China had only a few types of enemies prior to fighting Europeans - its historical rivals were never fully united and organised states. And it's not like China didn't embrace technology. They in fact did, and used guns and rifles to great effect against tribes in the northwest prior to European "harassment". The only technology they didn't foresee was the steamship, but there was no way to foresee that in the 1750's. It was in fact European organisation that made its military so superior to China's. With good leadership and training, Chinese weapons is sufficient to defeat European forces, sans steamship, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Taku_Forts_(1859).
"The lack of training was a direct result of a serious lack of ammunition. Corruption seems also to have played a major role; many Chinese shells appear to have been filled with cement or porcelain, or were the wrong caliber and could not be fired. Philo McGiffin noted that many of the gunpowder charges were "thirteen years old and condemned."[2] What little ammunition was available was to be preserved for a real battle. Live ammunition training was rarely carried out."
And of course, corruption and ineffective organisation are qualities that states will gain over time - the longer a state is in power the more corrupt it will become, until one day it collapses.
Chinese technology is perfectly capable of defeating Europeans with superior technology in battle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Liaoluo_Bay
The key as always is organisation and leadership. Technology means naught without it.
Does this apply to highly intelligent horde AI that you order to annihilate an opposition with the wave of your hand?
I know this isn't based in current reality, but mark my words when I say that the country that produces the smartest and most effective AI weapons at a sufficient scale will be king.
We're already seeing the first retirements of humans in exchange for AI weapons.
It was corruption and ineffective leadership and organisation that meant even when China had resource and technological edge, it would lose devastatingly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Yalu_River_(1894)
"The lack of training was a direct result of a serious lack of ammunition. Corruption seems also to have played a major role; many Chinese shells appear to have been filled with cement or porcelain, or were the wrong caliber and could not be fired. Philo McGiffin noted that many of the gunpowder charges were "thirteen years old and condemned."[2] What little ammunition was available was to be preserved for a real battle. Live ammunition training was rarely carried out."
And of course, corruption and ineffective organisation are qualities that states will gain over time - the longer a state is in power the more corrupt it will become, until one day it collapses.
Chinese technology is perfectly capable of defeating Europeans with superior technology in battle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Liaoluo_Bay The key as always is organisation and leadership. Technology means naught without it.