
How China could dominate science - known
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2019/01/12/how-china-could-dominate-science
======
grizzles
Not could, is. With the exception of the US, China is already ahead of all
other countries. A friend who's one of the top quantum physicists in the world
recently returned from a stint in China. He told me that the University lab he
was at had more equipment and resources than exist in the entire country of
Australia. Within 10-25 years it will become compulsory for western scientists
to learn Chinese. They simply value science far more so than we do in the
western countries.

~~~
JohnJamesRambo
This is not my experience working with Chinese scientists in chemistry in my
lab. None of the ones I work with want to go back to China and they are very
critical of the validity of any science done there.

~~~
bsaul
Do you have more specifics on what the critics were ? I have the intuition
that you can't really do good science in a totalitarian regime (because
superior pressure is too high, and totalitarian regimes are often associated
with "fear to fail" state of mind), but it's just a belief.

~~~
JohnJamesRambo
They think a lot of the science is just made up and not rigorously tested at
all. They also dislike the way promotion and advancement is done there, not
based on the scientist's merit but based on who you know, nepotism,
corruption, etc.

~~~
grizzles
I don't doubt it but don't you think it would be easy to find American
scientists that feel the same way? Also I'll just point out that your sample
is biased to people who have chosen to leave. Of course they made the right
decision!

------
gumby
> This gives Chinese scientists an incentive to observe international rules

Maybe. The US is currently discussing going the opposite direction (with
export restrictions, conference restrictions and the like) so China may resist
any efforts go to "international standards".

Which I do consider short-sighted for both countries.

------
shadykiller
Meanwhile, India seems to be going in the opposite direction -
[https://indianexpress.com/article/india/thirty-seven-
academi...](https://indianexpress.com/article/india/thirty-seven-academics-
write-to-isca-deeply-shocked-disturbed-5531135/)

~~~
temp231239
That a naive thinking.You didn't try to reason the motivation behind the
claims of accused scientists in the article. There have been numerous
discoveries of ancient artifacts proving again and again the advancement of
our ancestors in the field of science and technology. Why is it wrong to study
ancient texts to try to understand their techniques? Why are such
professionals are being targeted? Do you atleast believe in ancient medical
science of Ayurveda, whose methods are increasingly being accepted in modern
medical institutions in Europe and USA? You wouldn't dare point finger at them
but you would do it, without thinking twice, when someone from your country
try do it.

~~~
IC4RUS
Wikipedia entry on ayurveda:

Although laboratory experiments suggest it is possible that some substances
used in Ayurveda might be developed into effective treatments, there is no
scientific evidence that any are effective as currently practiced.[11]
Ayurveda medicine is considered pseudoscientific.[12] Other researchers
consider it a protoscience, or trans-science system instead.[13][14] In a 2008
study, close to 21% of Ayurveda U.S. and Indian-manufactured patent medicines
sold through the Internet were found to contain toxic levels of heavy metals,
specifically lead, mercury, and arsenic.[15] The public health implications of
such metallic contaminants in India are unknown.[15]

~~~
cscurmudgeon
Ah Wikipedia, the gold standard in science.

~~~
IC4RUS
I looked into the citations and they seemed reliable, so I trust it. Just put
it there because it presented the point succinctly.

------
peteretep
Tempted to be dismissive while China’s best, brightest, and richest seem to
favour the political environment in the West.

~~~
qtwhat
To the opposite, the west provides a buffer region where people with insights
can swing in between. Also, universities in China are way behind compared to
western ones, but the later ones also serve Chinese students well. Such system
benefits all.

~~~
peteretep
> universities in China are way behind compared to western ones, but the later
> ones also serve Chinese students well

I would be interested to learn more about this. Do the Chinese have different
educational needs to those of students in the west?

~~~
barry-cotter
He likely means that they are at least adequate. They are mostly adequate. The
average Chinese university is not very good and has corruption and plagiarism
problems that would be scandalous in North America or Europe but they’re so,
so much better than average African universities.

Edit: You should write about the Oxford M.Sc. CS and submit it. People would
be interested.

~~~
peteretep
> You should write about the Oxford M.Sc. CS

I get quite a lot of email from people on HN about it actually, but am a
little overwhelmed with a number of other things to try and put something
cohesive together. If anyone wants a free blog article, feel free to send me a
bunch of questions, and I'll reply and you can write them up. In summary:
part-time MSc in Software Engineering from Oxford, meant to be done while
working, existing undergrad degree not a hard requirement.

------
entity345
If you look beyond the next couple of years everything boils down to economic
strength and resources/population size. The two are related.

China is a massive country, with a lot of resources, the largest population,
and their economy has finally woken up after centuries of anemia.

It will reclaim the top spot in most, if not all, fields.

~~~
barry-cotter
China’s population has already peaked and there are no Han majority nation
states with anything close to replacement fertility. Absent uterine
replicators China’s population will be dropping for at least the next thirty
years.

Also, centuries of humiliation? China was the biggest economy in the world in
1900 and it still had Mongolia. China had one bad century.

~~~
entity345
It is quite irrelevant whether population has peaked. It is 4x the US's.

I mentioned centuries of anemia, not humiliation. China had fallen way behind
the West by 1900. The US had become the largest economy in the world by 1890
with a population much smaller than China's. China's economy might have been
the largest before that but it does not mean it was dynamic.

All of this does not really address my point apart from alluding to the fact
that China used to be the largest economy. I'm saying that it is on its way to
reclaiming its crown BUT in a position of strength compared to its position of
weakness (and humiliation) in the 19th century.

------
baybal2
I always though that China's best strength was in "field applications" of
technology than in institutional development.

China should, for once, stop chasing the West and develop its own strong
sides.

There are already many things where China got genuine uncontestable lead over
the rest of the world, but which most of Chinese themselves don't realise:

1\. Excellent system of 2 year technical education

2\. Highly experienced manufacturing specialists when it comes to "doing
engineering at manufacturing site"

3\. Industry that is much more eager to pick up new technologies than Western
one.

~~~
simonh
Surely the point of developing their own scientific capabilities is to break
free of technical and scientific direction set by the West? The reason China
has focused so much on 'field applications' is precisely because they lacked
the capability to do much original research and so specialized in applying
foreign technology cheaply and at scale.

China is rapidly approaching parity with the west in terms of infrastructure
and industrial development. The only way to keep pushing forward is to develop
new technologies of their own, rather than relying on foreigners to develop
the tech first and then copy it. That worked fine up to a point, but staying
with that approach indefinitely dooms them to perpetually playing catch-up.

~~~
baybal2
No no no, my point is exactly the opposite!

> The reason China has focused so much on 'field applications' is precisely
> because they lacked the capability to do much original research and so
> specialized in applying foreign technology cheaply and at scale.

I want to say that being good in 'field applications' is a really strong side
of Chinese, but they wont acknowledge that. China's official 'know-how
promotion' policy is to keep pumping tenth of billions into institutionalised
research, and keep people grinding cookie cutter PhDs.

For example, one of the biggest breakthroughs in making lithium batteries
economically has been done in China without much publicity: the "open air
process" that some no-name factory invented to make cells without shielding
them with copious amounts of inert gas, and that allowed to make battery cells
without sealed, fully robotised manufacturing lines.

In our own company, the two best paid employees after the boss are two middle
aged guys of exceptional ability when it comes to designing plastic injections
molds. They don't even have higher education of any kind besides 2 year
introductory level schooling in engineering college. But when it comes to
making molds, they are gods. They can make you anything from plastic bathtubs
to aerospace grade composite parts in a day or two.

------
Jack2019
Comments from China.

As an ordinary Chinese people, I'd say most comments are unbiased and true.
There's no doubt that China has improved in a number of fields over the last 4
decades since our policy is to aim at promoting economy, education,
technology, public facilities, and many other areas. We have 5 thousand
histories thereby we do know how to make a country thrive and flourish since
the history follows the natural course and tells truth. We work hard to study
and to work because we domestically have 1.4b fellows to compete for a better
life. We are united since the country virtually disappeared due to world war
II and 40m died in this national defense warfare. It's easy to imagine what
would happen if the 1.4b have the same dream to revive their country.

As for communist that some western residents of the earth are afraid to
discuss, as we counted it as an enemy in 1990s, it is just another ideology.
You could say we have no right to vote for an election and to participate in
politics. It's true but we also have People's Congress that is composed of
represents from professions of the legal, business, politic, science, etc.
They present proposals and vote for them. So the truth is not that the
president controls everyone and everything.

So will China dominate science? Possibly. We are living in a global village
nowadays, and as human beings, we have some serious global issues to tackle, I
don't believe only one or two countries could fix them all. Collaboration is
what I think the foremost to develop human civilization.

------
neverminder
One thing I always curious about: how can chinese do any meaningful science in
their language when most of the science (as far as I'm aware) is in Latin
alphabet? They don't even have an alphabet, do they? If so, how do they
translate all that information, is that even possible?

~~~
EastToWest
Most scientists can read and write English just fine.

------
stupidcar
Western commentators have be predicting that one social phenomenon or another
would lead to a democratic awakening in China for decades: The collapse of the
USSR, economic liberalisation, the growth of the middle class, generational
shift, the internet, growing prosperity, falling prosperity, etc.

We must be pretty far down the list if we're now proposing that career
scientists will lead a political revolution.

~~~
ardy42
> We must be pretty far down the list if we're now proposing that career
> scientists will lead a political revolution.

Andrei Sakharov, a scientist and developer of the Soviet H-Bomb, was one of
the Soviet Union's most prominent dissidents and human rights activists.

------
paulsutter
Don't underestimate China

------
trevyn
Hey, if Stalin could do it:

“The scientists and engineers at a sharashka were prisoners picked from
various camps and prisons and assigned to work on scientific and technological
problems for the state.” -
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharashka](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharashka)

“Well-fed and well-clothed but supervised by Party and police functionaries
with little knowledge of aviation, Tupolev and his team of 150 specialists
worked under the threat of harsh reprisal for the least setback.” -
[https://www.amazon.com/Stalins-Aviation-Gulag-Memoir-
Tupolev...](https://www.amazon.com/Stalins-Aviation-Gulag-Memoir-
Tupolev/dp/1560986409)

~~~
pessimizer
Weird to judge contemporary China by the behavior of a Soviet dictator who's
been dead for 65 years.

~~~
james_s_tayler
Well (a) he's making a joke and (b) it's not that weird to compare two
communist, authoritarian regimes.

