It's really hard to get anywhere with. I was in Hong Kong a while and gave up. I tried Cantonese and Mandarin. That's another thing with 'Chinese' - there are actually about 200 versions spoken although the written symbols are the same.
At least with Japanese if you read a phrase from the guide book they understand but with Chinese if you don't get the intonation right they can't figure what you are on about.
They are mostly happy to do business in English though - it's not a bad place to cultivate business ties.
Decades ago I had Chinese coworkers and decided to ask them to teach me a word or two a day. I immediately discovered I could not tell the difference between the five tonal sounds of "ma" and so never got very far at all.
Why shouldn't you? You learn 3 new characters a day with no effort whatsoever via SRS and pass the HSK1 in 2 months. If you like it, you keep on studying and improving, if you don't like it, at least you will be able to greet the taxi driver when you go there (but won't understand their reply).
Even if you don't learn Chinese, I've been consciously adding http://v2ex.com to my doomscrolling regimen and running it through Google translate. It's a popular Chinese webforum, and while I wouldn't say it's exactly Chinese HN, it's
a close enough approximation. It's interesting to see I have some of the same concerns and questions as someone halfway around the world in a totally different language and culture.
Here's an example from the front page, English title is: As a backend programmer writing front-end with the help of cursor, what is the most suitable front-end framework/solution
The comments mentioned all the usual suspects, Angular, Vute, React, next, etc.
China has mostly decoupled from the US (both for imports and exports) [1]. They will automate around their demographics issues (they build and install more robots than any other nation in the world) [2]. They export cleantech to the world [3]. What does the US build besides systems of rent seeking?
They'll presumably happily sell all the factory automation to anyone else who wants it (everyone else has), so it's not clear factories will stay where they are long term. Once factories are near fully automated, they'll place them wherever the combination of taxes and transportation costs is best.
Keeping the factories ensures trade continues, selling the factories eats the seed corn. To your point, I think its more likely they build fully automated factories where they want to sell to avoid tariffs or trade barriers, while maintaining ownership.
The chart shows a Biden-projected growth of 30GW renewable capacity until 2030.
If these renewables could run at max capacity 24/7 they'd then produce ballpark high estimate 270 TWh.
Looking at the Chinese comparison chart china adds 2000TWh of annual production per 5 year interval.
Now renewables run at 25% capacity factor on a good day, so the renewable growth with bidenomics would've added 65 TWh of growth in a span of time that china adds 2000. If Trump causes a further drawdown of 100 TWh in renewable capacity it will still only be a rounding error.
The US and most of the west is simply not even competing in this arena, the entire leadership is resting on their laurels and the focus is never on actual development but on policy, regulations and ideology.
Edit: I now see it was Paul Krugman as the author of that article which clearly illustrates my point on ideological drive of the western leadership, here we have an economic Nobel Prize winner that present numbers he either don't understand or misuse to take potshots at a leadership he's unhappy with.
That is actually the issue. All these talking heads, professional experts, writers, etc. make their reputation and money by constantly making predictions while never getting benchmarked.
It's the whole trope behind the book Superforcasters.
Do you believe Paul Krugman's intelligence and impact on the world to be equivalent to a 5th grader? Do you want to try to make an argument that support's Mr. Krugman's point of view, or did it just upset you that I brought up a factual quote from the past?
You know why you posted that quote, it's not just to "[bring] up a factual quote", it's to imply the man is a fool who's not to be listened to. And when challenged you pretend you're "just posting a quote".
Here's a Krugman quote from today (in fact it's in the post):
> A powerful faction in America has become deeply hostile to science and to expertise in general
“The growth of the Internet will slow drastically, as the flaw in ‘Metcalfe’s law’—which states that the number of potential connections in a network is proportional to the square of the number of participants—becomes apparent: most people have nothing to say to each other! By 2005 or so, it will become clear that the Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine’s.”
He's absolutely right. Most people have nothing to say to each other, and that's why social media is a small number of people broadcasting and an overwhelming number consuming. Most pairs of people don't say anything to each other. Absolutely spot on.
He's substantively wrong; he’s right that most people have nothing to say to each other, but its a scaling law being discussed, and “most people have nothing to say to each other" is an issue impacting the constant multiplier, not the scaling rate.
Porn drove electronic payments and a lot of other tech. The fax machine did not carry porn. Look to the medium's ability to be used for porn as a clear indicator of adoption.
It's weird how you just replied to me on social media to tell me people have nothing to say to one another. It's almost like you're ... unaware of what is happening?
Ah, we should be glad the MAGA movement is doing 2 of those things to catch up to China then... which senator do I talk to about child labor? Oh they're mostly sitting on one side of the chamber?
China is installing solar capacity at three times the rate of coal. What exactly is your point?
There's no "wonders of china", just the fact that we are falling further behind because of dumb policy which is justified by non sequiturs like "china also installs coal" or "china uses child labor".
It's weird to bring it up in response to an article about the US falling behind authorities china and how that's bad. Unless you think we can't improve our energy infrastructure in the USA without using child labor too?
> Unless you think we can't improve our energy infrastructure in the USA without using child labor too?
I think pointing out child labor anytime we're discussing someone who is doing it... actually is a good thing. You seem to not have your priorities on this.
Please stop being obtuse just because you're wrong.
Using "what about child labor" as a counterpoint to they are advancing at neck breaking speed, is a pointless argument because it's using a moral argument against a non-moral statement.
It's like saying: green energy is displacing coal towns, therefor it's bad!
> Today American leadership is once again being challenged by an authoritarian regime.
It’s strange to oppose the two concepts, as if American leadership weren’t itself an authoritarian regime.
Serious question - should I (an average engineer on HN) learn Chinese?
I'm old enough to remember when everyone was trying to learn Japanese back in the 80's.
It would be difficult to work in China, their green card equivalent is difficult to obtain.
The economic conditions in China right now are very bad for the average person, pretty high unemployment.
It's really hard to get anywhere with. I was in Hong Kong a while and gave up. I tried Cantonese and Mandarin. That's another thing with 'Chinese' - there are actually about 200 versions spoken although the written symbols are the same.
At least with Japanese if you read a phrase from the guide book they understand but with Chinese if you don't get the intonation right they can't figure what you are on about.
They are mostly happy to do business in English though - it's not a bad place to cultivate business ties.
Decades ago I had Chinese coworkers and decided to ask them to teach me a word or two a day. I immediately discovered I could not tell the difference between the five tonal sounds of "ma" and so never got very far at all.
Why shouldn't you? You learn 3 new characters a day with no effort whatsoever via SRS and pass the HSK1 in 2 months. If you like it, you keep on studying and improving, if you don't like it, at least you will be able to greet the taxi driver when you go there (but won't understand their reply).
What's SRS?
Spaced Repetition Software.
Probably good to have to pad it under language skills in resume but not a very important concern.
Even if you don't learn Chinese, I've been consciously adding http://v2ex.com to my doomscrolling regimen and running it through Google translate. It's a popular Chinese webforum, and while I wouldn't say it's exactly Chinese HN, it's a close enough approximation. It's interesting to see I have some of the same concerns and questions as someone halfway around the world in a totally different language and culture.
Here's an example from the front page, English title is: As a backend programmer writing front-end with the help of cursor, what is the most suitable front-end framework/solution
The comments mentioned all the usual suspects, Angular, Vute, React, next, etc.
https://www.v2ex.com/t/1165949
One thing that some users here would appreciate is their footer:
• Please do not copy and paste AI-generated content when answering technical questions
It is incredibly hard.
China has big problems. They are totally trade-dependent (imports and exports) and some of the worst demographics on the planet apparently.
https://youtu.be/UltVl2Qlf6A
China has mostly decoupled from the US (both for imports and exports) [1]. They will automate around their demographics issues (they build and install more robots than any other nation in the world) [2]. They export cleantech to the world [3]. What does the US build besides systems of rent seeking?
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45580229
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/25/business/china-factory-ro... | https://archive.today/RoygE
[3] https://ember-energy.org/data/china-cleantech-exports-data-e...
They'll presumably happily sell all the factory automation to anyone else who wants it (everyone else has), so it's not clear factories will stay where they are long term. Once factories are near fully automated, they'll place them wherever the combination of taxes and transportation costs is best.
Keeping the factories ensures trade continues, selling the factories eats the seed corn. To your point, I think its more likely they build fully automated factories where they want to sell to avoid tariffs or trade barriers, while maintaining ownership.
The chart shows a Biden-projected growth of 30GW renewable capacity until 2030.
If these renewables could run at max capacity 24/7 they'd then produce ballpark high estimate 270 TWh.
Looking at the Chinese comparison chart china adds 2000TWh of annual production per 5 year interval.
Now renewables run at 25% capacity factor on a good day, so the renewable growth with bidenomics would've added 65 TWh of growth in a span of time that china adds 2000. If Trump causes a further drawdown of 100 TWh in renewable capacity it will still only be a rounding error.
The US and most of the west is simply not even competing in this arena, the entire leadership is resting on their laurels and the focus is never on actual development but on policy, regulations and ideology.
Edit: I now see it was Paul Krugman as the author of that article which clearly illustrates my point on ideological drive of the western leadership, here we have an economic Nobel Prize winner that present numbers he either don't understand or misuse to take potshots at a leadership he's unhappy with.
[dead]
[dead]
Paul Krugman, the guy who predicted fax machines were more would have more impact on business than the Internet, even in 1998?
https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/revolutions/miscellany/paul...
Please let's not dip into the cosmic hashtable. It's boring and offtopic.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9722096 (June 2015)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22622773 (March 2020)
Predictions are wrong more often than observations, I expect.
McKinsey advised AT&T that the total market for cell phones would be just a handful. McKinsey is going strong.
You're right, he missed that one. Do you think his total track record is poor?
> Do you think his total track record is poor?
That is actually the issue. All these talking heads, professional experts, writers, etc. make their reputation and money by constantly making predictions while never getting benchmarked.
It's the whole trope behind the book Superforcasters.
Oh no, he made a mistake one time... When I was in 5th grade I added 2 numbers wrong, that must mean my whole career has been a lie.
Do you believe Paul Krugman's intelligence and impact on the world to be equivalent to a 5th grader? Do you want to try to make an argument that support's Mr. Krugman's point of view, or did it just upset you that I brought up a factual quote from the past?
Your last sentence is a verbose way of saying "Just sayin'".
https://psychcentral.com/health/defending-against-im-just-sa...
You know why you posted that quote, it's not just to "[bring] up a factual quote", it's to imply the man is a fool who's not to be listened to. And when challenged you pretend you're "just posting a quote".
Here's a Krugman quote from today (in fact it's in the post):
> A powerful faction in America has become deeply hostile to science and to expertise in general
Did I miss where you responded to whether Paul Krugman should be held to the same standards as a 5th grader? Or are you hoping to change subjects?
The original Paul Krugman quote
“The growth of the Internet will slow drastically, as the flaw in ‘Metcalfe’s law’—which states that the number of potential connections in a network is proportional to the square of the number of participants—becomes apparent: most people have nothing to say to each other! By 2005 or so, it will become clear that the Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine’s.”
> most people have nothing to say to each other!
Seems he was also wrong about social media
He's absolutely right. Most people have nothing to say to each other, and that's why social media is a small number of people broadcasting and an overwhelming number consuming. Most pairs of people don't say anything to each other. Absolutely spot on.
He's substantively wrong; he’s right that most people have nothing to say to each other, but its a scaling law being discussed, and “most people have nothing to say to each other" is an issue impacting the constant multiplier, not the scaling rate.
Porn drove electronic payments and a lot of other tech. The fax machine did not carry porn. Look to the medium's ability to be used for porn as a clear indicator of adoption.
Home robots will eventually catch fire.
It's weird how you just replied to me on social media to tell me people have nothing to say to one another. It's almost like you're ... unaware of what is happening?
[flagged]
The USA got where it is via slavery, imperialism, also child labor, environmental devastation. Hydraulic mining inspired the first environmental laws.
How you got there and where you are are different.
Ah, we should be glad the MAGA movement is doing 2 of those things to catch up to China then... which senator do I talk to about child labor? Oh they're mostly sitting on one side of the chamber?
China is installing solar capacity at three times the rate of coal. What exactly is your point?
There's no "wonders of china", just the fact that we are falling further behind because of dumb policy which is justified by non sequiturs like "china also installs coal" or "china uses child labor".
> "china uses child labor".
Oh, right, right. We just ignore this? Weird you brought it up as something that should be ignored? What?
It's weird to bring it up in response to an article about the US falling behind authorities china and how that's bad. Unless you think we can't improve our energy infrastructure in the USA without using child labor too?
> Unless you think we can't improve our energy infrastructure in the USA without using child labor too?
I think pointing out child labor anytime we're discussing someone who is doing it... actually is a good thing. You seem to not have your priorities on this.
Please stop being obtuse just because you're wrong.
Using "what about child labor" as a counterpoint to they are advancing at neck breaking speed, is a pointless argument because it's using a moral argument against a non-moral statement.
It's like saying: green energy is displacing coal towns, therefor it's bad!