No Country Poses a More Severe Threat To U.S.'s Innovation, Ideas and Economic Security Than China, FBI Director Says (axios.com) 154
The FBI is launching roughly two China-related counterintelligence investigations about every 12 hours, Bureau director Christopher Wray told NBC News in an interview published this week. From a report: Wray is increasingly sounding the alarm on the threat posed by China's government even as Russian troops amass at Ukraine's border, indicating that he believes the Chinese Communist Party is the biggest threat to the economic security of the U.S. in the long term. "There is no country that presents a broader, more severe threat to our innovation, our ideas and our economic security than China does," Wray said in his interview. Wray's comments build on his speech in California on Monday during which he said China's government was getting "more brazen" in economic espionage and other efforts to disrupt the U.S. In echoes of remarks he made in 2020, Wray said over 2,000 FBI investigations were "focused on the Chinese government trying to steal our information or technology, there's just no country that presents a broader threat to our ideas, innovation, and economic security than China."
No (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: No (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: No (Score:5, Informative)
China published more peer reviewed science research than the US, has more STEM graduates than US and China has more patents in new technology such as 5G than all the US companies combined.
Chinese scientists also published more completely bogus papers than all the world's scientists combined [qz.com].
Science requires more than degrees.
Re: No (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
China has more domestic patent *applications* than the US. That's not the same as patents granted. Also note that Chinese patent law is different from the US. There are three designations; regular inventions, small inventions (utility
models), and designs.
Utility models and designs aren't subject to much investigation and are easy to get. But the patent holders have to pay fees to keep them, and most are allowed to lapse because they aren't worth the fee.
"91 per cent of design patents granted in 2013 had bee
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That would only help large business. Small businesses would have yet another expense and risk losing their patent if they miss a payment.
Re: (Score:2)
As if the US and Europe aren't doing the same thing. Air France was notorious for having their aircraft bugged by the French state. The UK has been caught hacking its neighbours for industrial intel. Hollywood exists because film makers wanted to steal IP so set up as far away as possible from the IP owners, and to this day they continue to rip off foreign movies.
In any case, industrial espionage is not the problem. China is simply out-competing us. Huawei didn't steal 5G, they invented it.
Re: (Score:3)
Industrial espionage is definitely a problem, and if you think the US and Europe are doing just as much of it as China you need to provide evidence.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And what kind of 'real evidence' do you need to see? The actual IP that was stolen? The inner workings of the networks that were hacked? If you don't believe anything is true there will be no evidence that can ever convince you, so who cares what you think.
As for specific examples, here are a few;
https://www.fbi.gov/file-repos... [fbi.gov]
Now let's see your specific examples of US government-sponsored industrial espionage in China.
Re: No (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly the shareholders don't care much about your "failure of the rule of law".
Re: (Score:2)
Want to hear something hilarious? Replace the word 'China' with the word 'USA' in your rant and see if it doesn't make just as much sense. Think about it, don't just dismiss it.
Re: No (Score:4, Interesting)
That issue can normally be solved with very clear contracts and treaties. If you violate this then we will respond like that. The difference in culture and moral values, does make such documents very tedious and complex. However it become more like writing a program, because we cannot assume any common action.
Being unpredictable in your response is a plan for disaster because, there is a degree where one can get away with something, and also less of an incentive to do the right thing, because you may get punished for that.
We have these issues even with dealing with companies who operate in different states. The North Eastern Folks are direct to the point, if they are unhappy they will let you know. Southerners want to know the person, stay on their good side, and make them want to do you good. Mid west be polite, but mostly do what you gonna do and take what you get. Western States heavy on self promotion and show a lot of confidence. These are general cultural expectations they can be used for good or for ill, However for the guy from the North East, working with someone from down South, The guy from the North East doesn't hate the person, nor is the person from the South Flirting with the North easterner, where it may feel like that to the people who are use to their cultural norms.
Re: (Score:3)
Morals are arbitrary who's to say that IP "theft" is wrong, people have imposed an arbitrary length on patents and copyright and then call it theft when another breaks though arbitrary laws. China maintains so notion of keeping to intellectual property laws as long as it suits them, as soon as it doesn't the will remove that fake scarcity. The US has build a house of cards on the fact that they own the IP, and moved a large proportion of its manufacturing overseas, all China has to do is say we don't car ab
Re: (Score:2)
For a decade Chinese front companies bought used copy machines at auctions in DC, Silicon Valley and other key areas, hoping to find machines whose hard drives were intact (and held files of every document copied).
Presuming by "copy machine" you mean photocopier, that is not how they work. They don't store "every document copied" or indeed any documents.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. Blaming it all on Chinese espionage is misdirection.
Look at 5G. Huawei didn't steal it, they did the R&D. They invented most of the core technologies used in 5G, and got the patents. Nothing to do with stealing IP from anyone.
The US and Europe need to step up their games, otherwise it's just going to happen again with 6G. It's already happening with electric vehicles and batteries. People have been comparing Teslas with Chinese batteries and US/Japan batteries, and the Chinese ones are better.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Look at 5G. Huawei didn't steal it, they did the R&D.
\/\/ [natoassociation.ca]
Being in denial about the extent of Huawei's hacking and theft advances only the PRC's goals, and nothing positive whatsoever.
Re: (Score:2)
We've been over this more than once already. The alleged "theft" turned out to be some header files from the Nortel SDK, that's all. And it was two decades ago, long before 3G even existed, let alone 5G.
As far as I'm aware nobody has claimed that Huawei stole their 5G technology. They can't, because Huawei was making 5G hardware a couple of years before everyone else so there was nobody else to steal it from. Western governments has to wait until Western manufacturers caught up before they could even ban th
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
We've been over this more than once already. The alleged "theft" turned out to be some header files from the Nortel SDK, that's all.
That's what you said before, but the web is crawling with details of what they stole, and it was far more than that.
Whether they stole the 5G tech directly or not, it didn't just spring fully formed from the skull of its creators, it was based on earlier knowledge, some of which Huawei stole.
Saying that they created 5G on their own while ignoring their espionage is complete horse shit.
Re: (Score:2)
That earlier knowledge is called 4G, and anyone can go read the patents to see how it works.
The bottom line is that Huawei did the R&D, with people from Chinese universities working for them. Until the West accepts that fact and decides to up its game, the West will keep falling behind and China invests heavily in education and R&D.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. And then we hired people from all over the world to come here and design great stuff. Sadly, some of us haven't figured out how that's what made America great.
Re: (Score:2)
But only those parts of the government who didn't get our votes.
Despite the Cable news redirect, American Government is very out of the way of businesses especially compared to the rest of the industrialized world. Being the worlds largest economy, and the worlds third largest populous, and thirds largest land mass. Means the news can always find cases where a company is being targeted fairly or unfairly by the government. However with an economy as large as the US, that is actually rather very rare. Most
Re: (Score:2)
And you know this how?
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. There's not much sense in trying to blame a separate sovereign country, other than a means to deflect criticism from a corrupt, incompetent government.
The real question is what are we going to do about this well established fact.
Re: (Score:3)
As for the biggest threat being "ourselves and our government", they're the same thing.
Perhaps I should elaborate. I consider the government a larger threat to me than China.
We are not the government. We aren't even a united people.
We are either the gov't (Score:5, Insightful)
Government is inevitable. That because the case as soon as Armies could be raised which could not be beaten by militias. My military history isn't the best, but I know even George Washington lamented that a handful of trained soldiers would run circles around his best militia men. And this was 200+ years before drone strikes.
This means any country bigger enough to matter will have a large, standing army. And at that point you've got 2 choices: A large civilian apparatus used to manage that army, or a military dictatorship/Junta.
There really isn't a 3rd option. If you don't form the army, another country does and now you've got your military dictatorship when their tanks roll in. If you do form your army but you don't manage it with a large civilian apparatus your own generals will eventually seize power. Same if you try to form a weak civilian apparatus. It won't have enough power to counterbalance and manage the large military you just formed.
Big Government is inevitable. At least with our current level and system of civilization and technology. Think of it like a box of loaded riles lying out in the open. You either pick one up and join in defense of your nation (e.g. democracy) or you become a slave to guys who weren't afraid to pick up a gun.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Compentent Politicians? Those terms are pretty much mutually exclusive...and precisely why I and many others do NOT want the govt. especially the Federal Govt. in the US to be in charge of our health care and health care decisions.
Geez, what's next...other mutually exclusive terms, like Rap Music, and Jumbo Shrimp?
Re:I think January 6th (Score:4, Interesting)
Compentent Politicians? Those terms are pretty much mutually exclusive...and precisely why I and many others do NOT want the govt. especially the Federal Govt. in the US to be in charge of our health care and health care decisions.
Geez, what's next...other mutually exclusive terms, like Rap Music, and Jumbo Shrimp?
Can't be worse than what we have now: private for-profit corporations in charge of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Well put. It's really a shame that Bernie's time as a contender for president is essentially over due to his age. Sadly the Democrats are all moderates (or center right by international standards) aside from a few and those all seem to lack his influence and presence.
Re: (Score:3)
Believing there is a difference between those who rule and those who are ruled is the biggest cause of tension between the two groups, which in turn is the biggest cause of tribalism, which in turn is the biggest cause of the belief of there being a difference.
It's a problem that, once it has started, is almost impossible to stop because both sides have to not only stop but abandon 100% of their tribal power base. And neither side is ever going to be willing to go first. (It took decades to get the Good Fri
Re: (Score:3)
My point? Vote.
Go on, citizen, stamp the vote card. R or D, your choice.
Re: (Score:3)
"Punting" issues to Congress?
In the USA, the Congress is where the exclusive lawmaking power is enshrined.
It is good and proper - and by design - for the Supreme Court to frequently say, "Law 123 says XYZ. Plaintiff wants Law 123 to say ABC. We sympathize with Plaintiff's frustrations and acknowledge there is some unfortunate ambiguity in the language of Law 123. There are no other existing laws which sufficiently close the ambiguity gap in Law 123. The lawmaking body should address that ambiguity."
The Supr
Re: (Score:2)
The Supreme Court should not say, "Law 123 says XYZ. Plaintiff wants Law 123 to say ABC. Society has changed to where ABC seems like a good idea, or if we all agree to squint our eyes and let the image go fuzzy, XYZ can sort appear like it might have been ABC. Henceforth ABC shall be the law."
If that's the way it operates, the Supreme Court ceases to be a separate, adjudicating court, and instead becomes some kind of Super-Senate that uses post-hoc "reconciliation" to decree what the law should have been.
That all seems very straight forward and sensible but when it comes to our constitution it is unfortunately not written so clearly. For instance, our constitution has a welfare clause in it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] . What exactly does it empower the federal government to do? Who knows, it's not at all clearly defined but it shows up in two parts. This is where we get a lot of the claims that the supreme court is doing what you describe in your above quote, the constitution just isnt clear on a numb
Re:I think January 6th (Score:5, Informative)
The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court [pacourts.us] is not the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
The mail-in voting law was passed by Pennsylvania Republicans in 2019 [washingtonpost.com], so I'm unclear how you've decided that "Biden Cheated."
Even if we gave Pennsylvania to Trump [archives.gov], Trump would still have lost 286 to 252.
Mike Pence couldn't refuse to count electoral votes [usatoday.com], as he himself has said repeatedly.
Biden's legitimate until the loons actually manage to win a lawsuit [wikipedia.org]. They're only 0-53, with 2 ongoing lawsuits in which Donald Trump's campaign is the defendant, not the plaintiff.
We can't stop you from living in an alternate reality, but we don't have to alter reality to enable your fantasies.
What you should ask yourself (Score:5, Informative)
The Penn Supreme Court did not rule that way. They ruled that a voting law, lawfully passed by the state legislature, is unconstitutional. From a legal standpoint the election still stands, but future elections cannot be held under that law unless and until their constitution is amended.
I would also argue that decades of methodical court packing lead to a bad ruling, but that's neither here nor there, the point is you or your sources are misrepresenting the ruling, implying that it invalidates the 2020 election by casting doubt on the validity of the votes. It doesn't.
Worse, You're left in the rather unpleasant situation where you acknowledge there is zero evidence that those mail in ballots were illegitimate, meaning that rather than rely on your guy winning by the strength of arguments and policy, you need to suppress legitimate votes by making it harder to vote (eliminating vote by mail), which is exactly my point.
I get that you don't like losing, but here's the thing. Unless you die then you will live to see a day when you disagree with the people in charge. When that day comes these laws designed to make it harder to vote will be used to silence you, just as they're being used to silence people you disagree with today (e.g. Joe Biden Voters).
In short, we either all get democracy or none of us do. Democracy is very much an all or nothing.
Re: (Score:3)
Am not in the US. But US is generally known as a "sue happy" culture, where everything can go to court, even for the craziest reason.
As such, am wondering why noone sued Trump to show his "evidence" of the election being stolen (after all he always claims there is alot of evidence)? After all families have split over this, people have been hurt due to this, the country as a whole has been hurt by him claiming this.
Am sure there are alot of people who can proof they have standing to sue Trump, cos of whateve
It's almost impossible to sue Trump (Score:2)
As for individuals suing them it would be very difficu
Re: (Score:2)
Last I checked, Trump still claims there is evidence about the stolen election whenever he holds his rallies. And he has been holding them as a private citizen now.
Well, wife divorces husband cos she believes everything Trump says and husband does not follow eveything Trump states. Wouldn't the husband have pain and suffering, considering he may have to give some of his cash, etc to his current ex wife?
Or you have to leave your parents cos they are hardcore Trump followers - and so you incur costs with stay
Re:What you should ask yourself (Score:4, Interesting)
And have it include a required Critical Race Theory section.
Why would we include a graduate level course (Score:2)
It would be nice if I didn't have to unlearn so much mythological American history
Re: (Score:2)
I went to Catholic school in Texas for grades 1-12 in the 80's and 90s and did not learn any of the stuff you did.
We learned of slavery and it's effects on the nation. We learned the dangers of Manifest destiny and the importance of a separation of church and state. We learned of Columbus use of slaves and how we mistreated and murdered Native Americans (even using biological weapons against them.)
If anything, I wish there was more of an emphasis on the good we also did as a nation.
I'm curious what school
Re: (Score:2)
You can teach CRT when you define what the fuck it is. Math curriculum? Simple and easy. A syllabus is available. Science, History, etc? What is covered is super simple and easy to discover. CRT? "It teaches history, but all the bad things "we" did". What? So is it a history class? Oh no no no. There is no actual syllabus. It is a class where the teacher gets to try and interpret history in the most negative light possible towards a race.
Now explain to me why guilt-tripping 40% of the class is a good idea?
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, the United States does not work like that. You can do anything that isn't prohibited by law. If you want to prohibit it, you define what the fuck it is.
Meanwhile, if we're going to have a "basic civics and history exam before you get access to the ballot," it certainly is pertinent to test people concerning the sort of crap that the law has been dishing out to minority groups for the last 245 years. We want informed voters, hence the exam, righ
Re: What you should ask yourself (Score:2)
Case in point (Score:3)
Look at how I got modded down for saying mean things about shitheels who attempted a coup.
Even Slashdot is full of fuckfaces who want to watch the world burn.
Remember when the conservatives here still cared about America?
Re: (Score:2)
You mean that "insurrection" that involved 0.0005% of the US population and resulted in 5 deaths (4 protestors and 1 police officer who died of a stroke)?
Yep, it was a close call and our country was definitely hanging in the balance...
Re: (Score:2)
You mean that "insurrection"
No scare quotes are necessary to describe a violent attempt to alter the outcome of a legitimately conducted election as an "insurrection". That it failed and that more people were harmed is an indication of the level of chucklefuckery (high) and competence (low) and not the degree to which it was a coup attempt (100%).
that involved 0.0005% of the US population
What percentage of the US population has to be involved for there to have been a coup attempt? Answer, only one person has to be involved, so this is just another pathetic attempt at misdirec
Re: (Score:2)
Go back to Beijing, asshole.
Never been there, Anonymous Coward.
I wonder... (Score:5, Insightful)
How many other countries there are that do an analysis like this and determine the US is their largest threat.
I'd imagine the number is rather high and contains a lot of nominal 'friendly' countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Really?
Wouldn't that be overestimating the capabilities of the US? Or rather mixing up the capabilities of a bunch of US-based companies with the country itself?
On the other hand, there is the threat of the US starting a war in some country as "Wag the Dog"-esque diversion from domestic issues.
Re: (Score:2)
Or rather mixing up the capabilities of a bunch of US-based companies with the country itself?
The USA is more than the federal government. It is the combination of federal, state, and local governments combined with all companies its citizens incorporate along with the citizens themselves.
Just like China, where the US isn't just worried about the government but also its companies.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree that a country and its (political, economic, civil and military) potential(*) is more than just the federal government (or top-level government in general)
But I also see special cases for the situation in the US and China:
In China, the companies are held in pretty tight reigns by the government, so what ever Chinese companies are doing, it is supported (if not mandated) by the Chinese government.
In the US, that potential is out of balance. A few large companies have accumulated power that outweighs
China is just Xi Jinping (Score:2)
If he wakes up one day and decides that a company should do something, or that somebody should be found guilty of some crime, or that something should not be allowed to be said, or that some military action should be taken then that is it. There are virtually no checks and balances any more.
That is very dangerous. Both for China and the world.
Whereas the USA is more chaotic, with many schools of thought contending. Sure, they still do dumb things like invade Iraq, but lots of people have to agree with th
Re: I wonder... (Score:2)
contains a lot of nominal 'friendly' countries
Yeah. Blame Canada.
Re: (Score:2)
Idle speculation isn't very interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
How is it idle? This has been a human dynamic between nations throughout all of recorded history and is identifiable throughout the archaeological record. Understanding how it happens and when it happens is how you stop it happening.
Re: (Score:2)
The speculation was that other countries "determine the US is their largest threat", including 'friendly' ones. Zero evidence.
Re:I wonder... (Score:4, Insightful)
How many other countries there are that do an analysis like this and determine the US is their largest threat. I'd imagine the number is rather high and contains a lot of nominal 'friendly' countries.
The nominal friendly countries have determined US is their largest technology competitor (that currently out-competes them in most markets), but not a threat.
The possibility of breakthrough technology in Brazil or Italy (nominal friends of US) is not threatened by US, because US makes available the technology to its partners to use and extend, and most often abides by the rules (France has an independent nuclear industry, but still relies on very old IP from when they selected a first reactor design that came from US; US has not created any issues and France on its side obeys the US export restrictions).
Breakthrough technologies are threatened by the fact of China not having interest in respecting other's IP at all, together with its large capacity to then flood the world with inexpensive products made out of the pillaged IP.
If China was only only a cheap production place (like Bangladesh) and still obeying laws when you raise attention to the problems, China would not be a threat. If China was place of great ideas but limited production capacity (like Israel), they would also not be a threat. If they were both a place of great ideas and significant production capacity (like Germany), they would still not be a significant threat, if workable to sign and abide to agreements.
The root cause of China being a threat, is the combination of innovation/production AND the practical absence of rule of law (ignoring law as they see fit) that makes them unreliable at best, dangerous most often, as they bite the hand that feeds them.
In non-technological field like Culture, it would be more sensible to study if the US is a threat. I guess many countries have determined that the US music and movie industry are a threat to the survival of their own traditions, but that's an entirely separate issue, in which China is not currently a threat (they have good animated cartoons, but not challenging everyone else with replacement).
Re: (Score:2)
I'd imagine the number is rather high and contains a lot of nominal 'friendly' countries.
China and US are superpower countries. Other countries are not playing the same game. Being blindly friendly with US or China is not a good strategy for us.
"Steal" the technology we had them build (Score:5, Insightful)
If China is in a position to make America miserable, it’s because greedy American business owners put them there. They had China manufacture our tech, rather than open factories on US soil. They dumbed down and self-censored our movies so they could sell them in China. Some companies did pass down the savings of manufacturing in China, making this appear to American consumers as being a good thing (your hard earned dollars can now buy a bigger TV, etc.)
This isn’t an easy situation to fix, because many American businesses have become reliant on components sourced from China. Tariffs just get passed on to the consumer, so raise your hand if you want more inflation. Building stuff here requires investments in manufacturing facilities, and again, that cost will ultimately end up added to the final price of the goods you purchase. One can confidently say that the damage to our economy from dealing with China, is simply inevitable.
Re:"Steal" the technology we had them build (Score:4, Insightful)
If American business owners put us there its because the American government sold us out by admitting China into trade pacts like the WTO, allowed it favored status, and opened up the ports.
Companies have largely done exactly what anyone would have predicted they went to China for cheap manufacturing because if they did not someone else would have. China never should have been opened! It ought be closed down now and as fast as we possibly can.
We should move to cold war footing. No natural resources or food products exported to China, export controls on lots of high tech and progressively increasing tariffs on Chinese goods entering our market until they are cut off or cut themselves off. Seizure of state side assets held by Chinese nations!
Re: (Score:2)
I'm surprised (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That, and, well, this isn't news.
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't about manufacturing, it is about industrial espionage and stealing intellectual property.
What exactly is the problem? (Score:2)
> This isn't about manufacturing, it is about industrial espionage and stealing intellectual property.
How is the problem any worse than company vs. company espionage? Companies spy on each other all the time. I'm sure Apple is up in Google's gonads and vice versa.
Either patent/copyright it, or don't complain if a competitor swipes it, because stealing trade secrets is not illegal in the US (outside of some military applications).
If China is not respecting US co. patents/copyrights, then sanction/tariff t
Re: (Score:3)
The Chinese state has vastly more resources to apply to industrial espionage than any one company, and they use them.
https://www.fbi.gov/news/speec... [fbi.gov]
"Here in the U.S., they unleash a massive, sophisticated hacking program that is bigger than those of every other major nation combined. Operating from pretty much every major city in China, with a lot of funding and sophisticated tools, and often joining forces with cyber criminals, in effect, cyber mercenaries."
And whoever told you that stealing trade secret
Re: (Score:2)
My sense is that China has no qualms about cheating and stealing from foreign rivals, and it is a lot faster to do that than develop your own tech from scratch. We already appear to have loads of evidence that they have done and continue to do this.
As for tariffs and sanctions, those have already been applied in many cases with very little to show for it.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it depends on what you are stealing, and where you are starting off from.
If I'm trying to build my next-generation fighter jet I can either develop the stealth materials and geometry of the skin myself over years of trial and error, or I can just steal the composition and design and have it this year. Maybe use that to skip a generation or two. Do I need a more efficient data encoding system for my telecoms? We'll just use theirs. How do I formulate and construct more effective drugs to combat speci
US citizens recognized it ages ago (Score:3)
read Wray's speech before commenting here (Score:3)
https://www.fbi.gov/news/speec... [fbi.gov]
"Just using cyber means, Chinese government hackers have stolen more of our personal and corporate data than every other nation combined. The harm from the Chinese government’s economic espionage isn’t just that its companies pull ahead based on illegally gotten technology. While they pull ahead, they push our companies and workers behind. And that harm—company failures, job losses—has been building for a decade to the crush that we feel today. It’s harm felt across the country in a whole range of industries."
Re: (Score:2)
I am very ambivalent. (Score:2)
India lost more, not just the land and wealth but also the pride and allegiance and patriotism. China survived w
Uh-huh (Score:2, Funny)
Right. We all knew that already because we've read some news in the last two decades, but thanks for the update.
The question is what our gridlocked, incompetent, corrupt government going to do about it?
And the answer is: not much.
Re:Uh-huh [or ha ha?] (Score:2)
What was supposed to be funny about your bleak statement of fact?
However I've already searched the discussion and couldn't find anything deeper. I was looking for something about "divide and conquer" or stopping politics at "the water's edge". Or even "We have met the enemy and he is us" if you want to joke about it.
China isn't destroying America. It's the advertisers, especially the political advertisers. And the key technologies are for psychological manipulations that are mostly not patented or even pate
Re: (Score:2)
If you want an action, then I suggest that dissolving the tribalism and sectarianism would be an excellent start. However, that's too big a bite for people on the street, we need something a bit more human in scale. And that, I suggest, is where Eric Raymond's Bazaar comes into play. If you forget the huge cathedrals of ideas and their need for secrecy and central control, but put ALL ideas, ALL inventions, into the Bazaar philosophy, then the cathedrals will cease to matter.
This doesn't mean open source ev
Broken financial models yet again (Score:2)
I'm not disagreeing with you, but I think the bazaar model has been tested. And failed. My solution approach to that problem is tagged CSB for Charity Share Brokerage. Cost recovery for shareable services, including programming services. I've been "working" on evolving the CSB idea for at least 15 years, but there's something wrong with it and I still can't figure out what's wrong. Either I'm a special kind of stupid ior I'm a shitty salesman. (But the Libertarians are still fools and I have yet to meet one
Corporate America disagrees (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Funny.. (Score:2)
lookin up yu bum (Score:2)
No Country Poses a More Severe Threat To U.S.'s Innovation, Ideas and Economic Security Than the U.S.
From down under the view is pretty dismal.
Here's lookin up yu bum.
The threat is from within (Score:2)
The ultimate threat for this country is how its citizens are treated by the society as a whole. I have been alive for more than 50 years and every year has been worse economically than the previous year for the average person. It has descended to the point that hundreds of thousands of people who would like to work to survive can not work enough to even place a roof over their heads. No. It is millions. It is almost like the Holocaust except instead of Zyklon B, it is environmental exposure and starvation.
Re: (Score:3)
It isn't clear? Really?
China isn't like us the CCP decides an American innovation by an American company is a strategic threat to them they respond easily and consistently by cutting off its other business lines to their markets, until they agree to license whatever it is to some state-sponsored org.
Now look at us:
Once in a while our executive bureaucracy manages to coalesces around some idea of imposing a tariff of sanction or manages to articulate some liability like advanced semiconductor production. Od
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Right - China does not have a mind control ray to prevent you from having ideas. Ok.
Its not just IP though. Its give us all your IP or we will take it anyway...and cut off your access to our huge market while we dump stuff into your market. We will by nature of the international arbitrage and exploitation for our top down control vs your individual actors gradually squeeze you out of the production side of any market we choose.
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't seem to be true. For example, China is a big market for Apple and they have some of their products manufactured there. On the face of it, China has huge leverage over Apple.
Yet China has not stolen Apple's IP or dumped large numbers of knock-off iPhones onto the market.
In fact it's Western governments that are looking at Apple's app store policy as a potential monopoly issue.
Meanwhile Chinese phones have better cameras than the iPhone, so they can't be stealing or their cameras would only be Ap
Re: (Score:2)
That describes it pretty well i think. Apple makes all their stuff in China (well, Taiwan plays a large role too) but Apple makes all the money. The idea of Intellectual Property can be presented as a nice thing 'we can make money from our inventions' but to a large extent it is 'we let others make the goods, we make the money'. China has grown fast by making stuff for others and also by copying and stealing ideas, but they are way past that. They are ahead now on inventions and their main market is domesti
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile Chinese phones have better cameras than the iPhone, so they can't be stealing or their cameras would only be Apple quality. Check out DXOMark, they have been rating some Chinese phones higher than the iPhone for years
China could be "stealing" by taking iPhone technology and improving it, of course that's how innovation usually works, take a technology and improve it. But under our current patent laws it is "wrong" to do things like that.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes. The threat is to US org's ability to exploit innovation under our current conception of intellectual property laws. Nothing you said indicated how China would prevent people in the US from innovating, or having ideas.
No one has said (in the article, summary, or Slashdot posts) has stated or even insinuated that China would prevent the US from innovating or having ideas. But anything that reduces the value of innovation or ideas will have a negative effect on the amount of investment is but into those activities. This is what the FBI director is referring to.
Re: Threat to what now? (Score:2)
Now look at us
Just don't you dare try to misappropriate the image of Mickey Mouse.
Re: (Score:2)
America did the same to Europe. Europe did the same to Africa. It's what countries do to countries and continents do to continents. "Not like us" is the reason it happens, because that's how the two sides excuse their conduct.
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't clear from the links how he thought China was going to prevent people in the US from innovating or having ideas. I suppose one could reasonably argue about economic security, but in the end China doesn't care at all about US oligarch's 'intellectual property' any more than the US did before the US became the oligarch.
You touch on the reason the FBI director is stating China is a "severe threat to our innovation [and] our ideas" in your comment. He doesn't say China will stop people in the US from innovating or having ideas, but that corporate espionage and disregard for US IP threatens the value of our innovation and ideas. Regardless of your opinion on whether China does or should care about these concerns is irrelevant to the accuracy of the FBI director's statements.
Re: (Score:2)
Threat to "our ideas"? What?
Sigh. The article is referring to the Chinese proficiency at stealing information from foreign countries.
We all do this. They seem to be better at it.
Re: Next up (Score:3)
The problem with modern liberalism, even when it happens to sometime identify a problem it has no tools in its toolbox to fix it.
Globalism will continue until morale improves.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe the reason the US funds Israel is because its a proxy for the US in the middle east, If a country like Iran is getting too powerful Israel can bomb it, it takes the blame, the US says bad Israel and gives it more money.
Re: (Score:3)