The History Channel: "The Art of War"

[Parker]

This is over an hour long...but good

[arce1988]

  Thank you.

[Tapeworm]

Read it long ago and found it silly as hell, sorry to say.  An occasional obvious truism and a whole lot of nonsense, like the part where he discusses the importance of encamping one's army on the sunny side of a hill in order to benefit morale, lol.  So glad I'm reading this.  I also remember the large section on the use of secret agents as especially tiresome.

Chinese mystique and an enticing title keep it popping up in western culture but I don't remember it delivering any great insights.  Just another 'Secrets of the Orient' thing that we always seem to fall for.

[Irongrip400]

Read it long ago and found it silly as hell, sorry to say.  An occasional obvious truism and a whole lot of nonsense, like the part where he discusses the importance of encamping one's army on the sunny side of a hill in order to benefit morale, lol.  So glad I'm reading this.  I also remember the large section on the use of secret agents as especially tiresome.

Chinese mystique and an enticing title keep it popping up in western culture but I don't remember it delivering any great insights.  Just another 'Secrets of the Orient' thing that we always seem to fall for.

I thought similar of "The Prince" by Machiavelli. A lot of it after reading, I was thinking, "no shit". It seemed like an idiots guide to manipulation. Maybe during its time it was something cutting edge.

[Parker]

Read it long ago and found it silly as hell, sorry to say.  An occasional obvious truism and a whole lot of nonsense, like the part where he discusses the importance of encamping one's army on the sunny side of a hill in order to benefit morale, lol.  So glad I'm reading this.  I also remember the large section on the use of secret agents as especially tiresome.

Chinese mystique and an enticing title keep it popping up in western culture but I don't remember it delivering any great insights.  Just another 'Secrets of the Orient' thing that we always seem to fall for.

Look at what the Chinese have foreign car companies do...always partner up with a Chinese car company if they want to sell/build cars in China...this ensures that they learn how to build the cars, and steal their blueprints. Which has happened to VW...VW has learned that a company that they partnered with, has stolen its blueprints to engines,  and have built their own factory to make their own cars/engines using VW plans.

Also, look at what China is doing in Africa. And if you look at many YouTube videos, the comments are: "Chinese and Africans join to beat the white man..."

Seems like they are still using Sun Tzu's tactics.

[Tapeworm]

I'm undecided when it comes to IP.  Guess I'd like to see more protection where needed but less where there's a legal stranglehold.

If you invent something then someone else shouldn't be allowed to reverse engineer it or steal it and leave you completely out in the cold, but I don't agree with companies or individuals who exploit IP laws to such an extent that progress in general becomes stifled or something that could benefit the world is held hostage for profit (medical technology especially).  All progress is built on previous progress.  It's not like someone with a new machine invented fire, mined the ore, created steel, discovered principles of physics and mechanical engineering, etc, so I reject the claim that an invention is entirely the property of the inventor.

I also think that the adversarial system is a poor choice for litigation since patent enforcement is just a game of lawyers, making it so prohibitively expensive that small fish have no chance whatsoever.  Infringement should be adjudicated by a national or international body without the involvement of lawyers.  A country which instituted that policy would see an explosion in grassroots creativity.

As for China, I wouldn't bring a new idea there, patented or not.  Until their bad reputation fades, it's likely that people will try to keep new ideas out of Chinese hands, which puts them at a disadvantage, so I don't see their strategy as a winning one in the long term.

[Red Hook]

I'm undecided when it comes to IP.  Guess I'd like to see more protection where needed but less where there's a legal stranglehold.

If you invent something then someone else shouldn't be allowed to reverse engineer it or steal it and leave you completely out in the cold, but I don't agree with companies or individuals who exploit IP laws to such an extent that progress in general becomes stifled or something that could benefit the world is held hostage for profit (medical technology especially).  All progress is built on previous progress.  It's not like someone with a new machine invented fire, mined the ore, created steel, discovered principles of physics and mechanical engineering, etc, so I reject the claim that an invention is entirely the property of the inventor.

I also think that the adversarial system is a poor choice for litigation since patent enforcement is just a game of lawyers, making it so prohibitively expensive that small fish have no chance whatsoever.  Infringement should be adjudicated by a national or international body without the involvement of lawyers.  A country which instituted that policy would see an explosion in grassroots creativity.

As for China, I wouldn't bring a new idea there, patented or not.  Until their bad reputation fades, it's likely that people will try to keep new ideas out of Chinese hands, which puts them at a disadvantage, so I don't see their strategy as a winning one in the long term.

Once any IP is in the form of a tangible product the Chinese will steal it. They have the full backing of the government, explicitly and implicitly.  The Chinese spend very little on research since they world is already doing that for them.

[Irongrip400]

Once any IP is in the form of a tangible product the Chinese will steal it. They have the full backing of the government, explicitly and implicitly.  The Chinese spend very little on research since they world is already doing that for them.

Not to take this off track, but when people complain about the cost of healthcare in the US, most of that has to do with the research and education needed to obtain that knowledge. The Chinese are doing the same thing, although they probably justify it because they think we exploit their cheap labor (which we do).

[Tapeworm]

Once any IP is in the form of a tangible product the Chinese will steal it. They have the full backing of the government, explicitly and implicitly.  The Chinese spend very little on research since they world is already doing that for them.

Not sure how to feel about that either.  If a company is willing to advertise its products to the same people it just fired because manufacturing in China is cheaper, I'm only semi-sympathetic when they come running home with a skinned knee.

The west isn't any better though.  The legal system is geared toward extracting money from those foolish enough to come to it for help.  At least the Chinese just steal your IP.  They don't empty your bank account too with a lot of bullshit about patents actually being worth anything in today's world.

[Parker]

Not to take this off track, but when people complain about the cost of healthcare in the US, most of that has to do with the research and education needed to obtain that knowledge. The Chinese are doing the same thing, although they probably justify it because they think we exploit their cheap labor (which we do).

The Chinese are now exploiting their cheap labor in some African countries, namely Ethiopia...

[Irongrip400]

The Chinese are now exploiting their cheap labor in some African countries, namely Ethiopia...

Paying it forward I guess?

[Parker]

Paying it forward I guess?

yep, Ethiopian made boots...

[arce1988]

One of the more well-known stories about Sun Tzu, taken from Shiji, illustrates Sun Tzu's temperament as follows: Before hiring Sun Tzu, the King of Wu tested Sun Tzu's skills by commanding him to train a harem of 180 concubines into soldiers. Sun Tzu divided them into two companies, appointing the two concubines most favored by the king as the company commanders. When Sun Tzu first ordered the concubines to face right, they giggled. In response, Sun Tzu said that the general, in this case himself, was responsible for ensuring that soldiers understood the commands given to them. Then, he reiterated the command, and again the concubines giggled. Sun Tzu then ordered the execution of the king's two favored concubines, to the king's protests. He explained that if the general's soldiers understood their commands but did not obey, it was the fault of the officers. Sun Tzu also said that, once a general was appointed, it was his duty to carry out his mission, even if the king protested. After both concubines were killed, new officers were chosen to replace them. Afterwards, both companies, now well aware of the costs of further frivolity, performed their maneuvers flawlessly.

[arce1988]

[Parker]

I suspect a book recommending explicitly secular strategies for statecraft would be quite the tome of insight in an era where most accepted descriptions/prescriptions came from the Church, an organization that gave us such eternal pearls of wisdom as 'God put the weeds there to give us some hard work to do.'

...Meanwhile, the. Borgia Pope was screwing your sister...

[Seven Copper Coins]

I'm undecided when it comes to IP.  Guess I'd like to see more protection where needed but less where there's a legal stranglehold.

If you invent something then someone else shouldn't be allowed to reverse engineer it or steal it and leave you completely out in the cold, but I don't agree with companies or individuals who exploit IP laws to such an extent that progress in general becomes stifled or something that could benefit the world is held hostage for profit (medical technology especially).  All progress is built on previous progress.  It's not like someone with a new machine invented fire, mined the ore, created steel, discovered principles of physics and mechanical engineering, etc, so I reject the claim that an invention is entirely the property of the inventor.

I also think that the adversarial system is a poor choice for litigation since patent enforcement is just a game of lawyers, making it so prohibitively expensive that small fish have no chance whatsoever.  Infringement should be adjudicated by a national or international body without the involvement of lawyers.  A country which instituted that policy would see an explosion in grassroots creativity.

As for China, I wouldn't bring a new idea there, patented or not.  Until their bad reputation fades, it's likely that people will try to keep new ideas out of Chinese hands, which puts them at a disadvantage, so I don't see their strategy as a winning one in the long term.

Great post. Companies steal IP and then outlawyer you and keep it.

[Parker]

Great post. Companies buy your IP and then outlawyer you and keep it.

fixed...
It's funny when Oil companies buy up or bribe upstart companies that have alternative fuel ideas, or even new stronger than steel materials, and then either shut the projects down, of divert them to meet their own needs...

[The Abdominal Snoman]

Read it long ago and found it silly as hell, sorry to say.  An occasional obvious truism and a whole lot of nonsense, like the part where he discusses the importance of encamping one's army on the sunny side of a hill in order to benefit morale, lol.  So glad I'm reading this.  I also remember the large section on the use of secret agents as especially tiresome.

Chinese mystique and an enticing title keep it popping up in western culture but I don't remember it delivering any great insights.  Just another 'Secrets of the Orient' thing that we always seem to fall for.

Sunnyside of the hill=Vitamin D?

[The Abdominal Snoman]

Great post. Companies steal IP and then outlawyer you and keep it.

Conspiracy?

[cephissus]

Read it long ago and found it silly as hell, sorry to say.  An occasional obvious truism and a whole lot of nonsense, like the part where he discusses the importance of encamping one's army on the sunny side of a hill in order to benefit morale, lol.  So glad I'm reading this.  I also remember the large section on the use of secret agents as especially tiresome.

Chinese mystique and an enticing title keep it popping up in western culture but I don't remember it delivering any great insights.  Just another 'Secrets of the Orient' thing that we always seem to fall for.

what's nonsensical about this

[Tapeworm]

what's nonsensical about this

It didn't live up to Gordon Gecko's implicit promise that I would become an overnight millionaire, see my enemies driven before me, and hear the lamentations of their women.

I don't remember Clausewitz too well either but I remember liking him more.  I prefer his conception of war as an unpredictable endeavour requiring elasticity from participants, rather than Tzu's rigid approach of initial conditions dictating the outcome.  He also viewed military effectiveness as something built on a societal foundation, so you get an examination of economics, political propaganda, etc (at least I think that was him), while Tzu just sort of materializes with his army in the military theatre on behalf of his king.