SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Federal officials have labeled Boston a major target of Chinese spies who are looking to steal trade and technology secrets from the US.
US Assistant Attorney General John Demers, who leads a federal force against Chinese espionage in America, said Massachusetts had become a focus of his team's work, the Associated Press reported.
...
Massachusetts is home to top-ranked universities including Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. It also hosts military contractors such as weapon maker Raytheon and defense system provider Mercury Systems.As part of the China Initiative, officials said they had met with local companies and colleges last week to encourage them to bring suspected instances of espionage to the attention of federal investigators.
Lelling said the large number of Chinese nationals living in Boston also made the city a potential espionage target, but officials added that most were in the US for legitimate reasons, such as study.
Technology workers should keep a close eye on Wang?
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Wednesday April 10 2019, @03:38AM (13 children)
The Han leadership trends towards insular and protectionist polices too often for this to be an issue. They've surrounded themselves with the Great Wall. Burned their own fleets. Evolved their whole culture, from the written script to the political education, around barriers of entry... And now they're doing it again with the firewall and all the censorship.
I don't doubt they currently believe and promote an expansionist ideology. It's just that once their commerce and industry grow an educated middle class, their upper classes will feel threatened and try suppression. And for every other nation that went down that road, trying to halt progress didn't end well.
compiling...
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday April 10 2019, @05:03AM (6 children)
If they were operating in vacuum, maybe. But they're not, and the US (and other first world nations) foolishly handed them the keys to the kingdom. They've learned well. This isn't the 1400s anymore. "Burning their own fleets" is not only recognized to be suicidal, it may be physically impossible at this point.
And with technology growing into the fields it has, the way it has, under control of whom, they may very well succeed in suppression; I am watching their "social credit" experiment with jaw-dropping horror, knowing it's only a matter of time before this spreads worldwide. We're in the midst of an authoritarian takeover in the first world, and this sort of thing is completely irresistible to their kind. At some point, yes, rebellion will become impossible. Orwell was not only correct, he was an optimist.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Wednesday April 10 2019, @10:54AM (2 children)
They've learned little and mostly made the wrong conclusions. The individual empowerment that follows the development of disruptive technologies is what drives progress and yet it's exactly what the PRC are trying to suppress when introducing more and more social controls of this sort.
The Chinese already earned themselves a reputation in Asia of not being particularly creative. Give a generation or two. Those authoritarian polices will backfire as neighboring nations start out pacing them. It happened to the Soviets. It's happening to the US. It will happen to the Chinese.
compiling...
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday April 10 2019, @06:53PM (1 child)
I hope so, because we've passed a technological tipping point, or are close to doing so, that will make that disruption basically impossible. Imagine that for a moment.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Interesting) by RamiK on Thursday April 11 2019, @02:04AM
AI automation will screw the leadership's power base like it does in the west. They can have all the drones and mass surveillance they want. Once unemployment spreads they'll gradually lose popular support and all it will take is one ambitious general vying for power to join hands with a capable but disenfranchised engineer and use their weapons against them. It's precisely why I strongly dislike 1984. Even without considering the dependence on skilled personal to move the gears, people that spend their time brutally suppressing the population wouldn't shy from attempting to at least assassinate their superiors to move up the ranks or start a civil war when they get passed for promotion.
Just because the underclasses aren't cohesive and are easy to divide and conquer doesn't mean the upper classes are one mind. Read your Shakespeare. Even if it ends up with one guy holding all the cards, their kids will have a war of inheritance that disrupts social order. As soon as they hit flat growth like everyone else, they'll get back-stabbed by their friends and brothers members. Oldest story in the book.
compiling...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 11 2019, @12:24PM (2 children)
Sounds like they found a different way to burn their fleet. Not really feeling the more cosmopolitan China here.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday April 11 2019, @04:28PM (1 child)
It's a race against time: will their "fleet" "burn" before or after they take over the planet and/or export this particular trendy new form of fleet burning? Given the reach, scope, ubiquity, and speed of technology, I would not bet on it...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 11 2019, @11:27PM
You got me there.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday April 10 2019, @07:51AM (5 children)
I just started reading Civilization: The West And The Rest [goodreads.com] by Niall Ferguson. I haven't gotten very far yet, but Ferguson has already discussed this at some length. Given the turmoil and bullying that contact with the west has caused, starting in the mid 1600s or so, the Chinese have learned their lesson about turning away from the world.
Aside from the China stuff, there's quite a bit to recommend the book as well.
That they censor their people and media from around the world is unsurprising. But that in no way suggests that they will turn inward economically or militarily again.
As Azume pointed out, they haven't forgotten the opium wars or the centuries of bullying, condescension and bad deals forced down their throats at the point of a gun.
I don't think that necessarily means eventual war with China, but they're not turning their backs on the world any more. Things are too interconnected and they have too much to lose by turning inward again.
What does that mean for the rest of the world? I have no idea. I am pretty sure that if there is a reckoning with China coming, it won't be before I'm dead or too old to notice.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Wednesday April 10 2019, @10:58AM (4 children)
1. No war since all the major players have nukes.
2. The US is turning inwards just the same despite all that inter-connectivity.
3. The great firewall IS them turning inwards. See my above post.
compiling...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Wednesday April 10 2019, @11:28AM (3 children)
Never underestimate the power of stupidity and paranoia combined. For everyone's sake, I hope you're right.
But wars don't have to go nuclear to be incredibly damaging to, well, everything.
Some, but certainly not most, in the US are doing so. And we have an egomaniac tyro honking everyone off. We can fix that.
I disagree. They are in no way turning inward either militarily, economically or culturally for that matter.
The Great Firewall is an instrument of internal control, not a turning away from the rest of the world.
I did read your post. And I responded, at some length, to it.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Thursday April 11 2019, @02:21AM (1 child)
There's no distinction. It's like a parent trying to keep the children from porn. Nothing short of cutting yourself from the world can do that. And what skills would your child be able to demonstrate when they grow up like that?
See my other, other reply for why it's all doomed to fail.
compiling...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Thursday April 11 2019, @04:15AM
Again, I disagree. Although I think (please correct me if I'm wrong) that's because we're arguing two different points.
I'm arguing (which continued the discussion you and Azuma were having) that China will never again turn itself away from the rest of the world as it did after the death of the Yongle emperor and the mothballing/destruction of Zheng He's fleet.
You seem to be arguing that the current Chinese government is doomed to failure because of its repressive ways. That's certainly a plausible scenario, but isn't really related to the topic I thought we were discussing.,
Those are *not* mutually exclusive outcomes. I posit that Chinese political, economic, military and cultural engagement with the world will continue regardless of the fate of the current regime.
Does that cover it, or am I missing something?
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Thursday April 11 2019, @12:29PM
You can disagree all you want, but the Great Firewall is indeed an example of them turning inwards. So is their "social credit" scheme that Azuma mentioned. These are both filters of external ideas and thus, have the effect that you claim they don't have.