who say china is not copying

Originally posted by rapier28
People still managed to progress from the Stone age to the Industrial age without patents.

Half the patents nowdays are actually improvements on another patent, it's just the way it is. It happens all the time. These things take time, the creator will most likely have already benefited from it's creation.

The current copyright laws in the U.S are not the ones that Benjamin Franklin envisioned, he imagined them just to be a quick way to get paid for inventing something, not to be milked relentlessly for 50 years. That actually stops creativity and invention.

yes and no... and that is the entire question...
has the originator been rewarded enought to make him want to invent again?

in the old days, the sheer distances made an invention easier to protect...

in todays internet speed, and rapid prototyping... i can reverse engineer a complicated product in less than a week...
That is NOT enough time... some protection needs to be afforded a patent holder... to keep the creative incentive...

and yes, Franklin was one of our original inventors and somewhat responsible for the very protections that use... but I don't think he wanted the abuse of the system like we have now...
a reasonable time for recompense of expenses and making of incentive profit is all that is really required... then it is "free use" and adaptation...

did any body think china can seriousely curb the tech copy

China used copying like a solid rocket booster of a shuttle. Boost, then ditch. It copied a lot in the past when it just came out of Mao's cultural revolution which brought the country's science and technology to a collapse. They couldn't innovate new stuff at that time, so they used reverse engineering to gain experience and rebuild the science and technology. Now they are getting to the point where they can almost ditch the SRB and continue on their own, which explains why originality is beginning to show in some of their latest military equipment.

Originally posted by Taishyou
Now they are getting to the point where they can almost ditch the SRB and continue on their own, which explains why originality is beginning to show in some of their latest military equipment.

look quite far because china still belive in copying products

look at the there brand new IFV of china it is just modify version of he russian BMP III with smilar guns

Originally posted by mirza2003

Originally posted by Taishyou
Now they are getting to the point where they can almost ditch the SRB and continue on their own, which explains why originality is beginning to show in some of their latest military equipment.

look quite far because china still belive in copying products

look at the there brand new IFV of china it is just modify version of he russian BMP III with smilar guns

there is no proof

Originally posted by Daedalus3

I think the major irritant to the US was the stealing of SLBM technology from the Los Alamos labs and the acquisition of neutron bomb data as well..
This was carried out by US scientists (of chinese origin) working in those labs..

china alreay had SLBM tech to make smaller warheads.

Hyping Chinese Espionage


With little evidence and flawed logic, the Cox Report has concluded that China, exploiting purloined U.S. nuclear weapons design information, can now match U.S. nuclear weapons technology and emerge as a major nuclear threat to the United States. The report, presented in three lavishly illustrated volumes suitable for coffee table display, is clearly designed to hype a new Chinese nuclear missile threat rather than objectively examine the extent and implications of alleged Chinese nuclear espionage. Whatever the truth about the extent of the espionage, this extreme worst-case assessment is grossly misleading and threatens rational U.S. diplomatic and defense policy toward Beijing.

The report's case rests primarily on a reference in a classified Chinese document to certain aspects of the design of the Trident D-5 missile's W-88 thermonuclear warhead, which indicates Chinese access to classified information from an unidentified source. However, Cox Committee member Representative John Spratt (D-SC), in an act of considerable political courage, has revealed the paucity of evidence supporting the report's stark conclusions and pointed out that the Cox Committee had no evidence that the Chinese had actually obtained any blueprints or detailed engineering specifications on the W-88 or any other U.S. thermonuclear weapon. This important conclusion was also reached by the intelligence community in its damage assessment of the material presented in the classified version of the report.

www.armscontrol.org...

the only edvidence they got about chiense stealing nuclear tech is a reference to a picture of something about the W-88 warhead?

can you convicted a person and murder just because he knew the person

Wasn't this thread closed? It should be, all this stupid arguing is getting annoying. You guys should have a debate in the debate forum, or something.

Bluecell.. guess not and it's still going strong. CWs making points and people are responding to the plus or minus.

Interesting don't you think?

Dallas

Originally posted by blue cell
Wasn't this thread closed? It should be, all this stupid arguing is getting annoying. You guys should have a debate in the debate forum, or something.

mizza bought this thread back up again for a unknown reason.

this thread is a lot more mild than the other ones

i am here to discuss not to banned so i come with full backup of article. if you dont want to commit simply ignore this post.

also any other person who don't like this post can ignore this post there is no pressure on them to visit this page.


thanks



[edit on 8-7-2005 by mirza2003]

Chinawhite,

Well your counter article only points out the problem with copying the Trident-5 SLBM..

When I did a little research I found out that infact data on many other missiles(and more) were reported to be stolen:


W-87 Lawrence Livermore Peacekeeper/M-X ICBM

W-78 Los Alamos Minuteman III Mark 12A ICBM

W-76 Los Alamos Trident C-4 SLBM

W-70 Lawrence Livermore Lance SRBM

W-62 Lawrence Livermore Minuteman III ICBM

W-56 Lawrence Livermore Minuteman II ICBM

The complete article in 2 html links:

Page 1 : www.christusrex.org...
Page 2: www.christusrex.org...

as you can see the accusations go beyond just missiles..
They include:

1. Nuclear secret codes
2. Space intelligence

Also your article dated April/May is not the view of the US Govt. and so for the records IMO the Cox report still holds in essence..
Nowadays one can find critics to almost any event/publications etc..
But those are opinions..
I'd like to see a report that countres the COx report with corresponding evidence..

Till then officially the report still stands until refuted officially..
You can access the de-classified version of the report
(means that there are portions which are currently deemed classified thus indicating that the report may not be entirely bogus as claimed by some)
here:

www.house.gov...

Why don't we all skim through it and then share our views..
Where are the american ATS members on this?


[edit on 8-7-2005 by Daedalus3]

The report's case rests primarily on a reference in a classified Chinese document to certain aspects of the design of the Trident D-5 missile's W-88 thermonuclear warhead, which indicates Chinese access to classified information from an unidentified source. However, Cox Committee member Representative John Spratt (D-SC), in an act of considerable political courage, has revealed the paucity of evidence supporting the report's stark conclusions and pointed out that the Cox Committee had no evidence that the Chinese had actually obtained any blueprints or detailed engineering specifications on the W-88 or any other U.S. thermonuclear weapon

The main point is that the Cox reports case rest primarily to a reference in a classified Chinese document to certain apects of the design to the W-88 warhead.....

what that means is that in a chiense document their was a picture/design that looked like the W-88 warhead. you call that edvidence

here is the problem with the Cox report.

it says that china might be building american warheads. but if china builds these warheads with american tech they to to explode a few of these to make sure they are safe and will expolde. but china has signed a treaty banning future nuclear test so china cannot test these alleged improved warheads. if they cant test them to make sure they are safe they are practically useless. its like playing russian roulette with your nuclear warheads

yeah but you're quoting an article you twit...
That's just a point of view..
Not the accepted truth you know..
I can find ten articles pointing out flaws in the COx report if I wanted..
Since your articles' case rests primarily on th eW-88 D-5 subject it is obvious that
is will state likewise for the cox report.. why don't you read it and find out for your self.. the cox report that is..

Just a glance at the "detailed contents pdf will show that it is not limited to just one type of warhead

[edit on 8-7-2005 by Daedalus3]

Originally posted by Daedalus3
yeah but you're quoting an article you twit...
That's just a point of view..
Not the accepted truth you know..

I can find ten articles pointing out flaws in the COx report if I wanted..
Since your articles' case rests primarily on th eW-88 D-5 subject it is obvious that
is will state likewise for the cox report.. why don't you read it and find out for your self.. the cox report that is..

Just a glance at the "detailed contents pdf will show that it is not limited to just one type of warhead

[edit on 8-7-2005 by Daedalus3]

the cox report is mainly about the W-88 warhead.


my atricle mentions why the cox report is inaccurate. it mentions that the primainly edvidence is a chinese article that may or may not be the W-88 warhead.

the things you posted are the conclusions of the cox report. the thing my article disproved

Read the COX REPORT itself man!!!
I gave the link to that as well!!!
REad the detailed contents table..

Your article didn't disprove the COx report..
IT is a view that does so...
Only official reports can do so..
Articles are just points of view..Reports are MANy points of view BAcked with evidence..
REports take months,even years to compile.. and article can be written in under and hour..
There's a big difference!!

Don't argue stupidly..disprove ALL the claims made by the report and other articles SUPPORTING the cox report and then we have a valid counter arguement

Originally posted by Daedalus3
Read the COX REPORT itself man!!!
I gave the link to that as well!!!

REad the detailed contents table..

Your article didn't disprove the COx report..
IT is a view that does so...
Only official reports can do so..
Articles are just points of view..Reports are MANy points of view BAcked with evidence..
REports take months,even years to compile.. and article can be written in under and hour..

There's a big difference!!

Don't argue stupidly..disprove ALL the claims made by the report and other articles SUPPORTING the cox report and then we have a valid counter arguement

i read your links before you posted them these are old articles

anyhow your article states only the findings of the articles it doesn't state the edvidence it got.

here is a list of chiense nuclear test.

cns.miis.edu...

here is a website that states the power of a W-88 warhead
nuclearweaponarchive.org...


the reports says that it will make chinas own copy of the W-88.. but you can see that china has exploded anything close to 475kt

non no man.. im not talking about my articles..
I gave a link to the cox report itself..

The actual US gov certified report man.. read that..

here's the link again

www.house.gov...

Originally posted by Daedalus3
non no man.. im not talking about my articles..
I gave a link to the cox report itself..

The actual US gov certified report man.. read that..

here's the link again

www.house.gov...

i already read that. very brief article... the cox report refers to events that happened during the height of the cold war.. its incredibily hard to believe that with chinas microsocpic intelligence force could have gathered what the KGB couldn't. even you must think this is odd

BRIEF!!!??!!

ITs over 11 pdfs long!!
And each pdf has 80-90 pages!!
What the hec are you talking abt??

Here let me spoon feed you the correct page

www.house.gov...