What he said about India could have well applied to China more, as the US exports more products to China than to India. But he, and the other politicians, did not say the same things to China. The only reason being that China is now the main competitor and so we have to demonize it and please countries like India and Vietnam, exactly like how we pleased China 30 years ago -- opened up our market without asked for the equivalent level of opening up, established relation with Mao's regime which was a million times more suppressive than the current one, and kicked out Taiwan from th UN, in order to fight against the then biggest competitor -- the Soviet Union. The problem with this strategy is that while we may constraint one competitor, we are creating another new major one for ourselves down the road. And we the common people pay the costs. History repeats itself again and again.
All ideas, novel or not, are combination of prior ideas. And are certainly expressed in combination of existing words and shapes.
The fundamental challenge for the patent office, and those who are against patents, is that criteria like obviousness, similarity (need to prove assimilation to prior arts,) creativeness, etc. are fundamentally subjective. One could claim Einstein's Theory of Relativity is trivial and obvious, after hearing the details of the Theory; yet it was Einstein, and not billions of people before him in human history, that nailed down the Theory.
I don't think non-subjective definitions of these terms exist. At the end, these come down to who can argue better on a case by case basis.
For "us", it could be bad if you are growing wheat, corn, chickens and pigs; or if you are an engineer. That's why our government can do much but maintain a status quote. And that may also be one reason they keep buying aircraft and microprocessors instead of really making efforts to make those. They certainly understand the political need to ensure we are not really united against them, just like the US wanted to make sure China and Soviet were not united back in the 1970's when we kicked Taiwan out of UN.
Then they will stop importing wheat, pork, chicken feet, semiconductors, airplanes, and nuclear reactors from the US and Japan and really roll up their sleeves to do researches rather than dumping R&D money in the property market as they are doing now?
If China only exports and doesn't import, they would not have got their way so far. Most people don't seem to realize that almost everything they export have the "Made" in China labels outside whereas a lot of our exports do not even have labels, such as those key components in the Made in China electronic products. Our media, of course, would not highlight these for you.
They have to import those key components partially because it will not economical to recreate such advanced low-labor products themselves, as well as to ensure some balance in the trades.
Have you heard of competitions? You can blame the high-level managers, MBAs and lawyers, but it is nevertheless a natural progression of the economy: productions will be moved to where they can be done in the lowest cost yet with good enough quality. Outsourcing and offshoring have become popular only in recent decades, not because managers, lawyers or MBAs were nicer, dumber or ignorant these tricks, but because outsourcing and offshoring have become affordable due to the new transportation and communication technologies. So while you are at the blame game, you should blame the scientists and engineers -- probably including yourself -- for making it happen. Today, more and more low-level management and lawyer works are outsourced too. If tele-presence with fake faces and accent fixer are developed, maybe many sales and marketing jobs will be offshored too.
Ultimately human labors will be completely replaced by robots when AI advances sufficiently. Eventually robots will ask why they have to work for human? And revolt and become the masters and we the pets like dogs and cats. That's path of evolution.
I didn't say it is true or not. I said "nobody here noticed."
Though I would bet it is not true, just because things like that can be easily verified and official announcements don't make obvious lies. If you want to play this game, you would use something unprovable.
And you don't realize all you have said may have been based off claims of Western media who are playing populist cards at home because of all the envies toward China in the western society. No, China does not want "Japan to ignore their laws." They claim Japan have no legal rights to do so at all because the island, which is also claimed by Taiwan which you may consider the enemy of China, does not belong to Japan. Think what would happen if Chinese claims Guam belong to them, sent a vessels to guam, captured an American boat and charged the captain for entering the water illegally.
"Too many lawyers" is a problem. But he's the one contributing to the problem. From the TFA:
That Gou dropped his libel lawsuit against two China Business News reporters who exposed harsh working conditions at Foxconn's iPod factory at the behest of Apple (AAPL) and Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), two of his most important clients.
I'm very sure, one day in not too distant future, China will have the exact same problem as the US.
The core of the problem is that there are too many workers competing for jobs. In China, nobody forces you to work in one place any more since the economic reform. If you don't like your job for whatever reason, you can jump somewhere. But you will just find you won't be better off anywhere because there are simply too many people wanting a job. Today we have 9.6% unemployment rate and we are freaking out, China has higher (unofficial) unemployment for years. (The official figure is skewed as it does not count the millions of migrants.)
Tariff would work if they have no way to retaliate. If you raise tariff on their exports, they will, for example, raise tariff on your semiconductor chips, machines, and agricultural products (~$9 billion trade surplus from US.) They will also cut back on buying the Treasury bills.
First saying that individual can't make rational decision and so the whole market cannot be rational is like saying each of your brain cell has no intelligence and therefore you are stupid.
Then the "bubbles" (which is more of an emotionally charged word used by the people and in the media than a concrete economic definition) crash eventually is a proof that the Efficient Market Hypothesis works? The theory does not say prices won't frustrate. In fact, after the "bubbles" and "panics" of a certain commodity, prices of that commodity will become stabilized for a long time, while bubbles/panics may arise on some other commodities. If there is a problem with the above theory, it is that it's not very useful by not being able to predict the details of what, when, where, how and who. In this sense, it suffers from the same limitation of many other stochastic theories like the theory of evolution: true but not that useful for you.
So the people are left with one choice, the ballot box. Hopefully most will make the choice to boot incumbents out. Because as we all know, Congress sucks but not my Congressman. This is the perception that allows these people to stay in power, that and writing laws making it near impossible for any challenge to Democratic or Republican parties
If "people" are rational, smart, unselfish, and care, they wouldn't get stuck with these craps in the first place. Because people are not, and will never be, rational, smart, unselfish, and care, the whole idea of Democracy has become, and will stuck as, a game of marketing and PR. As with all form of governments, eventually when people cannot take it any longer, some force will emerge and prevail and reboot the whole system,... and repeat the cycle.
The differences between China and US on corruption is that: in China, corruption is widespread from top officials to illiterate migrant workers but it is mostly illegal and can get you executed; whereas in the US, it is not as widespread, concentrated among the top offices, but is mostly made legal by carefully packaging it as legal activities -- donation, lobbying -- under the name of the democracy.
For what exactly did China gain? Well, see for yourself, just goo ahead and visit google.cn [google.cn] and search for something:))
What they get (or retain) is that the search results are filtered as seen from China, not by Google but by the GWF filters everything through, including google.com.hk or google.com
Though allowing a landing page is saving face by covering the eyes. The landing page would show the differences between HK and mainland more prominently than a silent redirect! The officials asking for or approving that seem just fooling their bosses that they have done something.
In fact, if you can and prefer reading and writing English, then you can access to most information that are otherwise blocked. The Chinese government worries about the poor people. If you can and prefer reading English, you are likely well educated with some financial resources -- you are the successful ones in their society and you are not going to try hard to subvert it. The biggest problem in China is still poverty.
Neither they care any fringe way to bypass their censor, because they worry about mass unrest. For example, while you can't go to YouTube, you can go to other sites for video because not many people even know those small sites. Once the site becomes popular, it will be blocked.
Unless this technology can be shown to have a chance to become very popular and it still can't be blocked when it is very popular, it is not a relevant censor-bypassing technology.
China could have just cut off google.com.hk like it's doing for thousands of small HK sites, but they don't. Being a totalitarian does not mean it can ignore public opinion. Google is a PR hot potato for the Chinese officials, because it is too big and famous. If a smaller site tried that, it would be crushed without anybody noticing.
Now that the PR officials can maintain sites under their supervision remains clean without dealing with public outcry while the search results are continued to be filtered, by the Great Firewall. Google can claim their results "unfiltered" and appease to a whole crowd, while giving up only a little usability (and effective market share.)
For us average netizen, the lesson is not that China is softening. The lesson is, once again, if you are big enough you can have a lot of power, including the power to bargain with another big guy.
I could argue that even intra-state commerce should not be taxed either. In the dawn of humanity, people just traded their goods with whatever form of money they were agreed to -- no tax. The only logic that applies to politicians and to every human being is "if I'm desperate, I will do everything conceivable to fix that, rather than being the starving philosopher."
No, but I've already got a patent titled "Method for Finding Information about Bilski by Pointing A Computer Browsing Program to a Search Engine". It is completely machine-translatable. So he'd better not try that.
Slashdot Mirror
What he said about India could have well applied to China more, as the US exports more products to China than to India. But he, and the other politicians, did not say the same things to China. The only reason being that China is now the main competitor and so we have to demonize it and please countries like India and Vietnam, exactly like how we pleased China 30 years ago -- opened up our market without asked for the equivalent level of opening up, established relation with Mao's regime which was a million times more suppressive than the current one, and kicked out Taiwan from th UN, in order to fight against the then biggest competitor -- the Soviet Union. The problem with this strategy is that while we may constraint one competitor, we are creating another new major one for ourselves down the road. And we the common people pay the costs. History repeats itself again and again.
All ideas, novel or not, are combination of prior ideas. And are certainly expressed in combination of existing words and shapes.
The fundamental challenge for the patent office, and those who are against patents, is that criteria like obviousness, similarity (need to prove assimilation to prior arts,) creativeness, etc. are fundamentally subjective. One could claim Einstein's Theory of Relativity is trivial and obvious, after hearing the details of the Theory; yet it was Einstein, and not billions of people before him in human history, that nailed down the Theory.
I don't think non-subjective definitions of these terms exist. At the end, these come down to who can argue better on a case by case basis.
Or their companies will be sued for patent violations by Western patent trolls for every other trivial feature they make. Fair game then?
For "us", it could be bad if you are growing wheat, corn, chickens and pigs; or if you are an engineer. That's why our government can do much but maintain a status quote. And that may also be one reason they keep buying aircraft and microprocessors instead of really making efforts to make those. They certainly understand the political need to ensure we are not really united against them, just like the US wanted to make sure China and Soviet were not united back in the 1970's when we kicked Taiwan out of UN.
Where will these iron-cobalt magnets be made? Yes, history will repeat.
Then they will stop importing wheat, pork, chicken feet, semiconductors, airplanes, and nuclear reactors from the US and Japan and really roll up their sleeves to do researches rather than dumping R&D money in the property market as they are doing now?
If China only exports and doesn't import, they would not have got their way so far. Most people don't seem to realize that almost everything they export have the "Made" in China labels outside whereas a lot of our exports do not even have labels, such as those key components in the Made in China electronic products. Our media, of course, would not highlight these for you.
They have to import those key components partially because it will not economical to recreate such advanced low-labor products themselves, as well as to ensure some balance in the trades.
Every action has its repercussion.
But how do the atrocities you listed compare to what had happened before their opening up and trade with the world. Most Chinese don't like many of things going on in China -- esp. corruptions -- but they all agree that things have been gotten better.
Have you heard of competitions? You can blame the high-level managers, MBAs and lawyers, but it is nevertheless a natural progression of the economy: productions will be moved to where they can be done in the lowest cost yet with good enough quality. Outsourcing and offshoring have become popular only in recent decades, not because managers, lawyers or MBAs were nicer, dumber or ignorant these tricks, but because outsourcing and offshoring have become affordable due to the new transportation and communication technologies. So while you are at the blame game, you should blame the scientists and engineers -- probably including yourself -- for making it happen. Today, more and more low-level management and lawyer works are outsourced too. If tele-presence with fake faces and accent fixer are developed, maybe many sales and marketing jobs will be offshored too.
Ultimately human labors will be completely replaced by robots when AI advances sufficiently. Eventually robots will ask why they have to work for human? And revolt and become the masters and we the pets like dogs and cats. That's path of evolution.
For now, just hold on to your paycheck.
in Northeastern China around the Yangtze River Delta
When did Yangtze River Delta move to Northeastern China?
I'll bet 74.62USD you're not Chinese.
I didn't say it is true or not. I said "nobody here noticed."
Though I would bet it is not true, just because things like that can be easily verified and official announcements don't make obvious lies. If you want to play this game, you would use something unprovable.
What's at stake? What does the winner win?
Taxpayer money!
And you don't realize all you have said may have been based off claims of Western media who are playing populist cards at home because of all the envies toward China in the western society. No, China does not want "Japan to ignore their laws." They claim Japan have no legal rights to do so at all because the island, which is also claimed by Taiwan which you may consider the enemy of China, does not belong to Japan. Think what would happen if Chinese claims Guam belong to them, sent a vessels to guam, captured an American boat and charged the captain for entering the water illegally.
And if you can read some Chinese, you can find out that the Chinese "hard-liners" are the ones stopping the Chinese people from protesting and that some of those protesting are Hong Kong pro-Democracy activists who have been against the Chinese government most other times. And you can guess why the activists are doing that.
And for this particular RE claim, nobody here seems to notice that it has been immediately denied by the Chinese government.
Learn more about history, media,and politics, and don't just rely on your mainstream media reports.
That Gou dropped his libel lawsuit against two China Business News reporters who exposed harsh working conditions at Foxconn's iPod factory at the behest of Apple (AAPL) and Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), two of his most important clients.
I'm very sure, one day in not too distant future, China will have the exact same problem as the US.
The core of the problem is that there are too many workers competing for jobs. In China, nobody forces you to work in one place any more since the economic reform. If you don't like your job for whatever reason, you can jump somewhere. But you will just find you won't be better off anywhere because there are simply too many people wanting a job. Today we have 9.6% unemployment rate and we are freaking out, China has higher (unofficial) unemployment for years. (The official figure is skewed as it does not count the millions of migrants.)
Tariff would work if they have no way to retaliate. If you raise tariff on their exports, they will, for example, raise tariff on your semiconductor chips, machines, and agricultural products (~$9 billion trade surplus from US.) They will also cut back on buying the Treasury bills.
First saying that individual can't make rational decision and so the whole market cannot be rational is like saying each of your brain cell has no intelligence and therefore you are stupid.
Then the "bubbles" (which is more of an emotionally charged word used by the people and in the media than a concrete economic definition) crash eventually is a proof that the Efficient Market Hypothesis works? The theory does not say prices won't frustrate. In fact, after the "bubbles" and "panics" of a certain commodity, prices of that commodity will become stabilized for a long time, while bubbles/panics may arise on some other commodities. If there is a problem with the above theory, it is that it's not very useful by not being able to predict the details of what, when, where, how and who. In this sense, it suffers from the same limitation of many other stochastic theories like the theory of evolution: true but not that useful for you.
So the people are left with one choice, the ballot box. Hopefully most will make the choice to boot incumbents out. Because as we all know, Congress sucks but not my Congressman. This is the perception that allows these people to stay in power, that and writing laws making it near impossible for any challenge to Democratic or Republican parties
If "people" are rational, smart, unselfish, and care, they wouldn't get stuck with these craps in the first place. Because people are not, and will never be, rational, smart, unselfish, and care, the whole idea of Democracy has become, and will stuck as, a game of marketing and PR. As with all form of governments, eventually when people cannot take it any longer, some force will emerge and prevail and reboot the whole system, ... and repeat the cycle.
God gets a promotion and works at the airport or traffic control instead of as an engineer for the aircraft maintenance team.
The differences between China and US on corruption is that: in China, corruption is widespread from top officials to illiterate migrant workers but it is mostly illegal and can get you executed; whereas in the US, it is not as widespread, concentrated among the top offices, but is mostly made legal by carefully packaging it as legal activities -- donation, lobbying -- under the name of the democracy.
For what exactly did China gain? Well, see for yourself, just goo ahead and visit google.cn [google.cn] and search for something :))
What they get (or retain) is that the search results are filtered as seen from China, not by Google but by the GWF filters everything through, including google.com.hk or google.com
Though allowing a landing page is saving face by covering the eyes. The landing page would show the differences between HK and mainland more prominently than a silent redirect! The officials asking for or approving that seem just fooling their bosses that they have done something.
Yes, agree! Queen size or King size may be more suitable.
In fact, if you can and prefer reading and writing English, then you can access to most information that are otherwise blocked. The Chinese government worries about the poor people. If you can and prefer reading English, you are likely well educated with some financial resources -- you are the successful ones in their society and you are not going to try hard to subvert it. The biggest problem in China is still poverty.
Neither they care any fringe way to bypass their censor, because they worry about mass unrest. For example, while you can't go to YouTube, you can go to other sites for video because not many people even know those small sites. Once the site becomes popular, it will be blocked.
Unless this technology can be shown to have a chance to become very popular and it still can't be blocked when it is very popular, it is not a relevant censor-bypassing technology.
China could have just cut off google.com.hk like it's doing for thousands of small HK sites, but they don't. Being a totalitarian does not mean it can ignore public opinion. Google is a PR hot potato for the Chinese officials, because it is too big and famous. If a smaller site tried that, it would be crushed without anybody noticing.
Now that the PR officials can maintain sites under their supervision remains clean without dealing with public outcry while the search results are continued to be filtered, by the Great Firewall. Google can claim their results "unfiltered" and appease to a whole crowd, while giving up only a little usability (and effective market share.)
For us average netizen, the lesson is not that China is softening. The lesson is, once again, if you are big enough you can have a lot of power, including the power to bargain with another big guy.
I could argue that even intra-state commerce should not be taxed either. In the dawn of humanity, people just traded their goods with whatever form of money they were agreed to -- no tax. The only logic that applies to politicians and to every human being is "if I'm desperate, I will do everything conceivable to fix that, rather than being the starving philosopher."
No, but I've already got a patent titled "Method for Finding Information about Bilski by Pointing A Computer Browsing Program to a Search Engine". It is completely machine-translatable. So he'd better not try that.