They will throw stones at it!
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
They will throw stones at it!
by78
General
This thread is generally for military UAVs and UCAVs, not consumer drones. Unless a specific consumer drone model is being used in a military conflict or has a military variant or is proven to be dual-use (off-the-shelf), this isn't the right thread for it.
Last edited:
Well bro, if there is top ten list of most used drone by armies around the world I can guarantee that DJI models would be there for sure, The Russians, the Ukranians, the Israelies, name the army and is almost sure that they use DJI drones for something and If I am a commander of some army, I would be thinking fitting some of my troops with that AVATA drone to much of the horror of drone hobbyists who just want a good drone at a reasonable price. But at the end neither DJI or the hobbyist decide who use those drones, the same goes for almost every commercial company.
Regardless, he is right and that post and they way you made it is better suited for a different thread.
I will move the above relevant posts.
Looks like the post is more suited to China's scientific and technological development. thread. I just posted it because the use of civilians drones in the Russian-Ukrainian war and I though that some people would appreciate and discuss the potential military use of a technology like this in military operations.
by78
General
Unless you have footage of AVATA being used by belligerents or news articles and first-hand accounts of it being used in a conflict, as well as assessments of its performance in that regard, I don't see how a consumer drone that was just released last week would warrant a place at the military UCAV thread. It's true that many consumer drones, especially DJI ones, have been extensively used in conflicts around the world, but you said nothing about that in your original post. If you had prefaced your post with some thoughts on its potential military value based on its specs and performance, then it would have been a different story, but you did no such thing. Instead, you posted a short review/analysis of AVATA's place in the consumer drone market, which was way out of place at a thread dedicated to military UAVs and UCAVs.
Yeah my bad, I though members would see through it. Either way I still think this post is better suited for the China's scientific and technological development thread than the Economic thread.
I'm posting this report at the Economic thread instead of the COVID one, because increasingly China's Zero-Covid policy is politics-driven, not science- or health-driven. The impact is more economic and social. That much is clear. It's FT report, I know, but this one actually largely sticks to the reporting, relatively speaking.
I said a while back that zero-Covid policy kills China's vitality softly and gradually. The longer this policy sustains, the bigger and long-lasting the damages. This has been gradually borne out by the numbers coming out lately. The lowest new births in decades, the lowest new marriages in years, the huge jump in numbers of people thinking about immigration, especially among wealthy and middle-class people, very high youth unemployment rate. Despite very strong exports and large trade surplus, the yuan-dollar exchange rate has fallen almost ten percent, approaching 7 now. Large local fiscal deficits in the majority of the provinces, and so on. I'm sure people can find some bright spots and positive news, but ...
I said a while back that zero-Covid policy kills China's vitality softly and gradually. The longer this policy sustains, the bigger and long-lasting the damages. This has been gradually borne out by the numbers coming out lately. The lowest new births in decades, the lowest new marriages in years, the huge jump in numbers of people thinking about immigration, especially among wealthy and middle-class people, very high youth unemployment rate. Despite very strong exports and large trade surplus, the yuan-dollar exchange rate has fallen almost ten percent, approaching 7 now. Large local fiscal deficits in the majority of the provinces, and so on. I'm sure people can find some bright spots and positive news, but ...
As I see it, their current COVID policy has already changed somewhat compared to earlier this year, and has softened a little bit but it is unaffordable to remove.
I've posted a variation of this below elsewhere, but ultimately I think having covid policy be driven by politics (which in turn is an extension of societal expectations) is a prudent move.
The big picture was and is always what an uncontained covid outbreak would do for sociopolitical stability, in the absence of sufficient nationwide large scale healthcare planning and public relations messaging.
If people acknowledge and agree that the central government and CPC authority is the final upstream determinant of China's ability to carry out public governance and provide public services, to enable strategic planning in all sectors of China's interests (economics, industry, politics, military, sovereignty), then I'm surprised that people would be so dismissive about the importance of approaching a covid outbreak with more conservative and more cautious measures that allow for greater control and prevent uncontrolled transmissions and outbreaks that could challenge the sociopolitical fabric of the nation in a manner and result in an unforced errors that the central government and CPC would rather do without.
Because at the end of the day, the consequences of uncontrolled COVID outbreak at a regional or nationwide level and the sickness and the deaths it would cause (both directly and indirectly), and the subsequent sociopolitical instability it could cause and the potential to undermine govt authority and CPC rule, is still a far larger threat and presents a far wider array of unknowns than their current chosen option.
This isn't even considering the longer term healthcare consequences of long covid and the economic effects of suffering from a uncontained covid sweeping across the nation.
There are no good choices here, but the better choice is still one where CPC authority and CPC rule is able to be more credibly maintained and where the option to downregulate and tweak restrictions from more severe to more lax still exists.
Because once you reach uncontained covid outbreaks at a regional or national level, it becomes far, far more difficult to impose more severe restrictions to reverse an outbreak, and to in turn contain sociopolitical consequences.
Ultimately, a slightly healthier GDP or financial system won't mean much if you are flirting with sociopolitical instability and the risk of opening the CPC to significant risk or having its legitimacy attacked and exploited by other actors or elements.
