5 ms·

The desire to accuse China of just copying is like 20 years out of date. It’s been wrong since some people on HN were in diapers. People are going to be gobsma

by rayiner 3mo ago

The desire to accuse China of just copying is like 20 years out of date. It’s been wrong since some people on HN were in diapers. People are going to be gobsmacked when, in our lifetime, China becomes a world power comparable to the U.S. Probably still poorer per capita, but at Spain/Italy levels, not third world country levels. And they’ll be shocked at the implications of that on the world economy, migration patterns, etc. There will be fields where China is a global leader, and Americans and Europeans will have to learn Chinese and move there, or else be stuck in some satellite office of a Chinese company. We’re all in Europe circa 1895 not realizing the behemoth America will become in WWI.

warshinder 3mo ago
So the efficient market hypothesis is wrong?
- rayiner 3mo ago
  How is the efficient market hypothesis applicable here?
  - inigyou 3mo ago
    The efficient market hypothesis, read loosely, says that capitalism is the best system. Yet here it is being thoroughly pwned by a series of 5-year plans.
    - s1artibartfast 3mo ago
      exactly zero serious people draw that connection, and it suggests that you either dont know what the term means or are constructing a strawman. Most of the economic literature for the last 150 has explored the constraints on markets and their function. The efficient market hypothesis TM is a very narrow theory about price information, it says nothing about Economic Development or Direction. It is a theoretical extreme that can be used to compare real world Systems. Further, China's success relies heavily on market processes
    - rayiner 3mo ago
      You're correct that China today is not fully capitalist, but you're using the term "5 year plan" in a way that overstates the difference with the U.S. The term "5-year plan" means different things pre- and post-Deng Xiaoping. Classic central planning was a disaster in China. In 1990, after 78 years of communist rule, China's per-capita income was comparable to India and Bangladesh. In the 1980s, Deng Xiaoping undertook market reforms which, over the next decades, turned China into an authoritarian state-capitalist country. It was widely known at the time the classic model had failed and that China was trying something different. Here's Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew talking about it early on: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jw8wI9risfI https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jw8wI9risfI The modern Chinese system embraces Econ 101 "capitalism" in the sense that it relies on markets for price discovery. Today, the "5 year plans" are more like what we would call "industrial policy" in the west. That's different than pure capitalism, but so is the American system. Alexander Hamilton and Abraham Lincoln both advocated strong federal intervention in the economy in service of industrial policy: https://emergingamerica.org/blog/alexander-hamilton-founder-american-system https://emergingamerica.org/blog/alexander-hamilton-founder-... ("Hamilton’s plan involved the following aspects: 1) the creation of a Federally backed source of credit, the First Bank of the United States; 2) a system of tariffs, bounties, and other financial incentives or penalties to support the “essential” sectors of the U.S. economy; and 3) Federal support for developing manufactures by helping fund physical infrastructure ( transportation, in particular), regulating quality standards, and creating an institution to promote 'the prosecution and introduction of useful discoveries, inventions and improvements.'").
  - warshinder 3mo ago
    Your point that “people will be gobsmacked” suggests you think you know something that the broad market does not. In a loose way, that implies the market has enough information to anticipate this but is not pricing assets accordingly. Asked another way, why not just short American assets if you are convinced of your hypothesis? Why live here, assuming you do?
    - rayiner 3mo ago
      Gotcha. I was talking about American "people" generally; I don't know enough about the financial world to know if assets are appropriately priced or not. If you're talking about investment into China versus the U.S., I assume it reflects expropriation risk.
- sm-silversight 3mo ago
  What do you mean, I don't follow. Also, yes, often.
- baq 3mo ago
  This isn’t even controversial assuming you’re talking about the real world, economists freely admit that. It only holds for spherical markets in a vacuum.
darkoob12 3mo ago
There are huge evidence of copying. Some day China can pioneer in science or technology but the current claim about Chinese companies leading AI development is ridiculous given the evidence of distillation and the fact that like 95 percent of science that lead to the current state of AI happened in either North America or Europe. To be honest if you want to list academic papers that lead to the current AI models the majority is either done by Google Research or sponsored by Google.
- amunozo 3mo ago
  What about EVs, solar, or batteries? They are leading these fields for some time.
- JSR_FDED 3mo ago
  From the Hoover Institution’s analysis of the team behind DeepSeek: “We find striking evidence that China has developed a robust pipeline of homegrown talent. Nearly all of the researchers behind DeepSeek’s five papers were educated or trained in China. More than half of them never left China for schooling or work, demonstrating the country’s growing capacity to develop world-class AI talent through an entirely domestic pipeline. And while nearly a quarter of DeepSeek researchers gained some experience at US institutions during their careers, most returned to China, creating a one-way knowledge transfer that benefits China’s AI ecosystem.” That was from a year ago. Consider that on top of this the country was starved of access to Nvidia chips - and therefore accelerated its development of Ascend chips, and it’s clear they are undeniably leaders in AI research and development. Not the only ones, but the achievements are crystal clear.
  - rayiner 3mo ago
    Exactly. China is a real tech power now, just like Japan and Taiwan. The U.S. is ahead in a lot of areas of technology, but China has home grown talent that is taking the lead in other areas. And unlike Japan and Taiwan, China has a much bigger pool to draw from.
    - inigyou 3mo ago
gladimdim 3mo ago
I am still shocked Spain/Italy and USA are considered 'first world' countries. We are not in 70s or even 90s anymore. I've been to China in 2011 also thinking I am visiting some huge village but...that was the most futuristic trip I ever had. I was surprised by the penetration level of the mobile devices - everything had a QR code, you could buy/sell/send money, pay services all with a single tap on a phone.
- SideburnsOfDoom 3mo ago
  Not to disagree with you too much, but > I am still shocked Spain/Italy and USA are considered 'first world' countries. They're a mix. Rural southern Italy isn't the same as e.g. Milan or Venice. I've walked from 1st world to third world within a few blocks in San Francisco. It's a slightly longer walk in Cape Town. > I was surprised by the penetration level of the mobile devices - everything had a QR code, you could buy/sell/send money, I've has exact same experience in places in Africa (1). Yes there's poverty and crime, but also if the technology is affordable, effective and reduces the need to handle cash then it's adopted fast enough. People's understanding of that part of the world is also decades out of date. Mobile devices actually "leapfrogged" the wired telecoms network rollout (2), but that was decades ago. Africa is huge and diverse, and it is not going to be China this decade, but also it's changing fast. And it might be China-aligned as China positions to be a reliable trading partner with affordable goods. It's possible that affordable Chinese solar-battery electricity systems will cause another leapfrog. This includes Chinese EVs (3). 1) https://www.m-pesa.africa/ https://www.m-pesa.africa/ https://www.payshap.co.za https://www.payshap.co.za 2) https://mg.co.za/news/tech/2014-06-12-cellphones-create-a-technology-leapfrog/ https://mg.co.za/news/tech/2014-06-12-cellphones-create-a-te... 3) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo---4TAIEA&t=528s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo---4TAIEA&t=528s
- stingraycharles 3mo ago
  I mean, you have those kind of luxuries even in the poorest of countries in Asia, it’s just that there’s still a huge discrepancy between rich and poor, city vs countryside. It’s not difficult to find areas in all these countries that are significantly less developed than Spain/Portugal’s underdeveloped areas. It’s just not as black and white as you seem to suggest. (I come from EU but have been living in various countries in Asia for over a decade)
guesswho_ 3mo ago
[dead]
Certhas 3mo ago
I mean, China is the leader in PV panels, battery tech, telecommunication hardware, etc... already...
imadierich 3mo ago
[dead]
turtlesdown11 3mo ago
> We’re all in Europe circa 1895 not realizing the behemoth America will become in WWI The States already had a larger GDP than any European nation by 1870. The news of the time was rife with acknowledgement of the vast potential for growth in the States.

by rayiner 3mo ago

warshinder 3mo ago

So the efficient market hypothesis is wrong?

rayiner 3mo ago
How is the efficient market hypothesis applicable here?
- inigyou 3mo ago
  The efficient market hypothesis, read loosely, says that capitalism is the best system. Yet here it is being thoroughly pwned by a series of 5-year plans.
  - s1artibartfast 3mo ago
    exactly zero serious people draw that connection, and it suggests that you either dont know what the term means or are constructing a strawman. Most of the economic literature for the last 150 has explored the constraints on markets and their function. The efficient market hypothesis TM is a very narrow theory about price information, it says nothing about Economic Development or Direction. It is a theoretical extreme that can be used to compare real world Systems. Further, China's success relies heavily on market processes
  - rayiner 3mo ago
    You're correct that China today is not fully capitalist, but you're using the term "5 year plan" in a way that overstates the difference with the U.S. The term "5-year plan" means different things pre- and post-Deng Xiaoping. Classic central planning was a disaster in China. In 1990, after 78 years of communist rule, China's per-capita income was comparable to India and Bangladesh. In the 1980s, Deng Xiaoping undertook market reforms which, over the next decades, turned China into an authoritarian state-capitalist country. It was widely known at the time the classic model had failed and that China was trying something different. Here's Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew talking about it early on: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jw8wI9risfI https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jw8wI9risfI The modern Chinese system embraces Econ 101 "capitalism" in the sense that it relies on markets for price discovery. Today, the "5 year plans" are more like what we would call "industrial policy" in the west. That's different than pure capitalism, but so is the American system. Alexander Hamilton and Abraham Lincoln both advocated strong federal intervention in the economy in service of industrial policy: https://emergingamerica.org/blog/alexander-hamilton-founder-american-system https://emergingamerica.org/blog/alexander-hamilton-founder-... ("Hamilton’s plan involved the following aspects: 1) the creation of a Federally backed source of credit, the First Bank of the United States; 2) a system of tariffs, bounties, and other financial incentives or penalties to support the “essential” sectors of the U.S. economy; and 3) Federal support for developing manufactures by helping fund physical infrastructure ( transportation, in particular), regulating quality standards, and creating an institution to promote 'the prosecution and introduction of useful discoveries, inventions and improvements.'").
- warshinder 3mo ago
  Your point that “people will be gobsmacked” suggests you think you know something that the broad market does not. In a loose way, that implies the market has enough information to anticipate this but is not pricing assets accordingly. Asked another way, why not just short American assets if you are convinced of your hypothesis? Why live here, assuming you do?
  - rayiner 3mo ago
    Gotcha. I was talking about American "people" generally; I don't know enough about the financial world to know if assets are appropriately priced or not. If you're talking about investment into China versus the U.S., I assume it reflects expropriation risk.
sm-silversight 3mo ago
What do you mean, I don't follow. Also, yes, often.
baq 3mo ago
This isn’t even controversial assuming you’re talking about the real world, economists freely admit that. It only holds for spherical markets in a vacuum.

darkoob12 3mo ago

There are huge evidence of copying. Some day China can pioneer in science or technology but the current claim about Chinese companies leading AI development is ridiculous given the evidence of distillation and the fact that like 95 percent of science that lead to the current state of AI happened in either North America or Europe. To be honest if you want to list academic papers that lead to the current AI models the majority is either done by Google Research or sponsored by Google.

amunozo 3mo ago
What about EVs, solar, or batteries? They are leading these fields for some time.
JSR_FDED 3mo ago
From the Hoover Institution’s analysis of the team behind DeepSeek: “We find striking evidence that China has developed a robust pipeline of homegrown talent. Nearly all of the researchers behind DeepSeek’s five papers were educated or trained in China. More than half of them never left China for schooling or work, demonstrating the country’s growing capacity to develop world-class AI talent through an entirely domestic pipeline. And while nearly a quarter of DeepSeek researchers gained some experience at US institutions during their careers, most returned to China, creating a one-way knowledge transfer that benefits China’s AI ecosystem.” That was from a year ago. Consider that on top of this the country was starved of access to Nvidia chips - and therefore accelerated its development of Ascend chips, and it’s clear they are undeniably leaders in AI research and development. Not the only ones, but the achievements are crystal clear.
- rayiner 3mo ago
  Exactly. China is a real tech power now, just like Japan and Taiwan. The U.S. is ahead in a lot of areas of technology, but China has home grown talent that is taking the lead in other areas. And unlike Japan and Taiwan, China has a much bigger pool to draw from.
  - inigyou 3mo ago

gladimdim 3mo ago

I am still shocked Spain/Italy and USA are considered 'first world' countries. We are not in 70s or even 90s anymore. I've been to China in 2011 also thinking I am visiting some huge village but...that was the most futuristic trip I ever had. I was surprised by the penetration level of the mobile devices - everything had a QR code, you could buy/sell/send money, pay services all with a single tap on a phone.

SideburnsOfDoom 3mo ago
Not to disagree with you too much, but > I am still shocked Spain/Italy and USA are considered 'first world' countries. They're a mix. Rural southern Italy isn't the same as e.g. Milan or Venice. I've walked from 1st world to third world within a few blocks in San Francisco. It's a slightly longer walk in Cape Town. > I was surprised by the penetration level of the mobile devices - everything had a QR code, you could buy/sell/send money, I've has exact same experience in places in Africa (1). Yes there's poverty and crime, but also if the technology is affordable, effective and reduces the need to handle cash then it's adopted fast enough. People's understanding of that part of the world is also decades out of date. Mobile devices actually "leapfrogged" the wired telecoms network rollout (2), but that was decades ago. Africa is huge and diverse, and it is not going to be China this decade, but also it's changing fast. And it might be China-aligned as China positions to be a reliable trading partner with affordable goods. It's possible that affordable Chinese solar-battery electricity systems will cause another leapfrog. This includes Chinese EVs (3). 1) https://www.m-pesa.africa/ https://www.m-pesa.africa/ https://www.payshap.co.za https://www.payshap.co.za 2) https://mg.co.za/news/tech/2014-06-12-cellphones-create-a-technology-leapfrog/ https://mg.co.za/news/tech/2014-06-12-cellphones-create-a-te... 3) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo---4TAIEA&t=528s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo---4TAIEA&t=528s
stingraycharles 3mo ago
I mean, you have those kind of luxuries even in the poorest of countries in Asia, it’s just that there’s still a huge discrepancy between rich and poor, city vs countryside. It’s not difficult to find areas in all these countries that are significantly less developed than Spain/Portugal’s underdeveloped areas. It’s just not as black and white as you seem to suggest. (I come from EU but have been living in various countries in Asia for over a decade)

guesswho_ 3mo ago

[dead]

Certhas 3mo ago

I mean, China is the leader in PV panels, battery tech, telecommunication hardware, etc... already...

imadierich 3mo ago

[dead]

turtlesdown11 3mo ago

> We’re all in Europe circa 1895 not realizing the behemoth America will become in WWI The States already had a larger GDP than any European nation by 1870. The news of the time was rife with acknowledgement of the vast potential for growth in the States.