recentpopularlog in

jerryking : walled_gardens   4

Opinion | The World-Shaking News That You’re Missing
Nov. 26, 2019 | The New York Times | By Thomas L. Friedman

** “Has China Won? by  Kishore Mahbubani

A new wall — a digital Berlin Wall — had begun to be erected between China and America. And the only thing left to be determined, a Chinese business executive remarked to me, “is how high this wall will be,” and which countries will choose to be on which side.

This new wall, separating a U.S.-led technology and trade zone from a Chinese-led one, will have implications as vast as the wall bisecting Berlin did. Because the peace, prosperity and accelerations in technology and globalization that have so benefited the world over the past 40 years were due, in part, to the interweaving of the U.S. and Chinese economies.

The messy, ad hoc decoupling of these two economies, driven by miscalculations by leaders on both sides, will surely disrupt those trends and the costs could be huge. We might want to talk about that.

Former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson gave a speech here a year ago trying to kick-start that discussion. “For 40 years,” Paulson noted, “the U.S.-China relationship has been characterized by the integration of four things: goods, capital, technology and people. And over these 40 years, economic integration between the two countries was supposed to mitigate security competition. But an intellectually honest appraisal must now admit both that this hasn’t happened and that the reverse is taking place.” That reversal is happening for two reasons. First, because the U.S. is — rightly — no longer willing to accept China’s unfair trade practices. Second, because, now that China is a technology powerhouse — and technological products all have both economic and military applications........“after 40 years of integration, a surprising number of political and thought leaders on both sides advocate policies that could forcibly de-integrate the two countries across all four of these baskets.” the digital Berlin Wall took a big step up on May 17, when Trump blacklisted China’s Huawei.......Lots of Chinese tech companies are now thinking: We will never, ever, ever leave ourselves again in a situation where we are totally dependent on America for key components. Time to double down on making our own......similarly, U.S. manufacturers are thinking twice about building their next factory in China or solely depending on a supply chain from there.....this is the sound of two giant economies starting to decouple.....the State Department has been restricting visas for Chinese graduate students studying in sensitive fields — like aviation, robotics and advanced manufacturing ....
What to do?
Friedman is worried that by imposing more and more export and visa controls we will be cutting ourselves off from the access we need to the global investment pools, customers and collaborative scientists and engineers to maintain our technological lead.

I still believe that the most open systems win — they get all the signals of change first, they attract the most high-I.Q. risk-takers/innovators and they enrich and are enriched by the most global flows of talent, ideas and capital. That used to be us.....

China is our economic competitor, economic partner, source of talent and capital, geopolitical rival, collaborator and serial rule-breaker. It is not our enemy or our friend.

The only effective way to manage a relationship this complex is:
1) with an all-of-government approach. You can’t have the Justice Department doing one thing, the Pentagon another, the Treasury another, the trade negotiators another, the State Department another and the president tweeting another. And
2), we need as many Pacific and European allies as possible so it’s “The Whole World Versus China”
blacklists  books  China  China_rising  co-ordinated_approaches  decoupling  Donald_Trump  doubling_down  dual-use  economic_disengagement  economic_integration  espionage  future  Hank_Paulson  Huawei  miscalculations  new_tech_Cold_War  open_borders  security_&_intelligence  seismic_shifts  self-sufficiency  signals  students  supply_chains  technology  Tom_Friedman  undermining_of_trust  U.S.-China_relations  visa_students  walled_gardens  Xi_Jinping 
november 2019 by jerryking
The challenger - Technopolitics
Mar 15th 2018 | HONG KONG AND SAN FRANCISCO.

Technology is rarely, in and of itself, ideological. But technosystems have an ideological side—witness the struggles of open-source advocates against proprietary-software developers—and can be used to ideological ends. The global spread of a technosystem conceived in, and to an unknown extent controlled by, an undemocratic, authoritarian regime could have unprecedented historical significance.

China is not just in a better position to challenge America’s hegemony than it used to be. It is a good time to do so, too. It is not only the roll out of 5G. AI has started to move from the tech world to conventional businesses; quantum computing seems about to become useful. All this creates openings for newcomers, especially if backed by a state that takes a long view and doesn’t need a quick return......To focus on individual companies, though, is to miss the point. China’s leaders want to bind firms, customers and government agencies together with “robust governance”, in the words of Samm Sacks of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a think-tank in Washington, DC. They want to build a technosystem in which incentives to use other people’s technology are minimised. These are, as it happens, the same goals as those of the companies which run America’s large technology platforms, whether they are operating systems, social networks or computing clouds.

Gardening tools

A cardinal rule of managing such walled gardens is to control access. Developers of apps for Apple’s iPhone have to go through a lengthy application process with an uncertain outcome; for example, in an unexpected but welcome development, the firm now seems to reject apps using emojis. Similarly, foreign technology firms that want to sell their wares in China face at least six different security reviews, each of which can be used to delay or block market access. As with America’s worries about Huawei, this is not entirely unreasonable. The NSA has in the past exploited, or created, vulnerabilities in hardware sold by American companies. Local firms, for their part, are pushed to use “indigenous and controllable core cyber-security technology”, in the words of a report presented at last year’s National People’s Congress.

In the driving seat
Good platform managers also ensure that all parts of the system work for the greater good. In China this means doing the government’s bidding, something which seems increasingly expected of tech companies. About three dozen tech companies have instituted Communist Party committees in the past few years. There are rumours that the party is planning to take 1% stakes in some firms, including Tencent, not so much to add to the government’s control as to signal it—and to advertise that the company enjoys official blessing.

Many of China’s tech firms help develop military applications for technology, too, something called “civil-military fusion”. Most American hardware-makers do the same; its internet giants, not so much. “There’s a general concern in the tech community of somehow the military-industrial complex using their stuff to kill people incorrectly, if you will,” Eric Schmidt, the head of the Pentagon’s Defence Innovation Advisory Board said last November, when he was still Alphabet’s executive chairman. When it recently emerged that Google was helping the Pentagon with the AI for a drone project, some of its employees were outraged.

And then there is the walled gardens’ most prized bloom: data. China’s privacy regulations can look, on the face of it, as strict as Europe’s. But privacy is not a priority in practice. Control is.
China  U.S._Navy  ecosystems  Silicon_Valley  semiconductors  artificial_intelligence  quantum_computing  intellectual_property  military-industrial_complex  dual-use  walled_gardens  new_tech_Cold_War  self-sufficiency 
april 2018 by jerryking
What Comes After Apps - WSJ
By CHRISTOPHER MIMS
Updated Feb. 22, 2016

The first and most intriguing alternative to apps is chat. This is hard to understand for anyone who hasn’t spent time in Asia or at least read about the dominance of WeChat and its competitors, but in China chat apps are used for everything from hailing a car to paying for your Coke at a vending machine.

Kik, a chat app that doesn’t get as much attention as rivals but for U.S. teens is on par with Facebook Messenger and Snapchat in terms of users and importance, will roll out similar functionality within six months, says Chief Executive Ted Livingston.

A growing share of these commercial chats take place with so-called chat bots—interactive computer programs that prompt users to select from among several options, for example. Imagine scanning a chat code on the back of the seat in front of you at a ballpark and having a brief conversation with a chat bot about how many and what kind of beers you want to order.

Chat, says Mr. Livingston, could manage most of the real-world interactions that previously would have required us to visit a mobile Web page, download an app, or—in some cases—give up in frustration with a phone’s constraints. Chat apps won’t solve the walled-garden problem of apps, but they could at least create lightweight interactions with services that happen in seconds and don’t require us to spend time downloading or loading anything.

A TechCrunch article in January indicated that Facebook will soon reveal similar technology within its Messenger app. At least at first, building chat bots that work on any chat app should be easier for developers, because they have similar interfaces. Chat, in other words, could become the new Web browser.
bots  chat  chatbots  Christopher_Mims  conversational_commerce  Facebook  Kik  lightweight_interactions  messaging  mobile_applications  walled_gardens  WeChat 
february 2016 by jerryking

Copy this bookmark:





to read