5 ms·

Except that china also makes complex things, like planes and satelites. They don't need america for that.

by ako 7y ago

josefresco 7y ago
... with stolen IP from America.
- denzil_correa 7y ago
  They have learnt historical lessons from the USA who stole IP from the U.K. https://www.apnews.com/b40414d22f2248428ce11ff36b88dc53 https://www.apnews.com/b40414d22f2248428ce11ff36b88dc53
  - reaperducer 7y ago
    Why would you compare the actions of a developing country 200 years ago working within that timeframe's norms to the actions of a developed country working within today's norms?
    - sangnoir 7y ago
      > working within that timeframe's norms As you'd imagine, the norm in the UK[1] was to be against "IP theft" 200 years ago, but the US had a more cavalier attitude then - I wonder why. 1. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-industrial-espionage-started-americas-cotton-revolution-180967608/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-industrial-esp...
    - lostlogin 7y ago
      But it’s not the norm in China. If you are to decide what is normal, do you do this based on geography or population? Either way, China is a pretty big place.
    - kenned3 7y ago
      200 years ago, the behavoiur of the US was not consistant with the "norms" at the time. The UK had clear laws on this, and the US violated them. US leaders encouraged it. How is this not the same as what China is doing now?
  - evancox100 7y ago
    I suggest readers to draw their own conclusions from this article. To me, it does not make a convincing case that the scale of IP theft in 18th century USA is anywhere near as comprehensive as what is happening today in China.
    - dillondoyle 7y ago
      And to me there is a big difference between the Government encouraging recruitment of those with knowledge through immigration vs a Government who IS the 'primary' stakeholder in all Corps + actively using state resources/agencies for theft.
- la_barba 7y ago
  ..created by chinese phd students (sorry.. i know its a low-blow :P)
- charliesome 7y ago
  There's no inherent scarcity to information. Building your economy on such an assumption is a very shaky foundation to build on.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- michaelmrose 7y ago
  Owning the rights to ideas isn't a sustainable future unless you also have the influence or the power to force people to respect your imaginary property. If ultimately the only thing you end up owning over others is ideas it becomes increasingly attractive simply to opt out of such rights.
- rleigh 7y ago
  It ultimately doesn't matter much. What matters is that you have the ability to manufacture a product. You can own as much IP as you like, but if you don't have the capability of using that in a production process then it really is the Emperor's New Clothes. Having the capability is important. Outsourcing has removed the crown jewels from many companies, leaving them little more than marketing shells. The real value is in the technical know-how and skills of the people who actually made those companies run. Without that, there is no company and no product.
- mcculley 7y ago
  This is something I wonder about a lot. How long will IP be of value? IP only has value when it is completely secret or when a government enforces the monopoly for the owner. How can we expect governments to agree to enforce these monopolies reciprocally (or at all) as the cost of information copying and distribution continues to plummet? If a big country decided to drop out of the WTO, what would prevent them from just manufacturing anything they want? Would governments erect trade barriers?

Except that china also makes complex things, like planes and satelites. They don't need america for that.

by ako 7y ago

Except that china also makes complex things, like planes and satelites. They don't need america for that.

josefresco 7y ago

... with stolen IP from America.

denzil_correa 7y ago
They have learnt historical lessons from the USA who stole IP from the U.K. https://www.apnews.com/b40414d22f2248428ce11ff36b88dc53 https://www.apnews.com/b40414d22f2248428ce11ff36b88dc53
- reaperducer 7y ago
  Why would you compare the actions of a developing country 200 years ago working within that timeframe's norms to the actions of a developed country working within today's norms?
  - sangnoir 7y ago
    > working within that timeframe's norms As you'd imagine, the norm in the UK[1] was to be against "IP theft" 200 years ago, but the US had a more cavalier attitude then - I wonder why. 1. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-industrial-espionage-started-americas-cotton-revolution-180967608/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-industrial-esp...
  - lostlogin 7y ago
    But it’s not the norm in China. If you are to decide what is normal, do you do this based on geography or population? Either way, China is a pretty big place.
  - kenned3 7y ago
    200 years ago, the behavoiur of the US was not consistant with the "norms" at the time. The UK had clear laws on this, and the US violated them. US leaders encouraged it. How is this not the same as what China is doing now?
- evancox100 7y ago
  I suggest readers to draw their own conclusions from this article. To me, it does not make a convincing case that the scale of IP theft in 18th century USA is anywhere near as comprehensive as what is happening today in China.
  - dillondoyle 7y ago
    And to me there is a big difference between the Government encouraging recruitment of those with knowledge through immigration vs a Government who IS the 'primary' stakeholder in all Corps + actively using state resources/agencies for theft.
la_barba 7y ago
..created by chinese phd students (sorry.. i know its a low-blow :P)
charliesome 7y ago
There's no inherent scarcity to information. Building your economy on such an assumption is a very shaky foundation to build on.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
michaelmrose 7y ago
Owning the rights to ideas isn't a sustainable future unless you also have the influence or the power to force people to respect your imaginary property. If ultimately the only thing you end up owning over others is ideas it becomes increasingly attractive simply to opt out of such rights.
rleigh 7y ago
It ultimately doesn't matter much. What matters is that you have the ability to manufacture a product. You can own as much IP as you like, but if you don't have the capability of using that in a production process then it really is the Emperor's New Clothes. Having the capability is important. Outsourcing has removed the crown jewels from many companies, leaving them little more than marketing shells. The real value is in the technical know-how and skills of the people who actually made those companies run. Without that, there is no company and no product.
mcculley 7y ago
This is something I wonder about a lot. How long will IP be of value? IP only has value when it is completely secret or when a government enforces the monopoly for the owner. How can we expect governments to agree to enforce these monopolies reciprocally (or at all) as the cost of information copying and distribution continues to plummet? If a big country decided to drop out of the WTO, what would prevent them from just manufacturing anything they want? Would governments erect trade barriers?