7 ms·

Was thinking about this whilst watching Marco Polo on Netflix the other day. China gave the western world so much of it's tech, science and culture within the l

Was thinking about this whilst watching Marco Polo on Netflix the other day. China gave the western world so much of it's tech, science and culture within the last millennium. How the tables have turned. I'd put it down to karma. In general I think it will accelerate humanity's technological progress. Looking on an individual level the most impactful inventors weren't motivated by monetary reward (e.g. Tesla). If you are a true inventor it is a tap you cannot turn off. If you are a bro who is in it for the money chances are you will not invent anything particularly ground breaking. The major concern here is that it's the bros who control the capital.

dba7dba 11y ago
And west is trying to return the favor a few centuries later by trying to introduce basic human rights and/or democracy in China but so far, with not much success...
- tluyben2 11y ago
  Is that true though? Sure it happens but it also still happens in the US and other democratic countries. Maybe less but things progressed a lot. You keep reading things about oppression etc but Chinese colleagues I talk to in Shanghai and surrounding or Bejing and surrounding notice nothing of the sort. Maybe you have to actively oppose the gov to get kicked down? It is not there yet but not much success is too negative imho. Looking at Apple and other western brands here I think it even went too far. Mao would not be happy.
  - PavlovsCat 11y ago
    > Maybe you have to actively oppose the gov to get kicked down? You mean kind like you're free to go wherever you want in prison, as long as you don't try to walk out of the door of your cell? :P Here's a really sobering thought though: > You can have a lot of political 'change' in the United States, but will it really change that much? Will it change the amount of money in someone’s bank account? Will it change contracts? Will it void contracts that already exist? And contracts on contracts? And contracts on contracts on contracts? Not really. > So I say that free speech in many Western places is free not as a result of liberal circumstances but rather as a result of such intense fiscalization that it doesn’t matter what you say. The dominant elite doesn’t have to be scared of what people think, because a change in political view is not going to change whether they own their company or not; it is not going to change whether they own a piece of land or not. But China is still a political society, although it is rapidly heading toward a fiscalized society. And other societies, like Egypt, are still heavily politicized. Their rulers really do need to be concerned about what people think, so they expend proportionate efforts on controlling freedom of speech. -- Julian Assange
    - rorykoehler 11y ago
      A bit ironic to quote Julian Assange in this case considering his current predicament. Free speech exists in the west only for those who don't say anything important. As soon as you say something important you end up in Julian's shoes.
  - TheLogothete 11y ago
    There was a front page story here, on HN, about a guy that made some component to make VPNs work in China, stopping all work because the secret police threatened his life.
    - chrischen 11y ago
      VPNs do work in China, and it is a sovereign nation's right to enact and enforce laws it believes are just and necessary. My sister's home town in Michigan says it's illegal to spit on the ground. America threatens jail time for possessing weed!
      - TheLogothete 11y ago
        I don't think debating axiology with strangers on the internet is worth it.
    - rorykoehler 11y ago
      I raise you one Edward Snowden.
      - ggreer 11y ago
        I don't see how that's remotely comparable. In the US, state officials simply don't threaten your life for writing software. Despite leaking state secrets, Snowden's life was never threatened by US officials. Yes, he's a whistleblower, but his actions are far more serious than developing software. Even then, US officials talk of imprisonment at worst.
        marshray 11y ago
        > Snowden's life was never threatened by US officials http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/11/ron-paul-us-government-may-try-to-kill-whistleblower.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/11/ron-paul-us-gover... http://www.businessinsider.com/us-spies-talk-about-killing-snowden-2014-1 http://www.businessinsider.com/us-spies-talk-about-killing-s... http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/03/edward-snowden-kill-list-joke-us-intelligence-chiefs http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/03/edward-snowden-...
- 1stop 11y ago
  sigh This trope is a bit a over used. When you say "The West" you mean "The US" right? If you say "China's record on human rights" I say: "Guantanamo, NSA, Wikileaks...". If you say "Democracy in China" I say "China has a similar percentage of voters as the US" (That's right, lots of people are in the party!). And "George W Bush didn't actually win against Al Gore (Do we all remember the florida recount... or lack there of)". There is too much hypocrisy in the China/US political debate. They are both Super powers, they do some things differently, they do some things the same, neither of them are morally superior.
  - vijayr 11y ago
    Also solitary confinement, too much power to the police etc. Topics like this are not black and white. It is just a waste of time (unless one is a politician making noises to get elected) talking about these topics without solid proof and even then it should be case by case basis, instead of broad generalizations.
  - walterbell 11y ago
    Do you have more context on this story, http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/mag_article/chinas_latest_crackdown_on_lawyers_is_unprecedented_human_rights_monitors/ http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/mag_article/chinas_latest_c... "... Wang and her husband, human rights attorney Bao Longjun, were detained July 9 and accused of inciting subversion of state power. In early January, they were formally arrested, their lawyer told the New York Times on Jan. 13. The pair have been incommunicado since July, when they began languishing under “residential surveillance”—a status sometimes interpreted to be the equivalent of house arrest but that is actually akin to a “black jail.” There, detainees are held in solitary confinement and subjected to extreme interrogation, forced confessions and even torture. Family members, friends and colleagues have been denied access or even knowledge of their whereabouts. In April 2015, three months before she disappeared, human rights lawyer Wang protested against expropriations of farmland and properties in Suzhou, northwest of Shanghai. The arrests of Wang and Bao are just the tip of the iceberg. By mid-November, more than 300 people had been swept up in what human rights monitors describe as an unprecedented crackdown on Chinese lawyers. Those detained or questioned include not only some of the most active rights lawyers but also their support staff, associates and even family members. At least three have seen their children’s passports confiscated and their movements curtailed."
- 50CNT 11y ago
  Kinda. The Chinese government has been trying to mix sitting on a powder keg and rapid economic growth. They do not want to become a second USSR by opening up all the floodgates at once. Also, considering how they got to their position, I don't think that any of them have preconceptions of a gentle fall if things go south. What seems to be the case is that they're shooting for slow incremental improvement, moving from less touchy areas to more touchy areas. They've gone from not talking about corruption to cracking down on it higher and higher up the ranks. It's a very slow sleigh of hand, with the distraction being economic growth, and various distinctly communist tasting programs (the current one should be 中国梦(Chinese Dream), if I recall correctly). But their fear doesn't seem unjustified. There are still spontaneous uprisings which are usually nipped in the bud before they can escalate by means of information and communication monitoring. That's what they care about. Expats in China using VPNs? They don't give one. Whilst I'm all for democracy, introducing it to China right now would work about as well as introducing it to the Middle East. Groups feeling under-represented would fraction off, there would likely be civil war, widespread devastation to one of the most populous countries of the world, and worst of all, whilst Iran getting nuclear weapons seems like a looming threat, China does have them. The sheer pandemonium would make Syria look like a backwater stand-off. I may be exaggerating, but then look at the bloodshed of the cultural revolution. I grew up in Germany, so it's not like I'm opposed or unfamiliar with the idea of democracy, it's an incredible system. But for China right now? Well meant, but not practical. It'd be a less bloody affair to turn the US into a monarchy (to make a comparison). In 20 years, maybe, though it might take longer. Thinking China can be fixed with a fair heaping of democracy and human rights ignores a lot of very significant details in a country that works contrary to a lot of accepted wisdom in the west. /rant PS: There's lots of interesting things going on here, playing churned lover with western ideals is literally the least interesting thing to talk about. The day before yesterday they announced changes to the Visa regimen, coming into effect in March. 72-hour visa free visit in 4 yangtze river cities, and some streamlining of visa/green card programs for tech people and entrepreneurs working in China. Maybe I should have chosen a less ironic user name, because this is starting to sound like a sales pitch.
  - seanmcdirmid 11y ago
    Oh, I thought your user name meant the rapper :) The new visa regimes are interesting, but it hasn't seem to trickle down yet to us tech PhD people's. Really, China doesn't like foreigners, and they merely tolerate us, making us register at police stations after every trip, making us renew our visas yearly, not giving us access to the same services as natives.
- rorykoehler 11y ago
  Democracy? We don't even have a functioning one between us ourselves. Shameful attitude.
- marshray 11y ago
  I always remember this video, the 1st time I heard the US political establishment openly question its China trade policy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EVGOQVuU2Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EVGOQVuU2Q
michaelt 11y ago
If you are a true inventor it is a tap you cannot turn off. Maybe so, but if your invention is some clever semiconductor design or process, you'll need a few million dollars for prototyping. And even if inventors will do their thing for zero return, investors won't.
- newjersey 11y ago
  I sincerely disagree because the return will likely be greater than zero. I'm amazed how entrepreneurs and investors think that 100x is their birthright. it is perfectly fine to me that works changing innovations only make 1.2x return if it means we as a society watch each other's back the other 90% of time when we fail to produce.
  - seanmcdirmid 11y ago
    100x on success is needed to counter act 90/100 failures. Payoff should be related to risk of losing it all.
    - rorykoehler 11y ago
      This is true but because it is inbuilt into our current system and not a universal truth. There are mechanisms we could use to change the narrative from all or nothing to a lot or enough.
  - rhino369 11y ago
    It's all about allocating capital. Even if you only take a 1.2X return (which depending on the length of investment might be a loss), that doesn't mean someone else gets the other 98.8X for other investment. By default it would create positive externalities for customers, competitors, etc. You would need a mechanism to catch that extra value and redistribute it to real R&D. I'm not saying its impossible, but it's not as easy as just saying lets do it.
    - newjersey 11y ago
      > It's all about allocating capital. I completely agree. However, I propose we put a serious damper on growth. Now, I know I cannot effectively or efficiently dictate how capital is allocated but we can do something almost as good. We can try to disassociate risk and reward. It is my sincere beliefs that the inventions, the discoveries, and the creation of useful arts will take place sooner or later even without the motivation of the 100x gains. It might take a few years, decades, or centuries but we will get there. Yes, the plan requires a hint of central planning but I think it is acceptable. The more I think about this the more I am convinced that an effective maximum yearly individual income is pivotal to the success of our society going forward. If adding the value of perks would amount to the annual maximum income would push someone over the maximum individual income then they should rightfully pay the correct income tax on the sum over the maximum income (which I tentatively set at 100 * 2000 * minimum wage per hour, it ought to be lower but we need to be pragmatic). The reason we need to spend so much money on everything and we need 100x gains is that our enterprises have become too top heavy. The only "simple" way to curtail it that I can think of is to impose a maximum personal income (above which we tax away a large part, lets say 90% of the income). We can make it something more palatable. We have the ability to do it. We just need the will power to effect this tweak in the way our society rewards people. > Meanwhile billionaire Larry Ellison leased his own aircraft to the company he runs for $1.5 million. (source http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-05-02/ceos-take-leisure-trips-on-corporate-jets-as-stigma-wanes http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-05-02/ceos-take-... ) Now this idea isn't perfect. Right away I can think of a way people will try to game the system by "packing" the board of directors with nephews, nieces, children, grandchildren, butlers, and maids of the corporate officers. I don't have a solution to this yet but I am sure we can fix these bugs as we see them in production. The idea is to get the ball rolling and iterate as we go.
SixSigma 11y ago
> I'd put it down to karma. If karma were true, then the West getting Chinese tech was also deserved.
tw04 11y ago
>e.g. Tesla And how much more would we have gotten from Tesla if he hadn't been in financial ruins? He's probably proof positive that without the financial incentive/backing, the world loses out on countless inventions.
- Niten 11y ago
  Nikola Tesla was a great engineer and innovator—and showman—who's been mythologized beyond all reason. Even at the time, Tesla's greatest contributions were being simultaneously discovered by contemporaries like Galileo Ferraris. Discovery marches on, and is more a product of the existing body of scientific knowledge than of any one man. There have been too many other great minds in physics and electrical engineering for it to be remotely plausible that we've missed out on "countless inventions" that would be available to us today, if only Tesla had more money for his experiments.
  - tw04 11y ago
    Which is why we're just now starting to get wireless power 70 years after his death...
dang 11y ago
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11000967 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11000967 and marked it off-topic.

dba7dba 11y ago

And west is trying to return the favor a few centuries later by trying to introduce basic human rights and/or democracy in China but so far, with not much success...

tluyben2 11y ago
Is that true though? Sure it happens but it also still happens in the US and other democratic countries. Maybe less but things progressed a lot. You keep reading things about oppression etc but Chinese colleagues I talk to in Shanghai and surrounding or Bejing and surrounding notice nothing of the sort. Maybe you have to actively oppose the gov to get kicked down? It is not there yet but not much success is too negative imho. Looking at Apple and other western brands here I think it even went too far. Mao would not be happy.
- PavlovsCat 11y ago
  > Maybe you have to actively oppose the gov to get kicked down? You mean kind like you're free to go wherever you want in prison, as long as you don't try to walk out of the door of your cell? :P Here's a really sobering thought though: > You can have a lot of political 'change' in the United States, but will it really change that much? Will it change the amount of money in someone’s bank account? Will it change contracts? Will it void contracts that already exist? And contracts on contracts? And contracts on contracts on contracts? Not really. > So I say that free speech in many Western places is free not as a result of liberal circumstances but rather as a result of such intense fiscalization that it doesn’t matter what you say. The dominant elite doesn’t have to be scared of what people think, because a change in political view is not going to change whether they own their company or not; it is not going to change whether they own a piece of land or not. But China is still a political society, although it is rapidly heading toward a fiscalized society. And other societies, like Egypt, are still heavily politicized. Their rulers really do need to be concerned about what people think, so they expend proportionate efforts on controlling freedom of speech. -- Julian Assange
  - rorykoehler 11y ago
    A bit ironic to quote Julian Assange in this case considering his current predicament. Free speech exists in the west only for those who don't say anything important. As soon as you say something important you end up in Julian's shoes.
- TheLogothete 11y ago
  There was a front page story here, on HN, about a guy that made some component to make VPNs work in China, stopping all work because the secret police threatened his life.
  - chrischen 11y ago
    VPNs do work in China, and it is a sovereign nation's right to enact and enforce laws it believes are just and necessary. My sister's home town in Michigan says it's illegal to spit on the ground. America threatens jail time for possessing weed!
    - TheLogothete 11y ago
      I don't think debating axiology with strangers on the internet is worth it.
  - rorykoehler 11y ago
    I raise you one Edward Snowden.
    - ggreer 11y ago
      I don't see how that's remotely comparable. In the US, state officials simply don't threaten your life for writing software. Despite leaking state secrets, Snowden's life was never threatened by US officials. Yes, he's a whistleblower, but his actions are far more serious than developing software. Even then, US officials talk of imprisonment at worst.
      - marshray 11y ago
        > Snowden's life was never threatened by US officials http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/11/ron-paul-us-government-may-try-to-kill-whistleblower.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/11/ron-paul-us-gover... http://www.businessinsider.com/us-spies-talk-about-killing-snowden-2014-1 http://www.businessinsider.com/us-spies-talk-about-killing-s... http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/03/edward-snowden-kill-list-joke-us-intelligence-chiefs http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/03/edward-snowden-...
1stop 11y ago
sigh This trope is a bit a over used. When you say "The West" you mean "The US" right? If you say "China's record on human rights" I say: "Guantanamo, NSA, Wikileaks...". If you say "Democracy in China" I say "China has a similar percentage of voters as the US" (That's right, lots of people are in the party!). And "George W Bush didn't actually win against Al Gore (Do we all remember the florida recount... or lack there of)". There is too much hypocrisy in the China/US political debate. They are both Super powers, they do some things differently, they do some things the same, neither of them are morally superior.
- vijayr 11y ago
  Also solitary confinement, too much power to the police etc. Topics like this are not black and white. It is just a waste of time (unless one is a politician making noises to get elected) talking about these topics without solid proof and even then it should be case by case basis, instead of broad generalizations.
- walterbell 11y ago
  Do you have more context on this story, http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/mag_article/chinas_latest_crackdown_on_lawyers_is_unprecedented_human_rights_monitors/ http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/mag_article/chinas_latest_c... "... Wang and her husband, human rights attorney Bao Longjun, were detained July 9 and accused of inciting subversion of state power. In early January, they were formally arrested, their lawyer told the New York Times on Jan. 13. The pair have been incommunicado since July, when they began languishing under “residential surveillance”—a status sometimes interpreted to be the equivalent of house arrest but that is actually akin to a “black jail.” There, detainees are held in solitary confinement and subjected to extreme interrogation, forced confessions and even torture. Family members, friends and colleagues have been denied access or even knowledge of their whereabouts. In April 2015, three months before she disappeared, human rights lawyer Wang protested against expropriations of farmland and properties in Suzhou, northwest of Shanghai. The arrests of Wang and Bao are just the tip of the iceberg. By mid-November, more than 300 people had been swept up in what human rights monitors describe as an unprecedented crackdown on Chinese lawyers. Those detained or questioned include not only some of the most active rights lawyers but also their support staff, associates and even family members. At least three have seen their children’s passports confiscated and their movements curtailed."
50CNT 11y ago
Kinda. The Chinese government has been trying to mix sitting on a powder keg and rapid economic growth. They do not want to become a second USSR by opening up all the floodgates at once. Also, considering how they got to their position, I don't think that any of them have preconceptions of a gentle fall if things go south. What seems to be the case is that they're shooting for slow incremental improvement, moving from less touchy areas to more touchy areas. They've gone from not talking about corruption to cracking down on it higher and higher up the ranks. It's a very slow sleigh of hand, with the distraction being economic growth, and various distinctly communist tasting programs (the current one should be 中国梦(Chinese Dream), if I recall correctly). But their fear doesn't seem unjustified. There are still spontaneous uprisings which are usually nipped in the bud before they can escalate by means of information and communication monitoring. That's what they care about. Expats in China using VPNs? They don't give one. Whilst I'm all for democracy, introducing it to China right now would work about as well as introducing it to the Middle East. Groups feeling under-represented would fraction off, there would likely be civil war, widespread devastation to one of the most populous countries of the world, and worst of all, whilst Iran getting nuclear weapons seems like a looming threat, China does have them. The sheer pandemonium would make Syria look like a backwater stand-off. I may be exaggerating, but then look at the bloodshed of the cultural revolution. I grew up in Germany, so it's not like I'm opposed or unfamiliar with the idea of democracy, it's an incredible system. But for China right now? Well meant, but not practical. It'd be a less bloody affair to turn the US into a monarchy (to make a comparison). In 20 years, maybe, though it might take longer. Thinking China can be fixed with a fair heaping of democracy and human rights ignores a lot of very significant details in a country that works contrary to a lot of accepted wisdom in the west. /rant PS: There's lots of interesting things going on here, playing churned lover with western ideals is literally the least interesting thing to talk about. The day before yesterday they announced changes to the Visa regimen, coming into effect in March. 72-hour visa free visit in 4 yangtze river cities, and some streamlining of visa/green card programs for tech people and entrepreneurs working in China. Maybe I should have chosen a less ironic user name, because this is starting to sound like a sales pitch.
- seanmcdirmid 11y ago
  Oh, I thought your user name meant the rapper :) The new visa regimes are interesting, but it hasn't seem to trickle down yet to us tech PhD people's. Really, China doesn't like foreigners, and they merely tolerate us, making us register at police stations after every trip, making us renew our visas yearly, not giving us access to the same services as natives.
rorykoehler 11y ago
Democracy? We don't even have a functioning one between us ourselves. Shameful attitude.
marshray 11y ago
I always remember this video, the 1st time I heard the US political establishment openly question its China trade policy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EVGOQVuU2Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EVGOQVuU2Q

michaelt 11y ago

If you are a true inventor it is a tap you cannot turn off. Maybe so, but if your invention is some clever semiconductor design or process, you'll need a few million dollars for prototyping. And even if inventors will do their thing for zero return, investors won't.

newjersey 11y ago
I sincerely disagree because the return will likely be greater than zero. I'm amazed how entrepreneurs and investors think that 100x is their birthright. it is perfectly fine to me that works changing innovations only make 1.2x return if it means we as a society watch each other's back the other 90% of time when we fail to produce.
- seanmcdirmid 11y ago
  100x on success is needed to counter act 90/100 failures. Payoff should be related to risk of losing it all.
  - rorykoehler 11y ago
    This is true but because it is inbuilt into our current system and not a universal truth. There are mechanisms we could use to change the narrative from all or nothing to a lot or enough.
- rhino369 11y ago
  It's all about allocating capital. Even if you only take a 1.2X return (which depending on the length of investment might be a loss), that doesn't mean someone else gets the other 98.8X for other investment. By default it would create positive externalities for customers, competitors, etc. You would need a mechanism to catch that extra value and redistribute it to real R&D. I'm not saying its impossible, but it's not as easy as just saying lets do it.
  - newjersey 11y ago
    > It's all about allocating capital. I completely agree. However, I propose we put a serious damper on growth. Now, I know I cannot effectively or efficiently dictate how capital is allocated but we can do something almost as good. We can try to disassociate risk and reward. It is my sincere beliefs that the inventions, the discoveries, and the creation of useful arts will take place sooner or later even without the motivation of the 100x gains. It might take a few years, decades, or centuries but we will get there. Yes, the plan requires a hint of central planning but I think it is acceptable. The more I think about this the more I am convinced that an effective maximum yearly individual income is pivotal to the success of our society going forward. If adding the value of perks would amount to the annual maximum income would push someone over the maximum individual income then they should rightfully pay the correct income tax on the sum over the maximum income (which I tentatively set at 100 * 2000 * minimum wage per hour, it ought to be lower but we need to be pragmatic). The reason we need to spend so much money on everything and we need 100x gains is that our enterprises have become too top heavy. The only "simple" way to curtail it that I can think of is to impose a maximum personal income (above which we tax away a large part, lets say 90% of the income). We can make it something more palatable. We have the ability to do it. We just need the will power to effect this tweak in the way our society rewards people. > Meanwhile billionaire Larry Ellison leased his own aircraft to the company he runs for $1.5 million. (source http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-05-02/ceos-take-leisure-trips-on-corporate-jets-as-stigma-wanes http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-05-02/ceos-take-... ) Now this idea isn't perfect. Right away I can think of a way people will try to game the system by "packing" the board of directors with nephews, nieces, children, grandchildren, butlers, and maids of the corporate officers. I don't have a solution to this yet but I am sure we can fix these bugs as we see them in production. The idea is to get the ball rolling and iterate as we go.

SixSigma 11y ago

> I'd put it down to karma. If karma were true, then the West getting Chinese tech was also deserved.

tw04 11y ago

>e.g. Tesla And how much more would we have gotten from Tesla if he hadn't been in financial ruins? He's probably proof positive that without the financial incentive/backing, the world loses out on countless inventions.

Niten 11y ago
Nikola Tesla was a great engineer and innovator—and showman—who's been mythologized beyond all reason. Even at the time, Tesla's greatest contributions were being simultaneously discovered by contemporaries like Galileo Ferraris. Discovery marches on, and is more a product of the existing body of scientific knowledge than of any one man. There have been too many other great minds in physics and electrical engineering for it to be remotely plausible that we've missed out on "countless inventions" that would be available to us today, if only Tesla had more money for his experiments.
- tw04 11y ago
  Which is why we're just now starting to get wireless power 70 years after his death...

dang 11y ago

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11000967 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11000967 and marked it off-topic.