What's new

China: The Unsatisfied Power

...but when someone says something like, "The majority of Americans are incredibly stupid, lazy, apathetic people", I have to stand-up and say something. This is the most BS thing I have read on PDF in a while, and there is a lot of crap that floats around here.
When you see posts like that nonsense, it is more about the person's intent of being childish and ignorant than it is about engaging in a serious discussion.
 
.
We are talking about different level of Innovation.
You are talking about Country level of innovation -> planes, tanks, phones.

Im talking about civilization level of innovation -> create the whole mobile phone industry, create the whole computer industry, and Yes. new silk road is civilization level of innovation, given current trade are sea base, to change it to Eurasia continental base is civilization level of innovation (but is more political innovation than technical). China need one of this.

If I ask you to create a new way of writing in Chinese can you do it? No, having not known you, I don't know how smart you are, but I do know you don't speak Chinese. That's enough reason to say you can't do it.

China has always led in the field of innovation, until recently, why? The bar has gotten higher, one cannot make a iPhone if one don't know what a phone is, one cannot invent a light bulb without knowing what electricity is.

You think America just makes these things out of thin air? It's hundred of years of build up.

Why was stealth in ships used? Falklands showed that even a country like Argentina with terrible military can do damage with missiles.

Can China invent the Stealth trend at the time? No, one we have no experience that would make us want to.


It's quite a few things that drives innovation, and it's not a guy sitting in a house dreaming about stuff. It's need, know how, and resources. China is getting more and more resources, and with every advance, we build our expertise and experience in every field. With a more advanced military that will face more advanced weaponry and a more sophisticated and rich populous, we will need to fill their needs.

That's where innovation comes from. It's not from that moron from guatamawhothehellcares.

I certainly does not have much idea of how much closer to ideal is communism in China
This says it all, doesn't it.
 
.
If I ask you to create a new way of writing in Chinese can you do it? No, having not known you, I don't know how smart you are, but I do know you don't speak Chinese. That's enough reason to say you can't do it.

China has always led in the field of innovation, until recently, why? The bar has gotten higher, one cannot make a iPhone if one don't know what a phone is, one cannot invent a light bulb without knowing what electricity is.

You think America just makes these things out of thin air? It's hundred of years of build up.

Why was stealth in ships used? Falklands showed that even a country like Argentina with terrible military can do damage with missiles.

Can China invent the Stealth trend at the time? No, one we have no experience that would make us want to.


It's quite a few things that drives innovation, and it's not a guy sitting in a house dreaming about stuff. It's need, know how, and resources. China is getting more and more resources, and with every advance, we build our expertise and experience in every field. With a more advanced military that will face more advanced weaponry and a more sophisticated and rich populous, we will need to fill their needs.

That's where innovation comes from. It's not from that moron from guatamawhothehellcares.


This says it all, doesn't it.
I know China has come very far.
My point is U.S has broader base of population they can draw talent from.
1 Talent guys benefit to accelerate US research is perhaps > many normal guys.
Therefore US research will be faster. That's my point.
Even today you still see US inventing the whole smart phone industry out.
The next US innovation will be on data science, brain-like computers, etc.
I don't see that research intensive coming from China. The impact of publication is still US no. 1.
This is what I see today. We will see how things go.
 
.
I cannot see any Racist comment from me. Can you show me where did I generalize base on Race?
The strong point of China over US is huge population <- Racist?
A huge population with discipline working culture <- Racist?
That does not mean US does not have a discipline working culture. What it means is that the population with discipline working culture of US is less than China. <- A conjecture for sure. But Racist?

Remind you to choose the example of my racist that you never said the samething before. Because I will certainly go back and find similar example from your post history.


And__ if I am racist. So what? Suppose I say Yes. I am racist. So what?
----------------------------------------------------------------


Publication is one thing. We are in political/military power forum. Can China translate the research publication to real political power fast enough? That is the speed I am talking about. You can publish faster than Intel on CPU, yet your CPU rolling out rate is slower pace.

You know. A good publication on No.1 journal has more impact than 200 publications on mid level journal combined.

I don't see references or numbers for those. Not based in fact, generalizing based on birth - racism. You are in no position to be racist against Chinese as a Thai though.

I dunno how you got that the "innovation speed" of the US is faster. I've already cited numbers - publication count, patents filed and GDP ratio. It is not my problem that you cannot see it. I don't even know why you are obsessed with Intel, which is nobody in mobile computing and the sector of greatest growth in the processor market.

I know China has come very far.
My point is U.S has broader base of population they can draw talent from.
1 Talent guys benefit to accelerate US research is perhaps > many normal guys.
Therefore US research will be faster. That's my point.
Even today you still see US inventing the whole smart phone industry out.
The next US innovation will be on data science, brain-like computers, etc.
I don't see that research intensive coming from China. The impact of publication is still US no. 1.
This is what I see today. We will see how things go.

But you are not in a position to judge research impact nor are we discussing research impact today. You clearly said "faster rate" - which implies the gap is growing larger. I have clearly demonstrated that claim is false. Now you are moving your argument.
 
.
This says it all, doesn't it.
Not really :-) As you know internal and external matters are different, as much as potential and reality of a state, so perspective must be kept to as right as possible :p:
 
.
I don't see references or numbers for those. Not based in fact, generalizing based on birth - racism. You are in no position to be racist against Chinese as a Thai though.

I dunno how you got that the "innovation speed" of the US is faster. I've already cited numbers - publication count, patents filed and GDP ratio. It is not my problem that you cannot see it. I don't even know why you are obsessed with Intel, which is nobody in mobile computing and the sector of greatest growth in the processor market.



But you are not in a position to judge research impact nor are we discussing research impact today. You clearly said "faster rate" - which implies the gap is growing larger. I have clearly demonstrated that claim is false. Now you are moving your argument.

As you failed to argue which sentence of mine is racism, I reject your claim that I am a racist, since you classify me racist without supporting evidence.

Here is my reply to you for your insult me.

@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence :bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence :bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence:bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence:bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence:bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence:bounce:


--------------

Since I have said what my "uncharted territory innovation" means. It means game changing innnovation. Like Internet obsolete DVDs. (Not obsolete but it make DVD usage plummate a lot).

The reason I'm obsess with CPU is because I'm a programmer. I see the technological research around me on this section.
I read research papers on my field, and I rate the research from US the most impact. That's how I say US is researching faster.

US current uncharted terriroty research are about building brain-like Computers, Computers which can see the world around them. Computers that can recognize faces. Face search onto databases. etc. From this point of new game-changer research. Papers from China, there are. but not very impact compare to the US.

Please name the industry invented by China in past 5 years
 
.
As you failed to argue which sentence of mine is racism, I reject your claim that I am a racist, since you classify me racist without supporting evidence.

Here is my reply to you for your insult me.

@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence :bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence :bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence:bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence:bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence:bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence:bounce:


--------------

Since I have said what my "uncharted territory innovation" means. It means game changing innnovation. Like Internet obsolete DVDs. (Not obsolete but it make DVD usage plummate a lot).

The reason I'm obsess with CPU is because I'm a programmer. I see the technological research around me on this section.
I read research papers on my field, and I rate the research from US the most impact. That's how I say US is researching faster.

US current uncharted terriroty research are about building brain-like Computers, Computers which can see the world around them. Computers that can recognize faces. Face search onto databases. etc. From this point of new game-changer research. Papers from China, there are. but not very impact compare to the US.

Please name the industry invented by China in past 5 years

If you mean a totally new innovation rather than advancement of existing ones then i agree with you US is way ahead than any other country.
 
.
Gives an idea.

China must speak up for developing countries: Xi | The BRICS Post

November 30, 2014

235899128_8.jpg

Chinese President Xi Jinping (C, rear), also general secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee and chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC), addresses the central foreign affairs meeting held on Nov. 28 to 29, 2014 in Beijing, capital of China [Xinhua]

In a key foreign policy address to the Central committee of the ruling CPC, Chinese President Xi Jinping has underlined the importance of Beijing championing the cause of the developing countries.

“We are firm in our position that all countries, regardless of their size, strength and level of development, are equal members of the international community and that the destiny of the world should be decided by people of all countries. We should uphold international justice and, in particular, speak up for developing countries,” said Xi.

In 2014, China has launched a new Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) with 21 Asian nations, a $100 billion BRICS Bank and a $40 Silk Road investment fund, all geared towards giving a bigger say to BRICS and emerging economies in international economic affairs.

The Chinese President was speaking in Beijing on Friday and Saturday at a conference on foreign affairs presided over by the Chinese Premier Li Keqiang.

“We should advance multilateral diplomacy, work to reform the international system and global governance, and increase the representation and say of China and other developing countries,” Xi was quoted by Chinese state agency Xinhua.

Developing economies like the BRICS have long alleged that the IMF and World Bank impose belt-tightening policies in exchange for loans while giving them little say in deciding terms.

The IMF reforms have hit a serious roadblock with the Barack Obama administration failing to push IMF quota reforms through the US Congress till now.

Apart from Xi, the Chinese Premier Li Keqiang and top Communist leaders, China’s ambassador to the US also spoke at the conference.

The Chinese President also pledged to push for a world free of domination by any superpower, without mentioning the US.

“We should be fully mindful of the complexity of the evolving international architecture, and we should also recognize that the growing trend toward a multi-polar world will not change,” Xi said on Saturday in Beijing.

“We should be keenly aware of the protracted nature of contest over the international order; on the other hand, we need to recognize that the direction of reform of the international system will remain unchanged,” said the Chinese leader.

China has reservations about a much-hyped Asia pivot as Washington seeks to expand American interests in Asia as a counterpoint to China’s growing influence.

***

Lima Climate meet: China insists on differentiated responsibilities
December 2, 2014



shutterstock_65447548final_70.jpg

China say rich countries must do far more to cut emissions since they contributed the most to environmental degradation since the Industrial Revolution [Image: UNEP]

China will work with all parties to push for positive outcomes out of the Lima meeting in accordance with the equality principle, common but differentiated responsibilities and the respective capabilities principles, said a Foreign Ministry spokesperson in Beijing.

Beijing is reiterating calls by developing countries that say rich countries must do far more to cut emissions since they contributed the most to environment degradation since the Industrial Revolution.

Rich nations, meanwhile, say emerging economies led by China have to accept both caps and cuts.


Over 190 nations are negotiating new limits on greenhouse gas in a UN conference in Lima, the capital of Peru.

China hopes the Lima Climate Change Conference can reach consensus on key elements of a new deal on carbon emissions, said Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying on Monday.

Xie Zhenhua, deputy chief of China’s National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), and Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin, headed the Chinese delegation to Lima.

China and other developing countries continue to insist that “adaptation, finance, technology and capacity building support from developed countries” should also be included in the draft text of the 2015 agreement.

The Lima meeting must specify what should be included in “intended nationally determined contributions”, said the Chinese spokesperson.

Developed countries should continue to take the lead in cutting emissions by large margins before 2020 while offering finance, technology and capacity building support to developing countries to help them adapt to and address climate change, said Hua.

China’s BRICS partners, India and Russia, are yet to set a target for fossil fuel.

The UN is urging around 200 nations to arrive at a consensus for a climate accord at a summit in Paris in late 2015.

In a key announcement made by Chinese President Xi Jinping and his US counterpart Barack Obama earlier last month, both countries agreed on an accord to cut emissions. China said 2030 would be peak year for its soaring greenhouse gas emissions, the first time it has set a limit. The US would cut emissions by more than a quarter from 2005 levels by 2025, stressed Obama.

A UN panel on climate change has warned that unchecked climate change could have “severe, widespread and irreversible impacts” on human society and nature with heatwaves, floods, storms and rising sea levels.

The 20th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is being held in the Peruvian capital Lima from Dec. 1- 12.

The meeting is intended to pave the way for a new agreement addressing climate change, planned to be passed at the end of 2015 in Paris and come into force in 2020.
 
.
As you failed to argue which sentence of mine is racism, I reject your claim that I am a racist, since you classify me racist without supporting evidence.

Here is my reply to you for your insult me.

@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence :bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence :bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence:bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence:bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence:bounce:
@FairAndUnbiased Insults people without evidence:bounce:


--------------

Since I have said what my "uncharted territory innovation" means. It means game changing innnovation. Like Internet obsolete DVDs. (Not obsolete but it make DVD usage plummate a lot).

The reason I'm obsess with CPU is because I'm a programmer. I see the technological research around me on this section.
I read research papers on my field, and I rate the research from US the most impact. That's how I say US is researching faster.

US current uncharted terriroty research are about building brain-like Computers, Computers which can see the world around them. Computers that can recognize faces. Face search onto databases. etc. From this point of new game-changer research. Papers from China, there are. but not very impact compare to the US.

Please name the industry invented by China in past 5 years

That's right, I insult you because I talk on your level. Don't want to be insulted? Then don't be stupid lol. Both those sentences are racist, and I thought it was self explanitory. Don't make generalizations about people based on their race. Work ethic of a nationality is a generalization.

You are a programmer - you are not an electrical engineer or materials scientist. You have no idea how CPUs are fabricated and you don't know the issues facing modern CPUs. You are on the software side. Why do you worry about the CPUs lol? I work on real semiconductor materials, so I actually know a few things about the issues on the materials side, which are not software.

Being uninformed doesn't mean that you are right. Direct image database searching is already done by Baidu: Baidu Image Search - Baidu Institute of Deep Learning

'Chinese Google' Unveils Visual Search Engine Powered by Fake Brains | WIRED

Computer vision is not a new field lol. I don't know what kind of programmer you are, but I don't know of many programmers outside academia that actually read research papers. Don't need research papers to program an iPhone app.
 
.
China's demand of South China Sea is both logical and has historical bases, whether these historical reasons should play is another matter. Simply blocking China's claim will do as much as France's desire to hold on to continental power.
.

These would be the reason, we would not follow your discussion.
The whole world including Chinese people doesn't know what China mean with the dashed line.
Could you please read more from outside sources?
 
.
China has no ambition to rule all of Asia, and really doesn't want to,...
There is no reason for Asia to believe that. Am not saying that to be 'mean' to your argument and to China. Rather, am saying that in geopolitical perspectives.

The US and Canada have regular fishing disputes. But does anyone really believe that behind closed doors, Canada's PM quietly said to the judges/arbiters/whoever: 'The American Navy can wipe us out in a few days. Find some ways to settle this.' ?

No, because both countries believes each other to be the 'rule of law' country. We shared similar, if not identical ideologies, let alone trade relationships. Our borders are literally drawn lines in the dirt when possible and when not possible, we leave it to our citizens to respect the virtual lines they envision in their heads. We are so similar that we pledged to defend each other via NORAD. When the US was attacked on Sept 11, 2001, Canadians opened their airports to our distressed airborned citizens and got them all safely landed. For 9/11 alone, Canadians will always have our tearful gratitude. At the personal level, I may tease the few Canadians here about Canada being a US state, but I will always see Canada as a US peer.

China have NOT a single such relationship with ANY of the major Asian powers and so far have not done much to even foster the germ of a friendly suspicion that China is honest about her 'peaceful rise'. May be China is honest. But in relationships of any kind, between individuals to between nations, perceptions are just as important and powerful as the messages that produced those perceptions.
 
.
That's right, I insult you because I talk on your level. Don't want to be insulted? Then don't be stupid lol. Both those sentences are racist, and I thought it was self explanitory. Don't make generalizations about people based on their race. Work ethic of a nationality is a generalization.

You are a programmer - you are not an electrical engineer or materials scientist. You have no idea how CPUs are fabricated and you don't know the issues facing modern CPUs. You are on the software side. Why do you worry about the CPUs lol? I work on real semiconductor materials, so I actually know a few things about the issues on the materials side, which are not software.

Being uninformed doesn't mean that you are right. Direct image database searching is already done by Baidu: Baidu Image Search - Baidu Institute of Deep Learning

'Chinese Google' Unveils Visual Search Engine Powered by Fake Brains | WIRED

Computer vision is not a new field lol. I don't know what kind of programmer you are, but I don't know of many programmers outside academia that actually read research papers. Don't need research papers to program an iPhone app.

Who are you to judge me on what standard?
I say work ethic is a generalization.
Here in Thailand, this kind of generalization is not racist, especially if its complement.

Then I will say you are racist too because you are generalizing your classification what is racist and what is not on a me who are not in your society not in your country and do not share the same value of what racist is.

Why do I need to care just only your classification? You think of your self so high intelligence that you call me stupid and my level. I think that is racist too because you have not yet has any scientific measurement on your intelligence over me.

You are imposing your classification base on what you learn on the world what the racist mean on me.


YOU LOST MY DEBATE OVER China Slow CPUs and INSULT ME ALL OVER THE THREAD HERE AND THERE.
 
.
Recently, much has been made of the German Empire and China comparison, while I largely agree, the iteration of the Empire choosen was less agreeable. The choice of the World War 1 Germany was the obvious choice for those that want to view China as a revisionist power and a destabilizing power, and in many ways it is true, but upon closer examination, China actually bares far more resemblence to the revisionist but stabilizing power of Bismark Germany.

Bismark wanted a united Germany and a European order that has a major, but not exclusive German input. Wanting of power and prestige is just human nature and it not only exist in China, but also in the US, and even the Indonesians want some sort of leadership role in ASEAN.

How China handles this, is important to the 21st century, but the US and ASEAN + 2's response are also significant. However, due to the nature of this "conflict," and the fact US is at it's peak and China still closer to the beginning than the end, the initiative is squarely on us, and our actions

The topic at hand is how would China proceed based on concrete evidence and actions, while drawing similarities and differences from the past to better judge the future.

The most glaring omission from the Western analysts, and the biggest difference between the two German empires, is patience. China may be revisionist and in some ways destabilizing, but it is patient, which makes it more stabilizing than not.

To some it is a distinction without a difference, but it is this distinction that makes all the difference. China is rising, it is gaining strength both on the international stage and the regional stage. Side effect of 30 years of unrelenting growth.

With great power comes great responsibility, not because we got bit by a magical spider, but because we are literally everywhere, and we have the ability to make that change. People will expect it, both domestic and abroad. The US cannot say that we must help with Ebola, ISIS, and climate change, while cockblock us on other issues closer to home and far more important to our own strategic interests.

Bismark's idea of a satisfied power and gradual shift in power is of great similarity to the China of the present and past. China was not much of an expansion power save for very brief periods in our history. To think China will simply roll over the entire ASEAN and Japan is about as crazy as to think we will simply live in a world order where the second and soon to be first economy has less say in international affairs than France and less influence in Asia than Japan.

China has no ambition to rule all of Asia, and really doesn't want to, the number of headcases in Asia is no less than in Africa, and anyone getting into that mess better bring enough Advil, cause the headaches will keep on coming.

In reality it is not the China Seas today and tomorrow the Philippines, it's more like we are stopping at the China Seas, cause our health issurance don't cover non-prescription drugs.

The often described of aggressive expansion of the China Seas is both the truth and fabrication at the same time. The end game for the China seas, if played right and there is every indication that it is, will be largely devoit of blood shed and will result in the re-establishing of the status quo in favor of China through sheer dominance in the field of economics, technological and political, as well as time.

Ironically, it is the fact China isn't a dictatorship that makes it far more likely time will be the main weapon, rather than actual weapons. A departure even from Bismark Germany, the wishes of one man is not the state policy of China, and thus Chinese interests don't align with personal interests and in the interest of China, the continued growth of China in all fields while at the same time advancing our interests is far more adventagous than a blantant attack on the current world order and disrupt the order that has served China so well and will continue to do so in the future.

The evidence of this is the establishmenrt of the BRICS bank and the Asian infrastructure bank. The headquarters is in China, but the power is not only divided, but in the case of the BRICS bank, China mostly gave away leadership positions.

The need of the hour is to establish as the centre for global politics, as to the actual governance, that can be left to later when China has gathered more momentum.

The Chinese military modernization, for as much has been said of it's aggressive posture, in reality only 1.4% has been alocated, though the actual figure is probably closer to 2%-2.5%. This still pales in comparison to the military super powers of US and Russia, and is a clear indication of Chinese mindset.

We could easily upgrade all our ground forces to modern standards, we already have all the models, and factories, but that would require money that would otherwise need to go into other sectors, and just advancing on the military front has never been the goal of China, we also need to wait for other sectors to catch up, like becoming the biggest economy and finishing up the Silk road as well as improve the living standard of Chinese citizens, including but not limiting to tackling polution, and thus our soft power and stand higher on the moral high ground.

We created the AIDZ in East China Sea, but not South, we moved a Rig to a disputed area, and we had a stand off with Philippines, all didn't result in actual conflict, and all were controled as well as easily reversed if the situation called for it.

Fact of the matter is we can do a multiple of things that we are not doing to their fullest, because we realize our shortcomings, and our moves are one step at a time, never the invasion of Russia and declaring war on the whole of the world powers.

China's demand of South China Sea is both logical and has historical bases, whether these historical reasons should play is another matter. Simply blocking China's claim will do as much as France's desire to hold on to continental power.

China is at a point where US and China's interest will colide at some point due to the extent of the US power and the continue extention of Chinese interests. As of this moment China holds close to no cards and bluffing isn't going to work, as we are neither insane like North Korea, nor respected like Russia.

Thus it is in China's interest to remake it into a situation where China cannot be threatend or forced to do anything, but it is on the negotiation table that the great matters of the day are decided. A multipolar world.

The domination of the China Seas is in keeping with the need for a strategic buffer between the US and China. However if anyone wants to argue for freedom of navigation and resources, to that I say, become the biggest trading nation first before making the case that the biggest trading nation wants to disrupt the world's busiest trade route and taking instead of trading.

To sum up, to all those that say Asia is the second coming of WW1 Europe, they need to look again.
you compare communist china today to bismarck germany? do you know the ideas of bismarck at all? a hint for you: one of his ideas was to crush the socialism. do you think it is suitable for china CCP?

South China Sea is yours as both logical and historical? bullshit. do you know who really controlled the south china sea for the longest period of time? throw your ccp liar books into the trash bin and search a bit on the internet, you will find the answer. another hint for you: it is neither vietnam nor china.

BRICS bank is yours, and will become a political entity?

China army as military power? in reality, your army has a long history of defeats against foreign military powers and of a victor over domestic unrests. comparing german army to chinese is an insulting for the germans.

you are a brainwashed boy and have zero knowledge on history.
 
Last edited:
. .
look at the west-whoshipper barking? insulting germans? it is the other way around. In terms of war, no one can match China in human histroy. the world is not only 200 years' history. look at how german lose one strategic war from another, which ended up only occupaying a limited terrytory today.

For you inferior viets, of course you whoship france, german whites, that is the side effects of colonizing. go to take your white-slavery mentality to next to india section, you viets deserved to be there. you are a disgusting west-licking vietcong.
no, just correcting genesis. he is a liar. Bismarck united Germany, won the wars against Austria and France, became the undispute power on western european continent, establishing the German empire. What had China done to contribute on continental asia? by the way, this thread is not about VN. dude, don´t derail the thread. I ignore your comments.

here again for genesis, the troller: the core of Bismarck policy:

"Nicht auf Preußens Liberalismus sieht Deutschland, sondern auf seine Macht... Preußens Grenzen nach den Wiener Verträgen sind zu einem gesunden Staatsleben nicht günstig. Nicht durch Reden und Majoritätsbeschlüsse werden große Fragen der Zeit entschieden,...sondern durch Eisen und Blut."
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom