ttmrichter

Because there's not enough hours in the day to link to trivially-searched information to counter every ignoramus that thinks their opinion matters anyway.

I'm not their Google/Duckduckgo/Bing/Baidu/whatever stenographer. Google et al are a few keystrokes away. They can do the legwork themselves.

There's plenty of ignorant right-wing assholes out there who go around spouting utter gibberish about "TEH CCP" (sic) to the point that if I see "CCP" I quickly scan for the usual (inaccurate) talking points, roll my eyes, and move on. The fact you actually managed to say something good about "TEH CCP" (sic) made me think you had a slightly more balanced viewpoint.

Of course your subsequent performance (and your hilarious romp through my past posts that didn't look even slightly like a toddler throwing a tantrum, nosiree!) made me change my mind, so I'll be going back to the old policy: If I see "CCP" I assume ignorant jackass and move on.

Copyright laws (and other IP laws) exist in China. Ergo "never existed in Chinese history" is false on the face of it. Q.E.D.

Duh.

Or you could use the proper English initialization from their official English name: Communist Party of China. But hey, why not remain an ignoramus and snark instead?

You seem to have overlooked I actually praised the Communist Party of one of the Chinas in my comment.

I didn't. It's why I told you instead of rolling my eyes and ignoring you.

Here's a little tip for you: If you use "CCP" you're basically identifying yourself as an ignoramus whose opinions on the topic can be safely ignored. After all if you can't get the name of an institution correct, what are the odds that you got things that require genuine knowledge and nuance right?

"Not Chinese but here's what I think about China anyway because I can't listen instead of speak."

There are several things to unpack here.

First, if you think Chinese IP (not just copyright) laws are lax, come visit me and try to use the IP of a major Chinese company like, say, Huawei. Just let me keep a safe distance from you while you do it, OK?

Second, where they are "lax" is with specifically foreign IP: copyright or patent or whatever. And even there, if the foreign IP holder has significant presence in China they can come down on infringement like Huawei could. It's just that foreign IP holders often have no such Chinese presence and are faced with an inability to fight IP infringement in China. You know, exactly like a small player in, say, Thailand being faced with her work being stolen and sold all over the USA might find. Or, even when the foreign entity has presence in the USA … well, shall we ask Samsung how they feel about US courts' protection of their patents when Apple steals them? (Hint: it doesn't go well if it's a foreign company vs. an American one in an American court.)

Third, and most importantly, likely the source of a lot of trouble, is that Chinese IP law is, critically, very different from IP law in western countries. Baseline assumptions are different, for starters. If you come to China in matters that involve valuable IP and you don't hire a lawyer intimately familiar with CHINESE IP law, you're going to get fucked and rightly so. It's pretty arrogant and colonial to assume that every other nation in the world must follow your rules on their own soil. (Consider how you'd react to a flip in this: a Chinese company going to your nation and expecting you to obey Chinese IP law to understand why the notion is ludicrous.)

F/OSS is not the panacea its advocates claim it to be. I mentioned collecting bizarre compiler bugs. GCC has a huge presence in my collection.

And this ignores the fact that F/OSS often has no presence whatsoever in entire industry swathes. F/OSS, for the most part, with some exceptions, lags behind the technology curve when it comes to bleeding-edge tech. This is sometimes the fault of vendor shenanigans (I'm looking at you here, Altera and Xylinx), but often it's just the problem of a very specific problem domain with very few eyes willing to work on it as a hobby.

Show me now a picture of people walking around public spaces reading papers.

Here's another stark, but interesting, comparison. (Countries selected as countries I have friends or family in.)

What I see in this is that it's more than just capitalist and socialist differences. There are some "socialist" nations that did pretty badly in that mess. There are some "capitalist" nations that did OK.

But the real reason for China's success is spelled out more here: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1480168091745075200.html

My guess is that China would have done roughly equally as well under its imperial system because the very nature of the people is different.

I'm not sure this is meaningful. A lot of people yearn back for the days of Maggie Thatcher and Ronald Raygun as well.

Simplify requirements and the tooling and technologies simplify alongside.