocal gesture, but it's not
| needed now for neither side.
|
| Germany has been reluctant to completely remove its Huawei
| gears, but now that German cars are losing ground in China,
| they probably felt it's time to make the move.
| tonetegeatinst wrote:
| I know some open 5G hardware project exists as I read about it
| about a month ago.
|
| However I wonder if that will remain true with 6G, or if it will
| even be affordable.
| mannanj wrote:
| Why 6g? who asked for it? I am content with 4g, 5g was a push as
| it was.
| daneel_w wrote:
| You and I are content with it, but these standards were never
| really about our individual and immediate experiences. It's
| about concurrent capacity for the growing grid as a whole.
| Krasnol wrote:
| The grid must grow!
| kmeisthax wrote:
| It's Bieber 6G Fever!
| Zigurd wrote:
| Unless you live in an urban environment where millimeter wave
| is competently deployed, you should curb your contentment with
| 5G. 6G sounds like a distraction from the lack of full 5G
| capabilities in most places.
| PeterStuer wrote:
| They are not wrong, but will they also ban Cisco in their
| "Sovereignty Push"?
| anonporridge wrote:
| Why should they?
|
| The United States honors international IP law and doesn't cheat
| its way into threatening domestic production of other countries
| like China does.
| tharne wrote:
| > Why should they?
|
| Because bashing all things American while ignoring the threat
| posed by China is part of Europe's cultural DNA.
| anonporridge wrote:
| Ditto Russia.
| fleischhauf wrote:
| laughs in unhinged head of state that imposes arbitrary
| tarrifs on half of the world and mistakes dementia test for
| IQ test, says it's difficult
| hiimkeks wrote:
| https://archive.is/tDC0W
|
| https://archive.is/IQyBG
|
| and this was before the US elected an overt fascist
| coliveira wrote:
| > doesn't cheat its way into threatening domestic production
| of other countries
|
| Can you still say this with a straight face with everything
| that is coming from Washington?
| steve1977 wrote:
| Mentioning Cisco the context of honoring IP is a bit ironic:
| http://pdp10.nocrew.org/docs/cisco.html
| input_sh wrote:
| > The United States honors international IP law
|
| May I introduce you to a somewhat recent concept people like
| to call AI.
| thewebguyd wrote:
| Cisco complied with the NSA PRISM program (Snowden leaks) and
| were putting hardware backdoors in their hardware on request
| from the NSA, for hardware that was destined for overseas.
|
| Sounds pretty untrustworthy to me.
| wil421 wrote:
| So did the EU intelligence agencies and governments. You
| just route traffic through your neighbor so they spy for
| you and you do the same for them.
| kataklasm wrote:
| Ah yes, the country that has perfected industrial
| espionage...
| https://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/960011/trans-
| atlant...
| esbranson wrote:
| No. In the 2019 EU 5G Risk Assessment and the 2020 5G Toolbox,
| EU regulators gave three reasons why no US vendors triggered
| the "high-risk supplier" designation: US vendors weren't
| building the 5G core in Europe; EU regulators concluded that US
| law does allow compelled cooperation but accompanied by
| independent courts, adversarial process, and statutory limits;
| and no European regulator found technical-assurance failures in
| US vendors comparable to Huawei's.
|
| If you don't like what the EU Commission is doing, you can vote
| them out. (Just kidding, no you can't.)
| 9cb14c1ec0 wrote:
| Is 6G even a thing? From either a bandwidth demand perspective or
| a financial perspective? Every US wireless service just about
| bankrupted themselves rolling out 5G.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Bandwidth demand is very much there...
|
| My connection is 1.5 Gbits at 3am, but at peak time (7pm) I'm
| lucky to get 10 Mbits.
|
| My network needs more capacity, and if 6G can offer it cheaper
| than building 5x more 5G masts, that's the route they'll have
| to take.
| 9cb14c1ec0 wrote:
| I guess you must live in a much more heavily populated
| environment than I do. For myself, I'm still trying to figure
| out remote 5G IOT connectivity that doesn't require $1k in
| hardware. Non-consumer-grade 5G hardware is incredibly
| expensive still, which is why we are still deploying new 4G
| stuff.
| throw0101c wrote:
| > _Is 6G even a thing?_
|
| Currently being researched:
|
| > _6G aims to achieve higher data rates, lower latency, and
| greater energy efficiency than 5G.[8] Planned advances include
| new air interface designs, improved coding and modulation, and
| reconfigurable intelligent surfaces.[9] Research also explores
| integration with satellite, Wi-Fi, and non-terrestrial
| networks, as well as distributed edge computing for AR, VR, and
| AI applications.[10]_
|
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6G
| Zigurd wrote:
| 5G is a thing (5Ge excepted). 6G is aspirational and
| recycling use cases that go all the way back to 3G, like
| telesurgery. It's going to stay aspirational at least until
| 5G millimeter wave really works and can be widely deployed.
|
| "According to the NGMN Alliance, 6G development should focus
| on demonstrable user needs and avoid unnecessary replacement
| of existing 5G radio access network equipment."
| Incipient wrote:
| I don't get why Huawei gets specific hate? Shouldn't this equally
| apply to all Chinese vendors? I wouldn't expect any are less
| susceptible to government control?
| zweifuss wrote:
| ZTE is also under scrutiny. The reason it's only Huawei and ZTE
| is that other Chinese providers are so insignificant that the
| telecoms will likely be able to replace the infrastructure
| themselves with spares or consolidation. However, in an
| emergency, the government would have to foot the bill for
| replacing Huawei/ZTE systems quickly, as the telecoms couldn't
| finance this and lack of capacity would mean very high prices.
| esbranson wrote:
| Huawei simply accumulated a much more court-defensible paper
| trail--dominant presence, documented code issues, clearer
| evidence of state leverage, and heavier export-control
| exposure.
| ge96 wrote:
| Nortel
| culi wrote:
| Isn't the same true for American tech companies?
| applied_heat wrote:
| Huawei is often blamed for stealing information from Nortel
| that led to Nortel's bankruptcy, both information about deals
| being made that let Huawei undercut them and technical product
| details that allowed Huawei to more easily be a substitute for
| Nortel products
| kwanbix wrote:
| Nice, in 2025, the world is a place where China can not be
| trusted, Russia can not be trusted, USA can not be trusted,
| Europe can not be trusted, etc.
|
| We are very far from the "imagine all the people, living live in
| peace". I wonder why that is...
| deepsun wrote:
| Nice how you put them all on one row.
|
| How Isaac Asimov said in "Relativity of wrong":
|
| "When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When
| people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if
| you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong
| as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than
| both of them put together".
| peterlk wrote:
| I'm working my way through "The End of the World is Just the
| Beginning", and the main thesis is that everyone is preparing
| for demographic collapse. Global populations are declining
| almost everywhere, and this breaks the current global order.
| For example, what does the Chinese economy look like when all
| the people subject to the one child policy retire? What are the
| knock on effects of labor becoming more expensive almost
| everywhere? Can immigration solve this problem? What about the
| cultural friction of mass immigration? What happens to the
| places that everyone emigrates from?
|
| The book basically argues that a significant amount of the
| world is headed for destabilization, and a destabilized world
| involves a lot less trust.
|
| Side note: personally, I find the writing style and general
| tone to be hyperbolic, but some of the analysis is interesting.
| ferguess_k wrote:
| I think we are already seeing this happening as it is not
| rocket science. US is not willing to be the world police
| anymore, because it is more and more expensive and some of
| the elites and many ordinary people feel that they are not
| gaining much as return.
|
| So this left and is going to leave a lot of power gaps around
| the globes, and regional wars are picking up paces.
|
| China is not particularly happy about this, because it is not
| ready and perhaps don't even want to be the next world
| police. US has always wanted China to share the
| responsibility but China is hesitant, which is
| understandable. Plus most of the people in China do not want
| a destabilized world, for now.
|
| What I'd expect that China will gradually lose steam
| (actually people on HN already observed since like 10 years
| ago) when the people born in the 1970s/1980s retire. The
| officials who are resistant to the idea of expansion (because
| it damages their power base) are going to retire then. I'd
| expect the world to be a LOT hotter then. So that's about
| 2030-2040 and might come a bit earlier as the other players
| are already moving the pieces(e.g. Russia).
|
| Not sure how to prepare my family through that time, though.
| I mean, it's just my guess, so my wife just rolls up her eye
| and wants to buy more houses/stocks because "houses/stocks
| always go up if you look at the chart". What I think is that
| the whole economical-geopolitico logic is going to change
| forever, and what is gone is gone for good. The next
| globalization is maybe 50 years away but we will never see
| it. From hindsight, I believe the 2008 financial crisis was
| the turning points. They managed to drag it for another 20
| years, which I send my kudos.
|
| Again, just my guess. I have always wronged in the
| pessimistic side so I hope I'm wrong this time again.
| fodmap wrote:
| On the other hand Spain is using Huawei servers for almost all of
| their sensitive data. I wonder how the UE, and NATO, will react
| to that, because they're using Huawei for Social Security data,
| wiretapping data (SITEL), or even Intelligence Services data.
|
| https://therecord.media/spain-awards-contracts-huawei-intell...
| coliveira wrote:
| And Spain will have 6G and all the niceties of telecom
| technology, while Germany will be stuck forever on 5G.
| amaccuish wrote:
| I get why you do so, but the European Union is always shortened
| to EU, not UE.
|
| It would be as if I wrote a sentence, "The EWG was created by
| the treaty of Rome in 1957".
|
| What is EWG? Oh yes its the German abbreviation for the EEC.
| But we're writing in English?
| tchalla wrote:
| > "We'll discuss with industry what we can do, not only to make
| ourselves independent from China, but also for example
| independent from the USA, independent from the big tech
| companies," Merz said.
|
| Good to know it's not just China.
|
| > Merz ruled out fully decoupling from China, which is Germany's
| second-biggest trading partner. "We can't do that," he said.
| "China can't do that, but we can do it even less."
|
| And even better to know that the move is practical and
| understands who has the upper hand.
| V__ wrote:
| At the same time they are exploring the use of Palantir and
| want to use more of Microsofts 365 cloud.
|
| This is all just talk. Either there are very real security
| concerns or someone lobbied heavily.
| qwertox wrote:
| This is the most incredible thing about it. As soon as
| Palantir has a foot in the the door of the authorities, only
| a disaster will be able to get them banned. And that disaster
| is way past the point of all the citizen's data getting
| collected and analyzed in real-time, because that's what our
| authorities want: full insights.
| coliveira wrote:
| > Good to know it's not just China.
|
| If you believe this I have a bridge to sell you. They're using
| this to hide the real reason for the move, which is to do
| Washington's bid, just like a good colony does.
| tchalla wrote:
| I won't be surprised if they do the Washington's bid. A few
| years ago, they wouldn't even consider it. By the time we all
| die, may be they will.
| MangoToupe wrote:
| So fun that the west is moving in a direction where we are
| subject to all the negatives of both capitalism (wealth
| consolidation) and socialism (lack of competition).
| iso1631 wrote:
| Unchecked capitalism inevitably leads to a lack of competition,
| it's just a matter of who gets the benefits.
|
| The west went wrong when it stopped checking capitalism
| outside1234 wrote:
| Wonder if this was one of the secret requirements Trump made to
| avoid more draconian tariffs
| rzerowan wrote:
| Whose sovereignity though? And to replace it with what? As almost
| all 6G kit builds on 5G kit which is at most 40% Huawei FRAND
| patented.So whatever the path HW gets paid.
|
| As an aside the whole OpenRAN debacle to replcae 5G kit seems to
| have peterd out after the initial hype. This move also ignores
| economies of scale - if the rest of the planet is on HW kit
| lowerig cost even with razor thin margins.The opps Nokia/Ericsson
| would either have to get massive subsidies to make financial
| sense or have a worse cost/benefit ratio.
|
| One thing that gets glossed over though , is that the end user
| speeds/stability arent the main driver for 5/6G advancement (even
| though thats where all the marketing hype went) of course mobile
| device connectivity is growing and most users interaction online
| is primarily mobile. The big draw use case is the industrial and
| automation applications, where HW has a signifiant lead - from
| autiomated ports that aut load/unload to automated 'dark
| factories' that run without human intervention.Thats where the
| 'real' application is. The other use case for end users most
| likely will be in the autonomus cars and humanoid robots once
| they take off to any significant degree.
|
| The only other way to make up the requisite volume from such an
| endeavor is one that Brussels was floating about a month ago. The
| Global Gateway funds to assist developing countries will come
| with ano HW clause.Might just be the final nail in the coffin in
| EU efforts to retain friends and influence with the rest of the
| planet.Whose main concern is living a modern life with the infra
| not requiring you mortgage your childrens future.
| paganel wrote:
| > The Global Gateway funds to assist developing countries will
| come with ano HW clause.
|
| So they only want to "save" the Planet and its (presumably
| poorer) people if said poorer people acquiesce with their
| imperialistic reflexes, tale as old as time when it comes to
| the West.
|
| But not sure why would they need the Global South's money for
| all of this? Aren't they, the magnificent West, big enough to
| shoulder almost any costs? Especially when it comes to
| "strategic" concerns. Or so they were saying.
| rzerowan wrote:
| The way most of these deals get structured especially when
| multicorps get involved is requiring the donor gov to
| guarantee the loan. Which gets routed to the recepient
| country, kickbacks get shaved off and re-routed back to the
| donor country. In this instance though my thinking is that
| for competeive pricing they would need volume , and
| prerequisite demand. This would be one way to generate that
| demand.In a way similar to the whole Tariff circus just more
| upfront.
| CMay wrote:
| You don't need a crazy fast connection for most of this
| automation stuff, because it has to be able to operate offline
| successfully to start with. Any dark factory should be running
| on its own wireless network anyway, not some cellular network.
| Who would do that? Even for a local wireless network, why would
| a Huawei router be any better?
|
| To me, this was never about 5G or 6G. This was always about CCP
| controlled network hardware getting installed across the globe
| taking advantage of a natural iterative next step in network
| improvement which would be fine if the CCP wasn't absolutely
| psycho and immoral, but they seem to be. I'm sure there are
| many well-meaning and smart people who work at Huawei, but
| unfortunately any advantage a Chinese company gets in a foreign
| market becomes potentially leveraged as CCP advantage and
| control.
|
| Many countries leverage their companies abroad if something is
| important enough, but few countries are as bold or blatant as
| China in this regard. Nobody is worried about most of these
| countries excessively abusing their influence abroad, because
| most care about their reputation. China is basically untrusted
| by all of its neighbors and doesn't seem to care about
| authentic reputation over manipulation. To them, "harmony" just
| seems like a way to misspell "control". Balance to them means
| nothing if they aren't the center of gravity.
|
| For as old and advanced as China has become, it discarded all
| of its slow wisdom to be wrong as fast as possible. Can a
| country like that really be trusted? No, it can't. There isn't
| any country on Earth that can be trusted 100%, but the CCP is
| just far below the threshold of even tolerable levels of trust.
|
| There is nothing 5G or 6G provides that is worth letting the
| CCP control your networks. Aside from just spying or hacking,
| imagine World War 3 comes around and the CCP just decides it's
| time to shut off all our networks? Trust is almost always more
| important than speed.
| throawayonthe wrote:
| ignoring the weird moralizing about china, i think the parent
| comment is indeed referring to factories etc running their
| own 5G networks, that is very much a thing; ie aws used to
| have a private 5g offering, there are some open source
| projects, more that i can't remember
| CMay wrote:
| That's fair, I just don't see 5G or 6G being make-or-break
| for any kinds of manufacturing. Do any examples exist where
| this is the case?
| rzerowan wrote:
| To steelman some of the points ypuve posted >You don't need a
| crazy fast connection for most of this automation stuff,
| because it has to be able to operate offline successfully to
| start with
|
| As i mentioned youre looking at it as a consumer, this is
| industrial systems.Its not about speed primarily but latency
| - costs of deployment and maintainance.Your COTS router is
| not being installed wher million dollar assembly lines are
| operating, and for any serious business concern low
| opex/capex are first and foremost as well as reproducibility
| for expansion. KUKA robot arms are not being connected to
| TPlink routers.Together with the nature of Just-In-Time
| manufacturing , instant data for maintainance and logistics
| is crucial. Ditto for the automated ports [1]
|
| >There is nothing 5G or 6G provides that is worth letting the
| CCP control your networks. Aside from just spying or hacking
|
| The two standards are currently accelerating both consumer
| and industrial changes worldwide.There are some networks in
| GlobalSouth countries whose speed/latencies will rival even
| those deployed in major US cities. Its a question of
| leveraging future infrstructure for productivity and
| improving living standards. As for espionage and hacking that
| was stillthere even with dialup modems and fax machines.
|
| Regarding countries using their leverage via multicorps
| abroad , you really should read up on the US CLOUD act,
| patriot act etc and cast a cursory glance at entities as
| benign sounding as Nestle(child slaves in W.Africa)
| Chiquita(Death Squads in S.America) PullMan Cigarettes (suing
| to block ati cigaratte ads in SE.Asia) ,not adding historical
| ones like Swiss CryptoAG. In short multicorps are immoral
| profit extracting entities and on the global stage that act
| sometimes directly with their parent county to further
| whatever agandas they have. Thus far no Chinese companies
| have been implicated in any such shenanigans - as im pretty
| sure if it had happened it would be published about in banner
| headlines 24/7/365.
|
| As it stands all the accusations are simply alllegations of a
| future scenario , which most people specify any sensible
| person should be able to mitigate with good security
| architecture and practices.
|
| [1]https://govinsider.asia/intl-en/article/how-
| huaweis-5g-solut...
| LtdJorge wrote:
| We could start treating Chinese patents with the same respect
| they treated the rest of the world's, maybe.
| dragonelite wrote:
| This summer i was traveling through Germany and god fucking dam
| their telecommunication infrastructure is just 3rd world tier, so
| freaking bad. Constant signal loss, 5g was a rare sight etc.
| 0xbadcafebee wrote:
| All this is because they're afraid $COUNTRY inserted malware in
| the chips, right? So industry can solve this. Make a device that
| has all the hardware for networks, but without the chip. Make a
| simple hardware standard for the chip interface. Publish the
| standard.
|
| Now any country can make a chip that plugs into the networking
| device. Just buy your own country's spyware-laden chip, plug it
| into the NID. Install your software in the NID, the same way
| you'd install Linux on an AMD vs Intel computer. Works for PCs;
| it can work for routers (they're all just computers). Choose open
| source or an expensive proproprietary OS. Choose open hardware or
| proprietary hardware. Let people assemble them from parts so they
| can choose their level of surveillance-avoidance.
|
| And you're done. No more banning entire manufacturers; just ban
| those specific kinds of chips, but buy the cheap chinese hardware
| sans-chips. Feels a lot more sustainable than global instability
| and trade wars over what is essentially just a lack of design.
|
| (I'm aware how specialized router hw/sw is, I worked for Cisco
| once upon a time. but it can all be abstracted. it's just not in
| the interest of corporate profits to do so; but at this point, i
| think ramping down the china-phobia and stabilizing trade is a
| bigger concern)
| hereme888 wrote:
| Amazing to read in a site full of devs and cybersecurity experts
| how willing they are to use Huawei's tech despite all the
| international theft and security issues, some exposed, and but
| most of it kept under wraps until investigations are complete.
|
| And some even shill the conspiracy that the NSA will install
| backdoors in US equipment... I would like to think it's Chinese
| agents at work, but most likely it's regular people.
|
| For this reason I'm glad politicians are taking the initiative,
| despite the population's awareness of what Huawei really is. And
| sry but I don't have time to "prove it with irrefutable evidence"
| as some may demand. Plz spend your own time researching the
| facts.
| corimaith wrote:
| I feel that the majority in this thread are acting less in
| Europe's interests than effectively saying "fuck you" to Germany
| here for acting against China's interests. Or perhaps they're
| reaching as quickly as possible to blame everything on USA. But
| that's the consequence of letting outsiders into the
| conversation, everything has really turned into a "water armies",
| as defined by the Chinese themselves.
|
| In any case, I do hope that outsiders in this thread realize this
| isn't indicative of what Westerners think, so as far much as what
| their enemies are thinking. Do you really think people like these
| who are so quick to mock Europe are really your friends?
| fidotron wrote:
| The fundamental problem with the newer Huawei equipment is it's
| the best stuff. Others just aren't competing properly at all.
|
| As the west detaches from China, for quite plausible security
| concerns, it's going to find it expensive on both ends: they will
| be paying more and getting less.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-11-14 23:00 UTC)