Slashdot Mirror
When It Comes To China, Google's Experience Still Says It All (backchannel.com)
Uber's defeat by its local competitor in China was the latest of a string of such cases, and Google's experience trying to establish itself there is illustrative of the challenges facing all American tech companies that aspire to dominate in that market, writes reader mirandakatz. Steven Levy writes at Backchannel:Perhaps because its market share never rose high enough, Uber did not experience the brunt of China's regulation. Still, who's to say what would have happened if Uber had managed to outperform Didi? If Uber's market share topped fifty percent, would the government have sat by as a neutral observer? Would the Uber app start experiencing slowdowns? Would its drivers be stopped? Would airports welcome Didi cars and not Uber? My bet is that, mixed with disappointment at not winning the country, Uber executives might be feeling a bit relieved that such worries are now off the table. As it is, Uber has become one more casualty in China's other wall, a towering fortress of restrictions, regulations and unfair play that keeps down American internet companies.
Uber is Canadian.
If US companies can't operate under fair rules in China, should Chinese companies be permitted to operate in the US without restrictions?
We can still trade, but do we necessarily have to allow service oriented businesses operate on each other's soil?
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
America wouldn't know fair if it kicked them in the balls, what you're actually seeing is when you become number 2.
Number 1 gets to decide what's fair.
There is no factual analysis, only opinion and implication. It reads like a Trump speech.
US tech company like Google gmail keep collecting information from China and then hand it over to US government. That's why such company banned.
Different rules for different people is pretty much the definition of unfair.
Only among equals. There are different rules for employers and employees too. China is stronger than a decade ago but still far behind the US.
GDP per capita (2015 in USD) USA: $55,805, China: $7,990
Protecting a growing and still weak market is normal and proven to be a necessary step when growing an economy. There is no "equality" when you have "equal" access (which is anything but) between two highly unequal economies. The reason China seems so strong - with so much in the US marked "Made in China" - isn't because China is an advanced economy but because China is a huge country with a billion(!) more people than the US.
In theory "lopsided" trade where one side cheats is still beneficial to the more-open partner.
But, it seems such formulas and simulations fail to account for or detect "emergent" side-effects, such as income inequality, and financial bubbles caused in part by one side building up cash from the imbalance. Bubbles still puzzle economic simulation experts.
The simulation may predict that average GDP increases, which may technically be accurate, but most of the increase is flowing to the top 1%, not regular folks. This excess power allows them to buy the political system, giving us crap like the Citizen's United ruling, which in terms gives them even MORE influence, risking a slippery slope into a full-blown plutocracy.
They can simulate consumer buying behavior to some extent, but so far not the related politics that affect everything in practice.
They are using spherical cows.
Table-ized A.I.
The overriding issue with doing business in China is corruption and intellectual property theft. In plain English, that means (1) the government runs on bribery, and (2) Chinese cultural values do not regard things like corporate espionage, patent infringement, bootlegging, and knockoffs, as being unethical. This is why non-Chinese companies tend to fail, because they allowed to enter the market only long enough until a Chinese company can copy their ideas and property.
Fixed that one for you. Uber is a taxi company. Its a rent seeker. Google is an ad company. Its a rent seeker no different from a billboard company renting you a billboard. Because they provide "old school" services via a computer medium and not via some older means doesn't change the fact that they are rent seekers. Governments abusing rent seekers is A-Okay by me. Local Chinese rent seekers should get preferential treatment in China just like local rent seekers should get preferential treatment in the US. Its rent seeking. Stop pretending its innovative. It isn't.
on the U.S. when it comes to protectionism. You don't understand the culture, they are more tech-savvy than you, their market is almost 3x as large as yours, and also, they don't like you because of all your BS propaganda and hate-talk against them. You're in over your head, simply, so start learning to suck it up, because in the 21st century you will be doing it alot.
Red China has become Fascist China, where the state and business work hand-in-hand to ensure China-based companies dominate the marketplace of a billion+ people. The government keeps control, and the companies profit.
Posted by "OrangeTide (124937)", is that you Donald?
Sorry, couldn't resist.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
It's really strange to hear people claim Protectionism is bad for the US, but we are forced to compete against Countries who are protectionist. You can try to get them to compete openly, but at a point you get played for a sucker and lose your shirt. The US has lost it's wardrobe playing that game.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
When ever you buy that stuff "Made in China" you are helping to pay for the Aircraft carriers that dominate the south seas and soon a sea near you.
ABC - Anywhere But China
That's why they failed in China. Nothing to do with China. Everything to do with Uber.
China know it is US Government spyware, why would they just let it in? Do you think they are stupid from eating rice?
Their CEO literally works for the US government.
Racist, stoopid Trump has once again seen and voiced what politicians are loathe to even acknowledge.
But, but, free trade, TPP?
Oh right, we're getting raped on mfg by making deals that are bad for us, but let them have every bit of high-tech blocking that they want to defend their local industry.
Wake up sheeple!
If folks think Americans are jingoistic and racist, it's probably because they haven't dealt with the Chinese (yet). African countries are already starting to experience the Hidden Kingdom's version of TANSTAAFL. Ironically, I fully expect the USA and Vietnam to buddy-up pretty close over the next decade due to the increasing aggression of their common enemy.
In the case of Google I do agree, but the stupid summary goes on a stupid rant making assumptions how Uber will POTENTIALLY be beaten down if they did not merge with Didi. Like there are facts about google's example... Nobody will disagree if author just talk about Google, but why use made up assumptions to support a factual case? Only because it's more current and make old news relevant again with assumptions on current affairs?
Disclaimer: I did not RTFA.
Developing markets protect their infant industries. They have to in order to advance. See here for plenty of detail.
Chang blasts holes in the "World Is Flat" orthodoxy of Thomas Friedman and others who argue that only unfettered capitalism and wide-open international trade can lift struggling nations out of poverty. On the contrary, Chang shows, today's economic superpowers-from the U.S. to Britain to his native Korea-all attained prosperity by shameless protectionism and government intervention in industry, a fact conveniently forgotten now that they want to compete in foreign markets.
Nope, no sig