3 ms·
I think he's trying to say that there could be an argument made for catching China up to the rest of the world, so that they can spend their resources innovatin
by socialist_coder 7y ago
I think he's trying to say that there could be an argument made for catching China up to the rest of the world, so that they can spend their resources innovating on new things, not just trying to get caught up.
It's not hard to see how that would be a net benefit for the world (except of course for the Western IP holders).
Please don't think I'm supporting this, just trying to see this side of the argument.
- incompatible 7y agoI think we'd be better off with a system that promotes free flow of information, but local production of goods and services. Products shouldn't be available without full specifications and fabrication methods. Web services shouldn't exist without interoperability protocols and source code. I think this would be a hackers' paradise, and this is "Hacker News", after all.
- segfaultbuserr 7y agoUpvote. This is a very interesting alternative take on globalization vs protectionism I'd love to hear from Hacker News, even if it may be impractical. Perhaps something close to what you've described is LibreSilicon [0], a free and open source semiconductor manufacturing process (only 1 micrometer though) currently in development. [0] https://libresilicon.com/ https://libresilicon.com/
- wolco 7y agoLike a stronger military?
- majormajor 7y agoThe US famously did the "catch up and then leap fast" thing, which worked out great for the US, and probably less bad for the rest of the world than if Germany had won WWII or the Soviet Union had been more dominant. Hard for me to feel that all that influence over the next century going to the particular flavor of country that is modern China is gonna be good for the rest of the world, though. But, interestingly, that's not an IP-related argument, that's a political system one.