Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why China is the REAL master of the universe
Daily Mail ^ | 4.11.08 | ANTHONY BROWNE

Posted on 04/11/2008 5:26:53 PM PDT by Dr. Marten

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

1 posted on 04/11/2008 5:26:53 PM PDT by Dr. Marten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: HighRoadToChina; maui_hawaii; srm913; Free the USA; rightwing2; borghead; ChaseR; soccer8; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 04/11/2008 5:27:27 PM PDT by Dr. Marten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten

I tell ya this If you eat Chinese food and your hungry again in an hour They had us against the ropes along time ago


3 posted on 04/11/2008 5:32:32 PM PDT by al baby (Hi mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
I pressed on in spite of the term "businessman-imperialist." But when I saw "jingoistic," it was all over.

I guess I just can't even stomach a paragraph of bulls--t anymore.

4 posted on 04/11/2008 5:38:38 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand (can u feel the unity?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
The launch of the Tata Nano: The Chinese company has now taken over British manufactuing giants Land Rover and Jaguar

interesting error on the caption of the car picture. I guess the author was mesmerized by his fears.

5 posted on 04/11/2008 5:43:12 PM PDT by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
Why China is the REAL master of the universe

Yet, if the U.S. alone decided to take its business elsewhere, the Chinese would revert back to being just another struggling third world country. They are masters as long as the U.S. keeps them that way.
6 posted on 04/11/2008 5:44:07 PM PDT by adorno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten

Usually essays expose a problem then proffer a solution. This is nothing but a “sky-is-falling” rant. I’ll look forward to the conclusion in this series.


7 posted on 04/11/2008 5:44:59 PM PDT by Rudder (Klinton-Kool-Aid FReepers prefer spectacle over victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten

Excellent, thoughtful, perceptive post.

Thanks.


8 posted on 04/11/2008 5:46:21 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten

People still seem to be missing the paradigm shift that’s coming with advanced in computation over the next two decades.
I’ve said it before here, but I’ll repeat myself.

The first person to get AI wins, and it doesn’t matter how many people, engineers or PHds you have (even billions), China can’t compete with self engineering AI systems.

This is if you accept exceptionally optimistic notions like those coming from MIT alum Kurzweil. And even if you don’t, clearly, the lead people have in automation and computing technology will blast beyond the manpower of communist China.
Who’s getting the patents for this technology? MSFT for example, and Japanese and Korean companies.
Not China. And China must uphold the law. Therefore, China is a paper tiger IMHO.

China also should have owned the world in the last two centuries eh?
If manpower were the key, it would have.

But manpower wasn’t the key then and they didn’t. Turned out technology was the key.

But the paradigm shift was subtle then too, just as it is now.

Robotics and technology can easily overpower and squash manpower and human engineering.

You can bet Japan sees this and Japan ultimately will dominate Asia(followed in a close second by KOR).

I’d bet my 401k on it.


9 posted on 04/11/2008 5:46:48 PM PDT by kbingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
"It is an accident of history that Europeans took advantage of their window of opportunity in the last half of the second millennium to take over the world."
 
White men of western European extraction changed the course of history  not by accident, but because of competition between the myriad of principalities.
 
"The cause was a combination of factors such as the development of maritime technology in Europe, the competition between European countries that drove them to look outwards and find new ways to increase prosperity, and the fact China remained firmly locked in its agrarian, introspective past."
 
The Chinese were navigating the seas for decades before the birth of Columbus. It was the Chinese monolithic tendency toward every aspect of life and politics that resulted in (allowing) the Western Civilization dominating world wide commerce..
 
1421
 
 
Guns, Germs, Steel
 
 

10 posted on 04/11/2008 5:51:24 PM PDT by Radix (How come they call people "Morons" when they do not know as much? Shouldn't they be called "Lessons?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
China is living in both the 21st and 19th Century. It's intense nationaliztic behavior is that of a 19th Century imperialist power, in many ways it's practicing “catching up” of what the other world powers went thru in the 19th Century - complete with sense of manifested destiny, chauvinistic nationalism, and deploying military power as a blunt political and expansionist, empire building tool.

Except the world is not in the 19th Century anymore.

Much of China's schism with the west is - from Chinese perspective, that China is not doing anything that the western (and Japanese) imperial power didn't themselves do back in the 18th and 19th century - in fact, with some of that western imperialism applied towards China. So China tend to reject western objection to Chinese policies as hypocritical in a historical context.

But, we don't live in the 19th Century anymore. And what China is doing in its exercise of modern imperialism is clearly not acceptable in the 21st Century.

The trick is how do we get China off it's 19th Century based mindset and join the 21st Century?

11 posted on 04/11/2008 5:51:24 PM PDT by Republican Party Reptile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kbingham

What do you mean specifically by the first person to get AI wins? I’ve been in the AI business for over 20 years. It has been inside products for over a generation in both the US and in Asia.


12 posted on 04/11/2008 5:58:36 PM PDT by Kirkwood (Ask me again tomorrow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kbingham

In fact, I’ll just continue to blab on by replying to myself here.

I am interested in robotics and like to spend money, so I figured I’d get a semi-serious robot like Roboloid, but in my quest, I quickly realized all of the high end robots for serious hobbying are made in Korea/Japan.

Canada and the US make the best hobby planes. Go figure.

China is for cheap-shit knockoff plastic robots mass produced to sell at Best Buy.

And the US? The US can only hope to dominate here by being number 1 in AI, but we’re getting our asses kicked in mechanical engineering.

Japan has traditionally placed much more emphasis on engineering (like actual engineering of physical systems), whereas they have lacked interest in software. They’re trying to change this. MSFT has a lot of patents and does a lot of original research, so we’re fairly well protected here from complete domination.

It may take physical systems engineered and produced in Kor and Japan as well as software engineered in the US or Germany to get the first truly magnificent AI off the ground, but obviously missing from this formula is China.

Again, if you think those giant Japanese and Korean brains are going to stand by and watch China take over, think again.


13 posted on 04/11/2008 5:58:44 PM PDT by kbingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand
how was much of 19th century imperialism and empire building not jingoistic in nature? It was very much a time of nationalistic triumphalism (and finally came to a head in the Great War).
14 posted on 04/11/2008 6:01:04 PM PDT by Republican Party Reptile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kirkwood

I’m talking about strong AI.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_AI

The computational ability of the brain hasn’t even been achieved yet and probably isn’t due for at least 20 years (based on Kurzweil’s research), so there’s no way any strong AI system exsits anywhere in the world, yet.

If you accept Penrose’s conjecture, then strong AI is a long way off, but very few people think our brains work on a quantum level.
Marvin Minsky doesn’t, and he’s the man in AI (not to disparage Penrose).


15 posted on 04/11/2008 6:07:09 PM PDT by kbingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten

Well, that was a class A hand wringer. We might as well just go out and shoot ourselves.


16 posted on 04/11/2008 6:10:10 PM PDT by Mad_Tom_Rackham ("The land of the Free...Because of the Brave")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Radix

I think you discount the magic of the Christian faith


17 posted on 04/11/2008 6:11:26 PM PDT by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: gusopol3

Did I come across that way? I did not mean it that way.

I suppose that I should consider more before I post.


18 posted on 04/11/2008 6:21:05 PM PDT by Radix (How come they call people "Morons" when they do not know as much? Shouldn't they be called "Lessons?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten

The simple minded are always impressed by authoritarian regimes. They confuse a large group of people, all performing the same or similar tasks as “efficiency”. However, the truth of the matter is that such regimes are the furthest thing from efficient, and what efficiency there is, is likely either a holdover from a previous regime, or outside of governmental control to some extent.

If you objectively look at China, you get a very different picture. Expressions like “penny wise-pound foolish” and “mortgaging their future” come to mind. Their illusion of central control is betrayed by the reality of a confederacy of provinces, each who ignore the regime with relative impunity.

Perhaps the greatest irony is how much the typical Chinese *wants* the central government to succeed, and even more, to enforce its dictates over the provinces. The vast majority of the tens of thousands of protests that happen every year are in hopes that their national government will enforce its laws against the illegal activities of provincial and local governments.

Yet these protests are bizarrely seen as “anti-state”, and the central government brutally suppresses its most ardent supporters, while allowing provincial and local governments to run amok.

So what is going to happen? The Chinese economy is unsustainable, and most likely will have a major collapse in the near future. What happens from that point is critical. An efficient government would have a massive restructuring, but this will most likely not happen. What will happen is bizarre.

Throughout Chinese history, a reoccurring theme is the cyclic nature of China. Emperors were seen like the seasons of the year, and were trained from birth to carry out whatever their seasonal assignment was to be. The first of the four cycles was the “builder” emperor, who would recreate China from scratch. All new buildings, lots of new and untested ideas.

His successor was the “maintenance” emperor, who would get everything newly built running smoothly as a system. China would be harmonious. He was followed by the “degenerate” emperor, who would pull his government back to Beijing, and let the country fall apart, everything decaying and in disrepair.

Finally, the fourth emperor, the “water” emperor, would destroy everything and probably slaughter millions of people, using chaos to cleanse the country and eliminate the detritus. Then the cycle would begin anew with a “builder” emperor.

Everyone in China followed this system, and would carry out whatever would forward the current emperor. But they would ignore orders contrary to the purpose of the emperor. So there really was no choice in the matter.

Ironically enough, Mao Tse Tung, had he been emperor, would have been a “water”, destroying emperor. And he behaved like one, because even though he was a communist and supposedly above all that, everyone expected it of him.

Well, right now, China is moving from a “maintenance” cycle into a “decadence” cycle, or is possibly further along and nearing a “water” cycle. But that is not a good place for China to be, if their economy is about to collapse.

It will either mean that China will have either an extended depression, the country in chaos and collapse, or they are going to have an incredibly bloody civil war, destroying most of the country. Or another tyrant like Mao who will slaughter people like there is no tomorrow.

In any event, it doesn’t look good.


19 posted on 04/11/2008 6:30:34 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Radix
well, not so much yourself, but the quotes from the book. Fischer's Albion's Seed, I'm paraphrasing from memory, juxtaposed the attitude "We came to fish" (to look outwards and find new ways to increase prosperity) to the logo of the Massachusetts Bay Company of an Indian "Come over and help us" (the Macedonian call of Acts). Increasingly I'm impressed by the fact that the Founders prayed over the country and that its greatness and preservation was based on having that mind.
20 posted on 04/11/2008 6:30:55 PM PDT by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson