Open source technology.
A lot of the hardware on the commercial civilian market that many consider bleeding edge stuff developed exclusively in house in a private company is in fact technology used covertly by government agencies for a very long time.
Because of this technologies approved for the civilian commerrcial market might as well be open source used by many different companies instead of a few litigating about "their" technology in court.
Of course some big companies believe that they have developed some of their tech all on their own. That is cute, bordering on treason.
Patents are only legal for a certain amount of years. So if a technology has been used by the government for a few decades already, the patent should not be viable anymore.
Of course a patent may have been made when a private company received the tech from the government or got help from the government developing tech, not when it was first used by a government. Because of secrecy by obscurity.
What´s interesting from the governments point of view is developing the economy, creating jobs, helping companies and so on in their own and other countries.
South Korea´s economy/technology/companies would be nothing without USA´s help.
Eastern europe´s economy would be nothing without massive investments from EU.
This was all good before. It is not effective anymore.
If the government has tech it wants to give to companies or help companies develop it becomes problematic giving some tech to Intel, some tech to Samsung and allowing Huawei to steal some tech. All inthe name of economic development in different regions in the world.
Economic development in eastern europe, asia and at home lessens the risk of regular Big War.
So the strategy that different governments implement are correct. Soft Power in the shadows has been used by the west for centuries.
Now because of the increasing complexity of even civilian commercial technology open source sharing between companies, universities and even hobbyists in both allied and hostile countries is needed. Cooperation between them in open source projects is better than allowing one company to steal technology and helping another coompany to develop it.
The economic development in China has not only been supported by the west. It has been made possible because of the west.
On the plus side: no war because of Soft Power.
On the minus side: loss of jobs in the west because of outsourcing of jobs.
This is real diplomacy avoiding large scale conflicts getting out of hand.
It will be easier to establish new companies in the west and bring back jobs previously outsourced if companies without the clout of Intel, Pfizer and GM get access to open source tech.
A company wanting to establish a business should be able to use existing building blocks of technolgy and just put the components together. Whether those building blocks are big chunks of software code or hardware schematics or biochemical recipes.
Historically economic at home, among allies and even at the enemy has helped trade, created jobs.
And has lessened the risk of war.
So what about all those jobs lost by outsourcing? The economics can be discussed, but the general view is that because of outsourcin and automation the economy has grown. But a lot of people are unempolyed. That is why everything should be done to kickstart the economy.
If a car company at home uses open source battery tech in the cars they manufacture they will save money and hopefully build more factories both at home and abroad.
I open source automation technology is used in the factories then fewer people will be needed in the factory, but those needed will likely use a VR headset and a Xbox controller to supervise industrial robots instead of doing the heavy work themselves.
Because of technology it will become easier to control automated manufacturing and logistics, the employee will not need a engineering degree to sit at home with a VR headset and appropriate gamepad to monitor ten autonomous trucks transporting on the road.
Will sales of cars decrease because people work from home? Not necessarily if a customer buys an autonomous car and rents it out to a taxi company, then that car will make money for the owner, the taxi company. And the sales of cars will not decrease. These autonomous taxis will be cheap and will partly replace public transport atleast on the road. This will of course decrease costs for the government and instead increase tax income.
What governments can do is prioritize giving their technology in open source form to civilian companies. And when they help companies develop technologies they could require it to be published open source.
This could be a way for China to give back what it was given. If they have any honour left.
Because of this technologies approved for the civilian commerrcial market might as well be open source used by many different companies instead of a few litigating about "their" technology in court.
Of course some big companies believe that they have developed some of their tech all on their own. That is cute, bordering on treason.
Patents are only legal for a certain amount of years. So if a technology has been used by the government for a few decades already, the patent should not be viable anymore.
Of course a patent may have been made when a private company received the tech from the government or got help from the government developing tech, not when it was first used by a government. Because of secrecy by obscurity.
What´s interesting from the governments point of view is developing the economy, creating jobs, helping companies and so on in their own and other countries.
South Korea´s economy/technology/companies would be nothing without USA´s help.
Eastern europe´s economy would be nothing without massive investments from EU.
This was all good before. It is not effective anymore.
If the government has tech it wants to give to companies or help companies develop it becomes problematic giving some tech to Intel, some tech to Samsung and allowing Huawei to steal some tech. All inthe name of economic development in different regions in the world.
Economic development in eastern europe, asia and at home lessens the risk of regular Big War.
So the strategy that different governments implement are correct. Soft Power in the shadows has been used by the west for centuries.
Now because of the increasing complexity of even civilian commercial technology open source sharing between companies, universities and even hobbyists in both allied and hostile countries is needed. Cooperation between them in open source projects is better than allowing one company to steal technology and helping another coompany to develop it.
The economic development in China has not only been supported by the west. It has been made possible because of the west.
On the plus side: no war because of Soft Power.
On the minus side: loss of jobs in the west because of outsourcing of jobs.
This is real diplomacy avoiding large scale conflicts getting out of hand.
It will be easier to establish new companies in the west and bring back jobs previously outsourced if companies without the clout of Intel, Pfizer and GM get access to open source tech.
A company wanting to establish a business should be able to use existing building blocks of technolgy and just put the components together. Whether those building blocks are big chunks of software code or hardware schematics or biochemical recipes.
Historically economic at home, among allies and even at the enemy has helped trade, created jobs.
And has lessened the risk of war.
So what about all those jobs lost by outsourcing? The economics can be discussed, but the general view is that because of outsourcin and automation the economy has grown. But a lot of people are unempolyed. That is why everything should be done to kickstart the economy.
If a car company at home uses open source battery tech in the cars they manufacture they will save money and hopefully build more factories both at home and abroad.
I open source automation technology is used in the factories then fewer people will be needed in the factory, but those needed will likely use a VR headset and a Xbox controller to supervise industrial robots instead of doing the heavy work themselves.
Because of technology it will become easier to control automated manufacturing and logistics, the employee will not need a engineering degree to sit at home with a VR headset and appropriate gamepad to monitor ten autonomous trucks transporting on the road.
Will sales of cars decrease because people work from home? Not necessarily if a customer buys an autonomous car and rents it out to a taxi company, then that car will make money for the owner, the taxi company. And the sales of cars will not decrease. These autonomous taxis will be cheap and will partly replace public transport atleast on the road. This will of course decrease costs for the government and instead increase tax income.
What governments can do is prioritize giving their technology in open source form to civilian companies. And when they help companies develop technologies they could require it to be published open source.
This could be a way for China to give back what it was given. If they have any honour left.
Comments
Post a Comment