Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by nylonstrung 393 days ago
Really cool to see the microkernel vision come to reality

Who in 1990 would have thought a Chinese telecom company would productionize it before Hurd even released 1.0

1 comments

Quite easy when you are a state apparatus
Statements like this are just lazy justifications, born out of the desire to reinforce a certain world view, rather than genuine effort to understand.

Much has already been said about why Huawei is not simply a state apparatus, so I won't repeat that. The point I rather want to make is this: having a factually wrong image of the counterparty is dangerous, especially if you view the counterparty as an enemy (justified or not).

If you care about advancing your material interests, then you might want to emulate what you believe makes the counterparty successful (in this case, the belief that they're a state apparatus). But when you find out that the emulation yields bad results because your image of the counterparty was wrong in the first place, you will have wasted a bunch of time and resources. It's in your interest to get your world view right the first time aroubd.

Fair point on the need for nuance—I could have made that clearer. But the core idea still stands: Huawei can’t operate outside the CCP’s interests. Sure, the Party isn’t managing daily tasks, but it sets the rules of the game. Everything Huawei does ultimately aligns with national goals, whether by design or necessity. That makes it a de facto state apparatus.

Calling Huawei a “counterparty” suggests it has real independence. But in China’s system, especially with big tech, that’s just not how it works. The CCP doesn’t need to own a company to control it. There are legal, political, and financial levers that ensure Huawei stays on track. That’s not comparable to how companies operate in the U.S. or EU, where they can push back on the state without fear of retaliation.

I get why my comment came off as simplistic, but it’s not baseless. If we want to understand what we’re dealing with, we have to be honest about the structure Huawei operates in. Misreading that is a bigger risk than calling it what it is.

If you so believe that you're not misreading them, you ought to test those beliefs. Advocate for emulating their model. They're obviously doing something right, to have grown so much, and it's in your interest to make yourself stronger. The result of your emulation will tell you whether your image of them was right, or whether you misread them. Have skin in the game.
This is an interesting comment.

It makes me wonder why the Pentagon, with a US$1 trillion budget and being a critical piece of the US state apparatus, could not create a solution like that in recent years.

The DoD already uses a commercial microkernel OS called INTEGRITY for various applications.
The US government ( most governments in the world ) decided to give money to Microsoft instead.