7 ms·
So then maybe a little late to sanction their tech to keep them from being peer competitors.
by Jayab 4y ago
So then maybe a little late to sanction their tech to keep them from being peer competitors.
- russli1993 4y agoUS did sanction all of China's space industry, defense dual use industries since the 1990s, and never let go ever since. That is pretty early. And this is what happens 30 years since the sanctions. But I have no idea what will happen in the future, plus the nature of industry and technology is also different.
- ethbr0 4y agoAs much as it's a waste of duplicate effort, it's likely good for humanity and geopolitics to have multiple nation-states each trying their own approaches. Avoids path lock-in by exploring alternate solutions lines, and ensures that if one country decides to slow down (because politics) then the world doesn't lose its only leading-edge space program. Healthy competition for the betterment of all!
- nine_k 4y agoOne says "duplicate effort", someone else says "independent implementation". Some cooperation would be great, of course. Like the US / USSR space cooperation in 1970s, despite bitter ideological and military rivalry.
- hunglee2 4y agoagree with this - duplication of effort, but not duplication of approach or method, which means actually it becomes a giant A/B test, which hopefully means faster progress for humanity as a whole.
- thebooktocome 4y agoSanctions didn’t stop China from carrying out one of the most successful research and technology exfiltration campaigns in history.
- noizejoy 4y agoKind of ironic? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip
- thebooktocome 4y agoI assume I’m getting downvoted in the parent because there’s some implication that I’m judging them for it? But I’m not. I was simply saying that the sanctions have nothing to do with their ability to obtain western tech.
- NegativeLatency 4y agoAlso the guy who memorized how to build a power loom during the industrial revolution https://www.history.com/news/industrial-revolution-spies-europe https://www.history.com/news/industrial-revolution-spies-eur...
- mattnewton 4y agoI don't see irony; the US government knew the importance of these efforts first hand which is why they attempted the sanction at all.
- kortilla 4y agoThe sanctions are pretty irrelevant when China has one of the best hacking groups in the world and every US corporation of relevance is strongly connected to the Internet.
- bestouff 4y agoYeah, because they are only this advanced because they stole US technology. Chinese people can't be as intelligent as american.
- kortilla 4y agoIntelligence is irrelevant. The US government would do exactly the same thing if they were way behind some other country in anything strategic. The Chinese would be supremely unintelligent if they didn’t use that advantage.
- seanmcdirmid 4y agoAh, it’s worse than that, we basically gave them their rocket and missile program via xenophobia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qian_Xuesen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qian_Xuesen
- m4jor 4y agoActually, yes. That's accurate. Why would they waste time and their own money researching things when they can just steal it and then give that information to private and public Chinese industries? That is their entire MO. The Chinese are also responsible for $200-600 Billion worth of IP theft against the US every year. They will do whatever it takes to make China #1 and see nothing wrong with doing this. - https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/02/politics/china-hacking-espionage-us-agencies https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/02/politics/china-hacking-espion... - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/chinese-hackers-took-trillions-in-intellectual-property-from-about-30-multinational-companies/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/chinese-hackers-took-trillions-... - https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/16/china-intellectual-property-theft-progress/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/16/china-intellectual-prop...
- 4y ago
- bpodgursky 4y agoEh, unclear. Nobody was trying to stop China from building space stations. The goal was to limit jet and ICBM tech.
- epolanski 4y agoChina isn't 60s us or ussr, it's a country countless time richer and more technologically advanced, has all the means to produce all the ICBMs they want.
- kragen 4y agoWhat do you think the difference is between an ICBM and a LEO launch vehicle like the Long March 5B described in the article?
- skybrian 4y agoThat's way too broad, because it depends what it is. Surprisingly, it seems to be easier to build a space station than to compete with Boeing and Airbus.
- nine_k 4y agoSpace stations do not need to comply to international aviation requirements. Also, they may have fewer economic constraints, because they are not operated by something like commercial airlines. BTW competing with Lockheed-Martin and even Sukhoi seems to be harder, too.
- Aperocky 4y agoIt is indeed much easier. Because competing with Boeing and Airbus means building cost efficient aircraft in large volumes. Building cost efficient planes in large volume is way harder than building a singular space station with barely any cost concerns.
- seanmcdirmid 4y agoRocket engines are simpler than jet turbines, actually. It take a lot of material engineering to get something with both performance and economy. As for the rest, it’s just avionics that china hasn’t developed yet, and that really “just” software.
- npnpnp 4y agoBy that logic, scramjets are the simplest of all! But really, there’s an order of magnitude more engineering that goes into so many facets of rockets and rocket engines. On paper they’re similar, but the stresses and constraints are much, much higher.
- seanmcdirmid 4y agoRocket engines point up and ignite the fuel. They don’t need air intakes, nor can they benefit from them. They don’t need to be reused (SpaceX’s strategy isn’t common). Rocket engines came a few decades before jet turbines for good reason. Heck, there is a good argument they were invented during the Tang or Song Dynasty in some kind of crude but representive form.
- m4jor 4y agoSanctions do not matter to China. They will just have their nation state backed hackers hack into aerospace and defense contractors and steal their R&D instead. Thats the Chinese way and MO. Anything to further the Chinese economy. They have hacked nearly every F100 they needed to and steal hundreds of billions in IP annually already. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_intellectual_property_theft_by_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_intellectual_pr... - https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/09/china-state-backed-hackers-compromised-6-us-state-governments-report.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/09/china-state-backed-hackers-c... - https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/02/politics/china-hacking-espionage-us-agencies https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/02/politics/china-hacking-espion...
- animitronix 4y agoYup, precisely.
- epolanski 4y agoI find it very naive to think other countries do not have state-backed technological spying.
- ClumsyPilot 4y agoAh, so the chaos and lack of documentation in my company is really protection against chinese spies! Clever! On a more serious note, I find it quite unfair that Western conoany go into China to take advantage of loose labour laws and child labour, and then they complain when loose IP laws hit them. Like you knew what the deal was from the outset. Lastly not every society believes in the concept of intellectual property, it is not even clearly defined - for instance EU does not issue software patents.
- iancmceachern 4y agoI mean that's the thing, that wasn't the deal. No company, at all, would sign that agreement. Usually there is an nda, some kind of business agreement that says they won't steal your idea etc. and then they do. It's not like a company goes to China or another lower cost to manufacture country and signs an agreement to give them their business.