Connect with us

Business News

Complex battle between Trump White House and China heats up

(BUSINESS NEWS) Corporate espionage, midterm election meddling, intellectual property theft, cybercrimes, and more plague the relationship between China and America.

Published

on

President Trump vs. China

Recent news of corporate espionage from China highlights the current administration’s focus on America’s relationship with the Eastern nation — but is substantive change possible?

Amazon’s denials of allegedly compromised security highlights the Trump administration’s increasingly hardline stance on China over the last two years. Tariffs on billions of dollars worth of Chinese goods have escalated into a trade war between China and America (regardless of what the White House calls it). The reason cited? National security.

President Trump has even recently claimed Chinese interference in the midterm elections. “They do not want me or us to win because I am the first president ever to challenge China on trade,” he said. “We are winning on trade. We are winning at every level.”

Yet despite the President championing his tough policies against China, cybersecurity experts say that Chinese cyber-attacks on American interest are higher than ever.

Crowdstrike, a global cybersecurity firm, ranks China as the current number one state sponsor of cybercrime, ahead of Russia, Iran, and North Korea respectively.

While the Trump administration is half right (Chinese spies are a real threat to American business), comparing China’s cyber attacks to Russia’s is ill-informed. While Russian hackers by all accounts are attempting to destabilize American socio-political norms, China’s hacking attempts are both more subtle and more economic-focused. Chinese hackers commit corporate espionage, stealing companies’ intellectual property and trade secrets.

It’s the difference between cyber-terrorism and cyber-intellectual-property-rights-infringement. Criminal apples compared to economic oranges.

Take the case of American Superconductor (AMSC), a Massachusetts-based energy technology company. After creating proprietary power management software for wind turbines, AMSC began a partnership with Sinovel, the largest Chinese wind turbine manufacturer. This partnership turned out to be a ruse on Sinovel’s part. Through corporate espionage, Sinovel created their own wind turbines with stolen AMSC software. This loss of revenue cost AMSC an estimated billion dollars in market value, forcing the company to lay off two-thirds of its workforce — roughly 600 of 900 employees.

But in the cases of both AMSC and Amazon (whose tech was allegedly used to spy on American citizens and government operations), it was American companies who sought out the Chinese manufacturers first. Trump’s tariffs make doing business with China more difficult, yet companies are continuing to go to China for their manufacturing needs regardless. China has a manufacturing workforce of about 80 million people, roughly double the population of California. In 2011, China manufactured 90 percent of the global PC market.

Take the iPhone, for instance. The Chinese factories that assemble the iPhone are massive. Just one can employ up to 350,000 people and produce about half a million iPhones a day (that’s 350 iPhones per minute). These kind of manufacturing statistics just aren’t realistically possible anywhere else, yet they’re the statistics modern international companies demand.

Trump is championed by his base as a businessman. Placing hard sanctions against a global manufacturing hub like China risks his base turning on him. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, whose department would implement the sanctions, has already opposed any further sanctions against China going forward.

Any American company going into business with China for their manufacturing needs to know the risks involved.Click To Tweet

Yet somehow despite these risks, American companies can’t seem to resist the siren song of cheap manufacturing costs. Until another manufacturing powerhouse nation can grow to compete with China (or until short-term profit is outweighed by long-term security) American business interests will most likely continue to be stymied by Chinese cyber-theft for the foreseeable future.

James M Lane, AINS was born into this world without his consent an ornery 60 year old man with a full beard. He has worked in the insurance industry for the last half decade, and was a foreign language preschool teacher for years before that. He writes horror in his spare time. Follow him on Instagram for deliberations on pro wrestling and beards.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business News

The most common buzzwords (still) used in job descriptions

(BUSINESS) Employers are trying their best to attract really high quality talent, but the buzzwords that continue to plague the process are lame, annoying, and often insulting.

Published

on

job buzzwords

It’s that time of year again. Year-in-review lists abound and Indeed.com is no exception. The website for employers and potential employees has taken a look back at the year in job descriptions and released its list of the weirdest job titles used in online listings.

They found the usual suspects — yes, sadly rockstar and hero still make the cut — but a few other keywords skyrocketed up the charts in 2018.

Indeed recognized seven top-performing buzzwords in its research: genius, guru, hero, ninja, superhero, rockstar, and wizard. Among these Top 7, some were up over previous years, while others’ popularity seems to be fading.

Employers really loved referencing masked assassins in their descriptions this year, resulting in a 90 percent year-over-year jump for ninja, and a 140 percent increase for the term since Indeed began tracking these stats in 2015.

Wizards and heroes didn’t fare as well. Job titles containing “wizard” were down 17 percent from 2017 and use of the word “hero” was down a whopping 44 percent since last year. Superhero ended the year up over 2017 (19 percent), but is still down by 55 percent since 2015.

So which states are touting these weird (some might say annoying) titles the most? The answers aren’t too surprising. California tops the list for ninja, genius, rockstar, wizard, and guru. Texas, whose capital is Austin, aka Silicon Hills, loves using hero, superhero, guru, rockstar, and ninja. Populous states New York and Florida make the list for using several of the buzzwords — no surprise there. But a few smaller states snuck into the Top 4, including Ohio (No. 1 “superhero” user) and Utah (No. 4 on the “rockstar” and “wizard” lists).

While many companies like to use these so-called creative terms to convey a sense of a hip and cool company culture, does using these “fun” titles actually find the best candidates? According to Indeed, the answer might be “not exactly.” Job seekers aren’t necessarily searching for terms like ninja or guru, so they might not even find the job they would be the perfect fit for. And truth be told, many experienced job seekers are turned off by these weird titles and might not even apply to the job in the first place.

Continue Reading

Business News

Half of the jobs Amazon will offer at their new headquarters won’t be tech

(BUSINESS NEWS) As Amazon begins laying solid plans to start hiring, some are upset that half of the new jobs won’t be tech jobs – let’s discuss why.

Published

on

amazon hq

As 2019 gears up, one of the biggest tech stories of 2018 will carry into this year, and that’s Amazon HQ. Amazon’s two new headquarters in Crystal City, Virginia and Long Island City, New York have promised about 50,000 new jobs coming in 2019 according to Engadget and the Wall Street Journal.

The catch? Only half of those jobs will be in tech. Some are upset about this, so we’ll explain:

Naturally, a behemoth like Amazon has many moving parts and these two facilities will require different roles to keep the company functioning. An estimated 25,000 jobs will be in support roles like administration, marketing, finance, maintenance, and human resources. For the cities they’ll occupy, this means there will be more than one way to find employment besides tech or IT.

It’s undeniable that Amazon’s $5 billion investment will vastly change these two communities. Employment opportunities can bring growth for residents, however it will depend upon the company’s ability to hire local. Likewise, Amazon’s presence will draw city transplants, a tactic that historically raises property values and living costs (looking at you, Seattle).

Crystal City is expected to see a huge influx in traffic and housing, according to The Washington Post. Although the state has promised to allocate resources into transportation, and Amazon assures a slow growth at first, thousands of workers will need accommodation.

For Long Island City, a community who’s already transforming from industrial yards to a blooming arts neighborhood, we will likely see its gentrification reach new heights. LIC is set to become the digital-lifestyle relative across the river from its cousin, Manhattan.

In any case, residents can hope to take advantage of the varying positions that will need filling in 2019.

However, everyone should brace for change as this corporate beast gradually awakens.

Whatever the new headquarters will bring, we can expect it to be, in typical Amazon fashion, bold and flashy.

Continue Reading

Business News

Shocker: tech giant tried to patent a job candidate’s ideas

(CAREER) When a potential employer talks to you about your ideas, might they rush out to patent them? Yep. Time to protect yourself.

Published

on

patent

In 2014, Jie Qi was invited by Google to share her idea: pop-up electronic storybooks.

Combining her love of storytelling with interactive elements like light and sound, Qi was on the road to developing a new kind of interactive storybook. After years of research and while enrolled in a PhD program, Qi was invited by Google to their Advanced Technology and Projects lab. There she shared her ideas for interactive storytelling and much to her surprise, was offered a job on the spot.

Qi ultimately passed on the opportunity to finish her PhD program. Two years later, Qi came to find out through friends that Google had applied for patents on electronic interactive pop-up books for the same ideas she’d discussed and shown to them in 2014. In the end, Google’s patent was rejected as Qi was able to prove that the idea was hers.

While Qi’s story may not leave many of us surprised, it should.

What’s so jarring about Qi’s story is that the stealing of her idea is so flagrant.

Google seemed to think they were too big to get caught or even be held accountable. Further, had Qi not been informed of the patent application’s existence, chances are Google would’ve gotten away with stealing her ideas.

If you think companies don’t steal work all the time, you’re mistaken.

It’s not uncommon for companies to ask applicants to complete a small project as part of their application process. Mock projects are a way for potential employers to gauge an applicant’s skills and at times, help them choose one applicant over another.

These projects should take very little time to complete and should not be used by the company in any capacity other than to review an applicant’s potential. However, sometimes the sample projects get used by the company – and the applicant, whether or not they get the job, isn’t informed and is definitely not paid.

A few years ago, Toronto-based agency Zulu Alpha Kilo made a great video illustrating the common practice of asking for work on spec. Speculative (spec) work is the practice of essentially asking applicants to work for free and then deciding whether or not they want to pay for the work. It’s a common practice in the advertising world when trying to choose an agency of record that should not be implemented in other industries and yet, it’s happening more and more, particularly in tech.

So, what should you do if a company you respect asks to see your work? Feel free to show them samples of your work, but I don’t believe you should work for free. If you suspect that a company has stolen your work, confront them and if you must, take legal action. We’re all professionals who’ve put in the work to get where we are and what we deserve. When a potential employer declines to pay you for work or even downright steals it, that employer doesn’t value you and you shouldn’t want to be involved with them.

Job seeking is stressful and the competition can be fierce. Employers know this and some leverage those factors to their advantage. If you feel that you or your work is being taken advantage of, trust your instincts and take a hard pass on any company that tries to diminish your worth (and for goodness sake, if you opt to do these “assignments” anyhow, in fear of losing an opportunity – watermark and lock down any works as best you can).

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Our Great Parnters

The
American Genius
news neatly in your inbox

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.

Emerging Stories