[agent00f]

> It seems like you went in with preconceived notions about the subject.

This rather seems more applicable to the wsj and you. The op points out how weak some of these claims are, which is a sign that the wsj is desperately throwing everything at the wall and hope something sticks. This figures given they're a largely conservative pub prone to supporting the gop/Trump econ policy, which I might add a disturbing proportion of techies are sympathetic towards.

What's particularly revealing about this issue is how many parrot the "stealing" talking point while at same time going on in the past about how software shouldn't be patented etc. Basically it shows they want to be able to use the ideas of others but not vice versa when they're getting beat, typical hypocrisy.

[hatboat]

Your last paragraph makes little sense. You can advocate for a world where software shouldn't be patented, while still respecting existing IP laws.

Thinking everyone should play by the same rules, even if you disagree with those rules, is not hypocritical in the slightest.

[ineedasername]

The OP literally picked the most shallow of the IP theft claims, and nothing else, to critique the article. That is not pointing out how weak the article is, that is setting up a straw man of the article's claims in order to knock it down.

There's also no need to risk derailing a discussion of the merits of the article by inserting opinions about presidential politics. The proportion of techies supporting Trump is irrelevant to the more narrow question of whether or not Huawei has stolen IP, and if the potential theft is what has facilitated their leap in front of competition.

And yes, I did go into the article with preconceived notions because I was already very much aware of the details of their activities over the years. The OP chose to gloss over nearly every piece of content in favor of an emotional argument that people don't like Huawei because they are successful.

So let's boil this down: the OP chose the weakest example, and an emotional argument. I provided a more detailed counter argument. Your response is also an emotional one, that you don't like that people sharing my point of view tend to support Trump. Again, these do not comprise a cogent contribution to a discussion on the merits of the article.

And since you brought it up, I am heavily liberal in outlook, dislike nearly all Trump policy, and dislike the current state of IP law. That doesn't preclude me from believing Huawei acted improperly. There's nothing hypocritical is saying, "I don't like the current law, I think it should be changed. But it is the law, and breaking it is still more damaging to society and the rule of law than respecting it and pushing for change."