在接下来的几年，中国能超越美国硅谷吗？ [美国媒体]

Can China overtake Silicon Valley in the next few years?

在接下来的几年，中国能超越美国硅谷吗？


​1.    Godfree Roberts, Ed.D. Education & Geopolitics, University ofMassachusetts, Amherst (1973)
Answered Sep 8, 2016
Originally Answered: Can China overtakeSilicon Valley in the next few years?
China has already overtaken Silicon Valleyin several areas and will probably be dominant in all of them within 10 years.If you check the patents that are the Valley’s lifeblood you’ll see a Chinesename on more than half, and the engineers who stayed at home in China arebetter than those who left – and 100 times more numerous. This year Chinaovertook the Valley at the ‘heavy end’: Supercomputing (fastest, mostest,cheapest), network security, secure satellite communications, speech recognition,graphenics, metamaterials, hyperspectral imaging and nanotechnology.Their chipmakers have a billion-dollar war chest they’re using to buy smallersemiconductor makers with cutting-edge technology (as Intel has done fordecades). In July, Tsinghua Unigroup (China’s future Intel) acquired XMC, aleading domestic chipmaker, creating China's largest integrated circuitmanufacturer. Chen Lizhi, at CGP Investment in Beijing, explained: "Themainland's semiconductor industry has lagged behind in terms of design capacitybecause there were too many small players. The government’s capital injectionwill allow the industry to leapfrog the competition in a short

中国已经在好几个领域超越硅谷了。在未来的十年里，中国极有可能在几乎所有领域占据全面的竞争优势。如果你们检索硅谷的专利，你会发现其中有一半以上的专利上面都有华裔的名字。留在中国的工程师的质量比那些离开中国的工程师的水平更高，而且留在中国的工程师的数量几乎是那些离开中国的工程师的数量的100倍。今年（2016年），中国在“重大项目”上面超越了硅谷，项目如下：中国的超级计算机运行最快，性能最高，价格最便宜。其它的还有网络安全，卫星加密通信，网络安全，语音识别，石墨烯产业，超材料高光谱成像以及纳米技术。中国的芯片制造商用数十亿美元的金钱去购买小型半导体制造商。这种做法与英特尔最近几十年所做的事情如出一辙。今年7月，清华紫光（中国未来的英特尔）收购了国内领先的芯片制造商XMC，通过这种手段创建了中国最大的集成电路制造商。北京CGP投资公司的陈立芝解释说：“中国有太多的半导体行业的小公司，中国大陆的半导体行业在设计能力方面已经落后，政府的注资将使该行业在短时间内超越竞争对手。”

The policies are laready bearing fruit.China's semiconductor market grew 6 percent YOY to 1.1 trillion RMB in 2015while imports of electronic components fell 7.3 percent. That’s a hugedifferential.In 2016, chips designed and made on the mainland will supplyone-third of domestic demand, the CSIA says.China aims to grow itssemiconductor industry at 20 percent, compounded annually, to $143 billion by2020, the US Commerce Department’s ITA data shows. "Mainland rivals arequickly capturing the market and becoming more competitive by buying foreigncompanies with advanced technologies," said an employee at ASE Group. Hetold Caixin that ASE, a major Taiwanese chipmaker, lost a recent bid (to supplyApple Inc.) to a mainland rival. The mainland company had better technologyafter acquiring a South Korean firm and was able to offer lower prices, thesource said.

这些政策都起到了一定的效果。2015年，中国的半导体市场增长了6%，达到1.1万亿人民币，而电子元件的进口下降了7.3%。这件事情很不寻常，是一个很显着的变化。中国半导体行业协会表示，2016年，在中国大陆设计和制造的芯片将满足中国国内三分之一的需求。美国商务部工业与贸易管理局数据显示，中国的目标是在2020年之前将半导体产业增长率维持在20%。最终期待到2020年的时候，中国半导体的规模达到1430亿美元。ASE集团的一名员工表示“中国内地的竞争对手正迅速占领市场，通过收购拥有先进技术的外国公司变得更具竞争力，”。他告诉财新，台湾主要芯片制造商ASE最近（向苹果公司供货）输给了中国大陆的竞争对手。该消息人士称，这家中国内地公司在收购一家韩国公司后拥有更好的技术，并能够提供更低的价格。

Remember back in 2007 when Chinamanufactured, but contributed only 0.6% to, the value of an iPhone? In 2016China will be the #1 source for iPhone components and its largest consumer,retaining the retail margin as well. The iPhone 7 will contain even moreChinese IP, as will the iPhone 8…. There is no dimension of the Valley’s marketin which China does not compete today and there is no dimension in which itintends to grow its share at less than 20 percent annually.Do the

回溯到2007年，中国制造了iPhone，但是中国只获得了利润的0.6%.在2016年的时候，中国成了iPhone的最大的零件供应商及最大的市场。与此同时，中国也保留了一部分的IPhone的利润。在iPhone7当中将会采用更多的中国的专利，IPhone8也将延续这个趋势。在硅谷所擅长的各个领域里面，今天几乎没有哪一个领域是不面临中国竞争的，而且硅谷看起来也没有哪个领域是能够做到环比年度增长20%的。所以，你自己掰着手指头算算就知道结果了。

2.    Greg Blandino, works at Beijing, China
Answered Jan 18, 2016
In the short- to mid- term I say no for thefollowing reasons:
1)      Silicon Valley has access to aninternational labor market. SV can attract the best and brightest from India,China, Russia, Israel, etc. Part of that has to do with the American society'sopenness to foreigners, assimilation, and immigrants. For cultural reasons,this is not the case for China and will make it harder to keep and retainlong-term top-notch foreign talent. English as the international lingua francacertainly helps.
2)      SV makes products for aninternational market, Chinese tech companies make them for the domestic market.Alibaba's success can not be replicated easily overseas without access to theubiquitous 快递哥's that make it possible.Chinese UI and design is hampered by being in a protectionist market that keepsout foreign software, and results in bad design choices and UI beingperpetuated for longer. Use Didi Dache and Uber and tell me I'm wrong. A strolldown the Chinese internet reveals lots of respectable sites that look like 1997Ask Jeeves results.
3)      SV and the ZhongGuanCun sceneboth get government support. Despite libertarian protestations to the contrary,the US government and defense establishment funnels money and scientists intothis market. Chinese companies get the same thing. It's a wash on this count.

从短期或者是中期来看，我认为中国很难达到硅谷的水平。原因如下：
1）硅谷已经参与到国际劳动力市场。硅谷可以从印度，中国以及俄国以色列等国家吸引最优秀的工程师。这有一部分要归功于美国是一个移民国家，移民政策相对比较开放有关系。从文化融合上面来看，中国长期聘任高层次的外国人才的优势依然弱于美国。英语是国际语言，这对于美国吸引外国人才当然是很有帮助的。
2)硅谷是在为全世界生产产品，而中国的技术公司主要都是为国内市场服务。阿里巴巴的成功经验没有那么容易被复制，因为国外并没有那么多无处不在的“快递哥”，没有了无处不在的快递哥。网购就很难发展起来。中国软件市场是不对外开放的，这使得中国软件的UI界面设计滞后于世界的发展。造成的结果就是设计非常糟糕，中国软件界面所持续的时间通常都更长。但是，使用滴滴和uber的经历使我对这一点有了不一样的看法。漫步于中国的网站，你会觉得他们的界面设计都非常古典。
3)硅谷和中关村都得到了政府的支持，尽管很多自由主义者不愿意承认这一点，但是美国的政府和国防部都将资金和研发人才投入到这个市场里面去。中国的企业得到了类似的资助。

4) Capital funding and legal recourses arewell-established in SV. In China, they are emerging ad-hoc, but legallycompanies are still in very much the wild west, especially concerning IP issues,and this issues will certainly take more than a few years to sort out. Capitalis there, but it's harder to access and the dream of an IPO and mainstreamlegitimacy is currently in limbo for new companies due to uncertainty andshenanigans in the Shanghai stock market at the moment. It'll take at least acouple years to get that sorted out. Until then the "family hedgefunds" where all of the uncles and extended family pitch in will be ago-to for many start ups. It's hard to see such a mom-and-pop mode of financingscale up in the short to mid term.
5)Brain drain.
Lot's of Chinese you meet dream ofemigrating. Wages are higher, no pollution, houses are cheaper, food productsgenerally safer, societal competition is viewed as less cutthroat, and schoolsare better/cheaper/don't require a "gift" to the principal. TheChinese tech industry is centered around Beijing, and despite notions to thecontrary, Chinese people dislike 500+ PM 2.5 days as much as everyone else.Chinese people are often China's worse critics. These problems will always be afactor sucking talent out until they are solved, and exacerbating the culturalproblems enumerated in reason 1.All these being said, I don't think there isanything culturally precluding Chinese from being creative as is communlybandied about in the West. In 10 to 20 years this could easily be a

4)就硅谷而言，资本和法律资源都非常容易获取。在中国，相应的资源都是非常态化的，法律依然非常不规范，尤其是涉及到知识产权的时候，这个问题肯定需要几年的时间来进行解决。至少需要几年的时间来解决这个问题。在那之前，“家族对称基金”将会是主要的存在形式，所谓“家族对称基金”就是一个大家族中有很多的亲属参股，这成为了很多中国创业公司初期启动的主要模式。从短期和中期来看，很难看到这种“夫妻店”在短期内快速消失。
5)人才流失
有很多的中国的人才都有移民国外的想法。国外的工资更高，没有污染，房价更低，食品更为安全。国外的竞争不像中国那么的残酷，国外的教育看起来更好，更便宜，不需要给老师或者校长红包。中国的科技工业是以北京为中心的，尽管并非每个人都觉得难以忍受，但是北京的空气污染确实非常糟糕。中国人往往对自己本国批评得最为激烈。这些因素往往是导致中国人才外流的一些极其重要的原因，在这些问题被彻底解决之前，这些将一直都是导致中国人才外流的要素。我不认为在文化上有什么要素能够阻碍中国人的创新，中国人当然可以做到和西方人一样具有创造性。当然，在10年至20年之后，历史的发展将可能会朝着一个完全不同的脉络

3.    Jeremy Arnold, Co-founder. Ex business analyst. Ex SME consultant.
Updated Jun 28, 2016
The Chinese have no national interest inreplicating Silicon Valley.That wouldn't play to their strengths, nor would itestablish the future they've long been working toward.Keep in mind the lessonof the Olympics. China picks the events it thinks it can win, then throwsunmatchable resources at them until they do. There's a reason they don't fielda competitive hockey team: it wouldn't build on an existing strength, and thereis no obvious ROI to justify building the competency from scratch. What doesChina want?It is in their interests to shift from traditional manufacturingclusters to those suited for global competition in high-margin sectors(advanced electronics, especially). But this is more in line with the 90’sversion of the Bay Area than today’s incarnation.Silicon Valley arose from theconfluence of brainpower and capital in a single geographic area. Startupsthere had unparalleled access to talent, research, private money, andcomplementary services. At the time, these resources were largely leveraged inthe service of sophisticated hardware production.

在复制硅谷方面，中国本身并没有那么大的兴趣。这本身并不一定能够给中国带来多大的利益，更何况这与中国本身的发展方向也不符合。请记住奥林匹克的教训。中国认为自己可以从里面获得很多的东西，然后把大量的资源投入其中，最终中国确实有了一些收获。中国一直都没有去建立一支曲棍球队，这个道理非常简单，因为中国认为自己根本就不可能赢得这项比赛的冠军。中国究竟想要什么呢？中国希望能够从低端制造业转向具有全球竞争优势的高端制造业。这符合中国的利益。事实上，这个策略与上个世纪九十年代的旧金山湾区地区非常接近。硅谷之所以能够兴起是因为这个地区集聚了大量的智力和金融资源。那里的创业公司拥有着无与伦比的人才，他们的研发非常出色，他们还有很多私人的资金投入以及其他的相关服务。在硅谷兴起的那段时间里面，这些资源主要投入到了硬件的生产当中。

As the region matured, it kept thoseadvantages as the core of its spine, but began applying them to more evolvedgoals. The word of this era is “scalable”. VCs there want exposure tohigh-upside experiments that can provide out-sized marginal profits.Manufacturing, while still present, is no longer as sexy a proposition. Everyregion, if smart, plays to its unfair advantages. For the Bay Area, that’stheir legacy positives multiplied by their present concentration of CS-focusedSTEM talent. This means software. The next Facebook simply isn't reachingterminal velocity anywhere else (apologies to Boston and Seattle).What’s keepingChina from taking that mantle over time?

随着该地区不断的成熟。这些优势都成了硅谷竞争力的核心，相应的，这些资源也进入到了后续硅谷的升级当中。这里风投喜欢去曝光他们最新的研究成果，这些研究成果往往可以带来更高的预期收益。硅谷的整个运作模式开始发生改变，虽然硅谷依然有硬件制造企业的存在，但是这本身已经不再是一个让人着迷的话题了。不管哪一个地区，如果他足够智慧的话，他都会充分的去发挥自己的一些竞争优势。对于湾区而言，这是他们的传统优势。现在他们专注于软件及计算机方向的科学，技术，工程及数学人才。这些都是与软件高度相关的领域。其他的任何地区都达不到这样的一个发展速度。中国可以做到吗？我非常怀疑。

As others have pointed out, China hassignificant barriers to attempting a copycat cluster. Their IP laws are lackingand poorly enforced; their business culture isn't readily compatible withradical originalism; their VC infrastructure is still nascent, and they have noability to will a Stanford or a Caltech into being.But that doesn't mean they don'thave their own advantages.They already have comparable competencies when itcomes to complex manufacturing and product logistics (at a much better laborcost).

正如其他人所指出的那样。中国在尝试去模仿集群创新方面存在着很大的障碍。中国的知识产权缺乏法律的保障。相关的产权方面的法律执行不到位。中国的商业文化相对比较保守，而一个产业在创始的初期往往非常激进而野蛮，这不太符合中国的习惯。中国的风险投资基础设施还处于萌芽阶段，目前他们还不能创造出斯坦福和加州理工这样的学校。但是请注意，这并不意味着中国没有自己的竞争优势。当涉及到复杂的生产和物流的时候，中国已经具备了相当的实力。

They have a government willing and able topump obscene amounts of money into the system.
Their local market is massive andwell-suited for rapid domestic scaling (with most customers being particularlyadoption-friendly).They have less bureaucracy to deal with when it comes togetting things done (especially when your project is a "governmentpriority"). So, if not Silicon Valley 2.0, what’s their endgame?If youfast forward to 2025, ask yourself where the next Amazon or Samsung is going tocome from.We already see the early waves of this shift in motion with Alibaba,Lenovo, and Huawei. Give them another decade and I'd suggest that they'll havean insurmountable lead for anything involving retail-level physical technology.

中国有一个强大的政府，他们可以向他们确定的方向投入大量的资源。中国市场已经非常庞大，非常适合国内企业的快速扩张。中国很多时候在面对特定的事件的时候往往可以特事特办，这样他们的官僚作风将会减少，特别的，当你的项目如果是政府优先推行的项目的时候，种效率上的差距将会尤其明显。所以，如果中国产业集群不是硅谷2.0版本。那么他们的结局将会如何。如果你进入到2025年, 然后问一下下一个亚马逊或三星将从何而来, 这恐怕也不是一个好回答的问题。我们已经看到了中国科技兴起的第一波浪潮, 我们已经看到了阿里巴巴，联想和华为这种早期的科技公司。再给中国十年的时间，中国将会在非常多的领域都取得像他们在物流行业所取得那样巨大的成就。