Comment on China unveils video of its moon base plans, which weirdly includes a NASA space shuttle

• Num10ck@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  to be fair yes they invented paper, paper money, umbrellas, wheelbarrows, gunpowder, etc.

  chinese govt claims to have invented high-speed rail, e-commerce, mobile payments and bike sharing, but those are all untrue.

  but overall, given a billion people, i rarely see them invent game changers. maybe the artificial synthesis of starch will be a big one. or solid state EV batteries.

  source

  • kbin_space_program@kbin.run ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    One theory Ive read about is that they probably merely iterated on the (likely middle eastern, probably egyptian or persian) invention of "greek fire". Since its only a single ingredient difference between one of the known formulations of it.

    And the Europeans made gunpowder useful with the invention of pearled gunpowder, which made it possible to predict burn rates and slow them down for cannons, allowing for bigger and more potent cannons. Anecdotally, there is documentation of an Ottoman diplomat pleading to a Chinese one that "the Europeans never learn to make gunpowder"

    They also claim to have invented chariots, despite using the Sanskrit word for chariot.

    source

    • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I don't see how "war carriage" or "horse carriage" is the Sanskrit word for chariot.

      source
  • Hegar@kbin.social ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I wouldn't be looking for 'game changers' - that's a marketing phrase with no firm meaning and very low applicability to reality - all invention is just iterating on existing ideas.

    We didn't see much cutting-edge tech coming out of China while they were recovering from the collapse of the imperial system and the colonial period, but now that they have more money to throw at new tech, we'll see new tech.

    source
  • jaybone@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    They haven’t really invented anything big since gun powder.

    And even gun powder, they didn’t know how to fully apply all of its potential.

    source

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      they didn’t know how to fully apply all of its potential.

      For some period of time they did.

      It’s just that when all the civilized world in some relative measurement of it is one big centralized bureaucratic state, degeneracy starts.

      Why make cannons if you don’t have a problem to be solved with those? Why even think about something like cannons?

      Look at guerillas and combatants using FPV drones and the ways they do it, do you see developed nation states embracing that revolution? No, they still go for big expensive modern artillery, jets, big drones etc. It will be fun to watch the dynamics of power in coming decades, since stagnant rich militaries are very resistant to change and reform.

      source

      • jaybone@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        You can also use rifles for protection against animals and hunting. Or you trade / sell them to nations which do have conflict and military need.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Buttons@programming.dev ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  IP law is all about telling people what they can’t create.

  source

  • SaltySalamander@fedia.io ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    More like telling people what they can't reproduce. A pretty important distinction.

    source

    • Buttons@programming.dev ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Not always. As John Carmack said:

      The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying.

      Many people have created things entirely from their own mind, and then find that they’re violating IP law.

      source
• CosmoNova@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  To even suggest China was united let alone centralized for that long is so blatantly ignorant I‘m not even going to talk about the lack of micromanaging capabilities of ancient governments. Old China was overthrown and China‘s government today has no resemblance whatsoever to old dynasties so it doesn‘t even make sense to bring them up as an example for Chinese ingenuity. Besides, the speed and process of how inventions were made thousands of years ago compared to today are on entirely different planes of existence.

  The argument is not that autocratic states cannot be innovative under any circumstances, but historically, self proclaimed communist states had have their fair share of troubles with it because of stagnant hierarchies. Communist China is a very good example of a bad environment for innovation for reasons mentioned above.

  The only Chinese innovation I can think of is the introduction of gamified hyper fast consumerism via Temu, Shein and TikTok. That‘s the spearhead of their innovation.

  source

  • pirat@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    u - u - temuuuu

    u - u - temuuu-uuu

    Their ad budget for the superbowl must have been laughably big. After being exposed to it a couple o’ dozens o’ times within those few hours, their stupid little jingle anthem is now living rent-free in my head, alongside all those catchy radio commercials from my childhood. Too bad Temu (nor those radio advertisers) wont see the shadow of a coin from my pocket, but their expense has probably paid off anyways… I don’t even know what to do with this (detri)mental jingle collection now?!

    …

    u - u - temuuuu

    u - u - temuuu-uuu

    source
• verity_kindle@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  No, this is incorrect. China was a bunch of kingdoms, constantly at war with each other for longer than it’s ever been forcibly “united” by external forces, such as the Western powers in the 19th century, dividing up and ruthlessly controlling economic spheres of influence. It’s fascinating how ethnic, religious and cultural differences have been manipulated by so many governments for so long to feed their pockets and it isn’t over. The CCP is going to be nothing but a footnote in a research paper someday.

  source

  • Hegar@kbin.social ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    There has been a centralized bureaucratic autocracy in china since the legalist reforms of qin, a couple thousand years ago. Yes, the empire once united must divide but even during the long disunity before the sui and tang, there were multiple centralized autocratic states. Unity across all of the territory called modern china is not necessary to have a centralized state.

    forcibly “united” by external forces, such as the Western powers in the 19th century, dividing up and ruthlessly controlling economic spheres of influence

    Wait were western powers dividing or uniting china? You're claiming both in the same sentence. But that's kind of immaterial to my point that the centralized autocratic state has existed in china for a couple thousand years and that many important new technologies came out of the cultures governed in that way.

    source