I know what overseas means and I realize Microsoft has teams all over the globe. But Microsoft is a US company and by working there as a researcher you are trained and have access to know-how that is technically American in origin.

The intent of the original "boast" is to somehow claim the know-how comes solely out of China. It's boasting about China's abilities to generate cutting edge technology without reliance on the west. This has nothing to do with where you physically reside.

The gp said:

> Industrial espionage by China has a long history, and China has more valuable things to steal from America than the other way.

And you were countering that by saying nonono, these guys learnt everything they know solely from some Chinese origin. They've never been overseas.

> The intent of the original "boast" is to somehow claim the know-how comes solely out of China.

No, it isn’t. It just means they haven’t studied aboard or have worked in the U.S., which has been long seen as a prerequisite to innovate in the tech industry there.

My original comment was merely citing what they think. It’s unfortunate that you cannot tell the difference between describing and endorsing.

Here's the sequence:

>> Why does the US still allow Chinese nationals to study at its universities and work at its companies? Seems like a big risk that cutting edge research and trade secrets will go to America’s main adversary. Industrial espionage by China has a long history, and China has more valuable things to steal from America than the other way.

> I have good news for you. DeepSeek openly bragged that none of its people have “overseas experience”. They are all local talents.

...

> My original comment was merely citing what they think

Fair enough. So my comment is towards what they think? What is your position?

EDIT: Do you feel that DeepSeek open bragging about none of its people having "overseas experience" is simply to say they have not been overseas or that the technology originates in China? I'll admit I'm not down to the nuance of how studies overseas are viewed in China.

I don’t have a position. I’m simply very curious how this will play out.

You don’t have to guess what they mean since the CEO did an interview about it. For your convenience, I’ll paste a translated excerpt here:

> For many years, Chinese companies have often relied on others for technological innovation, adopting these advancements for commercialization while waiting for Moore's Law to deliver better hardware and software effortlessly. Our approach, however, is not about quick profits but about advancing to the forefront of technology and driving ecosystem development. China must gradually transition from being a free-rider to a contributor.

> Most Chinese companies tend to follow rather than innovate. The challenge for China's innovation isn't a lack of capital but a lack of confidence and the know-how to assemble highly skilled talent. Our team is entirely homegrown, without overseas returnees. While the top 50 global talents might not be in China, we aim to cultivate such expertise domestically.