5 ms·

Notice how everything is a clone or stealing western tech, and nothing you said was pure innovation? What would their computing have looked like without the we

Notice how everything is a clone or stealing western tech, and nothing you said was pure innovation? What would their computing have looked like without the west?

flohofwoe 8y ago
I think the whole point of the effort was catching up quickly through cloning (much the same strategy as Japan after WW2, or more recently China), and not creating incompatible technology which would ultimately be a dead-end. For instance, a home-grown, incompatible CPU that's only used in one country didn't make sense back then just as today. That's also the reason why the Z80 was chosen over the 6502, it was all about enabling compatibility with CP/M software. But although the basic chips were cloned, at least some of the actual computers that were build with those chips were not clones of existing Western computer designs, partly because many Western home computers had highly integrated custom chips to make mass production cheaper, which was out-of-question for Eastern computer designs.
- Lkjhmnbv 8y ago
  Why doesn't it make sense? If argue making a compatible system made no sense. They were fighting an existential war with the west, and it was a fight to win. They despised capitalism and sought to exterminate it. Its a bit (much more than a bit) hypocritical to deride your enemies as immoral and horrible people worth destroying while stealing their tech because you can't invent it. But then again logic was never a strong suit of these arguments.
  - detaro 8y ago
    Making an incompatible system just because would have meant lagging further behind, since they couldn't profit as much from the experience that went into the tech cloned. That's why copying made sense.
  - eropple 8y ago
    "Can't" and "don't want to incur the opportunity costs of" are different things. And hypocrisy is a rhetorical failing, not a logical one. BTW: HN doesn't usually cotton too well to this kind of YOLO ideolatry that you're tossing off.
    - Lkjhmnbv 8y ago
      The reply stated: >and not creating incompatible technology which would ultimately be a dead-end. Why would the tech be a dead end if the Soviets won the cold war? I really don't understand how I'm the one spouting any idolatry at all. No idea what that even means. I just think the argument is facile, and see no real grounds for believing it. I do understand that you're attacking me though, in spite of me trying to understand your position. Not sure why I deserve that for politely disagreeing, but here we are.
      - flohofwoe 8y ago
        I think even the most die-hard communists didn't have any illusions about beating the West economically since at least the mid-sixties. It was merely about dragging along as long as possible while not falling behind too much. I haven't attacked (nor downvoted) you btw.
      - eropple 8y ago
        So uh. Just so you know? It's not my position you're trying to dunk on while trying to not understand it. I don't particularly agree with the poster to whom you replied. I think you're being disingenuous and that you're kinda being a jerk. That's different, and that's worse. And I did not say "idolatry". If I had meant idolatry, I would have said it.
        Lkjhmnbv 8y ago
        Oh well. Have a happy Thanksgiving.
      - opportune 8y ago
        because you’re writing extremely condescendingly without writing smart enough supporting arguments to get away with it

Notice how everything is a clone or stealing western tech, and nothing you said was pure innovation? What would their computing have looked like without the west?

flohofwoe 8y ago

I think the whole point of the effort was catching up quickly through cloning (much the same strategy as Japan after WW2, or more recently China), and not creating incompatible technology which would ultimately be a dead-end. For instance, a home-grown, incompatible CPU that's only used in one country didn't make sense back then just as today. That's also the reason why the Z80 was chosen over the 6502, it was all about enabling compatibility with CP/M software. But although the basic chips were cloned, at least some of the actual computers that were build with those chips were not clones of existing Western computer designs, partly because many Western home computers had highly integrated custom chips to make mass production cheaper, which was out-of-question for Eastern computer designs.

Lkjhmnbv 8y ago
Why doesn't it make sense? If argue making a compatible system made no sense. They were fighting an existential war with the west, and it was a fight to win. They despised capitalism and sought to exterminate it. Its a bit (much more than a bit) hypocritical to deride your enemies as immoral and horrible people worth destroying while stealing their tech because you can't invent it. But then again logic was never a strong suit of these arguments.
- detaro 8y ago
  Making an incompatible system just because would have meant lagging further behind, since they couldn't profit as much from the experience that went into the tech cloned. That's why copying made sense.
- eropple 8y ago
  "Can't" and "don't want to incur the opportunity costs of" are different things. And hypocrisy is a rhetorical failing, not a logical one. BTW: HN doesn't usually cotton too well to this kind of YOLO ideolatry that you're tossing off.
  - Lkjhmnbv 8y ago
    The reply stated: >and not creating incompatible technology which would ultimately be a dead-end. Why would the tech be a dead end if the Soviets won the cold war? I really don't understand how I'm the one spouting any idolatry at all. No idea what that even means. I just think the argument is facile, and see no real grounds for believing it. I do understand that you're attacking me though, in spite of me trying to understand your position. Not sure why I deserve that for politely disagreeing, but here we are.
    - flohofwoe 8y ago
      I think even the most die-hard communists didn't have any illusions about beating the West economically since at least the mid-sixties. It was merely about dragging along as long as possible while not falling behind too much. I haven't attacked (nor downvoted) you btw.
    - eropple 8y ago
      So uh. Just so you know? It's not my position you're trying to dunk on while trying to not understand it. I don't particularly agree with the poster to whom you replied. I think you're being disingenuous and that you're kinda being a jerk. That's different, and that's worse. And I did not say "idolatry". If I had meant idolatry, I would have said it.
      - Lkjhmnbv 8y ago
        Oh well. Have a happy Thanksgiving.
    - opportune 8y ago
      because you’re writing extremely condescendingly without writing smart enough supporting arguments to get away with it