Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Book Review: The Chinese Information War

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the read-all-about-it dept.

Books 139

benrothke writes "It's said that truth is stranger than fiction, as fiction has to make sense. Had The Chinese Information War: Espionage, Cyberwar, Communications Control and Related Threats to United States Interests been written as a spy thriller, it would have been a fascinating novel of international intrigue. But the book is far from a novel. It's a dense, well-researched overview of China's cold-war like cyberwar tactics against the US to regain its past historical glory and world dominance." Read below for the rest of Ben's review.Author Dennis Poindexter shows that Chinese espionage isn't made up of lone wolves. Rather it's under the directive and long-term planning of the Chinese government and military.

Many people growing up in the 1940's expressed the sentiment "we were poor, but didn't know it". Poindexter argues that we are in a cyberwar with China; but most people are oblivious to it.

Rather than being a polemic against China, Poindexter backs it up with extensive factual research. By the end of the book, the sheer number of guilty pleas by Chinese nationals alone should be a staggering wake-up call.

In February, Mandiant released their groundbreaking report APT1: Exposing One of Chinas Cyber Espionage Units, which focused on APT1, the most prolific Chinese cyber-espionage group that Mandiant tracked. APT1 has conducted a cyber-espionage campaign against a broad range of victims since at least 2006. The report has evidence linking them to China's 2nd Bureau of the People's Liberation Army.

China is using this cyberwar to their supreme advantage and as Poindexter writes on page 1: until we see ourselves in a war, we can't fight it effectively. Part of the challenge is that cyberwar does not fit the definition of what a war generally is because the Chinese have changed the nature of war to carry it out.

Poindexter makes his case in fewer than 200 pages and provides ample references in his detailed research; including many details, court cases and guilty verdicts of how the Chinese government and military work hand in hand to achieve their goals.

The book should of interest to everyone given the implications of what China is doing. If you are planning to set up shop in China, be it R&D, manufacturing or the like, read this book. If you have intellectual property or confidential data in China, read this book as you need to know the risks before you lose control of your data there.

Huawei Technologies, a Chinese multinational telecommunications equipment and services firm; now the largest telecommunications equipment maker in the world is detailed in the book. Poindexter details a few cases involving Huawei and writes that if Huawei isn't linked to Chinese intelligence, then it's the most persecuted company in the history of international trade.

The book details in chapter 2 the intersection between cyberwar and economic war. He writes that any foreign business in China is required to share detailed design documents with the Chinese government in order to do business there. For many firms, the short-term economic incentives blind them to the long-term risks of losing control of their data. The book notes that in the Cold War with Russia, the US understood what Russia was trying to do. The US therefore cut back trade with Russia, particularly in areas where there might be some military benefit to them. But the US isn't doing that with China.

Chapter 2 closes with a damming indictment where Poindexter writes that the Chinese steal our technology, rack up sales back to us, counterfeit our goods, take our jobs and own a good deal of our debt. The problem he notes is that too many people focus solely on the economic relations between the US and China, and ignore the underpinnings of large-scale cyber-espionage.

Chapter 6 details that the Chinese have developed a long-term approach. They have deployed numerous sleepers who often wait decades and only then work slowly and stealthily. A point Poindexter makes many times is that the Chinese think big, but move slow.

Chapter 7 is appropriately titles The New Cold War. In order to win this war, Poindexter suggest some radical steps to stop it. He notes that the US needs to limit trade with China to items we can't get anywhere else. He says not to supply China with the rope that will be used to hang the US on.

He writes that the Federal Government has to deal with the issue seriously and quickly, to protect its telecommunications interests so that China isn't able to cut it all off one day. He also notes that national security must no longer take a backseat to price and cheap labor.

Poindexter writes that the US Government must take a long-view to the solution and he writes that it will take 10 years to build up the type of forces that that would be needed to counter the business and government spying that the Chinese are doing.

Rachel Carson's Silent Spring is the archetypal wake-up call book. Poindexter has written his version of Silent Spring,but it's unlikely that any action will be taken. As the book notes, the Chinese are so blatantly open about their goals via cyber-espionage, and their denials of it so arrogant, that business as usual simply carries on.

The Chinese portray themselves as benevolent benefactors, much like the Kanamits in To Serve Man. Just as the benevolence of the Kanamits was a façade, so too is what is going on with the cold cyberwar with China.

The book is an eye-opening expose that details the working of the Chinese government and notes that for most of history, China was the world's dominating force. The Chinese have made it their goal to regain that dominance.

The book states what the Chinese are trying to accomplish and lays out the cold facts. Will there be a response to this fascinating book? Will Washington take action? Will they limit Chinese access to strategic US data? Given Washington is operating in a mode of sequestration, the answer should be obvious.

The message detailed in The Chinese Information War: Espionage, Cyberwar, Communications Control and Related Threats to United States Interests should be a wake-up call. But given that it is currently ranked #266,881 on Amazon, it seems as if most of America is sleeping through this threat.

Reviewed by Ben Rothke

You can purchase The Chinese Information War: Espionage, Cyberwar, Communications Control and Related Threats to United States Interests from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews (sci-fi included) -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

cancel ×

139 comments

you could steal secrets back.. and are (3, Insightful)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44032053)

problem is, what the fuck is that good for if you're not manufacturing anything.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032363)

Please don't spread myths.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032739)

He's not. Perhaps YOU should stop believing in them.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033267)

He is, and I don't. If you want to claim that the US "doesn't manufacture anything", you need to prove it. But you can't and won't. You'll try, and you'll find that the closest you can manage is taking some tangentially-related fact about the manufacturing sector out of context and lying about what it actually means.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (4, Informative)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#44032459)

Oh bullshit. The US is the #1 manufacturing country on the planet, or damn close to it.

http://shopfloor.org/2011/03/u-s-manufacturing-remains-worlds-largest/18756 [shopfloor.org]

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/finance/2011/January/US-Manufacturing-Remains-No-1-in-World/ [cbn.com]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/14/china-us-manufacturing_n_835470.html [huffingtonpost.com]

In terms of worker productivity it isn't close. The average US worker produces almost 10 times as much value as the average Chinese worker.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032619)

Most of the manufacturing here is highly automated.

If its not highly automated or skirts the law somehow it is usually done in another country.

Why? It costs a decent amount of money to ship across the world. If you can build it here and do it cheaper than an army of underpaid workers plus shipping it will be here. Automation almost always wins. Except in 'one off' building. Things such as the iPhone can be automated to a point. But some assembly is required also next year the whole thing will be a different design. Bic pens on the other hand change very little other than color and style.

Most furniture and clothing is now made third world. They literally picked up the factory and moved them. Why? They could not be automated very well and an army of under paid workers is cheaper there than here. That is the 'giant sucking sound as jobs go south'. If they highly automate it you will see it all come back.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (3, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year ago | (#44032743)

In terms of worker productivity it isn't close. The average US worker produces almost 10 times as much value as the average Chinese worker.

Another way to say that is that we have need for one-tenth as many humans for a given amount of work done. That would be cool if we didn't insist that everyone have a job...

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (2)

Hognoxious (631665) | about a year ago | (#44033665)

That implies we could all get by working 3 days a month, which is just silly.

6 out of 10 should be working full time (or more) producing enough that 1, because of who his parents were, can have tons of stuff. In return they get a slice of the pie that's almost enough to be nearly comfortable. Siphon a bit off from those 6 to support the other 3 - just enough that they don't get desperate.

It's the American way.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#44033737)

> That implies we could all get by working 3 days a month, which is just silly.

What it implies is that we need far fewer workers in this sector of our economy to get a good standard of living.

Which is why manufacturing employment has gone down a lot since WWII.

It's the same thing that happened in farming at the beginning of the century.

The challenge with this is society is based on people having jobs, when it really takes 10-20% of the work force to provide all our material needs.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (1)

anubi (640541) | about a year ago | (#44034245)

I believe our malaise lies not with the Chinese, but the banks. For a long time we fought them off, but eventually they persuaded our Government to give them the privilege of printing unbacked money, then the right to collect interest on money they printed. Basically, they get paid rent for what was never theirs to let. The only way the banks can be paid back is with yet more ( interest bearing ) loans. They make friends with people in high places, so no-one has the power to stand up to them, lest they be called a "terrorist".

This video on YouTube is one of the best revealings I have yet seen on how this mess came to be.

Its about 30 minutes long... but once you have seen it, I think you will see how "they" are messing the whole world up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mII9NZ8MMVM [youtube.com]

If the Chinese let this beast in, it will do them in as it has done us.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (1)

similar_name (1164087) | about a year ago | (#44034783)

You might like the Money as Debt [youtube.com] videos.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032783)

BS. If you can do it by a robot, it gets done in the US... well, until the EPA demands that all robots belong to a union or does something so stupid that it causes all manufacturing to jump to China like they did with the entire steel industry.

Even engineering and design jobs. The place I work for has called Tata and replaced their entire dev staff with overseas contractors in the past 18 months. Now, for 10% the operating costs (no additional HVAC needed, no worry about employee liabilities, under a threshold with payroll taxes), four times as much coding gets done and handed in a neat package to the one person (ironically was a H-1B, but now a US citizen) who makes it all work. Demands are getting met, and there is a good chance the stock in the company may actually be worth something.

Even US companies eventually have to turn into "little Chinas" or "little Indias" in order to remain anywhere near competitive. You can't find good developers in this country because people rather be lawyers, musicians, or marijuana consumers than actually bother with STEM fields. The last US intern we had ended up causing tens of thousands in damage when he managed to break a sprinkler head.

Some empires go quickly into the night, others fade away. The US's (and Europe for that matter) best times are behind them.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (2)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44032833)

The US is the #1 manufacturing country on the planet

And an even bigger consumer of manufactured products, ergo our persistent trade deficit. We have, and will continue to have, a trade deficit in mineral wealth (most especially including oil), our vaunted surplus in services has never taken off as predicted, and we probably won't ever have a much bigger surplus in agriculture. Manufacturing was (believe it or not folks) our main surplus for many years, and it doesn't look like there's anything to replace it, so shipping factories to China doesn't seem like it was such a good idea.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#44034127)

The idea that the US shipped large amounts of it's industrial capacity to China is poppycock. Didn't happen.

The US has essentially the same percentage of world manufacturing today as it did in 1970.

86% of all US exports are manufactured goods.

http://www.manufacturing.gov/mfg_in_context.html [manufacturing.gov]

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44034361)

The US has essentially the same percentage of world manufacturing today as it did in 1970.

Now there's an irrelevant sound byte! Let me know when you're up to addressing the trade deficit issues.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033813)

The "US" worker has a H1-B and an exotic nationality.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44034037)

Oh bullshit. The US is the #1 manufacturing country on the planet, or damn close to it.

http://shopfloor.org/2011/03/u-s-manufacturing-remains-worlds-largest/18756 [shopfloor.org]

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/finance/2011/January/US-Manufacturing-Remains-No-1-in-World/ [cbn.com]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/14/china-us-manufacturing_n_835470.html [huffingtonpost.com]

In terms of worker productivity it isn't close. The average US worker produces almost 10 times as much value as the average Chinese worker.

well..
you use a lot of the produce. that production isn't at risk by the chinese. but it's not leaving the USA that much either.
which is also a bit why you shouldn't be that worried about the current situation as it is amassing wealth(physical goods!) into usa. if you default on the debts to china or whoever you end up with the net gain of physical stuff.

but I guess my original point was aimed more at stealing yer seeeecreeeets. look, if I can't buy an american made cisco router anyhow what the fuck does it matter if I buy a huawei? what does it matter for usa if they're stealing manufacturing secrets from ford when ford should really be worried about them stealing manufacturing secrets from VAG, like ford should be doing? if I couldn't buy an american made iPhone even if I tried what does it matter for usual american if I buy a chinese android pos phone? chances are even if I bought a ford it would be made in germany! If I wanted to buy American made high tech I'd have to buy a weber grill or a leatherman. I don't think the room I am in has _anything_ with a made in USA stamp on it(_some_ of the souvenirs might be - but just might).

OK, I thought of one thing that's assembled in USA, the makerbot replicator I got here - but I don't think any of it's parts were made in USA and certainly not the only certified part of it(the psu) - electronics on it certainly aren't american and neither are the stepper motors(arduino based electronics aren't exactly high tech anyways).

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44035097)

It's really a great system we have going for Americans. Not only does everyone honor our I.O.U.'s, they are based on payment in a currency that we create. Even better, other countries hold US dollars in reserves to back their own currencies. It's estimated between 1/2 and 2/3 of all US currency is outside of the U.S. Mostly held by foreign central banks.

Re:you could steal secrets back.. and are (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44035343)

I am sorry you are just kidding yourself you need to take a trip to china.

Would love to say that we're up to the task (1, Insightful)

Jawnn (445279) | about a year ago | (#44032103)

...of meeting the Chinese (or whomever) on this battlefield, but the sad fact is that we are not. Oh, we're death on "the threat" to RIAA and MPIAA interests, and we damned sure are doing what it takes to smoke out "teh terrorists" (all the while laying waste to our citizens liberties), but as a match for concerted, state-run effort the one we face with China, we're all but unarmed.

Re:Would love to say that we're up to the task (3, Insightful)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#44032195)

having the largest army has never guaranteed victory

Alexander almost always fought outnumbered. The Romans have won many battles outnumbered. same with the USA.

training, discipline, quality of weapons, intelligence and other factors trump raw numbers

Re:Would love to say that we're up to the task (3, Funny)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#44032471)

China v US would be like Zerg v Protoss.

Re:Would love to say that we're up to the task (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032609)

China v US would be like... BATTLEFIELD 4 BITCHES!!!!

\o/

Re:Would love to say that we're up to the task (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44035351)

Yes but both sides have nukes. It would more be watch zerg and protoss destroy a planet.

Re:Would love to say that we're up to the task (1)

Dins (2538550) | about a year ago | (#44032443)

...of meeting the Chinese (or whomever) on this battlefield, but the sad fact is that we are not. Oh, we're death on "the threat" to RIAA and MPIAA interests, and we damned sure are doing what it takes to smoke out "teh terrorists" (all the while laying waste to our citizens liberties), but as a match for concerted, state-run effort the one we face with China, we're all but unarmed.

Given what we know (and obviously don't know) about the NSA, how can you come to that conclusion? It's not like we're going to brag about it if we're doing it...

Re:Would love to say that we're up to the task (2)

Jawnn (445279) | about a year ago | (#44033993)

I know that the military, who has a substantial need to be "up to speed" in this arena has, historically, been way behind. To be fair, it's tough to for them to recruit talent from that particular pool.
I believe that the NSA has an easier time of it (recruiting the necessary talent), but that's conjecture, so let's not bother debating what neither of us can substantiate in the least.
I know that the federal government, at the policy making level, at least, is seriously clue-challenged when it comes to this arena. I was at one of the few "town hall" meetings. in 2001, where the then "President's Critical Infrastructure Protection Board" solicited input from IT and security pros. While there was no shortage of complete tools who stepped up to the mic to give Richard Clarke and his entourage "advice", there were a few serious security types there. I mean major-league talent. There were lots of sidelong glances amongst that cadre and just as many bored expressions on the faces of the government types. Lay the blame where you like, but they didn't communicate well. I have no reason to believe that much has changed since then, and thus no reason to believe that policy is based on anything but the most pedestrian understanding of the issues.

Re:Would love to say that we're up to the task (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44035759)

Sorry, i don't see it as an 'Us vs. Them' scenario.

There's no cohesive 'Us', as you just pointed out.

According to the author, publisher, reviewer, (2)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#44032139)

It's a dense, well-researched overview of China's cold-war like cyberwar tactics against the US to regain its past historical glory and world dominance.

How do I know how much of it I should believe? (Other than the fact that I read it on the internet.)

Yeah, you'd have to be delusional to think that countries play nice with each other, but seriously, how do we know how much of this is fact and how much is fearmongering (or cashing in on existing fears), or politics?

Re:According to the author, publisher, reviewer, (2)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44032401)

you'd have to be delusional to think that countries play nice with each other, but seriously, how do we know how much of this is fact and how much is fearmongering

The book sounds over-the-top, but that doesn't mean that everything recommended to fight this is a bad idea. Is there any doubt in your mind that China's industrial espionage is over-the-top, and that joint ventures between US and Chinese companies are something done for the sake of "technology transfer"? In some cases that's quite openly true. For example, GE happily showed China how to build gas turbines (half a step from jet engines) and is now happily showing them how to build the engines (via a joint venture). This is a technology where only three companies in the world are worth talking about. This is the kind of thing that's to the short term advantage of Jeff "American Jobs Czar" Immelt and major GE stockholders, and the long term detriment of most Americans.

On the military side, I'm the last person to bang the war drum. The whole "pivot to the Pacific" sounds like a way to give the navy its turn after the army and air force were the stars in Afghanistan and Iraq. OTOH, I'd also be very careful to keep China from getting advanced military technology as much as possible (e.g. don't help them learn how to design and build jet engines).

Re:According to the author, publisher, reviewer, (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032655)

How do you know this is not just another propaganda stunt from the west? Mentioning the cold war is admitting that there are at least 2 perspectives to this story. The banging of the drums of war tone of this article certainly worries me. You may claim all kind of things. Fact is that China is defensive in it's positions and pacifism is in China's interest and strategy. The kind of transfers of technological knowledge you are talking about are perfectly legal and necessary so China doesn't have to go the same lengthy pains of industrialization with even worse pollution and other horrors than we are seeing now. Keeping them as "the third world", exploited and underdeveloped is not an option. In the long run China will make more contributions to the world of modern science but currently they are obviously lagging in a number of fields in part because some are still closed to them.

Re:According to the author, publisher, reviewer, (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032867)

"Fact is that China is defensive in it's positions and pacifism is in China's interest and strategy"

Then why do we read in the news about China confronting other countries ( Philippines, Japan, et al ) over the ownership of Islands in the Pacific?

Re:According to the author, publisher, reviewer, (1)

Steve_Ussler (2941703) | about a year ago | (#44032925)

Ohthat is so easy. The author is known. The reviewer is known. The author has facts. And you are an anonymous coward. Onus on you bro.

Re:According to the author, publisher, reviewer, (2)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44032947)

Fact is that China is defensive in it's positions and pacifism is in China's interest and strategy.

That explains their belligerence over any worthless island within a few hundred miles of their coast and their refusal to recognize Taiwan as an independent country.

The kind of transfers of technological knowledge you are talking about are perfectly legal

They're legal from the US because the US has chosen to make it so. What we're debating is whether that's a good idea, from both a military and a commercial POV.

necessary so China doesn't have to go the same lengthy pains of industrialization with even worse pollution

So your rationale is that the purpose of these technology transfers is to keep Chinese pollution down? It's working well. Tell me another one.

Keeping them as "the third world", exploited and underdeveloped is not an option.

Not giving them jet engine tech is tantamount to keeping them exploited and underdeveloped? As I mentioned earlier, there are only 3 companies in the world worth talking about for jet engines, and they're located in 2 countries. Interestingly there are many countries in the world that don't manufacture jet engines and are anything but exploited and underdeveloped.

Re:According to the author, publisher, reviewer, (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44034695)

Re: "...belligerence over any worthless island..."

My understanding is that territorial disputes over islands, particularly uninhabited islands, rarely has much to do with the island itself. The goal is to gain control over large areas of the seabed.

Once a nation gains international recognition of ownership of an island, they gain control over all the seabed between that island and the continental territory. Furthermore due to international law they gain 12 miles beyond the perimeter of the island. This assumes that a continental shelf connects the two. This is absolute control you understand.

In addition, there are partial rights and control beyond the 12 mile limit, extending out 200 miles.

That's why nations will fight for territorial rights to "worthless islands".

Re:According to the author, publisher, reviewer, (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year ago | (#44032853)

This strange form of denial is seen everywhere Chinese espionage is discussed. The person is utterly convinced that China is, in fact, not doing what is in its own best interest. No, that takes a back seat to boogeyman fear-mongering. Because I think it could possibly be so, then it must be. China couldn't possibly be behaving this way, because if it were so then I'd have to re-question some of my core beliefs.

Way to go (3, Funny)

sentientbeing (688713) | about a year ago | (#44032149)

Nice book Poindexter

Hmm (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032155)

I wish we had a well-researched overview of the NSA's cold-war like cyberwar tactics against the US to regain its past historical glory and world dominance.

Re:Hmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032251)

There isn't much we can do in this country without being discovered. Even the NSA's darkest secrets are out. It's just that the signal to noise is so bad that no one pays attention anymore.

everyone does it (1)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#44032165)

what's the big deal?
i'm old enough to remember the nuclear cold war and as soon as it finished the french and other allies started spying on us commercially
everyone spies on each other. you do it even if you don't plan on going to war. you do it so that when you negotiate you know how much to give and what to ask for.

some of you naive kids need to grow up

Re:everyone does it (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44032431)

It's a matter of degree. It was one thing for the French or whomever to try to find out about the details of a bid by some US company to a foreign country, but China takes it much further. Very high level execs had to worry about being spied on, but in China every 2-bit businessman is well advised to leave their cell phone and laptop at home.

World dominance? Historical glory? (3, Interesting)

mveloso (325617) | about a year ago | (#44032183)

Are we talking about China?

Re:World dominance? Historical glory? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032227)

Are we talking about China?

Shhhh, they're not very scary without those labels!

Re:World dominance? Historical glory? (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#44032375)

Prior 1700 or so there were periods of time where China was the strongest and most advanced nation. World domination is a stretch through.

Yeah... (4, Insightful)

bmo (77928) | about a year ago | (#44032211)

He notes that the US needs to limit trade with China to items we can't get anywhere else. He says not to supply China with the rope that will be used to hang the US on.

1. Not bloody likely.
2. Too fucking late.

China plans for the long term

Well, duh.

People who have been looking at China for the past two decades have been screaming this at the top of their lungs, only for this concept to fall on deaf ears. The US has forgotten about the lesson of Samuel Slater, and China has picked it up and they are schooling us.

Where the manufacturing goes, so does the science and engineering. And that's what the Chinese want. They want what we had and we're giving it to them hand-over-fist for short term profits.

The "problem" is cultural, and it is entirely self-made.

And it ain't gonna get fixed until US businesses start looking at the long term, which has about the same chance of happening as a snowball's chance in Hell.

--
BMO

Re:Yeah... (2)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44032989)

The "problem" is cultural, and it is entirely self-made.

The problem is political, not cultural. Remember all the choices people had in 1992 if they were opposed to NAFTA? Me neither. Sure there was Perot, but no 3rd party candidate has won a presidential election since Lincoln. Both the D and R were for it. Yes I know that wasn't directly related to China, but it was the beginning of the whole so-called free trade scam in the US.

Mexico much friendlier than China (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44035111)

In the case of NAFTA, jobs would go to Mexico, a nation that is friendly to the United States. That is the problem with the debate over 'free trade'. It focuses on if jobs should leave America, not which nation those jobs are going to, and if it is friendly with the United States. As I recall, Bill Clinton's reason for giving China Most Favored Nation, was that trade with China, would export American culture and ideas to China. The effectiveness of that remains to be seen.

Re:Yeah...Mummy not fair they are spying on us (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033191)

like the US hasnt been doing to all its allies/enemies for years.

Re:Yeah... (1)

m00sh (2538182) | about a year ago | (#44033517)

Where the manufacturing goes, so does the science and engineering. And that's what the Chinese want. They want what we had and we're giving it to them hand-over-fist for short term profits.

Everybody wants science and engineering. Name one country that will say no to advancing science and technology.

We're giving them that hand-over-fist? You'd rather have China stay a third world country? Wouldn't you want to add a billion more to the first world, creating new products, producing innovation and advancing science and technology? Or, would we rather find devious ways to keep a billion people in squalor so that we can enjoy whatever it is that you think you're enjoying from that.

Re:Yeah... (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44033957)

We're giving them that hand-over-fist? You'd rather have China stay a third world country?

False dichotomy. Many countries have vastly increased their standard of living without the US transferring it's technological know-how and manufacturing capacity wholesale. I have faith in the Chinese people to figure it out for themselves, but I'm puzzled why you have such a low opinion of their abilities.

More Western hypocrisy (1, Flamebait)

compucomp2 (1776668) | about a year ago | (#44032223)

Blah blah blah, evil red China is hacking us. You guys do it to us too, all the time, according to your new hero Snowden, but it's all good if your team does it, right? Now watch as you guys will try your damnedest to split hairs and somehow say that China's hacking was somehow worse or that the US hacking is justified for national security. That just cements the hypocrisy.

Re:More Western hypocrisy (1)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#44032231)

its called rhetoric. no one pays any attention to it

If the Chinese technology is that advanced (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032229)

US would have already be fucked. That fact is that Windows dominates in China and the majority of Chinese backbones are bought from US companies such as Cisco. And everybody would assume the backdoors have already been planted.

Rest assured, only US is capable of building PRISM system or stuxnet virus. As a Chinese I see no difference in two regimes, US and China. They are both controlled by special interest groups. Neither of those countries are mine. As average people we are just given crumbs of the big pie. Only difference is that Americans got enough crumbs, not because the special interest group is more benevolent, just because they can afford less people here.

Don't give the shit like communist. China is not a communist or socialist country and it never is. Now it is pure capitalist like US, the worst kind of capitalism in the world.

Re:If the Chinese technology is that advanced (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033647)

While the secrecy and surveillance in the US are worthy of criticism, Chinese people like myself can still see some clear differences. For example, where are dissenting CPC members when it comes to censorship, targeting of journalists, jailing of political writers? Where are the Leahys and Pauls of Chinese government? What happens to the Glenn Greenwalds and Noam Chomskys of Chinese journalism and academia?

Re:If the Chinese technology is that advanced (2)

jdogalt (961241) | about a year ago | (#44034077)

While the secrecy and surveillance in the US are worthy of criticism, Chinese people like myself can still see some clear differences. For example, where are dissenting CPC members when it comes to censorship, targeting of journalists, jailing of political writers? Where are the Leahys and Pauls of Chinese government? What happens to the Glenn Greenwalds and Noam Chomskys of Chinese journalism and academia?

Indeed. The recent NSA revelations are quite bad, but there is a long way to go between that, and forbidding journalistic coverage of Tiananmen Square in '89. That Google/Yahoo/Microsoft saw fit to collaborate with that censorship while building their digital financial empire of data and servers on the internet...

TL:DR (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032237)

There is no such thing as "intelectual property" in the 21st century America.

Deal. With. It.

How much are spending on defending / attacking? (1)

Bearhouse (1034238) | about a year ago | (#44032249)

As compared to spying on our own citizens?

Would be interesting to know....

Keep pointing at the chinese (1)

houghi (78078) | about a year ago | (#44032323)

Keep pointing at them and telling how they are spying on us. That way it keeps the attention away how we are also spying on us and them.

Re:Keep pointing at the chinese (1)

Joshua Fan (1733100) | about a year ago | (#44032509)

Obama's recent summit with the Chinese president was probably so successful because they both agreed to spy on each other's countries and exchange intelligence so they could each avoid the flak from their own constituents!

Elephant in the room (1)

gmuslera (3436) | about a year ago | (#44032343)

We must spy everyone because they spy us! Is just wrong when others do it.

Threats to United States Interests (1)

jeff13 (255285) | about a year ago | (#44032355)

[Dr. Evil Voice] Yeeaaaa riiiiiiight.

Remember kids, if WE do it it's to fight terrorism. When someone ELSE does it they are bad, bad people.

Here comes the Chinese Water Army (1)

Squidlips (1206004) | about a year ago | (#44032361)

Beware the phony posts attacking this book by the Water Army....it has started already

Re:Here comes the Chinese Water Army (1)

Steve_Ussler (2941703) | about a year ago | (#44032433)

What is the Water Army?

Re:Here comes the Chinese Water Army (3, Informative)

stewsters (1406737) | about a year ago | (#44032605)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Water_Army [wikipedia.org]

The US does similar: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks [guardian.co.uk]

And I would imagine at the cost, many countries do it. Its kind of like affiliate marketing [wikipedia.org] , but more honest.

Re:Here comes the Chinese Water Army (1)

Steve_Ussler (2941703) | about a year ago | (#44032699)

I had no idea. Thank you for the information.

Re:Here comes the Chinese Water Army (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44034585)

Yeah, its a little bit like what the US does in spending billions of dollars winning the hearts and minds of Americans.

Re:Here comes the Chinese Water Army (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44033171)

Beware the phony posts attacking this book by the Water Army....it has started already

See above [slashdot.org] for example. But I like the Water Army. It's fun to rebut their arguments, even if it's not always sporting enough.

So the distraction tactics begin, even on slashdot (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032437)

Let's point fingers at everyone else and ignore the fact that the US is still the worst of them all, combined.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

Steve_Ussler (2941703) | about a year ago | (#44032601)

Well if you are going to do a drive by accusations with no factsthen let me try also. Want to know the worst country for this stuff: Uruguay!

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032709)

Did you just wake up from a coma? Snowden just did another interview, more details are coming.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

Steve_Ussler (2941703) | about a year ago | (#44032779)

Amazing that with all the so-called spy power, tools, and intercepts.that they can’t find Snowden. Something is amiss.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033021)

Don't be naive, sure they know where he is, they just can't do shit about it since he's not in one of those kiss-ass country.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44033057)

Snowden just did another interview, more details are coming.

Notice all the people here defending the NSA from Snowden's disclosures? Me neither. If China isn't doing this to its own citizens then they probably have a crash program to catch up. Is getting screwed by our own government in one respect a good reason to let China screw us in other respects?

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033201)

Snowden just did another interview, more details are coming.

Notice all the people here defending the NSA from Snowden's disclosures? Me neither. If China isn't doing this to its own citizens then they probably have a crash program to catch up. Is getting screwed by our own government in one respect a good reason to let China screw us in other respects?

You missed the point, The difference here is China never pretended to be some FREEEEEEEEEEEEDOM (tm) fighter running around telling people how to run things, but kept quiet when "friends" like the Saudi's does the exact same thing.

If everyone already knows you're a slut infested with dozens of STDs, why even bother pretending to be an innocent virgin, what's the fucking point?

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44033303)

You missed the point, The difference here is China never pretended to be some FREEEEEEEEEEEEDOM (tm) fighter ...

It's ok for China to oppress its own citizens because they never claimed they don't? According to your logic, it's ok to do anything as long as you're not a hypocrite about it.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033395)

See, here is your problem, you Americans never seem to understand one simple concept: "Mind your own business".

There are religious people who oppose eating beef, they don't show up outside your house screaming about "FREEDOM TO THE BULLS" when you eat a steak.

What is "ok" or not for others is up to others to decide, for their own people to judge and for their own people to deal with, it's not up to you to decide, sure you can do it in your head and talk about it in parties, but when you get all worked up about it and scream "OH MY GOD HOW EVIL" but at the same time ignore your own problems, you just sound like some delusional hypocritical idiot with no concept of boundaries and respect.

Study the world map before opening your mouths, there are other people on earth too.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44033707)

See, here is your problem, you Americans never seem to understand one simple concept: "Mind your own business".

By your own reasoning you don't know how to mind your own business, since (I infer from your post) you're not an American, and you're posting on an American website where American politics are frequently discussed. Unless you're Chinese, then by your own reasoning you really don't know how to mind your own business, since this is about Chinese and American issues.

Post back when you've resolved that hypocrisy.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033913)

LOL now that is just retarded.

You failed to remember this "Mind your own business" was referring to the exact moment when you used "So it is ok for Country-X to do Y then?" as an argument, which is a typical derail and distract tactic Americans use when they don't want to face their own problems.

So when you pull that crap and someone THEN say: "Judge yourself before you judge others", that is not them minding your businesses, that is someone telling you to stop being an idiot. What you just pulled here is the equivalent of speaking too loud in a library, then someone tells you to keep quite, and you respond with "But you're speaking too."

Seriously, why even bother with what others countries are doing when your own country is doing all these creepy shit around the world.

You Americans still have no ideas how much shit you're in because all your brains can process is "OMG ALL THESE BAD PEOPLE OUT THERE, WE MUST FIX THEM, BECAUSE WE ARE FUCKING SAINTS".

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44034351)

I see the AC is still in rant mode, using such elegant counterarguments as "that is just retarded". Hint: the first rule of being in a hole is to stop digging.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44033735)

Your "rebuttal" didn't address anything about what I wrote. Instead you just jumped into a rant. Did you have trouble countering my point?

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44033003)

Well if you are going to do a drive by accusations with no factsthen let me try also. Want to know the worst country for this stuff: Uruguay!

No, Paraguay (I get them confused too).

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

Steve_Ussler (2941703) | about a year ago | (#44033081)

You mean they are different places? :) Speaking of south america...check out this article today on msnbc: Why the World Cup can't save Brazil's tourism industry http://www.nbcnews.com/travel/why-world-cup-cant-save-brazils-tourism-industry-6C10344869 [nbcnews.com]

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44033015)

Let's point fingers at everyone else and ignore the fact that the US is still the worst of them all, combined.

As always, the most inflammatory comments come from AC's. If you're going to make an argument, at least be prepared to defend it. There are too many people here by the name of "Anonymous Coward" to do that.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033105)

Let's point fingers at everyone else and ignore the fact that the US is still the worst of them all, combined.

As always, the most inflammatory comments come from AC's. If you're going to make an argument, at least be prepared to defend it. There are too many people here by the name of "Anonymous Coward" to do that.

LOL yeah let's "argue" about it by attacking the poster instead of the actual point, because that is just so cool.

Pathetic.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033309)

How is this inflammatory? It's probably true. Oh - yeah - I forgot that Slashdot is dominated by arrogant, brainwashed Americans.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44033345)

More AC(s). 'nuf said.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033391)

People post as Anon for similar reasons as to why people protest while wearing masks in corrupt police states.

If you have something to say, which is a valid, but very unpopular opinion, sure, you can post with your real handle, but then you'll just get bad karma on here by the horribly biased masses.

Maybe, just maybe, people post as AC because they recognize this. It does not mean their opinion is any less valid, although it may mean that they realize their opinion is likely to be unpopular.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44033893)

People post as Anon for similar reasons as to why people protest while wearing masks in corrupt police states.

They're afraid that jackbooted Slashdotters will break into their homes at night and drag them off, never to be seen again?

If you have something to say, which is a valid, but very unpopular opinion, sure, you can post with your real handle, but then you'll just get bad karma

Oooh, bad karma. Is that anything like the gulag?

I honestly don't know how much courage I have to stand up to jackbooted thugs in a corrupt police state, but I'm incredibly intrepid when it comes to posting unpopular arguments on Slashdot using my "real" name (full disclosure: ebno-10db is not the name on my birth certificate). I even do it at the risk of my life giving karma!

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44034083)

You must not be aware of how the karma system works on here. Every time you get modded down, (or every few times, I'm not sure), your posts start off with one less rating point. Post enough unpopular shit, and eventually no one will ever see your posts.

There's nothing wrong with posting anon if you have a handle with good karma and don't want to destroy that.

Karma is a real thing on slashdot - we're not talking about metaphysics here.

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44034189)

Karma is a real thing on slashdot - we're not talking about metaphysics here.

This is comical. I admire people like they guy who stood in front of the tank in Tiananmen Square, but somehow I don't feel like I'm in his league if I risk my Slashdot karma.

P.S. I'm fully aware of how the karma system here works, but some some reason I'm less afraid of it than truncheons and bullets (let alone tanks!).

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033547)

More crying on nicknames from someone who can't make proper counter arguments.

Are you suggesting using a different nick will change the facts? What are you an idiot?

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44033787)

More crying on nicknames from someone who can't make proper counter arguments. ... What are you an idiot?

I'm impressed by the way you stick to "proper counter arguments".

Re:So the distraction tactics begin, even on slash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44034157)

And we are even more impressed by your dedication to "Real name discussions" by using names such as ebno-10db.

What a fucking idiot.

pages: 192 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44032935)

Is the review longer than the book?

Re:pages: 192 (1)

Steve_Ussler (2941703) | about a year ago | (#44033795)

Ever read an analysis of Finnegans Wake? There are some phd theses on it over 3,000 pages.

Meanwhile in China.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033049)

A new book has been released with rave reviews. It's called:

"The American Information War: Espionage, Cyberwar, Communications Control and Related Threats to Chinese Interests"

Sounds like a good read!

mood up (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033209)

outstrpips [goat.cx]

I think the review is missing something... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033433)

This book is $38(!!!) on amazon? Huh? 200 page paperback?

Re:I think the review is missing something... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033457)

http://www.amazon.com/The-Chinese-Information-War-Communications/dp/0786472715

Fourty years ago: Nixon went to China (1)

beachdog (690633) | about a year ago | (#44035163)

About 40 years ago, sitting US President Richard Nixon went to China. The plane landed in Shanghai China and there Nixon did some business regarding the Shanghai Accords. The Shanghai accords were a written document that organized or stabilized the enormous gap between Communist Chinese political ideology and American political ideology.

I highly recommend John Adam's opera Nixon In China. Fragments are available on Youtube and Wikipedia has a very helpful series of entries that describe the historical visit to China.

The opera reveals a series of cultural mysteries: The oblique standoffish ideas of Kissinger, the amazing cultural impact of the wife of Chairman Mao, the feelings and warmth that developed as Pat Nixon visited a poultry farm, the frankness of Nixon and Mao realizing their own limitations as leaders.

What is happening today with theft of secrets, electronic intrusion, removal of manufacturing to China needs to be balanced with the realization that the white hot ideological differences between the US and communist countries has developed into a new oblique engagement where the line of contact has become a huge blur.

If anything, the joke is on both parties. Coming up on both the American and Chinese societies is a threat that both societies are equally completely unable to defend against, namely global warming.

A heap of CyberBullshit ... (1)

dgharmon (2564621) | about a year ago | (#44035437)

When people watch a purported spy movie where a lone hacker can hack the computers of a spy-agency [imdb.com] and blow-up the heating - and not laugh out loud - then I suppose they would have no problem swallowing this heap of cyber-bullshit and no mentions of Visual Basic [youtube.com] in the entire review ..
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...