12 ms·

So when is the western world going to wake up and realize that China is a cutthroat competitor that does not respect western law or traditions, cannot be truste

So when is the western world going to wake up and realize that China is a cutthroat competitor that does not respect western law or traditions, cannot be trusted, and intends to dominate the world? This seems especially troubling for the tech world as IP is easily copied and the only thing that really protects it is the legal system, which China has shown over and over they don't care about.

echelon 5y ago
As soon as we stop banning people from saying that.
- trollski 5y ago
  and blaming _everything_ on Ze Russians?
- MichaelGroves 5y ago
  You joke, but I was earnestly pleasantly surprised to see that dang isn't chilling this conversation with his complaints about "nationalist flamebait" yet.
- cronix 5y ago
  Naw, we shall label them as racist and xenophobic for even bringing it up, and we just can't have people labeled as racists running around spewing "facts," so out the ban hammer comes. And the world will cheer it on as they only read the headline of "Another racist banned from x" and scroll on thinking what good people they are.
- xadhominemx 5y ago
  Who is banning people for saying China doesn’t respect western IP? Please show me a single example.
nickff 5y ago
You make the implicit assumption that it is possible to maintain an advantage in the market after destroying ongoing business relationships/expectations (as ARM China appears to have done). I think you may be overestimating the importance of 'apparent market power', and underestimating the value of consistency and adaptability. Highly centralized (command & control) and mercantilist systems tend to do well in the short term, but struggle and founder in the long term. In contrast, more chaotic, free market economies tend to look messy in the short term, but achieve amazing, spontaneous order over time.
- landryraccoon 5y ago
  > Highly centralized (command & control) and mercantilist systems tend to do well in the short term, but struggle and founder in the long term. That sounds like a prayer to me. What evidence is there that China can't win? How are you certain that authoritarian regimes can't both gain and keep dominance over timescale of decades or centuries? Consider that the dominance of democracy is a relatively short term thing on the historical timescale. For the vast majority of human history, civilizations have been ruled by authoritarian dictators. The rise of China could just be reversion to the mean. I don't want totalitarianism to win. But if we just complacently assume that it won't, doesn't that make the worst case scenario much more likely?
  - chrischen 5y ago
    If your system can’t win because it’s inherently better, then maybe your system shouldn’t win? Have a little faith. Our system shouldn’t win just because we are using it. After all, our core beliefs are that it is a better system, not just through our pure force of will. The OP is right, much of China is is still undeveloped and their policies short-sighted and naive. In fact the whole government is so sensitive to face-saving that it screams insecure teenager. Getting worried they might be winning and that we must start to take alternative measures just legitimizes their tactics.
    - landryraccoon 5y ago
      I'm curious where you fix the goalposts. The GDP of the Soviet Union never exceeded that of the United States at any point. If the GDP of China exceeds the United States in the near future (which seems quite possible), how does that fact reconcile with your analysis? I find the government of China to be morally reprehensible. However there are plenty of cases in history in the real world where that which is morally reprehensible prevails, at least in the short term.
      - chrischen 5y ago
        If they prevail in the short term then that answers your question. A lot of things prevail in the short term. If they prevail in the long term, then we might need to revisit our morals.
jiveturkey 5y ago
Pretty sure that the western world does realize this. Just as we are addicted to oil and realize it will be our downfall.
matheusmoreira 5y ago
Western businesses will never care. They don't care that the chinese destroy the planet. They don't care that the chinese manipulate the quality of the products they manufacture on their behalf. They don't care that the chinese sell counterfeits at huge markups in markets developed countries couldn't care less about. The only thing they care about is money. They'll never stop doing business with China until it stops making them money.
- post_break 5y ago
  We would sell the moon and the planet if it meant profit.
  - smlckz 5y ago
    Aren't we, now?
- arcanus 5y ago
  There has long been the quip, 'The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.'
  - bserge 5y ago
    I think "The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang ourselves" is more accurate.
- mercy_dude 5y ago
  > Western businesses Western business and the ruling class that are in bed with the said corporate world.
hintymad 5y ago
I have an honest question: why could China catch up to the western countries in many verticals and even become the dominant player, while in history the western could stay lightyears ahead of developing countries, no matter how hard the developing countries tried, with or without government interference or industrial espionage? What's changed?
- angio 5y ago
  We have an example most readers here are familiar with: the US ignored European (mostly British) intellectual property when they were developing and now they produce more innovation than any European country. Germany, Switzerland, and Italy also ignored patents for a while and now they are power houses when it comes to pharmaceuticals and chemicals.
  - 908B64B197 5y ago
    > the US ignored European (mostly British) intellectual property when they were developing and now they produce more innovation than any European country. There's this common trope, but there's two parts to IP; infringement and enforcement. The British didn't enforce their patents. They could have, but they didn't.
- vkou 5y ago
  > What's changed? Colonialism ended. The west was not light years ahead of, say, India, when it was first colonized. In the process of colonizing it, India's industrialization was stopped. Countries didn't somehow fall into 'developed' and 'undeveloped' buckets by divine fiat. The latter tended to be invaded by the former, with the occupiers focusing more on wealth extraction, than development. Once that parasitic relationship has been broken, a large number of developing countries have started moving towards prosperity. Some slower than others, to be sure.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - hintymad 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
truthwhisperer 5y ago
indeed we should open our eyes because those Chinese are just playing the racist/blm card if we give back pressure
ezconnect 5y ago
This is what the US did in its infancy and after WWII since their country was not devastated by the war took in all the scientist they could take for their own benefits.
the-dude 5y ago
Trump was pretty woke.
drumhead 5y ago
They were distracted by their "clash of cultures" wars in the middle east. They failed to fully identify China as the main threat to democratic nations and allowed the transfer of capital and technology to go on unhindered. The lack of democracy and human rights wasnt a real issue to them because China wasnt considered to be a future threat. There was the naive belief that democracy would be the inevitable outcome of economic growth and a growing and more affluent middle class. But people care primarily about their economic well being, and whatever system delivers it is what they'll be happy with. There are no huge movements calling for democratic reforms in well off non-democracies like Saudi Arabia, or the Gulf states. And even in democracies like Hungary or Poland the slow slide to a more authorotarian government hasnt got the majority of people worked up, as long as their personal circumstances arent too badly affected. Democracy is only that thing which is demanded when they want to change their circumstances for the better, otherwise its forgotten or undermined when the good times are rolling. Will China win? No I dont think they will, they dont have the ability to change course peacefully or quickly enough under an authorotrian system. They let momentum carry them in straight lines until they crash into a wall. Our problem is that we're stuck with a rich and technologically advanced threat that we built. Trump for all his faults did the right thing by starting the economic war with them, Obama was quite happy to let the status quo of technology, capital and job transfers continue unabated. But we havent learnt our lesson and we risk making the same mistakes with India. The western nation are looking for another low wage, low cost manufacturing base, and they're going all out on India. But we can see the authorotarian and less democratic direction the government there is taking everyday. Yet all our major tech companies and planning to build and invest in capacity over there. Until we end up with another rich and technologically nation that isnt a friend of democracy.
bllguo 5y ago
they want to dominate the world? shall we compare war involvement or record of foreign influence? this is literally a response to an American act of aggression to cut China off of access to chips. but we're the peaceful good guys?

echelon 5y ago

As soon as we stop banning people from saying that.

trollski 5y ago
and blaming _everything_ on Ze Russians?
MichaelGroves 5y ago
You joke, but I was earnestly pleasantly surprised to see that dang isn't chilling this conversation with his complaints about "nationalist flamebait" yet.
cronix 5y ago
Naw, we shall label them as racist and xenophobic for even bringing it up, and we just can't have people labeled as racists running around spewing "facts," so out the ban hammer comes. And the world will cheer it on as they only read the headline of "Another racist banned from x" and scroll on thinking what good people they are.
xadhominemx 5y ago
Who is banning people for saying China doesn’t respect western IP? Please show me a single example.

nickff 5y ago

You make the implicit assumption that it is possible to maintain an advantage in the market after destroying ongoing business relationships/expectations (as ARM China appears to have done). I think you may be overestimating the importance of 'apparent market power', and underestimating the value of consistency and adaptability. Highly centralized (command & control) and mercantilist systems tend to do well in the short term, but struggle and founder in the long term. In contrast, more chaotic, free market economies tend to look messy in the short term, but achieve amazing, spontaneous order over time.

landryraccoon 5y ago
> Highly centralized (command & control) and mercantilist systems tend to do well in the short term, but struggle and founder in the long term. That sounds like a prayer to me. What evidence is there that China can't win? How are you certain that authoritarian regimes can't both gain and keep dominance over timescale of decades or centuries? Consider that the dominance of democracy is a relatively short term thing on the historical timescale. For the vast majority of human history, civilizations have been ruled by authoritarian dictators. The rise of China could just be reversion to the mean. I don't want totalitarianism to win. But if we just complacently assume that it won't, doesn't that make the worst case scenario much more likely?
- chrischen 5y ago
  If your system can’t win because it’s inherently better, then maybe your system shouldn’t win? Have a little faith. Our system shouldn’t win just because we are using it. After all, our core beliefs are that it is a better system, not just through our pure force of will. The OP is right, much of China is is still undeveloped and their policies short-sighted and naive. In fact the whole government is so sensitive to face-saving that it screams insecure teenager. Getting worried they might be winning and that we must start to take alternative measures just legitimizes their tactics.
  - landryraccoon 5y ago
    I'm curious where you fix the goalposts. The GDP of the Soviet Union never exceeded that of the United States at any point. If the GDP of China exceeds the United States in the near future (which seems quite possible), how does that fact reconcile with your analysis? I find the government of China to be morally reprehensible. However there are plenty of cases in history in the real world where that which is morally reprehensible prevails, at least in the short term.
    - chrischen 5y ago
      If they prevail in the short term then that answers your question. A lot of things prevail in the short term. If they prevail in the long term, then we might need to revisit our morals.

jiveturkey 5y ago

Pretty sure that the western world does realize this. Just as we are addicted to oil and realize it will be our downfall.

matheusmoreira 5y ago

Western businesses will never care. They don't care that the chinese destroy the planet. They don't care that the chinese manipulate the quality of the products they manufacture on their behalf. They don't care that the chinese sell counterfeits at huge markups in markets developed countries couldn't care less about. The only thing they care about is money. They'll never stop doing business with China until it stops making them money.

post_break 5y ago
We would sell the moon and the planet if it meant profit.
- smlckz 5y ago
  Aren't we, now?
arcanus 5y ago
There has long been the quip, 'The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.'
- bserge 5y ago
  I think "The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang ourselves" is more accurate.
mercy_dude 5y ago
> Western businesses Western business and the ruling class that are in bed with the said corporate world.

hintymad 5y ago

I have an honest question: why could China catch up to the western countries in many verticals and even become the dominant player, while in history the western could stay lightyears ahead of developing countries, no matter how hard the developing countries tried, with or without government interference or industrial espionage? What's changed?

angio 5y ago
We have an example most readers here are familiar with: the US ignored European (mostly British) intellectual property when they were developing and now they produce more innovation than any European country. Germany, Switzerland, and Italy also ignored patents for a while and now they are power houses when it comes to pharmaceuticals and chemicals.
- 908B64B197 5y ago
  > the US ignored European (mostly British) intellectual property when they were developing and now they produce more innovation than any European country. There's this common trope, but there's two parts to IP; infringement and enforcement. The British didn't enforce their patents. They could have, but they didn't.
vkou 5y ago
> What's changed? Colonialism ended. The west was not light years ahead of, say, India, when it was first colonized. In the process of colonizing it, India's industrialization was stopped. Countries didn't somehow fall into 'developed' and 'undeveloped' buckets by divine fiat. The latter tended to be invaded by the former, with the occupiers focusing more on wealth extraction, than development. Once that parasitic relationship has been broken, a large number of developing countries have started moving towards prosperity. Some slower than others, to be sure.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- hintymad 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

truthwhisperer 5y ago

indeed we should open our eyes because those Chinese are just playing the racist/blm card if we give back pressure

ezconnect 5y ago

This is what the US did in its infancy and after WWII since their country was not devastated by the war took in all the scientist they could take for their own benefits.

the-dude 5y ago

Trump was pretty woke.

drumhead 5y ago

They were distracted by their "clash of cultures" wars in the middle east. They failed to fully identify China as the main threat to democratic nations and allowed the transfer of capital and technology to go on unhindered. The lack of democracy and human rights wasnt a real issue to them because China wasnt considered to be a future threat. There was the naive belief that democracy would be the inevitable outcome of economic growth and a growing and more affluent middle class. But people care primarily about their economic well being, and whatever system delivers it is what they'll be happy with. There are no huge movements calling for democratic reforms in well off non-democracies like Saudi Arabia, or the Gulf states. And even in democracies like Hungary or Poland the slow slide to a more authorotarian government hasnt got the majority of people worked up, as long as their personal circumstances arent too badly affected. Democracy is only that thing which is demanded when they want to change their circumstances for the better, otherwise its forgotten or undermined when the good times are rolling. Will China win? No I dont think they will, they dont have the ability to change course peacefully or quickly enough under an authorotrian system. They let momentum carry them in straight lines until they crash into a wall. Our problem is that we're stuck with a rich and technologically advanced threat that we built. Trump for all his faults did the right thing by starting the economic war with them, Obama was quite happy to let the status quo of technology, capital and job transfers continue unabated. But we havent learnt our lesson and we risk making the same mistakes with India. The western nation are looking for another low wage, low cost manufacturing base, and they're going all out on India. But we can see the authorotarian and less democratic direction the government there is taking everyday. Yet all our major tech companies and planning to build and invest in capacity over there. Until we end up with another rich and technologically nation that isnt a friend of democracy.

bllguo 5y ago

they want to dominate the world? shall we compare war involvement or record of foreign influence? this is literally a response to an American act of aggression to cut China off of access to chips. but we're the peaceful good guys?