Slashdot Mirror
Chinese Scientist Admits To Stealing Chip Research
An anonymous reader writes "A prominent Chinese scientist, one of the founders of the chip manufacturing industry in the country, has admitted to stealing his research." From the article: "Chen Jin, a dean of Shanghai's prestigious Jiaotong University and the leader of a government-funded high-tech research project, was dismissed from his university posts this week and stripped of other government titles and perks. The government also said that Chen had been permanently banned from taking part in any government-funded science projects. In a statement Friday, Jiaotong University--one of the nation's elite schools--said, 'Chen Jin has breached the trust of being a scientist and educator. His behavior is despicable.'"
not stole his research.
BTW I think American chocolate chips can be every bit as good as Belgian.
"A prominent Chinese scientist, one of the founders of the chip manufacturing industry in the country, has admitted to stealing his research."
Not a big surprise for a country that doesn't respect intellectual property.
There's no way I could think of a funny "chips own you" joke out of communist China. In this case, somebody else owned the chips and some guy in communist China didn't. Thanks, I'll be here all week!
What are the chances that this guy just did something against the Chinese Government's wishes, and so they faked this whole scandal. I mean, TFA makes it seem like the Government is in this a lot more than the blurb makes it seem so.
Meh, maybe I'm just too paranoid. Anyone know more about this? Is that a possibility?
It's no secret that China's unofficial policy is to steal whatever knowledge they can from whatever source. This policy is necessary due to the impaired intellect of the Chinese as a race. Without stolen American technology, a Chinese missile launched at Tibet would probably land somewhere in the Sahara Desert.
Yeah it's possible but it's the equivalent of shooting yourself in the foot. Lets ruin this guy's carreer while at the same time ruin any credibility of a product that works that was created legitimately?? They Chinese government would have to be idiots to do something like this. They have enough problems with intellectual property issues.
Ooo man the floppy drive is broken. No wait. The computer is just upside down.
This exposes one of the great flaws of a command economy: the politicization of everything. People get appointed to positions because of government connections and ideaology. Unfortunately, these appointees often aren't the most qualified people, and they are usually amoral. They'll do or say whatever they must to get what they want from the political machine. I spent several years working in Russia and saw this effect up close. We see the same thing in the United States when government gets involved in economic development activities. Who was this IP stolen from? How did it happen? How much will China be paying in damages? This sounds like a story with explosive potential.
From what I have known, this guy applied government research funding, but developed nothing because he knows nothing about chip design at all, and failed to find any expert would like to work for him, then he bought several chips from Transmeta and Freescale, removed any brand information on those chips, and printed their information on those chips, then showed those chips to the public as their products.
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
In an interview this morning, Daffy Duck agreed with Jiaotong University.
"Indeed, his behavior is despicable", said Mr. Duck.
http://www.theepochtimes.com/news/6-3-21/39544.htm l
IP theft in China reminds me of Casablanca:
-"I am shocked, shocked to find gambling in this establishment!"
-"Your winning's sir."
"Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out."
Most of the modern chinese economy is now based on stolen technology.
The mark of a mature person is not creating arbitrary criteria for considering others mature.
The government should get the lion's share of the blame for putting out such outrageous press releases. Obviously they hadn't put it through quality control if it didn't even exist.
PS: How does China even acknowledge foreign patents, no less patent things themselves, considering they're communist? Patents fly right in the face of giving according to ability and getting according to need, or are the Chinese just pretending to be communist to get sympathies from the world?
You mean the technology that the american corporations and their contractors in the chinese free trade zones brought with them?
Have some US company outsource its production to China, copy the specs, you're set. Where's the big deal?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
"His behavior is despicable."
How cute. The country that uses Buddhist monasteries as target practice for rockets thinks someone is despicable.What are the chances that this guy just did something against the Chinese Government's wishes, and so they faked this whole scandal.
Why? I mean, come on. Not everything done by China is something sneaky and awful. It's just another country, abeit one with a leadership that has some policies that most of us don't like much.
That's like hearing about someone being arrested for plagiarism in the US and assuming that a bunch of guys with black helicopters trumped up the scandal.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
The penalty will be permeant bar on publication in any journal, which rules out any sort of scientific career.
People don't generally get penalized by having a formal bar on publication. Someone guilty of scientific misconduct will probably find it a lot harder to publish or get grant money, and specific publications may refuse to accept papers from them. But to the degree that that is happening, it's itself a sign that the system is not working; ideally, who you are or what you have done in the past shouldn't matter in science.
Of course, what angry Chinese government officials will do to this guy is another question, but it's not a question that has anything to do with the scientific community.
It's not stealing... it's just sharing without the owner's consent. Maybe the TPAA (Technology Producer's Association of America) should start a lawsuit campaign.
Anyone following the press sees almost daily reports of Chinese industrial espionage circles working around the world. It is not just chips, but formulas, software, manufacturing techniques, and many trade secrets.
China is not the only country that does this. There have been serious incidents with Russia, Japan, France, etc.
However, in the case of countries with which the US does not have a defense treaty, wholesale theft of technology and related trade secrets risks strengthening the military establishment of those countries. This makes it a national security issue for the US.
Unfortunately, even if exposed, the chances in the US of getting caught, prosecuted, and having to pay for industrial espionage are so low that for all practical purposes US technology is free of charge. You probably have a better chance of winning the local lottery than getting punished.
The problem occurs when foreign espionage organizations target private [non-military related] companies that do not have adequate security measures.
In terms of this particular case, the reaction of the Chinese government is out of character to its past actions, which have somewhat ignored wholesale violation of intellectual property rights, and have encouraged massive collection of economic and technical information from the West.
There is no way other than the use of industrial espionage to explain the short amount of time China took in developing its space program and supercomputer capabilities.
In this chip case, the reaction seems motivated by one of two factors: 1/ it is an emotional reaction from someone higher up who felt duped by the scam of the "researcher", 2/ it is a politicized attempt at public relations -- one of those highly publicized "crack downs" that periodically emerge from China before everything gets back to normal.
It's really a non-event. There are probably dozens of other laboratories working right now on other pilfered technologies. In the long run, however, China is graduating enough engineers to surpass the West within about 25 years. In which case, all of this will seem rather transitional in nature.
The Chinese have no concept of copyright and patent restrictions like Americans do. This was probably a token sacrifice to appease the whiny US companies who just want to sit on their butts and collect royalties from the billions of masses. I don't know what their concept of plagiarism is, but ironically enforcing copyrights and patents encourages plagiarism - because you just can't be honest about and say "yeah, I did copy it".
Truthfully, I'm glad they don't respect copyrights and patents. It's one of the few freedoms that actually keep China from flying off the deep end. I could't even imagine RIAA types backed by authoritarian Chinese power.
People get appointed to positions because of government connections and ideaology. Unfortunately, these appointees often aren't the most qualified people, and they are usually amoral.
And how do you think this differs from your average corporate hierarchy? Ideology and connections are the prime mechanisms of power in any society.
We see the same thing in the United States when government gets involved in economic development activities.
You're apparently not familiar with the way democratic governments in free market economies "get involved". Let me give you a hint: they don't involved by appointing individuals, they get involved by creating conditions under which the market solves problems.
About 4 years ago now Libya renounced their backing of terrorism in the 80s (and 90s) and said they'd like to return to the world community. And since it was Ghadafi in charge then and now, he had no weaseling to do. He just said he was wrong.
It does happen. It takes a lot of humility to do it, which is why we're unlikely to see the US admit wrongdoing soon. On anything like, say, the Cuba embargo.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
"You mean the technology that the american corporations and their contractors in the chinese free trade zones brought with them?"
Yeah. Like the technology to make silent submarine propellers, or the stuff "borrowed" from IBM. Of course our "allies" are a big help.
I'm sorry, but I've seen too many first-hand examples of industrial espionage performed by Chinese engineers and scientists to find this at all surprising. I'm just surprised he admitted it, that's all.
And just to be clear, I'm not referring to American citizens who happen to be of Chinese extraction, or individuals who emigrate to the U.S. with the intention of becoming American citizens. I mean personnel that come here on a visa, work for a few years or go to school here, and then take what they have learned back home. That doesn't bother me in and of itself, but often this includes taking things such as research, engineering drawings and prototypes that don't belong to them. Other nations do this as well, of course (including us) but few on as grand a scale.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Do those government critics ever criticize their government?
Except that the Chinese government's hand was forced in this case by public disclosure of the theft. So low-and-behold, they found a scapegoat, the government gets to play the "I'm shocked, just shocked" card, and everybody nods and says "At least their honest".
Yeah. Right.
Think about it for a few minutes.
The Soviet Union was very advanced in several fields of science (especially theoretical physics and mathematics). They were the first to launch a sattelite orbiting Earth (Sputnik 1), first to put a living being in orbit (the dog Laika), first to put a man in space, first dual-manned flight, first space walk, first to land on the moon (with a probe), built the first space station (Salyut 1).
Just to name a few things.
It is much more indideous than that. China has an international reputation for having a lack of respect for patents or copyrights. Reguardless of you opinion on "intellectual property," they copy research results and produce product at a much decreased cost because they do not have to pay for the R&D. (I am sure there are other factors, but that is the most significant to this story.)
China knows this, and wants to divest the responsibility from the state. How so best to do this than to blame an individual. A doctor bent on individual success stuped to the evil of stealing research results, instead of taking the long, arduous road of independent research that would have enriched him, his colleagues and students, and therefore, the State. Of course, this is true for any scientist in any country in any field.
Is it the truth? Maybe, or maybe I just have my capitalist tinfoil hat on. Will we ever really be able to know? They censor google, they run the press, they make the truth. Do you really think Tiananmen Square is as well known in China as Kent State is in the US? What do you think?
(Yeah, the tinfoil is starting to spark...)
The cancel button is your friend. Do not hesitate to use it.
So the Chinese government is all about truth now? hmm, this poor guy probably didn't jump high enough when he was told and thus the Chinese are making an example out of him.
x-guru: In an interview this morning, Daffy Duck agreed with Jiaotong University. "Indeed, his behavior is despicable", said Mr. Duck.
Anonymous Coward: Sylvester's catch phrase was "sufferin' succotash!"
Or, as Mel Blanc would have put it:
I am sure he'll have no problems finding work - with Sony PS3 coming out in November and xbox360 already out, one of the modchip mfgs will snap him up.
He may not be a genius that he claimed he was but he already has two primary qualifications - reverse engineering skills and flexible morals.
Actually the Soviets had pretty advanced mainframe and supercomputer technology for military use, we just have never heard about them because they kept it secret and did not commercialize it.
"You're saying that becuase some system calls something a property right, that it is."
Obviously we should dissolve society so we'll stop having these "some system" arguments. Make it a free for all. My property rights is what I take out of your head with my club. Same with you. Much better than anything "some system" can come up with.
"Please feel free. You can take a *copy* of any property of mine that you see."
Easy to give when what you have is "borrowed" from others.
Haha, thats hilarious! You do remember Sputnik, don't you?
Or the fact that the cold war spurred massive advances in technology for both the US and the USSR?
Ingenuity and invention are not limited by the type of government, *because* of the type of government. It can be limited by hostile attitudes and rampant fundamentalism in the ruling classes however. If anything, the Soviet revolution spurred Russian invention, rapidly transforming its society into a heavily industrial one.
Between the Soviets forward looking attitude (especially during the earlier years of the USSR) and the conflicts with the Germans, and then with the Western world, the government actively pursued technological advancement and by all means achieved one of the quickest rates of invention in history, surpassed only by the United States during the same period of time, and the time since the end of the cold war which is in part a result of the cold war's legacy.
This is not a sig.
And that was freaking 40 years ago, give me a break, and look at some of the major scientists involved in both the USA and Russia, German scientists that both countries imported right after WWII; they were far ahead of both countries in rocket science. One thing I do respect about the Soviet Union is the ingenuity that they have at using existing technology to solve their problems (aka their engineers). As far as new stuff/research it's been a while for them to come up with anything new, so don't kid yourself.
Really, Chinese government does not need complicated plots to do this. If they want to throw someone to the street, or even the jail, due that he wears (for example) pink socks, they do not need to create faked documents. They would just say that wearing pink socks means disrespect for the government and bust him, with the subject having no means to oppose.
Why can't
Did the poster claim that this particular Chinese regime spokesman had personally taken part in the destruction of any of the some 2,000 (i.e. almost all of them) Tibetan buddhist monasteries that the communist party's army has destroyed in Tibet since China's invasion in 1950? No.
Neither did the poster claim that this particular official personally murdered any of the 1,500,000 Tibetans who have perished under the Chinese occupation.
Do the Chinese people bear collective responsibility for the lebensraum-style genocidal crimes committed by their regime? Of course they do, especially since the Chinese people still aren't lifting a finger to stop those crimes from being committed in their name.
The active regime officials (who by definition are also members of the Chinese Communist Party) must bear particular responsibility since they are the ones keeping the oppressive machinery functioning.
If anyone's bigoted(*) here it is the Chinese people who blindly support their regime's ongoing genocidal occupation of China's neighbours while obediently hating the Japanese for having attempted to do the same to China over 60 years ago.
And what ruffled your feathers here anyway? The Chinese regime's Propaganda Ministry's talking heads are notorious for their ridiculously facts-defying xenophobic and jingoistic lingo but one shouldn't have fun with their usage of the term "despicable"?
(*) Bigoted | Big"ot*ed | a. Obstinately and blindly attached to some creed, opinion practice, or ritual; unreasonably devoted to a system or party, and illiberal toward the opinions of others.
Should invading one's peaceful neighbours be opposed, or rewarded with trade deals?
If it did, we'd be placing trade barriers on allowing American companies to set up manufacturing capabilities in China.
In that case European companies would set up manufacturing companies rendering American companies incapable of competing. Or if Europe joined in on the protectionist wanking, maybe the Chinese would develop their own tech and keep the profits for themselves. I don't see the upside.
When I was at UBC in 1980 we had 2 Chinese grad students holed in a basement lab. In their spare time they were taking a Tektronix graphics terminal apart chip by chip, component by component, and sending the info home.
Especially in regards to the Soviet space program, while I do want to give credit where credit's due, I think it's also worth pointing out the number of Soviet failures and accidents; it seems to me that a lot of their progress can be attributed to playing fast-and-loose, and taking chances that NASA wasn't willing to take. Occasionally, these paid off, although even before their economy collapsed, they had fallen behind to the point where I don't think their development methodology was exactly validated.
Not to mention, their space program was jump-started by a lot of German rocket technology that they crated up and took East with them. (The U.S.'s was as well, we got a lot of personnel, although the Russians got some of of the best hardware and facilities.)
Of the examples you cited, Laika was an arguable failure (the dog died after only a few hours, long before it was supposed to and without getting much useful data back), Salyut 1 is notable, although I feel it necessary to point out that the crew never made home alive -- not strictly a problem with Salyut itself, but you have to wonder if the pace they were working at didn't contribute to lack of QC elsewhere.
Sputnik 1 is definitely a landmark and worth of recognition, and in general the Soviet space program had a lot going for it, but it also had a rather alarming rate of failures. So in considering their progress, one has to consider the cost it was earned at. (I'd say the exact same thing about some other areas of technological development, for instance, their submarines.)
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
The President, Hu Jintao, has a degree in hydraulic engineering and the Premier, Wen Jiabao, has a degree in geomechanics. Two very smart engineers. Too bad they're so fucking evil.
I bet the Chinese government still gets him cheap hookers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_the_P eople's_Republic_of_China/
Hunh? Nowhere in the linked news article does it say that Chen has admitted anything. To the contrary, it says he could not be reached for comment. A correct headline would be:
It's bad enough that both the summary and the headline contain such a glaring and defamatory error, but how come none of the more than one hundred previous posters noticed this? Sheesh.
IIRC, The soviet union has lost 4 cosmonauts but the US has lost 17 astronauts. The USSR was leading the body count with Soyuz 1 and 11 compared to America's Apollo 1, but the USA took a comfortable lead with the Challenger and left the USSR in their dust with the Columbia. That said, the American space program has launched more people up there than the Soviet one and the USSR had some nasty ground problems (though so did the US) but you can't claim that the Soviet space program was any more dangerous.
The USA got Werner Von Braun from the Third Reich, the chief designer of the V2 who was worth far more than any bombed to shit WWII industrial facility is worth. It was good old faciest know how driving both sides in equal amounts.
Your assessment of the space race is nothing more than rosy eyed patriotism, which is sweet and everything, but essentially, space is the only place that the Russians didn't screw up and no amount of re-interpretation can change that.
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
Obviously we should dissolve society so we'll stop having these "some system" arguments. Make it a free for all. My property rights is what I take out of your head with my club. Same with you. Much better than anything "some system" can come up with.
Obviously, rights exist inspite of systems not because of them. Obviously, there is a big difference between taking physical property which deprives the owner of the original and copying which doesn't. "Free for all"? for copyright monopolies, sure.
Easy to give when what you have is "borrowed" from others.
You mean "coppied", and since the greatest innovators are and always will be the greatest copiers - that's ok. But if you want me to return a copy of my copy to you, that will be fine too.
After years of reading Pravda, you learn Commie-speak.
My translation of this article is: this poor schmuck has fallen out of favor with the Central Committee. After being ordered to replicate western technologies, the Red Chinese now humiliate him as a token whipping boy to allay US/European concerns over intellectual properties.
This poor guy is probably going to be shot and his family will be charged for the bullet. Chances are we'll probably never knows what his real crime was.
Is that a SCSI connector or are you just glad to see me?
So you lost your job to a chinese guy with better qualities. Well, that is no need to bust out another comspiricy theory to kick out your competitors. Next time I know it you will be petitioning to have all muslem americans beheaded.
The Russians and the Americans both got to space on the backs of German scientists. You can masturbate the Russians all you want, but it would have been the Germans that were the first in space if they hadn't decided to invade every country in Europe and subsequently had their asses handed to them as a result. The Soviets eventually produced quite capable scientists and engineers of their own through eager binning of those with the most apparent aptitude for math in the populations that conquered, and then spent them on developing weapons. Often based upon research stolen from U.S. weapons programs. With the space program their leg up was even better for the time: hordes of conscripted German engineers that had been working on rocketry. Or as you characterize them, worthless bombed-out facilities.
> There is no way other than the use of industrial espionage to explain the short amount
> of time China took in developing its space program
Sure there are. To name two obvious ones:
1) Learning from Russian technology
"Are Chinese engineers just copycats, blueprinting the Shenzhou after the Russian Soyuz spacecraft design?" (link)
2) Longer development than you think
"[China]'s first satellite...was launched in 1970" (link)
> Especially in regards to the Soviet space program, while I do want to give credit where
> credit's due, I think it's also worth pointing out the number of Soviet failures and accidents
Yup, it's worth pointing out:
Number of Soviet/Russian failures resulting in fatalities: 7
Number of American failures resulting in fatalities: 13
Okay, how about before 1980 so we don't get the US Shuttles?
USSR: 5
USA: 9
(link)
If you measure by total number killed, on the other hand, the USSR is worse. Due to that, claiming that the USSR's space successes were due in any way to a greater tolerance for failure and death than the USA's space program is simply in ignorance of the historical data. Neither space program has a clearly better safety record, and it's misleading at best to claim otherwise.
Chips steal you...
OMG THEFT!
Give me good ratings or I will close down the internet.
...All your chips are belong to us
The problem of course is the potential legal/financial liability that goes with that, which is what this new law would eliminate. I read that there's a lot of interest in such a law in many parts of the US as well. Could we be entering a time when governments start to be a bit more honest about their screw ups?
"If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulders of giants." (Isaac Newton)
Stop the pissing contest!
Whoever gave you the idea China is a communist country? China has the purest form of capitalism in the world today. Its a total Laissez Faire economy Anything goes You can kill people and sell their organs as long as you make a profit. Just because the dictators in charge call themselves communist doesnt make them communist. Communism has been abused so much by dictators that people have come to associate the word with dictatorship. Whereas in reality a true communist state is a most democratic one as everyone is equal. I guess the US population is kind of uneducated as they grew up under the "Communist Threat" which was actually the Russian empire threat. It would have existed even if Russia was a capitalist country. The cold war was a fight between two elites. The politburo in Russia and the New England families who control America's Banking and Government. Even if Russia was capitalist but didnt allow market access to these families the cold war would still have been on. Now the closest thing to true communism as it was meant to be is the trade union movement and social security . So you could say USA is the only true communist country in the world but that wouldnt go down very well with a generation brought up to hate communists!!
**Life is too short to be serious**
"It was good old faciest know how driving both sides in equal amounts." --Me, if you had read my post
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
Grow up, actually read other people's posts, and stop being a dick. I made it perfectly clear in my original post that I have nothing against any person of Chinese extraction, and no problem with any such individual working here if they have the United States' best interests at heart. That, indeed, is the point of any good immigration policy, no matter what nations are under discussion. In this case, I simply dislike the transfer of knowledge and technology that is being made from the United States to China, with little being given in return. In fact, all we are doing is saving China from having to make the century of investment in research and development that we and the rest of the Western world did. Even worse, we are building up a fearsome economic and military opponent at our own expense. There is no conspiracy theory necessary: I can look at facts and draw my own conclusions, one of which is that China didn't burst onto the world scene as a major industrial power overnight without acquiring a lot of the necessary skills and knowledge from outside sources. That doesn't make me a racist ... at worst it makes me selfish because I don't want to see everything my countrymen sweated bullets to create given away for free to an inimical foreign power.
And, as an aside, let me say that I'm sick to death of people calling other people "racist" or "bigoted" when they try to discuss any issue that involves anyone from a different country. Just try and talk about illegal immigration here in the United States. "Oh, you think there's a problem with millions of people living and working on American soil in flagrant violation of the law? What are you, a racist?" There will never be anything resembling a rational discourse on any of these issues, nor will any of them be solved, until we can talk about them without calling each other names. So, yes, if I'm bigoted I'm bigoted against small-minded, stupid people that can't see the beyond their own noses.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
OMFG get away from the microwave!!!!!
-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ *** http://www.mountainfort.com *** +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-
In Australia, the [Chinese, as it happened] researcher,
who felt compelled to blow-the-whistle on her research-
head (for apparently not performing several experiments
reportes as if they'd been performed, etc) the whistle-
blower suffered, but the "bad guy" still has his job at
University of NWS & may still be involved in scientific
reseach there...
BACKGROUND:
2002: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ss/stories/s53140 6.htm
"Scientific & Financial Misconduct [re: Professon Bruce Hall at UNSW in Australia]
The Science Show - Broadcast Saturday 13/4/2002
Summary:
This week on The Science Show, Norman Swan presents a major investigation into
scientific and financial misconduct at the University of New South Wales.
Transcript:
Norman Swan: Hello, Norman Norman Swan here sitting in the chair on The Science
Show this week instead of Robyn Williams, because today I have a special and
disturbing feature for you.
Hong Ha: I want my story to be heard by the public because what I have been through
I don't want my children or any one else's children to go through. I want them to
admit the faults that they have done: they exploited me for free labour. This
problem has been going for too long. I want it to be stopped.
Norman Swan: This is a story about powerful scientists with international
reputations who've committed scientific misconduct so severe, it could be
considered fraud; as well as mismanaging public funds where the institution,
the university in which they work, has been slow to protect staff who've raised
their concerns. In fact, at times the university seems to have actively favoured
the strong over the weak. It's fifteen years since the exposure of Dr. William
McBride's scientific fraud, what you're about to hear suggests that safeguards
against scientific misconduct are still inadequate.
[Reading from UNSW Homepage:]
Why study at the University of New South Wales? The University of New South Wales
is one of Australia's major research institutions, attracting top national
competitive research grants and has extensive international research links.
Norman Swan: The University of New South Wales is one of the largest universities
in the country with a highly respected medical faculty. A few years ago, following
Sydney's sprawl to the south west, the university set up a clinical school in that
area centred on Liverpool Hospital.
They even attracted Bruce Hall, a well-known Australian immunologist, back from
Stanford University in California. Bruce Hall is a kidney specialist who researches
how the immune system deals with transplanted organs. The university made him
Foundation Professor of Medicine at Liverpool where he set up his own lab.
With him came his wife, Dr Suzanne Hodgkinson, a neurologist who studies rats with
brain inflammation similar to Multiple Sclerosis. Bruce Hall hired Dr Clara He,
a medical graduate from Shanghai with an Australian PhD and post-doctoral
experience in immunology.
Clara He: Professor Hall was asking me if I was interested in his new senior
position in Liverpool Hospital. I feel that could be new opportunity for me, so
I can design my program. I respect him; I believe we can collaborate and
make good program.
Norman Swan: Dr He has her own research group at Liverpool and is also the
laboratory manager. She's introduced molecular biology into the lab and
her small team has cloned and produc
It looks like you can't read either, you ignorant fuck. The guy already acknowledged that we had gained more than a little aerospace expertise from Germany.
Are you sure you're an Aussie and not a Canadian? You sound like a Canuck. "Oh, we helped send a man to the moon after those bad yanks wouldn't buy our Avro Arrow and then hired all of our engineers".. That's my favorite. To the Canadians reading this: the majority of Avro engineers by far were UK ex-pats that came over after WW II you idiots!
Think about it for a second though. would people in free, capitalist, english speaking, US allied countries like Canada and Australia concede that the USSR won in space if it was not true? Australia, the UK, Canada, etc. always wanted for you guys to win the space race (and did our part to help) because the USSR were commies, but you didn't win, get over it. For all of the failings of communism, the USSR beat everyone else in every goal but putting an actual human on the moon.
I am not a Canadian by the way, but I have Canadian friends and I really feel sorry for them having to share a border with you guys sometimes. I know not all Americans are fuckwits, but it seems that you do have a greater fuckwit per capita rating than anywhere outside of mainland Europe.
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
Forgetting for a moment that the article summary is wrong, IP "borrowing"/"theft" is as old as forever. Ogg started it when he hid behind a bush and watched how Ugg broke flint to make sharp edges. The Europeans stole mathematical, boat building and navigation technology from the Chinese 600+ years ago and from the Indians at least that long ago. Pythagoras (I can't be arsed checking the spelling) put his name on work that he got from others.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
It's pointless. It didn't drive Castro out. He'll die of old age first. It didn't change Cuba. And the major reason for it in the beginning was that Castro nationalized the assets of US compaines. This drove Cuba to the Soviets. He wasn't really a Communist, but after we turned our back on him, he had no choice, he had to survive, and the Soviets would drop money on him merely because he would be the only Communist country in the Western Hemisphere and only 60 miles from the US no less!
Now the major reason is that the anti-Castro Cuban exiles are a major swing party in a state that is important in the electoral college (and thus Presidential election process). So the parties in power subjagate the actual interests of the country to the votes of a small contingent in one area of one state.
Furthermore, and most importantly, if we don't reconcile with Castro before he dies, it will be difficult for Castro's replacement to make up with the US without being branded as going against "the revolution". So, if we wait out Castro, then try to reconcile, it doesn't go well. If we reconciled now, it'd be much smoother going.
Not that I love Castro. He executed people for the same things that Bautista had jailed Castro for (and released him early after treating him well). He ran his country into the ground trying to prove political points and partly out of spite. I do understand what drove him to do what he did, the same as the American Fruit Company (Chiquita) owning 80% of the land in Honduras.
But I do believe this, we are not solving the Castro problem with the current system, and we might be able to solve it if we changed. But we're too pigheaded to do so. We should apply the principles of engagement to Cuba as we do with China.
On the Libya front, Ghadafi, the asshole, showed himself the bigger man by capitulating. And no credit to Bush, Ghadafi had been kissing the US ass for years trying to get back on our good side. Bush was wise to accept and make maximum political hay from it, but he didn't have anything to do with it.
Too many poor decisions are made for the sake of "consistency". Sometimes you just have to say "the situation has change, the correct course is different now".
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Can you explain why you are posting anonymously? What professional concerns? I thought one of the cornerstones of academic ethics was to only post up statements that you can stand by, and are prepared to defend, and reference. Anonymous postings with no references - or justifications regarding the methodology - are no more valuable than bar room gossip surely?
And in 50 years, they'll be at the top of the world in research, industry, and science
Actually the way I read it, this guy faked his research, and couldn't in fact replicate a suitable chip. So the Chinese at this point literally cannot make the chip. See thats what stealing technology without having a solid scientific background gets you; its one thing to copy a car design, something else entirely to try to make cutting edge hardware do something outside the specs of the model you stole. So they first have to do all the legwork already done by western companies, just to draw parity, then they have to advance to the level we will be at in 50 years.
Given that their government and society aren't meritocracies, I ain't too concerned...
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.
Actually, There was already some messages in the campus that Chen, Jin faked his DSP chip when he first announced his first product(about 2002). But it seemed that the leaders of the university were trying to disguise that and applying more and more fund from government for his project. This encouraged him to fake his 2nd, 3rd..... product chip until there was an anonymous guy who claimed that he had worked for Chen, Jin published an article on bbs of the university and other website to tell the fact. After that, the government started to investigate the fact. Now bbs of the university was made to ban users to publish articles on that and the leaders of the university were trying to claim that it's all Chen, Jin's fault. How ridiculous!
Why do they need to steal when Clinton will sell it to them?
You are either missing the point or being deliberately hardheaded. Property rights encourage innovation and investment.
>>Please give me your home address. I think your right ot own property is "fairly stupid" and I should be free to take your stuff. Give me that freedom you hateful bastard!!!
>Please feel free. You can take a *copy* of any property of mine that you see
You feel that way because you own no original works. You are almost certainly not an inventor of the property to which you refer (meaning you have no investment in it's invention) which is why you feel so cavalier about copying.
However, your point is a distraction. At the core, the argument is not about taking a copy -- it's about stealing an invention and competing with the inventor. Anyone is free to copy an invention for research or personal use, but it may not be sold. You are free to build your own 1:1 scale reproduction of a Chevrolet Corvette but you may not benefit for its sale or pass it off as your own original work. Ditto for Crest Toothpaste, or a Sony TV. The purpose of the American Patent system is the dissemination of information, after all.
Why prohibit competiting with the original inventor? It's like this:
1) You work for several days/months/years to discover/invent a product, incurring great expense (time, money, etc.) along the way.
2) You offer your product for sale.
3) I offer your product for sale, at a much lower price (after all, my research and development costs were zero!)
4) Because my product is lower priced, "my" product sells well but you go out of business.
Now, are you feeling inspired to go invent the next great product?
You see, it's about rewarding innovation and preserving the value of original works.
I've always wondered how American students, who cheat (copy web stuff without attribution, share test and homework) at a reported rate of 50% or so, manage to become published scholars with much lower plagiarism rates (one percent or so in various studies).
This is perhaps a LITTLE less cheating than Asians, but a LOT less.
In all major Chinese forums, this has been considered good news and it is also considered a victory of internet.
The topic has been debated for months in all major Chinese forums. The disclosure first came from an anonymous user who claimed he is a former insider of the R&D group. Later, his post was forwarded to all major Chinese internet forums and then reporters from newspaper started to report this story. However, after a month, all the reports have been removed from official portal news sites. So people wondered this guy might be protected by the government since his work used to be appraised by the highest academic authority.
Then more and more detailed information comes out little by little, and finally the government has to form an investigation team to re-evaluate his work. It turns out his current design does not have the capabilities as he claimed, and the first version of his chips are actually some freescale chips he bought. He just re-labeled those chips and claimed he designed them.
So when the news comes out, we consider this is good news. Of course slashdotters may enjoy seeing it in a different way.
In all major Chinese forums, this has been considered good news and it is also considered a victory of internet.
The topic has been debated for months in all major Chinese forums. The disclosure first came from an anonymous user who claimed he is a former insider of the R&D group. Later, his post was forwarded to all major Chinese internet forums and then reporters from newspaper started to report this story. However, after a month, all the reports have been removed from official portal news sites. So people wondered this guy might be protected by the government since his work used to be appraised by the highest academic authority.
Then more and more detailed information comes out little by little, and finally the government has to form an investigation team to re-evaluate his work. It turns out his current design does not have the capabilities as he claimed, and the first version of his chips are actually some freescale chips he bought. He just re-labeled those chips and claimed he designed them.
Many people have doubted his work a long time ago because their speed of developing a new chip is too fast. People also used to blame this group because they absorb major funding that belongs to the Dragon chip group.
So when the news comes out, we consider this is good news. Of course slashdotters may enjoy seeing it in a different way.
What a great small scale research question. If I do it I will of course credit you, DrWho520, (I think I have met 283 before...)
Anyway, I digress. If you took a random poll of Chinese citizens and asked them about Tianamen vs US citizens and Kent State, I really don't know what the results would be.
My complete GUESS would be that MORE Chinese know of Tianamen than Americans know of Kent State. Thoughts? Anyone have any real data from the Chinese perspective?
-A
China puts incredible pressure on scientists and engineers doing any sort of technological research. I'm hardly surprised this happened. Even in the US people try to cheat, and it's usually because the people above them expect impossible results.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
China has produced a lot more engineers than U.S. The following is a typical engineer curriculum: 1. Copying Design 101 2. IP law and how to ignore it. 3. Stealing Foreign technologies is good for mother land.
Stop feeding the trolls.
-Not the GP, but actually someone who agrees with you
A lot of people have asked why the Chinese gov't picked this guy to make an example ofspeculating, for example, that he was a token victim because somebody's head had to roll.
Instead, it seems pretty clear from the article that stuff like this is bad for China, and the party leaders know it. Fraud does not lead to scientific progress and independence, and those are what the government of China is after, understandably.
More interesting, to me anyway, is that this points out how critical ethical behavior is for the progress of a nation. I don't want to belabor the point, but dishonesty and corruption breed chaos, infighting, and waste, which is the biggest reason China needs honest work and research.