4 ms·

A crucial difference is the US spying is for state use, whereas in China the state is deeply intermixed with industry. State industrial espionage is used for co

A crucial difference is the US spying is for state use, whereas in China the state is deeply intermixed with industry. State industrial espionage is used for commercial competitive advantage. This is a huge structural and cultural difference. For instance it’s hard to believe China bootstrapped BYD and GWM among others from green fields. They’ve been exfiltrating and transferring automotive technology for decades. Their products are often near duplicates of other brands - such as the fiat case: https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-news/spot-the-difference-case-hits-great-wall-15993 https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-news/spot-the-difference-ca... These aren’t cheap knock offs, they have a relatively high quality and with stolen R&D it’s easy to produce at a low cost - the cost can’t be explained by labor alone, as automakers outside China have access to similarly low cost labor. Note, I don’t think China is incapable of making their own R&D at the same quality as anywhere else; they can. But they don’t when they don’t have to. The next few decades will see a huge realignment as the decades of theft and forced transfer will begin to seriously pay off.

aurareturn 3y ago
“When governments permit counterfeiting or copying of American products, it is stealing our future, and it is no longer free trade.” - US President Donald Trump, commenting on China. Actually, the above quote is not Trump and not on China. It's Ronald Raegan on Japan in 1985. When a new economic threat rises, the US will use the same playbook- demonizing in media, accusations, turn the public against said country, ban products, increase tariffs from said country, turn to allies, etc.
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  Except China has required technology transfer and has been actively committing state sponsored industrial espionage for decades. Surely this isn’t news? I’m down with China as a competitor, but we have a strong division between state and industry and China does not. I don’t think a unipolar world is a good idea, and I’m glad for a resurgent China. But it’s absurd to put on blinders and believe forced technology transfer and industrial espionage isn’t a cornerstone of their success. https://www.investopedia.com/forced-technology-transfer-ftt-4687680 https://www.investopedia.com/forced-technology-transfer-ftt-... https://www.csis.org/programs/strategic-technologies-program/archives/survey-chinese-espionage-united-states-2000 https://www.csis.org/programs/strategic-technologies-program... At several megacorps seeking access to Chinese markets we were forced to transfer crucial trade secrets in exchange for access. We did our best to render it as useless as possible, but it was still very key stuff. Over two decades the Chinese government erected barrier after barrier even after complying to the point that the market access failed and competitors based on our technology dominated the domestic Chinese economy. I see your parallel comments where you vigorously decry these statements as some sort of nationalism and anti Chinese sentiment. This isn’t that - this is simple historical fact, and I have had first hand experience with it and know the game being played from personal experience. I assumed this was all common knowledge given how much press it’s gotten over the last twenty years, which makes me wonder why you’re grinding this contrarian axe so hard? Edit: I would note that this is fundamentally different from counterfeiting. This is capturing R&D directly at the top end of technology and processes through extortion and outright theft. I don’t actually blame China or Chinese people, it’s just a cultural difference in what’s acceptable and a belief that the state and industry are separate, which China doesn’t agree with. But the lesson to be learned is China doesn’t play by our rules, and we need to adapt to the situation better.
  - shostack 3y ago
    Don't bother. These whataboutism accounts pop up all the time on stories like this.
    - aurareturn 3y ago
      And you use the “whataboutism” as your main argument for whenever someone isn’t anti-china. The world runs on reciprocity. Whataboutism is built into assumptions. It’s called fairness and it’s an intrinsic human trait.
      - fnordpiglet 3y ago
        Fallacious thinking is in fact an intrinsic human trait, but to equate fallacious thinking with fairness is a little creepy. I’d also note while we are on the topic of anti-China, and you’ve lobbed anti Chinese out there - I’ll wager almost (almost!) everyone here, myself especially, isn’t anti anything about China or Chinese people. But that doesn’t mean we are pro the communist party’s policies - and frankly so are very few Chinese. The fact that forced tech transfer and industrial espionage is embarrassing to the Chinese government and sullies all success is no one’s fault but the Chinese governments, and that’s where it begins and ends. I’m no defender of the US government either, but that’s not even the topic here. I’ll be happy to engage on that topic in the relevant threads. That’s, after all, fair.
    - blackoil 3y ago
      Whataboutism is shield of hypocrites. Ignore all atrocities and human rights abuse we are doing, only wrongs of country X are relevant.
      - aurareturn 3y ago
        US media: China is wrong to use its military power to bully countries. Poster: But the US does it too and has done it for far longer and more often. Average HN reply: Omg, whataboutism.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  > Actually, the above quote is not Trump and not on China. It's Ronald Raegan on Japan in 1985. Good, I was surprised at the claim that trump would say something so balanced. What's "demonizing" about this? It doesn't even mention a specific country. "accusations" are not a problem if they're true...
ezconnect 3y ago
US government have been using all it's tools to destroy US corporation competition since forever. Look at Huawei for just one example.
- nonethewiser 3y ago
  Huaweis main competition is Ericson and Nokiabin the networking space. Neither American.
  - blackoil 3y ago
    Huawei is a giant. In phones they had bigger marketshare than Apple. Their chips are nearly on par with Qualcomm. It is naive to believe they are banned for security concerns.
    - iwant2endmyself 3y ago
      [dead]
  - aurareturn 3y ago
    Cisco, Apple, Google, Qualcomm
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - ezconnect 3y ago
    Qualcomm is their main competitor in 5G patents and technology.
- sumedh 3y ago
  > Look at Huawei for just one example. Didnt Huawei steal from Nortel?
PeterStuer 3y ago
US corporate espionage is also shared with select companies for economic gains. This has been going on since forever. Google Echelon.
didntcheck 3y ago
It's not just China. For example, there's been several accusations of the French state assisting in industrial espionage against the US, and France has acknowledged some of these cases as true https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_espionage#France_and_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_espionage#France_an...
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  To be clear I’m not saying China somehow invented the idea, but the scale, breadth, and depth is unparalleled in history.

aurareturn 3y ago

“When governments permit counterfeiting or copying of American products, it is stealing our future, and it is no longer free trade.” - US President Donald Trump, commenting on China. Actually, the above quote is not Trump and not on China. It's Ronald Raegan on Japan in 1985. When a new economic threat rises, the US will use the same playbook- demonizing in media, accusations, turn the public against said country, ban products, increase tariffs from said country, turn to allies, etc.

fnordpiglet 3y ago
Except China has required technology transfer and has been actively committing state sponsored industrial espionage for decades. Surely this isn’t news? I’m down with China as a competitor, but we have a strong division between state and industry and China does not. I don’t think a unipolar world is a good idea, and I’m glad for a resurgent China. But it’s absurd to put on blinders and believe forced technology transfer and industrial espionage isn’t a cornerstone of their success. https://www.investopedia.com/forced-technology-transfer-ftt-4687680 https://www.investopedia.com/forced-technology-transfer-ftt-... https://www.csis.org/programs/strategic-technologies-program/archives/survey-chinese-espionage-united-states-2000 https://www.csis.org/programs/strategic-technologies-program... At several megacorps seeking access to Chinese markets we were forced to transfer crucial trade secrets in exchange for access. We did our best to render it as useless as possible, but it was still very key stuff. Over two decades the Chinese government erected barrier after barrier even after complying to the point that the market access failed and competitors based on our technology dominated the domestic Chinese economy. I see your parallel comments where you vigorously decry these statements as some sort of nationalism and anti Chinese sentiment. This isn’t that - this is simple historical fact, and I have had first hand experience with it and know the game being played from personal experience. I assumed this was all common knowledge given how much press it’s gotten over the last twenty years, which makes me wonder why you’re grinding this contrarian axe so hard? Edit: I would note that this is fundamentally different from counterfeiting. This is capturing R&D directly at the top end of technology and processes through extortion and outright theft. I don’t actually blame China or Chinese people, it’s just a cultural difference in what’s acceptable and a belief that the state and industry are separate, which China doesn’t agree with. But the lesson to be learned is China doesn’t play by our rules, and we need to adapt to the situation better.
- shostack 3y ago
  Don't bother. These whataboutism accounts pop up all the time on stories like this.
  - aurareturn 3y ago
    And you use the “whataboutism” as your main argument for whenever someone isn’t anti-china. The world runs on reciprocity. Whataboutism is built into assumptions. It’s called fairness and it’s an intrinsic human trait.
    - fnordpiglet 3y ago
      Fallacious thinking is in fact an intrinsic human trait, but to equate fallacious thinking with fairness is a little creepy. I’d also note while we are on the topic of anti-China, and you’ve lobbed anti Chinese out there - I’ll wager almost (almost!) everyone here, myself especially, isn’t anti anything about China or Chinese people. But that doesn’t mean we are pro the communist party’s policies - and frankly so are very few Chinese. The fact that forced tech transfer and industrial espionage is embarrassing to the Chinese government and sullies all success is no one’s fault but the Chinese governments, and that’s where it begins and ends. I’m no defender of the US government either, but that’s not even the topic here. I’ll be happy to engage on that topic in the relevant threads. That’s, after all, fair.
  - blackoil 3y ago
    Whataboutism is shield of hypocrites. Ignore all atrocities and human rights abuse we are doing, only wrongs of country X are relevant.
    - aurareturn 3y ago
      US media: China is wrong to use its military power to bully countries. Poster: But the US does it too and has done it for far longer and more often. Average HN reply: Omg, whataboutism.
Dylan16807 3y ago
> Actually, the above quote is not Trump and not on China. It's Ronald Raegan on Japan in 1985. Good, I was surprised at the claim that trump would say something so balanced. What's "demonizing" about this? It doesn't even mention a specific country. "accusations" are not a problem if they're true...

ezconnect 3y ago

US government have been using all it's tools to destroy US corporation competition since forever. Look at Huawei for just one example.

nonethewiser 3y ago
Huaweis main competition is Ericson and Nokiabin the networking space. Neither American.
- blackoil 3y ago
  Huawei is a giant. In phones they had bigger marketshare than Apple. Their chips are nearly on par with Qualcomm. It is naive to believe they are banned for security concerns.
  - iwant2endmyself 3y ago
    [dead]
- aurareturn 3y ago
  Cisco, Apple, Google, Qualcomm
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- ezconnect 3y ago
  Qualcomm is their main competitor in 5G patents and technology.
sumedh 3y ago
> Look at Huawei for just one example. Didnt Huawei steal from Nortel?

PeterStuer 3y ago

US corporate espionage is also shared with select companies for economic gains. This has been going on since forever. Google Echelon.

didntcheck 3y ago

It's not just China. For example, there's been several accusations of the French state assisting in industrial espionage against the US, and France has acknowledged some of these cases as true https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_espionage#France_and_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_espionage#France_an...

fnordpiglet 3y ago
To be clear I’m not saying China somehow invented the idea, but the scale, breadth, and depth is unparalleled in history.