61–70 of 179 posts
They are not wrong, but will they also ban Cisco in their "Sovereignty Push"?
Why should they? The United States honors international IP law and doesn't cheat its way into threatening domestic production of other countries like China does.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, just no. I get where you’re coming from, but I disagree in the strongest terms that copying China is the way forward. Closed, centralized models can scale quickly, as China did, but open models generate more frontier innovation and resilience. Iirc, nearly half of our unicorns have immigrant founders. Sure, let’s harden IP and other trade laws, and punish China for violations (start treating them as an adult, a n…
this is what most WEIRD people do not understand: (Western-Educated-Industrial-Rich-Democratic) - by today it looks like that the Chinese system may proof to be more "performant" on most/several (all?) levels. Its hard to accept for libertarian minds, i guess. Once here on HN someone wrote like: "democratic systems seems to be too slow to adapt in world changing at our current speed". China did some vey wise decision…
Now people claim they stole their IPs through JVs and that's why they are good at making EVs, this theory doesn't add up.
Also, what China offered is a vast untapped market, no one forced these companies to go to China to set up JVs and start picking up gold down the street, this was way before WTO and China was not at all obligated to open it's market, let alone for free.
Now ask one question, what the EU has to offer to "force" China to set up JVs? Guaranteed billion dollars profit?
EU car market is crowded and full of incumbents, Chinese cars represent a low single digit market share despite the weekly "China is taking over the EU car market" news article.
Nice, in 2025, the world is a place where China can not be trusted, Russia can not be trusted, USA can not be trusted, Europe can not be trusted, etc. We are very far from the "imagine all the people, living live in peace". I wonder why that is...
The book basically argues that a significant amount of the world is headed for destabilization, and a destabilized world involves a lot less trust.
Side note: personally, I find the writing style and general tone to be hyperbolic, but some of the analysis is interesting.
Better late than never. China has so many anti-Foreigner laws for doing business in China. West has made China rich and powerful in exchange for cheap labour.
The rise of China has done a lot to destroy the neoliberal, globalist dream. Letting them cheat the globalist system (e.g. violating IP laws, human rights violations, Uyghur/Tibetan genocide) may have been fine when they were desperately poor, but there was always an implicit assumption that they would eventually start playing by the rules and culturally liberalize. But they're not. How can we hold onto ideals like "…
They are not wrong, but will they also ban Cisco in their "Sovereignty Push"?
Why should they? The United States honors international IP law and doesn't cheat its way into threatening domestic production of other countries like China does.
May I introduce you to a somewhat recent concept people like to call AI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should they? The United States honors international IP law and doesn't cheat its way into threatening domestic production of other countries like China does.
> Why should they? Because bashing all things American while ignoring the threat posed by China is part of Europe's cultural DNA.
Better late than never. China has so many anti-Foreigner laws for doing business in China. West has made China rich and powerful in exchange for cheap labour.
The rise of China has done a lot to destroy the neoliberal, globalist dream. Letting them cheat the globalist system (e.g. violating IP laws, human rights violations, Uyghur/Tibetan genocide) may have been fine when they were desperately poor, but there was always an implicit assumption that they would eventually start playing by the rules and culturally liberalize. But they're not. How can we hold onto ideals like "…
They didn’t cheat, we did.
China didn’t force the west to make them their workbench.
China isn’t the first authoritarian country the western industry loved as workforce.
No human wasn’t a negative, it was one of the main selling points.
Well, people will buy Huawei routers at home anyway.
They are not wrong, but will they also ban Cisco in their "Sovereignty Push"?
Why should they? The United States honors international IP law and doesn't cheat its way into threatening domestic production of other countries like China does.
Sounds pretty untrustworthy to me.
I don't get why Huawei gets specific hate? Shouldn't this equally apply to all Chinese vendors? I wouldn't expect any are less susceptible to government control?