How? Until China becomes a financial super power there's a limit to how far it can push back with causing long term damage to itself.
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Ban supply of rare earths and other critical materials to countries stealing Chinese assets. Not even to the civilian industries. China still allows EU access to rare earths and other minerals.
Ban access to Chinese market and access to Chinese ports for those countries. I would ban EU luxury brands from the Chinese market. Start with LVMH.
Use the anti-foreign sanctions law.
When you control the global supply chains, you control the global economy. It’s a far more powerful tool than blocking financial payments because payments of currency is a medium of exchange for goods.
Look how Japan is getting squeezed by China.
Last edited:
China does the rational thing and stops investing in Europe, propping up their economies and reassesses risk exposure.
China is popular but the Chinese lack confidence to treat foreigner the right way. Japan and South Korea is no less popular but they don't actually be tolerant to foreigner the way the Chinese is. It is correlated to how the Chinese feel proud about themselves, which unfortunately I don't feel the Chinese is much proud of.
didnt a China bank sold its shareholdings in deutschbank before? why these others didnot sell?
If anyone has been even tangentially following Chinese tech trends, there is a huge trend towards "open source".
Even in hardware, the culture in Shenzhen is to have open reference designs thus you have a thousand vacuum cleaners with brands like BZZZRG on amazon with only small differences like colour and packaging. Another popular example is the ESP32 microcontroller, the specifications are well documented and open, so you have it being used in all kinds of IOT gear, mass produced or DIY. So tech-communism has been a thing in China for a while.
On the software side, initially Chinese devs were not well regarded within the open source ecosystem, they were considered takers and rarely contributed source back despite GPL licensing, this was around the 2000's. As China's tech development capabilities grew, they also quickly became huge contributors back to the scene around the 2010's.
Found a decent article which aligns with the above.
Because China is playing theater and not geopolitics. Overwhelmingly, Chinese think too well of Westerners.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
So essentially this sentiment.
The western approach to AI is basically a little more refined version of the infinite monkeys on typewriters trying to create the complete works of Shakespeare joke.
It’s hyper resource intensive (hardware, power, water even) by design to try to force an arms race and to create insurmountable barriers to entry such that the first company to ‘win’ this ‘race’ takes all while everyone else gets locked out in the cold, forever. That’s how they can justify the current frankly insane levels of investment.
China’s breakthrough is extra devastating because it breaks their whole game by offering a real world alternative approach where you don’t need to invest the GDPs of whole medium sized countries to play this game, nor need the power demands of medium sized countries to run, and be fully competitive with the best the hyperscalpers could manage, and making it open source.
Western AI companies were betting on that no matter which one of them won ultimately, they would then get to set the price and extract maximum monopolistic profits from the market, forever, as there will literally be no other choice. That prize is what justifies the current and future investments.
Chinese open source AI just set an effective price ceiling of common utilities prices. That’s a collective death sentence to western AI companies.
The only question is whether it’s a spectacular black-hole formation implosion, or a slow by inextricable decline.
This is basically true for any half decent country, once it has reached a certain level of development, everyone is looking to get in. Migrant crisis in Europe, "Build the wall" in USA.
I can only imagine that this kind of thinking is prevalent amongst less educated people. There is no way a more educated person approaches education without looking at credentials and objective measurements.
The reason they weren't allowed was because as written, the GB 2626-2019 standard for KN95 was not equivalent to N95 and actually not meant to be. KN95 was developed in China for industrial/everyday use when air quality was bad. The filter media was basically the same performance, but the fitment/pressure was not. There was a different GB standard for proper medical grades GB 19083-2010.
Also note that the proper N95 standard used behind the head straps to secure the fit. KN95 usually just used Earloops. This is because KN95 was meant to be easy to put on/take off since it was for regular people (take a sip of water, have a snack).
Speaking of teachers and standards. Reminds me of a funny anecdote of a white friend who was learning Mandarin. He said the teacher's compliment would often be "that's up to the standard", or something along those lines, which sounds very average (the teacher was from mainland China). A typical Canadian teacher might say "Excellent work", but to him it was a good compliment.