5 ms·
I attended a top 5 business school in France at the turn of the century. We had partnerships with similar schools in NYC, Tokyo, Sydney, you name it. It was ta
by K0SM0S 7y ago
I attended a top 5 business school in France at the turn of the century. We had partnerships with similar schools in NYC, Tokyo, Sydney, you name it.
It was taught in first year of international business classes that outsourcing abroad was functionally equivalent to a transfer of technology — so you always had to factor in the time it took for your magic low-cost solution to fade out and become your competitor, essentially, but not just them: by then the whole market has access to that cost structure, so you have to keep finding new lower-cost solutions, and keep innovating on your technological part (HQ in Europe, USA, Japan, etc).
It's just international business 101, really, and has been for at least 20 years in my personal experience — but I'm pretty sure I read articles from the 1970s describing this process, because Japan was the first one to pull it off brilliantly.
People focus on China because somebody is waiving that name a lot and his voice carries a lot through the media; but this is definitely just how the world works, and has been forever — if you ask workers from the next village to come and help build stuff with your super tech, it won't take long before they replicate the process over there.
And that's called culture, knowledge, it lives and grows and moves like populations of viruses or molecules, it's been modeled for some time in anthropology at that macro-level.
- jariel 7y agoThis is a misleading narrative in the context of the charges against Huawei. To somehow equate the direct theft of IP and innovation as just 'shared culture and knowledge' completely avoids the material criminality at hand. Huawei is charged with literally incentivizing their employees to steal knowledge and IP, and of directly copying designs, on a systematic and widespread scale. These activities are instituted far beyond just Huawei. This is not a situation of the natural flow of industrial knowledge, it's direct theft.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- sneak 7y agoThe concept of IP is a relatively recent invention, created by legislatures to prop up specific industries hurt by copying of data, and, as is being demonstrated, not everyone agrees that it should be treated the same as existing systems of physical property. You wouldn’t download a car. But I would. I don’t think it’s possible to steal information.
- JonG123 7y agoYou are such a sneak!
- jariel 7y agoThis history of IP is not relevant. China knows the rules and they broke them. Therefore, there must be consequences.
- dependenttypes 7y ago> China knows the rules and they broke them So did Turing.