3 ms·
Given the markets in the 17 and 18th centuries weren't as vibrant and open as today, and the amount of technology stolen by the Chinese today, compared to the a
by bassman9000 8y ago
Given the markets in the 17 and 18th centuries weren't as vibrant and open as today, and the amount of technology stolen by the Chinese today, compared to the amount "stolen" by Europeans back then, this comparison is plain disingenuous.
Edit: expanding: the technology wasn't stolen in the same sense as today, because the Chinese couldn't not wanted to export and sell the technology back to the West. But US/Europe today are getting their IP stolen, and immediately sold to them. That's the asymmetry.
- ggm 8y agoOh certainly, the scale is significantly different. I think that the rei-ification of IPR just isn't understood the same way culturally, the "crime" is not taken in the same sense the effect on Chinese economy and polity is taken. Much the same as the Russians for much of the 20th century: must catch up is like a joker card mentality. Except of course as long as you steal IPR, you can't catch up in real sense.
- lovemenot 8y agoThat's right. The long-term trend will be in the direction of China playing by club rules. When China is a fully developed nation, its brands are valuable overseas and its own technology is superior in many markets. Then it'll be in China's interest to enforce global trading rules. Right now it's in transition.
- thefounder 8y agoThings move faster(fortunately) but the effect is similar. Any small invention in the past had huge effects on history. Europens won over the indigenious people because of the technology. It was not very advanced but good enough to change history. If the chinesse were not so...communist I wouldn't really say it's a bad thing in the big picture.