Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Nice media-led narrative.

The real reason is that the US cannot compete fairly



Is rampant IP theft and corporate espionage considered fair in your book?


Whose rampant IP theft are you referring to?


Hollywood from Edison...

> Thomas Edison's aggressive patent enforcement in the early days of filmmaking, particularly his control over motion picture technology, played a significant role in the development of Hollywood as the center of the film industry. Driven by a desire to control the market and eliminate competition, Edison's lawsuits and business practices pushed independent filmmakers westward, ultimately leading them to establish studios in Los Angeles, away from Edison's legal reach.


China is the pretty obvious answer in this context.


Odd. I’d think it’d be all the companies in the US ignoring IP and copyright laws.


Examples please.


This source provides on-going case numbers for court litigation:

https://www.bakerlaw.com/services/artificial-intelligence-ai...

Seems like it would be a definitive list to me as it shows US AI companies getting sued for copyright infringement.


So you're capable of knowing what the judges will decide on these cases? You've already decided that they are liable for what they're accused of?

And, isn't this the system working exactly how it is supposed to? Someone makes a claim and the courts decide, and then some kind of punishment will be doled out of the claim was found to be true?


You're changing the the topic of conversation, you asked for cases and now you want judgements as well.


No, I'm not. You made the claim " I’d think it’d be all the companies in the US ignoring IP and copyright laws" - and then point to ongoing cases, where the outcome hasn't even been decided yet. They may be ignoring IP and copyright laws, but no one knows whether they are or aren't yet.


I'm sure the parties suing the defendants feel very differently than you.


What exactly does fairly look like to you? Uyghurs in camps, suicide nets strung around factories?

Like, even if you just want to talk about protectionism, China is way worse than the US pre-Trump. "Fairly" has nothing to do with foreign policy.


I recall kids in cages back before trump was around. The US doesn't exactly have a clean track record when it comes to human rights and international law yet they are quick to point the finger at anyone else when they cross the line.

[1] https://www.aclu.org/news/smart-justice/president-obama-want...


There is a vast distance between putting unaccompanied minors in holding cells and what Trump is doing.

No nation is perfect, but the US has historically been better than many others.


What are you talking about


>> It's about China being expansionist

Citations? Apart from usual Western government propaganda outlets perhaps?


They are aiming for world domination by buying themselves into businesses all over the planet and by building up a very large army. But that’s just normal human behavior I guess.

The problem is rather that if the only moral compass is the communist party it will suck


It's a bit rich to attribute goals of world domination to buying into businesses all over the world and building a very large army.

By those metrics, the rest of the world should have been terrified by the US for the last 60 years...

Those are necessary precursors to aggressive expansionism, but insufficient without political will.


Context matters, who is leading that machinery? They seem to have the political will to invade.


Taiwan is a tricky case. The CCP isn't unjustified in making a claim to it. Granted: that claim is contrary to international norms, law, and the population's self determination.

But if China were only threatening to invade Taiwan it would be a gray area.

Imho, their claims in the South China Sea are much more obviously expansionist, given the settled cases against them under international law.

Much easier to see those boiling over into China invading a few populated islands of the Philippines.


Interesting, I don't recall Iran having to flying bombers for 36 hours to bomb a US military base...


Okay so thanks very much. That's not really a citation that's an opinion?

To translate what you're saying. The Chinese are trying to establish the same kind of global trade collaboration that Europe and the US have done for the past hundred and x years? But the Chinese civilization is over 2000 years old, and they had a much larger global trade network back when the west was a pile of wooden shacks and feudal barbarism?

They're also building up a large army in in the same way that the US and Europe have with NATO? I'm also not really sure what's wrong with the moral compass of the Chinese communist party? From what I can see at the moment it is authoritative, but not necessarily venal?

It seems that the Chinese people themselves are enjoying a pretty good standard of living and quality of life? I've only been there two or three times, but I never saw the same kind of deprivation in China that I saw behind the Iron Curtain for instance.


> I'm also not really sure what's wrong with the moral compass of the Chinese communist party? From what I can see at the moment it is authoritative, but not necessarily venal?

It's certainly corrupt. Xi didn't launch major, disruptive anti-corruption drives for no reason, but because he saw it as an existential threat to the CCP's legitimacy (after all, it did torpedo the Soviet Union).

Granted, an alternate rationale was internecine power struggles within the party and removing political enemies, but there was some real corruption.

The strongman argument against the CCP's moral compass is that it has no concept of or respect for individual rights: the party is above all.

Historically, this has always ended tragically because eventually it will be abused to either justify suffering or party gain at the expense of people.

Authoritarianism only works until someone bad grabs the reigns, and single-party non-democratic systems have a way of rewarding sociopaths.


I think stones in glass houses comes to mind right now? :)


The fact that the US still has functioning separation of powers is counter evidence.

People may gripe about fuzzy areas being stepped on and norms pushed (and they should gripe!), but there's a huge chasm between separation of powers in democracies and China.


Calling in the marine guard without congress approval seems a little bit un-separate, but I'm not an expert so I'm not going to continue this conversation. You have an opinion and I have my very inexpert one too.


The Marines were rebased within the bounds of Constitutional and legal powers, as was the National Guard federalization and deployment.

Not agreeing with a thing doesn't make it illegal.

If Congress wants to prohibit Presidents from pushing these areas, then they're free to do so. (And expect they will once the clock tocks)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: