加拿大华人论坛 加拿大生活信息五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with Ameri

在加拿大

http://www.economist.com/debate/overview/264HOW OXFORD STYLE DEBATES WORKEconomist Debates adapt the Oxford style of debating to an online forum. The format was made famous by the 186-year-old Oxford Union and has been practised by heads of state, prominent intellectuals and galvanising figures from across the cultural spectrum. It revolves around an assertion that is defended on one side (the "proposer") and assailed on another (the "opposition") in a contest hosted and overseen by a moderator. Each side has three chances to persuade readers: opening, rebuttal and closing.In Economist Debates, proposer and opposition each consist of a single speaker, experts in the issue at hand. We also invite featured guests to comment on the debate, not to take sides, but to provide context and informed perspective on the subject.Those attending an Oxford-style debate participate in two ways: by voting to determine the debate's winner and by addressing comments to the moderator. The same holds here. As a reader, you are encouraged to vote. As long as the debate is open, you may change your vote as many times as you change your mind. And you are encouraged to air your own views by sending comments to the moderator. These should be relevant to the motion, the speakers' statements or the observations of featured guests. And they must be addressed directly to the moderator, who will single out the most compelling for discussion by the speakers.

评论
回复: China is an innovation power on par with America?China's spectacular economic rise is producing some of the world's biggest and fastest-growing companies. Does this also mean that China is an innovation power on par with America? On the one hand, boosters point to the soaring number of patents held by Chinese technology firms like Huawei and Lenovo, the number of Chinese PhDs in technical fields graduating each year and the success of internet firms like Alibaba and Tencent as evidence that China is leapfrogging to the forefront of global innovation. On the other hand, sceptics highlight the lack of rule of law and respect for intellectual property rights inside the country, widespread corporate espionage and cybertheft, and forced technology transfers as evidence that China remains a copycat and a cheat.

评论
回复: China is an innovation power on par with America?This question becomes particularly important as the country's export-led growth model based on cheap labour runs out of steam. Now China's leaders openly talk about the need to shift from exports to domestic consumption, and of the need to boost services. They are explicitly targeting innovation as a national priority, in the hope of speeding the shift from brawn to brain that is required to prosper in this new century's ideas economy. So is China a world-class innovator or not? What do you think?

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?英文的话更没人理萨布拉同学了

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?英文的话更没人理萨布拉同学了点击展开... 波斯话咱们不会啊,

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?波斯话咱们不会啊,点击展开...说母语吧透着亲兴许围观的人还多点儿

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?说母语吧透着亲兴许围观的人还多点儿点击展开...咸盐碎语不要讲,表一表咱们山东好汉武二郎

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?咸盐碎语不要讲,表一表咱们山东好汉武二郎点击展开...咸湿类的帖子你可以试试应该是屡试不爽的当然可能是慢热型

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?咸湿类的帖子你可以试试应该是屡试不爽的当然可能是慢热型点击展开...[FONT=楷体_GB2312]一九五三年，美帝的和谈阴谋被揭穿，他要疯狂北窜霸占全朝鲜.[/FONT]

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?[FONT=楷体_GB2312]一九五三年，美帝的和谈阴谋被揭穿，他要疯狂北窜霸占全朝鲜.[/FONT]点击展开...忒干比风干还干

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?[FONT=楷体_GB2312]班长折了腿，班副玩了完，就数我命大，我撒腿往回颠[/FONT]

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?如此下去这个坛子有望成为萨布拉同学专属的上甘岭

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?忒干比风干还干点击展开... 美国顾问胡高参, 吓得就往桌下钻,

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?如此下去这个坛子有望成为萨布拉同学专属的上甘岭点击展开... 这就是中朝人民并肩来作战,胜利奇袭白虎团.

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?这个嘛，俺作为五毛实事求是地承认中国的创新目前依然落后于美国。这点还是有点让人担忧的。

评论
我曾经来过。2011短登记录 - 2012短登记录 - 中登进行时这个嘛，俺作为五毛实事求是地承认中国的创新目前依然落后于美国。这点还是有点让人担忧的。点击展开...这个嘛，看点在于怎么论证, 反方: Two principal types of innovation preoccupy managers of businesses: one creates new value and the other protects existing value. Some of the examples of innovations, large and small, that create commercial value, respond to market opportunities and improve competitive advantage would include the invention of the computer mouse by Stanford Research Institute, the development of a stronger, oval-shaped ball bearing by Timken, or the development of an online ticketing system common to multiple airlines by a consortium of the carriers. China has the building blocks for the first type of innovation but is thwarted by government domination of the economy. With a high educational level and intense commercial competition among small, private businesses, heavily populated areas like Zhejiang and coastal Guangdong can be particularly generative of innovation. Inventiveness, however, is only one requirement for commercial innovation; having the means and incentive to undertake a long and uncertain development cycle is another. Without property rights, the incentive is absent. The problem here is not the law; should China's government cease to own and manage businesses, innovation would thrive even amid a complete absence of intellectual property regulation. Instead, companies cannot afford to invest in developing technologies because of competition from protected actors in the state sector. As a result, they find it most adaptive to push new products into the market as rapidly as possible in order to benefit from their brief commercial lives, even if this means capturing technologies through copying or reverse engineering. This is a defect of the state economy. In China, the most valuable asset a company can own is a set of bureaucratic relationships, and this is why some of the strongest Chinese companies are diversified conglomerates whose critical competitive edge consists of their ability to bring government relationships, and the attendant capital, to bear on any commercial opportunity. The second form of innovation defends companies from predatory regulatory or competitive practices. Commonly, this type of innovation takes the form of rapid adaptation to a fast-changing and opaque commercial environment, made uncertain by regulatory change. To be competitive, Chinese companies must move quickly, and so they maintain highly decentralised organisations, incentive systems that are indexed to growth, short product-development cycles, locally deployed capital, and an organisational separation between product and distribution that enables the distribution chain to move from product to product easily. These activities in China absorb much innovative energy. To name just a few: • Tencent's QQ tool, which added so much convenience for consumers, was launched against the background of the state-owned carriers and regulatory restrictions that barred direct competition. • The same was true for Sohu's early adaptation of short messaging services, or the short-range Little Smart phones that UT Starcom adapted from old Japanese technology. • The same evasive motives have driven the adoption of third-party payment systems such as Shanda's and Tencent's payment cards. All of these represent high levels of innovation by entrepreneurs, but most are against the background of micro-regulation that otherwise would inhibit enterprise growth and improved offerings to the marketplace. Although overcoming the obstacles created by distribution channels monopolised by the state in itself generates adaptive innovation, such obstacles tend to kill inventions before they have a chance to be tested in the market. Once monopolisation works against innovation, the government steps in to create programmes focused on funding streams for incumbents that undermine the very innovation they are designed to support, as they direct research efforts toward predetermined targets. • Cell phone companies in the later 1990s were given generous funding for R&D to help them compete with international incumbents in the export market. The Chinese companies focused on undercutting the internationals on price and were left behind when international companies moved up the value chain. • Auto companies now receive huge grants to develop energy-saving technologies and consequently develop redundant capacity in the same lithium-ion batteries, with no development of infrastructure for electric cars. • Solar companies were given large subsidies in order to make competitive polysilicon, such that they undercut internationals on price but developed products that cannot survive outside the subsidised environment. Many times, technology is acquired in Chinese companies under government incentive programmes that encourage capital spending, but the technology is not absorbed into any business process. Yili Milk is one example. The company's packaging plant in Hohhot is as modern as any in the world, but the milk collection is done in unsanitary village stations, because agricultural policy in China makes the aggregation of pasturage impossible. China's challenge as a nation is to redirect its entrepreneurial energy away from this sort of "window dressing" innovation and towards new value creation.

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?正方: Innovation, as defined in Wikipedia, is "the application of better solutions that meet new requirements, inarticulate needs, or existing market needs. Innovation differs from invention in that innovation refers to the use of a better and … novel idea or method, and invention refers more directly to the creation of the idea or method itself." The key drivers of the innovation process can be classified in three major categories and one can picture them as three concentric circles. At the centre there are people, in the middle there are organisations (including culture, processes, offerings) and in the outermost circle there is the environment (economic climate, market condition and geopolitical). Starting first at the centre: people. Most studies on innovation have shown that it is often more difficult for large corporations to maintain the same level of creativity and freedom (both conducive to the innovation process) as start-ups. China today is filled with start-ups, so it already has a head start. But these Chinese entrepreneurs are looking at other global success stories and, ignited by a "Why not me" mentality, they forge ahead and are not thwarted by the lack of support, but rather find ways to create success against an ever-changing landscape. With limited resources and even less to lose, they are often more risk-tolerant and ready to make tough decisions with short notice, believing that even if these turn out to be suboptimal, they can always change paths and try something else. Against this background, many of them become the embodiment of fearless innovators. Xiaomi is an excellent example of this. Knowing that it does not have enough money to do detailed research it innovates, and it has completely redefined "listening to your customers". The strategy is working—the company went from zero in 2010 to a current valuation of $10 billion. An obvious comparison would be its American counterpart, Apple, which is undoubtedly one of the most successful innovation companies in the past decade, creating significant market impact and changing the competitive landscape. It is important to note that Apple did not invent the mobile phone or even the smartphone, but it recognised unarticulated consumer needs and went ahead and served those needs. The result for the iPhone is complete market dominance for a long period of time. Steve Jobs did not believe in focus groups because he felt that he knew best. Lei Jun is the opposite, believing that customers are the best ones to tell him what products they want—he listened and then delivered. Both Xiaomi and Apple are highly successful companies and noteworthy innovators, but completely different in their approach. The second factor is organisations. Organisations generally become more reluctant to change as they become more successful and established. Markets start to mature through time and the market leaders often start to decline as they continue to bask in the glory of yesteryear and miss the early signs of change. Before the emergence of China, these well-established organisations, often market leaders in their respective industries, had attained global leadership and were basically on top of the world. China, however, is a rapidly changing market, and this forces the local market leaders to remain astute. With the lure of the global golden ring, Chinese organisations remain hungry and continue to push for growth. Haier gained rapid market awareness and share by introducing a washer capable of cleaning not only clothes but also potatoes. This development came about through customer demand from a lower-tier city and is a living embodiment of Haier's "customer centric" management philosophy. Not every company will be like this, but the fact that the market is rapidly changing and there is still more to conquer will encourage more Chinese companies to remain agile and nimble. The final driver is the environment, and this is the area that causes the most concern for people looking at the future of innovation in China. The criticisms centre on the dominance of state-owned enterprises (SOEs), which basically have little accountability and are not entirely market driven, especially those in closed sectors; the overabundance of government incentive programmes to push for certain technological changes but without the needed oversight; and the heavy involvement of the government in the market. SOEs will continue to play a big part in China, but most of the innovation will come from private companies (and foreign companies operating in China) and there will be an abundance of these springing up across multiple sectors. Where sectors are open, the competition typically becomes intense as all players, be they multinationals, SOEs or private companies, try to capture a piece of the pie. Government incentives in key industries, eg solar energy, have allowed a nascent industry to attain an enviable global position in a relatively short time. However, without any oversight, as demonstrated by the solar-panel market, there is now a glut. Through time, the government's involvement will decrease and normal market dynamics will follow, ie market consolidation and rationalisation. China is increasingly becoming more open and the government is pushing for more deregulation, thereby increasing competition against the backdrop of a large and complicated market and operating environment. All these changes will serve to further foster innovation. China is one of the most populous countries in the world and the road ahead is not easy. However, the key drivers for successful innovation are very much present in China and will continue to guide the next generation of innovators.

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?翻译一下吧，想捧个场还这么难。

评论
天空没有翅膀的痕迹，而我已飞过～～翻译一下吧，想捧个场还这么难。点击展开...正方: 发明的三圈, 核心是人, 中圈是组织, 外圈是环境, 人是好人, 组织有奋进精神, 环境差点, 三个占了两个, 前途乐观.反方: 发明的动机, 1 发现价值, 2, 保护价值, 国企对这两点都是阻力, 国家对发明投的钱, 因为是冲上往下来的, 效率低, 因为这两个原因, 前途不乐观.

评论
回复: 五毛PK五分 China is an innovation power on par with America?正方: 发明的三圈, 核心是人, 中圈是组织, 外圈是环境, 人是好人, 组织有奋进精神, 环境差点, 三个占了两个, 前途乐观.反方: 发明的动机, 1 发现价值, 2, 保护价值, 国企对这两点都是阻力, 国家对发明投的钱, 因为是冲上往下来的, 效率低, 因为这两个原因, 前途不乐观.点击展开...就创新而言，我是反方，创新需要个性需要超前独立思维，组织和环境往往都会阻碍和扼杀创新的火苗，但反方提出的动机有点不给力，没有这么简单吧。

  ·生活百科 地板、地砖、拖把，哪一种轻便好用？
·房产房屋 如果我想在瓷砖上钻孔，我应该购买什么样的钻孔工具？