What China Thinks is a "Tech Company"

[@Asianometry]

As with everything related to China topics, please be civil in the comments. Check out other videos on China's economy with the playlist: kzbin.info/aero/PLKtxx9TnH76T_4R7Lxs8QoDr64zlvt8SS

[@ClimateKiller]

Do you think that mainlanders will one day get tired of being kicked around and overthrow the CCP?

[@clocktower1164]

@@ClimateKiller Do you think you are smarter than the mainlanders ?

[@ClimateKiller]

@@clocktower1164 no, but i have better access to information than they have. Also exposed to much less brainwashing. What’s your point?

[@clocktower1164]

@@ClimateKiller You may think that you have *_better access_* to information, but exactly what type of information are you getting ? Have you ever wonder what kind of information you are allowed to access in the first place ? I used to work in the intelligence field and I know pretty much what the authority is doing behind the scene, with how they tune the information to their own benefits and their method of distributing information is much more than you can ever imagine. You, and hundreds of millions of others, may think that you have the freedom to access any information you want, but you are not. As I said, I used to work in the intelligence field, and I know what happened, is happening, and will always happen behind the scene. Regarding the term 'brainwashing' ---- if you think only the CPC brainwashes their people, I'll tell you one thing, you yourself have been brainwashed to believe so. You are brainwashed. No, not you alone, hundreds of millions of others also have. The CPC and the Soviets and those commies are super clumsy in their way to brainwash their own people, but on the other hand, our own government (and the government of all the Western nations, are much more cunning than China and the Soviets and all those commies. Our own government is so cunning that you do not even notice that you have been brainwashed, and yet, you are. If you think that I'm full of crap, I don't blame you, because you have been brainwashed to think that only you know the truth, that *_our side_* are the good guys and theirs are the baddies. Anyways, have a *_*super wonderful brainwashed life*_*_ !_

[@ClimateKiller]

@@clocktower1164 have a wonderful day too and don’t spend all the 50 cents at once, wumao !

[@roxymarrese]

These videos are nothing short of perfect. Well thought out, speckles of humor, and straight forward. Thank you for doing these! Patron incoming.

[@halahmilksheikh]

It was very meandering and unfocused. I mean, he said so in the description but it was very annoying to listen to

[@crowman1795]

@@halahmilksheikh What exactly made it annoying to listen to?

[@jpbrown7668]

Yours is an extremely underrated channel. Accurate, unbiased, focused information! Love it! Keep it up!

[@paulw7738]

Yes! Such a breath of fresh air in the sea of KZbin clickbait and BS. I've learned so much from this channel about a part of the world I've never yet been to.

[@hipantcii]

After reading for months about the China tech crackdowns, this is the first video presenting a really interesting point which seems to be well researched and makes sense.

[@obsidianstatue]

If you read those sensationalist news articles, they have political motive, their goal is not to report on the actual event, but to use the event itself to push their own narrative. So a deep dive into how and why is China actually trying to regulate the tech sector is very refreshing.

[@odaialzrigat]

What a great analysis...an eye opening... You're right, a company like Facebook is mere advertising agency and a waste of human resources

[@goldreserve]

Google is far more sinister company than FB or any other Big Tech company. They funded G ov F in Wu for 5-10 years before the pandemic. YT have taken down 850k videos about cv treatment and censor doctors and experts talking about success of repurposed medicines. They think people aren't smart enough to make an informed choice so need to be fed propaganda. But G literally have no moat. People will tire of their woke narrative and switch to less biased search engine e.g. duck duck go, and never return.

[@Marvin-ii7bh]

name one company that isnt a waste of resources. there is none because there is no bigger meaning to human life (at least havent found it yet). youre comment therfore is totally useless too.

[@crowman1795]

@@Marvin-ii7bh Your comment is just as useless. Try something other than nihilism.

[@Marvin-ii7bh]

@@crowman1795 well i never stated the opposite

[@sunhuatom]

I fully support these new regulatory actions. Didi is a perfect example of disordered capital expansion: kill all major competitors by subsidy, and then raise the price to skim consumers; nowadays didi's price a lot of times are even higher than regular taxi services.

[@cbrtdgh4210]

the most disordered expansion of capital at the moment is Evergrande, where people are losing their entire savings due to their greed and their historical ease of finding new funding, over-leveraging. We will see what is done about that.

[@letsburn00]

That was always the plan with most of those types of companies. Wipe out the competition, claim your low prices was because you're amazing, but in reality you're just losing money or violating basic worker rights. The problem is that unless you're going to somehow use the government to stop competition (which does happen with Didi, who used it's connections to ensure that Uber couldn't sue it for Car request DDOSing) you can't stop competitors appearing, like how Uber has Lyft and Doordash to stop what was their endgame of jacking up prices.

[@monad_tcp]

@@letsburn00 there's name for this (that should be) illegal business practice: dumping.

[@letsburn00]

@@monad_tcp pretty much. The entire "gig economy" idea, which was predicated on the claim that existing companies and regulated system were inefficient turned out to be entirely a lie(pretty much the same as privatizing all gov industries). Once Uber etc stopped losing money on every transaction, it became either charge almost as much as Taxis, or pay your drivers peanuts, which leads primarily to a drop in quality. Since competition exists and Uber doesn't have a monopoly, their entire dumping plan failed. Since It's not like building a Chip foundary, there is no Moat. The claims that gig people want flexibility is mostly nonsense. It's actually just that the barrier to entry is extremely low that it gets desperate people. People do want flexibility in their lives, but in reality that means they want to be paid enough to have 1 day a week or fortnight off (I work in Engineering, almost everyone offered this takes it)

[@ChairmanMo]

@@letsburn00 These people just don't learn from the lessons of history. South Korea almost turned back into a 3rd World S-hole in 1997 because the big Cheobols were doing the same thing. They got lucky and got bailed out by the IMF...after the leaders of South Korea acted like complete cucks when they begged all the working class and middle class women to donate their wedding rings and jewelry to get the gold that was the collateral for the IMF bailout. It was a disgusting spectacle.

[@mapleveritas2698]

A few years ago, one of my clients, the owner of a cabinet factory, told me this: "my partners don't know this, but we are a software company". He is quite right: without software, he really does not have a viable company. I was writing a factory management software system for him at that time. Software is like oxygen, you don't need to mention it as something you must have to survive; it is understood. Software and software development is in every R&D goals you mentioned. It simply goes without saying. For me, China is trying to nudge its companies to move away from businesses that are socially and consumption focused. It just turns out that these businesses all depend on data about people to rank stuff. And then their users are fed stuff based on that. So, it is actually a simple way to separate these businesses out. In terms of following the footsteps of Japanese multinationals, Mainland Chinese companies have one thing that I am not sure how they can overcome: party cells. Which countries will allow a Chinese multinational to have party cells in their country? If the overseas subsidiaries don't need to have party cells, how is the government going to control these companies?

[@ChairmanMo]

Hollywood has had US government agents running from the shadows since the 1920s. Ben Afflack openly admitted that 1/2 the people in Hollywood are CIA.

[@gebys4559]

@@ChairmanMo not saying this is or isn't true, but not sure what kind of authority Ben Affleck is to make such a wide encompassing statement.

[@ChairmanMo]

@@gebys4559 I was just thinking off the top of my head for this...Look up the Mark Dice videos where he talks about Operation Mockingbird.

[@shallowabyss515]

In regards to cells, they will be allowed anywhere a politician can be bought. Large parts of Asia, and almost all of Africa is primed for their expansion.

[@jinruizhang]

See here is the interesting part. Chinese political structure does not relay of formula. You dont need to make a party cell for each overseas branch, just make sure that your party cell at the headquarters arrange for party members to be present at a few positions of importance at the over seas branches. Also, overseas business is overseas affairs, they might not require party cells at all. When in Rome, be Roman. Always remember, China is top down oriented, as long as party cells exist at the top management in China, its should be mostly enough.

[@Misterz3r0]

Peter Thiel: We don't innovate anymore, we are instead chasing the next app. We need to focus on the world of atoms, as opposed to the world of bits American Tech Bros: WHOA! HE'S RIGHT! China: These companies aren't tech companies. They aggregate content and turn it into a walled garden. That's not innovation. American Tech Bros: WHAT!? TYRANNY!

[@guanyuan3285]

This couldn't be more true. A walled garden, when reaches too large a scale, is extracting values rather than creating values for others.

[@Misterz3r0]

@@guanyuan3285 Indeed, my friend. Deprioritizing rent seeking as a substitute for advancement in innovation is another brilliant move by China. It understands the amazing waste of collective resources companies like Facebook and most aspects of Google represent, not to mention the damage it does to its citizens. America, so called democracy, let's our corporations run roughshod over us at the expense of the social fabric. Venture capital is always more focused on investing in the next dopamine machine aka low hanging fruit rather than investing in great leaps forward. As a result, Americans are more divided than ever and vulnerable to external manipulation. China is the next superpower and, as an American, I would be a fool not to acknowledge the technocratic superiority of China.

[@clocktower1164]

@@Misterz3r0 It goes without saying that the Chinese government is genuinely concerned about China (not only the people, their concern encompasses the entire nation), while the Western governments prioritize on how to make the rich even richer.

[@Misterz3r0]

@@clocktower1164 While China invests heavily in fundamental science research with no short term benefits that will pay tenfold in the future, Americans use research on shrimp and other misunderstood endeavors to justify slashing science funding across the board and shooting ourselves in the foot. America is a nation of fools governed by lawyers taught how to manipulate fools for personal gain at the expense of the nation. We are done. I will be making every effort to learn Mandarin, and if I can't, my children will. No country is perfect but America, being the most powerful country on the planet, can leverage intelligence or stupidity, and more often than not, it amplifies the latter than the former.

[@overlordborn6131]

@@Misterz3r0 America only seriously invested in R&D and science when it saw USSR being ahead of it, so USA wanted to be best in it, but after its fall since 90s interest in science and innovation is gone and only big internet giants have been born and too liberal and stone minded conservative doesn't look into the future ,and so just see how much America is fallen into robotics and how much budget if NASA has been cut but budget of defence is now at $900 billion. A country of lawyers or a country run by engineeers which one is better for future of mankind. I think that china will be the first country to build base on moon and Mars and rest will say but they are not committed as china.

[@illeatmyhat]

China sees the danger of social media and broadly declares that, "it does not need more"

[@maniswil2]

Anyway that people can interact unhindered and could facilitate a conspiracy is crushed ruthlessly.

[@anthonymarquez2542]

@@maniswil2 this is a really stupid comment

[@maniswil2]

@@anthonymarquez2542 Ask any chinese person you can find on any website with comments about Tianamen Square. See for yourself.

[@anthonymarquez2542]

@@maniswil2 Tianamen square incident is highly propagandized and the picture with the tank is wholly misconstrued on purpose. Go try that revisionist history bs with someone else.

[@maniswil2]

@@anthonymarquez2542 Ok it's so revisionist it can land you chinese prison, ok bud. Way to change the subject.

[@Molybed1]

Interesting what you said about Playstation considering that Nintendo proves that you can BOTH bring in money from overseas activities and also boost domestic growth. Playstation has NOT contributed to Japan's domestic growth in gaming (for example they shut down their gaming division and laid off a bunch of people), yet Japan's domestic growth in gaming is thriving mostly because of the Nintendo Switch. Guess where most of Nintendo's revenue comes from? You guess it, overseas.

[@hahahuhu9828]

Japan is now giving money through QE. I am ok with China move and definition of Tech company

[@gkanai]

Ben Evans has left A16Z afaik. He has his own podcast now.

[@duxbox]

I appreciate the lack of music in your videos. I get to play whatever I want while I watch, which is a really nice change of pace!

[@gohanssj48]

You say this vídeo is Just some ramblings, yet you managed to bring an unique perspective that most western media ignores. Kudos for you!

[@mingdianli7802]

It was a good video but the perspective wasn't that unique. It's common knowledge in the investment world that companies like Google and Facebook aren't actually tech companies.

[@venture.brothers]

Great video. I'd felt similarly about the pseudo tech companies, but this articulates it so beautifully

[@paulrath7764]

Excellent analysis. Its hard to argue with china's position. Take aggregators like Facebook and Twitter to the extreme and they become social-engineering and propaganda organizations - which is how they are being used in the USA. China doesn't need new propaganda methods, but it does need "tech" that will benefit the country.

[@monad_tcp]

"tech" that benefits, its called research and development, and it takes decades and is done in universities, not for profit.

[@ChairmanMo]

China still has so much work to do to modernize the country, the last thing China needs is people wasting their time on non-sense like aggregators and moronic business models.

[@ChairmanMo]

@@monad_tcp You need to have the Universities and actual academics who go and do not even R&D just pure science research out of simple curiosity.

[@blcheah2672]

Actually China needs to improve its propaganda. CCP propaganda is too blatant and off putting and requires a constant input of central government resources. Compare that with Hollywood, Facebook, Liberal Press etc propaganda which is subtle and popular and organically self-reproducing or self sustaining.

[@goldreserve]

@@blcheah2672 You need to tell KZbin to stop deleting people's comments. And googlag searches leading to disinformation. Duck duck go far less biased.

[@AlGoulIbnAtomi]

Instant subscribe. Very competent analise.

[@yash92328]

It feels so good to discover such a fantastic channel👏👏❤️

[@darwinpolat8109]

Who else is watching and reading comments at the same time 😊

[@ronjon7942]

I am now

[@asumazilla]

Not me.

[@larsartmann]

Already got your 100k subs. Congrats!

[@daniellima3730]

China has the most organized and clear program of development. Monstrous competence!

[@HellishPestilence]

Japan is small compared to the world, so it can support itself with overseas profits. China is too big for that. I'd also argue that the internationalisation of Japanese tech companies has only delayed their demise. By now, very few of them are still globally leading while Korean, Taiwanese and Chinese companies are outcompeting them.

[@deezeed2817]

China's future is to eliminate the market. That's what socialism is. Marx spoke about the Anarchy of markets which is what Xi is talking about. It is irrational and leads to greater crisis. Using big data and advanced AI you could eventually plan the economy without repeating the mistakes of the past. Thus markets would eventually be phased out.

[@jinruizhang]

@@deezeed2817 You are right about the theory. However, the biggest mistake in trying to understand China and its politics is to look at theory. China only cares about political theory as a tool of historic consistency and party consistency. China's future will have lots of markets, more than ever before. Chinese officials are not liberal college professors, nor are they young adults who took intro to politics. most of them lived through the tumultuous early years of the PRC and knows what market economy brings to society. But one thing is correct, China does not believe in free running markets. The government will scrutinize, regulate and at times tinker their incentives.

[@crimsOn0011]

Some tech giants being essentially huge data-mining operations on top of being advertising agencies finally reached this channel.

[@anonimuse6553]

Great train of logic and visual editing. A pleasure as always to watch. We are lucky to follow along with your investigations involving the actors who are transforming our lives.

[@DonutSurprise]

Man, this was razor-sharp. Thanks!

[@joela.4058]

Dang this was a great vid. Succinct and with perfect blend of opinion and fact. This is one of the few times where I agree with the Chinese gov and their definition of tech. However their tight grip on everything doesn’t exactly seed innovation

[@fannyalbi9040]

don’t innovate things r fishy then u r safe and make money.

[@kailab6157]

@@fannyalbi9040 firstly try to build a company with 100 millions revenue then you would care about that law later.

[@dznuts123]

On the contrary, startups are thriving in china, because ccp’s crackdown on monopolies

[@OuterRem]

Incredible video, as usual. I love the level of research you perform to back up your statements, and your clear, concise and matter of fact delivery. Personally, I suspect another major battleground that China will utilize for economic growth will be XR, that is Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality and everything in between. Prior to 2018, I might have dismissed these systems out of hand, but now watching Facebook shift to become "Meta" and pledge billions towards the development of a metaverse, I understand that they have seen some sort of writing on the wall that many of us are not entirely aware of. Watching the steady adoption of the internet in the 90's, and the growth of Cellphones in the 2000's, I don't want to allow my age to underestimate things I don't entirely understand anymore, so I am interested to see XR technologies and their development in the 2020's. I would be VERY interested to see a video from you on XR in China, Taiwan (given HTC's presence in the market) and elsewhere, if you haven't already done one.

[@dreadjoker10]

Your stuff's really great! A lot of other channels on China are so biased either for or against, it's hard to trust what they say. These videos feel more nuanced and believable. Keep it up

[@Mkoivuka]

A "tech company" is a company, which makes new technology. It will have sales, marketing, but its revenues are primarily reliant on new technological breakthroughs or developments made in-house. An unsuccessful tech company goes bust, because its tech has no use-case. A successful tech company grows, because its tech has use-cases. Apple used to be a tech company, so did Google. They're no longer. For the MBA types, here's some concrete way to think about it: What the company does for money, is what the company is. If the company seeks continual shareholder funding, it is a fundraiser. If a company spends 40% of its startup capital in advertising, it is a sales company. If a company *actively develops new technology* whether or not that technology succeeds in commercialization, it is a tech company. We all "know" that the number of websites between today and 2050 will probably go 100X. We all "know" that technology will disrupt most things we take for granted today. Will GAFAM make this reality? No. They're not tech companies anymore.

[@macicoinc9363]

What are you talking about? Have you never heard of Waymo, GoogleX, Apple Silicon, Oculus, AWS, Google Cloud, Google AI chips, TensorFlow, PyTorch, Google and Microsoft Quantum Computers, shall I continue?

[@Mkoivuka]

@@macicoinc9363 Please do, you've yet to name a tech company, all you've managed to do is name a bunch of relatively small lab-sized ventures of 50-100 people each contained in large corporate structures that do not adequately invest in them. TL;DR: If 2% of my company's spending is in R&D, I would not call it a tech company. If 2% of my company's spending is in toilets, I would not call it a toiletry company. What you do for money, is what your company is. And by that definition not a single company you named is a tech company. TL: I'm shocked you didn't mention Boston Dynamics - a company bought by Google, sold to some other corp, which in 15 years of operations hasn't produced anything beyond dancing robots and PR stunts. Google X makes vanity projects, of which most have failed and none have become successful self-funding businesses. They make relatively calculated bets of 100's of millions. Example: Loon - stratosphere balloons for remote internet access. As of May, job cuts: www.mercurynews.com/2021/05/28/alphabet-moonshot-loon-jolted-layoff-employee-job-tech-google-edd/ Bear in mind Alphabet Corp has in its cash reserves *hundreds of billions of dollars* they are refusing to spend on anything, it's money literally rotting in bank accounts accruing negative interest rate. At some point this global economy will return to sanity and we will start to actually need the solutions we've been promised. People are aging, wages have become stagnant and innovation has ceased to produce meaningful solutions.

[@Lambyyy]

@@Mkoivuka Opinions on ARM or TSMC - surely this fits what you're talking about? I don't know the figures for R&D spending, but I imagine this to be pretty high in comparison to most companies. Both companies not close to failing, and very profitable.

[@Mkoivuka]

@@Lambyyy Definitely those are tech companies. Let me clarify: A company that makes money doing R&D, that is, is paid to do R&D on behalf of another company, is an R&D company. A company that makes money making new technology - like ARM and TSMC, are tech companies. Nokia is an infrastructure company, they make money developing and selling 5G infrastructure, their phones are a drop in the bucket. Google is an advertisement company, they make 80% of their revenue off of ads, for which Android, the search engine and other technologies are simply vehicles. Microsoft is trying to be an ads company, but they're struggling to make any money doing that. They make money mostly from Office (26%) and servers to maintain Office 365 (25%). Microsoft is therefore an enterprise productivity company. So it's not "does the company have technology?", it's "Does the company primarily make its money from technology?". Technology is the engineering application of science, whether that's computer science or physics. Technology is a tool. Most companies use technology as a tool, to do a thing, and they get paid for that thing. They are not tech companies, they are tech-utilizing companies. Few companies make new technology. They - the vanishingly tiny collection of businesses - are tech companies. This is in my view a critical distinction, because today so much of "tech" is just computer code that's been copy-pasted from SatckOverflow or Github. We're seeing an explosion of companies that have software-based business models, but which are absolutely reliant on no one else competing with them with the same copy-pasta. Fake it until you make it and FOMO are making investors and business owners greedy. And it will hurt all of us, especially once "real" technology companies rear their heads and start disrupting things. Imagine if 1000 companies are using technology A as a business model, and then someone invents technology B that completely tears out the business model of technology A. Most of those 1000 companies will default. That's ugly.

[@honkhonk8009]

@@Mkoivuka Yeah I kinda agree with your definitions. Calling google and microsoft tech companies, are pretty outdated, since software has basically become synonymous with business in general. But what about Amazon? They make most they make most their money off AWS. Would that be infrastructure or tech? What about SpaceX? They technically make "new tech", but are also becoming an infrastructure and launch provider. What would you class them onto?

[@MoritzvonSchweinitz]

At 5:55, they mention "addiction or high-value consumption". What does the latter refer to? Luxury spending? If so, that is a very interesting thing to put next to "addiction"!

[@akakybashmachkin656]

addiction to the app & high-value consumption because of ads in app i suppose

[@Ryuker16]

Cash gaming and gambling apps

[@manabprakash1745]

Simply WOW! What a commentry.

[@dwchen1]

Could be an interesting story to cover Indonesia that at the moment up to decades to come the government are on all out to kick off battery industry and try to dominate the EV battery supply chain as Indonesia had the world's largest nickel recourses, one of the crucial element in lithium ion battery industry. Just a couple of days ago the Indonesian president ground breaking a $1,2 billion battery factory in West Java. Multinational battery company like CATL, LG, Panasonic said to be preparing to invest billions of dollars in this country to have some piece of a pie in this industry, even Tesla said to be interested to join the frenzy.

[@leezhieng]

Latest news: Tesla cancelled their plan in Indonesia

[@dwchen1]

@@leezhieng heard that one, on the government side they said Tesla was too dictating on the term. They want this they want that we should do this we should do that then the negotiations failed to reach an agreement.

[@sesam2k998]

Great stuff, dont get this level of insight and explanation in regular news. Would love to come to Taipei someday and have that coffie 😊

[@CesarGarciaJara]

Great video. Thanks for your time and research.

[@1ProAssassin]

As far as I'm concerned a tech company is any company that develops and/or actively maintains any computer, computer hardware and/or software in-house but it must also be their primary product(s) and/or service(s) offered.

[@tonysu8860]

Very nice video. Displays your foundation knowledge and understanding of technology and economics (if you don't know yourself, you at least were able to find good sources with better than average understanding). I don't know if it has anything to do with how China defines "Tech" but you seem to describe CCP leadership as understanding a difference between Technology and Applied Technology. Technology is larger and all encompassing, and includes areas where basic Technology is explored, and new frontiers are conquered. China seems to be very lacking in that but has shown exceptional capability in Applied Technology where technology is used in varied and better ways. Frontiers are not extended, but how technology is used is optimized and utilized in sometimes new and better ways. From your description, the CCP understands that its global competition is better at exploring, discovering and utilizing new technology so wants to shift the focus of its workers, companies and industry. But, I wonder about the wisdom of not trying equally hard to keep improving on what China is already developing a talent for, making more ordinary technology work better. The surprising thing I seem to be reading more often are incidents where the CCP has actually cracked down on companies which have become "too successful," even destroying them. That to me is illogical and hard to understand.

[@tony31181]

Just cutting leek 😋

[@mikec1651]

Tony i don't quite see the destroying of “ too successful" companies. m point me in a direction if you have the time thanks m

[@Ateshtesh]

The trees has leaves, they grow because that leaves feed them. Then theological says if you cut it they will die. From that perspective, when you cut them, can seems you are doing something wrong, but actually you are helping them to grow stronger. The economy to be healthy in long term, needs to avoid monopoly over all. Regulate in order to help everyone can grow is a good way to grow well.

[@dznuts123]

Or rather, CCP cares more about China's internal development. It wants companies to develop in the direction the party has decided on. That explains why some large companies are getting hammered in China.

[@Ateshtesh]

@@dznuts123 You are right! they should be as US and let the companies to do whatever they want to do, such as Lehman Brothers, bubbles are funny! =D

[@howellPan]

Excellent content! well explained

[@jinruizhang]

This channel is incredible!!!!!

[@walizenlegrand9040]

You reach a million.easy . this was very refreshing.. IChina is amazing

[@MRT-co1sd]

Software and AI is already very big in China, these are given and required for all industries. They don’t have to specifically state it. It’s a tool that picks other industry developments. But u r right Software and AI are not considered as high tech by China it’s just a necessary tool.

[@weiminooi8799]

interesting perspective...

[@lelouch9609]

Sir some videos on indian and Japanese companies

[@jordanishere123]

could you please provide links of the chinese documents shown in the video as well? thanks

[@dom1310df]

Is BSkyB a media or a tech company, given it owns Amstrad (and in turn the Sinclair Spectrum product line)? I don't think any company can be grouped wholly into a single category.

[@ravindertalwar553]

Congratulations 👏 and lots of love and blessings for your success and happiness 💕

[@fataliity101]

Love your videos!

[@Yotrek]

8:00 I wanted Mo Bike and Ofo to merge. MoFo would have killed it.

[@onceuponfewtime]

13:15 which are companies T and C, exactly? I am so curious. great video anw. Thank you.

[@davidding8814]

He means Tech Companies, like Huawei, SMIC, etc. as opposed tech companies (without the capitalized T and C) like Meituan and Didi

[@TheMuzaffar2010]

Thank you for the video

[@Septumsempra8818]

Really good vid! s/o from South Africa

[@Terzy]

Really good video dude

[@walizenlegrand9040]

very refreshing thanks

[@odaialzrigat]

Do you think China's economic model is sustainable?

[@anthonymarquez2542]

Why wouldn’t it be? Most of other capitalist markets periodically go through boom and bust cycles. Which no one seems to bat an eye to. It’s alarming to me how the channel cited people like noah smith as insightful, now I’ll have to start taking some of the assumptions made on this channel with a huge grain of salt

[@davidradtke160]

@@anthonymarquez2542 because economies with excess planning and top down control have never managed to sustain themselves long term. All the communist countries nearly collapse under planned economies and take off when bottom up markets are allowed. China looks like it is going back to a lot more planning and less markets. That’s not likely to work well based on history.

[@anthonymarquez2542]

@@davidradtke160 Most communist economies worked with much more complex conditions than what’s been acknowledged. Which is a amusing contrasting given that all capitalist countries operate under boom & bust cycles, though they have never had to operate under the intense conditions like say the USSR had to when it was around. I would ask for ppl to be a bit more thorough with their critique of economies especially in a field that has always lacked empiricism. I would also counter that China is just keeping capital in check, harnessing the productive forces it has while simultaneously tempering it’s inherently disastrous results by not allowing the predatory nature of a capitalist economy to negatively affect it’s citizens. This is quite admirable and indeed a great example of how China, has managed to tame capital and not grant it rights, when compared to the U.S. and other capitalist economies where capital reins supreme. The material conditions are vastly different between the two competing models. I won’t get into enlightenment issues as I have a great disdain for applying selectively created euro western beliefs on to other countries. Thanks for the kind reply.

[@davidradtke160]

@@anthonymarquez2542 your disdain for universal ideals as “western” kind of shows the whole game. For all the critiques of capitalism and it’s many many issues, it does work more often then not unlike planned economies. You can disdain the enlightenment ideas as western…except that they work rather universally. Look at Japan VS China prior to WW2. One decided to embrace “western” enlightenment ideas like the scientific method etc. Countries that have adopted “western” enlightenment ideas have out competed countries that have not. Japan and South Korea both show this pretty clearly compared to neighbors. Some ideas just work better then others no matter the origin of those ideas. Taming capital for a single ruler and party state is not taking capital for a good cause so it won’t work out well. The problem with excess capital power is that it concentrates power in the hands of too few people…in China capital has been tamed to give all the power to xi jinping, not to spread power around or democratize it. The excesses of capital you talk about will now just happen within the state and party. That’s not net a better situation for the Chinese people so why should it be cheered on?

[@anthonymarquez2542]

@@davidradtke160 Universal? Simple trading does not equal capitalism. Though I think I’ll leave it here as this conversation is verging onto the fanatical with these assumptions you are utilizing.

[@enzocaputodevos]

Brillant ! TY

[@napmansion]

Good one

[@everythingisfine9988]

The Japan modal doesn't seem like something that's going to be a long term strategy. It's all based on growing markets around the world. But this shrinking and aging population phenomenon is taking place everywhere but just a different rates.

[@NightpireVideos]

Thanks for the insight

[@joem0088]

Great video

[@henrikvendelbo1117]

If you cannot define your terms everything eventually becomes pointless. Tech company has to be a technology driven company. Since tech for decades referred to computing technology we have to prefix tech with computing. I’d define it as “company with a core software strategy aiming for scale” That said it seems like a good list. It is more likely to lead to success as progress can be better measured

[@honkhonk8009]

Someone said that software is almost synonymous with business itself. At this point, a carpentry shop can be called a tech company. Theres a need to make a distinction. Dude made a good point, where should call Google an advertising firm. Apple a consumer products/fashion retailer. Facebook, a consumer products company, and Microsoft, to be a corporate productivity firm. Amazon funny enough, is the company everyone thinks of as just an online shopping brand, but at this point is more of a tech company, than either of these others, just because of AWS.

[@marioxdc123]

amazing video!

[@justcommenting4981]

Damn you're gettin close.

[@briankimathi5033]

Great content

[@minecraftdonebig]

great video :)

[@anthonymarquez2542]

Noah Smith, is someone you find insightful?

[@harrykekgmail]

The Singapore Economic Development Board (EDB) should get all their officers including Top Management to watch this video and see how Singapore can create the ecosystem to fuse into China's thrust into these industries/technologies. 100k subscribers is no longer the aim. Today at 79.4k, your acceleration should be picking up and soon you will be 300k. This channel is great for deep research into published articles to make things easier for mere mortals like us to make sense of, but this particular video on China is a great summary of what we can expect China to be instead of the usual humiliating accusations of stealing technology or copying technology.

[@imrevadasz1086]

Netflix is innovating in Tech actually. It *is* a tech company. Thy use large volume of highly customized and newly developed software, together with an innovative design on their serving infrastructure. Google is of course even more a tech company, with developing large amounts of fully custom datacenter tech. Also Amazon is a tech company at this point, they also innovated a lot in technology for their AWS offers, you can't buy those datacenters from other companies.

[@bronzedisease]

A good tie in topic can be 科创版. The srocks trading on it and the its influence on the main indexs

[@karimedx]

This is interesting!

[@richwu6752]

Good stuff

[@catschoose1248]

Great video. makes me feel better about letting go off my tencent shares. sigh.

[@blink182bfsftw]

Learnt a lot

[@zodiacfml]

Great topic! This is actually huge and far fetching. I'm also figuring this 7:12 wealth imbalance problem, tech companies, and dropping population growth 9:32. 13:20 I think the solution is not as easy as clamping on algorithm based companies such as search, social media or shopping apps. it is funny they thought of this considering most of Chinese product sales are coming from ads from facebook, google, youtube, shopping apps, and social media. Ride hailing or food delivery apps can be considered tech/algorithm based. There is plenty of growth in tech because it is real considering its age. A solution I thought is strict reduction of work hours for a working individual. A reduction of work hours allowed (including max overtime) will force most companies to hire more people. It will reduce the unemployed, improve salaries/benefits, improve work/life balance, actually reduce inefficiencies, and couples will have more time building a family thus improving population growth. It could be argued that this will only accelerate robotics and AI tech but such will remove people from repetitive, none creative work.

[@ender-gaming]

I think the idea to focus companies away from fighting with money internally is a bit flawed. When companies are fighting like that wealth is often redistributed into the locals they're targeting. Of course there can be issues like the left over bikes, but overall tech companies waging wars with venture capital is often beneficial to the market. I can go too far however, and so its not like regulations couldn't help.

[@francisdayon]

It is when they are in the fighting phase. What happens when it's over? You get a monopoly that will squeeze every profit out of you. They all will anyway but it's always better to have a few options.

[@林振华-t4v]

Well, in a sense, yes. But at the end, it is capita that wins and more money for the rich less for the poor. I think the burecra in China has seen the amount of damage wall Street did to US. They are trying to no go down the same path. The whole saga started last September Jack Ma make a comment saying the finance regulator are bunch fossil and the regulations are obsolete and fully abolished. That is the moment the burecrat get ticked and decided to drop the hammer. It doesnt help while DiDi try to push IPO in NYSE before the regulation take effect and more importantly hand over Chinese Road network and address survey data over to SEC as part of audit package. That survey data is consider matter of national security, and DiDi just given it away like that. It is no suprise the goverment goes on rampage start slaughtering those so called tech company left and right.

[@sunhuatom]

not really, at least in long term. There were two soft-drink tea brands in China, Wanglaoji, and Jiaduobao. Their price fight was good for consumers and locals in the beginning, but in the end, they literally almost killed the industry. The shared bike war, in the end, created huge wasted bikes, and caused lots of bike manufactures bankrupt because they could not collect payment. The shared ride wars between didi, etc, is basically another "dragon slayer becomes a worse dragon" story.

[@h.barkas1571]

"i'd like to see one hundred thousand subscribers someday." Congratulations, you already have 112 K.

[@seamusoblainn]

Hundreds of bikes? Makes that tens of millions. Go hiking and find new ones sawn in half amongst bamboo, or at night people filing the qr codes off so they'd have exclusive access to them. An obvious and total waste of money.

[@ahadicow]

China want to develop world-class technologies while maintaining goverments' chokehold on industry. That has never suceeded anywhere. In China, the drive to develop and the drive to maintain political order constantly fight each other. One sides sucess (like byte jump) is easily wiped by other side. How can you expand globally while clearly channeling the message that "China don't need you". How can you sell products and keep investment on countries that you express open hostility? What China's recent crack down reveals is a deeply-rooted systematic problem and conflict that has been hiden by rapid economic growth(or debt growth). Now those days are over, it comes time for China to choose what kind of country it really want to be.

[@Xind0898]

There are several things that are wrong with your take. "How can you expand globally while clearly channeling the message that "China doesn't need you"" - I see no contradiction here, just like US don't 'need' Google or Amazon (i mean there are constant debates in the congress about breaking up the big techs), doesn't mean Google and Amazon can't succeed on a international scale. “How can you sell products and keep investment in countries that you express open hostility?” - Yes, international relations matter a lot, but it is not China that is the aggressor is it? China has been playing a defender role in this (and the West the aggressor) diplomatic warfare ever since CCP's establishment, China does retaliate (in the case of US santions, and recently EU's sanction of China), but retaliation is not exactly aggression is it..? “What China's recent crack down reveals is a deeply-rooted systematic problem and conflict that has been hiden by rapid economic growth(or debt growth)” - How did you even arrive at this conclusion? What IS a systematic problem is uncontrolled capital that drives towards short-term speculation while gearing up a high leverage ratio knowing that it will be bailed out by the government even if the investment fails (looking at you Wall st).

[@ShhhHhhhz]

What about green, sustainable and nuclear engineering?

[@hugoboyce9648]

Weirdly, these regulations seem to make a lot of sense. Great video!

[@jinruizhang]

How unbelievable, Chinese government does something that can't be called bad or evil. (This is sarcasm)

[@dj_koen1265]

Well with some of the shit they pull off it is nice to see them do something good

[@tonysoviet3692]

10:25 Lol that's an interesting choice for an example of majority minority area. I went to UCI and instantly was shocked by your image pick. Are you by any chance a UC graduate too? Your stream of thinking and logical arguments are very similar to those of my friends.

[@ericyang5237]

Spectrum center right? that was so Irvine.

[@goldiealjuaid1964]

You WILL reach 100k subscribers I'm absolutely sure of.it

[@dznuts123]

Love this soothing voice. The way your past videos were narrated really irked me.

[@sarcasmo57]

It was nice.

[@youxkio]

Those social causes are still a way of clearly and transparently explaining where those billions are really ending at.

[@matthewchiu9898]

China is still a planned economy and its realigning its definition of Tech from 'anything new that makes a lot of money ' to anything that builds up the Industrial base of the planned future of the economy. Software is considered a tool, and means to an end and not an end itself. But that is just a matter of definitions, because software is control and control in China already has a root. Capitalists in china should take note that the party is signaling its firmly in charge, and that making excess profits through ringfencing capital and user data is no longer in the national interest.

[@johnsullivan8673]

Planned economy? No. Directed Economy? Yes.

[@DaxSass]

At least the government is still in charge in China. Here, in the US, the companies are in charge by lobbying dark money into laws to benefit themselves. Like 90% of officials will say one thing, get a ring from rich donors, them turn around and say another thing. I am not saying China is not corrupt as well nor that it is good or bad... just that it has a vision for the nation and it follow that vision, not blundering about and going circle.

[@leitsh1]

Highly regulated, not planned.

[@dznuts123]

Planned economy or command economy is a type of economic system where investment, production and the allocation of capital goods takes place according to economy-wide economic plans and production plans. This is clearly not the model of Chinese economy. CCP designates areas of interest, but that designation is merely a directional move. Actual implementation is still done by the individual players. Even the lesser branch of the central command like the provincial governments doesn't play a major role in the movement.

[@dznuts123]

Bs. Do you know what planned economy is?

[@andro7862]

I understand where the party is coming from, but I don't think declaring war on their private enterprises will help them win the trade war. Maybe if they offered tax incentives, or open internet access to hardware manufacturers the market would shift by itself, without the need to kill the stock market.

[@appa609]

When the fuck did "tech" become a synonym for "software"? Of course Tesla is a tech company! It develops batteries, microchips, sensors, AI, motors, manufacturing systems! All that is tech!

[@MrMoon-hy6pn]

We don't typically call other automotive companies "tech companies" even though they do all that, so what's the distinction?

[@DetectiveBlackCat]

14th Five Year plan DO have AI development in it.

[@steaminglobster]

China is a manufacture centered country, so I guess it defines "tech" company based on its "manufacture" capacity. Based on this definition, Alibaba is not a Tech company, and Amazon is not either. I use this analogy: if you grow your food from your land, you are farmer, if you use money to buy food or if you use something else to trade for your food, you are not a farmer.

[@honkhonk8009]

Amazon is probably the few companies that are a tech company. Think of AWS, and the massive infrastructure and tooling they develop. Meanwhile Google ont he otherhand barely comes out with any new innovations and tooling that arent just vanity projects and investor candy. Their just a glorified advertising firm. Microsoft is just a corporate productivity firm.

[@jihadao]

How can people hate China after moves like this?

[@daveandrew589]

So China is de-emphasizing software at the same time that 'software is eating the world' elsewhere.... Biotech in particular is rapidly becoming more about data and algorithms than chemistry. 40 years ago Bill Gates found out that he could sell CD-ROMS of bits for many, many times the cost of the CDs, and greatly more even than the cost of development, which is why he is still one of the world's richest men. Even a hard goods 'manufacturer' like Tesla employs an awful lot of software engineers, supply chain experts, and so on. The value of a Tesla is not in the steel, and their market cap is only distantly related to their product success. Everything in China is ultimately about the illusion of control, and I think they will find themselves on the wrong end of history with regards to algorithms. The dragon has already escaped the cage.

[@biborkiraly394]

nobody said they are de-emphasizing software?

[@cbrtdgh4210]

1:30 - I agree! SCMP has been garbage of late. On their space articles for instance, the writer used to give balanced coverage, voices skeptical of China achieving targets like "a fleet of spaceplanes to ferry 10,000 people per year to the Moon or Mars by 2045". Actually, this quote is far more fantastical than what he wrote about in 2017, with the addition of a skeptical comment and this time he's just repeating it as if it's certain to happen, like propaganda.

[@macicoinc9363]

The slow takeover of Hong Kong is the reason for the process you are describing.

[@hiflyinlowlife]

Buzzfeed is a tech company

[@mastershredder2002]

Chinese Thiel: We wanted flying cars, instead, we got 140,000 bikes on the ground.

[@marco21274]

Oh, I think postmodern thinking is quite healthy. You can easily stop every fundamental discussion like what is a tech company. 😉

[@FobosLee]

Actually, looks like a smart, although totalitarian, move. Real tech progress, not the skimming of the population

[@anthonymarquez2542]

Totalitarian is such a weird and useless term. One that was popularized by a nazi at that

[@khanch.6807]

Just measure the amount of data bandwidth companies use for online activities. All tech companies uses huge amount of bandwidth. So high bandwidth mean the company is most likely a tech company.

[@cancerino666]

Hate to say it, but have to agree with CPP on this point. The US idea of tech has become "if it involves a computer or cellphone and makes money, it's high-tech!". Which job doesn't involve either of those nowadays? Even a construction worker checks the cell for time and weather.

[@林振华-t4v]

Deep space, deep sea, and polar exploration... Not sure if you intentionally put it to the last. But all aspects metioned before are to serve this goal. That is the way I see it... It is funny that "we are destine to set sail towards the sea of stars" is the catch phase of net user there for our mainlander.

[@michal5642]

"5 year economic policy" oh no

[@Bvic3]

The US and EU have those too.

[@jerrywatson1958]

Just to add at the end of 2023 that plan has failed. China is going broke like something I flushed down the toilet this morning. With more than half the population unemployed where are they going to get the tax revenue to keep spending like drunken sailors at the casino? Thanks for all your hard work! Merry Christmas and have a Happy New Year.