I still have my Interact (first computer) and the original box. It still works too. My dad had tried to replace the keyboard with a decent one, and the original has been misplaced for some time. A couple months ago I spotted it over in moms basement, so I just have to remember to bring it home and restore the old interact to its original form:-)
I have a boatload of tapes, including MS basic. An interesting note about that... MS disabled the "peek" and "poke" commands to prevent viewing their code and the system ROM. I still recall "poke 19215,25" will re-enable poke for the whole system. There are a few pokes to re-enable "peeking" at the ROM and BASIC interpreter - separately. It seems MS was all concerned about IP even in 1979. Stupid, I had some fun patching in new commands to the interpreter.
It also has the ROM monitor written by a Walt Hendrickson (sp?).
I might agree that someone sending a copy to a friend could be considered "private copying" depending on your definition, but to put it on p2p where the whole world can download it seems much more public than private. The french court must have some very interesting definitions indeed.
Sorry, but I didn't see which license they put it under. Slashdot is notoriously bad about having headlines that say some project has been open-sourced without telling us what license is used. This is just another example.
"Not for HDTV. The advantage of cablecard is that it allows the device to directly access the compressed digital signal."
My HD2000 gets me direct access to the compressed digital signal, but it's over the air. The HD3000 can tune unencrypted digital cable channels too. The only thing all this cablecard crap is really going to accomplish is DRM. Why anyone would want to run out and buy an expensive DRM system that only reduces their options is beyond me. As for protecting premium HD content - who cares. I just recorded the superbowl in HD for grins and it ate up 35GB (yes that GIGAbytes) of hard drive space. Nobody is going to be passing this stuff around the net, or archiving it, or much of anything, DRM or not, - it's just too darn big. It's going to take my computer 30-60 seconds just to delete that file!
Besides, only a few channels are available in HD from the local cableco. They market this stuff with the "future" in mind. But as the article shows, the future will involve something different than you can buy today. If you're going to buy this stuff anyway, I'd make sure it has some immediate value today and not believe a word about what they plan to do next year or even next week. Me? I've got HDTV DVR capability on my PC today, and it's really not that useful. It is fun to show people the picture quality of HD, but beyond that it's just too much data.
If Apple wants to get IBM chip manufacturing technology, they can buy Intel compatible chips from AMD. Since IBM tech often ends up in AMD fabs, Apple can get the best of both worlds without having to recompile. Now why they went with a 32bit Intel part is still a mystery to me. 32bit processors are so last millenium....
Since HDTV uses MPEG 2 in the US, and the government has mandated its use... Could that invalidate the patents here? I know similar things have happened with copyrights being revoked (when the material was encoded into law by reference or some such). IANAL, and apparently this argument doesn't work for MPEG. Any "IP" lawyers out there care to explain exactly when and how this comes into play?
"You're just making that up, really. If you go to this fantasy country that condones murder, you won't be legally accountable when you return home"
OK, I should not have specified that the other country condones murder. Lets say it's illegal there too. Now what happens on your return? In fact, what happens when a teenage (US) girl goes missing in a foreign country? The US govt gets rather upset (probably only because it made headlines) at them. In the end, they can't do anything because the suspects live in that country. I bet they'd have a something to say if she had gone there with a boyfriend who came back and was a suspect. My point is that just because you're outside your own country doesn't necessarily make you exempt from those rules.
Sure, Google is playing by chinese rules, but that doesn't exempt them from reporting income from that part of the business. It doesn't exempt them from a lot of things they have to do back home. Why is censorship any different?
Am I proposing that the only activity they should be allowed to do over there is the intersection of what's allowed here AND there? I dunno, but that would probably exclude generating search results. Nobody ever said there has to be a way to make a buck in a particular situation.
"Well, a publicly traded company is supposed to put profits first."
No, they are supposed to obey the law first, starting with the constitution. A company can not kill a person in order to boost profit. Yes, a publicly traded company has an obligation to the shareholders, but that obligation does not take priority over other laws.
If you and a friend visit a country that condones murder, and you kill your friend, you'll still be acountable when you come home to the US. Not sure what happens if you kill a local while you're there... So if you go to China and Google is censoring the net while you're using it that's illegal. I'm not sure about censoring the locals, but it still violates our principals.
Successful people tend to disregard the priciples that created the environment that made them successful. It happens all the time, and I think if Congress wants to smack someone for it that's great - we should deal with congressional misbehavior separately (for those shouting hypocrisy).
The most important aspect of this non-story to me is that it's all normal. They tried to get the computers. They were told to get a warrent. They went and got one. I'm happy to see they didn't just barge in and take them anyway. I'm glad they didn't try to charge the librarian with anything stupid. Most of all, it does point out that they can still get their job done even when they have to get one of those pesky warrants. It's a simple proceedure to have a check against unreasonable search and seizure (that whole constitution thing). And remember, they did take the computers - I'd want them to have a warrant for that too.
There's really nothing to see here, unless you think the system never works the way it's supposed to.
"...that Google's response will be, "If you don't want to be listed, you don't have to be listed. Bye."
It amazes me how willing people are to shoot themselves in the foot."
I suspect the larger news sources would rather have the practice halted completely. This would force people to go to a major news site (them) rather than google which sometimes leads people to lesser news sites. Slashdot has been linked from a Google headline more than once. Big news sites don't want people to be aware of any alternatives.
Smaller news sources probably like the publicity Google provides them. Larger news sources probably don't like the publicity Google provides those smaller competitors.
They don't want to opt out, they want it all to just go away.
"What's the point of banning specific IP addresses when they can do it from their home computer?"
You think they're going to do this stuff on their own time? I suspect being a congressional aid is a reasonable way to get laid in washington. Why would they even think about a computer when they go home? Oh right, you read slashdot...
"I think the main developer who would want to use it is Google with their adwords program. They're probably trying to minimize the bandwidth those redirects consume for all the clicking that happens on their ads.
Google gets paid for those clicks on their ads. They don't need to be altering my browser to help their business anyway. As bender would say, Google can bite my shiney metal 4$$. Hopefully distros will patch firefox, so their users won't need to fret about this. Just those windows users who get it straight from the firefox site.
I've been thinking it's time for a firefox fork that drops the MPL. The dual licensing is preventing integration of other GPLed work - like a built in PDF viewer so we can avoid Adobe. A GPL only fork would help prevent folks like Google from creating their own branded browser with stupid features no user would ever want.
From the original post: "future action in patent policy to create an EU-wide patent system can take account of stakeholders needs."
Patents are not supposed to have anything to do with "stakeholders". They need to go back and look at the justification for having patents in the first place. You won't find any reference to "stakeholders needs".
In the US, the stated purpose is (my words here) to promote dissemination of ideas - you get a limited term monopoly in exchange for disclosing to the public how your invention works. What they have come to be in practice is quite different. Some people would say we need to harmonize the rules to accepted practice, but that doesn't agree with the justification for having patents in the first place. There aren't too many things where a patent actually explains something that can't be figured out by looking at the actual implementation.
I think I just figured out the problem with our "non-obvious" requirement. You can argue about weather something was obvious before it existed, but the purpose of patents is to encourage disclosure to the public how something works or is made. This implies that it needs to cover something that is not obvious even after the public has access to the invention. A good example would be the recent methods for making diamonds - having one does not tell you how to make one. Another example would be the recipe for Coke, but they like to keep that a trade-secret. By offering Coke a patent, we'd all get to find out how to make it (legally in 20 years) but instead they keep it a secret - which has worked equally well for them without any term limit. When shown a one-click shopping cart on the web, most anyone with a little programming skill and HTML knowhow can replicate it - hence not patentable. Slick new algorithms... Hmmm. Perhaps. Ones that can be figured out easily with a disassembler - no. Basically if you need to read the patent to know how to do something then it's probably patentable based on the original justification for having them. Otherwise not. OK, so I'm dreaming...
"My statements weren't an attempt to say that Global Warming isn't real, just that people saying they "remember" it as colder wasn't legit.
Everyone who has responded to my post has done so with evidence that can be measured. Which has nothing to do with what I was saying."
My response was based on memory, so I interpreted what you said as meaning my claim isn't legit. All I know is that sleding season used to be long and fun, but now we can go out once or twice a year, and only right after a big snowfall before it all melts:-(
You may be right that people don't have an accurate memory of what it actually felt like. As you point out, you can't actually feel your memory of "cold" for direct comparison. However, I think most people who say they remember it being colder are basing that on any number of factors other than the physical feeling of lower temperatures.
You seemed to be discounting people who say nothing more than "I remember it being colder". I suspect there is usually more to it than just that, they just don't offer up more specific reasons all the time.
When I was a kid in Michigan, there was a winter where it snowed on Thanksgiving and we didn't see the grass again until March or April (spring is what I remember). I also remember that that was a hard winter - a little worse than usual, but not significantly different. Christmas was always white. Nowadays, Christmas might see a little snow leftover from very little that fell, but it is generally green these days. A few days ago, we saw 50-something degrees - this is January.
When I was a kid, we dug caves in the snow mounds that lined the driveway. In recent years, I have only had to shovel snow once or twice per season. Here it is January and I shoveled once already this year. The remaining snow has melted completely. We had several days of 40-something and rain. Yes that 50 degrees was a fluke, but a week of warm weather is not just noise. I fully expect more snow. February is the worst month - not just because we're sick of winter by then, but perhaps because for the last 15 years we've been seeing a strange warming in late January that is now perhaps taking the whole month. I'll shovel snow probably one more time probably in February.
I'm not saying the change is due to humans (though I believe much of it is). I'm just saying I disagree with your framing it as a perceived change due to problems with human memory over decades. No sir, the actual temperatures and snowfall are significantly different now than they were 30 years ago. Perhaps it's just local due to the urban sprawl, but it most definitely is real.
They did it so users couldn't accidentally delete important files?? Sure would be nice if there was such thing as "root" on Windows so you could have files that every day users couldn't delete...
You're not paying specifically for the good shows. If nobody paid, there would be some nice competition on the networks. Remember, cable takes in money from both sides. I don't know how the public got so stupid. Would you really pay $50 a month to watch that stuff you listed? Or do the other 125 channels of crap influence that decision just a bit? If nobody watched cable, the networks would compete and pick up the good programming.
"We're SWIMMING in media these days, barraged by content"
That's why some people love TiVo. Most of that media flood is crap. TiVo allows them to select what they want to see and view it when they want instead of being some kind of slave to the TV. This doesn't make TiVo the best solution.
Personally, I think people should drop cable altogether. All the local channels are broadcast in digital, and each cable company carries a different subset of them. The arguement that all the good stuff is on cable is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you'd drop cable and make the broadcasters compete (and increase their market share) they'd start picking up good shows and the quality would increase quite a bit. TiVo would not be needed to sift through it all. Best of all, people wouldn't be paying monthly for any of it.
I don't need cable to watch Desperate Housewives or the Super Bowl - both of which will be in HDTV across the nation over the air. You want to record? Get an HD3000 or Air2PC card and dump to hard drive, convert to DVD (reduced quality), use across your network, whatever. It's amazing to me that the public has decided it's normal to pay to watch TV programs that have already been paid for by advertisers.
OTOH, People pay for bottled water and complain about the price of gas. WTF?
Can't someone just point a really good telescope up there and get pictures of the stuff left behind? I know, the moon is too bright for telescopes of that power - use a filter. Oh, and the atmospheric distortion - use adaptive optics. It just seems like it could be verified with todays tech. It seems perfect for Adam to climb on top of an observatory to install a filter over a huge telescope that already has the adaptive optics.
Yes, the first web browser (Mosaic) was distributed as source. A friend of mine downloaded and compiled it at university. It ran on the X window system (ahem there's another). That was just before someone got his own domain and put his homepage at www.yahoo.com with a manually created index.
I'd argue that big companies don't innovate. Individuals and small groups innovate - sometimes they release source code, others not. PKzip and Flight Simulator also come to mind. Autocad started as a very small team that formed a startup. I suspect there are lots of major commercial apps that are copies of something done outside the company, or started small and just grew. Please name one real innovation from MicroSoft - the largest software company in the world. And please do your homework before naming it so people don't have to show you the prior art.
I'm not saying innovation is in open source here, just that it's generally not coming from big companies. Sometimes the little guy tries to make a buck instead of giving away new stuff.
"and have a kind of Huffman coding so that the most commonly used characters are quickest to type.
Exactly. So this guy claiming it's ergonomic is full of crap. Alphabetical layouts are terrible for getting common keys under the home row because they have to use that fixed (arbitrary actually) order. I think QWERTY is bad too, but if we're going to change, lets at least put some letter frequency information into the design.
"Yes, technically, it is GNU/Linux. But the world knows it as Linux."
Actually, most people have heard of Linux but don't really know what it is. Why do I say this? Becasue if they knew what it really is, more of them would be using it. My wife will likely switch to Linux in the near future, but only because I use it on my computer and she now sees what it really is - mostly the same as what she's using without the spyware and viruses. Had I not installed it myself and showed it to her, she'd be skeptical. There are one or two commercial apps that she occasionally uses that don't have (good) free equivalents yet, but the security issues are really starting to get her attention. At any rate, if it were not for me showing her what GNU/Linux really is, she would not really it an option. Having heard about it and really knowing what it is are not the same thing. The world really doesn't know much about it.
"...absolutely necessary because of the dire threat PCs and the Internet pose to the content-creation industry's very livelihood."
Right. Technology has made content production much easier, and the little guy (read independant films in the movie context) is becoming a threat to the big guys. We need a legally enforced "content protection" mechanism that is unavailable to the little guy unless he signs with the big guys... Independants will get ripped off unless they pay their protection money to get the big guys DRM.
"the Chinese are playing one mean game of chess in everything they do"
The Chinese play a mean game of GO (wei chi). I'm not particularly good at it, but the whole feel of the game is quite different. It's really challenging to say which of some moves is better or why. Moves often have very subtle effect over a large area of the board, and the "battle" is fought on many many fronts. It fits the "in everything they do" part of your comment better than chess.
You want to understand their strategy? Study their strategy game.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a boatload of tapes, including MS basic. An interesting note about that... MS disabled the "peek" and "poke" commands to prevent viewing their code and the system ROM. I still recall "poke 19215,25" will re-enable poke for the whole system. There are a few pokes to re-enable "peeking" at the ROM and BASIC interpreter - separately. It seems MS was all concerned about IP even in 1979. Stupid, I had some fun patching in new commands to the interpreter.
It also has the ROM monitor written by a Walt Hendrickson (sp?).
Fun little 8086 with crap TV graphics.
I might agree that someone sending a copy to a friend could be considered "private copying" depending on your definition, but to put it on p2p where the whole world can download it seems much more public than private. The french court must have some very interesting definitions indeed.
Sorry, but I didn't see which license they put it under. Slashdot is notoriously bad about having headlines that say some project has been open-sourced without telling us what license is used. This is just another example.
My HD2000 gets me direct access to the compressed digital signal, but it's over the air. The HD3000 can tune unencrypted digital cable channels too. The only thing all this cablecard crap is really going to accomplish is DRM. Why anyone would want to run out and buy an expensive DRM system that only reduces their options is beyond me. As for protecting premium HD content - who cares. I just recorded the superbowl in HD for grins and it ate up 35GB (yes that GIGAbytes) of hard drive space. Nobody is going to be passing this stuff around the net, or archiving it, or much of anything, DRM or not, - it's just too darn big. It's going to take my computer 30-60 seconds just to delete that file!
Besides, only a few channels are available in HD from the local cableco. They market this stuff with the "future" in mind. But as the article shows, the future will involve something different than you can buy today. If you're going to buy this stuff anyway, I'd make sure it has some immediate value today and not believe a word about what they plan to do next year or even next week. Me? I've got HDTV DVR capability on my PC today, and it's really not that useful. It is fun to show people the picture quality of HD, but beyond that it's just too much data.
If Apple wants to get IBM chip manufacturing technology, they can buy Intel compatible chips from AMD. Since IBM tech often ends up in AMD fabs, Apple can get the best of both worlds without having to recompile. Now why they went with a 32bit Intel part is still a mystery to me. 32bit processors are so last millenium....
Thanks
OK, I should not have specified that the other country condones murder. Lets say it's illegal there too. Now what happens on your return? In fact, what happens when a teenage (US) girl goes missing in a foreign country? The US govt gets rather upset (probably only because it made headlines) at them. In the end, they can't do anything because the suspects live in that country. I bet they'd have a something to say if she had gone there with a boyfriend who came back and was a suspect. My point is that just because you're outside your own country doesn't necessarily make you exempt from those rules.
Sure, Google is playing by chinese rules, but that doesn't exempt them from reporting income from that part of the business. It doesn't exempt them from a lot of things they have to do back home. Why is censorship any different?
Am I proposing that the only activity they should be allowed to do over there is the intersection of what's allowed here AND there? I dunno, but that would probably exclude generating search results. Nobody ever said there has to be a way to make a buck in a particular situation.
No, they are supposed to obey the law first, starting with the constitution. A company can not kill a person in order to boost profit. Yes, a publicly traded company has an obligation to the shareholders, but that obligation does not take priority over other laws.
If you and a friend visit a country that condones murder, and you kill your friend, you'll still be acountable when you come home to the US. Not sure what happens if you kill a local while you're there... So if you go to China and Google is censoring the net while you're using it that's illegal. I'm not sure about censoring the locals, but it still violates our principals.
Successful people tend to disregard the priciples that created the environment that made them successful. It happens all the time, and I think if Congress wants to smack someone for it that's great - we should deal with congressional misbehavior separately (for those shouting hypocrisy).
There's really nothing to see here, unless you think the system never works the way it's supposed to.
It amazes me how willing people are to shoot themselves in the foot."
I suspect the larger news sources would rather have the practice halted completely. This would force people to go to a major news site (them) rather than google which sometimes leads people to lesser news sites. Slashdot has been linked from a Google headline more than once. Big news sites don't want people to be aware of any alternatives.
Smaller news sources probably like the publicity Google provides them. Larger news sources probably don't like the publicity Google provides those smaller competitors.
They don't want to opt out, they want it all to just go away.
You think they're going to do this stuff on their own time? I suspect being a congressional aid is a reasonable way to get laid in washington. Why would they even think about a computer when they go home? Oh right, you read slashdot...
Google gets paid for those clicks on their ads. They don't need to be altering my browser to help their business anyway. As bender would say, Google can bite my shiney metal 4$$. Hopefully distros will patch firefox, so their users won't need to fret about this. Just those windows users who get it straight from the firefox site.
I've been thinking it's time for a firefox fork that drops the MPL. The dual licensing is preventing integration of other GPLed work - like a built in PDF viewer so we can avoid Adobe. A GPL only fork would help prevent folks like Google from creating their own branded browser with stupid features no user would ever want.
Patents are not supposed to have anything to do with "stakeholders". They need to go back and look at the justification for having patents in the first place. You won't find any reference to "stakeholders needs".
In the US, the stated purpose is (my words here) to promote dissemination of ideas - you get a limited term monopoly in exchange for disclosing to the public how your invention works. What they have come to be in practice is quite different. Some people would say we need to harmonize the rules to accepted practice, but that doesn't agree with the justification for having patents in the first place. There aren't too many things where a patent actually explains something that can't be figured out by looking at the actual implementation.
I think I just figured out the problem with our "non-obvious" requirement. You can argue about weather something was obvious before it existed, but the purpose of patents is to encourage disclosure to the public how something works or is made. This implies that it needs to cover something that is not obvious even after the public has access to the invention. A good example would be the recent methods for making diamonds - having one does not tell you how to make one. Another example would be the recipe for Coke, but they like to keep that a trade-secret. By offering Coke a patent, we'd all get to find out how to make it (legally in 20 years) but instead they keep it a secret - which has worked equally well for them without any term limit. When shown a one-click shopping cart on the web, most anyone with a little programming skill and HTML knowhow can replicate it - hence not patentable. Slick new algorithms... Hmmm. Perhaps. Ones that can be figured out easily with a disassembler - no. Basically if you need to read the patent to know how to do something then it's probably patentable based on the original justification for having them. Otherwise not. OK, so I'm dreaming...
My response was based on memory, so I interpreted what you said as meaning my claim isn't legit. All I know is that sleding season used to be long and fun, but now we can go out once or twice a year, and only right after a big snowfall before it all melts :-(
You may be right that people don't have an accurate memory of what it actually felt like. As you point out, you can't actually feel your memory of "cold" for direct comparison. However, I think most people who say they remember it being colder are basing that on any number of factors other than the physical feeling of lower temperatures.
You seemed to be discounting people who say nothing more than "I remember it being colder". I suspect there is usually more to it than just that, they just don't offer up more specific reasons all the time.
When I was a kid, we dug caves in the snow mounds that lined the driveway. In recent years, I have only had to shovel snow once or twice per season. Here it is January and I shoveled once already this year. The remaining snow has melted completely. We had several days of 40-something and rain. Yes that 50 degrees was a fluke, but a week of warm weather is not just noise. I fully expect more snow. February is the worst month - not just because we're sick of winter by then, but perhaps because for the last 15 years we've been seeing a strange warming in late January that is now perhaps taking the whole month. I'll shovel snow probably one more time probably in February.
I'm not saying the change is due to humans (though I believe much of it is). I'm just saying I disagree with your framing it as a perceived change due to problems with human memory over decades. No sir, the actual temperatures and snowfall are significantly different now than they were 30 years ago. Perhaps it's just local due to the urban sprawl, but it most definitely is real.
They did it so users couldn't accidentally delete important files?? Sure would be nice if there was such thing as "root" on Windows so you could have files that every day users couldn't delete...
You're not paying specifically for the good shows. If nobody paid, there would be some nice competition on the networks. Remember, cable takes in money from both sides. I don't know how the public got so stupid. Would you really pay $50 a month to watch that stuff you listed? Or do the other 125 channels of crap influence that decision just a bit? If nobody watched cable, the networks would compete and pick up the good programming.
That's why some people love TiVo. Most of that media flood is crap. TiVo allows them to select what they want to see and view it when they want instead of being some kind of slave to the TV. This doesn't make TiVo the best solution.
Personally, I think people should drop cable altogether. All the local channels are broadcast in digital, and each cable company carries a different subset of them. The arguement that all the good stuff is on cable is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you'd drop cable and make the broadcasters compete (and increase their market share) they'd start picking up good shows and the quality would increase quite a bit. TiVo would not be needed to sift through it all. Best of all, people wouldn't be paying monthly for any of it.
I don't need cable to watch Desperate Housewives or the Super Bowl - both of which will be in HDTV across the nation over the air. You want to record? Get an HD3000 or Air2PC card and dump to hard drive, convert to DVD (reduced quality), use across your network, whatever. It's amazing to me that the public has decided it's normal to pay to watch TV programs that have already been paid for by advertisers.
OTOH, People pay for bottled water and complain about the price of gas. WTF?
Can't someone just point a really good telescope up there and get pictures of the stuff left behind? I know, the moon is too bright for telescopes of that power - use a filter. Oh, and the atmospheric distortion - use adaptive optics. It just seems like it could be verified with todays tech. It seems perfect for Adam to climb on top of an observatory to install a filter over a huge telescope that already has the adaptive optics.
I'd argue that big companies don't innovate. Individuals and small groups innovate - sometimes they release source code, others not. PKzip and Flight Simulator also come to mind. Autocad started as a very small team that formed a startup. I suspect there are lots of major commercial apps that are copies of something done outside the company, or started small and just grew. Please name one real innovation from MicroSoft - the largest software company in the world. And please do your homework before naming it so people don't have to show you the prior art.
I'm not saying innovation is in open source here, just that it's generally not coming from big companies. Sometimes the little guy tries to make a buck instead of giving away new stuff.
So now all the Seagate drives that failed quality control can finally be sold anyway - under the Maxtor brand.
Exactly. So this guy claiming it's ergonomic is full of crap. Alphabetical layouts are terrible for getting common keys under the home row because they have to use that fixed (arbitrary actually) order. I think QWERTY is bad too, but if we're going to change, lets at least put some letter frequency information into the design.
Actually, most people have heard of Linux but don't really know what it is. Why do I say this? Becasue if they knew what it really is, more of them would be using it. My wife will likely switch to Linux in the near future, but only because I use it on my computer and she now sees what it really is - mostly the same as what she's using without the spyware and viruses. Had I not installed it myself and showed it to her, she'd be skeptical. There are one or two commercial apps that she occasionally uses that don't have (good) free equivalents yet, but the security issues are really starting to get her attention. At any rate, if it were not for me showing her what GNU/Linux really is, she would not really it an option. Having heard about it and really knowing what it is are not the same thing. The world really doesn't know much about it.
Right. Technology has made content production much easier, and the little guy (read independant films in the movie context) is becoming a threat to the big guys. We need a legally enforced "content protection" mechanism that is unavailable to the little guy unless he signs with the big guys... Independants will get ripped off unless they pay their protection money to get the big guys DRM.
The Chinese play a mean game of GO (wei chi). I'm not particularly good at it, but the whole feel of the game is quite different. It's really challenging to say which of some moves is better or why. Moves often have very subtle effect over a large area of the board, and the "battle" is fought on many many fronts. It fits the "in everything they do" part of your comment better than chess.
You want to understand their strategy? Study their strategy game.