Slashdot Mirror


China: the New Advanced Technology Research Hotbed

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.'"

452 comments

  1. Reg Free Link - No Karma Whoring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Reg Free Link

    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 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...

    1. Re:Reg Free Link - No Karma Whoring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      now let's argue over whether or not Slashdot counts as a "Blog"

      Well, this definition fits, and even mentions Slashdot as an extreme form of blog:

      "At the other extreme, the Slashdot weblog, featuring news about technology and tech policy, is essentially written by its audience."
    2. Re:Reg Free Link - No Karma Whoring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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...

      An Unwritten Rule of article submission is that articles with hoop-jumping links will not be posted, at least as far as the New York Times is concerned.

      Perhaps there is some private arrangement.

    3. Re:Reg Free Link - No Karma Whoring by nutshell42 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Now if they did that where would all the newbies get their karma from?

      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.

      --
      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
    4. Re:Reg Free Link - No Karma Whoring by nutshell42 · · Score: 1
      Just to be on the safe side because the people around here sometimes have real troubles with jokes.

      Now if they did that where would all the newbies get their karma from?

      Yes, that was a joke, yes I know that the grandparent was ac. Nothing to see here troll on

      --
      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
  2. Any link to China-Linux here? by Progman3K · · Score: 3, Insightful

    China announces massive adoption of Linux.
    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*

    --
    I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
    1. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by Stripe7 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      China knows that it is way behind in technology, so it is establishiing technology enclaves where its people can learn and train up to catch up fast. This is opposed to the US where biotech is being squahed by the right wingers, and info tech is being restricted by the copyright holders and the US goverment. The US is also pushing all its high tech manufacturing industries offshore, China is offering really good terms for moving those industries into China. Project 20 years from now, all our weapons systems are dependent on hardware and software from China. Our millionaires will be running to China for longetivity treatments etc..

    2. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

      China isn't only pushing for software research, though. The country has a huge drive being pushed for involving tech research of all kinds. Back when I worked at Rockwell-Collins, we sometimes read papers about the sort of radio and radar research being worked on in China... pretty impressive stuff, really. One that really stood out to me was a type of radar which broadcasts very broad-spectrum, relatively low-energy, "noise" of the same frequency distribution as background noise, and does a statistical analysis on received background noise to look for unnatural shifts in distrubtion that would represent a reflected signal.

      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.

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    3. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by mothz · · Score: 2, Funny
      Our millionaires will be running to China for longetivity treatments etc

      I don't have a problem with that, as long as they bring huge barrels of Wonton Soup back to the States with them.

    4. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Did you read what you just posted? What the fuck is wrong with you?

    5. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by router · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You miss the point; strategic control over markets exerted by who? Its easy to start playing catch up. Then, you have to figure out where to go. Following is easier than leading. Reacting is easier than acting. These planned economies leave out the free part of the market that leads and acts. Look at large companies in the US. They buy innovators. They rarely innovate themselves, they let others take that chance. Unfortunately, when you are trying to plan everything from the top, you will miss the economic inflection points that matter, and relegate yourself to perpetual catch up. Especially when most of the proceeds that would go to you in the US (maybe Europe, but I think they still have confiscatory tax rates?(Like ours aren't, I know)) instead go to the One Party Leadership. Talk about removing the incentive to compete, when a fat connected slob is buying a BMW with your money.

      Not to mention, since Chinese companies that you are forced to "invest" with are owned by the PLA and don't value IP, anything you happen to come up with is quickly copied by another PLA subsidiary and sold below your research cost. Sometimes using your own labs and factories to manufacture it. Enough of that, and nobody invests money in China any more.

      Right now, they are in the fat part of the curve, they will all jump on the bandwagon for a while and it will bite them in the ass in the end. And they will learn yet again. Its what people are good at, reinventing history. Old news.

      andy

    6. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck are you babeling about? And what's even crazier, who modded this insightful? Holy shit. Read this guy's posts in this thread http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=121790&cid=102 46554.

    7. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by gillbates · · Score: 2, Interesting

      biotech is being squahed by the right wingers

      If you're going to troll, at least get your facts straight:

      • Germany has banned the practice of embrionic stem cell research.
      • The EU has stringent controls concerning genetically modified foods.
      • Meanwhile, the US is simply refusing to fund embrionic stem cell research.

      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!

      • Today Parkinson's disease patients are being treated and cured with adult stem cell derived therapies.
      • There has been a limited success with using adult stem cell therapies to treat Alzheimer's.

      Why bother researching embrionic stem cells when adult stem cells are already being used to develop cures? Even given enough research money, developing a pratical therapy using embrionic stem cells is at least 15 to 20 years away.

      Biotech isn't dying in the US. Instead, drug companies are pushing expensive cures for mild ailments (heartburn?!) instead of developing the relatively expensive and risky treatments for more serious conditions. It isn't the Feds - it is economics - there's more money in selling a heartburn medication to hundreds of millions than in finding a cure for AIDS.

      --
      The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
    8. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by tsotha · · Score: 1
      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.

      I don't know if everyone on /. is old enough to remember, but that's the same argument that was made for the Japanese economy in the '80s. By now we were all supposed to be speaking Japanese and eating bentos because Japan's MITI was intelligently directing research in Japan and the Japanese government was controlling local markets. Japanese companies were able to do research almost for free through government incentives and artificially low interest rates.

      But it didn't happen, did it? The problem is economies overly influenced by governments start to become inefficient. Yes, in the short run you can "leapfrog" the competition, but you're sowing the seeds of a ten year recession.

      In China's case, corruption and outright stupid policies have kept the country thirty years behind the developed world until very recently, and the economy is white hot now as it catches up. But unless the government relinquishes much of its control it won't last.

      Incidentally, the patent system was designed to force inventors to disclose tech secrets, and it works relatively well for that. Unfortunately, however, the patent process has become so abused it's antithetical to the common good. But this is slashdot, and we all known that.

    9. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why increase human understanding by performing research with embrionic stem cells? Why do you have to ask a question with such an obvious answer?

    10. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by composer777 · · Score: 1

      I would love to believe this, after all China's human rights record is atrocious. How is our manufacturing sector supposed to "compete" with their prison labor? Anyway, I digress.

      The reasons the USSR failed, to put it simply are:
      1. Economic isolation. They did not receive much direct investment, and in fact often helped the nations they were trading with, provided they were socialist.
      2. They overextended their economy by spending too much on military expenditures.
      3. They gave too much status and priveledge to party leaders, which drew the resentment and ire of the average workers.

      The first issue isn't a problem with China, as they are awash in investment capital. China hasn't, as of yet, made the second mistake. As long as they keep their party leaders in check, and distribute resources in a fair manner, they could be very successful, at least in terms of GDP. The third issue, is the likely issue that will take them down, whereas in the USSR, it was primarily issue number 2 that destroyed them. As far as being successful in a moral, democratic sense, or in promoting freedom, liberty, happiness, and all that good stuff, well, I think we know what the answer to that question will be.

      I don't think that China will follow the same path as the USSR. But, they will nevertheless leave quite a bit to be desired as a society.

    11. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Japan's problem was not in research. It was, and still is, it's banking system.

    12. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by timeOday · · Score: 2, Informative
      But it gets better. The reason why embrionic stem cell research isn't being done in the US...
      But it is. In fact, you're paying for some of it (if you pay US taxes). The only caveat is that public money is restricted to research on certain lines of stem cells.
    13. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by Shihar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can tell you why the US is the leader in technology and why China will never catch up. The US actively promotes immigration, especially the immigration of intelligent people. If you walk onto any University in the US, hell, any corporation in the US, you will find them awash with people who barely speak English, but speak math or whatever there profession is with great skill. The advantage the US has enjoyed in the world is because it culls the world for the greatest minds.

      Now, that is not to say that China would not jump over the chance to snag up a few great minds of their own. Unfortunately for China though, the US has two advantages over China that it will keep it ahead, at least in the foreseeable future. First, the US is very multicultural, and very culturally tolerant. There is nothing you can do to raise eyebrows in New York City. Further, you can always find people from the same culture as yours with minimal effort. In other words, the US has the groundwork laid out to accept anyone, and has extensive experience in integrating such people. Further, US workers and businesses are so used to foreign works that it is norm, not the exception.

      Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, the US will always be a more desirable place to live because it ranks very high in its freedoms. For the foreseeable future, the US will outrank China in its freedoms by a massive margin. China can basically write off ever receiving the brightest minds from the US, Europe, and other liberal democracies, simply because very few people from these nations are going to take kindly to having their Internet access restricted and likely can not even contemplate keeping a lid on their political beliefs when in public. That goes ten times if you are talking about someone from the US. Asking an American to shut the hell up about their beliefs on the way the world should be run is about as productive as screaming at a rock.

      I imagine China is going to hit very hard bump on the road to progress. Corporations are more then happy to dump goods and factories into China, but when it comes to intellectual power, China is always going to lag well behind the US. China can really only count on its own population to provide them with intellectual power, and even then China suffers from the fact that the US and Europe will continue to cull a great deal of their brightest minds.

      I personally only see two options for China. Either they become a significantly freer society, or they accept the fact that they will never be the world's intellectual leader. Either option sounds good to me.

    14. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by antifoidulus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

      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.

    15. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by sgt_doom · · Score: 0
      Of course, dude! The Corporate Globalists prefer totalitarian and dictatorial governments - haven't you been reading any news the last 20 years????

      Seriously, though, just reflect for a moment what would have happened, if early in the 20th century, Henry Ford had offshored all those automotive industry jobs overseas - have you figured it out yet??????

    16. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Only problem with your theory is:

      China has a bigger population than the united states and europe combined so it will produce more "bright minds" on its own.

      Second, a lot of the "bright minds" America used to import came from china in the first place. Now that the market has been liberalized in china you no longer have to come to america to get rich so a lot of people are just staying home.

      Third after 9/11 there is a really hostile attitude towards many immigrants. Believe it or not but the rest of the world doesn't see america the same way it sees itself. Lots of people are happy to come to america, get a Phd then go back to india or china. They don't want to stay in such a right-wing pompous country.

      You think america is some great place that people love for its freedoms. if you talk to enogh foreigners you find most people just like it becuase they can make 5 times the money for the same work. as the wage differention decreases there is less reason to come to america.

    17. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by Shihar · · Score: 1

      1) No doubt China has the advantage of having a massive population to pull from to find their minds. However, much of that billion is overlooked, and even if it was all recognized, that still is not enough.

      2) Market liberalization might go a long way to help China keep some of their minds simply by offering money. That said, market liberalization alone can not offset there general lack of freedom compared to the US. The US has a population of poor, yet you never see them stuff themselves in a cargo container to make the journey to China risking life and limb, you do see the converse of this though. In order to be effective, China must communicate with the rest of the world, and in this communication they will be forced to see that other places in the world are more free.

      3) 9/11 has not increased hostility towards most immigrants. Asian immigrants in particular are pretty immune. Even Middle Eastern immigrants still enjoy great prosperity and acceptance in the US. Further, you need to realize that many places in the world are still highly tribal and racist on levels that American's don't comprehend. For an antidotal story, when the US was trying to build the Iraqi army, they were surprised to find that the Iraqi recruits where extremely racist towards each other. To the American commanders they all looked like Iraqi. Among the Iraqis there was bitter resentment between various ethnic factions. The point is that intolerance is not a strictly American thing, and in the grand scheme of things, the US is very tolerant in this day and age. On my block there are two Middle Eastern businesses, and my apartment is owned by a handful of Middle Eastern men. All of them are doing very well for themselves.

      The big problem with 9/11 is not the changing attitude of American's towards immigrants already in the nation. The real problem 9/11 presents is the stricter immigration controls. This absolutely is a serious problem and you could very well be correct in that it could lead to the decline of the US. The US has always relied very heavily on importing talented people, and its reliance on importing minds has only increased over the past few decades. If there is a real danger the US supremacy, it is the danger of declining immigration.

      That said, I don't think it is all that bleak. From what I understand out immigration levels are slowly ramping back up, and hopefully the delays that have been created in getting in and out of the nation will be worked out.

    18. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to agree. As pro-China as I am, the physical and societal infrastructure is and will hold China back. I belive China will close the gap between it and the US, but I don't think it will surpass the US unless some fundalmental changes are made

    19. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Have you looked at any top universitys research departments lately? I go to Stanford as an undergrad, and more than half the grad students in my dept, computer science, are foreign, mainly for China and India. And after theyre done with their PhDs, its become so ridiculously hard to get H1Bs that theyre all heading home. Check out http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/lo cal/7974578.htm?1c

      During the tech boom, Congress raised the H1B cap to 195,000 a year but now the law expired and its back down to 65,000 a year. And a lot of those arent going to Silicon Valley (think about foreign multinationals posting their employees from home countries to the US). The big software companies of course dont really care, because theyre all busy setting up research centers in China and India anyway, where its so much cheaper for them to do business, snapping up all those US-educated PhDs who are producing the innovations at US universities.

    20. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Japan had a bubble economy, much like the dotcom bubble in the USA. However, their ridiculous banking laws, and the Japanese reluctance to let corporations fail, resulted in their economy never recovering from the bust. 15 years later, they're still stuck. Economists call Japan's economy a "zombie economy", and that's about the best description I've seen. It merely continues, it does not gain any new life.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    21. Re:Any link to China-Linux here? by router · · Score: 1

      Our manufacturing base isn't going to compete. It went upmarket. We don't mass produce generic electric fans anymore, but we do produce custom upmarket electric fans. If another country can do something cheaper, and does so, then that's a market we have to get out of. Its good for the other country because they are now productive and good for us because we quit wasting our resources doing something inefficently. At least, that's how its supposed to work. Our better infrastructure and environment should better prepare us for competition with these folks, and it has. We can't perpetually salvage these businesses, we just have to find things that other countries will buy that cannot be locally produced.

      I don't think it was #2 that killed off the USSR, I think its #1 and #3. They couldn't (wouldn't, since they didn't float their currency, hi China!) join the western markets and the Party got corrupt (Hi China!). Corruption is insideous and massively taxing. Look at Mexico; the baja peninsula is 1000 miles of california coastline (currently priced north of the border at 600k$/postage stamp) that is essentially unoccupied because Mexico a) has no water (solvable because they have lots of ocean) and b) the government is corrupt. Corruption is a huge invisible tax on economies. It affects every legitimate transaction negatively. It would be like paying 1.5% of the value everytime anything changed hands. Fine for corn; but for cars, adds 30%. Taxes on innovation and economic incubators is even higher, since fledgling businesses have no money for racketeering costs and so usually get killed by entrenched competitive interests instead of paying off their founders. I don't worry about China because of this. Corruption doesn't pay off, just like Cheating at the GRE doesn't pay off (Hi China!). Here's a link to that, since there might be grad student hopefuls who will understand now why they didn't get a slot....
      http://www.ethics.org/resources/article_ detail.cfm ?ID=826

      andy

  3. Is "insourcing" a word? by Control+Group · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Interesting - it seems China is engaging in a sort of internal outsourcing, if that makes any sense. The pace of technological development in China was slower than they wanted, so they've farmed the job out to imported companies. Make the country more attractive to foreign investors (no, not the ones from the Hotel Royale), and take advantage of their experience and financial grounding to foster a tech development surge.

    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.

    --

    Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
    1. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It seems to me that the Chinese government made a tacit agreement with the Chinese people after Tiananmen Square: you keep your mouths shut about politics (and if you don't, we've got tanks to remind you) and we'll let you get rich. It would be nice to believe that economic freedom and social freedom are inextricably linked, but in fact China (and Vietnam, for that matter) are doing a pretty good job of allowing the first while keeping strict controls on the second. This is a trick the Right learned long ago, but now the Left is catching up.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by winkydink · · Score: 1

      I think it's more, "we don't mind you getting rich as long as we get even richer freom the fruits of your labor."

      --

      "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

    3. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by uradu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What all the newcomers will eventually find out is what the early "adopters" already have: that China is an industrial Black Widow. It wines and dines and flatters corporations it has interest in, gets them to commit major resources to China and thus into a vulnerable situation, and then it scavenges them to the highest degree possible for technical know-how and IP. It's happened with heavy technology companies, it's happened with electronics companies, it's happening with car manufacturers. And yet they are still all drawn to China by their money-grubbing little hearts. I wouldn't be surprised at all if in the long run most of these western corporations won't benefit much or any at all from that mythical Chinese exploding consumer and workforce base. But they will lose a lot of their technical advantage in the process, when all of a sudden they find themselves competing in their own home markets with either cheap and cheeky clones of their own products, or with cheap products heavily influenced by IP they so willingly handed to China as the price of doing business there. Of course, in their minds that will only happen to their competitors, not to themselves.

    4. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by demachina · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I find the whole thing terrifying.

      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.

      --
      @de_machina
    5. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by smallpaul · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How is a dictatorship that allows capitalistic enterprise "the Left"? The central idea of "the Left" is more equal distribution of income. China is becoming more and more unequal. That's why today's China appeals to neither the freedom-loving Right nor the equality-loving Left.

    6. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Tackhead · · Score: 3, Interesting
      > 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.

      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 :)

    7. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by smurf975 · · Score: 1

      Well I guess the Chinese government figured out that first you need wealth before you can distribute it.

      So maybe later when China has reached its economic peak the government will increase taxes for the rich and so distribute the wealth.

      --
      -- I don't buy it, I grow it.
    8. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      I mean, of course, left-wing dictatorships as opposed to right-wing ones. E.g., Nazi Germany was actually a pretty good place to be a businessman, as long as you didn't mind the risk of your employees (or yourself!) disappearing without warning; and the German economy in the Nazi era was healthier than it had been since WW1, or indeed, would be for some time after WW2. The USSR never did learn this lesson -- largely because, as you say, of its core leftist ideas -- and this led, quite directly, to its downfall. China is still meaningfully "leftist" in a lot of ways, but the Chinese government is realistic above all else, and to the exclusion of inconvenient ideology.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    9. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      freedom-loving Right

      In todays day and age, that is an oxymoran. You are allowed all the freddom that you want as long as it agrees with the right wing. You are allowed all the freedom that you want as long as you do not defy the right. If you disagree, then the right will kill you. This differs from China in what way?

    10. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by MarsDefenseMinister · · Score: 1

      How is freedom-loving "the Right"? Last I checked, the authors of the Constitution were a bunch of anti-Royalists. I'm having a hard time at this point working in the word "fascism" somewhere so someone else can continue the criticism chain...

      --
      No weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men.-Ronald Reagan
    11. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Thud457 · · Score: 1
      As Kruschev said, "We will bury you!"

      Apparently with our own shovel. Wouldn't that be ironic, the communists use capitalism's short-sightedness against it.

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    12. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by evangellydonut · · Score: 1

      Once again, as I've had to explain to just about every white person, 1989 isn't about students protesting democracy, its abut an internal political struggle much like the cultural revolution, and the students were merely pawns of the game.

    13. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by cbare · · Score: 1

      Really good point.

      China is taking another "great leap forward". The first attempt was something of a disaster, but you've got to admit their track record has improved a lot.

      Capitalism is definitely not the same as a free market.

      China's (new) model is very capitalistic, just with all the capital owned by the state or members of the well-connected business class. Thus reducing the potential for increased wealth to lead to increased demands for increased political freedom.

      Which is scarily like the crony-capitalism model the United States is moving towards.

      It's sad that the post-industrial economy is leading to the loss of political rights in the West, rather than as once was hoped, an increase in freedom in places like China and Russia (where the state is also reasserting its power).

      by the way http://www.johnkerryisadouchebagbutimvotingforhima nyway.com/

      --
      -cbare
    14. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Paulrothrock · · Score: 1
      To think that economic growth can continue unabated is autistic. That is, it shows a person wholly obsessed with one thing, and ignorant of all others. Economic growth is the increase in the amount of capital. Capital, being resources or work, is finite: There's only so much stuff on the Earth or, indeed, in the universe. What happens when it's all turned to capital? Economic growth ceases, and we better start recycling as much as we can, because entropy will start turning things into unusable forms, and the amount of wealth will decrease at an ever-accelerating rate until everyone is dead.

      The first key to insane economic growth is a strong space program. Of course, if you have a lunar or Martian colony, they're kinda hard for a totalitarian government to control.

      History won't repeat, it will rhyme.

      --
      I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
    15. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      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.

      A cool model? I hope that's some sort of sick joke. There's nothing cool about secret police dragging people away in the middle of the night and torturing people to death because they belong to a spiritual movement.

      The West should have cut off relations with China until they started treating people with respect instead of slaves of the State.

    16. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      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...

      I don't think it is a matter of our population becoming "dumber", just that science and math are NOT the career path here the way they are in the 3rd-world. Why study Luddite topics?

      Because of their cheaper labor, understanding and improving physical processes is more cost effective there. In the US, social knowledge goes further because our economy is too heavily tied to consumerism. China knows this and promotes it, even subsidizes it. They want to keep the "real work" for themselves, probably for military purposes.

      Our education system is trying to reverse this by forcing more science and math down student throats, but it will not work unless it leads to better careers for most students. They need to fix the carrot, not the stick.

    17. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1
      Capital, being resources or work, is finite: There's only so much stuff on the Earth or, indeed, in the universe. What happens when it's all turned to capital?
      Maximum entropy...
    18. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by j.+andrew+rogers · · Score: 0, Troll
      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.

      Ugh. Have you actually been to China? It is still clearly a "third world" type country, and will be for the foreseeable future. What makes you think this model scales?

      If the standards of living are rising, it is only because they were so poor to begin with. Efficiency isn't such an important factor because you can buy big improvements for little money. But if you try to scale this to the standard of living of, say, Europe, you end up with a non-competitive economy because standards of living are pretty much defined by relative efficiency.

      Centralized political economies do not scale well, and are not competitive at the high-end.

    19. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      China's (new) model is very capitalistic, just with all the capital owned by the state or members of the well-connected business class.

      That's not capitalism. It's either communism/socialism (capital owned by the state) or fascism (capital owned by members of the well-connected business class).

    20. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Yokaze · · Score: 2, Informative

      > and the German economy in the Nazi era was healthier than it had been since WW1

      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 have one goal: war.
      Otherwise, it could be expected that the massive spending would lead to an economic collapse, since the money in circulation had no corresponding economic value.

      --
      "Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
    21. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      There's nothing cool about secret police dragging people away in the middle of the night and torturing people to death because they belong to a spiritual movement.

      you're right - ashcroft should stop dragging off muslims in the middle of the night.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    22. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      > The West should have cut off relations with China until they started treating people with respect instead of slaves of the State.

      Score (+5, Funny)

    23. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you can have a lunar or martian colony where people can freely emmigrate as they see fit, then expressing totalitarian control of any such colonies is as trivial as it is now. Not to mention you're already pissing enormous amounts of energy into carrying heavy humans into space on a regular basis for this interplanetary freeway.

    24. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's your excuse for your legendary poor math skills?

    25. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you keep your mouths shut about politics (and if you don't, we've got tanks to remind you) and we'll let you get rich.

      Can I join that party here in the US? I'd expect rich to be pretty high though...

    26. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by uradu · · Score: 1

      > 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.

      You're drawing conclusions without looking at the bigger picture. The part of China that is experiencing this vast economic boom is TINY both in terms of percentage of the total population and geography. The current model only works because the HUGE BULK of the Chinese population is still being kept in blissful ignorance. If you read much about China, you will also find that the hotspots of political dissent strangely coincide with the areas of economic boom. Funny how when people learn to read and have a full tummy they tend to disagree with you more.

      What it comes down to is the current model is not sustainable. Either the economic boom will collapse or dramatically slow down for various reasons, or else the percentage of the population attaining a certain level of education and prosperity will reach a critical mass that the Communist party will find itself unable to control anymore.

    27. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Truly out of curiosity, what parts of china have you been to?

    28. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by orasio · · Score: 1

      In socialism, capital is owned by the ones who make it work (employees?). In communism, the concept of property starts to fade.

    29. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not much of an explantion, now is it?

    30. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      Actually not.

      Nothing you wrote refutes the claim that businessmen had it good in Nazi Germany. Yes, the economy was based on war... so what? It was still lucrative! The invasion of France was VERY profitable... it's like the military providing valuable service to business, and for free.

      (Compare against how much military spending the USA has used to protect the investments of Exxon & the other petroleum importation firms)

      Speer himself, later Minister for Economy under the Nazi-Regime, noted, that this economic policy could only have one goal: war

      That's a really good point to consider next to the USA's push to lower taxes and drive up the deficit. So what's the goal of Bush's economic policy?

      (Hey, in 50 years, the USA might be 100% in hock to foreign financiers. But with this kind of military, they won't dare collect!)

    31. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      To think that economic growth can continue unabated is autistic.

      Yes. Judging a nation's economy by it's "growth" is little better than evaluating a startup business on "burn rate".

    32. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the dumbest thing anyone has said here in probably an hour. That's saying a lot.

      You were allowed to post this idiocy, were you not? Something tells me you're not cowering or running away.

    33. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Brian+Stretch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

      Oh yeah, really cool.

      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 system could be replicated.

      The West still has a political requirement to appear free and capitalistic, but is increasingly becoming more statist.

      Sadly I have to agree here, but I disagree with the reasons. I'd blame an overabundance of lawyers (and the resulting defenses against them) and the natural tendency of bureaucracies to grow and their members to vote themselves more resources. Too many Republican politicians (including our President) have given up fighting these trends and are trying to co-opt them instead (the "No Child Left Behind" act, etc). It's driving right-wingers like me nuts. Remember the 1994 "Contract with America"? We lost, statism won.

    34. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by sgt_doom · · Score: 0
      A "cool model" indeed! I suppose you think Nazism was a "cool model" and the KGM were truly righteous???

      Allow me to explain the global economic picture to you: all the countries which the corporations offshore American jobs to are the very same countries which target the same market - namely the ole USA - for all their exports. Consumer spending continues to drop as the tax base is constantly being shrunk - both nationally and locally - by the ever-increasing offshoring of American jobs. Pretty soon the dwindling market those foreign countries depend upon ceases to exist - yet at the same time their working citizens don't earn enough to buy the goods they are producing there. END OF STORY.

    35. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But as soon as China starts to "jack up the prices" other countries become more competitive and investment moves back.

      It is like one of those supply and demand graph things that they show you in High School economics.

    36. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Tungbo · · Score: 1

      "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 system could be replicated."

      Would you like to be colonized by a foreign power and threatened to be thrown back to the red menance if you ever complained to your colonial masters? That might do it.

      HK people had economic freedom but no polical freedom under the British. That's why its not such a shocking change after 1997. In the mean time, British transferred whatever profit they could back to the UK before the hand-over. Does this sound like a good model for a country?

      HK is a very special historical accident that would never have worked for an entire country. So quit dreaming about it!

      "The West still has a political requirement to appear free and capitalistic, but is increasingly becoming more statist.

      Sadly I have to agree here, but I disagree with the reasons. I'd blame an overabundance of lawyers (and the resulting defenses against them) and the natural tendency of bureaucracies to grow and their members to vote themselves more resources. Too many Republican politicians (including our President) have given up fighting these trends and are trying to co-opt them instead (the "No Child Left Behind" act, etc). It's driving right-wingers like me nuts. Remember the 1994 "Contract with America"? We lost, statism won."

      Dubya is for no principle but getting himself elected. Those who think that he has any character beyond self-preservation are deluding themselves.

      Just one last word about lawyers. No one like ambulance chasers. However, I would suggest that the Rule of Law is a major balwark against the capricious exercise of powers by the executive branch. It has probably done more to protect our civil liberties than all the guns that the NRA has kept in circulation. Do ponder that while you shot at the easy marks (lawyers).

    37. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by DarkAdonis · · Score: 1

      I can elaborate further about China black widow strategy. One tactic used by China is to allow a western company to build infrastructure (i.e pipelines) in China. Both parties agree on a how to split profits before construction begins.

      At a point during construction, but before the project is complete, the Chinese government would change the terms of the profit sharing agreement, making it no longer worthwhile for the engineering company to continue the project. Because demolishing the construction would increase costs, the company simply abandons the work.

      As a result, the Chinese not only obtains technical knowledge, but also parts that can be used to continue the construction project internally.

    38. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Yokaze · · Score: 1

      > Nothing you wrote refutes the claim that businessmen had it good in Nazi Germany.

      I mainly refuted the statement, that the economy was healthy. Whether an inflated economy is good or bad for businessmen depends majorly on the time frame and the wit of the businessman. In the long term (after 12 years), it was bad for them.

      --
      "Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
    39. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by uradu · · Score: 1

      Another example is Siemens' Transrapid project in Shanghai. One of the conditions China set for signing on to the project was to manufacture the track locally. Even though track manufacture was supposed to be the big cash cow for Siemens (and Germany, since all the components and raw materials including steel were to come from Germany), they agreed in order to sign on their first commercial customer. Shanghai was to be their loss leader, besides everyone knew the major cost with maglev was the ridiculously expensive track, so they didn't object too much. As the project progressed, Chinese engineers supposedly significantly lowered the cost of track and improved production efficiency (apparently by using concrete instead of steel for many components). Yet even though China was pretty much getting the system for free because of discounts, incentives and aid from Germany, they strictly controlled access for German engineers to the manufacturing facilities, being extremely paranoid of reverse IP transfer.

      As coincidence would have it, mere months later China announced "significant" breakthroughs in their own home-grown maglev technology, demonstrating a new faster train that had gone nowhere fast before. I find this just slighly ironic. What are the odds that within the next decade this slower-but-cheaper system will show up all over Asia as a short haul people mover? Now don't get me wrong, I like affordable access to new tech as much as the next guy, and Germany is far from being the champion of cheap high-tech for the masses. But don't these people get just how Faustian this business with China really is?

    40. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > 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 system could be replicated.

      No argument there. Unfortunately - as you point out - we lost, statism won, and that war was lost ten years ago. The Chinese model of statism still beats the brand of statism practiced in the West. If we must live under an all-encompassing government, it's semi-reassuring to see that the Chinese and Western models appear to be merging and taking the most useful parts from each other.

      > > The West still has a political requirement to appear free and capitalistic, but is increasingly becoming more statist.
      >
      >Sadly I have to agree here, but I disagree with the reasons. I'd blame an overabundance of lawyers (and the resulting defenses against them) and the natural tendency of bureaucracies to grow and their members to vote themselves more resources.

      Yes, those are also major factors. In a way, the Chinese "make 'em pay for the bullets" model is at least a partial defense against lawyers. At least you can get things done. Sometimes those things are "evil", like Tienanmen. But the ability to wipe out dissent without lawyers getting in the way also enables you to do "good" things, like building economic infrastructures such as power plants, mines, housing, roads, and what-not.

      Making a living in a semi-free market is still possible - it's just that "the best business plan" now includes a new factor: how much pull a company has on the Hill, and what branches of the bureaucracy are in political ascendance or decline, and are therefore more likely to get the lion's share of funding. Bush makes noises about medicare bill, buy stocks in HMOs that have high Medicare exposure. Bush makes noises about prescription drug benefit, buy pharmaceuticals. Kerry makes noise about universal healthcare? Sell 'em back, and short McDonald's while you're at it.

      As we adopt Chinese methods of mass behavioral modification/control, the Chinese adopt our methods of efficient computerized surveillance, and the two societies can leverage each other's strengths. Economic collapse of either society is a pretty bad scenario for the world, so even if the merger of Chinese and Western political systems only delays implosion for 50 years, that's still long enough for my needs :)

    41. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      I mainly refuted the statement, that the economy was healthy.

      But their economy WAS healthy, but every normal metric. Their military defensibility was bad, but that's not "the economy".

      You might as well say the US economy is bad, because it depends on environmental pollution.

    42. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by j.+andrew+rogers · · Score: 1

      Several parts, but have spent most of my time in the regions around Beijing.

    43. Re:Is "insourcing" a word? by Yokaze · · Score: 1

      > But their economy WAS healthy, but every normal metric.

      You may be talking about a lack of inflation, a sinking jobless rate, an increase of industrial production, which are all positive signs for the economy.

      But you can't ignore a governmental spending of twice its income, totalling in 33.5% of the GDP.

      It's like saying a person economically sound, because he is driving a Mercedes and owning a villa, ignoring the fact that he bought it all on credit, but isn't even earning enough money to pay the interest.

      --
      "Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
  4. Good or Bad? by feyhunde · · Score: 0
    I'm unsure if this is good or bad. Good for society that there is more research, bad for other first world nations because China will be a major player in the information economy.

    Of course I could RTFA and find out what they want me to feel. But this is Slashdot after all.

    --
    I'd say more, but my guild is raiding.
  5. This should serve as a warning to US lawmakers ... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... to lift technology export restrictions. Right now. All of them. (Okay, with the exception of classified military research -- but we should also take a hard look at what's classified, and why, and whether keeping it classified does any good.) Once upon a time, when the US and its European allies were the only source for high tech, this policy made a certain amount of sense on national security grounds. But now, the restrictions only serve to weaken national security, by hurting the technology base in the US -- or are simply annoyances to be worked around by companies like Microsoft and Oracle, which are theoretically US companies but are in fact loyal only to themselves.

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
  6. The irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The irony of the "google beating search" is that it's being done in a country that heavily censors the internet. I wonder what they might use a powerful search engine for...?

    1. Re:The irony by teal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That was exactly my thought. Why would they want a better search engine since they would be censoring a lot of it anyways. Maybe the idea is by building a better search engine they can do better censorship.

    2. Re:The irony by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I suspect that Microsoft's definition of "better" in search engine terms looks a lot more like the Chinese government's than Google's does. Just a thought ...

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:The irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I think it's amusing that Microsoft may build and host this in China where (if done under a different company's name) they might make it hard for Google to chase them for IP infringements, though.

      If it works, perhaps this'll change MSFTs view on IP piracy.

    4. Re:The irony by smallpaul · · Score: 1

      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.

    5. Re:The irony by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      I think you answered your own question. They want a search that everyone will use so they can control who gets what information. They don't want people in their country to see a site? In addition to blocking it, don't even list it in the engine so they don't know what they're missing.

    6. Re:The irony by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      Why would they want a better search engine since they would be censoring a lot of it anyways.

      Better search engine => better classification of page content => automated censorship.

  7. Within 5 years? by Trigun · · Score: 3, Funny

    "within five years China could overtake Britain, Germany and Japan as a base for corporate research, leaving it second only to the United States."

    And within ten? Maybe we can do their tech support for them. Outsourcing's a bitch, but it works both ways.

    1. Re:Within 5 years? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      More likely, they'll be "outsourcing" to those areas of China which, right now, are effectively still living in the Middle Ages. Coastal China is now very nearly First World, but they've got a lot of Second and Third World inside the country to work with. And they're patient.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:Within 5 years? by gears5665 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      do you speak or read chinese?

    3. Re:Within 5 years? by Trigun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not only are they patient, they are controlling resources. They do not have destructive competition as we do here. If competition is good for the economy, they keep it. If it is bad, they simply repurpose a company. There is no redoubling of effort for no perceived gain.

      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!

    4. Re:Within 5 years? by phyruxus · · Score: 1
      China: pop 1,298,847,624.
      Britain: pop 60,270,708.
      Germany: pop 82,424,609.
      Japan: pop 127,333,002.

      China has plenty of people. I don't imagine they'd outsource anything they could keep in-house. (IANAEconomist)

      --
      "A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
      "d'Oh!" ~Homer
    5. Re:Within 5 years? by Trigun · · Score: 1

      I've got ten years to learn. How hard can it be? I've seen children do it for chrissakes.

    6. Re:Within 5 years? by ThosLives · · Score: 2, Interesting
      It's an odd thing that most "good capitalists" forget: cooperation is actually better than competition. The trouble is, generally it is only competition that drives people to cooperate...go figure, eh?

      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 others what is and is not a hardship anyway?).

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    7. Re:Within 5 years? by Donny+Smith · · Score: 1

      >There is no redoubling of effort for no perceived gain.

      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, and you can remain your own boss forever...

      >As an additional caveat, they get to completely skip the industrial revolution, but get all the benefits

      Well, yeah - many have no professional working attitude, little have clue about the service economy, appreciation of intellectual property is minimal, etc. They also missed out a lot.

      Their approach is nothing new - Japan has done the same thing - a lot of perispiration followed by some inspiration. China is doing the same, but they're 10 times the size.

      In the end, once they get developed to some reasonable extent, they're gonna hit the wall because the way their society is organized, it can't truly prosper. To make that final step, they'll need good democracy. Even Japan, where democracy doesn't work very well as far as government efficiency and handling of the recent crisis is concerned, hasn't passed that test yet!

    8. Re:Within 5 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, in Japan it's: J-pop 127,333,002.

      *ducks*

    9. Re:Within 5 years? by Trigun · · Score: 1

      Many of the social hardships were state-imposed. They knew that the transition would hurt, and hurt a lot. China had to do things very drasticly, quickly, and covertly, so as to not tip off the rest of the world and have the rest of the world isolate them. People were unemployed, homeless, and starving. But it got better, and quickly.

      Isn't it strange that this all ramped up and came to fruition when China got control of Taiwan, it's gateway to the West? Funnel goods from China to Taiwanese companies, Taiwanese companies sell goods to everyone else, nobody has to deal with the 'Red Menace' Chinamen?

      Seems we got played, and had our asses handed to us on that one.

    10. Re:Within 5 years? by Solder+Fumes · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Can't be that bad:

      *RING*

      "Bob's Tech Support!"

      "<Computer not working, screen black!>"

      "Moo goo gai pan!"

      "<WTF?!?>"

      "Kung Pao!"

      "<Are you serious?>"

      "Orange Duck! Xie xie, call again!"

    11. Re:Within 5 years? by Trigun · · Score: 1

      In the end, once they get developed to some reasonable extent, they're gonna hit the wall because the way their society is organized, it can't truly prosper. To make that final step, they'll need good democracy

      Why do you insist on democracy for success? Is the USA the model for democracy, with all of its perceived freedoms, but government oppression? Government is about fascism. As long as humans run Government, it will never act benevolently.

      Soviet Russia collapsed because of the capitlaist pressures from the outside, as well as the corruption of the elite ruling class. It's not the system that is flawed, but the players and the game.

      China will adapt to maximize its world presence. It does not have to turn into a democracy, but it is well on its way to embracing some democratic ideals. They just have to strike a balance, and their communism has just as much of success as our capitalism with some communistic ideals.

      As for Japan, the economy tanked because they saw layoffs as a form of business failure, and the investors punished them for that, and then they were faced with more layoffs that they did not want to do, and they were punished again. Now that is a very simplistic view, but their 'honour' was punished by greed.

    12. Re:Within 5 years? by mochan_s · · Score: 1

      In the end, once they get developed to some reasonable extent, they're gonna hit the wall because the way their society is organized, it can't truly prosper. To make that final step, they'll need good democracy.

      Maybe I haven't been keeping up but I don't see how your conclusion of hitting a wall follows from the organization of society.

    13. Re:Within 5 years? by Ripp · · Score: 1

      I think you mean Hong Kong.

      The day China 'gains control' of Taiwan I fully expect the draft to be reinstated and car factories repurposed as aircraft factories again. :p

      --
      Blech. Signatures.
    14. Re:Within 5 years? by WindBourne · · Score: 1
      do you speak or read chinese?

      No, but the earlier NFS chip may allow for a neat translation device. However, I would like to think that we will not be doing tech support.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    15. Re:Within 5 years? by jaaron · · Score: 1

      yes, actually. Which means I should be well set for the next several years. :)

      Spoken Chinese isn't that hard. The tones can be difficult at first but the grammer is fairly easy. The difficult part are the characters. It's not like you can sound them out when you bump into one you don't know.

      --
      Who said Freedom was Fair?
    16. Re:Within 5 years? by freqres · · Score: 1

      When China leapfrogs the rest of the developed world and becomes the leader in inovation and R&D, the rest of the world can steal their ideas and just use all the technology they invented. Who's going to be the next Marco Polo?

      --
      Rampant Ninja related crimes these days...Whitehouse is not the exception
    17. Re:Within 5 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, yeah - many have no professional working attitude, little have clue about the service economy, appreciation of intellectual property is minimal, etc

      I don't know where you live, but that sounds like 90% of the population,where I live, here in the USA

    18. Re:Within 5 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Government oppression?

      [x] net kook

    19. Re:Within 5 years? by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 1

      what car factories?

      whats going to happen to the US auto industry when the chinese sell a cadillac-equivalent car for $12,000 ?

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    20. Re:Within 5 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fortunately, you don't have to speak Chinese to work at Microsoft Research Asia. Most CS research papers are written in English, so everyone there has to be able to speak English to some degree. Also, there's a McDonald's right next door with signs you can point to, so you won't starve.

      I had added some Chinese to this message, but slashdot doesn't support unicode, apparently... What would Joel say?

    21. Re:Within 5 years? by potmos · · Score: 0

      According to Firefly, in the future we will all be able to curse in Chinese.

    22. Re:Within 5 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey dumbass, do you still think Dan Rather's forged documents given to him by an "unimpeachable source" in the Kerry campaing are genuine?

      Anyone else in Dan Rather's position would have been unemployed by now for this level of partisan motivated incompetence.

      Meanwhile all Dan can do is blame a right wing blog conspiracy for his trouble, not his own blatant partisanship, and ignore the scandal. It's fun watching Dan squirming like Nixon in his self-made memogate. All the CBS cited experts now say they never verified the document and even warned CBS and the Guard secretary who would have typed it says the documents are fake and the universal concensus among qualified observers and any impartial viewer now say this is laughably and obviously fake. Even the tennuous claim by you and other partisan idiots relied on a Guard unit having access to a typewriter they never did and the incredible coincidence of it's output impossibly matching Microsoft Word to the nit.

      Unfortunately there are plenty of fools out there who value partisan advantage over the facts so Dan may yet scrape through this scandalous fiasco, hopefully not. What a disgrace to 'impartial' journalism.

    23. Re:Within 5 years? by Ozan · · Score: 1

      It's socialist capitalization

      The word you're looking for is fascism.

      Yes, it's very effective until you run out of people to enslave.

    24. Re:Within 5 years? by Donny+Smith · · Score: 1

      When huge resources are wasted on corruption, poor investment choices, sustaining politically important investment projects, supporting failing state banks, etc. the economy can't bear that.

      These things happen everywhere, but in developed democracies to a lesser extent - the more democratic a society is, the higher their efficiency.

      You can tell by the way China looked before the 80's (before Deng Xiao Ping started reforming China). The growth didn't come just because people started working "harder".

  8. Those damn bits... by GillBates0 · · Score: 1
    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.

    ...have no business hiding deep inside the Intarweb's bowels. They think they can look all doe-eyed and innocent and get away, but it won't work. I, for one, welcome Microsoft's earnest efforts in trying to drill them out.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
  9. Research Assistants by johnnyb · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So are you treated better or worse over there as a research assistent than over here in the USA?

    1. Re:Research Assistants by 7-Vodka · · Score: 2, Insightful
      oh dude. By my reckoning they are treated horribly over there.

      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.

      --

      Liberty.

    2. Re:Research Assistants by The+Jonas · · Score: 1

      So are you treated better or worse over there as a research assistent than over here in the USA?

      It depends on how you act.

      Read the last two paragraphs over and over. Scary stuff.

    3. Re:Research Assistants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well, some non-chinese companies can be pretty tough on employees as well.

      another link http://www.cokewatch.org/news/hn_040421_1.htm

    4. Re:Research Assistants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Compared to being in a U.S. university, you are treated a little better there. You are expected to work all the time, just like in U.S. schools, but you have a team to work with, which is just nicer. Also, MSRA has free coke and stuff.

      The pay there is spectacular, too. Relative to the others in China, you can expect to be in the top 1% of salaries. And, if you are white, you will be treated better than the locals. The government wants to impress westerners, I suppose.

  10. Bad news for US by CommanderData · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.'

    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...

    --
    Urge to post... fading... fading... RISING!... fading... fading... gone.
    1. Re:Bad news for US by plasm4 · · Score: 1

      Hopefully by that time the real estate market bubbles even more to make up for the fact that productivity is down so we can still look good on paper.

    2. Re:Bad news for US by MonkeyDev · · Score: 1
      This issue concerns me - maybe because I have young kids and am no longer certain what field I should tell them to go into. Computer science like your parents? Forget it - the US outsources the low-level jobs so you can no longer get experience. And to get the good jobs, you need experience. Doesn't anyone see the problem here? An interesting article in InfoWorld about China's institute founded by Microsoft - and the 3-D technology being developed. http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/09/03/36OPedit or_1.html

      We're falling behind - how many of you work with teachers wannabe highly paid IT people! There's something fundamentally wrong with our industry and these articles should be a wake up call. Where do I get these research jobs - where are the Microsoft institutes for research in the US?

    3. Re:Bad news for US by servognome · · Score: 1

      This is the same thing that was said in the 80's about Japan. The US spent too much on the cold war, all manufacturing jobs have gone away, and Japan is going to take over economic and technical leadership of the world. IIRC Japan has been in a recession for the past 10 years
      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 growth isn't always best, you need monetary stability, and inflation control.

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    4. Re:Bad news for US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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...

      And along with it, the rest of the world economy. What is the point of developing high technology if you bankrupt the largest customer while doing it?

    5. Re:Bad news for US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      within ten years China will be so polluted and short of clean drinking water their clever researchers will have to leave the country to find somewhere moderately habitable.

    6. Re:Bad news for US by semafour · · Score: 1

      You can find Microsoft's US-based offices here.

    7. Re:Bad news for US by cubicledrone · · Score: 1

      Doesn't anyone see the problem here?

      No. Nobody gives a fuck. Half the people are too tired from working double shifts at Wal-Mart and the other half are busy being apologists for rat lying fuck cheat thief bastard middle management.

      Half (that's right, HALF) of the people in L.A., for example, are illiterate.

      HALF THE PEOPLE ARE ILLITERATE.

      Yet, people with college degrees can't find jobs. Guy with a PhD could walk into whatever company he wants in this fucked up economy, and every single one of them would come up with some horseshit excuse why they can't hire him. Meanwhile, they're firing everyone as fast as they can and shipping all the jobs to elsewhere.

      But people still stand up and say "hey, it's cool! It's the free market!"

      --
      Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
    8. Re:Bad news for US by evangellydonut · · Score: 1

      Maybe then, the general population of the US will realize how important higher education is and actually *gasp* try to learn something!!! There's a reason why 20-40% of the student body at the top rated and general universities are Asian when they only consititute ~5% of the US population as a whole. It's the fundamental building block of the Asian society.

    9. Re:Bad news for US by freqres · · Score: 1

      Tell your kids to go into skilled-trades (plumber, electrician, etc.) These jobs are a lot harder to outsource and you don't usually have to go through 4 years of debt increasing schooling just to be eligible to start getting experience.

      --
      Rampant Ninja related crimes these days...Whitehouse is not the exception
    10. Re:Bad news for US by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I'll second that.

      Also teach them to learn to be very self-sufficient, so they can fix things themselves. Lastly, teach them to prepare for disasters. It'd be a good idea to buy some land with a cabin someplace rural, and keep it stocked with supplies.

      The only problem with skilled trades is that they rely on a functioning economy, so that there are people willing to pay for their services. When no one has any more money, their business will dry up.

    11. Re:Bad news for US by freqres · · Score: 1

      I agree with your comments. The one thing that skilled-trades does have going for it in a non-functioning economy is that a lot of the services they perform (plumbing, carpentry, mechanic, etc.) are still needed by most regular folks and can easily be traded for goods produced by others (I'll build you a chicken coop for 3 dozen eggs and 4lbs of chicken meat for example). If Great Depression like times do come back, I don't see a huge desire for people to have fancy webpages or install a virus scanner.

      And like you said, learn to be self-sufficient. Learn to hunt and fish and garden. Have some place to go that's not totally dependent on public utilities to live in (a cabin with a wood burning stove, candles or oil lamps, pit toilet, well and hand pump). Hopefully I'll never have to use my cabin in Northern MI because of desperate times, but I have a great place to vacation and relax and it's there should I need a place to 'weather the storm'.

      --
      Rampant Ninja related crimes these days...Whitehouse is not the exception
    12. Re:Bad news for US by Snarph · · Score: 1

      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...

      Well, the good news is that some of the talent should gravitate back to the US in that event.

      /runs like hell.

    13. Re:Bad news for US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think with 20% of the worlds population China should surpass the US.

  11. Better than Google? by tyler_larson · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...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.'

    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.

    --
    "With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea...."
    RFC 1925
    1. Re:Better than Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Mod parent up. Search technology, as the parent pointed out is a maturing technology. This no longer high-tech R&D.

      Once you get to the point where "I search ... it gives me what I wanted" almost every time, you've really reached a point of diminishing returns.

      At that point, it's a question of who can "manufacture" their search engine more cheaply, and MSFT and China are both good at that game.

    2. Re:Better than Google? by mochan_s · · Score: 1

      Google works very well for certain things, most notably anything computer related (like programming, or some sort of reference). However, it's horrendous in many other aspects. I have to search through pages and pages to get the data I want. And, it's not transparent at all. I have to think - OK how does Google store this and how do I best phrase my search query. Google has a lot lot more ways to go.

    3. Re:Better than Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One problem that Google has is that the top results are often commercial links, not information. Websites that sell stuff go to extreme lengths to trick Google into giving them higher pageranks, while the most informative pages are left behind. This makes Google hard to use for research. I wish Google had a way to filter out people who are trying to sell me something, sort of like the Anti-Froogle.

  12. Way to go guys! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    That's good business sense - train your competition, so that native Chinese companies can steal your lunch in a few years.

    Typical American crap - since anything past 1-2 quarters is "an infinity away".

    *sigh*

    1. Re:Way to go guys! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, not to worry. Tech workers will all migrate to the service sector. Working for Wal Mart and flipping burgers and such.

  13. Drill down? by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is the announcement trying to be buzzword compliant?

  14. This is Good for World Peace by tealover · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Many people make fun of Nixon, but his Sunshine Policy with regard to China has really helped China and the world. Can you imagine China as closed and belligerent as North Korea ?

    And the other thing is competition is good for everyone.

    --
    -- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
    1. Re:This is Good for World Peace by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Many people make fun of Nixon, but his Sunshine Policy with regard to China has really helped China and the world. Can you imagine China as closed and belligerent as North Korea ?

      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.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    2. Re:This is Good for World Peace by Quixote · · Score: 1

      So.. who's going to apply this "sunshine" policy to Cuba and DPRK ?

    3. Re:This is Good for World Peace by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Do you know how many of the countries that germany, in WW2, attacked/invaded had major economic ties with germany? Most of them.

      It has happend before, and it will happen again.

    4. Re:This is Good for World Peace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once again Americans think they did everything .. I beleive it was France who introduced China to the international community .. They got China into the UN .. Also i think their economy is irrelevant because the New World Order will have setup shop before they have the chance.. So yes maybe they will surpass everyone .. but who's going to be buying when the American economy crashes .. and money has no value. I guess we will all wish we lived in Communist China versus Nazi USA ..

    5. Re:This is Good for World Peace by freqres · · Score: 1

      Maybe Toby Keith's boot in their ass? Oh sorry, that's the where the sun don't shine policy. Sure has that Dubya twang to it though.

      --
      Rampant Ninja related crimes these days...Whitehouse is not the exception
    6. Re:This is Good for World Peace by Bendebecker · · Score: 1

      And the other thing is competition is good for everyone.

      Not when you're on the losing side.

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
    7. Re:This is Good for World Peace by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      germany, in WW2, attacked/invaded had major economic ties with germany

      Those "economic ties" were often in the form of unbearable reparations imposed for the damage of the Great War.

      Slaves have major economic ties with their masters, which has no bearing on their willingness to revolt.

  15. But they can't even form acronyms! by YetAnotherName · · Score: 5, Funny

    Western languages like English use alphabetical glyphs which are combined to form words, which can recursively combine to form acronyms and abbreviations.

    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?

    1. Re:But they can't even form acronyms! by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1

      Good point, but they just use the english acronyms e.g. DVI, TFT, LCD.

    2. Re:But they can't even form acronyms! by Mordibity · · Score: 2, Funny

      > Now, where's my company acronym dictionary again?

      It's under your TPS report.

    3. Re:But they can't even form acronyms! by servognome · · Score: 1

      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
      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

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    4. Re:But they can't even form acronyms! by Psyqlone · · Score: 1

      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.

      Ideographs on a shell prompt can be an unholy bitch too.
    5. Re:But they can't even form acronyms! by psetzer · · Score: 1

      It's inevitable that people are going to switch to Chinese in the long run, at least Unix sysadmins. Perl becomes so much more fun when you have tens of thousands of one-glyph variable names. Heck, there's probably some one-line-wonder OS written in Chinese, just waiting for us to find it.

      --
      "Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is living in a state of sin." -- John von Neumann
    6. Re:But they can't even form acronyms! by Paulrothrock · · Score: 1

      Why couldn't the next economic powerhouse speak something simple, like Esperanto???

      --
      I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
    7. Re:But they can't even form acronyms! by mikael · · Score: 1

      Perl becomes so much more fun when you have tens of thousands of one-glyph variable names. Heck, there's probably some one-line-wonder OS written in Chinese, just waiting for us to find it.

      Have a look at the APL programming language (APL = A Programming Language). And you need a keyboard marked out with the key symbols.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    8. Re:But they can't even form acronyms! by Psyqlone · · Score: 1

      It's inevitable that people are going to switch to Chinese in the long run, at least Unix sysadmins. Perl becomes so much more fun when you have tens of thousands of one-glyph variable names. Heck, there's probably some one-line-wonder OS written in Chinese, just waiting for us to find it.

      ...commands, arguments and options - consisting of ideographs, which is what Chinese characters are. ...very much like icons. A few thousand years back they were much more graphically descriptive, but they're still kindasorta pictures.

      Alphabetic characters convey phonetic sounds (and acronyms, I suppose). Pictographic characters were intended to convey meaning. Oddly enough, the Chinese started requiring that their kids master English long after the Koreans and Japanese implemented phonetic alphabetic systems of their own, even though their contact with the west was rather extensive. Isolationism and snobbery can have that effect, I guess.

      Also when spoken, different intonations change the meaning in Chinese. The language is not only enunciated. You kinda have to sing it too. Fortunately, IBM has recently released much of their speech-recognition technology to the open-source community.

    9. Re:But they can't even form acronyms! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No acronyms? Then how do the guys on the street corners in Beijing yell "DVD? VCD?"

    10. Re:But they can't even form acronyms! by ross.w · · Score: 1

      They won't let that stop them.
      Example: SSEC (Shanghai SINOPEC Engineering Corporation).

      --
      If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
  16. Figures. by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 4, Informative

    In other words, they don't want to have to pay american or european researchers fat salaries.

    1. Re:Figures. by CommanderData · · Score: 1

      Exactly. That and depending on the area of research they may be able to do things that would be considered illegal in the USA.

      --
      Urge to post... fading... fading... RISING!... fading... fading... gone.
  17. Where's the whining... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Come on where's all the expected whining? These are 'potential' American research jobs, aren't they? High paying, cutting edge positions. If this article was about India I am sure all the regulars would be coming out of the woodwork.

    Maybe it just goes to show...

    1. Re:Where's the whining... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, I just bought a house in Silcon Valley at a ridiculous price. Now I have to keep up with the Jones, or would that be the Zhangs, just when I was starting to be in the black again, now I am back in the Red.

    2. Re:Where's the whining... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Actually, I was waiting for the usual "why don't they solve all their social problems and get running water to the starving peasants before doing all that good technical stuff" posts.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    3. Re:Where's the whining... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you think of a Chinese outsourced shop, you think of millions of agrarian, poorly educated people wearing frustrum shaped hats.

      When you think of an Indian outsourced shop, you think of your econ TA.

      Let's face it, there's nothing worse than losing your job to a guy who acts like your econ TA.

  18. Money goes where... by Duncan3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All money flows as fast as possible to where it can grow the fastest.

    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.

    --
    - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
    1. Re:Money goes where... by Chess_the_cat · · Score: 1
      China has a billion poor people, just waiting to spend all their money on stuff.

      What does that even mean?

      --
      Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
    2. Re:Money goes where... by DAldredge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First, most of the poor in china don't have enough money to by more than 3 suits of clothes.

      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.

    3. Re:Money goes where... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But in China companies are growing like crazy.

      Is SCOX traded on the Shanghai exchange?

    4. Re:Money goes where... by Peldor · · Score: 1
      China has a billion poor people, just waiting to spend all their money on stuff

      Poor people don't have money to spend. It's one of the drawbacks to being poor.

    5. Re:Money goes where... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Rewrite :

      First, most of the poor in the USA don't have enough money to by more than 3 suits of clothes.

      Second, the Banking system in The USA is flush with bad loans ( Enrons and the likes ) and, if something isn't done ( get bush out of presidency ), it will colapse ( US total debt as nearly doubled ) . Either way, it will be very painful to fix.

      Third, USA as been in a major energy crisis , for a log time ,If it where not for Canada ( #1 US oil furnisher , #1 US electricity furnisher , #1 US GAz furnisher ), you would be doomed by now .

      Forth, what do you think will happen when all those poor peole realize that their 'leaders' are reaping all the profits? ( nothing )

      Fifth, what happens to those stock holdings if USA ever nationalizes our investements? ( BTW the stock market where IBM , Dell and others are is not China ... )

      "The world isn't a nice place"

      All due to The US and there politics ...

      And The US is the Worst , they can do something to fix things but they decide its not in there interest to do so. The #1 terrorist organization in the world is the CIA ...

      The US dont like anyone not even themself ...

      "as soon as they can, they will rid themselves of us. "

      Why , your doing the job for them

    6. Re:Money goes where... by ethanms · · Score: 1

      But the parent read part of an article that said that they have a big middle class so he must be right!

      China sucks... we have bombs... I say we use 'em.

      Except then it'd be a pain to get all those cheap electronics... Taiwan will still be our bitch... we just them smart bomb thingamajigs to keep them safe while microwaving the others into submission.

      Then we fat, evil Western Europeans and American's can sit on our piles of stuff and throw it up into the air while giggling.

      If you eat nothing but cheeseburgers you will die because you are what you eat. Similarly a nation "is" what it's made of, which is it's citizens... if we're all cheeseburgers then our nation will die. It's ok for some of us to be cheeseburgers, but we need more oatmeals, carrots and other fiber... where the hell was I going with this? Oh right... lunch...

      I say forget it... things will last long enough for us to die, at least wish we were dead... just don't have any kids.

    7. Re:Money goes where... by freqres · · Score: 1

      It's Lotto monetary logistics. You know, that 'If I had a bunch of money I would buy xxx' financial plan. Lots of people here in the US are already masters of this strategy. I guess we are outsourcing that as well.

      --
      Rampant Ninja related crimes these days...Whitehouse is not the exception
    8. Re:Money goes where... by evangellydonut · · Score: 2, Informative

      First, the Chinese government recognizes the problem. Doesn't mean there will be a solution soon, but its at least recognized. I think its something that can be turned around in 30-50 years time, just have to have the right person to do it. (In fact, I had a long discussion with my father about it recently, and I'm personally very interested... just need to learn more about the agricultural field)

      Second, banking system went through MAJOR reforms among other things. Hundreads of billions of USD were injected into the 4 major banks to write off bad loans, and for the first time, Bankruptcy laws and personal loans are allowed and taking off like crazy so that the bad loans will be repaid as much as possible

      Third, the energy crisis is overstated. 60% efficiency was the operational efficiency of most foreignlly invested plants back in the late 90s (around '99). The problem isn't lacking of energy as a whole, but rather routing power to the general public. Combined with the nuclear plant strategy (Clinton and Jiang's agreement, China stop selling Nukes to Iran and other countries, US aid China in nuclear power), China's problem isn't as big as some make it out to be

      Fourth, the poor people and everyone and their cat knows how corrupted the government is, but at least the poor people have no way to organize. In all 5000 years of Chinese history and 8 major empires, none except arguably the Ming was formed by pesant revolt, and that's due to the fact that Yuan wasn't a Han government. It simply won't happen.

      Fifth, China is too entrenched in WTO and other capitalistic reforms to nationalize those investments. The greatest legacy of the Jiang administration was the WTO bit, which probably came closest to a revolution because most didn't and still don't recognize the long term impact of it. Jiang's biggest achievement was to use Zhu as Preimer, who will go down in Chinese history books to be one of the greatest leaders of China (along with Zhou, Deng, and Mao...)

      China is a rapidly changing place, and the speed of evolution is WAY too fast for most people to keep up. Until China's wings gets strong enough, which will be heavily dependent on Korea, HK, and Taiwan's technological advancements, we will infact get rid of the westerners...

    9. Re:Money goes where... by hackus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Very 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

      --
      Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
    10. Re:Money goes where... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Think you can double you money fast in US stocks? Fat chance. But in China companies are growing like crazy."

      Both of the major Chinese stock indexes (Shanghai Stock Exchange Composite Index & Shenzhen Stock Exchange Composite Index) hit FIVE YEAR LOWS on September 9th. Nobody's doubling their money there either. Do a little research next time so that you don't sound like such a dumbass.

    11. Re:Money goes where... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      But the facts are on my side while your post is complete and total bullshit. :->

    12. Re:Money goes where... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be fooled by what thing appears!

      Emerging market never means fat profit. It means higher risk, for sure. Remember 1997 Asia Finanical Crisis? On statistics, using Thailand as an example, the loss is equal to having a local WWII: half of the national wealth is gone.

      What is the quality of the PhD in China? I can tell you China has one of the worse university system in the world because it is the 'relationship' thing. You never fire old professor even they are *seriously* out of touch.(Please take into account they many of them do not learn anything new during 1945~1980 when China is ruled by orthodox Communist) To compensate to the younger ones, they promote a lot of people to assoicate professors. At the end, there are more professors to the PhD students!

      And the best highschool students have already gone to USA/Canada/Other western countries once they have a chance...

      We shall not be fooled. Sometimes some big companies invest there (such as M$) becuase they have to please the powerful people there. Maybe the investment does not make any sense.

  19. Is it really any surprise? by FerretFrottage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Considering that companies (MS, IBM, et al.) are patent whoring (whether be defensive or strategic in nature) in the US and reverse engineering is now considered to be a crime in most cases, it is stifling innovation. The US is now a sue-society where money talks and lesser companies/individuals are being held back my the corporate oligarchy.

    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)

    --
    "Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
    1. Re:Is it really any surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Newsflash: The Chinese government will have no reservation about stealing IP generated by these research labs. My opinion is that many of these companies are setting themselves up for a double whammy. First, they are gutting their customer base in the US for very low-paid potential customers in India and China that may never exist. Second, they are creating the next generation of low-cost competition and are essentially handing them the IP jewels.

      The fact of the matter, though, is that all of this academic and industrial research, in the end, is a huge waste of resources that should be directed at product development. And, there is a difference.

      My money is not on IT, biotech, or nanotech anymore. The signal/noise ratio is too small.

    2. Re:Is it really any surprise? by FerretFrottage · · Score: 1

      Great point on the Chinese government and the IP of the companies. However, I don't think those companies via lobbying/trade laws, etc. will allow any Chinese exported products based on their "stolen" IP to be sold in the US or other "western" countries. So those companies got cheap, unfettered research and lose some of it in return (which probably could never be "capitialized" on directly outside of China)....a triple whammy.

      --
      "Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
  20. Kylin and China development by tod_miller · · Score: 3, Interesting

    China Tech News has great articles about the hotbed of activity there.

    And Kylin 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 /. do we have? To keep up, I suggest we all Learn chinese characters!

    Looking forward to 2008. See you there!

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
    1. Re:Kylin and China development by thomasa · · Score: 1

      qu ni de. wo ji xuexi zhongwen.

      Of course you have to say which chinese. Mandarin,
      Cantonese, Simplified, Traditional, Taiwanese Mandarin, Beijing Mandarin.

      Wo xuexi de bu kuai

    2. Re:Kylin and China development by botsmaster25 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Rice Fanboy.

    3. Re:Kylin and China development by figgypower · · Score: 1

      Um... if they're developing Kylin to rid of foreign, invading OSes, wouldn't that include Linux? Of course, I can see them adopting Linux in the short run, but wanting to dump it ASAP. Even that is questionable. Although, Kylin kinda smells funny... like vapor... ware

    4. Re:Kylin and China development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wo bu dong. qu ta de shenme?

      The dialects are all written the same way. They are only spoken differently. Anyway, you would obviously need Mandarin. It's the standard.

      wo ai xigua ;)

    5. Re:Kylin and China development by thomasa · · Score: 1

      qunide = go to heck.

      wo bu xihuan xigua.

  21. Can I give out PhD's too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful
    I'm getting sick of the "Hire 10 PhD's from Elbonia for the price of one here" mentality some countries seem to have. I won't name any names, but it seems like half the countries in asia and eastern europe have PhD farms that are really starting to deflate the prestige once associated with such degrees.

    Now I can't complain too much, because these country's high-school kids have better educations than your average college kid here. But it sure seems like this practice is narrowing the gap between a PhD and high-schooler.

    I just wonder how many of the companies mentioned in this article are falling for the "everyone in our town has a PhD or two" pitch so many of these cities are selling them.

    1. Re:Can I give out PhD's too? by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      I just wonder how many of the companies mentioned in this article are falling for the "everyone in our town has a PhD or two" pitch so many of these cities are selling them.

      On the contrary, they're there because the chinese market is the last frontier, and it's the big one. To not be a player in China is to say you're comfortable in your niche until they come and take it away from you.

      Sure, there will always be fly-by-night doctoral schools. Heck there are in the USA, where do you suppose John Gray (mars and venus) got his Masters and PhD? But that doesn't mean you can't screen them out and out of 1000 candidates find some who really know their stuff (same as in the west, I might add!)

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  22. Re:its about time... by Chess_the_cat · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Chess? What the fuck are you smoking? Chess is an Indian game. As for "works on how to run a government" maybe the Chinese should read those themselves. And silk comes from a worm! That's like crediting Canadians with lobster! Spaghetti is Italian. You're thinking of noodles. But Art of War is a good book. I'll give you that.

    --
    Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
  23. Raise Your Hand by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Raise your hand if you were surprised by this. Really.

    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.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Raise Your Hand by currivan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One question I've never seen an answer to: Why is China attracting so much more foreign investment than India? To an outsider, they both seem to put the same premium on science and engineering, and they both seem to have large pools of cheaper labor. Yet China has several times the dollar amount of foreign direct investment.

      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 protection from labor unrest and environmental regulation? Or are the Indians too protectionist with regard to foreign ownership?

    2. Re:Raise Your Hand by The+Jonas · · Score: 1

      No one has been able to say with any certainty as to why, but this Google search for China and FDI (Foreign Direct investment) should be interesting.

      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.

    3. Re:Raise Your Hand by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      One question I've never seen an answer to: Why is China attracting so much more foreign investment than India? To an outsider, they both seem to put the same premium on science and engineering, and they both seem to have large pools of cheaper labor. Yet China has several times the dollar amount of foreign direct investment.

      Part of it is infrastructure. In India, even in the best tech areas, you should have backup power and a satellite phone connection. India hasn't put the muscle behind bringing the country into the 20th century, let alone the 21st that China has. Even backwaters will have broadband, I'm not making this up! The BBC aired a special on China's push a few months back -- some woman goes back to the farming community she came from (She lives in Shanghai, which is booming) to visit her mother. No running water, outside toilet, but by golly she's got Broadband, even if she could hardly scratch together the money to buy a computer to use it.

      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 protection from labor unrest and environmental regulation? Or are the Indians too protectionist with regard to foreign ownership?

      Can't say much for protectionism, but China has not just embraced business, but has very high ambitions. While people may grumble, they have opportunity and growth has been so fast, while the rest of the world has stagnated for the last 4 years, they had to cool it down by restricting loans (not jacking up interest rates, just restricting access to loans!) A key difference between India and China may simply be that the leadership of China is aiming high and means advance China. Ok, they're autocratic, but they're actually doing a lot to advance the country. Democracies can do as well, but the people need to be united behind the idea. Half the people in the US can't seem to see the current administration is a pack of thieves and liars, so it's no mystery why the US is falling behind -- though it's still a land of opportunity, so you can bet rich chinese will eventually be buying big chunks of it, same as the Saudi's and Japanese have done in years past.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    4. Re:Raise Your Hand by John+Betonschaar · · Score: 1

      Maybe the next opium craze in china will be western fashion, television and SUV's.

      I sure don't hope so. If the Chinese also start to like these ridiculous petrol-lurking SUV's that nobody actually needs, the whole world will probably collapse because it cannot support this kind of energy consumption. All because the Chinese want to have the same things that Americans want (and why not?).

      Thanks for that...

    5. Re:Raise Your Hand by freqres · · Score: 1

      Maybe we can put Opium in the Hello Kitties?

      --
      Rampant Ninja related crimes these days...Whitehouse is not the exception
    6. Re:Raise Your Hand by evangellydonut · · Score: 1

      Even though the political environment in China isn't exactly favorable, at least its perceived to be stable, compared to India... Just look at the recent election in India... In addition, China's only lagged to the level of India mostly due to the Cultural Revolution...but if you examine the wave of immigrants from PRC to the US around the late 80s and early 90s, most of them are either running their own company or at least an assistant professor at a university. (or the stinking rich ones from the china's economy boom, but that's different) In comparison, as a percentage, the Chinese have a huge lead over Indians in various high-tech sectors minus semiconductor related (ie Biotech, pharma, etc)

    7. Re:Raise Your Hand by smurf975 · · Score: 1

      I think it has to do with the fact that China has some very wealthy and developed neighbours who have almost the same culture. Those neighbours being South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and Hong Kong. And between those countries and China for some decades there have huge money flows. Europe and the USA are playing catch up.

      Especially for Taiwanese and Hong Kong business people it should not be culturaly a big effort to invest in China. And already for many years there were huge money flows between Hong Kong, Taiwan and China. You would know some Chinese local government guy that would allow them to open up a shop for cheap products to be sold in Hong Kong and Taiwan.

      India doesn't have rich neighbours, well actually it's close neighbours (Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka) are one of the poorest countries of the world.

      And besides that India's region (Its neighbours) has more political issues. While South East Asia is more stable if you forget North Korea which I think will not do anything really crazy without China's consent.

      --
      -- I don't buy it, I grow it.
    8. Re:Raise Your Hand by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      . If the Chinese also start to like these ridiculous petrol-lurking SUV's that nobody actually needs, the whole world will probably collapse because it cannot support this kind of energy consumption.

      It'll happen. It's happening already. They're banning bicycles on city streets to make way for cars.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    9. Re:Raise Your Hand by deepestblue · · Score: 1

      A bit of both. China started liberalising its economy and removing barriers a good 10-15 years before India did (1992). India still has a lot of leftover morass from decades of the "licence Raj". Also, an autocratic government lends itself more easily to introducing new policies and suppressing opposition. In short, democracy can be quite inefficient, although it can be argued that the efficiency an authoritarian regime fosters is at very high cost.

    10. Re:Raise Your Hand by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      I think it has to do with the fact that China has some very wealthy and developed neighbours who have almost the same culture. Those neighbours being South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and Hong Kong. And between those countries and China for some decades there have huge money flows. Europe and the USA are playing catch up.
      Methinks you better learn a bit more about Asia:
      A lot of Chinese still hate Japan over WWII and Japan never apologizing. The mainlanders hate the Taiwanese(though they are willing to do business with them), and are somewhat indifferent towards South Korea.
      South Koreans hate the Japanese for the whole colonization thing, and really aren't too keen on China helping their neighboor to the north(though that has changed some in recent years).
      Taiwan never really like Japan because of the whole WWII thing, and is usually quite suspicious of what the mainland is doing.
      Asian nations aren't exactly as friendly with eachother as you think they are.

    11. Re:Raise Your Hand by smurf975 · · Score: 1

      I admit I don't know alot of South East Asian countries.

      But you have to admit there is some pretty big trading going on in the past and present between Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea, Japan and China. Which all helped China to reach the position that it has now.

      India has the disadvantage of not being able to really trade with its neighbours.

      --
      -- I don't buy it, I grow it.
  24. The only cause for concern... by Vexler · · Score: 1

    ...is if China views this tremendous opportunity for cooperation and collaboration as a chance to exercise "techno-nationalism". Recall recent technological initiatives by China, such as the E-DVD format, that have been criticized as efforts to strongarm international community to adopt China's own technological standards - standards which even its own manufacturers have trouble meeting and even denounce as unworkable. While other efforts have been more subtle (think "Red Flag Linux"), one can't help but wonder if China's own tremendous potential may be undone by its nationalistic bent. But for the time being, China is indeed in the "zone".

    1. Re:The only cause for concern... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really hope the new Chinese HD-DVD standard becomes widespead, it will be cheaper, and is more likely to be free-software friendly.

  25. Re:its about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about Fireworks? And Chinese Food! Love that take-out ;)

  26. USA advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The Rise of the Creative Class" by Richard Florida makes it clear that the US is not in danger of losing its innovation and therefore its edge in the international economy ... as long as the politicians don't screw things up worse.

    1. Re:USA advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based on the field of available choices on US ballots this fall, it doens't look very good, does it.

  27. Re:first post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yankee
    Oscar
    Uniform

    Foxtrot
    Alpha
    India
    Lima

    India
    Tango

  28. Dont credit communism! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I saw someone crediting communism in this thread. Here is my reply to all those people:

    I would not credit communism in this case. I call myself a communist and in my opinion (and most others) China is absoluteley not a communist nation.

    I would credit the totalitarian system in china. If the leader(s) in such a system are working towards a goal, it will always reach that goal more effectively than a democracy (since the democratic process often slow things down - especially if it something that is unpopular - like terraforming a planet). However, more often than not, you end up with a leadership that spends most of its time on quelling resistance or abusing its powers, wich you do not want!

    Totalitarian systems are verry bad things - even if it is more effective (like china) in some cases, for obvious reasons.

  29. RIP by anandpur · · Score: 0

    Silicon valley CA USA 199x-200x

    1. Re:RIP by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 1

      Let me help refine that:
      1984-2004

      --
      stuff |
    2. Re:RIP by slew · · Score: 1

      > Silicon valley CA USA 199x-200x

      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 everywhere), it is the venture capital $$$ from firms based in the mid-pennisula area (eg. Palo Alto). They all seem to want to invest near home. That maybe change slowly (just as it moved from new york/new jersey to boston/route128 to paloalto/siliconvalley over time, money tends to move pretty slowly over time unlike technology...

    3. Re:RIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      Not a chance. Silicon Valley has 3 things going for it that will make it last forever.
      1. Smart people - Top tier universities like Stanford and Berkeley provide the intellectual resources.
      2. Lots of money - Look where the top VC firms are, and you'll see that most of them are on sandhill road, just yards away from Stanford's campus. And when you outgrow the VCs, there are plenty of investment banks up 101 in SF.
      3. A nice climate - And this is what'll keep the two groups mentioned above here.
      When you look at the returns that high tech delivers to both the investors and the entrepreneurs, the cost of living in the area is meaningless. It's no accident that practically every large wave of high tech innovation had its leading companies here (Genentech, Intel, Yahoo, Electronic Arts, HP).

      Sure, old maturing industries (notably software) will move on to places where it's cheaper to manufacture that kind of stuff. But good riddence. With the falling margins in such maturing industries do we really want them here anymore?

    4. Re:RIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Furthermore, what's keeping the VCs here is Stanford. The relationship between Stanford's engineering school and the Stanford Business Park which brought the venture capital community here was carefully engineered by Fred Terman. It's a fascinating read, but it's no coincidence that he encouraged his students Packard and Hewlett to set up a company here, nor that he got Shockley to move out here, nor that Sugurd Varian put his company here. For people more in touch with biotech than computer stuff, this same Fred Terman got Zaffaroni and Djerassi here to start things like Alza and Syva.

      Stanford Engineering's philosophy that fosters high-tech business is what keeps the VC's here. And top-tier universities move even slower than money.

    5. Re:RIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cost living in the area might be meaningless to the company, but it sure means a lot to us there undergoing wage deflation because of outsourcing and off shore research.

    6. Re:RIP by Colonel+Panic · · Score: 1

      Not a chance. Silicon Valley has 3 things going for it that will make it last forever.


      No center of anything (cultural, technological, commercial, religious) will last forever. A cursory look at history shows that nations rise and fall.

      China itself was once the technological, cultural, artistic leader of the world till about 600 years ago when Europe began to emerge from the dark ages.

      No, eventually (and it could be happening now, or it could be in 100 years) Silicon Valley will cease to be the technological center of the world and it will go back to being one of the best farming areas in the world. One thing definately going against it now is the cost of living. That's certainly hurting it now. Also, when it comes to climate, you neglect the geological climate (earthquakes) - it has a very stormy one.

  30. Surprise, Surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do you expect from a country that eschews civilization retardants like the draconian intellectual "property" laws of the West.

  31. Re:The irony: In Communist China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's pretty obvious what a censoring, Big Brother state wants do with an extremely powersul search engine:

    In Communist China, the search engine looks for YOU!

  32. Re:its about time... by Trigun · · Score: 1

    As for "works on how to run a government" maybe the Chinese should read those themselves.

    Umm, their government was totally crooked when the U.S. was trying to find the best way to exploit their workers. They beat the U.S. there.

    The war is on. And the Chinese will win. All they have to do is stop shipping to the U.S. and it will hurt the U.S. faster than it will hurt China. They now have the ability to not only raise themselves to first world status, but the ability to lower others from first world to second and third world status. on a whim.

    All the U.S. has is nukes. And they'll go about as far as its righteous indignation.

  33. Wow, who'd have thought! by lgordon · · Score: 0, Troll

    Who'd have thought that slave labor would be so intellectually stimulating!

  34. Hmm wonder why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    could it be that every company in the USA and most companies elsewhere is struggling to establish any relation it can with a million zillion chinese prospective customers?

    Oh that involves investing a little bit? Well that's the nature of buisiness. What? You want us to put some jobs over there? Sure! How about some research jobs? They are egghead and cool-sounding, but that leaves us with the all-important administrative jobs still here in the west... wouldn't want to outsource ourselves now, would we?

  35. Cheap labor, but no IP protection by winkydink · · Score: 2, Insightful

    After a few big companies get burned by having their IP stolen by the Chinese, I suspect that the lure of cheap, highly educated labor will wane.

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

    1. Re:Cheap labor, but no IP protection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How did this get modded up? I thought IP couldn't be "stolen", and I thought that laws protecting IP only stifle innovation and restrict competition, and overall are a Bad Thing(tm).

  36. Re:its about time... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 5, Insightful
    i can't think of a single thing to date the chinese have ever created that has benifited humans.
    Gunpowder. Rockets. Astronomical records dating back to the supernova that became the Crab Nebula.
    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
  37. Sweet! Let's help 'em... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we can just do what we're already doing and keep outsourcing there to help build up their resumes! =)

  38. Re:its about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Silk does come from a worm, the same way ICs come from sand.

  39. So what by Frequanaut · · Score: 2, Funny
    We've got FASHION WEEK here in the good old U.S OF FREAKING A!!!!!

    Let's see THAT in China!

  40. The immorality of Open Source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Having read the article thoroughly, this startling news shows the flaws in the brewing Open Source Zeitgeist that is gripping the software community. Have you considered that providing software for free to countries such as China is essentially tacit support for oppressive regimes?

    Far-fetched? Think about it: With MySQL, the People's Army will now be able to do multiple queries on their tables of democratic activists in Olog(n) time instead of lengthy searches in card catalogs. The bureaucratic overhead previously allowed activists enough time to flee the country. How about building cheap firewalls so the people can't get the unbiased reporting that CNN provides? Or using Apache to publish lists of Falun Gong people to their police forces instantly? I doubt that never crossed your minds when you were coding away in your parents' basements. Consider putting that little thought in your mental resolv.conf file.

    If that does not concern you ( which it probably doesn't, since the slashdot.org paradigm is publishing articles about how not to pay for things ), consider something else. When China eventually goes to war with Taiwan, we want to be able turn their command and control facilities into the computing equivalent of a train-wreck. One of the advantages of Windows never mentioned in the article is the ability of Microsoft to remotely deactivate Windows XP in the case of a national emergency. Thanks to GNU/Lunix, Taiwan will be on a collision course with the mainland in the near future.

    Which throws into question Mr. Stallman's motives. A known proponent of socialism, the Chinese government and RMS are natural allies. Could it be a back door to Stallman's dream of an uber-Socialist United States? We may never know for sure. Next time you consider contributing to an open source project, ask yourself this question: don't you want to make sure your work isn't used for nefarious purposes? Will you risk having blood on your hands?

    1. Re:The immorality of Open Source by kiljoy001 · · Score: 1

      I'm not concerned. First off, if anything, China pushing hard to become reigonal/world power. To do that they need to compete with the United States on multiple fields. My concern now is if the United States can compete with China. This is a country that is aiming to put us in our "place". That is, not leting the US get away with it's current phase of overbearance. Hell people that I know are scared we are turning into a stagnat empire, instead of the republic that we are suposed to be. If "free" market practices are what you believe in, the US must stop diddlying around and start competeing.

  41. PhD != (Expert || Intelligence) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The world places too much emphasis on PhDs and "experts". I have a PhD in CS from a name brand school, and people suddenly think you know everything about everything. The reality is that many PhDs do not jack because there is a tendency to push people through to degree, especially if they are funded on big projects at big schools. Academic integrity isn't the most important factor, quantity is. Go read a randomly selected dissertation to understand.

    The world would be better off with fewer PhDs (i.e., pedantic blowhards) and more critical thinkers and problems solvers, people like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Edison.

  42. So what is this "advanced technology" anyway by ahfoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not a pessimist about technology, but I'm disappointed in what has passed for technology since, say the 1960s. As they say --where's the flying cars damnit? It was supposed to be like radio, black and white TV, color TV, high speed Internet, holographic immersion, direct neural interface and beyond already. It's 2004! What happened? It's practically the same as the seventies.
    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.

    1. Re:So what is this "advanced technology" anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If you talk to the IT industry, academics, and biotech, anything they say and produce is revolutionary, profound, etc. The fact, though, is as you've described it: there is virtually nothing earth-shattering about most of the things that are touted as such. But, you don't get customers to pay big bucks and government to pony-up big research grants if what you do is evolutionary, iterative, and derivative. It's not sexy, and sex sells.

    2. Re:So what is this "advanced technology" anyway by kylector · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You make some good points. Where are the flying cars predicted 30-40 years ago? With the "pace of technology" they really should be here. At the very least, super fuel efficient automobiles should be here. What's holding them back? Ah, dare I say it, I feel like such a conspiracy-theorist when I do...

      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.

    3. Re:So what is this "advanced technology" anyway by smurf975 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the whole new technology things of China is just Taiwanese (and perhaps Korean and Japanese) mobo and chip fabs moving to China because of cheaper labor and less enveriomental laws.

      --
      -- I don't buy it, I grow it.
    4. Re:So what is this "advanced technology" anyway by servognome · · Score: 1

      Technology has always been running the same course, incremental steps.
      Many times a "groundbreaking" idea or piece of technology has to wait for other technologies to catch up, or because it doesn't make good business sense. Like you said the internet has been building for a long time, but it had to wait for hardware prices to come down and wide scale adoption for it to change our lives. Flip chip packaging was invented by IBM in the 70's, but it didn't make sense to use until chip designs, silicon processes, and assembly equipment could catch up, same with immersion lithography, which is now becoming necessary.
      Not only do you have to create something you also have to be able to sell it. It doesn't make sense to spend billions of dollars on a new idea, when there is no advantage. What would be the advantage to a company to develop a flying car? How many times have companies failed at the "automated kitchen" There are better architectures than x86, just nobody will buy them
      Cars get this treatment all the time. The differnce between the new model and the old model is the freakin' plastic brake light reflectors
      Airbags, fuel injection, quieter interior, anti-lock brakes. It takes time to integrate new technologies into a product. You want the company to stop selling cars for 10 years until the next improvement can be integrated? Just like microchips, you have constant incremental improvement, so it doesn't seem like there were any breakthroughs, but if you look at a chip from 7 years ago, there are many major changes.
      Technology outside of IT moves unbelievably slowly.
      I would say medicine is changing just as fast. I think this is a reflection of what we care about as a species. knowledge and our own health.

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    5. Re:So what is this "advanced technology" anyway by jmac880n · · Score: 1

      I'm not a pessimist about technology, but I'm disappointed in what has passed for technology since, say the 1960s.

      ...

      Technology outside of IT moves unbelievably slowly.

      I would say that you are myopic, or perhaps just impatient.

      In the 60's, computers were 1000 times larger, 1000 times more expensive, and 10000 times slower. In a series of small (yes, evolutionary) steps, they have made big advances. Is this enough to be revolutionary? Hmmm...

      Yes, computers are still organized around old von Neumann architectures, and still use printers and disks. User interfaces have had a revolution since the 1960s (courtesy of Xerox).

      But, I think people in business (accounting as a stellar example), publishing, and multimedia have been profoundly affected (in revolutionary ways?) by computers.

      I have left out the best example, delaying it until the last. The Bio sciences have extended genetics in incredible strides (yes, made possible by computers and other inventions). Think of the research possibilities opened up by genome mapping, for instance.

      If that is not revolutionary, then perhaps I am guilty of misunderstanding the proper term to label something that has dominated such an important field in so short of a time.

      Perhaps I am biased, because such advances in biotech have saved my life (I am a cancer survivor, cured by advanced drugs developed by biotech firms - with the help of computers). Had I been ill twenty years earlier, I probably would not have survived. You may disagree, but being alive is revolutionary progress to me!

    6. Re:So what is this "advanced technology" anyway by be951 · · Score: 1
      I'm not a pessimist about technology, but I'm disappointed in what has passed for technology since, say the 1960s. As they say --where's the flying cars damnit?

      Here. Now before you whine that you can't buy one yet, you should decide which way you want it. On one hand, you're saying the big "technological developments" of late (e.g. the internet) are not really new. Of course that is true, but generally technology doesn't get interesting until it approaches commercial viability. That's when it becomes the next big thing, even though the "breakthrough" that made it possible occurred five or ten years before.

      From that perspective, technology isn't really about inventing revolutionary new things or processes. Almost everything is an iterative advancement based on older technology. The bulk of the work in technology is making it useful and affordable.

      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.

      Like computers in every home and office, in cars and appliances? Wrist phones (which never really caught on, but there are phones not much larger than a largish watch)? Video phones (think webcams)?

      Think of all the things we have today that weren't available (to the average consumer) 30 years ago (Internet, cell phones --even cordless phones, Tivo --hell you probably didn't have more than 3 or 4 TV channels in 1974 unless you lived in a major metro area). And you're complaining because some things (flying cars and holographic immersion) haven't come along yet.

      To answer your question, the "advanced technology" will probably be a small advance here, a little improvement there, that may add up to something significant. Maybe even the "next big thing".

    7. Re:So what is this "advanced technology" anyway by hackus · · Score: 1

      So what?

      Think about this when you go to bed at night:

      1) As more technology moves off shore, how do you suppose we support our military? It takes mega wads of cash to support 3-4 carrier groups.

      Without the BEST research facilities in the world, America will not be able to project power or secure the wests interests.

      I do not see that as a long term good thing. The Chinese government doesn't permit freedom of will, and it only does so on the premises it needs dollars and cash to enforce its iron will and placate the population.

      China has PLANS, and some of them will intersect in very dangerous ways with the soverienty of the West. Taiwan is just one example, but there are many many more with respect to Japan, and the Pacific rim.

      2) History has not seen or provided us with a point of reference to exactly what will happen when a totalitarian regime is cash infused with the resources as large as China's to do as it wills. Both with manpower and economic power.

      Soviet Russia was always a Tiger, with much more Roar than bite because poor infrastructure and very little cash meant it could not sustain a military fight of any length of time, conventionally speaking.

      What would happen if China achieves the financial base to do so?

      It is common knowledge that military planners in China are perfectly "OK" with a planned invasion of the US mainland, if ONLY 1 Billion casualties are sufferred.

      Conquoring the mainland of the US would be more than worth the cost.

      3) The Chinese actually have a dual purpose plan in dealing with the West. The Chinese government has looked at how the Soviet Union failed to conquor the west....and they realize that military force is just one part of true strength.

      Economic might is the other.

      They will not make the same mistake THIS TIME in dealing with Western powers as Soviet Russia did.

      I DO NOT believe that China is proping up the US dollar by buying enourmous amounts of US Treastury bills out of the kindess of its heart.

      All CHina has to do is STOP BUYING our government treasury bills at a certain critical mass and our entire economy will come crashing down too its knees.

      4) Finally, if you have manufacturing capacity to make extremely high tech goods, AS WELL AS the research and R&D facilities then you can form your own economic world economy, quite nicely, without input from the West.

      When this happens, China will be a world unto its own. Nothing will stop a country militarily or economically if it researches and produces all of its own goods and technology.

      This has yet come to pass, but everything else is falling into the MASTER PLAN.

      What that plan is, is to bring about what Chinese leaders call the "Age of the Golden Dragon". In this age, every country in the world is a satellite nation and province of CHina.

      Me? No thanks, I don't like my town square with tanks in it thank you very much.

      Your entire essay of "SO WHAT" is typical of the lack of foresight and dangerous games that are happening with future of Western culture.

      -Hack

      --
      Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
    8. Re:So what is this "advanced technology" anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fetch, fetch. Get the stick boy. Get the stick.

    9. Re:So what is this "advanced technology" anyway by sgt_doom · · Score: 0
      You make an extremely intelligent point which I would like to add to - I believe the primary reason for that tech "boost" in the '60s and '70s, which has carried us into the 21st century, was the direct result of the largest government-sponsored R & D program in history, namely, N.A.S.A. and the space program.

      An almost limitless number of development in digital electronics, computer science, microelectronics, biomech engineering, materials science, polymer chemistry, data and telecommunications (LASER and fuel cell tech, etc.) and satellite com, etc., ad infinitum, have derived from there.

  43. One reason: scarcity of women. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The "one child policy" coupled with the practice of killing females newborns and fetuses has created a scarcity of women to distract the males. With no women to be chasing, there's nothing to do but work.

    1. Re:One reason: scarcity of women. by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      They can masturbate, or have gay sex.

  44. Re:its about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
  45. Re:its about time... by gcaseye6677 · · Score: 1

    If China ever stopped shipping to the U.S, there would be plenty of other countries lined up to take their place. Chinese firms have managed to provide products that are cheap and of adequate quality, depending on what your standards are. Other countries have cheap labor too, and as soon as there is demand they will be able to crank out manufactured products in almost the same way.

  46. Yes, but by doombob · · Score: 1

    Yes, but does Microsoft Really NEED China? I don't think they do. I think with the average consumer (read: American), new features created from research in another country isn't going to matter in their operating system, other software on their computer, or the internet.

    1. Re:Yes, but by limabone · · Score: 1

      That kind of thinking is going to leave the United States (assuming you are an America) in the dust. The U.S. is a small fraction of the global population and when other nations like China and India grow a consumer culture larger than (y)ours, the question will be 'Does China need the US?' and it seems increasingly that the answer is no.
      (Yes I know your original post was about Microsoft specifically)

  47. funny how I just read something relating to this by xutopia · · Score: 1

    He speaks of China in there somewhere. Do a search but if you want read the whole thing. It's really interesting. http://www.operatingthetan.com/metameme.txt

  48. Re:its about time... by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 1

    Let's not forget inventing typeset printing -- that's _actually_ inventing it, not coming up with it magically thousands of years after someone else invented it... COUGH*Gutenberg*COUGH

    The first thing off of the Gutenberg press? The Bible. The next thing? Pr0n.
    (clean history of printing) http://www.studyworld.com/newsite/ReportEssay/Hist ory/General%5CThe_History_of_Printing-362967.htm
    (brief mention of gutenberg's rapid switch to printing filth: R-rated link, sorry) http://www.robyncalifornia.com/writing/o_01-06-25. html

    --
    stuff |
  49. You didn't listen to Arnold. by asoap · · Score: 5, Funny
    You are obviously wrong here. If you had listened to Arnold at the Republican convention you would already know that this is not a possibility, because... well.. because the Governator said so! If you don't like then your just being an economic girlie man!!!!

    Personally, I agree with you, I just don't think Arnie will though.

    -Derek

    --
    Treat me like a marketing stat, and I'll treat your movie like a series of ones and zeros
    1. Re:You didn't listen to Arnold. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that was funny......should have been moded higher

    2. Re:You didn't listen to Arnold. by ColaMan · · Score: 1

      Personally, I agree with you, I just don't think Arnie will though.

      I'd think he'd say it more along the lines of:
      "eeekhonomhic gihrrly mahn"

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
  50. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by gosand · · 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...

    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.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  51. Re:its about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Don't forget the compass and the printing press. Or their excellent martial arts.

  52. Re:This should serve as a warning to US lawmakers by catherder_finleyd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Actually it should serve to make US lawmakers ask hard questions about US Companies "Offshoring" R&D to China. China is a major long-term security threat to the US. Giving them a major economic-techbological base "hands them the rope they'll use to hang us!".

  53. Oh, great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now I have to move from India to China. Jeeez! I can't keep up.

  54. Filling in the blanks.. by kagaku · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    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.

    Microsoft Research Asia hopes Google-surpassing technology comes from a group of '10 researchers locked in a small windowless room getting paid $0.10 an hour and all the rice they can eat working on new ways to drill deep into the Internet and select and organize the information found there.'

    --
    everyday is another shooter.
  55. Well, we did this to ourselves. by ErichTheRed · · Score: 4, Interesting
    This is going to be interesting to watch. The US has been de-emphasizing education for so long that I don't think we could catch up to a rapid growth spurt like this without serious intervention. I don't blame companies for reasoning that China probably has 100 times the well-trained engineers/scientists who will work for less.

    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.

    1. Re:Well, we did this to ourselves. by kimanaw · · Score: 1
      Not everyone can be a lawyer or investment banker, and almost no one can be a rock star or sports hero.
      Perhaps you missed the nineties ? We've got lawyers falling out of trees, and the law schools are still flushing them out the doors. The bagboy at the local Safeway was giving me stock picks. Hip hop labels continue to churn out "stars/artists" like an assembly line. And while not everyone can be a sports hero, most everyone *can* be a sports agent or hanger-on. SO, you see, the US is still the land of opportunity!

      Hell, we don't need to actually make anything! Where's the ROI in that ? Esp. when there's always reality TV ! Eaten any raw pig genitals lately ?

      Perhaps the US will simply become a weekly TV show for the rest of the world. It'd be the best sitcom ever produced. Rabid attorneys, greasy politicians, shallow pop stars, doped up athletes, Jerry Springer, Geraldo Rivera...

      So just sit back, enjoy the ride, and see if your name shows up when the credits roll.

      --
      007: "Who are you?"
      Pussy: "My name is Pussy Galore."
      007: "I must be dreaming..."
    2. Re:Well, we did this to ourselves. by Watcher · · Score: 1

      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.
      Would that this were true. In reality, there are a lot of us who would love to get into research of one form or another, but there are almost no companies left in the US who want to spend money on something so frivolous as future technology that could make them billions. Accademia would be an alternative, but its highly competitive because of the small number of slots open.

    3. Re:Well, we did this to ourselves. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the U.S., if you don't work your ass off to be the best in your field, you get a B.A., live with your parents for a couple of years, and then get some moderate wage job, and live a somewhat comfortable life.

      In China, if you aren't THE best at what you do, you won't get into college, you'll live in the ghetto (or worse), and always be hungry... There isn't much of a middle class.

      It's incentive.

  56. Comparative stats by bitswapper · · Score: 4, Interesting

    China .vs. US
    GDP $6.449T .vs. $10.98T
    GDP Growth 9.1% .vs. 3.1%
    Inflation 1.2% .vs. 2.1%
    PerCap Income $5000 .vs. $37,500
    Phones (LL) 214M .vs. 186M
    CellPhones 240M .vs. 140M
    Internet Users 59M .vs. 159M
    Internet Hosts 156,53 .vs. 115,311,958
    TV Stations 3240 .vs. 1500+
    Population 1.2B .vs. 2.9M
    Pop. Growth .57% .vs. .92%


    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....

    1. Re:Comparative stats by servognome · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's more a reflection of poor land line infrastructure. Many "poor" countries have high use of cell phones because it's the only way the people can get service.
      Pop. Growth .57% .vs. .92%
      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, /. hotties contact me. :)

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    2. Re:Comparative stats by fireboy1919 · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking it's the lower quality landlines couples with the fact that therey's 1.2B of them. The US would probably have a more cell phones if it had more people.

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    3. Re:Comparative stats by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 2, Informative

      Relative percentages, China vs. US

      Landline phones: ~20% vs ~60%
      Cellphones: ~25% vs ~50%

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
    4. Re:Comparative stats by evangellydonut · · Score: 1

      China's PPP GDP is maybe around US$6T, second to the US, but real GDP is only around US$1.2T, seventh in the world as of 2003.

    5. Re:Comparative stats by freqres · · Score: 1

      I'm sure tubgirl will be getting in touch with you any day now.

      --
      Rampant Ninja related crimes these days...Whitehouse is not the exception
    6. Re:Comparative stats by Emperor+Shaddam+IV · · Score: 1

      Executions:

      China 5,000 - 10,000 a year, estimated,

      US 928 since 1976.

      Economic progress and population growth are not the only factors in a society.

      http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/14/news/internation al /china_banks.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes

      http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid =8 &did=839

    7. Re:Comparative stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Population 1.2B .vs. 2.9M

      I think you meant to say that the US has .29B or 290M odd people not a mere 2.9M ;)

    8. Re:Comparative stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fine, then compare executions + murders and the US will surely be ahead.

    9. Re:Comparative stats by AtomicBomb · · Score: 1
      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....

      I noticed that the East Asian markets (Japan, South Korea, big cities in China, Singapore...) have a much stronger demand for some high tech products, e.g. cell phone, PDA then the "West". And I tried to explain this in terms of the culture... After a while, I found my analysis is inconclusive. Now, I think there are two main camps of customers in a developed region: suburban vs city dweller. In the first camp, the customers enjoy a more comfortable living area. They tend to spend more of their disposable income in car, home improvement, outdoor sport, travel etc. Most places in US, Canada, Australia are like that. In the second camp, people simply don't have that much of space in their houses; resorts, ski-field or surf beaches are far far away. The extra cash will more likely to go into gadgets (new cell phone, PDA/laptop, iPod etc) more delicated restaurant food and such. The mentioned East Asian cities and metropolitian area in the West, e.g. London and New York are good examples... So, I guess it is more related to the urban development pattern than just culture.
    10. Re:Comparative stats by Mex · · Score: 1

      I was there last week, and one of the students said that they're kind of a status symbol. They may be initially expensive, but once you have one the service plans are pretty cheap.

      I went to Xiamen, and I came away convinced that the US will have a lot of trouble economically, thanks to China. Their government is doing A LOT to promote China as an investment opportunity. And it's a beautiful, clean place to live.

    11. Re:Comparative stats by Emperor+Shaddam+IV · · Score: 1

      That doesn't change the fact China's government is a human rights violator. Besides, I would wager that many murders in China are not even reported, especially out in the villages and provinces. Besides, a lot of people are being executed for non-violent crimes.

      By the way, I checked, the murder rate per-capa is higher in the US, but the Chinese government likely "fudged" their figures to look better. Meanwhile, chinese newspapers and websites continue to "distort" the news to make the US look much worse than what it is. This was the same thing Soviet Russia used to do.

  57. Dependence on foreign oil wasn't enough by HangingChad · · Score: 1
    Then we had to extend that dependence to manufacturing by shipping our factories overseas and now we're shipping our brainshare to China as well. This is just f'ing brilliant.

    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.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    1. Re:Dependence on foreign oil wasn't enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      now we're shipping our brainshare to China


      Many of these people come from China or India anyway (and were taught by same), so I consider that only fair.

  58. WTF? by taustin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Porting a software package to Chinese is "advanced technology research"? Writing a new search function is "advanced technology research"? I don't see any other examples of what this "advanced technology research" consists of, other than Nokia moving its programming operations to China, which is also not "advanced technology research."

    "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."

    1. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying google is just a "search function"?

      You do realize that papers published by americans in scientific journals has been steadily declining in the last 10 years. The amount of published chinese research is increasing constantly.

      In America being a lawyer or a MBA is the most prestigious things you can do work wise.

      In Asia being an engineer is bigger than being a lawyer or a pointy hair boss.

      Every empire must decline eventually no matter how glorious or advanced. Just admit it and go with it. These awful excuses about why China sucks just looks like some kind of sore loser stuff.

    2. Re:WTF? by Stripe7 · · Score: 1

      Remember what was said about the Japanse "toys" and then their cars. Now look at where they are at with the electronics industry and the car industry. Then it was said that all the Japanese were good at was taking American ideas and manufacturing them. Well now a lot of new technology patents for new R&D fields are all Japanese. The only difference between China and Japan will be that China will do it a lot faster.

    3. Re:WTF? by taustin · · Score: 1

      So you're saying google is just a "search function"?

      No, I'm saying Google has already been done. Doing it again isn't "advanced technology research."

      You do realize that papers published by americans in scientific journals has been steadily declining in the last 10 years.

      So? The reasons are a lot more complex than that America sucks, and only vaguely related to the amount of research being done.

      The amount of published chinese research is increasing constantly.

      By "research," do you mean learning new stuff that wasn't known before, or moving your programming staff to a country where you can buy cheap slave labor? Do you mean learning stuff that wasn't known before, or porting your database application to a new language?

      In America being a lawyer or a MBA is the most prestigious things you can /do work wise.

      Do you get aroused when you chant "AMERICA SUCKS!"

      In Asia being an engineer is bigger than being a lawyer or a pointy hair boss.

      Engineers do not "advanced technology research." Scientists do research. Engineers do shit that's already been done by scientsts. Which is rather my point.

      Every empire must decline eventually no matter how glorious or advanced. Just admit it and go with it.

      It just pisses you off that the US runs the world, doesn't it?

      These awful excuses about why China sucks just looks like some kind of sore loser stuff.

      Feel free to quote where I said China sucks, dumbass. I said the story sucked, because the writer (who is as stupid as you are) doesn't know what "advanced technical research" is, much less who is doing it.

    4. Re:WTF? by mochan_s · · Score: 1

      Dude, you're living under a rock if you think China is limited to doing the gruntwork (like people talk about India outsourcing). Just for example, look at the graduate students in any science program in any American university. Half of them are Chinese. So, in the next generation, even the American base of scientific research will be Chinese. The point is that China has placed a lot of emphasis in development of basic scientifc research. The US universities who know they need the best of the world finds most in China.

    5. Re:WTF? by ploppy · · Score: 1
      the writer (who is as stupid as you are) doesn't know what "advanced technical research" is, much less who is doing it.

      Actually you're wrong. Your definition of "advanced technical research" harks back to the 60s and 70s. Today with corporates focussed on quarterly results, "advanced technical research" means anything which will take more than six months work. Of course this attitude is wrong, but not liking it (which I don't) doesn't change the fact this is how coporates work these days.

      Before you reply, I would like to point out I have 4 years post doc research (+PhD) in academia, and 8 years+ experience in industrial R&D, and so unlike a lot of people here, I do know what I'm talking about.

      BTW insulting people by calling them dumbass isn't big and contrary to what you think, it does nothing to improve your argument...

      Engineers do not "advanced technology research." Scientists do research. Engineers do shit that's already been done by scientsts. Which is rather my point.

      This is just words. What researchers call themselves while they're doing research is up to them, "research engineer" makes just as much sense as "research scientist". Go and ask a researcher in an engineering department at a university, they're be happy to be called a "research engineer". Just because you seem to dislike the term engineer doesn't mean everyone else does too.

    6. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just go look at who publishes in, say, the WWW conference, etc...

      Developing extensions to the PageRank algorithm that can examine sub-page level importance (authority) to improve results over Google is not "writing a new search function".

      But, since you're just a troll, you probably haven't read any of the latest research from China...

    7. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scientists could find new ideas but engineers make them work.

  59. Re:its about time... by Trigun · · Score: 1

    And there would be plenty of countries lined up to take the surplus stock off of China's hands, as well as supply natural resources to China. The other countries couldn't produce fast enough for the U.S. initially.

    It would hurt both ways, but it would hurt the U.S. more. Wal-mart alone would go crazy.

  60. Another Sign that... by SparafucileMan · · Score: 1

    the target for WW3 will be China. I give it, say, 30-50 years. Of course, if your Chineese, the target will be the U.S.

    1. Re:Another Sign that... by d2_m_viant · · Score: 0

      the target for WW3 will be China. I give it, say, 30-50 years. Of course, if your Chineese, the target will be the U.S.

      China can't compete militarily with the United States. Even 30 years from now, our technology is so much more sophisticated than theirs, it would be suicidal. They outnumber us in manpower by a huge ratio, but then so did Iraq, and so does North Korea. Both of which have (or soon will) get their asses buried in the dirt. You can be assured that both the Chinese and North Korean leaders were watching every second of our "shock and awe" campaign with a cold nervousness.

      Unless China wanted to take it nuclear in a war against us (which is not really a viable option if they want their country to survive), China's only weapon against us is their economy. However, economically, China is just as dependent on the United States as the US is on them, so an economic threat could be vitally damaging to them as well.

      China realizes that their only hope at progressing as a country is to stay on the track they're on. This is why they're not risking alienation by siding with the North Koreans. As cliche as it is to hate the United States in this era, smart countries realize that it's entirely more beneficial to be on America's good side.

    2. Re:Another Sign that... by Bendebecker · · Score: 1

      Just wait till china invades Alaska and we annex Canada. War. War never changes...

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
  61. Execution?!?!? Yeah, first offense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wouldn't like to work over there, what with China's propensity to execute you for offenses that would get you less than 5 years in the rest of the world...

  62. Riiiight by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The evil communist Chinese geniuses planned this going back to Mao and continuing with the Gang of Four and Deng and so on. Keep the masses low in power so labor costs are low so we can sucker the western world into outsourcing and thereby lowering themselves economically by raising us economically.

    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.

    1. Re:Riiiight by cubicledrone · · Score: 1

      But outsourcing and offshoring are a natural result of a free market,

      Nope. Nothing free about it. We are stuck with artificially high prices and artificially low wages. In a truly free market, prices would have to drop to accomodate the spending ability of the median wage. Housing (just one example) is increasing at a 15% annual rate, while inflation is steady at 3%, and wage growth is at zero.

      Not a free market. Sorry.

      --
      Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
    2. Re:Riiiight by randall_burns · · Score: 1

      There is _nothing_ free market about the corporate welfare of H-1b/L-1 and huge trade deficits facilitated with a $0.5 Trillion annual governmental deficit financed largely with foreign borrowing.

      H-1b/L-1 expansion are a bigger factor in US tech unemployment than outsourcing. Just look at the numbers. These policies mean that any company can offer what amounts to a "sign on" bonus paid for at the expense of the public(and US programmers in particular). If US citizenship could be bought it would _still_ be valuable-despite the best efforts of congress. So if a company can dangle US citizenship in front of a potential employee-at no cost to the company-there is a clear conflict of interest.

      Stop worshipping the corporate cheats!

    3. Re:Riiiight by demachina · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "planned this going back to Mao and continuing with the Gang of Four and Deng and so on"

      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 natural parts of a free market."

      If it were a truly free market I might agree with you but it isn't.

      Exhibit A the Chinese manipulate their currency and peg it at an artificially low rate so their labor and goods are inherently cheaper, at least until they've destroyed all their competition. Thats who you win an economic war, just like Microsoft did, you undersell all your competition until they collapse and when they are gone you can charge as much as you feel like. If you want free markets the first prerequisite is the Chinese have to let their currency float so the markets decide what their currency, goods and labor are worth.

      Exhibit B if you want free markets that are sane they have to respect intellectual property. They don't, they routinely reverse engineer machinery designed at considerable expense by others, sell knock offs at a fraction of the price and put the company that designed the product out of business. They also look the other way when software and media are pirated wholesale.

      I'm sorry friend but you really are a sucker to think that what is happening is just A-OK. You've fallen for globalization propaganda. Globalization benefits multinational corporation, its going to lead to devastation for working people. Sure you can buy stuff cheap at Walmart but that won't help if your unemployed or getting an ever declining wages and benefits. Fact is nations exist to insure the economic well being of their citizens. There is no rule that says you have to put all the working people in your country in to poverty in the name of globalization. Trade barriers were there to prevent other countries from dumping, and economic manipulations that would otherwise allow them to destroy your economy.

      As for your delusion that it makes the world safe from war, just wait till you see the kind of blackmail leverage the Chinese will have on the West when they can destroy Western economies just by shutting off the container ship traffic, and have a massive pool of U.S. dollars that can be used to destabilize the U.S. economy. If the Chinese want to regain control of Taiwan, they will soon have the leverage to do it without firing a shot. The Chinese are also working towards a position of economic dominance that can be coupled with, not instead of a powerful military. They will soon have the money and technology to build weapons that match those of the U.S. and combine that with 5 fold more boots to put on the ground.

      --
      @de_machina
    4. Re:Riiiight by timeOday · · Score: 1
      Repeat: outsourcing and offshoring are natural parts of a free market.
      You stop there as if that's the end of the matter. As if the point of our government were to serve the ideology of free market capitalism instead of serving the citizens.

      Yes, I agree in the long run that free markets and benefitting citizens are largely aligned, but not completely, especially in the short run. Capitalism is policy, not natural law, and simply arguing that something is a free market phonomenon doesn't automatically justify it.

      You know what I like best about having a global economy? It encourages cooperation and reduces the chances of war.
      Makes you wonder how Iraq could be so messed up, with the billions of barrels of oil we bought there.

      Still it's an interesting point. Given our dependence on China, can we afford to promote freedom in Taiwan?

    5. Re:Riiiight by randall_burns · · Score: 1

      The fact that housing increases faster than wages is just what Henry George predicted over 100 years ago. George was an interesesting character that advocated a free market in labor and taxation of landed property and monopolies.

    6. Re:Riiiight by randall_burns · · Score: 1

      On top of this is the fact that the US dollar is the reserve currency for many banks world wide-which means the US government has a lot more capacity to borrow than any other. The current madness is driven by borrowed money and politicians willing to sell their offices for campaign donations.

    7. Re:Riiiight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sooner or later they will realize that huge primitive army is best converted to gainful employment.

      No way in hell. Go smoke another bong kid.
    8. Re:Riiiight by sgt_doom · · Score: 0

      Kindly explain to this person - and the rest of the /.ers - what does the offshoring of as many American (and European and Japanese) jobs have to do with the free market???? What does the offshoring of American jobs have to do with trade???? And maybe you should take a break and read up on the classical French economist, Jean-Baptiste Say, so you might better understand the realm of macroeconomics.

    9. Re:Riiiight by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Let's see, the US has never manipulated its currency, has always respected intellectual property, has never reverse engineered anynody else's products .... like I said, riiiight.

      Besides, most intellectual property isn't. Only suckers for corporate welfare believe that particular slice of propaganda.

      And you are some kind of blowhard if you think I like what's going on. If you read that from my rant, it's because you wanted to, not because I said it.

      And war? Seems to me that the 60 years since the end of the last global war have been a lot more peaceful than almost any other period in history.

      Queen Victoria's reign was pretty peaceful unless you count massive colonization as lopsided war.

    10. Re:Riiiight by demachina · · Score: 1

      "Let's see, the US has never manipulated its currency, has always respected intellectual property, has never reverse engineered anynody else's products .... like I said, riiiight."

      The U.S. buys and sells dollars like every country does, it is a free market currency so you do that. China PEGS their currency. It is the ultimate manipulation. It completely prevents any market forces from adjusting it. There isn't any comparison.

      The U.S. had intellectual property rights as does most of the Western world. They actually do try to enforce them. Reverse engineering and IP theft is rampant in China. There isn't any comparison.

      I forgot to mention China's workers are also decidedly unfree so they have very little ability to fight for better working conditions, benefits and salaries. It makes them look great to businessmen looking for cheap subservient labor but its not a free labor market.

      At this point you seem to be to dumb to argue with.

      "Seems to me that the 60 years since the end of the last global war have been a lot more peaceful than almost any other period in history."

      You also seem to have no graspe of modern history. There has been one proxy war after another. since the end of World War II, Korea, Vietnam for 30 years, Afghanistan multiple times, Yuogoslavia multiple times, Arab Israeli multiple times, Iran-Iraq, Iraq-Kuwait, India-Pakistan, two invasions of Iraq, Panama, Grenada, and civil wars across the globes. The only reason there hasn't been a global war was because the U.S., the U.S.S.R, Britain and France and China have nuclear weapons. It had NOTHING to do with globalization or economics. Again you have no clue what you are talking about.

      Later dude.

      --
      @de_machina
    11. Re:Riiiight by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      A bunch of countries around the world peg their currency to the almighty US dollar.

      As for the US protecting IP, first is the assumption that IP really is P, and it certainly isn't the way the US over-enforces it and pressures other countries to copycat our rampany Disney-led control of it. Then you might want to check your own history, and the US rampant copyright violations in the 1800s.

      Proxy wars? You compare them to massive wars like the ones that ravaged Europe twice in the 1900s and just about constantly prior to Waterloo in 1815? I think maybe you are the one lacking in historical knowledge.

  63. Obviously capital is immobile. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's why we still need more H1-B and L1 visas. So we can really smash the unions and establish one dollar, one vote government.

    Abolish Minimum Wage !!!

    Leave no billionaire behind !!!!

    Vote Republican !!!

  64. Not exactly by d2_m_viant · · Score: 0

    Or do they just like cellphones more than 'we' do? The US is traditionally slow in accepting new technologies. Whereas other countries are using cellphones for their normal household phones, Americans have not made that transition yet. I mean, c'mon, just recently they let you keep your number when switching phones. This trend can be likened to other fields as well. Look at South Korea's broadband infrastructure for example. Their country is one of the most sophisticated in the world, and the bandwidth that is available is eye-popping. Across the ocean, however, millions of Americans are still using dial-up to connect to AOL. It's quite pitiful, and although there are some legitimate reasons for it; as the biggest superpower in the world, we should be leading the pack in these technologies.

  65. Re:its about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Gunpowder. Rockets.

    That benefited humans.

  66. More likely to be the opposite by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

    More likely the Chinese government will be gradually wedged open by all the research requirements. A few exceptions here and there for foreign companies to conduct proper research and development. A few domestic partners let in on the uncensored web. A few party hacks wanting uncensored access. Pretty soon it will be the norm.

  67. Well well well... by geeveees · · Score: 1

    1) slashdot.org
    2) slashdot.jp
    3) slashdot.ch
    4) ???
    5) PROFIT (for china)!

    --
    I am a viral sig. Please help me spread.
    1. Re:Well well well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      slashdot.cn

    2. Re:Well well well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      slashdot.cn not ch

  68. Competition in Nano/Biotech can only be good!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Competition can only be a good thing (after all, it is what cpitalism is built on). 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, which can only be good for us all, because if you look at it, the leading edge baby-boomers are now, what, 58, just look at clinton, he is recovering from his heart operation, a lot of aging processes are driven by genetics, which, after all, is genetic programs (dna) operating in your cells, so understanding how the "small computers" and other mechanisms in our cells operate and how we can modify them, and in the future, how we can build our own cells from scratch, we can reverse aging and get true indefinite longevity. Countries like china and india have stated that they will be world leaders, after all, it took japan about 35 years to go from crappy car technology (1968 era) to the superpower it is today, 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, there are billions of people with a lot of money who do not what to get old, and countries that develop this technology will become the next world superpowers (biot/nano will be what the PC revolution was to silicon valley and the US economy of the late 70's, 80's and 90's), to develop these new technologies requires brainpower and both china and india have much more potential brainpower that for instance, the US has.

    1. Re:Competition in Nano/Biotech can only be good!! by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Competition can only be a good thing (after all, it is what cpitalism is built on).

      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.

    2. Re:Competition in Nano/Biotech can only be good!! by NewtonsUrge! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This comment really downplays America's consistent strength in innovation. If the kids are so smart, they wouldn't be running away from direct competition in the fields that matter the most for America's economic survival. They would instead be applying their brain power to developing the next best thing(s) as Americans always have.

      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 significantly larger quantities of illegal drugs than their Chinese and Indian counterparts because the hippie baby boomers have created a society (aggressively supported by their media monopoly) which promotes such behavior as the only way for a kid to be cool.

      When last was a high school chess champion the most popular kid in school? American culture has been engineered such that all kids are ensnared (when they are young and impressionable) by a media that programs them to want to become the next Eminem (or worse). It's really no suprise therefore that the Chinese and Indians are making the most of these opportunities, since their traditional cultures value intelligence and hard work, instead of superficial glitz.

      When the nation is full of kids who are all out to compete over who's the biggest thug in town, or who takes the most drugs, it leaves little room for legitimate competition in areas that will actually benefit their long term survival.

      Again this is the fault of the fcukin' hippies. You know it's true..

      --
      my other .sig is really witty
    3. Re:Competition in Nano/Biotech can only be good!! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Yeah, whatever. Hippie-ism has nothing to do with America's current culture of greed, laziness, and anti-intellectualism. Why is education, hard work, personal responsibility, and not maxing out your debt shunned by so many in society? I really don't know how we got this way, but I certainly don't blame it on a small movement that lasted a very short time in the 60's and 70's.

      This comment really downplays America's consistent strength in innovation.

      What innovation? Like Microsoft's "innovation" where they copy other people's inventions and claim to have invented them themselves?

      Yes, America was a big innovator in the early 1900's. Wake up! It's 2004 now! WWII is long since over, and America is not the same country now. America has slowly lost its innovation edge over the years, as corporations have grown ever larger. The only big "innovations" I see these days are companies figuring out new ways to screw over consumers with various sleazy business tactics. Spam is a great example of this, since most of it originates in the US (according to various reports).

    4. Re:Competition in Nano/Biotech can only be good!! by NewtonsUrge! · · Score: 1, Insightful


      What innovation? Like Microsoft's "innovation" where they copy other people's inventions and claim to have invented them themselves?

      Grishnakh, in case you hadn't noticed those "other people" were also mostly Americans, and their innovations occured within the past 15 years (not 1900 like your dream world tells you). With your own lifetime you have seen a more rapid pace of innovation than has ever been the case in world history, and America has been the source of most of these. Like I said.. America has a consistent strength in innovation, and is the predominant R&D player on the global scene. Hence the reason that China and India are playing "catch up". My point is that Americans cannot be complacent about this incredible legacy, and the culture must not be so negative toward those which have been the most siginificant contributors to our success. Check out the 1900s/2000s section of the following list for some irrefutable evidence proving my point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Notable_Innov ation

      --
      my other .sig is really witty
    5. Re:Competition in Nano/Biotech can only be good!! by NewtonsUrge! · · Score: 0

      Here's a list of computing pioneers for your perusal:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Computer_pio neers

      --
      my other .sig is really witty
    6. Re:Competition in Nano/Biotech can only be good!! by Zilfondel2 · · Score: 1

      Dude, I already bought my tickets to Europe. Maybe I'll be able to marry a nice European chick when I get there.

      =)

      here's hoping!

    7. Re:Competition in Nano/Biotech can only be good!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess the article is just selling 'fear'.

      1) China simply will not be the technology innovation powerhouse in the future. Not given the current set of social conditions. If nothing changes now, China will have an social unrest of scale none seem before in 5 to 10 years time.

      Why? Major reasons are: wide-spread corruption and near bankrupt social security, health care and banking system. The whole society is now held togther by brute force.

      (Remember that India/Pakistan almost come to a brink of war? Developing countries simply do not have the social stability.)

      2) Culturally they do not have the level of professionalism of else where. It is not uncommon that an engineer works for a foreign firm and steal all the secret and backmail the firm.

      3) Look at Olympic Game you will also see a trend. A trend that due to spread of technology, many countries has started to do pretty well comparing USA. USA is still big, but downfall it appears because of the rise of the other, due to the free flow of knowledge via the internet. You cannot stop others form getting smarter, right?

      I'd worry more about Eastern European and Russian. They rock! :-)

  69. Little misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Quoted in italics from the article:

    But he said 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.

    There is no research to back this up. It is Dr. von Zedtwitz opinion. Just like experts say.

    Recently, Oracle opened a lab in Beijing to tailor its Linux operating software to suit its Asian customers.

    And experts (like me) say other mature companies are writing products by Chinese for Chinese because it is lucrative market. Some may call this research. I don't.

    The article has little hard facts; mostly opinions, speculation and optimism of Chinese. I saw no quotes from Microsoft or Oracle.

  70. That's what outsourcing will do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you think the Chinese haven't been paying attention when foreign manufacturers set up a factory in China to take advantage of cheap labor?

    It's the best way to learn - copy other manufacturing processes and see what is going on.

  71. Re:its about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok... now give us some examples of stuff that has benefitted humans. Oh yes... paper money.

  72. Re:its about time... by StandardDeviant · · Score: 1

    And toilet paper!

    I think not having itchy bums from using things like corn husks and such has probably contributed more to world peace than any other single human invention. ;)

  73. microsoft at 2004 siggraph by peter303 · · Score: 2

    I was impressed with the number MicroSoft Asia authors at the 2004 SIGGRAPH Meeting in Los Angeles last month. Something like 12% of the papers. Its very hard to get a paper accepted at that meeting- over 80% are rejected.

    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.

  74. MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More heat than light.

  75. The rest of the story by Brandybuck · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Here's the rest of the story. One of those multinationals listed bought my company three years ago. Then last year they started bragging up their Asia division, and hinting that we were the bad guys because we weren't coming out with innovative products like they were. Well we finally got one of those "innovative" products in the shop and started poking into it. Turns out it was essentially *OUR* old product with a new skin!

    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.

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  76. INDUCE innovation to go overseas. by dpilot · · Score: 1

    Then add the INDUCE act, and the chilling effect it will have on new products, and there will be even *more* incentive to do business in China, including R&D.

    Example: You invent the new Gizmo, and it starts to look like a market success. But then someone discovers that you can use it to store/swap music. Then it comes to the attention of the RIAA, who notifies the DA that the Gizmo has become a "criminal copright-breaking device." Litigation time!

    Instead: Do all of the R&D in China. Sell in China, export to the US. When threatened in the US under INDUCE, simply withdraw Gizmo from the US market. Is the US market worth the legal hassles? If need be for additional protection, make sure Gizmo is developed and manufactured by a corporate shelter of some sort in China. Then the US company "just" markets it, and can completely disassociate itself from the product. I presume investment/ownership of the shelter company can be properly hidden by the right legal constructs.

    Still, the net effect is that innovation has been driven out of the US. Voting this morning was really tough, because Leahy was in the Primary this morning, and I had to decide between the lesser of two evils, the INDUCE Act or giving up a senior spot on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

    --
    The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  77. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yea. You're right. I would rather live in a country on the bottom of the ladder than on the top of it. I mean, who would want to live in the best country in the world?

  78. What do you expect? by Colonel+Panic · · Score: 1

    The US is 'investing' (wasting) $200+Billion on a senseless war in Iraq while China is investing Billions on R&D.

    Ridiculous software/tech patents are costing the US Billions in litigation not to mention the stiffling effect on innovation.

    The US K-12 education system is a mess, while the Chinese consistently score much higher in math & science tests.

    Nations rise and fall. Look at the long view of history. Go back one or two thousand years and you'll find that China was on top then when Europe was in the dark ages. We had our time in the Sun, maybe it's just about over.

  79. kent brockman... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I for one welcome our new overlords"

  80. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "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."

    You make me SICK.... America IS the greatest country in the world. First off, for being one of the youngest countries in the world, we have the oldest and longest standing Constitution in existance. I agree the US isn't perfect. But what entity or individual is? For you to come out and say America isn't the BEST country in the world is blasphemy. Go to China were you cant view all the pr0n you want. Or Russia with its wishy washy and highly secretive (more than ours) government. Or Ruwanda were kids 10 yrs old are being given assault weapons to go kill people. Or...... well, I could go on forever. Anyway, go blow smoke up someone else's a$$ because I don't want to hear it, commie bastard!!!!

    P.S. The United States of America gives more money to countries around the world than all the rest of the countries combined. If that isn't "worldly" I don't know what is, so SHUT UP!!!

  81. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And maybe then, people in the US will FINALLY realize that the US is not the center of the universe.

    Until it comes time to feed people. Or dispense medicine and disease control. Or clothing. Or low-cost housing. Or disaster assistance. Or investment. Or literacy and education projects. Or environmental cleanup projects. Or public works projects. Or farming.

    But we still suck, right?

  82. Atheism and Environmental Law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fact that China is officially atheist and has little to no regulations protecting the environment has to help industry immensely. They don't have to deal with Christian morals and don't need to have environmentally friendly processes.

    1. Re:Atheism and Environmental Law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christian morals?

      Like the "Screw the environment, it's all going up in flames anyway when Armageddon comes" idea so beloved of the Religious Wrong?

  83. Language by thoughtprocessor · · Score: 1

    China has the largest contigious block of people all speaking a couple of languages with mandarin being the most widely spoken in the world. This information network is not readily accessable by others, as few westerners speak chinese. China has a longer continious history than europe, streching back many thousands of years and dynasties. China's economic growth cannot and will not grow at the current rate for ever. The way to compete is not to create barriers amoung ourselves but to lower them in every market. Our strongest companies which play to our strengths will survive. software patents are undeniable evil. They are a contrivence fabricated by lawyers for large corporations to use to stop other companies. Other companies which will not now be the apples and microsofts and ibms of tomorrow. I long for the day when lawyers are not admired but as they were in the past seen as parasites who live off of human conflict. These people do not create anything. Society always follws cycles and eventually this dispisal will return. There must be a greater degree of integration between english speaking countries, including as a second language to provide a polar to china. india is not so much of a threat because the many different languages. the eu, nafta, and various affiliates should all lower barriers between each other, and most importantly stop frivilous patents. Patents were intended to act as a stimulous for research. so that a company or individual could be rewarded for creating something, for investing in something. instead it is being used by american corporations to stifle competition and innovation. This is encouraged by the republican government in my opinion. (A government which is a caraciture of all that is greedy, glutonous and to be depised in american society imho) I hope there is reform and enlightenment in your truly great country for without it i fear your slow gradual decline. Concerned brit.

    1. Re:Language by Bendebecker · · Score: 1

      A government which is a caraciture of all that is greedy, glutonous and to be depised I got news for ya, brit. Both parties are like that. They just pretend not to be when their guys aren't in office.

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
  84. "You killed Mao-bel!!!" by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Always remember to mount a scratch research assistant.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  85. Read more carefully. by Rufus88 · · Score: 1


    I can't think of a single thing to date the chinese have ever created that has benifited humans.

    Gunpowder.


    He said " benefitted humans".

    1. Re:Read more carefully. by MonkeyCookie · · Score: 1

      Gunpowder has been kind of a mixed bag. It's been used to kill lots of people, but it's also been essential in the industrial era for use in mining, construction, and other areas that benefit society.

      Alfred Nobel, the founder of the Nobel Peace prize also invented nitroglycerin, which is commonly used in explosives that kill people. He intended it to be used as a safer way of digging tunnels than gunpowder explosives, which could be unstable. Unfortunately, people used it to kill other people as well, and he earned a reputation as making money off of death. One newspaper referred to him as a "merchant of death". Not wanting to be remembered that way, he founded the Nobel Peace Prizes to promote peaceful endeavours.

      Do keep in mind that if we didn't have gunpowder, we'd be happily killing each other with other methods. Most of the mass-killings in Rwanda were accomplished with machetes.

    2. Re:Read more carefully. by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I've been living in America too long and I seem to have ended up thinking that guns make people safer.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
  86. Re:Just move by Tyler+Durden · · Score: 1

    Maybe because if everybody who dared think there might be something wrong with the country moved it would never improve?

    --
    Happy people make bad consumers.
  87. Sounds like by glass_window · · Score: 1

    Advanced technology research = Programing

  88. Worker's Paradise by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1, Troll

    While China climbs the tech ladder to success and power, America is climbing down into a miasma of faith and innuendo. Isn't it wierd how President Bush Sr. went from Nixon's UN ambassador to his GOP Chairman spinmaster to his China ambassador to CIA director to VP to President, then finally director of the giant multinational Carlyle Group as his son presided over the greatest transfer of wealth and power from the US to China? This will be a swell nation of bucolic christian farmers growing feasts for the Chinese mobsters running the globe, and the Bushes will have reaped a healthy reward.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  89. Re:its about time... by freedom_india · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I recall a TIME special magazine 1995 which was devoted to China as a whole: it says Gunpowder, Rockets, Dams, Silk, Tea, Finance, Strategies for War, Papyrus, Writing, Commerce, Printing, Banking was invented by China long before Europeans came down from trees, and long before US of A existed.
    Don't show your ignorance of the world by mimicking Dubya. You are neither the President, nor his Lackey.

    --
    "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
  90. What? by MarkusQ · · Score: 1

    In a truly free market, prices would have to drop to accomodate the spending ability of the median wage. Housing (just one example) is increasing at a 15% annual rate, while inflation is steady at 3%, and wage growth is at zero.
    Huh? On what planet? The free market doesn't have to accomodate anyone. If the cheapest suplier isn't willing to sell for a price the highest bidder is willing to pay, guess what? No money changes hands and there's no deal. End of story. The "seller" isn't obligated to sell anything he doesn't want to, and the "buyer" isn't required to buy anything if they think the price is too high.

    That's the whole point.

    -- MarkusQ

    1. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If the cheapest suplier isn't willing to sell for a price the highest bidder is willing to pay, guess what? No money changes hands and there's no deal. End of story."

      That's called a total economic collapse.

    2. Re:What? by cubicledrone · · Score: 1

      Huh? On what planet? The free market doesn't have to accomodate anyone.

      It has to accomodate demand. When wage growth is at zero, price growth MUST BE at zero or the economy will eventually be unsustainable. That's first week Economics class.

      If the cheapest suplier isn't willing to sell for a price the highest bidder is willing to pay, guess what? No money changes hands and there's no deal.

      Lather, rinse, repeat. Company goes out of business.

      The "seller" isn't obligated to sell anything he doesn't want to, and the "buyer" isn't required to buy anything if they think the price is too high.

      That works for television sets. Housing and food are necessities. The average wage-earner cannot afford housing. Why not? Why is housing beyond the reach of the average employed person? Simple. It ain't a free market.

      --
      Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
    3. Re:What? by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 2, Insightful

      price growth MUST BE at zero or the economy will eventually be unsustainable

      "Free-market" does not imply sustainability.

    4. Re:What? by MarkusQ · · Score: 1

      If the cheapest suplier isn't willing to sell for a price the highest bidder is willing to pay, guess what? No money changes hands and there's no deal. Lather, rinse, repeat. Company goes out of business.

      That happens in a free market. Comapnies go out of business. Whole industries dry up an blow away. The last slide rule manufacturer closed up shop over a decade ago. The free market didn't raise a finger to stop it, nor, by definition, should it have.

      That works for television sets. Housing and food are necessities.
      In what sense? People existed long before there were houses. There are many people in America that can't aford houses right now. Same with packaged food. In a totally free market, some people will die of starvation and/or exposure; there's nothing about free market economics to say otherwise, your "first week" quip notwithstanding.

      -- MarkusQ

      P.S. I also dispute your claim that the average wage earner can't afford housing. Since wage distribution in the US roughly follows Boltzman's law, this would mean that the vast majority of americans would be homeless. Surely someone would have noticed.

  91. What about the Green by phobos13013 · · Score: 2

    Being as rampantly anti-american as i am (aka liberal) i welcome a future challenge to american political/economic hegemony. But looking at China's environmental history as evidinced in this book, including the mass devastation that occured in the three gorges dam project and the fact that China has allowed for themselves to become a major tech dumping ground for the worlds unwanted 386s and floppy drives and the like as became big news over two years ago. Perhaps this isnt the best thing for China and the worlds environmental health. Lets hope China's future bring both technological revolution and acknowledgement of environemtal respect!

    --
    ...and it should be known by now
  92. *YAWN* by Stickerboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...and in other news, the USSR surpassed the US in aerospace science and technology in the 1950s with the launch of Sputnik. Experts predict that the Soviet emphasis on technical education and its outstanding ability to centrally marshal resources to a purpose mean grave times ahead for the US.

    Five decades later, where would you rather be living? The former Soviet Union, or the US?

    --
    Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
  93. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Vancorps · · Score: 3, Insightful
    You can't possibly be serious. First of all, the reason the U.S. grew up so fast was because we cooperated, we put protections in place and built off of them. Now for France, what was D-Day all about? The reason the U.S. has always been a technological super power is because everyone from all those other countries immigrated here and contribute both to our culture and the technology base. We have all the same advantages of people from other countries because we have those very same people.

    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.

  94. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by gosand · · Score: 1, Flamebait
    You make me SICK.... America IS the greatest country in the world. First off, for being one of the youngest countries in the world, we have the oldest and longest standing Constitution in existance. I agree the US isn't perfect. But what entity or individual is? For you to come out and say America isn't the BEST country in the world is blasphemy. Go to China were you cant view all the pr0n you want. Or Russia with its wishy washy and highly secretive (more than ours) government. Or Ruwanda were kids 10 yrs old are being given assault weapons to go kill people. Or...... well, I could go on forever. Anyway, go blow smoke up someone else's a$$ because I don't want to hear it, commie bastard!!!! P.S. The United States of America gives more money to countries around the world than all the rest of the countries combined. If that isn't "worldly" I don't know what is, so SHUT UP!!!

    Thank you for illustrating my point perfectly.

    You read what you wanted to read, and missed the last half of that sentence where I said "and that it always will be." I DISTINCTLY put that in there. I never said this country wasn't great. But pride goeth before a fall, and there were many many more great civilizations before use that were around much longer. There is a good reason they aren't still around today. But you miss that point. You call me a commie because you are an ignorant, jingoistic fool. You say what I said is blasphemy, which is EXACTLY the point I was trying to make, yet I am sure you don't see why calling it blasphemy is making my point. You see donating money as being worldly.

    I keep trying to think that people like you don't exist, and that there is hope for this country.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  95. Teller and Oppenheimer. by Trespass · · Score: 1

    By proxy, of course. :P

  96. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Vancorps · · Score: 2
    Ouch, should have ready that before submitting.

    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.
  97. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by gosand · · Score: 1
    Yea. You're right. I would rather live in a country on the bottom of the ladder than on the top of it. I mean, who would want to live in the best country in the world?

    Did you ever think that our superiority complex may knock us down a few rungs on that ladder? They have moved a lot of our IT jobs overseas. Our manufacturing is already there for the most part. Now technology R&D? Pretty soon, we are going to be very dependent on other countries, and the tide may turn. Yes, we offer the world a lot. But we can't forget that we aren't the only country in the world. We can't treat other countries like they are beneath us, even if we are on top *for right now*. If the day comes when we aren't on top (and it will), then I can only hope that we have good international relations at the time.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  98. Re:its about time... by phobos13013 · · Score: 1

    All the U.S. has is nukes.

    About 10,000 to be exact... and we're finding more EVERYDAY!!!!

    --
    ...and it should be known by now
  99. Haven't we seen this before? by Kphrak · · 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.

    --

    There's no sig like this sig anywhere near this sig, so this must be the sig.
    1. Re:Haven't we seen this before? by Bendebecker · · Score: 1

      They cite instances of Japanese failed loans as evidence that such central stimulus is prone to terrible consequences. In reality, despite a "slumping economy," by all meaningful measures Japan is one of the most prosperous nations in the world having a tremendous trade surplus each year with the US, China, and Europe. It is a country that accounts for 1/3 of the entire world savings (meaning reinvestment as opposed to wealth eroding consumption) each year (at a world beating rate of 15% of GDP) compared to a US level of 1.7% in 1999 (the lowest level since the great depression). It is a country that holds more than 1/3 of our US national (government) debt. According to the IMF, Japan's net foreign assets have quadrupled in the last 12 years and their current account surpluses in the 1990's were 2.4 times that of the 1980's. Its so-called "huge" and oft misquoted internal government debt is financed almost entirely by the Japanese themselves and on a "net" basis is actually quite marginal considering that much of this debt goes towards the purchase of US government bonds (i.e. the Japanese government borrows money from its people to purchase US debt securities). Japan is a net creditor country, with tremendous industry, that does not rely at all on internal consumer spending for its economy, and has managed to accomplish all of this while being smaller than the state of California, having 86% unusable land, whose only natural resources are fish, and a country within 50 years of complete decimation following World War II.

      In the 1980's there was tremendous concern among Reagan administration officials that the US was losing its competitive position in the world. Reagan enacted numerous protectionist policies in an effort to stem the hemorrhaging trade deficit. Media attention was centered on a doomsday scenario whereby Japanese and Arab interests would come to own and control everything in this country. "Fortunately" for America, Japan's economy suffered a supposed devastating meltdown following a series of failed loans, a stock market crash, and a burst real estate bubble. Twenty years later, however, Japan's economy is stronger than ever. As noted elsewhere, its assets have quadrupled in the same period and its dominance of global industries is now unparalleled and unquestioned.


      http://www.economyincrisis.com/index.php?module= fe atured&function=disp&aid=322

      It's like the rainforest - the problem didn't go away, in fact its probably worse. It's just we stopped paying attention to it.

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
    2. Re:Haven't we seen this before? by Kphrak · · Score: 1

      Anything impartial to back your post up? An editorial from "economyincrisis.com", basically an anti-free-trade and anti-foreign-import site from my reading of its solutions, is not a particularly good counterargument. Just sayin'...

      --

      There's no sig like this sig anywhere near this sig, so this must be the sig.
    3. Re:Haven't we seen this before? by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 1

      An alternative to recognize is that the Chinese have learned from the Japanese's mistakes. A bonus is that North Korea isn't threatening to launch nukes @ them...

      --
      [o]_O
    4. Re:Haven't we seen this before? by dcmeserve · · Score: 2
      ...you might remember another Asian economy that was steamrolling us...[Japan]

      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 -- the fledgling U.S. vs. England, early-to-mid 1800's. The British Empire had made all sorts of advances in manufacturing (textiles, etc.), but the U.S. leapfrogged them, leveraging the known technology. And the U.S. had maybe 2-3x England's population at the time (I'd need to check on that, but suffice to say it was significantly more).

      --
      "Orthodoxy is unconsciousness" - Orwell
    5. Re:Haven't we seen this before? by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      An alternative to recognize is that the Chinese have learned from the Japanese's mistakes.
      Um, no, they haven't learned a god damned thing from Japan. China's rise is following in Japan's footsteps from the getting started in cheap manufacturing exported to the US to rising up the food chain to moving into R&D, right down to the bad loans. Japan's economic bubble collapsed because of too much speculation, right now in China, there is too much speculation.....

    6. Re:Haven't we seen this before? by sgt_doom · · Score: 0
      As an individual who welcomed the competition of the Japanese - and please understand the difference between healthy competition between the Japanese corporations and the deconstructing of our culture, country and economy by the offshoring of American jobs (a process which began several years after the assassination of John F. Kennedy - I shall make no comment on that coincidence here).

      And again - please read the article prior to commenting - virtually the top R & D (that's research and development, in case you haven't figured it out yet) jobs have been shipped there from the top American, Japanese and Euro corporations. The Chinese have had one of the top missile and space programs on the planet - far outstripping the Japanese, and not that far behind - and some might suggest equal to - the Russians and their vacuum-tube space tech.

      This is a serious situation that will end this country and any chance at any form of democracy.

    7. Re:Haven't we seen this before? by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 1

      It was an idea. At some point though, someone is gonna learn from something, and then we're fucked. In the meantime, we should be planning for the future...

      --
      [o]_O
  100. Hmm .. by ReidMaynard · · Score: 1
    Above, Zhang Benyu works in a lounge.

    Zhang Benyu looks like he's busy posting to /. to me.

    --
    -- www.globaltics.net

    Political discussion for a new world

  101. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Bendebecker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What is happening is China is growing strong off of us. It's like a parasite, its sapping our current power to feed its own. The big shift your thinking about? That will be the end, when China no longer needs us and drops us like a hot potato. Just look at the currencies - if the chinese ever decide to stop tying their currency to the dollar and instead decides to fly on their own, our currency will plummet and theirs will skyrocket. They are in a much better economic position than we are. Much better and it will only get better as time progresses. So why don't they drop us? Because they still need us. A lot of people have fooled themselves into thinking that they will always need us. They can't imagine a global economic model were we are not the center of the universe. Right now, we are the only market capable of absorbing the amount of goods China wants to sell. That's all we are to the chinese: customers. We aren't business partners, I don't understand why people can't get that through their skulls. There was a time when china's economy was dependent on what we did. In five years, that will no longer be the case. In five years, their economy will be the one in control. Yet our politicians have fooled themselves into thinking we will always be the dominant economy (even as it shifts towards China). In 1996 my global studies teacher said that when China awoke as an industrial power, watch out because unless we were real careful we wouldn't even stand a chance of competeing with them. We have elected people that not only don't realize the extent of the problem, they refuse to acept the problem even exists. I know its cliched to say so but there is a parrellel here with ancient Rome in one respect. The ancient Romans believed that Rome was invincible and eternal. They were sure of it. When Alaric and the goths sacked Rome in the 300's AD, it almost caused the collapse of their society. Now 1700 years later, we find ourselves in a similiar situation. Everyone thinks the US is invincible and eternal. I can't wait till the chinese prove us wrong, this time not through military actions but economic conquest. Its funny really, we invented economic imperialism (the concept that if you control a country's economy, you in effect control the country without ever having to put a man on the ground.) Now we find the chinese using our own tactics against us.

    --
    There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
    most of us won't be able to afford it.
    -- Lemmy
  102. Literacy rate finding somewhat deceptive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see this admittedly shocking figure thrown around a lot, but I think if you actually take the time to look closely at the study you'll find that the literacy rate in LA among English speaking (meaning English as a first language) residents is higher than 53 percent.

    The study takes into account the entire population of LA. This means immigrants (legal and illegal) who can't read English (but may be literate in there own language) are counted as illiterate.

    1. Re:Literacy rate finding somewhat deceptive by cubicledrone · · Score: 1

      I see this admittedly shocking figure thrown around a lot,

      Yeah. Study was published last week.

      but I think if you actually take the time to look closely at the study you'll find that the literacy rate in LA among English speaking (meaning English as a first language) residents is higher than 53 percent.

      Ok. Doesn't change anything. Half the people in L.A. can't read.

      --
      Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
    2. Re:Literacy rate finding somewhat deceptive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you really mean is - can't read english - they can read their native languages just fine I bet.

  103. Re:its about time... by dutky · · Score: 4, Informative
    Some anonymous (and abyssmally ignorant) coward wrote:
    i can't think of a single thing to date the chinese have ever created that has benifited humans

    How aboutfor starters?
  104. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

    Yes, we offer the world a lot.

    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.

  105. IQ testing considered harmful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Microsoft began to realize we can't find all the talented people in the U.S.," he said. Pointing outside, he added: "Nowhere in this universe has a higher concentration of I.Q. power."

    I'm sorry, but this retarded.

    1. Scores for IQ tests are centered based upon fitting the results of an unbiased sample of a population to a normal distribution.

    2. If for instance one were to take an English-biased IQ test and fit the results of testing 500M Chinese, there will still be 2% of 500M in the 98th percentile even if the results of the scoring for any one of those in the 98th percentile might result in a considerably poorer ranking when compared to data for people in the U.S.

    3. Applying this asinine normal distribution of a larger population => a larger quantity of high-IQ people, then of course the correct place to look for talent would be "Earth," because "Earth," has >7B humans whereas China itself only has >1B humans and as such fitting the results of the entire human population to the normal curve will result in a larger crop of people to employ.

    4. This is giving them the benefit of a doubt and presuming that by 'concentration' he meant 'population' and not 'concentration,' because a normal distribution centered by the results of Chinese testing would give an equal concentration to the results of centering in any other nation, and if instead he meant measuring it by population density, it would place Monaco at the top of the list and China somewhere way down in the list.

    5. There's really no telling what the education level of someone in nth percentile for any normal distribution of test results will have, which would be far more important for producing results in industry that being able to rotate arbitrary geometric shapes in your head.

  106. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "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."

    Then clarify your sentance.....in its current form you are stating you're sick that everyone thinks the US will always be the greatest country. Open your Phonics book and learn some sentance structure. If what you said in reply to my response is true then you have contradicted yourself in that sentance. You must have "DISTINCTLY" put it in there to make yourself look like an ass. On to your next part....

    "there were many many more great civilizations before use that were around much longer"

    The fall of ancient civilizations don't apply in today's world. The Roman Empire fell because the outgrew their reach (I'm simplifying things)and couldn't defend their borders or control their "allies" within their territory, a problem we wouldn't encounter today with modern technologies. Other civilizations fell to famine or disease, neither of which hopefully won't apply in a modern, first world society.

    Please feel free to give me examples of countries who extend beyond their borders to help others more than we do and I will shut my mouth. I don't see the UN stepping into Afica to stop the bloodshed and people still bitch about the US not doing anything. The whold world needs to be more "worldly" not just one country. But I still hold my ground that the United States is the GREATEST country in the world. What is wrong with that belief anyway? Even if things aren't going as you or I would like the very ground this country was built on and its people (well most of them)are what make it the greatest country in the world.

    "You call me a commie because you are an ignorant, jingoistic fool"

    I called you a commie because because as an American it upsets me to see any American think otherwise. You SHOULD think the US is the greatest country in the world. If not, move to YOUR greatest country in the world.

  107. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Bendebecker · · Score: 1

    (Now with better formatting)

    What is happening is China is growing strong off of us. It's like a parasite, its sapping our current power to feed its own. The big shift your thinking about? That will be the end, when China no longer needs us and drops us like a hot potato. Just look at the currencies - if the chinese ever decide to stop tying their currency to the dollar and instead decides to fly on their own, our currency will plummet and theirs will skyrocket. They are in a much better economic position than we are. Much better and it will only get better as time progresses. So why don't they drop us? Because they still need us. A lot of people have fooled themselves into thinking that they will always need us. They can't imagine a global economic model were we are not the center of the universe.

    Right now, we are the only market capable of absorbing the amount of goods China wants to sell. That's all we are to the chinese: customers. We aren't business partners, I don't understand why people can't get that through their skulls. There was a time when china's economy was dependent on what we did. In five years, that will no longer be the case. In five years, their economy will be the one in control. Yet our politicians have fooled themselves into thinking we will always be the dominant economy (even as it shifts towards China). In 1996 my global studies teacher said that when China awoke as an industrial power, watch out because unless we were real careful we wouldn't even stand a chance of competeing with them. We have elected people that not only don't realize the extent of the problem, they refuse to acept the problem even exists.

    I know its cliched to say so but there is a parrellel here with ancient Rome in one respect. The ancient Romans believed that Rome was invincible and eternal. They were sure of it. When Alaric and the goths sacked Rome in the 300's AD, it almost caused the collapse of their society. Now 1700 years later, we find ourselves in a similiar situation. Everyone thinks the US is invincible and eternal. I can't wait till the chinese prove us wrong, this time not through military actions but economic conquest. Its funny really, we invented economic imperialism (the concept that if you control a country's economy, you in effect control the country without ever having to put a man on the ground.) Now we find the chinese using our own tactics against us.

    --
    There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
    most of us won't be able to afford it.
    -- Lemmy
  108. This could be good or bad by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

    It could be good because history has shown that there is nothing better for opening up a closed society than business. Trade has turned the former USSR into the USA's ally. Trade is what prompted the debate about normalizing US relations with Vietnam. So perhaps more trade with China will open up their society and lead to the easing of the restrictions placed upon their people.

    It could be bad in that these big corporations could get used to having slave labor. Don't mistake it, people in China are slaves. The country limits how many children you can have. They will use force to prevent you from having children. They don't allow people to decide for themselves what to do with the dead bodies of their loved ones.

    This could result in the exporting of all work to 3rd world countries. Instead of paying someone $36k per year, they can pay 36 people $1k per year. In Bangladesh, where people make nearly no money, this would be a fortune.

    I look at this with guarded optimism.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  109. Finger Traps by xombo · · Score: 1

    Now we can have Advanced Technocolgy Chinese Finger Traps with 128bit encryption sporting a 200mhz Dragonball Processor.

  110. Re:its about time... by Tyler+Durden · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ok, but besides gunpowder, rockets, astronomical records, the printing press, martial arts, paper money and toilet paper what have the Chinese ever done for us?

    Oh, and besides silk too.

    --
    Happy people make bad consumers.
  111. Research yes, human rights no by Emperor+Shaddam+IV · · Score: 1


    Execution for embezzling, a little harse, isn't it?

    http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/14/news/internation al /china_banks.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes

    1. Re:Research yes, human rights no by b1scuit · · Score: 1
      Agreed. But on the other hand, maybe people would, you know, not do it if they thought that if they got arrested, at least /something/ bad would happen to them.

    2. Re:Research yes, human rights no by Emperor+Shaddam+IV · · Score: 1

      Prison isn't already bad enough? Besides, China is executing people for non-violent crimes. Like fraud and accepting bribes. Thats a little harse, don't you think?

    3. Re:Research yes, human rights no by b1scuit · · Score: 1
      Oh, I'm not for killing people over this stuff. But while the punishments of these crimes are far too harsh in china, the punishments here are a bit too... adaptive for similar crimes, when you see what actually happens to the perpetrator.

      If a middle class man in china had broken into a bank in the middle of the night, and stolen 500,000 dollars (whatever that comes out to in chinese money), the chinese government would most likely kill the guy. And if someone steals 500,000 from a bank (or company, what have you) by embezzling it via some book cooking gets the same punishment, for stealing the same sum, and killing the same number of people in the process, with the main differences being the m.o. and (probably) the suspects social status.

      Now let's get on a plane and cross the ocean. A middle class man robs a bank in the middle of the night, and steals $500,000. Noone is killed. he goes to prison for (depending on the state) 20 to life. A man embezzles from a corporation $500,000. Noone is killed. Something tells me he won't be spending twenty years in a state pen. If he goes to jail at all, it'll most likely be medium/minimum security, and not a very long stay.

      If I had a good lawyer, I'd probably feel alright about embezzling 500 grand from a company. If I had a public defender, or even the kind of attorney one could get by mortgaging the house and selling the kids organs, I wouldn't stand a chance. At least china's punishments are consistent and don't get lighter (one should not be able to spend money to get a lighter sentence, which is how the whole lawyer thing tends to work) as the tax bracket gets bigger. I'm not saying that China is a shining example to follow, but at the same time our system needs enough work that I tend to hold of the "Gee, that's awful!" style statements. Stealing half a million dollars is stealing half a million dollars. If noone gets hurt, then I don't much care whether you used a computer or a drill and stethoscope... just that a half a million dollars was stolen, and that a half a million dollars worth of punishment should be doled out.

      Our system tends to have problems with that train of thought.

  112. Re:its about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spaghetti!!!

  113. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by HishamMuhammad · · Score: 1

    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.

    Was I the only one who read that as "over the last 30 years"? :)

    (and don't come telling me "yes, and that's what I meant"... :) )

  114. The new colonial powers? by samberdoo · · Score: 1

    Will the major corporations begin carving out territory now like the major governments did at the turn of the 20th century? We used Chinese labor to build our railroads and dig our mines, the only difference here is we are treating the workers slightly better. Many of these projects are not taking jobs away from Americans and will benefit the Chinese in the long run. I'm sure they'll do a good job. Wasn't one of the first UNIX programs "fortune"?

  115. Math by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    China has a billion poor people, just waiting to spend all their money on stuff

    And a billion times zero is?

    Unless you like to be paid in dirt.

    When a billion non-poor people are hoarding money to spend - then I can take the ecenomic potential a little more seriously.

    However, what that does represent is a great huge load of manpower that can be applied on projects of the governments choosing! It's so handy to have a billion slaves when you need to clean up a city for the Olympics, or other onerous tasks.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  116. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by michael_cain · · Score: 1
    And maybe then, people in the US will FINALLY realize that the US is not the center of the universe... 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.

    Yet, from an economic perspective, the US continues to be the center of the universe -- or at least the global economy on Earth. Last year, the US GDP was just about 25% of the world GDP. An even larger fraction of world economic growth for the past few years has been due to the US. The US has, for the most part, been quite willing to open its markets to foreign firms. To your point, Japanese auto makers led the way in developing reliable, well-engineered cars -- but would they have been able to do so without the US market in which to sell those cars? Much of the growth of the "Asian Tigers" has been possible because we were willing to buy their goods and services, to buy more from them than they were from us, effectively to share our wealth with them. It is interesting to note that when there were recent proposals to close US military bases in countries where their role has disappeared, the response was not "Thank goodness you're finally leaving!" but rather "Wait! We need you to keep spending that money in our country!"

    As The Economist has noted on numerous occasions, the world economy is FAR too dependent on the US for anyone's real good. Put it in an example: the US can live without motherboards from Taiwan or DVD players from China; we're perfectly capable of building them ourselves, even if that would make them somewhat more expensive; but Taiwan and China would be much more seriously hurt if the US quit buying those products. Until the US gets to quit being the market of last resort for everyone else, the US is going to be the dominant player in the world economy.

  117. air bags? anti-lock brakes?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is why my car can't fly?
    Fuck!
    Why didn't they ask me which one I wanted first?
    Hey seriously though, how come nobody is doing a gas turbine/electric hybrid? There wre already prototypes but gas was so cheap it didn't matter. I bet a little mini LPG turbine can produce way more electricity per gallon than an IC motor and the exhaust would be quite clean.

  118. China vs Gutenburg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're exaggerating when you say that the Chinese printing press was thousands of years before Gutenburg; it was hundreds. However, the printing press was the easy part. Gutenburg's great accomplishments were in creating type alloy (used through the 19th century) and special inks so that he could create an effective, re-usable movable type printing press.

    1. Re:China vs Gutenburg by Stephen+Ma · · Score: 1
      The original block printing press was invented during the Tang Dynasty, about 700 years before Gutenberg.

      The moveable-type printing press was also invented in China during the Song Dynasty (1040 AD). That's more than 400 years before Gutenberg.

      As far as I know, moveable metal type was used first in Korea, about a hundred years before Gutenberg.

  119. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by kabocox · · Score: 1

    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.

    Actually, we copied that from China. China doesn't care about the rest of the world though. It knows it is the best in the world. China has known this for centuries. The US hasn't been around very long. We only had the USSR as a serious global challenge. The USSR didn't even last a century. Remember, the rest of the world has nothing that China wants. Will the US last 2-3 more centuries?

  120. Re:its about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Restaurants?

    How could that ever be established?

    It seems to me, that a restaurant is any place where prepared (cooked) food is exchanged for money...I would assume this would have taken place when civilization had barely spread beyond the fertile crescent.

  121. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by gosand · · Score: 1
    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.

    Actually, I was thinking of food when I wrote that. We export a lot. We also offer business - as in we consume a lot of the world's products. We offer entertainment, although other countries can certainly survive without that.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  122. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The concept of China has always been sort of freely-defined. They've been overrun a time or two, balkanized and reformed in various ways, and have as amorphous a border as any nation in history.

    China may be an ancient state, but as a country or nation, it's not that old.

    One could make the case that Iraq or Egypt or India is far older.

  123. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

    That is true in terms of absolute dollars, but there are a lot of mitigating circumstances:

    1) The USA has a tax system that gives extremely favorable treatment to charitable donations. This reduces the net cost of the giving which is important when you are using the magnitude of giving to evaluate a characteristic like "generosity."

    2) 62% of charitable giving in the USA is done through organized religion -- that may or may not be bad - depending on how much "social engineering" that money is used for, but it can't be better than non-religious giving, so it is overall a negative characteristic compared to most other western countries were religiously affiliated giving is closer to 10% of the total.

    3) Excluding gifts to religious organizations and factoring in the value of volunteering at an hourly rate equal to the average joe in an average local job, the USA is behind the Netherlands, Sweden, Tanzania, France and Britain as a % of GDP.

    4) In terms of GDP, the percent or so that the USA leads the rest of the western world in giving is dwarfed by the difference in goverment spending on social welfare - for example in the USA, such goverment spending is 18% of GDP while in Britain it is 28%. USA giving, including religiously affiliated, was only about 2.3% of GDP and Britain's was about 0.8% of GDP.

    Reference for the quoted numbers comes from:

    http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_ id =2963247

    I realize that article probably costs money to access, but if you really think I made them up, pony up for a subscription, and find out for yourself -- it is worth it anyway.

  124. Which means bad news for the world. by Genjurosan · · Score: 1

    The unfortunate thing is that this means that the peace that the world has seen from the nuclear age will begin to end. The US isn't the center of the universe, true.. but it does have the most nuclear weapons. That's the entire problem.

    The idea of assured mutual destruction also includes a period of peace, then a period of nuclear holocaust because of the destabilization of the power that wins the battle. Ultimately the war will be lost.

    Hear that sucking sound? That's the money moving to china... or perhaps it's the sound of rockets fueling up.

  125. Re:its about time... by phobos13013 · · Score: 1

    About 10,000 to be exact ok im correcting my own lame statement even tho no one else prolly read it. No About 10,000 is not the exact number. :)

    --
    ...and it should be known by now
  126. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I cannot agree more. Just look at the history of Europe. During last 1500 years virtually any country there had a longer or shorter period where it was (local, but Europe==world for Europeans then) superpower. And every single one of them had fallen.

  127. What an insightful comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >do not like the US or Europe that much as, as soon as they can, they will rid themselves of us.

    Mr. Multi-National Force: when was the last time China invaded another country?

    1. Re:What an insightful comment by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      I didn't say invade. They could just stop selling to us and sell to the middle east and asia.

  128. History Repeats by argoff · · Score: 1

    Just renember that high tech German economy in 1935, and all those prestigious investors who put their money in it.

    One day we are going to half to learn the lesson that free markets are not about markets, but about freedoms. When you have freedoms, you get the growth AND the stability that won't lead to disaster down the road.

    And renember how we sold out on Austria to Germany, well lets renember Hong Kong for a minute here too.

  129. My recent China impressions by otisg · · Score: 1

    I went to China recently. Guandzhou, more precisely. A monster of a city. HUGE! More skyscrapers than in NYC (but mostly residential... which is actually scary).
    Anyhow, as I walked through Guangzhou downtown, which is full of tall, glass-and-steel office-space skyscrapers, I thought to myself: why don't U.S. companies (and not just the MSFTs, GOOGs, and ORCLs) come here and open offices? It would make their money last SO much longer.
    If I had a start-up, one of the things that I think I would do, is open an engineering office in China. Maybe even deeper in China, as people there are supposed to be even more hard-working than people in Canton. If my company was running on VC money, this would be a great move, IMHO.

    Why aren't more _young_ U.S. companies doing this?

    --
    Simpy
  130. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    I believe I mentioned food. That's our biggest natural resource, thanks to all the fertile land here.

    Consumption is not an offering; you need to have money to give the other countries if you want to buy their stuff. Money is just an exchange medium that removes the need for bartering directly, but in order to trade, you still have to have something of value to use in trade. If all your country is doing is consuming, and not supplying anything else, then your money will be worthless.

    A lot of our entertainment is actually coming from Canada (Vancouver specifically) because Hollywood is too overpriced. LOTR was made in New Zealand. We definitely don't have a monopoly on entertainment, but it is something I guess.

  131. Re:The irony: In Communist China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear god, it actually works. Never thought i'd see the day with that joke actually making sense.

  132. "Rich", by definition, can only be a MINORITY by Cryofan · · Score: 1

    Umm, by DEFINITION, only a small fraction of people can be "rich". Period.

    --
    eat shiat and bark at the moon
    1. Re:"Rich", by definition, can only be a MINORITY by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      Period.

      Nope. "Rich" means wealthier than average, but it's up to us what group that average is measured against. A poor American may have more money than a rich Chinese...

      In particular, if you choose definitions so that the poor aren't really human, then all humans can be rich.

      Or, against dead humans from earlier times. It's impossible for a majority of people to be tall, yet it's also true that USA residents have gotten much taller in the past 200 years.

  133. What is so good about having to work hard? by Cryofan · · Score: 1

    You would have loved it back in the slavery days...IF you were one of the top five percent who could afford to own slaves. Otherwise, it sucked. The poor whites had to compete with free slave labor, and the slaves had it worst of all.

    --
    eat shiat and bark at the moon
    1. Re:What is so good about having to work hard? by otisg · · Score: 1

      Ah, there are some good sides to working hard. I know I am working hard. I don't always enjoy it, but I am often happy with myself. In any case, what does this have to do with slavery?

      --
      Simpy
  134. Here's a great motivator. We'll shoot you by AppyPappy · · Score: 1

    BEIJING (Reuters) - China executed four people, including employees of two of its Big Four state-owned banks, for fraud totaling $15 million, the state Xinhua news agency said Tuesday.

    http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/14/news/internation al /china_banks.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes

    --

    If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem

  135. Indians have a slave mentality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And they are disunited based on caste, religion, language etc. Thats the reason India remains abjectly poor, malnourished and chaotic.

    India's leaders, who are mostly of the priestly or brahmin caste, are the most clueless, corrupt and delusional people on the planet.

  136. Re:its about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    While I am overall sympathatic to your point, it is far over-stated:

    From the websites you mentioned:
    "Arabic" numerals were developed in India. It is highly speculative that they were even inspired by something in China.

    Rice: "If these assumptions are correct, then domestication most likely took place in the area of the Korat or in some sheltered basin area of northern Thailand, in one of the longitudinal valleys of Myanmar's Shan Upland, in southwestern China, or in Assam. " From this how did you conclude rice developed in china?

    post office, restaurants & umbrellas??? That's very speculative.

    You did forget the compass which was invented in China. :http://nvnv.essortment.com/compasshistory_rumo.ht m

    Also the I think there was the water clock or something like that which was an important chinese invention.

    I agree that there is an euro-centric tendency to claim everything was invented in Europe. But balacing that with a Sino-centric is hardly any better.

  137. hmmmmm by orasio · · Score: 1

    Maybe Bush is not the one to blame in his crusades, but the (more than ) half-a-country that stands behind him (or at least does not stand against him, what equates to supporting him).

    The US (government, but in representation of its people) has promoted war in many places of the world, and that has been the source of wealth in the US. "Free trade", in the US sense of "freedom", is not opposed to war, military stuff can be traded too. Closed markets can be "liberated" with weapons.

  138. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by bit01 · · Score: 1

    Hollywood makes the USA visible but I wouldn't be so sure the USA is the "center". The USA doesn't have a monopoly on diversity and other good things. The USA's population is also only 4.6% of the world's population, by some measures statistically insignificant.

    Reminds me of Britain and the British Commonwealth, the empire where the sun never set, early in the last century. Britain had a policy of having a navy more than twice the size of the rest of the world put together. Look at where they are now.

    ---

    It's wrong that an intellectual property creator should not be rewarded for their work.
    It's equally wrong that an IP creator should be rewarded too many times for the one piece of work, for exactly the same reasons.
    Reform IP law and stop the M$/RIAA abuse.

  139. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Dire+Bonobo · · Score: 1
    > You might notice all of my references are dated in WW2 because the
    > current Bush administration is indeed what I would call a bully.

    I believe that's what the original poster was referring to.

    At least as I read his post, he was not saying that the US has always been arrogant, unworldly, and naive about change - he was saying that we are becoming complacent because our historical strengths have allowed us to be on top for so long. We're resting on our laurels, and that's a sure-fire way to be surpassed by someone who's still working full-bore.

    I believe the original poster's point was that the US is a great nation, but that can change if we get arrogant or foolish. Without a little bit of the perspective that humility brings, we might not see our own fall until it's already over, and nobody wants that.

  140. Re:its about time... by bitswapper · · Score: 1

    Tofu!

  141. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

    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.

    Pearl Harbor was a response to USA bullying Japan and blocking their petroleum importation, which was serious economic warfare.

  142. Ideograms in shell by KWTm · · Score: 1

    Actually, they're not as bad as you think. I set my locale to China and language to Chinese (Mandrake Linux v10). Directory listings and anything else with tables and column headings are aligned much more nicely because each heading is more or less the same length (2-3 Chinese words) rather than widely varying word lengths.

    --
    404555974007725459910684486621289147856453481154 in hex is "You sank my Battleship?"
    [GPG key in journal]
  143. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Vancorps · · Score: 1

    That was not how I read it but you may be right and in fact, I would hope you're right in your interpretation. It sounded a lot like drivel I see in parts of the country. I grew around it so I assumed. I know its wrong to assume things but it sure sounded like it. Don't like referring to an entire country based on the current administration. I think its terribly short sighted to assume that everybody thinks like Bush. Although considering his approval ratings it seems like many do.

  144. Am I the only one by waspleg · · Score: 1

    who keeps hearing the repeating chorus from the South Park episode with teh mormons? the one that plays DUMB, DUMBDUMB, DUMB over and over?

    hello? these are the CHINESE this is not taiwan they're not friendly to us they will take our manufacturering facilities and high tech and USE THEM AGAINST US, i'm sure that out of several billion people they're not all bad but the ones in power sure are (just like here)

    did we forget why we won ww2? an ocean and our manufacturing, guess what they have now

    oh well at least corporate greed will be the undoing of the land of the "free", delicious irony, i wonder what canada's like this time of year

  145. Re:its about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes. They also had the brilliant ideas like North Korea, the Cultural Revolution, and Tianamen Square. Every culture has its ups and downs. But with such an illustrious past you'd think China would be further ahead than they are now.

  146. Dependence on [greed] wasn't enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Then we had to extend that dependence to manufacturing by shipping our factories overseas and now we're shipping our brainshare to China as well. This is just f'ing brilliant."

    Of course it is.

  147. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Vancorps · · Score: 1
    If you want to play statistics then look at the composition of that 4.6%. It contains people from every country on the planet. Not one or two people either. The U.S. really is a melting pot. Ideas from every culture have constributed to become the society that currently exists. That does not say that certain aspects have more influence right now but the pieces are all there and the level of influence varies greatly.

    As for Britain, they dramatically underestimated the power of the rest of the world which is indeed a contributing factor. I don't believe the U.S. does that even though I do believe the current administration does.

  148. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Vancorps · · Score: 1
    Pearl Harbor was a declaration of war against the U.S.

    Until that time we did not fire a single shot at Japan even though we did withhold oil. Of course we did hold the oil for a reason and it was in response to Japan's actions elsewhere.

    Might also add that even if I ignored the above facts the U.S. did not get involved in the pacific in any meaningful way. We were expanding west and had no intention of fighting a war for land considering it was seen as a quest, not a mandate.
  149. "second only to the United States" by nusratt · · Score: 1

    "within five years China could overtake Britain, Germany and Japan as a base for corporate research, leaving it second only to the United States"

    Second? Not for long.
    Students have already seen the offshore handwriting on the wall, and have started bailing out of tech programs in droves.

  150. ohhhh, I dunno.... by zogger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...this baby boomer hippie was the second in my circle of friends and aquantainces to own a computer, the first with a lot of transceivers, and the first with alternate energy, I got solar PV panels and a wind genny.

    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.

  151. you have it exactly. by zogger · · Score: 1

    The chinese were pretty shrewd. They dangled the bait of what used to be called "two billion arm pits" out to the west, a billion consumers waiting to buy WESTERN goods. Ok, that was the plan. then china goes, "but first, we need to develop our economy so that we can buy from you, how about giving us A TRILLION DOLLAHS OF FREE EVERYTHING first"

    OK, the banksters fell for that scam, they have invested, tgiven tax breaks for corps to move over there, yada yada.

    Now this is what happens. china becomes the worlds largest maker of STUFF. They no longer NEED anything else from the west, not even consumers! Once they have enough infrastructure in place, all they need is energy, oil, electric, whatever, and they are set and they can tell the west to kiss off, because their internal market will be big enough and integrated enough that' there will be little left that the west makes that they can't do for a few pennies on the dollar.

    It's a sucker congame, and to make it worse, they are taking surplus cash FROM trading with US and turning it right back around buying our future labor in the form of government paper and mortgages.

    They got to be laughing every day over this scam. Hollywood couldn't come up with a better plot, and we fell for it in exchange for a few cheap trinkets for a few years.

    Sometimes it's actually embarrasing to see people still thinking this was a good idea.

    China been running double digits a year in obvious force projection expansionist military.

    Now let's see, who in their right mind would want to invade china? Answer = "no one".

    So... why china need such a big military, why are they throwing so much effort at it?

    Peak oil, peak water (very important, publically underreported and under rated), and other minerals and resources. They got engineers/emergency soldiers by the hundreds of thousands all over the planet now, in every place they can get them into, especially places with oil, strategic minerals, good geophysical locations like...panama canals and extremely large seaports and such like. Hmmm...

    US= short term thinking in business and politics, this quarter profits, biennial political changes, never any consistency except lowest common denominator that just barely manages to work

    China= long range views and planning in business and politics. They lose some on running fascistic controls, but gain on...the same thing..control!

    They can lose a certain percentage intellectual brain drain to western countries, and the reason is easy to see--those people rarely go with their entire families. Leave enough of the family group at home, in a pinch you can still control the expatriate. Need classified R and D info from xyz western country? Not much problem, either the fools will give it to them gratis or their people in xyz country can slip the info out. In an international crisis/emergency, need some high tech local monkey wrenching inside xyz western nation? Again, not much of a problem.

    I think in the future that the free/subsidised development of china will prove to be THE single most boneheaded move that western nations ever made.

  152. US foreign aid is a myth by Cornelius+Chesterfie · · Score: 2, Informative

    "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."

    The average american donates LESS than the average citizen of most developed nations in terms of percentage of salary. The total donated is more, yes, but that's only because you have higher salaries.

    http://www.foreignaidwatch.org/print.php?sid=792

    Now look at this list. Who exactly is the recipient of your "foreign aid"? The biggest amount of money goes to buy Israel new tanks to destroy Palestinian villages with, or to Egypt as a guarantee that they leave Israel alone, and so on and so forth. Looking at that list, I see very little humanitarian aid coming from the US, it's all kickbacks to allies and 3rd world dictatorships that choose to support you.

    But your (false) beliefs are understandable.
    http://cfrterrorism.org/policy/fo reignaid.html

    "A 2001 poll sponsored by the University of Maryland showed that most Americans think the United States spends about 24 percent of its annual budget on foreign aid--more than 24 times the actual figure."

    It must be nice thinking you're the center of the world.

    1. Re:US foreign aid is a myth by Vancorps · · Score: 1
      You are confusing foreign aid with charity. There is a very large difference between what the american people donate and what the government hands out.

      You words on contradictory, are you saying because we make more is the only reason we donate more? If that is the case then why is the percent of average income and american donates to charity also higher?

      As for the recipients, Bill and Melinda Gates alone have contributed $5billion to combat AIDS in Africa. So to that, I say shove your cynicism elsewhere.

      As for what qualifies as the center of the world. What would be the center? Would it be where the most number of ideas are exchanged? Would it be who makes the most money per capita? Would it be a technological super power? Sorry, but if the U.S. is not the center of the world then what would be? We have people from every country on the planet. That speaks to the center to me. Maybe you have a different definition of center?

  153. Re:its about time... by sgt_doom · · Score: 0

    Hopefully, sometime between 2012 and 2023, they will be merciful slave masters.

  154. Expand your market by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

    If you stick to just the US, maybe so. But a global economy matches. We do get lower prices here, from Wal-Mart on. India, China, all sorts of places get better wages.

    It all balances out. That's why it's a global economy.

  155. English teacher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By early adolescence the love of learning has been thoroughly stamped out of most kids. Few kids have hobbies or interests outside of reading cartoons, watching TV, playing violent video games and sleeping (Taiwanese kids watch far more TV than American kids).

    what Westerners mistake for good behavior is actually mere passivity. As a teacher of adolescents, I often long to see a little more real rebellion among my students

    In Taiwan students rarely write reports (though this is changing) and are generally poor at coming to conclusions, developing and expressing opinions, and similar activities which involve autonomous open-ended problem solving, creativity and integration. This is a deliberate authoritarian property of the educational system, since creativity, comprehension, wide interests and originality are characteristics of autonomous personalities and the last thing the political system wants to see here is personal autonomy.

    Another major impact of the system is that Taiwanese kids often have poorly-developed social skills, especially with peers and with the opposite sex. Self-images and self-esteem are destroyed. Finally, students learn that there is only one answer to everything, and so what they want when you teach (tell) them is the answer and don't make me figure it out either, teacher

    I am usually either amused or angered when I read ignorant, duped, or bought idiots writing in the Western press about how wonderful the educational system is here.

    The situation is really not much better for adults. Most adults here lead lives of stultifying routine, every weekend the same. A running joke in all my adult English classes is that Taiwanese do only four things: watch TV, sleep, have a barbecue or go shopping. They generally do not have hobbies, belong to clubs, do volunteer work, engage in politics or do other interesting things.
    Part of the problem is that the obsession with the appearance of doing work means that leisure is thought to be frivolous, another part is that working six days a week leaves little time for leisure. Permanently fatigued, Taiwanese sleep on Sunday. You might think children's English courses are repetitive, but kids are often delightfully abusive and can be made to laugh at the drop of a hat. Adult classes, by contrast, are often far more boring.

  156. To Be Corrected by coming Indo-Chinese War... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in which the 20 largest Chinese cities are nuked by New IndiaPak (that's India after it nukes and takes over Pakistan), eliminating 5000 years of Chinese culture and history written in 30 dialects of China ideography and reducing the survivors to pounding rocks together and learning English (something good comes out of this after all).

  157. Not to mention the Compass -- by Tungbo · · Score: 1

    without which the Europeans might not have conquered the Americas....

  158. I would think by tjstork · · Score: 1

    that the problem lies more with lefties that think kids can learn or want to learn while shuffling between parents and daycare.

    I would say that the real problem underlying our national demise is a lack of social stability. Birthrates are down, kids know that their world is so random that learning is arguably pointless so they don't.

    While it's easy enough to blame George Bush for kids being put on prozac because their parents suck, maybe, it's time to start asking parents to grow up and give a shit about their children.

    --
    This is my sig.
  159. Well, we did this to ourselves-Deja Vu Career. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Someone has to step up and explain to students that science and engineering aren't dead end career paths! "

    a) It is if the jobs are headed overseas, and we don't want to be up to our eyeballs in debt, nor do we want to lather, rinse, repeat every time a CEO gets an itch, and we're the dandruff.

    b) It is if we have to put up with every tom, dick, and harry reading us the riot act about love, and "get the hell out of my profession. You're taking up space for someone more deserving, and no I'm not an arrogant bastard(1)".

    (1) Shhh! Hear that? Even the "may I take your order?" and "welcome to walmart." people are doing it.

  160. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by G-funk · · Score: 1

    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.

    I'd like to see some references for this, and I'd also like to know wether it's the amount an average person donates, as oppposed to the average amount donated per person... Having most of the worlds richest people and companies must definitely skew the former.

    --
    Send lawyers, guns, and money!
  161. Re:its about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Paper, books, compass

    Maybe some more..

  162. Winner takes all... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...including, the winner gets to own your descendents. At least, that is what over-extended laissez-faire capitalism tends to become. Now, how is this different from that feudalism thing we thought we grew out of a few centuries back?

    Please, enough with the brain-dead "all competition is good for everyone" mantra! Try: competition often benefits the minority who win, and occasionally some others.

  163. Work... and join the army. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nuff said. A big enough army can always get its women from other countries... not a nice thought.

  164. Some of those are a bit stretched. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just checked your Arabic Numerals link, and the article says the Chinese origin idea is completely speculative. The numerals themselves certainly bear no resemblance to Chinese; the only similarity is that it is a base-10 system.

    As for soybeans & rice, that is like Columbus inventing the Americas. The plants were already there for eons, in part of the huge geographical area we now call China. And as for the people who learned to grow those crops, their descendents were later [probably involuntarily] absorbed into the empire we now call China. Again, no smarts involved--lotsa stuff statistically *ought to* have happened in any arbitrary place that big.

    Seriously, Chinese are not that different from the rest of us human beings: They can innovate, hate/ kill/ be paranoid, love/ give/ care, [etc] just like the rest of us can. Like the French, their antipathy towards America may just come from being too *similar*.

    Oh and about people's socioeconomic questions:

    You can have 300 million people with cellphones getting decent educations, while the other 900 million are still treated like dirt & used as human chattel [sp?]. And that 300 million can easily be snooty, self-righteous, posturing assholes who think they are the natural born upper management of everyone else. You can easily have a very stable, sustainable, dynamic society that way--have you seen it happen before?

    But it still isn't a good thing.

    I for one envy the Chinese. At least they don't *have to* debase themselves into doctors, lawyers, or businessmen to get a respectable job that pays. Who knows, I may have to head over there myself soon if the job markets in the civilized countries [EU/ NAFTA/ Jp-Kr-Tw-Hk] stay so dead.

    Nuff cynical flamebait? :-P

  165. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by meringuoid · · Score: 1
    Remember, the rest of the world has nothing that China wants.

    We thought that in Britain, back when we were the ones ruling the world. We eventually found that the one thing we had that China did want was heroin. Once the Chinese government was, er... persuaded of the benefits of free trade as opposed to prohibition, a very profitable business ensued.

    --
    Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  166. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by gosand · · Score: 1
    Also, where do you get off saying the country always bullies everyone?


    We have a long history of it. I can state two very distinct instances where we behaved horribly.


    1. destruction of Native Americans


    2. Slavery


    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  167. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1
    Until that time we did not fire a single shot at Japan even though we did withhold oil.

    You embargoed an island nation currently at war. What did you expect the response to be? Removal from Christmas card lists? ;-)

    Those in charge at the time were either complete morons or they knew what they were doing. And as common conceptions about Pearl Harbour are debatable (e.g. radio silence), I'd tend to go for the later. Goggle for "Remember the Maine", this is not the first time this sort of thing has happened.

  168. Im from Argentina by cesjavi2 · · Score: 1

    Inmigrants lives in your country in "Ghettos". Why the people who comes to USA and are of different races or colors lives separated one of each-other? Thats is racism. My parents are grandsons of italians, spanish, jews, natives and black people. I dont identify with anyone of that people, im argentine. In your country italians, spanish, jews, natives and blacks never get married with other person that is from the same race. PD: I dont go to the job in mules. I use subway. Yes, there exist subway in third world! PD: I use a computer too.} PD: I speak spanish and a little bit of english, and soon, i speak chinese.

    1. Re:Im from Argentina by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm an American. My ancestry is Irish, German, Swedish, English, and Italian. My girlfriend's ancestry is Chinese. My best friend's ancestry is Lebinese. I am by no means an oddity. True, recent immigrants tend to collect together, but that is less racism and more people wanting to be around people who speak the same language. After that first generation arrives though, all bets are off. True, some people cling to ancestry and what not, but by and large intermarrage is completely normal.

    2. Re:Im from Argentina by Shihar · · Score: 1

      Really? You need to understand the difference between an ethnic community and a ghetto. An ethnic community is a group of people who live together by choice in order to share a similar culture with like minded people. I live in Boston. In Boston we have the North End, which is an "Italian" district and a "China Town". The Italian district is down right nice and is a favorite spot for romantic couples to go to eat. It is Italian in that Italian immigrants used to collect there together to speak their common language and be around culturally similar people. It is a much nicer place to live then where I live. People who live in that district are more likely to be Italian in origin, but it certainly is not the rule.

      China Town is primarily made up of Chinese, Koreans, and a few other Asian nations. The vast majority of the population in China town are immigrants. It should be noted though that very few of the people in China town were born in the US. Generally their children quickly move out. The major reason why people live in China town is to be around culturally similar people. I wouldn't call that a weakness by any stretch of the imagination. It eases people into the American culture which can be radically different then Chinese culture. Further, no one forces people to live in these districts. People often choose to simply out of convince. As for the case of China town, very few people actually live in China town, seeing as how it is only a few blocks big. It is more a collection of ethnically Asian store.

      America's real problem is not immigration. The US has a very good track record of quickly integrating immigrant populations and bringing them to standard American conditions very quickly. Very few nations are as skilled as the US is an immigrating large numbers of radically culturally different people. The real problem is, as you point out, are ghettos. Ghettos are primarily NOT made up of immigrant populations. The reason for why ghettos exist is something not worth going into here because people's opinions very widely. What is true is that the ghettos that exist are not made up of immigrant populations. They are made up of Americans that generally have been here for a few generations and are poor. The only exception to this is on the southern border of the US with Mexico where you can find third world like conditions along the border where illegal Mexican immigrants live.

  169. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

    "Remember the Maine", this is not the first time this sort of thing has happened.

    Nor the last. (In fact, the Maine and Tonkin incidents are quite similar to each other, but different from Pearl Harbor- in that at Pearl Harbor, an actual enemy was present)

    sig: America has never gone to war against a country that has McDonalds restaurants

    That's only true if you consider Japan to be the last country the USA warred against. (Since it was the last time Congress officially declared war). Since then, the USA has attacked Bosnian cities hosting active McDonalds.

  170. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by Vancorps · · Score: 1
    The distribution is skewed but even if you leave off the $5bil the Gates foundation put towards AIDS in Africa I start to ask myself why? Having most of the worlds richest people inherently gives us the ability to be more charitable. That said, very large quantities of money come from that dollar many millions of people pay every sunday to their church.

    As for figures, I'd charge you to prove it wrong, but since that is no way to start a debate. here is an old article. I was actually having a hard time finding facts. This interview might also provide some insight. This place actually has some numbers. I'll leave it at this for now and see if you can counter my statements with numbers as well.

  171. Re:its about time... by freedom_india · · Score: 1

    i think we differ on timelines.
    i was referring to Ancient china, not the present communist thugs.
    If we do take the present into account, their economic revolution is far better than Dubya's economic policies.

    --
    "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
  172. Re:Bad news for US (USA USA USA) by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 1
    Its funny really, we invented economic imperialism (the concept that if you control a country's economy, you in effect control the country without ever having to put a man on the ground.)

    You obviously don't know the history of Britain in India :-)

    Huge country (by headcount). UK owned it, lock stock and barrel. Now that's economic control in action.

    --

    -WolfWithoutAClause

    "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"