5 ms·

Layoffs followed by a round of hiring mean that a company thinks its engineers are making too much money and can be replaced by cheaper hires with the same leve

Layoffs followed by a round of hiring mean that a company thinks its engineers are making too much money and can be replaced by cheaper hires with the same level of skill. This is one of many reasons why investment capitalism is a really poor method of technological development - a better option would be to reduce the control of external investors and adopt a more democratic internal hiring and promotion policy. Unfortunately four decades of neoliberal government and corporate policy has concentrated all the capital in a few hands, and the outsourcing of much of the hardware manufacturing base overseas has resulted in a decrepit technological base. Thus, I imagine Chinese development of RISC-V is well ahead of whatever SiFive is up to and if they were directly competing, they'd be well behind the curve: https://techwireasia.com/2023/10/do-risc-v-restrictions-signal-the-failure-of-the-us-export-controls-on-china/ https://techwireasia.com/2023/10/do-risc-v-restrictions-sign...

robertlagrant 3y ago
Counterpoint: the last four decades have seen some of the biggest explosions in technological progress in history. And based on what we've seen, not on anyone's imagination.
- photochemsyn 3y ago
  Who is to say that the rate of progress wouldn't have been doubled if the constraints of excessive intellectual property laws (a key component of the neoliberal outsourcing program) had been drastically limited? Indeed any analysis of the Chinese technological boom will conclude that their more laissez-faire attitude towards IP played a large role in that outcome. A similar argument is that the open-source movement has become the main driver of software innovation (Linux in the server space etc.) and that without it we'd still be back in the early 2000s tech-wise.
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    > Indeed any analysis of the Chinese technological boom will conclude that their more laissez-faire attitude towards IP played a large role in that outcome. That works for catching up; not for moving ahead. > A similar argument is that the open-source movement has become the main driver of software innovation (Linux in the server space etc.) and that without it we'd still be back in the early 2000s tech-wise. The open source movement exists in this timeline.
    - jihiggins 3y ago
      research output from china is already outpacing the us... and their point is that the open source movement is not driven by capital / neoliberal economics
      - robertlagrant 3y ago
        > research output from china is already outpacing the us... Research output isn't to do with IP law relaxation. It's also extremely hard to draw conclusions from.
Vt71fcAqt7 3y ago
China also uses Capital to invest. They have one of the largest capital markets in the world. I think what you do not like is not capitalism but free markets or the extent of freedom of the agents in those markets. But no matter what capital is the best way to industrialize a nation and this has been proven in Japan, Korea and China. >the outsourcing of much of the hardware manufacturing base overseas has resulted in a decrepit technological base. This is nonsense. All this shows to me is that you are not aware of the current semiconductor supply chain of which the US is a large member. And I suggest you find out how democratic the "hiring and promotion policy" is in Korea, or how concentrated the wealth is there.
- photochemsyn 3y ago
  America closed Radio Shack stores that used to provide hobbyists with all kinds of electronic components (before it tried to become a little version of Best Buy). In contrast, China has Shenzhen. Interestingly they seem to be engaged in state-sponsored VC-like activities: https://www.scmp.com/tech/policy/article/3237339/shenzhen-chinas-silicon-valley-unveils-20-point-plan-boost-funding-local-tech-companies-amid-us https://www.scmp.com/tech/policy/article/3237339/shenzhen-ch...
  - Vt71fcAqt7 3y ago
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Driving the current state of the art in semiconductors requires something like a PhD in physics or materials science. There are certainly many PhDs in China (and being educated is more respected there than here) but Radio Shack and Shenzhen pcbs have little to do with this. They aren't growing the state of the art. Have you looked into the "democratic internal hiring and promotion policy" of those Shenzhen factories by the way? Shenzhen is as far from communism as you can get. Marx described workers being "a slave of the machine" as an inherent quality of Capitalism: and he is right (until these things can be automated). I have no doubt that Chinese semiconductor output will increase in quantity and quality. I also have no doubt that it will be sold on the global market for capital and that capital will be the primary way the owners and workers of those companies are rewarded as well as the means used to create and grow the company. Also, Radio Shack closed down because its customers moved online – that is simple supply and demand.

robertlagrant 3y ago

Counterpoint: the last four decades have seen some of the biggest explosions in technological progress in history. And based on what we've seen, not on anyone's imagination.

photochemsyn 3y ago
Who is to say that the rate of progress wouldn't have been doubled if the constraints of excessive intellectual property laws (a key component of the neoliberal outsourcing program) had been drastically limited? Indeed any analysis of the Chinese technological boom will conclude that their more laissez-faire attitude towards IP played a large role in that outcome. A similar argument is that the open-source movement has become the main driver of software innovation (Linux in the server space etc.) and that without it we'd still be back in the early 2000s tech-wise.
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  > Indeed any analysis of the Chinese technological boom will conclude that their more laissez-faire attitude towards IP played a large role in that outcome. That works for catching up; not for moving ahead. > A similar argument is that the open-source movement has become the main driver of software innovation (Linux in the server space etc.) and that without it we'd still be back in the early 2000s tech-wise. The open source movement exists in this timeline.
  - jihiggins 3y ago
    research output from china is already outpacing the us... and their point is that the open source movement is not driven by capital / neoliberal economics
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      > research output from china is already outpacing the us... Research output isn't to do with IP law relaxation. It's also extremely hard to draw conclusions from.

Vt71fcAqt7 3y ago

China also uses Capital to invest. They have one of the largest capital markets in the world. I think what you do not like is not capitalism but free markets or the extent of freedom of the agents in those markets. But no matter what capital is the best way to industrialize a nation and this has been proven in Japan, Korea and China. >the outsourcing of much of the hardware manufacturing base overseas has resulted in a decrepit technological base. This is nonsense. All this shows to me is that you are not aware of the current semiconductor supply chain of which the US is a large member. And I suggest you find out how democratic the "hiring and promotion policy" is in Korea, or how concentrated the wealth is there.

photochemsyn 3y ago
America closed Radio Shack stores that used to provide hobbyists with all kinds of electronic components (before it tried to become a little version of Best Buy). In contrast, China has Shenzhen. Interestingly they seem to be engaged in state-sponsored VC-like activities: https://www.scmp.com/tech/policy/article/3237339/shenzhen-chinas-silicon-valley-unveils-20-point-plan-boost-funding-local-tech-companies-amid-us https://www.scmp.com/tech/policy/article/3237339/shenzhen-ch...
- Vt71fcAqt7 3y ago
  I'm not sure what point you're making. Driving the current state of the art in semiconductors requires something like a PhD in physics or materials science. There are certainly many PhDs in China (and being educated is more respected there than here) but Radio Shack and Shenzhen pcbs have little to do with this. They aren't growing the state of the art. Have you looked into the "democratic internal hiring and promotion policy" of those Shenzhen factories by the way? Shenzhen is as far from communism as you can get. Marx described workers being "a slave of the machine" as an inherent quality of Capitalism: and he is right (until these things can be automated). I have no doubt that Chinese semiconductor output will increase in quantity and quality. I also have no doubt that it will be sold on the global market for capital and that capital will be the primary way the owners and workers of those companies are rewarded as well as the means used to create and grow the company. Also, Radio Shack closed down because its customers moved online – that is simple supply and demand.