this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2024
5 points (85.7% liked)

World News

39019 readers
2743 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/41003385

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Why is this downvoted? the article is based on a REAL report by ASPI:
https://www.aspi.org.au/

The report:
https://www.aspi.org.au/report/aspis-two-decade-critical-technology-tracker

If you like graphs here's a good one:
https://ad-aspi.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/2024-08/ASPI%E2%80%99s%20two-decade%20Critical%20Technology%20Tracker_Figure1.png?VersionId=I5XtNvKHQGJPYNWJieBDAhC_ct8mM57r

But notice they do not claim China is necessarily leading the fields, only that they are doing more research.
For instance an area like advanced aircraft engines, where China is doing what looks like 5 times more research than USA, USA has worked on that for 80 years, and China is probably still catching up.

But have no doubt, China is a major force in research and technology today.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And let's see who the ASPI is since you didn't really go into that:

In February 2020, Australian Labor Party Senator Kim Carr described the ASPI as "hawks intent on fighting a new cold war."[29][30] Former Foreign Minister Bob Carr (no relation) said the ASPI provides a "one-sided, pro-American view of the world" and criticised the group for taking what he claimed was almost $450,000 from the U.S. State Department, to track Australian universities with Chinese research collaborations, and "vilifying and denigrating Australian researchers and their work." Bob Carr's criticism of ASPI came after ASPI president Peter Jennings had raised questions about the donation of $1.8 million by a Chinese billionaire to a group related to Carr.[31][32] ASPI replied that it "doesn't have an editorial line on China, but we have a very clear method for how we go about our research," and claimed that the true amount of State Department funding was less than half that amount stated by Carr.[33][34] ASPI was criticized by former diplomats John Menadue, Geoff Raby, and Bruce Haigh, with Haigh referring to ASPI as serving the foreign policy interests of the Liberal Party of Australia.[35][36] In July 2022 an article in The Economist described ASPI as "hawkish".[37]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Strategic_Policy_Institute

Maybe that's why it's downvoted.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Well to be fair, it turned out that we should probably have been more hawkish towards China sooner.
So it seems to me you are arguing against what you say you are arguing for.

Nothing in what you describe shows anything wrong with the report or the article.
There is little doubt that China is spending way more on research than most countries, and being a close #2 in the world on economy, that makes it very plausible that China is in fact #1 in research today, and if we do nothing, China is destined to surpass us.

Silencing that warning is doing work for China.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Nothing in what you describe shows anything wrong with the report or the article.

This is how people defend articles from Fox News.

When the source has been shown to be severely biased, it is enough to not trust the report on its face. You do not have to vet everything they do once you've already seen they can't be trusted.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Whats the need to involve Fox News into this? We are dealing with science and technology matters. At least I expect something more academic in nature.

Anyway, is this not good enough source for. you? SJR - International Science Ranking

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That would certainly be a better source, yes. There is absolutely no reason to ever trust a source that you already know isn't trustworthy. On anything.

However, that source does not really give a full picture.

For example, who is citing who? Are the Chinese papers all just citing each other? If so, that would be a pretty poor measurement.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Man... that's based on Scopus index. Do you even know what you're talking about.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If you won't answer my questions, please at least refuse to do so without violating our civility rule as listed in the sidebar.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"Do you even know what you’re talking about" was clearly a personal attack. You could have told me why I was wrong, but you decided to go call me ignorant instead.

And I think it's clear that you'd rather go off on this tangent than answer my questions, so I think we are done here.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

How can it be personal attacks. It is simple logic. I give you a simple example -> The research conducted in certain countries usually is based on industry needs of the country. In China, for example, the have demand in the technology of space exploration and High-speed rail. So you'll see a lot of research being churned out speedily by a number of local researchers due to the immediate demand in the country. You've touched about ball bearing tech, for example, and this is an example of recent research article for that which could be beneficial in the HSR areas. When those people in the same country citing each other, we can't simply claim they're doing it as a matter of convenience. It could be an indicator that the subject itself is the top priority in the country.

Another point to consider -> If the journal where the article have been written is in the Scopus index, there's even low probability for the work to be of low value, no matter who has been citing them.

Of course that the general idea, but there's still room to debate.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

It's a personal attack because you just went with "you're ignorant" rather than explaining why what I said was incorrect.

Thank you for finally explaining.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

That's whataboutism, and it's very easy to point to FOX news spewing lies if you want to.
Just saying FOX news is right wing is not a very good argument against Fox news either.

Do you in fact disagree with the main sentiment of the report? And if you do, then why?
I happen to agree with the report on the main issue, that China is surpassing us on science and technology research.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I can see that China has made major strides in just about every field. For instance China can make their own quality ball bearings, which Russia can't.

Just as an example of a seemingly minor thing, that has had a major impact on Russia when the west embargoed them because of Ukraine.

It's OK to warn the report may be biased, but downvoting because you disagree is bad practice.
Downvoting it because it has false info however, is perfectly allright IMO, but nobody has shown that.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

I disagree with the concept that you can accurately measure who is leading the way in science overall based on specific individual technologies that you may be the industry leader in at the moment.

Engineering superiority is not scientific superiority. Your ball bearings example is not suggestive of scientific superiority. China isn't making massive technological strides in ball bearing studies which are furthering science as a whole.

Frankly, I disagree with the idea that it is possible to, as The Register puts it, beat the world at science because science is a global endeavor and the scientific method requires it to be in order to make sure things are verifiable.