• nucleative@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    I feel like we should at least consider that DJI is a mainland Chinese company and nearly all drone innovation in the past decade has originated there. They are no strangers to extreme manufacturing or advanced automated drone technology.

    • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Quadcopters are actually insanely simple devices. I dont think the west would have any issue making hundreds of thousands of them without the help of china. Maybe the chips could be an issue but im sure taiwan would be happy to provide.

      • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        The future of drone warfare will be determined by software. That’s the one thing where the US still have a huge lead.

        • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          In terms of future AI stuff maybe, but for current year practical purposes there is no relevant difference in software capabilities for controlling a bunch of drones in the way it is being done in ukraine.

          • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            3 months ago

            The Ukrainians are controlling the drones one at a time. One drone, one pilot, operating remotely over wireless link. They’re having an absolutely devastating effect on Russia’s troops and equipment.

            Autonomy is the future. It’s how you get to thousands or even millions of drones without the need for millions of human pilots. Trying to attack into a space which is defended by millions of drones absolutely will be a hellscape!

            • Agent641@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              3 months ago

              The hard part of good automation is onboard sensor processing. Takes a reasonable amount of compute onboard, which is expensive. Im told the US has a fat wallet though.

          • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            They’re already working on autonomous drones. That’s still in its early stages but that will be a decisive factor in the future.

    • MehBlah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Its funny but when I think of drones and innovation I don’t think of china. China just mass produces but for the most part when the current class of true drones were being created I remember a lot of amateurs working on it and others, china being one of them stealing the base tech. Just like 3d printing.

      • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        When I think of China I think of serious medical innovations including the cure for fucking HIV and herpes. Idk that they are so great with robotics but I wouldn’t really underestimate them.

        • BobGnarley@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Those are being tested, not proven treatments for those diseases.

          A few people have been cured of HIV from bone marrow transplants but it has to be a super specific set of circumstances like their blood type has to be a certain type and things like that.

        • MehBlah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          I think of thieves and I am not underestimating them nor am I giving them credit for most of things they ‘discover’ Since its based on tech they stole. I also know that much of the HIV research did not originate in china.

          • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            It’s just not true to say that China is relying on copying other’s technology anymore. In the last decade, they’ve caught up and are now at the cutting edge of research in many fields. I think this shift is catching a lot of people off guard including many western journalists and pundits.

            • boyi@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Japan, and S. Korea used to be the thieves and copycats, and now China. That’s how these countries keep up with the current techs and build up their foundation for the future technology, and now are surpassing their counterparts. People need to accept that’s how things work and it won’t change nothing even if they keep whining.

              The thing with China now is how people has been underestimating them. All they can think are on their human right issues, Uyghur, child labours etc. And they think that China people are stupid, can’t think and can’t innovate. Sorry to say - currently they have the highest ranking for research yield, Scopus and Nature Index, and not to mention how many PhD graduates they are producing each year. Many people are just in denial. By the time they realize the reality, it’s might be too late to hit back.

              • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                I do not support the PRC’s foreign policy but I absolutely envy their commitment to funding research.

          • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            Hmm, sounds bigoted. One way I can tell this is bigoted, is that you’re making Chinese people out to be both ultra competent (at stealing) while also being ultra incompetent (at science). This boogeyman who will “get you,” but is also way beneath you and who you obviously can “get back,” has existed towards Jewish people, black people, Islamic people, Latinos, women, gay people, etc etc.

            All innovations are based on the people who came before us. Or are you saying the West should give all Arabic people the money we make in hospitals since the origin of the hospital is from there and they were originally free. The origin of our numbers themselves comes from Arabic countries.

            Do you think America’s patent system is just? Do you think the patent system stifles innovation? Do you think the inventors of Crispr Gene Editing have more rights to this bone marrow transplant cure for HIV than the actual people who thought of it and implemented it?

  • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Ukraine has had massive success with naval drones which I would imagine to translate very well to the defence of Taiwan as well.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      The difference between hypersonic missiles and drones is interesting, too. Hypersonics are something a major nation state needs a years long development program to make. They have some inherent issues, like having a limited maneuvering budget without burning themselves up. The response time of defenses are shorter, but existing Patriot missile batteries have managed to deal with them to at least some success.

      Meanwhile, Ukraine attaches bombs to some fancy RC planes and sinks much of the Black Sea Fleet. IIRC, they’re up to something like half of it by tonnage, and Russia likely has no way to replace some of the larger Soviet-era ships.

  • superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Millions of inexperienced soldiers stuck on ships facing thousands of drones coming from all directions -
    I…don’t want to imagine the absolute, pure horror that would be.
    The fact that the two current superpowers are actually gearing up for war with each other makes my blood freeze.
    This would cause global suffering on par with World War 2. Except in World War 2, most battles were still fought primarily with glorified armored tractors, rifles, shovels and horse-drawn artillery.
    Oh, and now, there’s the added danger of a nuclear escalation that will literally bomb us all back into the stone age.

    • andrewth09@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yes. Defend Taiwan from a Chinese invasion that threatens their sovereignty. One that is continuously threatened by China and one Taiwan actively prepares for.

        • zbyte64@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          That would be dumb. Taiwan is a better asset if they have an independent government that’s on the same page geopolitically. Australia bucked the USA’s geopolitical agenda, and they got couped.

          • exanime@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            That would be dumb. Taiwan is a better asset if they have an independent government that’s on the same page geopolitically

            Which is why the US wants to “defend democracy” there, that is clearly what I mean… they want a Taiwan that is subservient to the USA, not an independent Taiwan that would actually be independent

            Australia bucked the USA’s geopolitical agenda

            I don’t understand what “bucked” means in this context

            • zbyte64@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              In this context the Australian people voted for an administration that would no longer “co-operate” with the USA’s geopolitical aims, they “bucked”/rejected the agenda. The USA responded by pressing those in power to create a constitutional crisis and replace the administration.

              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis

              I guess my point is that America doesn’t engage in the same tactics as China does in regards to Taiwan, or that hemisphere, probably because of distance. The USA favors regime change over making a new colony.

  • RangerJosie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    Dude. Don’t pretend to be bad now. Our best drones are regularly being shot down by goat herders. Lol.

  • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Archive link here https://archive.is/kJlQW

    China has no incentive to invade Taiwan. Geographically there’s nowhere but the heavily fortified western side of the island to land an amphibious assault. And even if you get a beach head there, it’s not Normandy, there’s sheer fucking cliffs, and then MORE mountains. China doesn’t have the Navy to setup a blockade or the carriers to setup an air bridge and if they did it’ll be Antoniv all over again.

    The Taiwan government isn’t trying to unify the “two Chinas” anymore as Chiang Kai-shek and Sun Li-Jen have been dead a long while. The PLA or what’s left of it does not want control over mainland China and the current ruling Taiwanese government are happy to create 60% of the worlds super conductors. In fact they have Thermite and other destructive charges setup in the fabs in case china invades. There’s other fabs in the US or EU they can spin up with engineers and personnel that will likely be swept away by the US or Japan or South Korea.

    This is saber rattling from the Pentagon and a distraction from Pooh Bear’s own internal problems. Nobody wants war in Taiwan most of all the Chinese.

    However it would be very profitable for defense contractors. Hey, I should write an article about that.

    Edit: sorry if it wasn’t clear in my tone, I do not like China and do not support their foreign policy. People in Taipei and across Taiwan are very very worried. And likely as not it’s so Xi can feel big after the Olympics. It’s terrible that they’re taking advantage of such global strife to pull this again. With Iran and Israel playing brinkmanship, the genocide in Palestine, the ongoing war in Ukraine… A German naval vessel is waiting for the go ahead to cross international waters.

    Edit 2: I have sprinkled references to support my points throughout my comment to hopefully form a cogent thought from the word salad I originally wrote. Further reading for those interested:

    https://www.cfr.org/article/why-china-would-struggle-invade-taiwan

    https://www.newsweek.com/china-taiwan-blockade-invasion-us-navy-pacific-fleet-admiral-samuel-paparo-1749139

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_Defense_Treaty_between_the_United_States_and_the_Republic_of_China

    • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      China has no incentive to invade Taiwan.

      I hope you are right, but your post is giving me big “herr Hitler is not going to invade Poland” vibes.

      • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        There isn’t the same political pay off at home in China that Hitler got. Chinese economy is not in the same dire straights and there is no economic benefit as China would start a war with 70% of their trading partners.

        Also unlike when Hitler invaded, the EU and the US is already building up arms because of the bullshit Putin is pulling right now.

        When I get to my computer tomorrow I’ll drop some links. But this is sounding more like North Korea and less like Nazi Germany.

        • TheWeirdestCunt@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Tbf other countries were starting to build up prior to the start of ww2, it’s not like they suddenly started the war effort in 1939. Afaik the only reason the war didn’t start when other countries were annexed is because Britain and France wanted to build up their armies first and Poland just became the breaking point.

      • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Or how we were all convinced that Russia wouldn’t invade until it actually happened

        • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Pasted from my response to another post

          Russia invaded Ukraine twice before there was a war, Putin took Georgia before that, very little international response happened. It wasn’t until Ukraine had the Revolution of Dignity in 2014 before anyone was even concerned about Ukraine and when Zelensky was elected, a comedian, Putin thought he could have his special operation and assassinate Zelensky.

          There’s none of that in the last 30 years with Taiwan. Unlike Ukraine in 2015; Taiwan has very strong mutual defense treaties with Japan and the US, strong trading partners in the EU. There’s a German Naval Vessel standing by to join the fight

          The position the US holds about Taiwan and making it rain “hellfire from drones” tells you all you need to know. They just last month let Ukraine use HIMARS in Russia, and Ukraine took Kursk.

          Chinese troop numbers are down, their equipment isn’t doing well in Ukraine and their pilots are using solid fuel from missiles to cook hot noodle on cold days.

          Now if this article was about the Chinese “third navy” I’d understand the rhetoric but it isn’t.

    • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Nobody is saying invading Taiwan would be a good idea, the CCP has been very consistent in stating that they are willing to do it though.

      I personally thought Ukraine wouldn’t be invaded by Russia because it would make no sense and go against Russia’s interests. Turns out I was half right, but it happened anyway.

      So let’s hope that it’s all sabre rattling and continue planning for the worst.

      • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Russia invaded Ukraine twice before there was a war, Putin took Georgia before that, very little international response happened. It wasn’t until Ukraine had the Revolution of Dignity in 2014 before anyone was even concerned about Ukraine and when Zelensky was elected, a comedian, Putin thought he could have his special operation and assassinate Zelensky.

        There’s none of that in the last 30 years with Taiwan. Unlike Ukraine in 2015; Taiwan has very strong mutual defense treaties with Japan and the US, strong trading partners in the EU. There’s a German Naval Vessel standing by to join the fight

        The position the US holds about Taiwan and making it rain “hellfire from drones” tells you all you need to know. They just last month let Ukraine use HIMARS in Russia, and Ukraine took Kursk.

        Chinese troop numbers are down, their equipment isn’t doing well in Ukraine and their pilots are using solid fuel from missiles to cook hot noodle on cold days.

        Now if this article was about the Chinese “third navy” I’d understand the rhetoric but it isn’t.

          • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Yes.

            Not a single government (not even Taiwan’s government) has ever said that Taiwan is not part of China.

            I understand why you’d think otherwise if you get your understanding of the situation from online discourse. But here’s the thing: Most online discussion is coming from people who don’t know what they’re talking about.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              3 months ago

              And not a single government, not even Peru’s government, has ever said that Peru is not part of Swaziland.

              Strangely, that’s not the same thing as all nations agreeing that Peru is part of Swaziland.

              • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                From 1945 to 1971, China was represented at the United Nations by the government in Taipei, with almost universal recognition. It would be very odd for any country to say that Taipei (and hence Taiwan) was not part of China at that time.

                And if Taiwan was part of China from 1945 to 1971, surely it must be part of China now, because there have been no significant political changes in China since then.

                Both the government in Beijing and the government in Taipei recognize Taiwan as being part of China. Each government claims to be the rightful government of all of China, including Taiwan. (However, the government in Taipei only has effective control over Taiwan and a few islands, while the government in Beijing has control of the mainland.)

                Since 1979, the USA has had a policy of “strategic ambiguity” where they do not say that Taiwan is part of China, but they clearly recognized Taiwan as part of China up until then, and they have not made any statements changing that position.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  if it’s ambiguous, how can they recognize it as part of China at the same time? That’s the opposite of ambiguous.

        • OfCourseNot@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Wouldn’t the separatists be mainland china? Honest question. Like there’s continuity from the former china government to Taiwan’s, the people’s republic is the newest entity.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      China has no incentive to invade Taiwan

      Thank you for explaining you know nothing about geopolitics right at the start.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago
          • China has an old ideological incentive
          • Xi might want an invasion to hide his own failures
          • China wants TSMC ** TSMC might be rigged to explode, but China might be willing to go, anyway, in a “if we can’t have it, nobody can” strategy
          • China doesn’t want an unsinkable aircraft carrier in range of its mainland
          • China wants to extend its territorial waters and exclusive economic zone ** Which itself has implications for how the US can deploy carriers around China

          You can argue that none of the benefits add up to the cost of an invasion–I would tend to agree–but saying China has no incentive is just dumb. In particular, ideological reasons may be weighted much higher by Chinese leaders than any outsider could guess.

          • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Thanks for the reply.

            I’m quoted using such black and white language from my original post so I’ll have to leave it there even though I know it smacks of smug rhetoric, but I said it so it’ll stay.

            I do have counter points to each of your points in my original post except for the unsinkable aircraft carrier, however pardon the pun but that ship has sailed. But you know that as you referenced the killswitches TSMC has.

            That last point I think we agree. With the recent purges in the military and a lame duck president with a pending election that’s exactly what I think is happening here. Especially since they’re not really moving any of their “third navy” into formation for defilade and screening so it is still, as it stands, a loud and frightening bluff.

    • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I don’t disagree with the points you’re making in terms of military explanations.

      I think the U.S. definitely wants to provide Taiwan with all manner of drones, as they can use that as a test bed for their own drone efforts. Even if it’s unlikely to actually occur, I think the specter of China getting involved militarily is an opportunity the U.S. is keen to exploit that will allow them to deploy and test drone systems on the dime of one of their strategic partners, rather than solely at their own expense.

      But I also think that China is working on a diplomatic/economic win in Taiwan.
      With the recent passage of the … oh, I can’t remember the name of it … the law that allows China to arrest people who criticize China online that will apply to Chinese citizens who live/work in Taiwan, or to Taiwanese citizens who have reason to visit China, it means that there is a pall of fear over criticizing China in Taiwan.
      If folks can’t criticize China, it skews the narrative in Taiwan. A few more laws like that, some social/election influence campaigns (in the U.S. and Taiwan), and I could see a gradual undoing of Taiwanese-U.S. relations, and perhaps even a voluntary joining of PRC in a few decades.
      I’m sure, though, that the U.S. is doing the same thing in Taiwan, to try to keep the relationship tight. So it sorta comes down to who can do the best data mining, influence campaigning, and crafty diplomacy.

      All armchair speculation on my part, but that’s how I think it’ll shake out. Less of a military conquest, and more of a cultural conquest.

      • 100@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        lol who is trying to claim most of south china sea again and harassing their neighbours?

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I don’t know if this is what they’re talking about, but pretty much the entirety of the Chinese government elite is made up of Han Chinese despite there being a bunch of other ethnic groups. And, of course, there’s the ethnic groups that the Chinese government severely oppresses within their borders like the Uyghurs and the Tibetans.

          • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            How does Pooh Bear relate to the Han people?

            The only time I hear the racism card pulled about Pooh is when it’s coming from the party line. There is a history of that being used by the government or those parroting party talking points. It’s the logic they initially used to get the references pulled internationally where they don’t have as much control of media.

            I stand with the Uyghur and Tibetan people. The complex in Xiajang needs to be internationally condemned until it is demolished and a monument erected in the memory of those interned there, sometimes until the end of their lives.

            https://apnews.com/article/business-religion-china-only-on-ap-f89c20645e69208a416c64d229c072de

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Hmm… how does the Han Chinese dictator of China relate to the ethnonationalist policies of the Chinese government, which promotes the Han over other ethnic groups and outright oppresses other ethnic groups…

              You know, I’ll have to ponder that for a while and get back to you on it because you’re right, I just don’t see a direct line.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Sorry… your issue here is that there is not a direct link between A. A. Milne’s Winnie the Pooh character and a Chinese ethnonationalist state?

      • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’m not so sure. A majority of people polled in Taiwan disagreed with the US’s approach of a military forward strategy of ensuring Taiwan’s political independence. I believe the reasons the US has not pursued a diplomatic solution is largely because it wouldn’t serve their geopolitical interests. By pursuing a militaristic strategy, they’ve escalated the stakes at the expense of the Taiwanese people and I think Taiwanese people generally understand that.

      • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        This is always the correct response in a system where food scarcity is a matter of economics and not supply. Some years we burn more corn than we feed folk with.

    • MehBlah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Is the ‘we’ you are referring to china? If so, then yes you are. Bunch of cry babies who can’t accept that Taiwan is not theirs and never was. The government of Taiwan predates their government.

      • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’m not sure you want to stake the validity of Taiwan’s independence on the fact that Chiang Kai-shek’s fascist dictatorship predates the PRC. lol

          • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            I suggest you admit that the age of any particular government is irrelevant to its legitimacy before defending fascists. It’s not that hard.