• Red Wizard 🪄
    link
    fedilink
    22
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    https://archive.is/20240220003112/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-19/china-vows-to-centralize-tech-development-under-communist-party

    Archive of the full article.

    This is rational from China’s perspective. Divesting in the American technology pipeline not only weakens America’s grip on the global economy but also positions China as the leader in global technology.

    Also, we have more evidence of US putting back doors into technology than we do China. If you’re living in the imperial core, it’s far more likely that the US is monitoring your activities than China is.

    • @Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Nothing makes that more clear than how quickly the US dropped their bullshit accusations of DikDok once it was under their control.

  • @Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    17
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Looking forward to my purchase going towards R&D for new tech and not just some CEO’s coke/CSAM addiction.

      • @Tinidril@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -71 year ago

        Nobody’s capitalist, or communist for that matter. Both of these are mythical ideals that nobody has ever managed to implement at any large scale.

        • @OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
          link
          fedilink
          81 year ago

          Sure, if you base your politics in idealism instead of materialism, which isn’t a very useful lense for analyzing politics.

          • @Tinidril@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -31 year ago

            Exactly, though I would say there are some ideals that are more realistic than others. I think the whole debate between communism and capitalism is largely a distraction from actual tangible change that can be achieved and sustained.

            • queermunist she/her
              link
              fedilink
              31 year ago

              It’s still capitalism when the government does things. It’s not a mix of capitalism and socialism or whatever, it’s just capitalism because what matters is who is in control. Under capitalism there is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, the owners of capital. Hence, capital-ism.

              • @Tinidril@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -11 year ago

                Under capitalism, corporations take over the government and use it to their own ends. Under communism, the government takes over the corporations and uses them to it’s own ends. Either outcome ends up looking pretty much the same.

                What we have in the west, especially America, is far more than just “the government doing stuff”. Government power and corporate power have become nearly indistinguishable. Corporations don’t make long term investments of any kind without government grants to ensure consistent steady profits. We are constantly at war, and those wars consistently serve corporate interests.

                On the other side, every large scale implementation of Communist ideals has resulted instead in state capitalism.

                • queermunist she/her
                  link
                  fedilink
                  41 year ago

                  No, every implementation of a communist state (or even a vaguely leftish state) is ruthlessly hunted down and destroyed by capitalist powers - chiefly the United States.

                • @Eldritch@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -11 year ago

                  Under communism, the government takes over the corporations and uses them to it’s own ends.

                  No, that is Leninism. Not communism. Those groups called themselves communist, communist party, communist Republic etc. But we’re not communist in any significant sense beyond nominally.

                  Replace every time you mention communism with Leninism or ML and I largely agree however. Russia evolved into fascism. China is absolutely state capitalist. North Korea 100% a dictatorial nepo-state. But not because of communism.

        • @Eldritch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          Plenty are capitalist. True no one will ever achieve the capitalist ideal. Because capitalism amplifies and encourages the worst of human behavior. Without offering any controls for it. Capitalism is absurdist by it’s very nature.

          While it’s true no nation has ever achieved ideological communism either. Thats because it requires post scarcity. Which strictly speaking we don’t have yet. And directly requires us to address the worst of human nature. It simply isn’t currently achievable. But there are plenty of things we could do to move towards it that we aren’t and should be doing. But can’t, in the United States for example. Because wealthy oligarchs and authoritarians have invested heavily in miseducation and propaganda.

          • @Tinidril@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            I would argue that post scarcity is something that we could actually have today if it were a priority. Most of the work people do today is entirely unnecessary. What’s left could mostly be automated if that were a priority. Instead, what we see is consumer demand expanding to demand more and more stuff, and the majority of the workforce being employed in scams to help their employer collect power coupons.

            • @Eldritch@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              01 year ago

              I disagree. But you aren’t that wrong. We could claw back the theft of capitalism and absolutely provide a comfortable standard of living for almost everyone. But there are absolutely some big road blocks. Energy and food demand in particular. But we are rapidly approaching some significant milestones on those fronts. Cell cultures/lab grown meat, advancements in fusion. But again if we don’t address the problem that is capitalism. Those things will be hamstrung and used to fleece regular people all the more.

              • @Tinidril@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                11 year ago

                I didn’t say that we actually are post scarcity, only that we could be if that were society’s priority. Take away all the useless work, and that doesn’t leave a whole lot to require coercion. Most of our food production is already pretty much automated, and most of the rest would be if coercion was taken off the table.

                I don’t share your optimism on fusion, but that’s not very relevant since there are other technologies that I see as long term solutions. We also waste tons of energy, for instance Bitcoin alone is estimated to account for 2% of US electricity use.

                I don’t think it says much for communism as an economic system if all the economic problems have to be resolved before it becomes possible.

  • @GnuLinuxDude@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    41 year ago

    I think we can expect to see a future where a lot of Chinese computing is done on RISC-V. They will not have any need for American technology companies, b/c we don’t do the manufacturing anyway. We just have the IP for entrenched technology. Americans were too short-sighted with all that trade war, Nvidia GPUs, and Huawei stuff. Why wouldn’t your biggest trading partner take that as a warning sign that they must foster their own tech sector?

    Also, when you can truly plan for longer terms than fiscal quarters or, if you’re being really ambitious, fiscal years then I don’t see how you can’t just eventually dominate the sector.

  • @shiroininja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    -61 year ago

    Not that you could before, but I wouldn’t trust any chips, hardware, software, anything made from there from a security stand point anymore.

  • Jaysyn
    link
    fedilink
    -81 year ago

    Which will further stifle innovation, just like every other time it’s been attempted.

    Thanks China!

        • @frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          8
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That comes across as hiding in vagueness. If there are abundant examples like you claim, it should be very easy to cite a few.

          Is China a dictatorship ?

        • @Alsephina@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          6
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You are currently living in a bourgeois dictatorship (no, getting to “choose” out of two capitalist imperialist parties is not “democracy”). Has your country not innovated on anything?

          Have proletarian dictatorships like the USSR, which went from feudal backwaters to the first nation ever to explore space in just 30 years, and China, which has gone from one of the 10 poorest nations to now the second (soon to be first) richest, not innovated?

    • @Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      Name one major new innovation of the past 50 years that didn’t rely substantially on government funding? NASA alone is responsible for most of the technologies in your cell phone, except for the touch screen which was funded by the Smithsonian.

      I’ll even tie one arm behind my back and we can ignore indirect things like public schooling or military conquest for resources like oil.

      • @novibe@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 year ago

        Because it’s not right? The biggest competitor to the US technologically for decades was the USSR. They were the first into space, made the first computers etc. and they were much more centralised than China is.

        • @voracitude@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          -71 year ago

          Yes, and Chernobyl never exploded because Soviet engineers don’t make mistakes.

          Komarov did not know he was going to die in Soyuz 1, he was excited and happy to be going up and didn’t want Gagarin to get all the glory: https://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2011/05/02/134597833/cosmonaut-crashed-into-earth-crying-in-rage

          Science was so much better in the USSR there’s even a whole list of things about how much better it was: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repression_of_science_in_the_Soviet_Union

          🤡

          • @novibe@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            101 year ago

            Omg a Wikipedia article shit talking the USSR? Communism is over, pack it up boys.

            You can spew anti-communist Cold War era propaganda all you want.

            I know the USSR wasn’t perfect. But it really serves only the interests of the US empire to focus on that without ever mentioning all the bullshit anti-science shit the US and Western powers engaged in for centuries.

            Acting like only communist nations had issues is propaganda, plain and simple. Ignoring all the similar issues western capitalist nations had is propaganda, plain and simple.

            • @Alsephina@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              61 year ago

              Michael Parenti - Blackshirts and Reds:

              The pure socialists’ ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed.

              I doubt the person you’re replying to is a socialist though ig. Prolly just a lib judging by them citing NATOpedia lol

      • @sibachian@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        71 year ago

        got news for you, all innovation happens on the tax roll. and because it’s free and public to use, companies take it, stick licenses on it, and sell it back to you (gotta love paying twice).

        • @voracitude@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          -6
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’ve got news for you: historically, “centralised” research has led to fewer innovations in consumer technology and bureaucrats unilaterally redirecting funds away from promising areas for political reasons. For just two examples: Cybernetics was the target of a political campaign in the USSR, and their biologists denied genetics of all things and tried to promote agricultural policy based on genetics being wrong.

          Alternatively, we could just look at where the USSR is now to see how well their centralised research and development efforts are going 👀

          • @sibachian@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            51 year ago

            your example is irrelevant and makes little sense as a counter when all research and innovation globally is still paid for by taxes. no business will spend billions on new ideas, they spend billions on commercial application of public (tax paid) ideas in order to profit.

          • @ShepherdPie@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            01 year ago

            You could even lump giant US corporations into that group too. Companies like IBM innovated less and less the larger they got. You can’t expect constant innovation from a singular machine that runs the same all the time.

      • Flinch
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        There’s that classic homophobia, always juuuust below the surface, all it takes is a little scratch for it all to come flowing out 😌

      • @Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        0
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m not downvoting you because your score being “7/11” is hilarious to me, and is only two upvotes off another very funny set of numbers.

        EDIT: Nooooooo!

    • @Alsephina@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 year ago

      their entire tech industry was built on by industrial espionage and corporate theft

      We need more of that. Fuck megacorps and their IPs. Hell, even the US completely disregarded br*tish IP laws when it was industrializing, and African countries will do too when they industrialize.

    • queermunist she/her
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      their entire tech industry was built on by industrial espionage and corporate theft

      basedbasedbasedbasedbasedbasedbasedbased

    • Agree that IP laws are shit for developing a country & its people.

      You’ve come to the right site; we’re all pro-piracy and anti walled gardens here.

      • @Tinidril@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        Reasonable IP laws are conceptually a good thing. Unfortunately, America is incapable of implementing reasonable laws about anything. Between rampant authoritarianism and legalized bribery, American IP laws only favor large corporate interests.