Alibaba Co-founder Says Many Americans 'Want To Stop China' From Upgrading Its Tech (cnbc.com) 213
With the threat of Trump's ever-looming trade war with China and his administration's sanctions on Chinese companies like ZTE, it's hard to remember a more contentious period between the two countries in recent times. Adding fuel to the conversation, an Alibaba co-founder alleged that many Americans want to stop China from upgrading its technology and from becoming more innovative. From a report: Chinese media outlets have repeatedly asserted that American complaints about the tech sector are really just efforts to slow the country's rise as a global power. "There's nothing wrong with a country wanting to upgrade its own manufacturing sector, go higher tech, be more innovative," Tsai said. "But then, from the Chinese perspective, what we're seeing is there are a lot of people in America that want to stop China from doing that." After three decades of producing low-end manufacturing goods, Tsai said, China recognizes the need to develop better technology, upgrade its manufacturing sector and focus more on value-added areas like robotics, aeronautics and high-tech medical equipment.
or... (Score:5, Interesting)
Maturity curve [Re:or...] (Score:5, Insightful)
Basically he's denying China cheats like the wind. To be fair, when USA industry was young, we played intellectual property games with Europe also.
But when you become a trading super-power, your scrappy "street-smarts" 3rd-world tendencies need to be corrected or you will face retaliation. You can no longer fly under the radar. China has yet to kick its bad habits.
Re: (Score:2)
How does the wind cheat?
Re: (Score:3)
But when you become a trading super-power, your scrappy "street-smarts" 3rd-world tendencies need to be corrected or you will face retaliation. You can no longer fly under the radar. China has yet to kick its bad habits.
In fairness, China may be a trading super-power but it is still a developing nation. Its GDP (PPP) per capita needs to double if not triple until it can really be considered a developed power house like the top European nations or the US. China's shear size allows it to compete with more developed economies in the industries it chooses, but it likely has at least a decade or two until it would be considered a truly developed nation on the same level playing field as countries such as the UK, Germany, or US.
Re:Maturity curve [Re:or...] (Score:4, Interesting)
America does not do that. In fact, up until now, we have allowed/encouraged manufacturing to go offshore. The idea was to help other nation's get rich to have better 2 way trade. Problem is, when the other nation puts up massive barriers even once they are equals in many aspects.
That has been insane.
Of course, Trump's approach with the rest of our western allies is just as insane.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Basically he's denying China cheats like the wind. To be fair, when USA industry was young, we played intellectual property games with Europe also.
Yup. If the Chinese economy gains advantage and then comes to rely on intellectual property and trade secrets and the US tries to catch up by stealing trade secrets and not enforcing intellectual property laws of just Chinese companies I expect they would feel the same way as US companies do now.
And the hypocrisy and lack of empathy on both sides is palpable. China is in many ways following a US model of development... including the theft of intellectual property from competitors.
Also, fundamentally our t
Re:Maturity curve [Re:or...] (Score:5, Insightful)
Every country steals tech. The French were notorious for bugging Air France flights and doing state level industrial espionage. A lot of early nuclear tech was stolen by the US from Britain. European and US car-makers "adopted" a lot of Japanese tech to make their vehicles more reliable, after accusing the Japanese of copying them.
Now China is filing a lot of patents. They are really leading with electric vehicle tech, for example. A lot of European and Japanese manufacturers that missed the boat are turning to them now while their own domestic suppliers try to catch up.
This is just the way of the world. Everyone steals from everyone else, countries that were developing eventually start leading in some areas. Korea used to be a source of cheap labour, now they are leading manufacturers of memory, displays, batteries, phones, some kinds of software...
If anything, I much prefer the Chinese attitude towards patents and IP to the American one. They get on and innovate without worrying too much about rounded corners and vague, obscure and never-used patents. And actually the west isn't that different - we just waste more time and money looking for trivial variations to get around patents and IP.
I worked on a sensor product that three short sampling periods. I asked why not just use one longer sampling period and it turned out it was to get around a patent that covered the complex detection algorithm, and was of no benefit.
Military vs. commercial shenanigans (Score:3, Interesting)
That's mostly military tech. Everyone expects and does military espionage.
But China plays games on the commercial side. It would be like the US Federal Gov't breaking into Chinese OS companies and giving the trade secrets to Microsoft, or creating red-tape for foreign competitors to MS that MS itself doesn't have.
Re: (Score:2)
Stealing is one of the 'commercial side''s favorite game.
Its just a matter of being big enough to kill your the competition you steal from.
Funniest part of your analogy is the Corporation you named.
Re: (Score:2)
It almost sounds like you are trying to make a case the US is not doing something China is doing out of pure ethics, which is not credible. China is not going to be
Re:Maturity curve [Re:or...] (Score:5, Interesting)
There is stealing tech like you described, and stealing tech like China is doing it.
Industrial espionage is basically the acceptable form of doing it. If you can slip someone into the company, sneak up to the golden goose, and get out, that's a corporate success story. Alternatively if you can hire away their workers, or if you can reverse engineer technology, those are also generally acceptable. The goods are still protected by assorted laws, but if you can sneak some information out that's generally accepted.
China's form is a mandate that every company doing business turns over the golden goose outright. If you want to do business in China you must turn over the technology, and you must pass along ownership to a mandatory Chinese business partner. Many times the mandated business partner takes the IP and makes their own products from it. They aren't adapting it, nor growing from it, nor trying to integrate it into their own. The law requires corporations give up their secrets, then those secrets are directly used against the corporation.
Re: (Score:2)
If you can slip someone into the company, sneak up to the golden goose, and get out, that's a corporate success story.
In the US, any company you try to sell that info to turns you in to the police and you go to prison. If you used it at a company you worked for, you got fired and if anybody found out and the company got sued, they turned the evidence over to the police too.
You don't even read the business section of the newspaper, do you?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Except that's not the full story. Companies that went to China and gave up IP did so because what they were giving up wasn't 1st tier IP, but 2nd or 3rd tier tech. What this meant is that companies were essentially giving up old tech IP. China learned from that and is not trying to create their own 1st tier IP.
Companies thought they could give up the 2nd or 3rd tier older tech because they thought they could continue to rely on innovation and their 1st tier IP. The issue is that these companies didn't r
Re: (Score:2)
That's a pretty useless statement. It's the way of the world until we change things.
That's an explicit benefit. You said, "why don't we do X, it's better" and the answer was "X is patented."
Re: (Score:2)
Chinese viewpoint...easier and cheaper to ask forgiveness for ip violations than permission.
Re: (Score:2)
US based multi-national corporations run by psychopaths only accept egoistic win at all costs management. They are actively using their control over the US government to cripple other countries economically so that they can continue to exploit them. The US has fucked up the EU economy on purpose and they know and they are pissed. The US is attacking China to remain dominant over it. The more South America unites, the more the US government attacks individual countries in South America to destabilise it. The
Re: Maturity curve [Re:or...] (Score:2)
Kind of, but not the same. Many Europeans immigrated to the US bringing their knowledge over and staying here, building companies to service the US.
China on the other hand, you have Americans stealing designs and going to China, copying everything and abusing the cheap labor there, coming back to America to reap the rewards of crushing the business you stole from. Notice I said American and not Chinese, because it's our own citizens enabling China, not the Chinese themselves. The Chinese cloning the clones
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds good, except that it makes clear you have no idea what the physical mechanisms of the "stealing" are.
They're not as you describe. At all. Get some internet and look it up, Cluestick.
Re: (Score:2)
And American employees want to stop seeing their jobs shipped overseas. I know and have actively resisted the Chinese invasion in several "American" companies who realized that engineers are cheaper in China just like everything else. That said, in three past employers I have seen technology blatantly stolen by a certain Chinese company, and those statements are backed by arrests and convictions.
So yes, absolutely they're correct. So what? Want it to stop? Simple, throw out your government, replace it with
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
You know China has the biggest parliamentary body in the world? People tell me we can't have 1,000 Representatives in Congress because it would be a mad house; China has 2,980.
Those 2,980 are elected. Their elections are ridiculous: people elect local officials, who then elect officials in broader assemblies, and so forth, equivalent to how the US used to elect the Senate (and US elections today are largely controlled by Central Committee, notably in the Democratic Party, by way of influencing voters).
Re: (Score:2)
notably in the Democratic Party, by way of influencing voters
LOL, I know, I know, in your Party they prefer to elect politicians without having had to influence any voters!
z0mg the stupidity of your propaganda is truly astounding, Comrade.
Re: (Score:2)
You're thinking of getting the Democratic Nominee elected.
A handful of oligarchical elites in the Democratic Party select the nominee they want. Then the Party stages a campaign to get that person nominated in the Primary. The Democratic voters are told they're voting for who they want to represent them in Congress or as President; meanwhile the Democratic Party is working to ensure that anyone except who a few hundred elites want to nominate is thoroughly-crushed.
They even go to candidates who are gai
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it's closer to this. Americans generally don't care if Chinese or Saudis or Turks or Venezuelans have enough wealth to buy all the kind of luxury goods we buy.
What people care about is being made unemployed or being employed at a lower standard of living than they currently enjoy.
The cost of high wages (Score:2)
And American employees want to stop seeing their jobs shipped overseas.
They can do this any time they want. They just have to accept the same wages as their overseas competitors. It's a hard reality but US wages are among the highest in the world. If you want to compete on price you have to have lower costs than the other guy.
Re: (Score:2)
A valid point, but the resulting real estate crash would probably be the end of us.
Re: (Score:2)
If we get the manufacturing back, the job wont come with it. More jobs will be lost to automation than to china in the next 20-30 years.
Re:or... (Score:4, Insightful)
But you are not fighting that corrupt dictatorship, you are fighting the people there.
If those people are actively working to get rid of their government, then I'm all for them. But they're not, so they're part of the problem. If they like it, great, but it makes us enemies. Tough shit.
Re: (Score:2)
It does not make you enemies.
And at the current situation, if they fight they get imprisioned or even killed.
So, why can't you let them grow up and get out of the dictatorship in their own time with their own means?
Why do you actively claim they are your enemies when they never did anything wrong to you?
Re: (Score:2)
Also, don't start with something as silly and foolish as: "it's hard to remember a more contentious period between the two countries in recent times". Really? Is it that hard to remember more contentious countries? Let me get you started: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
That made no sense.
I am Certain that In the Fullness of Time (Score:2)
Contentiousness (Score:5, Insightful)
it's hard to remember a more contentious period between the two countries in recent times.
Well, Saudi Arabia is bombing the crap out of Yemen. Russia has been covertly sending troops into Ukraine. Israel and Iran are almost at war.
So yeah, one country increasing tariffs on another is probably the most contentious thing going on right now.
Re: (Score:2)
it's hard to remember a more contentious period between the two countries in recent times.
Well, Saudi Arabia is bombing the crap out of Yemen. Russia has been covertly sending troops into Ukraine. Israel and Iran are almost at war.
Yeah, but you can't blame those on the US (not for lack of trying) so they don't count.
War schmar, Trump tweeted something today! get your priorities straight!!
Wrongness (Score:2)
You're right, I missed the article "the" Now take a pill and relax, 'cause it doesn't mean I'm not right. Something similar happened seventeen years ago, which isn't that long a time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Slashdot is infected with Europeans who aren't fluent in any form of English, but have the false belief that if they simply ignore all the syntax and grammar, and use their own language's grammar, then it counts as a mythical language called Continental English. Which is fine, as long as the other person you're speaking to also doesn't speak any English.
Thank you Captain Obvious (Score:2)
Who doesn't want their greatest rival to be struggling?
While I want to watch China suffer another two centuries of "shame" (which most working poor Chinese don't even care about), America needs a worthy rival.
Otherwise, this country stagnates which is what has happened since the Soviet Union went belly up in 1991. Another cold war won't hurt anyone and would probably start another space race. All good things in my eyes.
Innovate away ON YOUR OWN China, just don't expect to get the free USA ride you've been g
Re: (Score:2)
I agree to an extent, HOWEVER, things are a lot different from the 80's and before....
Back then, we had MUCH more manufacturing here in the US, we could not only come up with the ideas, we could BUILD it then.
We don't have that now, and with debt...and our depende
Re: Thank you Captain Obvious (Score:2)
You'd be surprised how quickly retooling and training can occur when there's a need.
And the debt is meaningless. Remember the old adage: when you owe the bank 100 million dollars, that's there problem.
The US has renigged on their debt obligations before (hid it with a devaluation and gold confiscation in the 30s) but got away with it. It would be easy to make most of it disappear again. Whether the credit agencies care will be up for debate.
Re: (Score:2)
We had more manufacturing jobs, and probably more manufacturing, but we're still the world's no. 1 manufacturer (maybe no.2 by now). It's just that we've given up on manufacturing the cheap crap that can be made cheaper in cheap-labor countries, and we've automated away many of the rest of the jobs. (Automation, by the way, has given us very high labor productivity, which is one of t
Re: (Score:2)
Look at WWII to see how fast manufacturing can be ramped up when there are local buyers.
It wouldn't be that fast in every industry, but certainly some industries could ramp up that fast! Anything important.
"Oh no, we don't have enough time to save ourselves," that's a very European attitude, Americans don't even consider it.
Faster or slower, it doesn't matter if the giant was awake or napping, he's not so easy to kill. ;) Americans know this.
Americans want to stop China from upgrading... (Score:3, Insightful)
Where's the connection? (Score:2)
America's push to stop china's dumping/theft/etc (Score:5, Interesting)
And yet, this is America's fault for a western company wanting to keep their IP, while Chinese companies will sue for theft of their IP.
Yeah, totally makes sense.
Now, if Trump would just do his GD job or at least keep a few of his promises esp for dealing with CHina.
Re: (Score:2)
China continues to require that nearly all companies that operate in CHina to have 51% chinese ownership
And why is that so? Hm? Any idea? Most (all?) asian countries have laws like that. And: why is tat wo? Hm? Any idea?
A country that got fucked over by outside forces over a course of 300 - 400 years makes a law that all companies inside needs to be minimum 51% owned by its citizens. Wow, and you somehow think that makes no sense? Because after the tea party your country never got fucked over? Perhaps you
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When does this constant need for reparations from the USA to Communist China stop?
When is the USA finally able trade with China as an equal?
The USA is not the UK when "reading some history books... about China.
The US can set any trade policy it wants in 2018 with its tech.
China can invite in experts and try and extract tech from the advanced West.
Start making tech in China with its own dom
Re: (Score:2)
So the USA has to keep offering China its tech for free in 2018 for some "300 - 400 years" reading of history? ... why do you think that? Who implied that?
No it has not
When is the USA finally able trade with China as an equal? What stupid meme is that? You buy stuff from China you sell stuff to them. Thats all.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is USA tech in 2018 and US trade policy in 2018 in some way connected to what happened to China 300 years ago?
The USA does not have to give its advanced tech to China due to "reading some history books".
Why should a US company have to enter into an unfair trade agreement with a company in China and transfer its tech to China in 2018?
Re: (Score:2)
Why should a US company have to enter into an unfair trade agreement with a company in China and transfer its tech to China in 2018?
If you would find the trade agreement unfair, you would not sign the contract, or would you?
No idea what point you want to make.
Re: (Score:2)
US patents (Score:3)
Unless one is under threats, each party involved in any deal can make any demand and the other parties can walk away if he doesn't like it. If these American companies don't like transferring IPs, then they can walk away. Just like a Chinese company should not deal with the US if it doesn't want to obey the (questionably erected) Iran sanction. (In practice, most companies may transfer some assembling IP over to the Chinese entities while retaining the most valuable components/tech; which is why much of the
Re: (Score:2)
typo in the last sentence: Why *do* people in tech complain about the US patent system in other context but never when it involves China?
Re: (Score:2)
China opened up to the USA and then China moved away from the Soviet Union.
For that deal a lot of US tech had given to Communist China.
The US could enjoy low cost production lines in China bu the tech had to be given to China.
Generations of advanced US innovation was lost to China for some 1970's politics.
Re: (Score:2)
Not everything is U.S vs China (Score:4, Insightful)
Most Americans don't give a shit (Score:2)
Actually American's are too self absorbed to give a shit except when China literally steals American developed technology or cheats in the market with the help of their government. Not to say the US is pure in that regard either but if China could be bothered to just reasonably fair it would be fine for everyone but the most xenophobic among us.
Many Americans whine about jobs moving to China but they moved there because they pay their workers a lot less on average. If we were willing to work for Chinese w
I don't have a problem with upgrade and improve (Score:3)
It's the blatant stealing you've done to me four times now with successive LED designs I've asked various companies to manufacture for me, only for them to turn around and sell my fucking units to a competitor.
And this is why all my primary manufacturing gets done here in the USA, by my own hand. Fuck you assholes, you just supply raw components to me. No more asking you to build advanced things for me when you steal it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Well, we sure as hell can't innovate ourselves! (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, we sure as hell can't innovate ourselves! So our only recourse is to try to stop other countries from innovating! No way can we allow someone a chance at bettering themselves if we're not able to steal the betterment for our own use.
Regardless of the many problems the US has, not being able to innovate certainly isn't one of them. China is playing catch up in innovation, and who do you think they are trying to catch up to? The US is having a hard time dealing with not being the only game in town, but it is still top dog. Possibly not for long but it certainly still is today.
While there is certainly a significant portion of Americans who simply want China to fail, most of us just don't want China to steal. Even that is a bit misguided though since every developing nation (including the early US) steals while catching up. Americans fundamentally have to realize we cannot rest on our laurels. The lead we have right now will diminish and then evaporate and we will need to compete on a level playing field. That is already true with many developed countries, and it will soon be true with China.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"we will need to compete on a level playing field."
Bullshit. The playing field will never be level, so long as Chinese companies continue to steal then undercut both quality and price.
What I mean by a level playing field is when China has just as much tech for the US to steal as we do of them. Right now China is like the early US, when we stole a significant amount of IP from Europe. It is simply what developing nations do, and it hastens the time it takes for them to contribute more to the World economy (which helps everyone) . Soon China will become a developed nation and expectations regarding China's behavior will shift.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Moving the goal posts back a couple hundred years? Yeah... I see what you did there.
I'm not exactly sure what you are saying here. Are you saying developing countries now should be held to a different standard than countries whose economies were in a similar state 200 years ago? If so, do you believe that only because it's different when you do it or do you have a reasonable reason to feel this way?
Re: (Score:2)
I would hope so. I would hope we as a globally connect species who have shrunk the world down to meer days have different standards than our ancestors.
Some of the crap we can even agree on: no torture, no inhumane weapons, no slavery, no killing of babies, no raping, no nuclear waste dumping, etc.
While I wasn't explicit, I thought it was clear I meant acting the same from an economic standpoint. It is stretch for you to bring up slavery and torture and insinuate I would support developing countries today committing those acts.
Intellectual property rights and slavery are very different things and I'm not sure why you are creating some kind of equivalency between them.
Re:Well, we sure as hell can't innovate ourselves! (Score:4, Informative)
Nearly all of AE still comes from America.
EV innovation is coming from America.
Space innovation is coming from America.
China/India are still trying to catch up with civil nuclear tech innovation from America's 60s.
Most of the items that are made in China but sold in America were innovated in America, not china.
BUT, America is not innovative?
You could only be Porky/Red Tide to have such egregious lies.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
EV innovation is coming from America. ... but in the vehicle itself is nothing really innovative.+
If you mean electric vehicle with EV, then no. america is decades behind Europe. Tesla made a new and better battery and manages to sell a nice set of cars
E.g. it still uses a classic connection between engine and wheels, instead of four wheels drive with 4 engines directly at the wheels. Why? Because ABS and other electronic controls of traction etc. are state of the art only on classic ICE based car designs.
Re: (Score:3)
Every company out there is screaming that they will build tesla killers. They are not saying that they will build Renault killers or Mercdes killers or BYD killers.
Tesla is not doing motors on each wheel because it is ineffective. That is why every car maker that starts down that path stops. They do OTA updates and constantly have a car that improves. All their cars compete head on with ICE versions, instead of being highly over priced shit like the leaf, i3, bolt, etc. Tesla has a massive super char
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla is not doing motors on each wheel because it is ineffective.
That is wrong. It is the most effective way.
However they would need to reinvent all stuff that is state of the art on ICE cars/wheels (like aBS etc.) because those systems are state of the art and mandated by law.
Finally, there IS no real EV innovation in Europe.
How do you come to that brain dead idea? We had full working, see above, four wheel linear engine drives decades ago. They never were sold, mainly because of batteries and because th
Re: (Score:2)
1895: Ogden Bolton of Ohio patents an electric bicycle with a front-wheel hub motor.
1900: Professor Ferdinand Porsche develops the Lohner Porsche, the world's first hybrid electric car, with a hub motor in each of the front
Re: (Score:2)
And what is your point? Since when are we talking about "hub motors"?
Never heard the term btw.
You want to imply we had no hub motors in Europe 30 - 40 years ago? Strange, I learned about similar motors when I still was in school. And we most certainly did not call them "hub motors". Hub motor implies the engine is inside of the wheel. The four wheels drive I know about had the engines in the chassis, linear engines. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not a native english speaker, whichbwould be obvious to you if you were not a moron :)
Back here on Earth (Score:5, Informative)
If you mean electric vehicle with EV, then no. america is decades behind Europe.
What color is the sky on your planet? You certainly aren't basing that claim on any facts (nor did you provide any) so one has to presume you are talking about a different America and a different Europe than the one here on Earth.
Tesla made a new and better battery and manages to sell a nice set of cars ... but in the vehicle itself is nothing really innovative.+
Spare me your attempt to seem unimpressed. "Nothing really innovative"? You might have an argument if anyone else was making more innovative vehicles. Nobody has moved the auto industry more towards electrification than Tesla and to claim their cars aren't innovative is preposterous even if you don't like them.
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla made a new and better battery and manages to sell a nice set of cars ... but in the vehicle itself is nothing really innovative.+
Spare me your attempt to seem unimpressed. "Nothing really innovative"? You might have an argument if anyone else was making more innovative vehicles. Nobody has moved the auto industry more towards electrification than Tesla and to claim their cars aren't innovative is preposterous even if you don't like them.
As much of a complete idiot as he is, there is a tiny piece of a point there. Tesla has some nice automobile features, but several other manufacturers have many, if not all, of the same features. It's ridiculous to say that Tesla is "decades behind Europe", but I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that Tesla's most important contribution by far has been improvements to the battery.
Re: (Score:2)
It's ridiculous to say that Tesla is "decades behind Europe", but I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that Tesla's most important contribution by far has been improvements to the battery.
No, it is not ridiculous. Cars likeTesla is building now, we built 30 years ago. They never were widely sold, that is all. So Teslas contribution are battery management and big scale production.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody has moved the auto industry more towards electrification correct. than Tesla and to claim their cars aren't innovative is preposterous even if you don't like them. But that is not innovative. That is just building a factory and then building cars :D
Re: (Score:2)
Electric vehicles don't even have an engine!
The reason that Tesla uses two motors is that axles increase efficiency and performance/weight. There is a huge advantage to having two motors so that you can give different amounts of power to the front and back depending on speed and conditions, but there is very little advantages from having a motor at each wheel. You lose more than you gain for a regular automobile.
Now, for miniature vehicles like golf carts, town cars, parking enforcement, etc., then you want
Re: (Score:2)
Strange, in my dictionary a motor and an engine are the same thing :D
And probably most drivers don't want "state of the art" ABS, they want "proven-technology" ABS. :D it is mandatory by law.
It does not matter what they want
but there is very little advantages from having a motor at each wheel. Direct drive linear motors have the advantage that everything is integrated into that motor. So you don't need ABS etc. as "extra systems". Regenerative brakeing can be done on every wheel etc. The cars would be ligh
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How about nobel prize winners? Yeah, America wins. [telegraph.co.uk]
How about scientific papers by nations? [reddit.com] Now, the ONE thing that you got somewhat right is that 20% of America's tech is 'foreign-born'.That does not mean that they are all H1B or just student visa. Ppl like Elon musk who is foreign-born, but not American citizen, counts on that. [prb.org]
But to make wild claims that America has totally lost it with science is a joke. Hell, even the bulk of the papers coming from China/CHinese
yes how about scientific papers by nations (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Both sides are idiots.
With China, there is a high risk of your technology and your ideas being stolen to be "innovate", even if you just want them to put it together for you. And if you get out competed because your product cost $100 a unit to sell, and they can sell it for $75 a unit, because it cost you so much to come up with the product and the hundreds of failed ideas before that. You loose out on business on a good idea. Even if that $75 unit may have a small improvement. It was your Idea, your work
Re: (Score:2)
Re:More likely (Score:5, Insightful)
We do the R&D on new ideas, they use espionage (been going on for decades) to steal it and then "upgrade" their systems, to compete back with us.
Re: (Score:2)
The CIA and FBI protected US interests from the EU, Soviet Union, many other nations industrial spies.
China sent its expert over and the USA gave away its secrets for free. No FBI, no CIA to stop China.
Who stopped protecting US industrial and military secrets and allowed China to take what it wanted from the USA?
Who is now helping China extract the emerging tech from top US innovators?
Who allo
Re: More likely (Score:3)
...the US DISREGARDED AND DIDN'T GIVE A SHIT about European patents or Copyrights.
Oh, we certainly regarded them: feel free to shut your mouth for a bit and learn a little. [movingtofreedom.org]
Re: More likely (Score:2)
We just need to steal the technology back from them
Considering the "quality" of most of their goods, not to mention that of their "research papers," I'm not sure we want it.
Maybe 5-10 years ago (Score:3)
Now there are innovative and competitive chinese products out there. Trump just likes stroking the "Were number 1" jingoism among the old timers some more.
Your not number 1 unless you earn it and keep earning it.
Re: Maybe 5-10 years ago (Score:2)
Now there are innovative and competitive chinese products out there.
There are. And they are very much the exception.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:We did it to the Brits (Score:5, Informative)
For centuries the "gold standard" and the "British Pound" were the defect standard currencies for trade. Because the UK gold reserves were stripped from them by the USA the pound was conferred no longer to have the backing of the gold held in treasuries, so to get international trade the US$ became the standard because they now had the most gold.
Re: (Score:2)
How many overseas military bases does China have, yep ZERO.
The US has a long history with interfering in other countries politics and they have ZERO respect for any democratically elected government if they make policies that don't suit the USA.
The USA also uses trade as a weapon to enforce the protection of Mickey Mouse etc.
Re: (Score:2)
How many overseas military bases does China have, yep ZERO.
Actually, they have a naval base in Djibouti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:"becoming more innovative" (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, China steals a great deal. BUT, that does not mean that CHina's innovation is not up and coming. It is a horrible mistake to claim otherwise.
Just like Japan and India today, you have many ppl in CHina that are learning and are as innovative as any others.
Re: (Score:2)
According to someone I know who lived in China for a few years and visits frequently (his mother-in-law is a Chinese citizen), we don't have to worry about China out-innovating us. Their culture is too much about staying in line with the group-think and out of trouble with authorities and not individualistic enough for the risk-taking type of innovation that happens in the US and other developed, democratic