4 ms·

It’s not like it’s too late, especially with the US pursuing 19th century solutions to 21st century problems. The level of understanding possessed by the US pre

It’s not like it’s too late, especially with the US pursuing 19th century solutions to 21st century problems. The level of understanding possessed by the US presidential candidates for the 2020 elections is a little worrying. For starters, we have a number of folks who want to break up big tech without a corresponding plan to break up the oligarchies held by the big telcos. The article alludes to a major Chinese shortcoming: that it thought it could own semiconductor manufacturing by owning the equipment. A lot of US nationalism is centered on how the US leads in terms of culture. It would be precarious to assume that we should really be so advantaged, or more broadly, to pin your success on the failure of your competitor.

Fjolsvith 7y ago
> It’s not like it’s too late, especially with the US pursuing 19th century solutions to 21st century problems. Of course not. It just requires China actually do the research for the tech instead of stealing it. > The level of understanding possessed by the US presidential candidates for the 2020 elections is a little worrying. For starters, we have a number of folks who want to break up big tech without a corresponding plan to break up the oligarchies held by the big telcos. Another set of 19th century solutions. > The article alludes to a major Chinese shortcoming: that it thought it could own semiconductor manufacturing by owning the equipment. IP theft isn't the same as IP research. > A lot of US nationalism is centered on how the US leads in terms of culture. It would be precarious to assume that we should really be so advantaged, or more broadly, to pin your success on the failure of your competitor. It's more than just culture. We have a set of law that protects our research efforts. In China, what protection is there from competition or even the government?

Fjolsvith 7y ago

> It’s not like it’s too late, especially with the US pursuing 19th century solutions to 21st century problems. Of course not. It just requires China actually do the research for the tech instead of stealing it. > The level of understanding possessed by the US presidential candidates for the 2020 elections is a little worrying. For starters, we have a number of folks who want to break up big tech without a corresponding plan to break up the oligarchies held by the big telcos. Another set of 19th century solutions. > The article alludes to a major Chinese shortcoming: that it thought it could own semiconductor manufacturing by owning the equipment. IP theft isn't the same as IP research. > A lot of US nationalism is centered on how the US leads in terms of culture. It would be precarious to assume that we should really be so advantaged, or more broadly, to pin your success on the failure of your competitor. It's more than just culture. We have a set of law that protects our research efforts. In China, what protection is there from competition or even the government?