China Plans for a World Without American Technology (nytimes.com) 228
China is freeing up tens of billions of dollars for its tech industry to borrow. It is cataloging the sectors where the United States or others could cut off access to crucial technologies. And when its leaders released their most important economic plans last week, they laid out their ambitions to become an innovation superpower beholden to none. From a report: Anticipating efforts by the Biden administration to continue to challenge China's technological rise, the country's leaders are accelerating plans to go it alone, seeking to address vulnerabilities in the country's economy that could thwart its ambitions in a wide range of industries, from smartphones to jet engines.
China has made audacious and ambitious plans before -- in 2015 -- but is falling short of its goals. With more countries becoming wary of China's behavior and its growing economic might, Beijing's drive for technological independence has taken on a new urgency. The country's new five-year plan, made public on Friday, called tech development a matter of national security, not just economic development, a break from the previous plan. The plan pledged to increase spending on research and development by 7 percent annually, including the public and private sectors. That figure was higher than budget increases for China's military, which is slated to grow 6.8 percent next year, raising the prospect of an era of looming Cold War-like competition with the United States.
China has made audacious and ambitious plans before -- in 2015 -- but is falling short of its goals. With more countries becoming wary of China's behavior and its growing economic might, Beijing's drive for technological independence has taken on a new urgency. The country's new five-year plan, made public on Friday, called tech development a matter of national security, not just economic development, a break from the previous plan. The plan pledged to increase spending on research and development by 7 percent annually, including the public and private sectors. That figure was higher than budget increases for China's military, which is slated to grow 6.8 percent next year, raising the prospect of an era of looming Cold War-like competition with the United States.
Good for them (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good for them (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Good for them (Score:2)
The next major war between great powers is unlikely to be a WW2 style industrial complex war. Any military resources not already on hand won't be built long before it's over. How hard is it to hit a big fat juicy factory producing or assembling air craft parts in this day of missiles, satellites, super sonic fighter bombers, and so on? An out all all-but-nuclear war will not run for years or likely even months.
In short, Russia may have a handful of their new jet vs the hundreds of F35 already produced.
Re: (Score:2)
The next major war between great powers is unlikely to be a WW2 style industrial complex war..
Schrödinger's cat, both true and untrue until it happens. depending on who and what each is afraid of will depend on the outcome and process. Iraq was a tiny country all bark and almost no bite just good for bullying its neighbours and using up a few weapons was good for the US to perform some live tests unfortunately it gave your bigger countries an idea of what the US could do. and they have changed tact (more cyber espionage) or a building an arsenal to combat it. yes factories will be the first tar
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe I'm an ignorant American, but I'm not even sure why Bolivia is on that list. When did they mat
Re: (Score:3)
I am not sure that's true. If one country needs what another country has, that is an automatic incentive to go take it by force. Further, the countries may escalate anger between one another by withholding whatever-it-is that they depend on.
A country benefits from having other countries depend on it. Especially if they can use that dependency to create a favorable balance of trade (which is the polite way of saying "price gouge."). It also gives a measure of political control over the dependent countrie
Re: (Score:2)
If one country needs what another country has, that is an automatic incentive to go take it by force.
You are not likely to be able to take over some country by force without destroying capital. And most of the production is there thanks to the capital (factories, machines, infrastructure and knowhow of the citizens). Taking over a country by force gives you a country with destroyed infrastructure and factories and also likely a population which hates the occupants and is willing to take it to guerilla warfare. It is not useful.
The only case one may consider taking a country by force is if that country has
Re: (Score:2)
During WWI, the British and Germans sold and traded equipment with each other to help fight the war.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is, in a global economy, you are now spending a lot of money on "low level" stuff simply to keep people out vs. farming out "junk" to others so you can focus on higher tech areas.. (its one reason why the US has the power it has is, its farmed a lot of things out, which makes other countries dependent on the money flow.. (it also makes the US dependent on them) which means because there is a symbiotic relationship, you won't screw each other TOO badly.. because you need each other. When that re
Re: (Score:2)
Very close to tipping point... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can thank one Richard Nixon for whatever happens to Taiwan. What stopped Nixon from promoting Taiwan into a real country when he switched the US-accepted China from the RoC to the PRC back in 1972? Generalissimo Chiang's delusions of grandeur?
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you trying to weasel in "every country on the planet" in an argument about one specific place, namely Taiwan, and a specific set of historical circumstances, namely it being thrown to a non-country status by Nixon recognizing China? The responsibility in this case is pretty clear, as it was fairly easy to predict what would happen, yet it chose to do what it did, and it happened on US initiative.
Re: (Score:3)
Nixon did what he did on the heels of the Vietnam War quagmire as an attempt to avoid Part 2.
LOL, No.
Nixon did what he did because he tried to break the Soviet bloc by making China stronger and supporting the anti-Soviet, nationalist factions of the ruling party there.
Now, can you guess what's the corollary to "China becoming stronger and more nationalistic" in international politics?
Yep, precisely.
Why do you act like the Taiwan/China history began in the 1970's?
Because pretending the detente and the recognition of China was made on Chinese terms, or out of fear from unrecognized China attacking the US is a lie you just made up. China in the 70s was on its knee
Re: (Score:2)
Taiwan is not quite a part of China, unless you suffer from a KMT or CCP propaganda overload. It has literally not been a part of China since 1895, and it was ruled by warlords not quite obedient to the mainlaind before that. And before them it was ruled by the Dutch, and before that by the Portugese.
Also, there wasn't much difference between KMT and CPP before the CPP had KMT move to Taiwan and slaughter a bunch of people there so that they can say "Taiwan is a part of China".
So, with pretty please and sug
Re: (Score:2)
Other than all the stuff they already stole? (Score:2, Flamebait)
I doubt the spying and stealing will stop either.
Re: (Score:2)
1) Steal technology from countries that are ahead of you
2) Become an industrial powerhouse
3) Become a scientific and design powerhouse while exporting most ordinary manufacturing; also become a massive market
That's the US playbook from inception to present. Look familiar?
The Good and the Bad (Score:5, Insightful)
This is actually the real cost of the economic ambushes of the previous US administration: motivating China into finding alternatives, thus becoming not only more independent, but also creating less revenue for the US. So: bad move.
On the other hand: 1180 BC the bronze age collapsed because it was a too strongly intertwined civilization, and failing of a few actors led to the others not being able to continue their technological advance. We're arguably at a similar point in our development, where failing of few actors means that for a significant time we can't even produce enough paper masks, let alone electronics, syringes etc.
So a significant part of our civilization (e.g. China) gaining ability to go it alone, and succeeding, is a good move. It means better redundancy, and in the larger picture this means our own cicilization less likely to collapse.
Of course, this probably sucks if you're used to whining that it's "the other party" (e.g. China) that "wins". But if you're still thinking in terms of my-tribe-vs-the-other, and still haven't realized that, as humanity, from now on we're in this together, and we'll inevitably survive or go extinct *together*, you're really lacking a few clues.
Re: (Score:2)
1180 BC the bronze age collapsed because it was a too strongly intertwined civilization, and failing of a few actors led to the others not being able to continue their technological advance.
This explanation seems an unlikely explanation for the late bronze age collapse, since many civilizations in the region were able to survive and continue improving their technology.
The most likely explanation is the improved technology of warfare allowed groups that had the new technology to destroy the cities of groups who did not have the technology.
Re: (Score:2)
This explanation seems an unlikely explanation for the late bronze age collapse, since many civilizations in the region were able to survive and continue improving their technology.
actually only egypt and assyria avoided complete destruction and managed to survive long enough to experiment permanent decline over the next century before becoming irrelevant. they never made it out alone. what supposed improved technology are you talking about?
Re: (Score:2)
actually only egypt and assyria avoided complete destruction
No that's not true, there were not many groups that were completely destroyed in that era.
what supposed improved technology are you talking about?
Iron working is the most notable.
You'd be right if not (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What innovations are coming out of China? What technological advancement is happening there?
Re: (Score:2)
I can tell you don't read research papers. China is absolutely churning them out (lots of them high quality too).
I was travelling China nearly 20 years ago, and while going around the back roads, some areas had what looked like a small city being built. Turns out that these were tech campuses for new universities. And it was apparently a big plan to implement them to push research forward. I suspect they're working very nicely at that.
China has also had the policy that if you were extremely well educate
Re: (Score:2)
To name two, quantum computing/telecomm and tunnel burrowing. Should be easy enough to do an article search on these and look at the universities producing results.
Re: (Score:2)
The real problem with China is that they are spending tons of money on their military when they should not have to if you think about it.
if you think of what? public military spending in china has been the same proportionally to gnp for decades. ofc when gnp skyrocketed so did military spending. so how much "should china spend on military" regarding your criteria and who actually are you to have a say on the issue?
extra fun fact, china actually spends less than half as the us.
Re: (Score:2)
At the moment the West believe that technical superiority and control of monetary policy will perpetuate historic dominance. China is investing in everything - just look at recent announcements about magl
Re: (Score:2)
for the fact that China's plan was to go at it alone eventually anyway.
This is a self-fulfilling prophecy that Trump helped to fulfil.
Before Trump, there were long and heated debates in China whether they should develop, buy, or just rent, any technology they needed. While self-reliance is more or less an overarching policy, time-to-market concerns and sometimes simply convenience were more important, so they often buy what they needed. If the US had not have long standing restrictions on high-tech exports to China since even before Clinton, the US trade deficit would not ha
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The truth is I don't care much for, or against, China's ideology. That's China's people's problem, not mine
you're not alone, that's basically an us-sponsored mindset that doesn't really extend to the rest of the world.
seeing it as a competitor, it seems like the us would want the rest of the world to rally to crush this menace. the rest of the world, however, does fully realize that in a coming age full of lots of uncertainty in many fronts china will inevitably be part of the conversation, if not driving much of it, probably more so than the us.
that doesn't mean that there aren't serious concerns about human ri
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like you might have a deeper understanding. Can you elaborate. You speak and read mandarin? What media are you consuming?
What gives you the idea that China's plans include anything for changing your societies "live-and-let-live" mentality? Can you provide some references?
What do you think of the twelve communist ideals?
Re: (Score:2)
This fight is not about "winning over the other party". It's about human decency; our children's future.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
On the other hand: 1180 BC the bronze age collapsed because it was a too strongly intertwined civilization, and failing of a few actors led to the others not being able to continue their technological advance.
I would like to learn more about this. Can you recommend a YouTube video or similar documentary on the topic?
OP does not understand this issue. It was not the failing of a few actors that destroyed an intertwined civilization.
There is written documentation (a lot of it tax records and accounting stuff) that has been translated concerning the bronze age collapse. The years before the collapse were economically very healthy. But in the records just before the collapse there are reports of strange vessels being sighted, and watchposts being established on the cost, and similar military preparations (all of which h
Really? (Score:2)
''called tech development a matter of national security, not just economic development, ''
So... does that mean wholesale theft of IP is now officially governmentally sanctioned? Surely, any development created will be designed to own the market for the development, regardless of the actual cost of development, production or distribution.
''Chinaâ(TM)s typical modus operandi is to steal American IP, replicate it, replace the U.S. company originating that IP in the Chinese domestic market, then displace t
Oh New York Times (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We're already in a Cold War. It's here, now. And has been for years.
And our establishment is on China's side.
Sensible (Score:4, Interesting)
We're rapidly heading towards a second Cold War (hopefully.) The weird thing about this one is that China makes all the world's manufactured goods. Not sure how we're going to reconcile this...
Should be interesting to watch. The Soviet Union was slightly behind on technology during the Cold War which gave the US the advantage in a lot of areas. Not sure how well we'll fare when we're not able to manufacture items ourselves, plus China's on a more equal footing technology-wise. The advantage they have (other than population) is total state control over a modern economy. They let the market be "free enough" and exercise control when needed.
Re: (Score:2)
Manufacturing returns to the states?
'American'? (Score:4, Interesting)
Little wonder (Score:2, Insightful)
In China they have 5 year plans. In the US we can't even pass a budget and have been unable to do so for years.
In China they are building new airports. In the US we are telling air traffic controllers to wear masks, hampering communications with pilots.
In China they build everything. In the US we build almost nothing.
In China their schools focus on math and science. In the US our schools focus on critical race theory, tearing down statues of formerly revered Americans, and leftist indoctrination. Math and s
Re: (Score:2)
In the US we are telling air traffic controllers to wear masks, hampering communications with pilots.
In the US we are telling people to protect themselves against deadly contagious diseases by wearing masks. Any evidence that this "hampers communications" or did you invent that?
In the US our schools focus on critical race theory, tearing down statues of formerly revered Americans, and leftist indoctrination. Math and science are way down the list
Funny how our universities are full of foreigners, including many Chinese, who come specifically to US universities to study and research there.
In China they appear to have little in the way of racial tension.
Except for the ongoing genocide of Uighurs of course.
Our governments (Republican and Democrat alike) continue to piss away trillions of dollars that we don't have and pay for it by increasing the money supply. The interest rates are so low
If we increase the money supply and interest rates stay near zero, then clearly the market isn't worried by our money printing.
Re: (Score:2)
"The education problem in particular creates a huge, lifetime disadvantage for poor people, especially those in some minority groups" - Agreed. That is why I support charter schools. Public schools receive most of their funding from property tax so neighborhoods with expensive homes receive much more money than neighborhoods with run down homes. Canada, as an example, provides equal funding regardless of zip code so you see much less of a disparity between good schools and terrible schools. A voucher progra
Re: (Score:2)
"infrastructure spending by the government is an unsustainable way to prop up an economy" - I didn't claim that it was. Our airports are old and outdated because successive governments have failed to make it a priority.
"No, in China, they build cheap shit, in the US innovation occurs" - The cheap shit that you refer to is increasingly made in Vietnam and the Philippines, where labor rates are lower. The Chinese economy is evolving.
"you don't understand finance, I don't have hours to explain this to you" - W
USA will become ... Spain ....? (Score:2)
But despite losing local productive ind
Re:USA will become ... Spain ....? (Score:4, Informative)
UK lost its colonies and the wealth from them too. UK still has decent standard of living.
Someone in another thread about global powers posted what I think is interesting (maybe need to do some research) when UK decided to stop being a global empire, the standard of living for the average bloke went UP.
Re: (Score:2)
Not yet (Score:2)
They have to wait for SpaceX to finish designing Starship and Raptor. Pretty sure they would want the latest CAD files, they wonâ(TM)t want to be stuck with the SN10 design.
Are they able to do without industrial espionage? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Because all that population wants to be paid a wage that provides for housing and health care.
America's end game is a country of like 1000 people, 3 of them super rich and the other 997 attending to the personal needs of the 3. Everyone else a superfluous burden.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You're forgetting the 1.2 million people of the US Army, to "project soft power" or liberate the shit out of the rest of the world that disagrees with the first three. There is a drive to robotize it, but it ain't there yet.
and the 400 million living in abject poverty (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Inequality is far worse in China.
Nope. America is worse. But not by much.
Income inequality by country [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But I make such an adorable pet.
Aren't you supposed to include some sort of obfuscated URL-shortened link when you say that? This is still Slashdot.
and when factories levee china for the next cheap? (Score:3)
and when factories levee china for the next cheap place to make stuff?
Right now to much stuff is made in china.
Re:and when factories levee china for the next che (Score:5, Funny)
Re:and when factories levee china for the next che (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
or yur spail chekkers frum Miroscoft.
Re: and when factories levee china for the next ch (Score:2)
Always make sure your Hooked On Phonics package is the real deal.
Avoid rip offs which at first glance looks like a genuine Hooked On Phonics, but might really be "Hoeked On Phoincs".
Re: (Score:2)
as long as their mission is still in priority of the welfare of the majority, its okay.
When it comes to China you might consider they do statistics differently first they consider you are either Chinese or not Chinese. If you are not Chinese to them you are to be used for what they can get just ask the Urghers. As for the western point of view to help everyone and maybe they will think like us, you only need to see that China does not think the same way. When trump said make USA number 1 they called him racist, here is China doing the same and much worse. And they use our history against us,
Re:America doesn't even try anymore (Score:4, Insightful)
Unless you want compete in the race to bottom in terms of what would be for us more like bringing back slavery than I am fairly certain masses of poorly educated, unskilled mass from Mexico and South America are not going to meaningfully help us compete for the 21st century economy with China.
So in sense you are right, we are not trying when it comes to cranking out low cost widgets and we probably should not be; I mean let someone else live with the environmental consequences of churning out disposable crap, keep the heavy industry we do have focused on critical supplies, like medical equipment, raw materials, chips, etc - China can make our Happy Meal toys.
As far designing the next advanced micro process those humans at our boarder are simply not 'resources' pretending they are is silly.
Re: (Score:3)
The race is for the largest markets where the largest companies make the most money. And the markets are made of people, silly.
Re: (Score:2)
Who is talking about "the stock market", smartypants?
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt you've ever paid anyone in your life, you lone dweller of your immigrant ancestors' basement.
Re: (Score:2)
I am fairly certain masses of poorly educated, unskilled mass from Mexico and South America
They aren't unskilled.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The koolaid you guys drink really gives you outstanding capabilities to jump to outlandish conclusions. Try reading from the top again.
Re: (Score:2)
If it helps any, I'm not USian. In fact, passing through the USA i've been subject to the stupidity of your border guards who thought I was illegal because I have dual citizenship, mexico and Canada, and I couldn't produce whatever 'papers' you idiots make mexicans carry.
Now, reread the thread slowly, specifically the idiot I responded to.
Re: (Score:2)
Y'all are fucked in the head and can't admit when you're wrong. And then you guys wonder why most of the world hates you.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It is anything but UNSKILLED work!! And anybody who tries it will understand that.
Yall are so fucking blinded by your divisive propaganda fed to you in the media you can't even follow a thread, just bashing at the demons in your head.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the USA is happy enough with enacting policy change through all the USA thinktanks that 'advise' the Canadian government.
I'm not sure USians will ever understand that their sick society creates the largest demand for drugs in the world and everybody that needs money is more than happy to supply them.
Re: (Score:2)
China openly invests a lot in several African nations and in Eur-Asia as well. The goodwill those create
Do you think it creates goodwill? Did the investments of the United Fruit Company create goodwill?
Re: (Score:2)
You know we're living with those consequences too (Score:2)
As for those people at the border not being of use designing the next micro process (sic) who's to say. Nobody knows why Albert Einstien was
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
As far designing the next advanced micro process those humans at our boarder are simply not 'resources' pretending they are is silly.
They may not be. Who can say? You surely can't. Can you say the same about their children? Even less so.
The US should remember that one of Intel's founding members was Andy Grove—whose original name was Gróf András István. He was a Hungarian immigrant to the United States. Hungary was a Second World country at the time, with economic development just as bad as the bad parts of Central and South America today. He was fleeing the Hungarian Revolution of 1956. He spoke little Engli
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you want compete in the race to bottom in terms of what would be for us more like bringing back slavery than I am fairly certain masses of poorly educated, unskilled mass from Mexico and South America are not going to meaningfully help us compete for the 21st century economy with China.
30 years ago, China has more poor people than the combined population of Mexico, South America, AND the US. And yet those 800M poor people did not make the remaining 600M or so Chinese race to the bottom, nor did they prevent China from rising from 10% of US's GDP to over 70% now. Instead, those 800M poor became less poor and now formed the largest single consumer market in the world, which is going to power China's growth in the next decade.
Furthermore, China do not worry that the poorly educated, unskil
Re: America doesn't even try anymore (Score:2)
You are either trolling and have no clue about that region. USA has made more investments in Pakistan than it has In India Bangladesh ans Sri Lanka combined.
And human resources? China is genociding all Muslims at the border of Pakistan. Bangladeshi immigrants make majority in many neighboring cities of India. Look at the map dude - India is Bangladesh only neighbour. Same with Sri Lanka. When Myanmar started killing rohingyas do you think fled to China? Where do you think Tibetans are immigrating to?
The rea
Re: (Score:2)
Right, because the problem with the US is we don't have enough landscapers and drywall hangers.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you ever actually tried to hire drywall hangers?
It is not easy. It can delay construction for long periods.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:America doesn't even try anymore (Score:5, Interesting)
This is not unlike the Arabic peoples having more advanced math and science, at varying times, but then stagnating. Or individuals that had great personal power like Alexander the Great, Caesar, Ghengis Khan, King Edward VII, the Vikings, and so on. They all had great "Empires" for their times, some impressive even to this day, but all empires in the world tend toward equilibrium. Sometimes there's a bloody war involved, but even today it's just as plausible that it will simply slide as soft power projection is as (if not more) important as actual military power.
America and China will be no different. The US and China (let's not forget India here as well) will probably continue sliding toward equilibrium. None of them has any real reason to pitch everything into a massive conflict, lest the worst case scenario come to fruition. The historical anomaly will likely be "number 1" per se, but what's number 1 mean when number 2 is only a few percentage points different?
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder what the US' plan is? Population clearly isn't everything -- a tiny island with a small population in Europe ended up controlling about half of the world at one point.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I seriously doubt they want to take on the expense of fielding a worldwide military. Right now (per 2020 estimates) China spends a shade over US$200 billion per year on defens
Re: (Score:2)
> China has been the most powerful single country for most of the human written history
You're thinking of Africa.... bigot.
Just a reminder, Africa is not a country.
Re: America doesn't even try anymore (Score:2)
I think the point is that China is.
Re: (Score:2)
US and other multi national corporations would disagree with you.
Re: (Score:2)
Now go back to Beijing.
Re: (Score:2)
They cannot even be slowed down. Look at the resilience of their economy through the coronavirus epidemic.