China: the New Advanced Technology Research Hotbed 452
securitas writes "The New York Times' Chris Buckley reports that China is the new hotbed of advanced technology research and development for hundreds of global technology companies. The list includes household names like Oracle (which 'opened a lab in Beijing to tailor its Linux operating software to suit its Asian customers'), Motorola, Siemens, IBM, Intel, General Electric, Nokia and others. Microsoft Research Asia hopes Google-surpassing technology comes from a group of '10 researchers ... working on new ways to drill deep into the Internet and select and organize the information found there.' Growth of the R&D sector in China is so rapid that 'within five years China could overtake Britain, Germany and Japan as a base for corporate research, leaving it second only to the United States.'"
Reg Free Link - No Karma Whoring (Score:5, Informative)
OK, now let's argue over whether or not Slashdot counts as a "Blog", and whether or not we should be using the New York Times Link Generator [blogspace.com] to create links so that people can RTFA!
Yes, BugMeNot works too, but if you're going to provide an article to Slashdot, at least make it so everyone can read it without jumping through hoops...
Re:Reg Free Link - No Karma Whoring (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously I'm registered for years, have never gotten any spam from this registration and if you don't want to register head over to google or wait for the reg free link which *will* appear within 10min.
If a free painless registration is the price it takes for NYT to keep the niveau and the sheer amount of free stuff on their homepage I'm willing to pay it.
Any link to China-Linux here? (Score:3, Insightful)
A short time later, China emerges as a research-leader...
Of course you CAN do research with closed-source operating systems like Windows, but you have to wait until Microsoft ALLOWS you to.
*chuckle*
Re:Any link to China-Linux here? (Score:4, Interesting)
You didn't listen to Arnold. (Score:5, Funny)
Personally, I agree with you, I just don't think Arnie will though.
-Derek
Re:Any link to China-Linux here? (Score:2, Funny)
I don't have a problem with that, as long as they bring huge barrels of Wonton Soup back to the States with them.
Re:Any link to China-Linux here? (Score:3, Interesting)
biotech is being squahed by the right wingers
If you're going to troll, at least get your facts straight:
But it gets better. The reason why embrionic stem cell research isn't being done in the US is because there's no future in it!
Re:Any link to China-Linux here? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Competition in Nano/Biotech can only be good!! (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem, and the reason why so many Americans are worried about all this, is that this is not a competition we will win, and we already know it.
With more people working on nanotech and biotech and stem cell research, the right wing in the US can only back down on issues like stem cell research,
And why do you think that? The religious right takes the positions it does because of irrational religious beliefs (when was religion ever based on rationality?). They don't care if the USA turns into a biotech backwater; all that matters is that they're "right", and that they can push their morality on the rest of us. You don't see the Islamic fundamentalists trying to turn their countries and regions into world-class high-tech hubs; they want to impose strict religious law (which includes stoning women to death if they allow their arm to be seen outside their bourqa) on everyone under their control, even if that means turning those places into societies with less technology than the Ancient Greeks had.
so we will have to stop wasting, what, 200 billion on wars in iraq, and start spending this money on fuuture technologies like nano and biotech, for the future is life extention, just look at the massive market out there,
And what makes you think this is going to happen? Americans are happy to spend billions on wars with no justification. From the latest polls I've seen, it looks like Bush is going to win the next election, so that means a majority of Americans approve of his actions in Iraq. Sure, there's a huge market out there in the nanotech and biotech fields, but there's other countries out there that are probably going to be the ones to capitalize on them, not the US.
to develop these new technologies requires brainpower and both china and india have much more potential brainpower that for instance, the US has.
Yep, and our kids are being failed by our pathetic education system, and the smart ones that get to college are staying the hell away from the tech fields, for good reason: there's much better (more stable, better paying) careers out there, which you don't have to worry about being offshored.
The fact is, the USA is going downhill very fast. The downfall of the tech industries is just the start; pretty soon, other countries will realize that we just don't have anything to offer them, since they'll have all the technology, manufacturing capacity, etc. The only thing we'll have is silly IP laws that let companies patent things like 1-click shopping. Our economy is based on a house of cards, and pretty soon everyone else is going to stop believing in the things that allow the US to keep its house of cards propped up. The best thing to do is to plan for the collapse.
Re:Competition in Nano/Biotech can only be good!! (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the fundamental problem is one of values. American kids shun competition because the hippies told them that life should be easier than that. American kids consume signif
ohhhh, I dunno.... (Score:5, Interesting)
I know it's fun to generalise, but "alternative culture" also lends itself to innovation, dreaming, rejection of the staid status quo, etc. It's not just drugs and losers. Way back, when we shifted from being called "beatniks" to "hippies" WE were the ones to point out ridiculous illegal wars and draft slavery. We were the first ones to say "wait a minnit, why are all these global international corporations running our nation?" WE marched and took the gas on behalf of non priveleged minorites and in support of equal gender rights. We'd say stuff like "Hey, what do you mean we don't have full property rights, we want to build a yurt instead of a boring square stick frame box you insensitive clod!" And so on and so forth. Poison free food? Certainly wasn't the suits pushing that. Medical care that WORKS and don't cost an arm and a leg and don't all go to enrich global medical monopolies? Check who was a big part of that movement. And now to get to normal slashdotisms, who's pushing open source the most?
So, how about a little credit along with the deserved dissin, every generation and culture got good and bad to it.
Re:Any link to China-Linux here? (Score:5, Interesting)
The country has been pushing heavily for all kinds of tech development; if you'll recall, the US and china had a rift a while ago over China trying to force hardware to release proprietary fabrication and design information if they wanted to have access to China's markets. China wants to take the US and Japan's places as the leading international tech powerhouses. It's probably a good strategy, too - they have a large, well educated (at least in urban areas) population. I think they can pull it off.
And, as unpopular as this statement might be... I think their largely totalitarian government - so long as they don't infringe enough on their people so as to reduce their work ethic, their national pride, and the ability for businesses to compete with each other - will actually help them in competition with the US, due to the greater degree of strategic control they can have over their markets. The US would have a lot more trouble trying to do things like force foreign companies to disclose their tech secrets, apart from outright spying.
Re:Any link to China-Linux here? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Any link to China-Linux here? (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, that is not to say that
Re:Any link to China-Linux here? (Score:5, Interesting)
No, you seem to have a VERY limited knowledge of Chinese history, both recent and ancient. Look up things like the cultural revolution and the great leap forward. There is control of markets in action! China has always managed to grow at an astounding pace to only fall into ruin, moreso than most other civilizations of the world. Things are going pretty well now, but that is way too small a timeline to say that China's government is so wonderful. China will hit a bust, and with their government, the bust will be as loud as the boom.
Is "insourcing" a word? (Score:5, Insightful)
What's most fascinating about this, to me at least, is that in Western countries, this would be just a sort of emergent phenomenon, unpredicted and unplanned. But in China, odds are good that this is a deliberate strategy on the part of the Chinese government.
Which, incidentally, is something that a lot of people seem to overlook: China's economy is becoming more and more capitalistic, but China is still politically and socially very much a state-run nation. The increasing captilism is part of the government's plan to bring the Chinese economy to the forefront of the world, and I tend to believe that this surge in R&D is just as much a deliberate strategy on the part of the Chinese government.
Frankly, I find the whole thing fascinating.
Re:Is "insourcing" a word? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is "insourcing" a word? (Score:2)
Re:Is "insourcing" a word? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is "insourcing" a word? (Score:3, Informative)
Actually not. The economy was booming, but largely to the fact that the government was spending massive amounts of money on projects, like building the Autobahn, rearmament, representative buildings and events. All money, which they actually didn't have, but lend. Mostly from countries, which they later invaded.
IRC, Speer himself, later Minister for Economy under the Nazi-Regime, noted, that this economic policy could only
Re:Is "insourcing" a word? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is "insourcing" a word? (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course the Chinese government is behind and it is a plan. It the high tech version of what they've been doing to manufacturing for a few years now. Undercut manufacturing in the rest of the world especially through low labor costs, the rest of the world gives up and moves all their machine tools, manufacturing capibility and technology to China, the rest of the world becomes completely dependent on China for manufacturing and they can so start to jack up their prices because they no will soon have no competition worth mentioning.
The end result is one giant American or European company after another is transfering the crown jewels of their intellectual property in to a country that has complete disdain for intellectual property rights and enforcement. Once its all transfered and Chinese nationals are the ones doing all the new development the foreign devil companies are going to be completely expendable and expended.
Its a great strategy for catapulting yourself from a technology backwater where you are mostly reverse engineering and soldering to global technological dominion.
The stupidity of American politicians and business leaders is truly amazing especially when they are blinded by greed.
Riiiight (Score:5, Insightful)
Riiiight. You've sold me on that idea, sonny.
I got offshored, and it's a bitch finding a job. I don't like it. But outsourcing and offshoring are a natural result of a free market, and if I believe in a free market when it comes to steel and cars, I'd be pretty hypocritical to suddenly stop when my own ox is being gored.
Repeat: outsourcing and offshoring are natural parts of a free market.
You know what I like best about having a global economy? It encourages cooperation and reduces the chances of war. The Chinese are learning that trade --> booming economy, and they like that. Sooner or later they will realize that huge primitive army is best converted to gainful employment.
The US used to know this, until Shrub found a golden opportunity to finish Daddy's war and help his oil buddies. The US is now going to learn it again, just as Microsoft has taught the rest of the computer industry that playing with Microsoft doesn't involve a level playing field, and Microsoft finds it harder and harder to find partners. Coalitions of the willing require partners, not the old style teamwork where the leader cracks the whip and the team pulls harder.
Re:Riiiight (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually no, it started after Mao and the Gang of Four died. Your rhetoric here is just stupid. Its became the plan of the current leadership when they deduced the obvious, they couldn't beat the west militarily or idealogically but they have the one thing needed to destroy the West economically, a huge underpaid, oppressed labor pool, versus the West where labor is expensive.
"Repeat: outsourcing and offshoring are na
Re:Is "insourcing" a word? (Score:4, Interesting)
And it cuts both ways: The West still has a political requirement to appear free and capitalistic, but is increasingly becoming more statist. The increasing statism is part of our governments' plans to consolidate power in the face of declining domestic R&D capabilities. (An undereducated population's easier to control, so why not outsource the R&D, and bring the profits back home, in the form of earnings to shareholders, and taxes on the profits and any income distributed to shareholders? Spend the taxes on making sure the non-shareholders have enough cash to buy the cheap goods you're making offshore, and everyone's happy!)
As a fringe benefit, we get to beta-test the new surveillance and data-mining techniques on a population not subject to the few remaining privacy limits in the West, and to see how various methods of social control work against various groups of unreliable social elements.
50 years ago, or even 20 years ago, that model wasn't viable; most states that tried it wound up collapsing under the weight of their own bureaucracies. East Germany was probably the worst example; there were so many people filing records for STASI that there was nobody left to design or build the new toys.
> Frankly, I find the whole thing fascinating.
Ditto. China seems to have achieved the social stability and unity of purpose normally associated with totalitarianism, without sacrificing the rising standards of living afforded by capitalism. It's actually a pretty cool model.
(Which is a good thing, because it's the model we'll probably end up with whether we think it's cool or not :)
Re:Is "insourcing" a word? (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh yeah, really cool [laogai.org].
I still think Hong Kong had the best model, right before the ChiComs took over. Minimalist but competent government, simple 15% flat tax (complexity == corruption when it comes to laws), and at least near-American standard of living. Damned if I know how the syste
This should serve as a warning to US lawmakers ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:This should serve as a warning to US lawmakers (Score:3, Insightful)
The irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The irony (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The irony (Score:2)
Why would they want a better search engine since they would be censoring a lot of it anyways.
You know there are vast quantities of information on the Internet that the Chinese government considers benign. Vast shopping malls. Massive physics and computer science knowledge repositories. Fan sites. etc.
Re:The irony: In Communist China (Score:3, Insightful)
In Communist China, the search engine looks for YOU!
More likely to be the opposite (Score:2)
Within 5 years? (Score:3, Funny)
And within ten? Maybe we can do their tech support for them. Outsourcing's a bitch, but it works both ways.
Re:Within 5 years? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Within 5 years? (Score:4, Insightful)
As an additional caveat, they get to completely skip the industrial revolution, but get all the benefits. They didn't have to invent and refine the assembly line, the cotton gin, the milling machine, anything that would increase production. They simply bought them. And when they couldn't buy them, they threw their biggest natural resource at the problem; their population.
It's socialist capitalization, and unfortunately for us, it's quite effective!
Re:Within 5 years? (Score:3, Interesting)
And, when you're China and can manage to get your billion-plus population to cooperate...you pretty much don't have anone that can effectively compete against you. It is really quite genious houw they worked that out, even considering the social hardships that we consider them to have (for who are we to tell
Re:Within 5 years? (Score:2)
Oh, well, it's not all that great. They wouldn't be that way if it all worked perfectly as you say.
Many state-run businesses are the worst effort doublers (at least in the financial sense - they pour money in them) for continued negative gain (losses, that is) because they employ "the masses".
Another category of effort doublers are small family owned businesses - they have nowhere to go - you just put in as many hours as you can, tighten your belt,
Re:Within 5 years? (Score:5, Insightful)
Those damn bits... (Score:2)
Research Assistants (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Research Assistants (Score:3, Insightful)
We have this one chinese lady working as a research assistant here. Every time she's doing minor experiments she freaks OUT like we're gonna beat her if she does something wrong or the test is invalid.
Seriously they must send researchers who make little mistakes in for electricution torture or something down there.
Bad news for US (Score:4, Insightful)
Great, and within 10 years they'll probably surpass the USA. That is the direction everything's heading- outsourcing the skilled, high tech, and R&D work is going to hollow out the US economy until it collapses in on itself like a neutron star...
Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) (Score:4, Insightful)
And maybe then, people in the US will FINALLY realize that the US is not the center of the universe.
And yes, I am a born-and-raised American. I am just so friggin sick of this idea that the USA is the greatest country in the world and that it always will be. It isn't a big surprise that the "rest of the world" will catch up to and probably surpass us in lots of things. Think automobile production in the 70s. Think electronics. Think military. We are so used to being bullies and living in our own minds that we have forgotten the rest of the world. How many times have you heard something like: "France doesn't like our politics? Screw 'em, who needs the French anyway?" I have heard it way too much. The US is probably the least worldly nation on the planet. (that should be)
Not to start a flamewar, but this is what the Bush administration has been basing its entire existence on! And it hasn't just been Bush, it has been our entire government over the last XXX years.
Unfortunately, it will probably take something catastrophic like a shift in the tech sector, or even worse some military shift to wake people up in this country.
Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) (Score:4, Insightful)
No the U.S. is not the center of the universe but we are certainly the center of the population that inhabits this earth. Our diversity is our strength and you dramatically and astoundingly underestimate it.
Also, where do you get off saying the country always bullies everyone? Last I checked we waited until Pearl Harbor to get involved with WW2. Yes there are examples that support your conclusion but the fact that in the average American donates more to charity than the average citizen of any other country.Also, by definition the United States is worldly. Our citizens come from every country on this earth.
Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) (Score:3)
I was stating that the fact that the average american donates more money than the average citizen of any other country suggests that we are inherently not bullies. It has been this way since the 50's and continues to be the trend.
You might notice all of my references are dated in WW2 because the current Bush administration is indeed what I would call a bully.Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) (Score:3)
I was with you up until this point.
What exactly do we still offer the world? There's still some tech here, but it's moving away rapidly. Manufacturing is all gone, and engineering is fast on its heels.
I think the only thing America is still good at is producing food in huge quantities, and blowing things up. So I guess if you mean that we offer the world cheap food, and bullets and bombs if they piss us off, I'll agree with that.
Re:Bad news for US (Score:2)
I think China certainly has the ability to take over economic and technical leadership. Large, well educated population and natural resources. It will require good management of the economy by the country's leadership. Explosive gr
Better than Google? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry to say it, but I really don't find anything dissatisfying about the way Google selects and organizes information found on the Internet. Rarely do I ever even look at the second page of search results, because the first one always has the information I was after.
If Microsoft wants to beat Google, they're going to have to pick a different venue.
Drill down? (Score:3, Funny)
This is Good for World Peace (Score:5, Insightful)
And the other thing is competition is good for everyone.
Re:This is Good for World Peace (Score:2)
Yes- because I've dealt with Chinese businesmen. Of course, I find all businesspeople to be closed and belligerent- so that shuldn't be surprising.
And the other thing is competition is good for everyone.
Everyone excpe the guy who used to be on top- who is now homeless due to competition.
Re:This is Good for World Peace (Score:2)
Re:This is Good for World Peace (Score:2, Interesting)
It has happend before, and it will happen again.
But they can't even form acronyms! (Score:5, Funny)
By in China, Mandarin, Cantonese and other dialects are all written using ideographs, where one glyph represents a single word. As a result, it is impossible to form acronyms. And as a result, technological progress is impossible.
Now, where's my company acronym dictionary again?
Re:But they can't even form acronyms! (Score:2)
Re:But they can't even form acronyms! (Score:2, Funny)
It's under your TPS report.
Re:But they can't even form acronyms! (Score:2)
worker 1: Hey what is this character?
worker 2: Oh that is short for spear guy, picnic table, hangman, jumping jack guy.
worker 1: I'll never understand all these acronyms
Figures. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Figures. (Score:2)
Money goes where... (Score:5, Insightful)
Think you can double you money fast in US stocks? Fat chance. But in China companies are growing like crazy.
The US has peaked because everyone is already consuming at 110%, about set for a complete economic meltdown. China has a billion poor people, just waiting to spend all their money on stuff, and they don't speak English. *gasp*
That and a PhD researcher will cost you like $US 200/month.
Re:Money goes where... (Score:2)
What does that even mean?
Re:Money goes where... (Score:5, Insightful)
Second, the Banking system in china is flush with bad loans and, if something isn't done, it will colapse. Either way, it will be very painful to fix.
Third, china is in the beginings of a major energy crisis.
Forth, what do you think will happen when all those poor peole realize that their 'leaders' are reaping all the profits?
Fifth, what happens to those stock holdings if China ever nationalizes our investements?
The world isn't a nice place, and neither is China. They do not like the US or Europe that much as, as soon as they can, they will rid themselves of us.
Re:Money goes where... (Score:3, Interesting)
You raised some good points.
Also, if you look at how China is investing that money, they are propping up US securities as well.
That makes me wonder, if China fails to buy US government securities, because of a banking collapse, what will that do to the value of our dollar with a record 384 Billion deficit?
Not a pretty thought.
-Hack
Is it really any surprise? (Score:5, Insightful)
Add to that the "bad stigma" associated with stem cell research here in the US...it's no surprise to me that the R&D in the US is declining and increasing in the world where people are less shackled by legal systems/lobbyist (now shackled human rights saved for another discussion)
Kylin and China development (Score:4, Interesting)
And Kylin [chinatechnews.com] is supposed to be a windows, linux, unix and *BSD and MacOS beater ! Interesting stuff!
After the 2008 Olympics people will wake up to a reality, how advanced China is! I think it is great! Lets hope China becomes a huge adopter of linux!
How many Chinese
Looking forward to 2008. See you there!
Raise Your Hand (Score:5, Interesting)
Over a decade back China placed great emphasis on education in technology, now with a large pool of talent to draw from the country is in a great position to harness it's own technology future, as well as that of other countries.
Meanwhile in the US, students care about being cool, having the latest toys and what others think. Only nerds actually study.
Perhaps chinese youth will catch up to the slovenly and egocentric ways of the west. Some chinese diplomat, back in the 1800's said something to the effect of 'China already has everything and needs nothing, what can Europe offer to China?' Well, the answer was Opium. Maybe the next opium craze in china will be western fashion, television and SUV's.
Re:Raise Your Hand (Score:3, Interesting)
Could it be because India is a democracy and at least partially looks after its rural communities and environment, whereas the autocratic Chinese government can promise businesses pr
Re:Raise Your Hand (Score:2)
DISCLAIMER: I am currently taking and Internation al Trade class right now and my professor is from China, so I've just recently starting keeping up with this stuff.
The only cause for concern... (Score:2)
Cheap labor, but no IP protection (Score:3, Insightful)
So what (Score:3, Funny)
Let's see THAT in China!
So what is this "advanced technology" anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, when the iMac counts as a technological breakthrough things are slow. No offense to the Mac lovers, but it was more of a design breaktrhough than anything. That's just one of many examples of that same thing where it's a new style as opposed to a radically new technology. Cars get this treatment all the time. The differnce between the new model and the old model is the freakin' plastic brake light reflectors. That's not an advance. That sucks.
The Internet itself is another example. Just because a series of factors made it seem to emerge suddenly, it isn't really the case that it happened suddenly at all. Mostly it was just a matter of merging rather dated defence research into the private sector. Same with a lot of chip designs. It's not really all that amazing or recent. It just took a long time to make it your way.
And as for CMOS process tecnologies and the whole Moore's Law thing. Give me a break, that was not and is not really about pusing the edge of technology as much as it was about markets being controlled by only a few players being able to afford to compete.
Immersion lithography which is part of what is making China so hot was experimented with decades ago and abandoned because it didn't fit the business plans of the likes of Intel or IBM at the time.
So, when I see this stuff about China being the new "technology research hotbed" it doesn't strike me as being all that meaningful. It's the new manufacturing center for chips. So what.
I mean besides CMOS chip technology which is already very, very mature its hard to point to real major technology that has been developed in the last forty years with any serious economic significance. Okay lasers, though for the most part just the small ones, have improved a lot and small motors are more reliable. Anything outside of IT though? Even MEMS is still mostly about IT. There's promises about ultra efficient fuel cells and nanotubes and such but there were promises forty years ago as well. They even had better promises back then. We're still building houses out of wooden sticks for crying out loud.
Technology outside of IT moves unbelievably slowly.
So, if China is where the chips are going to be made then naturally you'll have a lot of designers there making consumer products, but is that really a technology research hotbed? I'd call it more like a designer extravaganza.
I do hope it could be otherwise, but I don't know. Something tells me we're still going to have internal combustion autos a hundred years from now.
However, like I said, I'm not a pessimist. I think the revenge we will get is that we'll live incredibly long lives so we will eventually see the flying cars, space elevators and what-not. We'll just have to be very patient. All I expect out of China is cheaper PCs. As if they weren't cheap already.
Re:So what is this "advanced technology" anyway (Score:4, Insightful)
My purposed reason is because of corporate America. The bottom line is about money, not about furthering technology or civilization. The international oil industry would be significantly smaller right now if we had super fuel efficient cars. They knew/know this, so they're doing (and did) everything in their power (which is a lot) to slow down that pace. Case in point: When you're in Chicago or NYC, what is the best way to get around? The L/subway. Everyone knows this. It's cheap and very quick and easy for navigating large cities. So why aren't those sorts of mass transit options available in cities across the country? Because of lobbyists funded by the oil/car industry, lest they lose market share. Lest people realize that mass-transit really does work and even more cities adopt it! One could argue that they're simply not feasible in cities that are more "spread out" or don't have the same sort of downtown, but I would argue that the city planners early on designed it all that way from the start. Most cities were designed to be traversed by cars, not mass-transit. I'm sure that this was often on purpose because they really did think cars were better, and sometimes it was on purpose because the oil/auto industry had funded/bribed them and it was part of the "agenda".
Is that far fetched? Perhaps. But I think it can't be underestimated. There is big money in oil and auto, but not really in mass-transit. In fact, mass-transit tends to be a public entity that doesn't exist to make a huge profit, only to pay for maintenance, operations, and expansion. If no one can get rich off it, no one wants to pursue it. The same reason that most people stay out of science and research fields: you can't get rich from it! And that's what most people care about. And by "most people" I don't mean Americans, I mean people around the world. Everyone. Everyone wants to be rich and live the high-life. That goal used to be directly linked with bettering society, but now we see society as "sufficient" and don't care to better it, only to get rich and enjoy it now.
This post isn't meant to be an "America/humanity sucks because they're greedy bastards", it's simply meant to purpose a theory as to the change in the pace of technological development. It's not even meant to be a "corporate America" bashing post, because corporate America is made of people like you and me who got to the top. Somewhere along the line some of them, not all, changed from being idealists who wanted to further society to only wanting what's best for their pocket book.
One reason: scarcity of women. (Score:5, Funny)
funny how I just read something relating to this (Score:2)
Well, we did this to ourselves. (Score:5, Interesting)
One of the major problems is that we don't have enough people who are willing to pursue basic research, or who are intellectually up to the task. Someone has to step up and explain to students that science and engineering aren't dead end career paths! Not everyone can be a lawyer or investment banker, and almost no one can be a rock star or sports hero. Unfortunately for us, China still has central planning, and can dump everything into a project that it can (see the Great Leap Forward for an example.) Communist countries are well-known for forced industrialization efforts. The government could let the peasants starve for a few years and become the number one science power on the planet if they wanted to.
Comparative stats (Score:4, Interesting)
GDP $6.449T
GDP Growth 9.1%
Inflation 1.2%
PerCap Income $5000
Phones (LL) 214M
CellPhones 240M
Internet Users 59M
Internet Hosts 156,53
TV Stations 3240
Population 1.2B
Pop. Growth
Interesting numbers (from another post I saw here). Maybe the most telling is how the average person makes $5000 (US Equiv), but how many more cellphone there are. Does this mean there is a higher willingness to adopt new technology in China? Or do they just like cellphones more than 'we' do? Maybe they don't have to put up with Sprint....
Re:Comparative stats (Score:3, Informative)
Pop. Growth
How are we ever going to catch up with such a low rate of population growth. I volunteer to do my part in helping improve our numbers,
Re:Comparative stats (Score:2)
Re:Comparative stats (Score:3, Informative)
Landline phones: ~20% vs ~60%
Cellphones: ~25% vs ~50%
Dependence on foreign oil wasn't enough (Score:2)
On the other hand I used to work at a contract research laboratory and they'd charge the full cost of running the research plus 200-400% overhead. It's hard to blame someone for not wanting to pay those prices.
Something's gotta give before too much longer. We're replacing well paying jobs with Wal-Mart parking lot attendants.
WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)
"Within five years China could overtake Britain, Germany and Japan as a base for corporate research, leaving it second only to the United States."
Yeah, maybe, if you define "corporate research" as "learning how to use ten year old technology."
microsoft at 2004 siggraph (Score:3)
The research was solid, but not not super creative. There were things like you might do in a 3-D version of Photoshop, etc. The heavy duty mathematics came were still in papers from Stanford and CMU.
The big mystery is when MicroSoft is going release products from its impressive R&D lab. Most of its products are boring copycat stuff like the recent MS-Tunes.
The rest of the story (Score:4, Insightful)
I've got nothing against my company lowballing itself, but it really pisses me off that they're insulting the goose the laid their golden eggs.
*YAWN* (Score:3, Insightful)
Five decades later, where would you rather be living? The former Soviet Union, or the US?
Haven't we seen this before? (Score:5, Insightful)
Disclaimer: I'm not an economist, and I think economics is boring as hell. Real economists, please correct any of the points I screw up.
For those of us over 20 years old, you might remember another Asian economy that was steamrolling us. Everyone was complaining that the US was really going under this time, and fingers were pointing at all our shortcomings compared to that economy.
They've figured out a way to repeal or circumvent Adam Smith's laws. Our education isn't good enough. We work harder, not smarter. We don't work hard enough. We watch too much useless TV. We don't appreciate the power of multimedia. We aren't an ancient enough culture to appreciate the strategy of business. We're buying too many of the other country's products. We're selling too much of our real estate. We aren't pragmatic enough to give up drugs/religion/sexual habits/hobbies/music that holds us back.
Does anyone remember this attitude? I seem to recall people saying this about Japan when I was a kid. Anyone remember those guys? They're still recovering from an economic slowdown that lasted about 15 years. But they were pretty worrying at the time. They were an economic bogeyman -- Better work harder, or the Japanese will 0wn us. I recall a sarcastic commentator on some of the pushes for diversity education, "Diversity training is essential for the global marketplace. We've got to push for understanding and appreciation of other cultures. So we can beat hell out of the Japs."
I'm mentioning this because I see people in the thread saying all the same stuff we used to say about the Japanese. "There's nothing we can compete against them in. It's because we're conservative (it would be 'liberal' if Slashdot didn't lean to the left). It's because we're lazy." This attitude is not surprising; it's natural to assume that something that seems huge today is going to be even bigger in the future. It's why all William Gibson's futuristic books imagine a world dominated by zaibatsu.
Although I do believe that software patents, draconian laws regarding intellectual property, weird political bans on scientific research, etc are going to hurt us in several ways, I have trouble believing the extent of the gloomy scenarios imagined by Slashdotters here simply because I've lived through at least one of them. Really, all of us have lived through another, opposite one: The dot-com era. Remember how everyone was saying "It's the new economy! Everyone is making millions from web design and advertising! We're all going to keep getting richer, forever!" This, too, is a result of basing tomorrow's predictions on a literal interpretation of today's economic climate.
I'm sure China will end up dominating one or another sections of the market, and I'm sure a lot of blue-collar workers (such as call-center workers; they may have been "support engineers" here in the dot-bomb age, but let's face it, they're no more engineers than 1920s Ford factory workers) will be displaced. This happened the last time an Asian country figured largely in our economy. But most of the posts here rely on 1. The fallacy that economics is a zero-sum game, and 2. The assumption that we've got absolutely nothing to offer because China can manufacture many products more cheaply. Personally, I suspect that a glut will occur on some of these items (just how many curtain rods do you need, anyway?), and the laws of supply and demand will assert themselves.
The Japanese weren't magicians. They hadn't beaten supply and demand any more than anyone else. They make some great products, dominate in several fields, but they aren't going to make a world empire. I think, in time, history will show that the Chinese aren't any better magicians than the rest of us.
Re:Haven't we seen this before? (Score:3)
A lot of good points. I'd just point out one problem with the comparison, and that's relative population size: The U.S. is something like 2-3x Japan's population. China is 5x the U.S. population. Granted, a huge portion of those are poor and uneducated, and will remain so for quite some time; so knock it down to the same 2-3x factor.
I wonder if a somewhat better comparison would be back at the dawn of the industrial age --
Re:Where's the whining... (Score:2)
Re:its about time... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:its about time... (Score:2)
The first thing off of the Gutenberg press? The Bible. The next thing? Pr0n.
(clean history of printing) http://www.studyworld.com/newsite/ReportEssay/His t ory/General%5CThe_History_of_Printing-362967.htm [studyworld.com]
(brief mention of gutenberg's rapid switch to printing filth: R-rated link, sorry) http://www.robyncalifornia.com/writing [robyncalifornia.com]
Re:its about time... (Score:2, Funny)
That benefited humans.
Re:its about time... (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, and besides silk too.
Re:its about time... (Score:4, Interesting)
Don't show your ignorance of the world by mimicking Dubya. You are neither the President, nor his Lackey.
Re:its about time... (Score:5, Informative)
How about
- movable type [about.com]
- the printing press [fact-index.com]
- paper [about.com] (as well as paper money)
- meritocratic civil service [bartleby.com]
- 'gaussian' elimination [thefreedictionary.com]
- so-called 'arabic' numerals [wikipedia.org] and the base-10 number system
- gunpowder and rocketry [about.com]
- the post office
- restaurants
- umbrellas
- porcelain [asianartmall.com] (also called, simply, 'china' or 'china-ware')
- ketsup [essortment.com]
- silk [silk-road.com]
- rice [riceweb.org]
- and soybean [netfirms.com] (including tofu and soy-sauce)
for starters?Re:its about time... (Score:2)
Re:RIP (Score:2)
1984-2004
Re:RIP (Score:2)
What a young'n...
Silicon valley has been around much longer than 199x... That's quite a short sighted dot-bomb perspective.
Not saying that silicon valley does or doesn't have it's best years behind it (maybe, maybe not), but I always find it amusing how people forget about Fairchild/Intel, HP/Apple, and focus on the last business cycle...
The main thing keeping Si valley anchored where it is today isn't technology or technology people at all (there are tech people eve