4 ms·
Being ambiguous as to what "China" means is both vitally important for international relations and also generally unhelpful for the purpose of clear communicati
by computerfriend 2y ago
Being ambiguous as to what "China" means is both vitally important for international relations and also generally unhelpful for the purpose of clear communication. Corporate (and other) espionage notwithstanding.
- kragen 2y agothere was no ambiguity in my comment; i said 'chinese companies (in both prc and roc)' to ensure that i was communicating clearly
- account42 2y agoDeliberately conflating the two, especially in discussion of US strategic interests, is not just unhelpful but makes your entire argument nonsensical.
- kragen 2y agosigh
- account42 2y agoConsider not spewing bs instead of sighing.
- kragen 2y agodisagreeing with you is not the same thing as spewing bs. in fifteen years you'll see i was right looking at your comment history, the most likely explanation for the disagreement is that you're out of your depth discussing geopolitics, the history of innovation, and international trade, so you're limited to repeating the ideas you're surrounded by, and even the best-founded counterarguments to them appear to you as 'bullshit' because you aren't familiar with the background knowledge they're based on