News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:China hires over 100 TSMC engineers in push for chip lead... by DetroitThrow on Wednesday August 12, 2020 @08:17PM (#24138665)
The US has become a very developed market since then, though certainly not the "dominant market", but regardless should we as actors in the current legal system advocate for something that gives preferential treatment of Chinese businesses OR an entirely different system with very little protections for IP?

I don't think so, and would actually prefer we take on something closer to the Chinese approach of leasing land in the same way we encourage people to put ideas in the public domain for a guarantee of a period of market monopoly. Though there are many reforms about current US IP law that I would love to see.

>US Foreign policy (as well as that of any nation) even in 2020, when you take justifications, stunningly aligned with US national interest.

I disagree - most nations advocate for their self-interests, otherwise we would be the United States of the World right now rather than the United States of America. Similarly, many countries have a foreign policy favorable to China because of economic incentives with a voluntary relationship between them. Are all countries or localities as equally 'autonomous' as China or the US when deciding with whom their most beneficial economic relationships are? No, though I don't think "dropping IP law" is a particular benefit to increasing that autonomy either.

Asides from Afghanistan and Iraq, are there any states you can name that are advocating for almost objectively US aligned policy?

Re:China hires over 100 TSMC engineers in push for chip lead... by sudosysgen on Wednesday August 12, 2020 @08:39PM (#24138806)
I meant that most nations action's align with their interests, not their rhetoric or ideology.

I'm not making a claim as to what we should do, I'm just saying that our current IP system has nothing to do with morality and everything to do with Western power and interest.

Personally I think a system such as the one you described is preferable too, but I'm just explaining the Realist (and by extension Materialist in the Fuerbachian sense, and thus Marxist, and thus Chinese) perspective on why laws are the way they are (which is incidentally correct), by contrast with the Idealist narrative that States tend to use to justify their interests.

Re:China hires over 100 TSMC engineers in push for chip lead... by totalZero on Thursday August 13, 2020 @12:19AM (#24139893)
> our current IP system has nothing to do with morality and everything to do with Western power and interest.

Property rights are neither a question of morality nor a question of realpolitik. They are an economic construct. Property is the only so-called natural right that does not exist at birth. We are born with life, and we are born with liberty, but we are not born with property.

Re:China hires over 100 TSMC engineers in push for chip lead... by sudosysgen on Thursday August 13, 2020 @11:11AM (#24144152)
I never understood this line of argument. Economics is 100% inextricable from realpolitik. Whether you have a socially constructed economic right or not is 100% a question of realpolitik.

Also, private property simply isn't a natural right, not even by the definition of Hobbes. The right of exclusion of something you don't use is neither natural nor universal in most early human civilizations, it just simply isn't a natural right.

And intellectual property in particular is perhaps the opposite of a natural right.

Re:China hires over 100 TSMC engineers in push for chip lead... by DetroitThrow on Thursday August 13, 2020 @05:06PM (#24149155)
Locke ran with Life, Liberty, and Estate but even the American founding fathers went with the idea that Estate is an socioeconomic construct for the purpose of "freedom".