10 ms·

It must help Chinese startups that many SV companies are blocked from competing in China. For example no competition from Facebook, Messenger, Instagram, Twitte

• ignoramous 10y ago
  You're undermining the fact that to build services of that scale is not trivial at all, and the fact they have managed to do it is the basis of why they are an effective competition to SV, now that they are as economically strong as the Bay Area is. Once they are done with "replicating" SV, they'd start "inventing" too. What's stopping them from that?
  • supster 10y ago
    I'm not undermining them - simply stating that there was a vacuum created by the lack of competition. Even cloning successful services at scale is incredibly difficult, but it's not 0 to 1, it's 1 to n. Nonetheless, I agree Chinese startups are using their current leverage to innovate in really interesting new ways.
    • doppp 10y ago
      I highly doubt there is a "lack of competition" in China. For each and every one of those "Facebook, Messenger, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, Youtube, Gmail, Dropbox, Vimeo, SoundCloud" you mentioned, there are a hundred similar companies. In fact, I'd argue that competition is rife and more ruthless in China than in Silicon Valley. The moment you have a good idea, ten companies will appear the next day hot on your heels. Even if the American stalwarts were to enter the Chinese market, who's to say they won't be crushed by Chinese competition?
      • Apocryphon 10y ago
        On the other hand, the customer base is also much larger in China.
        • bx_ 10y ago
          With that said, reputation and word of mouth is everything in China. Before an app like Didi was the king, people were changing ride share apps every month. New deals, new coupons, new rumors, etc... The tide changes really fast here. Didi just happened to be the only app that could hang in there. Regardless of how many people there are, if 10 people online say something is not worth using, no one else is going to use it.
• api 10y ago
  I've been told that the great firewall is actually more about protectionism than censorship. They know they can't really contain information, but they can block or degrade foreign services to favor their own. Of course this does serve a state censorship and surveillance agenda indirectly since home grown services can be more easily controlled. As much as I can't stand Trump and could never vote for him, I do think he's one of the few candidates raising the issue of how unfair our trade relations are with China. The WTO limits tariffs but the Chinese have found tons of indirect ways to implement protectionism: the great firewall, manipulating their currency, making it hard for US firms to take payments in China, etc.
  • chx 10y ago
    Stop right there. Think of what you are doing. You are already trying to find positive values in Trump. Don't. Resist him. The whole world is in deep shit if he gets elected. Check https://twitter.com/ivan_hernandez/status/694388187284795392 https://twitter.com/ivan_hernandez/status/694388187284795392 as well :)
    • tmptmp 10y ago
      No, Trump has made many important and crucial things about USA. The matter of shoddy trade practices by China is one such thing. I guess, Trump is a right candidate for USA now given the situation of Islamist immigration and China and such things.
  • mrb 10y ago
    I think most economists will tell you the USA-China economic trade benefits both countries. Few will tell you it is "unfair". China get American money, and the USA get swath of cheap goods.
    • seanmcdirmid 10y ago
      China's environment is ruined in the pursuit of cheap goods, which considering weren't really as cheap as China sold them for. China gets American money, which then goes back to buy America real estate just like Japan decided to do on the late 80s after investment oppurtunities started drying up at home. And we know what happened next....
• jfoster 10y ago
  Absolutely. Corollary: When running a country, protectionism of tech businesses can really pay off if your population is large enough. Should every country follow Beijing's example? I'm not sure it leads to a good outcome globally, but on a per-country basis it seems like countries with large populations do have something to gain by acting selfishly.
  • Drakim 10y ago
    Protectionism is a sorta tragedy of the commons type of deal, if everybody did it the advantage it offered would disappear.
    • deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
      • yummyfajitas 10y ago
        What's wrong if black people only pocket black people's money and white people only pocket white people's money? (And of course if anyone chooses to engage with those of the wrong group, violence will be used to stop them.)
        • deleted 10y ago
          [deleted]
        • akshatpradhan 10y ago
          So is protectionism then the same as racism?
          • yummyfajitas 10y ago
            I simply asked a question. I see nothing in your argument which distinguishes between protectionism motivated by racism and protection motivated by nationalism. What principle do you use to distinguish between them? (Incidentally, if you want my view, it's the following. Racism and patriotism/nationalism is just a feeling and is intrinsically harmless. However they often motivate intrinsically harmful behaviors such as protectionism or other more direct forms of tribal violence.)
• nbevans 10y ago
  I wish the UK would block American SV firms in a similar way, to be quite honest.