Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (160892)	8/4/2020 11:28:19 AM
From: Pogeu Mahone	1 Recommendation Recommended By zamboz Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 217792

Is Tic-Tock a danger to U.S.? Our rating: Partly false (My Rating: PARTLY TRUE ) The claims in the post have been rated PARTLY FALSE. While it is true that TikTok, owned by a Chinese-based company, previously has faced scrutiny for its security, it is false to say it has no security. TikTok states it has addressed and solved identified security issues, taking action that has been verified by the cybersecurity company that identified the weaknesses. Additionally, no evidence suggests that TikTok is any more prone to hacking or trafficking than other social media platforms, or that the app is used "extensively" by hackers or traffickers. ( the author knows nothing however that does not stop him from writing a false article) usatoday.com

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (160892)	8/4/2020 4:28:58 PM
From: Snowshoe	1 Recommendation Recommended By zamboz Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 217792

It will be interesting to see how this plays out... Opinion: Trump has no right to demand money from Microsoft-TikTok deal marketwatch.com Published: Aug. 4, 2020 at 3:59 p.m. ET The fact that Trump seems to think that the U.S. government is acting as an investment banker in this possible match-up is a new level of delusion. Finder’s fees may be a core component of how real estate works, but not the federal government. “There is zero legal authority for the president to extort money from a company seeking to clear a deal under the laws creating CFIUS,” John Coates, a professor of law at Harvard University, said in an email. “Congress has never authorized an executive branch official, or any agency, to condition regulatory approval or clearance on the payment of the ‘cut’ of a deal, a ‘finder’s fee,’ or a bribe. The fact that the money might in theory go into the U.S. Treasury does not make it legal. Congress, and only Congress, can authorize taxes, through legislation.” The president’s decree that TikTok must sell or stop operating appears to be on sounder legal ground. CFIUS, or the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S., is a committee under the Treasury Department that analyzes cross-border transactions. Trump has used powers related to CFIUS before in blocking Broadcom Inc. AVGO, +2.22% from acquiring Qualcomm Corp. QCOM, +1.24% , and predecessors used it to block Chinese acquisitions of chip companies and other transactions, saying those deals threatened national security.

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (160892)	8/4/2020 11:40:53 PM
From: TobagoJack	1 Recommendation Recommended By Pogeu Mahone Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217792

The Russians made him quit WHO, am certain

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (160892)	8/5/2020 12:23:19 PM
From: Pogeu Mahone	1 Recommendation Recommended By SirWalterRalegh Respond to of 217792

Still waiting for you to list who you as an individual owe reparations? Or to your way of thinking only white Americans owe raparations?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (160892)	9/19/2020 10:27:25 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 217792

RE <<Tik Tok is a shakedown LOL Like Mexico paying for the wall>> Easier to get the Team China to play than it is to get Team Mexico to pay, would guess. This is precisely why I love the deal, because it was not a shakedown. It was a business game. It was a gift. The game was not poker, but Go. And just like the tariff, somebodies pay for it, but not main / direct players. slow-motion shadow boxing part of a kabuki opera that was a whole lot of years in the making. reminds me of rare earth. Especially as I project Bannon bending over in shower stall being TikTok-ed The deal is a hoot, and opens door of hell to a lot of other national security issues previously intractable in Beijing circa 2015 and now endorsed by Team America Even the legislations are already ready, and have been for awhile, in Beijing, and Trump just pressed the green "Go" button Am sure Tesla codes shall be secure w/ the reviewers as they cycle from public duties to private enterprise. piie.com Should US Tech Companies Share Their “Source Code” with China? October 28th 2015 (This has been cross-posted from the PIIE RealTime Economic Issues blog.) IBM and Microsoft have agreed to let the Chinese government review some of their proprietary source code in a secure setting, provoking criticism from the Obama administration and some technology companies that doing so will reopen the door to the Chinese campaign to force technology transfer to Chinese companies. These two tech giants do want to secure their place in the large Chinese market, but their willingness to provide the Chinese with a look at their source code is clearly focused on blunting concern about surveillance, not transferring technology to Chinese companies. The Chinese have been determined to examine the source code for technology company products to make sure there are no security risks of the sort disclosed in 2013, when materials made public by Edward Snowden revealed that the US government was penetrating information technology (IT) products to spy on China and other governments. In a highly charged atmosphere of mistrust between the United States and China, the effort by IBM and Microsoft should be seen as a step in the right direction that would reassure both users and foreign governments that data placed on their equipment will not be compromised. The international IT industry is being splintered by suspicions about the integrity of hardware and software systems, leading to discrimination according to the nationality of the producing company. In an era of globalized supply chains, national or regional demonstration centers that can test large random samples of IT products may be the way to reassure all parties that such products do not have secret backdoors or spyholes. The goal would be to have IT source code inspected by independent impartial demonstration centers—not government-run labs with lax intellectual property protections—that would help provide confidence about the integrity of IT goods and services from all around the globe (Moran 2013). What did IBM and Microsoft agree to do? On Friday, October 16, the Wall Street Journal reported that IBM had agreed to share its source code with the Chinese government, which IBM promptly confirmed. The story provoked widespread media coverage, much of it filled with alarm. The Journal asserted that IBM was “the first major U.S. tech company to comply with Beijing’s recent demands” for the sharing of source code. In fact, a dozen years earlier, in September 2003, Microsoft announced the opening of a software review lab in partnership with the Chinese government in Beijing, an announcement that was with met with no coverage and no alarm ( Microsoft News Center, September 26, 2003). Source code is a set of software instructions that tells a computer how to execute a particular program to achieve the objectives desired by the programmer. “Sharing source code” could involve access that is very broad or quite narrow. IBM insisted that its agreement with China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology was carefully constricted, allowing only “the capability to conduct limited demonstrations of specific aspects of our technology in highly-secure, controlled IBM environments that have no external communication links”( IBM response to press inquiries, October 16, 2015). IBM said further that the purpose of sharing source code was “to reassure key stakeholders, including our clients, that no means exist for other parties to access IBM technology or data we manage on behalf of clients.” In a 2014 Open Letter to clients, IBM “stated unequivocally that we respect the security and privacy of client data. IBM does not provide government access to client data or ‘back doors’ into our technology. That commitment remains firm.” At the same time, IBM maintains that careful steps will be taken “to ensure that no software source code is released, copied or altered in any way” so as to prevent technology theft or imitation. Microsoft’s agreement to share source technology has the same twin stated objectives of reassuring Chinese users and the Chinese government about product integrity without allowing theft of intellectual property. In February of 2003 Bill Gates signed a source code agreement with the China Information Technology Security Certification Center (CNITSEC). On September 25, 2003, CNITSEC’s Source Code Review Lab officially opened in Beijing. Tim Chen, vice president of Microsoft and CEO of Microsoft Greater China, said: “The opening of CNITSEC Source Code Review Lab is a significant step in fulfilling Microsoft’s long-term commitment in China. To create a trustworthy computing environment is the goal of Microsoft.” Microsoft emphasized that its Windows technology would be inspected under carefully “controlled access,” built around the global ISO 15408 standard to test, evaluate, and certify information security products, systems, and web services. The ISO 15408 standard provides a framework in which computer system users can specify their security requirements, vendors can implement and make claims about the security attributes of their products, and testing laboratories can evaluate the products to determine if they meet the claims. ISO 15408 is a mutually recognized standard across many countries, including Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, as well as the United States and Canada. CNITSEC is the first and only technology security center in China to adopt the ISO 15408 standard. While narrowly circumscribing the review of their source code, both IBM and Microsoft maintained, however, that they will continue to follow through on past steps to integrate basic building blocks of their technology portfolios into China’s rapidly expanding IT infrastructure. Since 2013 IBM has pursued a global program called Open Power that offers base technology that can be enhanced by local licensees worldwide to spur business opportunities in which IBM can participate. “Our Open Power partners in China are getting access to the same technology that we make available to all Open Power members around the world,” Edward Barbini, a spokesman for IBM, pointed out ( New York Times, April 19, 2015). Microsoft explained its agreement to share source code with CNITSEC as a central component of the company’s strategy to help fortify its long-term position in the Chinese market. To this end, Tim Chen affirmed at the opening of the Source Code Review Lab that “Microsoft is willing to cooperate with the Chinese government and its authorized parties and share Microsoft’s accumulated experience in software and security development.” As noted earlier, Microsoft’s agreement to share source code has gone largely unnoted, while IBM has been the subject of much critical comment. In September 2014, in an earlier example of Chinese pressure to force technology transfer from US to Chinese companies, China’s banking regulator introduced rules to govern foreign banks that would require them to switch to what was called “safe and controllable technologies” from providers that incorporated Chinese companies as partners. The rules were seen in the United States as protectionist, discriminatory, and distortionary in many ways. They included a requirement to share source code with regulators. With strong backing from US trade groups, the Obama administration pushed back hard against the proposed rules, and in April 2015 the Chinese banking regulator suspended their implementation. IBM’s willingness to work with Chinese authorities as part of an aggressive strategy to incorporate its technology into the backbone of the Chinese IT industry, meanwhile, has been criticized as appearing to undermine the orchestrated US resistance to Chinese demands. According to the New York Times, “critics say IBM is caving in to Chinese demands, placing short-term business gains ahead of longer-term political and trade issues. Its actions may spur other American companies to break ranks and also submit to the new Chinese regulations, out of concern that IBM will get advantages by cooperating with the country.” “People do feel angry about what appears to be an accommodation with the Chinese,” noted James A. Lewis, a former government official now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “And you have to kind of expect that, particularly at a time when you have the whole U.S. government ginned up to push the Chinese on this.” But instinctive criticism such as this may miss the larger opportunity for multilateral cooperation in the fraught arena of ensuring the integrity of IT supply chains. IBM reports that its actions in China are part of a wider effort to establish technology demonstration centers in diverse countries to ensure that the company’s hardware and software do not allow unauthorized access to client data. Microsoft too points out that their source code agreement is part of a “global initiative that provides national governments with managed access to Microsoft Windows source code and other technical information they need to be confident in the security of the Windows platform.” The Chinese government, Microsoft notes, is simply “one of the first governments around the globe to sign the agreement.” The willingness of IBM and Microsoft to set up demonstration centers outside of China, as well as inside, underscores the importance of finding agreed upon procedures to protect the integrity of high technology by consumers and producers. All IT companies procure their inputs from sources in China, Mexico, Israel, and other sites where backdoors or penetration portholes might be inserted. Ensuring the integrity of IT equipment and IT upgrades in a world of globalized supply chains, therefore, may require setting up regional vetting stations to examine random samples of hardware and software from all providers (see Moran, Policy Brief 13-11: Dealing with Cybersecurity Threats Posed by Globalized Information Technology Suppliers, May 2013). To be credible such vetting stations may have to move beyond the look-but-don’t-touch approach of IBM to allow multilaterally-agreed test procedures by independent experts. The large objective of such an international initiative would be precisely to prevent discrimination on the basis of nationality of supplier. In this context, the steps taken by IBM and Microsoft may help blunt and even reverse the balkanization of information technology that now haunts the international IT industry. ReferencesDou, Eva. 2015. IBM Allows Chinese Government to Review Source Code. Wall Street Journal(October 16). IBM. 2015. IBM Statement on Limited Technology Demonstrations (October 16). Microsoft News Center. 2003. China Information Technology Security Certification Center Source Code Review Lab Opened (September 26). Mozur, Paul. 2015. IBM Venture With China Stirs Concerns. New York Times(April 19). Moran, Theodore H. 2013. Dealing with Cybersecurity Threats Posed by Globalized Information Technology Suppliers. Policy Brief 13-11. Washington: Peterson Institute for International Economics.

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (160892)

9/20/2020 5:23:38 AM

From: TobagoJack

1 Recommendation

Recommended By
marcher

Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 217792

Forced-IPO at whatever price, complete w/ Compelled-Pre-IPO anchor investors in for 12B @ 60B valuation, together w/ mandate for 5B dictate-history-is-important post-IPO VC fund

Like I had always believed Message 32009355

This is why folks in Asia prefer to deal w/ the USA Republican Party as all be a trade to the republicans, whereas the democrats demand the near impossible, that they, so it is rumoured, want everyone to be just like them.

... Team China can deal with and deal-in the Republicans, who just want to believe they are on top, whereas much impossibility to dialogue w/ the Democrats, who just want everyone to be like themselves

bloomberg.com

TikTok Owner Seeking $60 Billion Valuation in U.S. Deal
Zheping Huang20 September 2020, 15:27 GMT+8

China’s ByteDance Ltd. is seeking a valuation of $60 billion for TikTok as Oracle Corp. and Walmart Inc. take stakes in the short-video app’s business to address U.S. security concerns, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Oracle and Walmart have rights to buy 12.5% and 7.5% respectively of a newly established TikTok Global under an agreement that won the approval of President Donald Trump, the person said, asking not to be named discussing private negotiations. The two companies would pay a combined $12 billion for their stakes if they agree to that asking price.

The final valuation had not been set as the parties worked out the equity structure and measures for data security, the person said. Terms are still in flux and the proposed valuation could still change. Beijing also has yet to approve the deal, though regulators are said to favor any transaction in which ByteDance maintains control of its valuable recommendation algorithms and other proprietary technology.

ByteDance was pressured into a deal for TikTok when Trump threatened to ban the app in the U.S. over national security concerns. After Microsoft Corp. made a proposal for a full buyout of the service, ByteDance instead turned to Oracle’s offering in which the Chinese parent will maintain a solid majority stake.

“I approved the deal in concept,” Trump told reporters Saturday as he left the White House for a campaign rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina. “If they get it done, that’s great. If they don’t, that’s OK too.”

ByteDance and Oracle representatives didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Trump’s TikTok Drama Was Just Another Empty Threat: Tae Kim

For the latest on the TikTok saga:

Trump Blesses Oracle’s TikTok Deal, Delays App Store Ban TikTok App Store Ban Delayed After Trump Approves Oracle Deal TikTok Owner Is Gaining Confidence Beijing to Okay U.S. Deal Trump Wants $5 Billion From TikTok Deal for History Project Oracle, Walmart Invest in TikTok to Gain Social Media Toehold

The valuation for TikTok has been a looming question as Washington and Beijing escalated their rhetoric over the negotiations. The service for the U.S. market alone has been estimated to be worth $20 billion to $50 billion, or even more. Snap Inc., for context, trades at a $35 billion valuation.

ByteDance, the Beijing-based parent company, is the most valuable private startup in the world at $140 billion, according to market researcher CB Insights. The TikTok Global deal does not include the app’s China twin, Douyin, which has become an enormous hit in its own right.

Oracle TikTok Investment Wins Trump’s Blessing: Deal at a Glance

ByteDance may end up owning as much as 80% of TikTok Global, which would include the app’s operations in the U.S. and the rest of the world excluding China. Venture firms, including Sequoia Capital and General Atlantic, may also acquire equity in the new business.

Under the current proposal, there will be five seats on the board of TikTok Global. Walmart Chief Executive Officer Doug McMillon will become a director, the retailer said in a statement. TikTok Global will likely be headquartered in Texas and will hire “at least” 25,000 people, Trump said. It will need to hire thousands of content moderators, engineers, and marketing staff that were previously located in China and around the world.

TikTok Global intends to hold an initial public offering within 12 months, Oracle and Walmart said. And Trump said Saturday he wants $5 billion from companies creating a new U.S.-based TikTok venture directed toward teaching American children “the real history of our country.”

Oracle will get full access to review TikTok’s source code and updates to make sure there are no back doors used by the company’s Chinese parent to gather data or to spy on the video-sharing app’s 100 million American users, according to people familiar with the matter. The U.S. software giant has given reassurances it can protect TikTok user data from foreign influence.

“Oracle will quickly deploy, rapidly scale, and operate TikTok systems in the Oracle Cloud,” CEO Safra Catz said in a statement. “We are a 100% confident in our ability to deliver a highly secure environment to TikTok and ensure data privacy to TikTok’s American users.”

— With assistance by Nico Grant, and Edwin Chan

(Updates with deal and valuation comparisons from the second paragraph)

Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal.
LEARN MORE