Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

China Developing own Standards

Posted by CmdrTaco on Tue May 25, 2004 09:22 AM
from the well-bully-for-them dept.
J ROC writes "Encouraged by their government Chinese electronics firms are shunning technological protocols invented abroad and developing their own, according to this article. The Chinese have developed several standards including EVD to replace DVD standards, and TD-SCDMA to replace the CDMA cell phone standard found elsewhere. The reasons seem to be partly based on "techno-nationalism", and Chinese firms growing tired of paying foreign patent fees. While this may force foreign firms to lower their patent fees, some experts warn that China risks isolating itself if it creates standards that are incompatible with the rest of the world."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Hardware: China Readies Royalty-Free DVD Format, Again 183 comments
An anonymous reader writes with an InfoWorld article on China's new attempt to introduce a royalty-free format to rival the DVD. The article is not sanguine on China's chances of getting the EVD format used outside of its own borders (they tried once before in 2003). The submitter is more optimistic, asking: "Is this the future and the effective end of DRM — to be taken and co-opted by nation-states?" From the article: "The DVD player makers plan to switch to EVD (enhanced versatile disk) in an attempt to avoid paying patent royalties on the DVD format, according to published reports. The world's largest producers of DVD players, Chinese electronics companies would use the format instead of standards such as MPEG-4. Last week, 20 top manufacturers including Haier announced their plans to switch from DVD to EVD entirely by 2008, according to a report in China Economic News."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Piracy... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by stephenisu (580105) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:24AM (#9247354)
    Wonder how this will effect all the rampant pirating of our wares?
    • Re:Piracy... (Score:4, Informative)

      by mblase (200735) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:52AM (#9247760)
      Wonder how this will effect all the rampant pirating of our wares?

      I'm sure it won't affect it at all, although it will probably affect the manufacture of devices it's played on.

      For instance, right now you can buy a DVD player in the USA for $40, if not less, because the components to make one are so widely standardized they can be bought at rock-bottom prices.

      If China enforces a new format to replace DVDs, they'll have to require manufacturers to build new devices to play the new format -- which won't be as cheap and won't sell as well, if at all.

      It'll be little problem for pirate movie sellers to convert overseas movies to the new format, but it'll be harder for manufacturers to get people to buy the new players unless China goes door-to-door to retake people's region-free players.

      If anything, widespread piracy will defeat China's effort to impose new standards, because the government won't be able to stop pirates from selling standard DVDs.
  • by twbecker (315312) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:24AM (#9247361)
    . . .and China will come up with an incompatible email protocol, and rid us of much of our spam problem ;)
  • by Spatula Sam (770957) * on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:24AM (#9247362)
    Creating national standards is an eventual dead-end. Eventually, when the Next Big Thing overtakes the world, these national standards will only serve as an impediment to technical progress in China. Remember Minitel vs the global internet in France? If it's this kind of backwards progress they're after, they might as well invent their own alternative to the metric system.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:24AM (#9247364)
    China has a market that is far far FAR too large to care what the rest of the world thinks or does. As the middle class grows, companies from the rest of the world are going to come crawling to China in order to participate in the market.

    They won't isolate themselves, they'll re-write the books on standardization.

  • Funny that. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mateito (746185) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:24AM (#9247367) Homepage
    20% of the world's population.

    I reckon that's a pretty good base on which to design standards.

    Jackie Chan was asked once in an interview if he regretted not breaking into the US market. He replied that with 2 billion people in asia, why should he care about the States? :)
    • by n1ywb (555767) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:27AM (#9247404) Homepage Journal
      Yeah with only 2 billion people in their market, they could wind up being really isolated.
    • Re:Funny that. (Score:5, Informative)

      20% of the world's population.
      Just think how much more it would be if Mao hadn't killed 30-60 million of his own people during "The Great Leap Forward" (plus another million or so during the "Cultural Revolution"), and if the current regime didn't perform forced abortions for population control.

      Jackie Chan was asked once in an interview if he regretted not breaking into the US market. He replied that with 2 billion people in asia, why should he care about the States?
      Yes, that would explain why he never came to the U.S. and started working in Hollywood. Hey, wait a minute...

      • Re:Funny that. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Mateito (746185) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:43AM (#9247645) Homepage
        True (Why did you get modded down.. that was a good point?)

        > China may be 20% of the world population, but it
        > doesn't have 20% of the world's wealth.

        I'm going to add a word to that statement.

        "Yet".

        Sure, people have been predicting that the most populous nations on earth would be the "next superpower" for years... brazil, india and now china.

        I think it will happen, not only for their size, but because they seem to have retained an understanding of the importance of education while the rest of the world... especially the US and Australia... are opting for modeles where the Rich get educated and the "poor" (those not in the top 10%) are receiving less education in order to become serfs for the elite.

        I don't think the model is sustainable. But then, Bush is the most powerful man in the world and he's a dipshit intellectually, so maybe I'm wrong.
        • Re:Funny that. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by NeoSkandranon (515696) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:53AM (#9247775)
          If china ever has 20% of the world's wealth, you can bet it won't be in the hands of the people.
        • Re:Funny that. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by ForsakenRegex (312284) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @10:38AM (#9248443) Homepage
          "...especially the US and Australia... are opting for modeles where the Rich get educated and the 'poor' (those not in the top 10%) are receiving less education in order to become serfs for the elite."

          The problem with education in America isn't the government. It is the parenting. I grew up in a trailer. We had barely enough money to eat. I attended a substandard school with substandard academics that did little to prepare me for the future. Yet, I've been successful, and my sister even more so (fucking overachiever). How is this possible with the low education and non-existant support from my government? Our parents instilled in us, from an early age, the importance of succeeding where they had failed. They paid attention and made sure we did not regress. This is the job of the parent. It is not the job of the government. No one, child or adult, should expect to "receive" an education. You seldom learn from something handed to you. The true lessons are from what you take or from what is taken from you. Any education is available if you have the initiative to find it. It is this initiative that children lack. For this lack, the parents are predominantly to blame.

  • by robslimo (587196) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:25AM (#9247378) Homepage Journal
    China risks isolating itself if it creates standards that are incompatible with the rest of the world.

    I'm more concerned that someday the rest of the world may need to bend over [backward] to support China's standards. They are, after all, manufacturing a great many of the electronic items that we buy.
  • Standards (Score:4, Funny)

    by dacarr (562277) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:27AM (#9247393) Homepage Journal
    I love standards. There are just so many to choose from. And now China is going to give us more.
  • Metric? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:27AM (#9247395)

    some experts warn that China risks isolating itself if it creates standards that are incompatible with the rest of the world

    Why not? It works for the United States...

    On a serious note, China is big enough to throw its own weight around if it wants to, though.

  • by Ximbiot (723866) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:27AM (#9247398) Homepage
    I don't know about that isolation warning. China is pretty big and has access to cheap labor. Microsoft isolated itself right into a market monopoly by ignoring standards.
  • by JumboMessiah (316083) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:27AM (#9247403)
    " some experts warn that China risks isolating itself if it creates standards that are incompatible with the rest of the world."

    And that's particularly different from the U.S. how? PCS vs. GSM...
  • Turning the table (Score:5, Interesting)

    by DJ Rubbie (621940) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:28AM (#9247410) Homepage Journal
    While this may force foreign firms to lower their patent fees, some experts warn that China risks isolating itself if it creates standards that are incompatible with the rest of the world.

    While that is true, China could also benefit from setting their own standards, letting other corporations or other countries use it for free or much lower cost than the more costly, patent protected counterparts. That will likely turn the table around and isolate the more expensive alternatives of what we have now, and will be using their cheaper and possibly superior standards for our future needs.

  • by akaina (472254) * on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:28AM (#9247423) Journal
    Compatible with the 'rest of the world'? China IS the rest of the world. America occupies about 5% of the world population. Instead of worrying about China technologically cutting itself off, how about we worry about being compatible with their standards? I'm more worried that one day there will be 3 billion EVD players that won't read DVDs.
  • Not Really.. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by xchino (591175) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:31AM (#9247462)
    I don't think they'd be isolating themseleves (anymore so than they are now, willingly). There's no reason that they couldn't develop gateways to interface with foriegn technology. It's not like compatable technologies won't be available, they'll still be made over there to be shipped to first world countries, and I'm sure they'd be happy to sell to the chinese people as well. If this brings lower cost technology to the people, I'm all for it. If it's intended as a means of information isolation, then of course they can make that happen, but I don't think that's the case here. It seems like they genuinely want to get out of patent costs, which is why they have a national Linux distribution. Truly Open standards aren't patent encumbered, and maybe they'll open up some of their tech to us, and we end up being the ones who adopt it, as an open and perhaps better standard.
  • Isolated market??? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by OzPeter (195038) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:31AM (#9247467)
    With an estimated population of 1.3 to 1.4 BILLION by 2010, I can really see China's techno nationalism hurting itself.

    If (for example) the US with a population of ONLY 300 Million, and Japan (130 million) and a few other countries can dominate the worlds technology, I can easily imagine that in 50 years time we could be all following Chinas leads with regards to technology (assuming of course they haven't outsourced it all to India by then :-)
  • No duh.... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Himring (646324) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:32AM (#9247478) Homepage Journal
    Experts warn that China risks isolating itself

    China's history is all about isolation (erm, the great wall and stuff), not to mention what communism did to them. Their modern history is rife with isolationism. To quote Spock, "Only Nixon could go to China." This says nothing of the centuries before that. So isolated were they that they didn't even realize they were the ones who invented the clock!

    China, isolating itself?... It took experts to realize this?...
  • After RTFA, I thought of a decent question. Are there Chinese developed formats better then the current US/Japanese formats out there right now? They mentioned the Chinese WIFI encryption; WAPI. Is it better then WAP? Worse?

    To be honest, I could see why they would want thier own formats. They have a country of over a billion people, and even if only a fraction of them buy eqiupment based on foreign patents; that's a lot of money.
  • Patent fees (Score:5, Insightful)

    by m.h.2 (617891) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:33AM (#9247489) Journal
    ...Chinese firms growing tired of paying foreign patent fees.

    Are they even _paying_ patent fees now?
  • ... as a sovereign state. Not so good for those who dream of a one world integrated system. I don't concieve of any reason interchanges couldn't be develop to allow the chinese standards to coexist with the rest of the world, sure it will be bothersome to some, but maybe this will give China an opportunity to innovate in new and interesting ways. What some may regard as fractioning I would say could potentially spurr innovation and competition. But you know, why look for a bright side to this when it gives us ample opportunity to pull a chicken little or to belittle somebody else...

    Woot for the chinese! Dirty commies! :-)
  • by Clinoti (696723) * on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:35AM (#9247528)
    While this may force foreign firms to lower their patent fees, some experts warn that China risks isolating itself if it creates standards that are incompatible with the rest of the world."

    Bullhockey, the rest of the world will cater easily to a market of possibly 1.3 billion consumers, let us not forget the system of capitalism which does not really care who is buying it as long as someone is buying it. If the cost of licensing and fees are so high in a market where the foothold was not that strong to begin with then it would only follow reason that people/corporations/governments will adapt to the fabrication of their own systems...which is the same argument we use in the OSS community.

    Additionally, China does not like to follow foreign arrangements, they tangle with democracy and touches of capitalism too much as it is (their opinion), having them rely on those same foreign arrangements undermines the authority of the governing powers.

    It's about time that China started doing these things, hopefully the push in the technology direction wont spark another arms race, but rather easier and open stream technology and systems for the lower end users.

  • Linus is Chinese? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Vellmont (569020) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:37AM (#9247551)

    It has been promoting as more secure the homegrown Red Flag Linux, based on an open-code operating system.


    First Linux was invented by the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus, and now Linus is Chinese. Methinks the article author doesn't get it with respect to linux.

    As far as the other technolgies, I think the EVD standard is doomed to failure. People are going to want DVDs from abroad, and a player that only does EVD isn't going to sell. The mobile phone standard doesn't matter. The US has gone its own way with cell phone standards and the sky hasn't fallen yet. There's not a lot of compelling reasons why mobile phone standards have to be compatible with the rest of the world, and China is definately big enough to set their own standard.

    As far as this cry of "nationalism", that just sounds like posturing to justify this to a certain communist segment of the Chinese populace. Setting your own standards and avoiding patent fees sounds like capitalism to me.
  • by mav[LAG] (31387) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:42AM (#9247625)
    Lazlo's Chinese Relativity Axiom:

    No matter how great your triumphs or how tragic your defeats - approximately one billion Chinese couldn't care less.
  • While the problem of incompatibility may appear to make this move foolish, it is in fact very smart of them to do so from an economic and national standpoint. Consider these points:
    • China has a huge trade surplus with the western world, and in particular the USA. They hold very large sums of US treasury bonds, giving them real economic leverage against US intervention in Taiwan and North Korea.
    • By developing their own protocols, technical standards, and software (based on Linux or other open source we suppose) they further their goal of keeping capital inside China while sucking capital out from other industrialized nations in trade. Further, they maintain legitimate WTO status be meeting the letter of the law in their international trade treaties.
    • With each step they take integrating into the world trade community by breaking down centralized management of their economy the Chinese government has taken flanking steps politically to shore up power within the central government. This is a great example of how to implement capitalist economic theory without sacrificing political power with political decentralization through democratic means. IOW: freemarket capitalism doesn't necessarily require or create democracy, and here's your proof.
    • While Chinese GDP is small compared to the US or Europe, that won't continue for long. The Chinese economy is the fastest growing of all industrializing nations. And they have a huge pool of cheap labor with which to maintain that growth. Don't assume that just because we set technical standards here in the west that fifty years from now standards designed in China today can't take over a Chinese dominated marketplace tomorrow. Apple once held control over the GUI market for a time, who controls it now? There are many alternative scenarios whereby the technical leaders who dominate a market today lose their power and fade from the market tomorrow.

    China is a real threat to the potential for world democracy. And don't forget it. They may trade with the west, but their political structure and long term planning make them political and economic adversaries long term. Compared to them, Iraq is a "[...]side show of a side show" (See Lawrence of Arabia for the quote).

    --Maynard
      • by isaac (2852) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @12:26PM (#9249874)
        Chinese economic growth in the future is dependent on the same thing US economic growth is dependent on.

        Cheap Oil.

        China is actually a coal-fueled country, to a much greater degree than the US. Fortunately for them, they happen to have the largest coal reserves in the world. (Unfortunately for them, the coal they have is really dirty, and pollution is the biggest constraint on growth they face.)

        -Isaac

  • by Anonymous Bullard (62082) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:46AM (#9247675) Homepage
    And the Chinese Communist Party leadership would consider that a negative thing? Foreign firms located in China would still churn out "made in China" products for the foreign market, and probably adopted China's own standards as well. After all, everyone's flocking to the Chinese market exactly to "tap into" that massive market of 1.3B consumers.

    Secondly, China remains a totalitarian country which has only adopted capitalistic market as a stepping stone on its way back to pure communism. That remains the ultimate goal and doctrine of the CCP. Isolation from foreign "control" allows them to better insulate their own population, selectively, from expected evil foreign manipulation and "interference in China's internal affairs". Becoming a "standards-setter" might also give the CCP more leverage over Taiwan's extremely powerful business lobby in preparation of the "re-unification" of that island with communist China.

    On a related note, all this foreign investment feeding the growth of totalitarian China is somewhat akin to helping Hitler build up the Nazi German industry, after Hitler had already begun invading its neighbours. China's nationalist propaganda aside, they are holding Tibet under very harsh foreign occupation, and the turkic Uighur people of East Turkestan (which the Chinese call Xinjiang, or "New Frontier") are not too happy under Chinese control and massive influx of ethnic Chinese on their lands either. But yet China is a great business buddy while the fully contained and de facto harmless Iraq had to be invaded... Maybe I just don't get the true meaning of this "liberation of people" stuff.

  • by jlowery (47102) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:47AM (#9247690)

    While this may force foreign firms to lower their patent fees, some experts warn that China risks isolating itself if it creates standards that are incompatible with the rest of the world.


    Seems that the US and Canada have done okay despite their standardization on Imperial measurement units as opposed to metric. The Chinese populations is now something like 1.2 billion people if I recall correctly, which is 4 times larger than the US. Once they get going economically they'll be dictating a lot of standards, I'm afraid.

  • by bullitB (447519) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:56AM (#9247827)
    Just as an example, EVD has been something of a flop.

    The Chinese didn't actually invent most of the technology in EVD; they seem to have just taken the existing DVD medium and licensed On2's VP6 video codec (On2 is US-based). They've shipped so little actual EVD units that On2 is suing the Chinese companies involved [on2.com] for not fulfilling their minimum units obligations. As a bit of anecdotal evidence, my Chinese friend claims that he can't even find EVDs any more (there were more several months ago).

    TD-SCDMA was also developed in large part by outsiders (Siemen's IIRC), and hasn't completely taken off, though this may change if/when the government decides to require operators to use it. Point is, I believe many of these new "Chinese standards" are really just a way to encourage real competition in the new Chinese economy, and it's actually working extremely well. EVD, for example, might actually be a really great way to stop the HD-DVD mafia from imposing discriminatory patent fees against Chinese electronics manufacturers.
  • by Servo (9177) <dstringf@gmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Tuesday May 25 2004, @10:12AM (#9248054) Journal
    Lowers the cost of technology in China.

    Reduces revenue to American and Japanese technology firms.

    Allows for a new technical-design boom for Chinese workers, increasing knowledge and affluence.

    Creates a cheaper alternative for worldwide consumers, including Americans. (Can you say WAL-MART?)

    Increases the brain drain already in full swing from the major outsourcing of programmers and other tech positions to India.
    • by akaina (472254) * on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:30AM (#9247453) Journal
      There isn't a dillema in China. China was given open access to the WTO by President Clinton who called them a "strategic ally".

      China is having a field day, and we should be very concerned that their form of government can reap the benefits of a free society without adhering to its rules.
      • by citog (206365) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @10:14AM (#9248097)
        Have to question your assertion that, we should be very concerned that their form of government can reap the benefits of a free society without adhering to its rules.

        That smacks of 'our-system-is-better-than-yours' elitism which I don't believe is justified. I'm not deliberately going off on an anti-US tirade here but how is the US government adhering to the rules of a free society when it allows the RIAA to haul up hundreds of people in the name of the draconian DMCA? The refusal to be kept in check by the Geneva convention is another example. Of course the Chinese government are draconian, but it's another variation of the draconian governance practiced elsewhere, even in the sanctity of the 'free world'.
        • by swb (14022) <mobocracy@gmail.com> on Tuesday May 25 2004, @11:38AM (#9249287)
          No thinking person denies there are problems with the US system of government, it's current government, and many of the social, political and economic systems we have here.

          However, we all know it. We talk about it constantly. We publish newspapers, magazines, and TV shows that display content critical of the government. We protest, rally, demonstrate. We lampoon our past and present leaders, demand (and often get!) changes in leadership and policy.

          By and large, we don't kill our own people for it. We don't run slave labor camps, populated by people whose opinion on political matters differs from that of the government.

          The Chinese do. China is a police state, run by dictators. It's not a democracy. There is no freedom of expression. Don't confuse the limited expression of economic capitalism in China with individual liberty.

          Is the US system perfect? Hell no! Would you trade your life here for a life in China? I wouldn't.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:31AM (#9247461)
      Without getting into politics, China is only walking the well trodden path of other emerging super powers in their time. America pulled pretty much exactly the same tricks with everything from science (hell what kind of global standard is CDMA anyway?) to sport.

      China walks all over global standards because China is big enough to get away with it. Same as America, same as Russia, same as Britain (in its time) probably too.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:32AM (#9247482)
      Are you delusional? China is not and never has been Communist. And for your information no other country in modern history has either. Now before you start spouting crap again, each country claimed to be moving TOWARDS communism. That is they weren't (and still aren't) communist but given time they would become communist. This approach has since be shown not to work and China is now moving towards capitalism.

      Communism is defined as a classless (and stateless) society. If you look at China, it has classes. The people at the top are in one class and the people on the bottom in another. Just because they call themselves communist doesn't mean they are. And if you think that they are I'm the most intelligent person on the planet (and I have this bridge to sell you).

      On the matter at hand, I think that it is important for China to develop their own technologies, however, I don't like the idea of them ignoring international standards. If it is just a matter of patents, why they should just ignore them. Oh wait, they're capitalist, they can't do that...
    • by pubjames (468013) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:42AM (#9247629)
      It should be no suprise that the Chinese want to develop their own standards

      No it shouldn't. But not for the motives you give.

      The USA has for decades played hardball in international trade. They have been good at getting their own way. The Chinese realise that if they want to become a world ecomonic superpower, they've got to start playing as hard as the USA traditionally has. Europe is also now getting it's act together - the EU is a powerful force in international trade negociations, much more that the individual countries of Europe can be.

      You say "Communism itself can't tolerate any kinds of rivals whatsoever". I don't think this has got anything to do with Communism, it's about global trade and China's desire to become a global economic superpower.
    • More power to 'em (Score:5, Insightful)

      by fleener (140714) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:48AM (#9247701)
      You underestimate the interest in escaping outrageous patents, patent fees and monopolies. China can set its own standards because it has enough consumers to force foreign companies to listen. Pundits saying China will isolate itself (e.g. suffer) are blowing industry smoke. What, are American corporations pulling themselves from Uncle Sam's tit long enough to cry that capitalism is unfair? Boo hoo.
    • You have it partially right, but your drawing too many comparisons between them being "communist" as the reason this is being done.

      "...Chinese firms growing tired of paying foreign patent fees."

      This is the part that holds the most significance as the reason it is being done. The western world dominates when it comes to patents. What patents mean in a legal sense is control. The Chinese business interests obviously want control over their own businesses. They have two choices, pay the patent fees and allow U.S. interests control over certain aspects of their technology and business, or ignore patents and/or develop your own so that the control and knowledge is held within your own businesses and country.

      Here is the major problem. We are seperating. The U.S., business interests, investors, and even the citizens are unwilling to give up/change the patent system. It is about control and losing it is not what most want. So China is pushing away. This will create tensions between the western world and China, which is not a good thing. Tensions will exist between programmers, politicians, business persons, and many others. Why will they exist? Because now there is a whole new level of understanding and translation. Between China and the west, standards would not match and so translation is required. Understanding would include Chinese attempting to understand our system and the west understanding the Chinese system. Patents are deeply integrated in the technological and business world. All the way from the few existing lone inventors that have a patent of a few to the large conglomerates and even the military.

      The ignorance of the Chinese towards patents is not a bad thing. We are led to believe that patents are the answer to progress (and I will argue that with anyone if they wish), but after the introduction of a patent system within our entire legal, social, and economical structure the opposite becomes true and progress is then defined within the limits of the remaining freedoms of thought within our corporate economic system. By ignoring patents and allowing a more natural kind of competition that prevents the tieing up of progress by the legal system which corporations in the U.S. and western countries use as control mechanisms. If is plain to see that the Chinese benefit from such a move and could easily overtake the western world in progress. They have the resources and the people.

      Maybe I should consider learning Chinese.

      Btw, if anyone isn't sure what I meant by this entire post, please ask. I have a way with words that causes confusion for many.
      • tumbling (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Doc Ruby (173196) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @09:46AM (#9247682) Homepage Journal
        No, they'll just get the foreign corporations, like Sun, to bootstrap them with subsidized projects. While Sun's marketers and bizdev suits salivate over the Chinese market, their mafia government will just announce new API standards and cut out every company that's not Chinese. Sun will cut its losses, sell its useless stakes in their Chinese operations to Chinese "partners", and the Chinese companies will proceed to revise the open source OS and apps.

        It's called judo: leverage your larger opponent against himself, as he clumsily grasps at you. Chinese people invented it, and it still works, at all scales, in all arenas.
        • Re:tumbling (Score:5, Informative)

          by Ishin (671694) on Tuesday May 25 2004, @10:04AM (#9247939) Journal
          Actually judo is very much Japanese, and means passive way. (or letting your opponent beat himself. It was adapted from jujitsu (another Japanese martial art)

          Remember, kung fu != karate, just like chinese != japanese.