239
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2024
239 points (97.6% liked)
Technology
59381 readers
1585 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
hard to invent your own stuff when you have no social mobility or intellectual property and torture individualism.
China has been a centralized autocratic state for a couple thousands years and has invented almost everything in that time.
More seriously though, it's just not true to suggest that collectivist societies or autocratic states can't invent new things. The briefest glance at history shows it's just not true.
New things come from people having the time and resources to sit around and think about how to improve on the things we have. IP, social mobility and individualism just don't really come into it.
to be fair yes they invented paper, paper money, umbrellas, wheelbarrows, gunpowder, etc.
chinese govt claims to have invented high-speed rail, e-commerce, mobile payments and bike sharing, but those are all untrue.
but overall, given a billion people, i rarely see them invent game changers. maybe the artificial synthesis of starch will be a big one. or solid state EV batteries.
One theory Ive read about is that they probably merely iterated on the (likely middle eastern, probably egyptian or persian) invention of "greek fire". Since its only a single ingredient difference between one of the known formulations of it.
And the Europeans made gunpowder useful with the invention of pearled gunpowder, which made it possible to predict burn rates and slow them down for cannons, allowing for bigger and more potent cannons. Anecdotally, there is documentation of an Ottoman diplomat pleading to a Chinese one that "the Europeans never learn to make gunpowder"
They also claim to have invented chariots, despite using the Sanskrit word for chariot.
I don't see how "war carriage" or "horse carriage" is the Sanskrit word for chariot.
I wouldn't be looking for 'game changers' - that's a marketing phrase with no firm meaning and very low applicability to reality. All invention is just iterating on existing ideas.
We didn't see much cutting-edge tech coming out of China while they were recovering from the collapse of the imperial system and the colonial period, but now that they have more resources to throw at new tech, we'll see new tech.
They haven’t really invented anything big since gun powder.
And even gun powder, they didn’t know how to fully apply all of its potential.
For some period of time they did.
It's just that when all the civilized world in some relative measurement of it is one big centralized bureaucratic state, degeneracy starts.
Why make cannons if you don't have a problem to be solved with those? Why even think about something like cannons?
Look at guerillas and combatants using FPV drones and the ways they do it, do you see developed nation states embracing that revolution? No, they still go for big expensive modern artillery, jets, big drones etc. It will be fun to watch the dynamics of power in coming decades, since stagnant rich militaries are very resistant to change and reform.
You can also use rifles for protection against animals and hunting. Or you trade / sell them to nations which do have conflict and military need.
Rifles were and are a mass product. Cannons even 100 years ago were not.
IP law is all about telling people what they can't create.
More like telling people what they can't reproduce. A pretty important distinction.
Not always. As John Carmack said:
Many people have created things entirely from their own mind, and then find that they're violating IP law.
Even things like Calculus were invented simultaneously in different parts of the world. I mean, think about it, Calculus allows us to solve all kinds of problem that humankind had spent thousands of years thinking about and being unable to solve. Then, independently, in separate parts of the world 2 people invent / discover Calculus around the same time. If world wide IP law had existed, it might swoop in and tell one of them their thoughts were not legal.
To even suggest China was united let alone centralized for that long is so blatantly ignorant I‘m not even going to talk about the lack of micromanaging capabilities of ancient governments. Old China was overthrown and China‘s government today has no resemblance whatsoever to old dynasties so it doesn‘t even make sense to bring them up as an example for Chinese ingenuity. Besides, the speed and process of how inventions were made thousands of years ago compared to today are on entirely different planes of existence.
The argument is not that autocratic states cannot be innovative under any circumstances, but historically, self proclaimed communist states had have their fair share of troubles with it because of stagnant hierarchies. Communist China is a very good example of a bad environment for innovation for reasons mentioned above.
The only Chinese innovation I can think of is the introduction of gamified hyper fast consumerism via Temu, Shein and TikTok. That‘s the spearhead of their innovation.
u - u - temuuuu
u - u - temuuu-uuu
Their ad budget for the superbowl must have been laughably big. After being exposed to it a couple o' dozens o' times within those few hours, their stupid little jingle anthem is now living rent-free in my head, alongside all those catchy radio commercials from my childhood. Too bad Temu (nor those radio advertisers) wont see the shadow of a coin from my pocket, but their expense has probably paid off anyways... I don't even know what to do with this (detri)mental jingle collection now?!
...
u - u - temuuuu
u - u - temuuu-uuu
No, this is incorrect. China was a bunch of kingdoms, constantly at war with each other for longer than it's ever been forcibly "united" by external forces, such as the Western powers in the 19th century, dividing up and ruthlessly controlling economic spheres of influence. It's fascinating how ethnic, religious and cultural differences have been manipulated by so many governments for so long to feed their pockets and it isn't over. The CCP is going to be nothing but a footnote in a research paper someday.
There has been a centralized bureaucratic autocracy in china since the legalist reforms of qin, a couple thousand years ago. Yes, the empire once united must divide but even during the long disunity before the sui and tang, there were multiple centralized autocratic states. Unity across all of the territory called modern china is not necessary to have a centralized state, and you'll notice I never once used the word united.
Wait were western powers dividing or uniting china? You're claiming both in the same sentence. But that's kind of immaterial to my point that the centralized autocratic state has existed in china for a couple thousand years and that many important new technologies came out of the cultures governed in that way.
Yes, getting sued for stepping on a mine like rounded corners is so good for inventiveness.
IP helps fast modernization in new industries. Of the "industrial revolution" kind. It didn't help inventiveness itself even back then, and now it's clearly the main impediment.
Which also makes me think that all kinds of political diversity, even states like China, are good for humanity as a whole. How else would we be able to compare them after all.
It's so strange to me that people buy this BS line about IP laws having anything to do with why we get cool new things.
Either competition fosters innovation and therefore IP laws stifle it, or protecting monopolies fosters innovation and our IP laws make sense.
China has actually been capitalist since Deng. Not sure about social mobility, but intellectual property and individualism are respected, though they're still pretty authoritarian, along with Xi's atrocities.
The entire fundamental basis of the CCPs economic miracle is that intellectual property is not respected.
I'm intrigued, how so?
In short:
Sinovac, "their" covid vaccine, was stolen from Canada when Canada offered to help them produce a vaccine. Signed an official treaty and everything. Canada did the hard work that they literally couldn't, and still can't, do. Then they took the vaccine and claimed it was entirely their own work.
Huawei's 5G development miracle is 100% stolen technology from Nortel. They did no work of their own other than work so shoddy even the UK Tories didn't want to touch it.
These are just the two highest profile ones that go right to the leaders of the CCP.
Funny how both of these stole from Canada. I found no information whatsoever on whether Sinovac stole from anyone.
I did find information on Nortel and how Huawei took their secrets from Chinese hackers. But 1. Nortel filed bankruptcy the same year LTE was introduced, and the hacks were a few years before. I seriously doubt that their technology was this advanced to be retrofit for 5G that easily without much innovation. 2. These were still Chinese hackers. This industry also requires innovation.
Lol saying china respects IP is hilarious.