彭博：中国的科技水平正赶超美国 [美国媒体]

Thirty years ago in December, the modern exchange of scholars between the U.S. and China began. Since then, Chinese academics have become the most prolific global contributors to publications in physical sciences, engineering and math. Recent attempts by the U.S. to curtail academic collaboration are unlikely to change this trend.

1988年12月，美国和中国开始了现代学术交流。自那以后，中国学者成为全球物理科学、工程和数学领域出版物的最多产贡献者。以至于美国最近试图限制与中国的学术合作，但这种趋势显然不太可能改变。



Furthermore, the authors argue that these metrics -- which are based on the addresses of the authors -- understate China's impact. The data don't count papers written by Chinese researchers located in other countries with addresses outside China and exclude most papers written in Chinese publications. The researchers adjusted for both factors and conclude that Chinese academics now account for more than one-third of global publications in these scientific fields.

此外，作者认为这些基于作者地址来判断论文是中国人写的低估了中国应有的影响力。这些数据不包括中国研究人员在中国以外的其他国家发表的论文，也不包括大多数中国出版物发表的论文。研究人员对这两个因素进行了调整，得出的结论是，中国学者在这些科学领域的全球出版物中占了三分之一以上。

The quality of Chinese research is also improving, though it currently remains below that of U.S. academics. A recent analysis suggests that, measured not just by numbers of papers but also by citations from other academics, Chinese scholars could become the global leaders in the near future. Similarly, Xie and Freeman examine authorship of publications in Nature and Science, arguably the two most prestigious scientific journals. They find that in 2016, 20 percent of the authors were Chinese -- more than twice the share in 2000.

中国的研究质量也在提高，尽管目前仍低于美国学者。最近的一项分析表明，中国学者可能在不久的将来成为全球领军人物，这不仅取决于论文数量，还取决于被其他学术论文里引用的频繁程度。还有，谢和弗里曼统计了《自然与科学》杂志的作者国籍分布。他们发现在2016年，20%的作者是中国人——是2000年的两倍之多。

At the same time, this dramatic expansion in scientific scholarship has raised serious concerns, including whether the Chinese government exerts excessive influence over both Chinese students and professors in the U.S. A related concern is whether the deep ties between Chinese and U.S. academics facilitates too much technology transfer and even academic espionage.

同时，这种戏剧性的扩张在学术界已经引发了严重的问题，包括中国政府是否对在美的中国学生和教授施加了过度的影响继而担心美国和中国的学术关系是否太深促进了太多的技术转让甚至怀疑有学术间谍活动。



Whatever the other costs or benefits of the restrictions, and I believe there are more of the former than of the latter, they seem unlikely to alter in any significant way the global rise of China as an academic power. We may not want to admit it yet, but the rise of China to the top ranks of global scientific achievement is now a historical fact.

无论这些限制的其他成本或好处是什么(我相信前者比后者更多)，它们似乎都不太可能显着改变中国作为学术强国崛起的事实。我们可能还不想承认这一点，但中国崛起为全球科技成就最高的国家这一点已成定局。

[–]bdavidbva
Also in infrastructure and renewable energy. If we don't get our priorities straight soon, we will be left behind just as England was left behind during our ascent.

在基础建设和新能源方面也是完爆美国。如果我们还不重视这些方面的话，我们就会像当年被我们祖辈超越的英格兰那样被中国抛在身后。



[–]CaptainBearman
Most authoritarian regimes do not get shit done. The opposite is true and typically results in failed states.

大部分专制国家可做不到这些事，而它们可作为正面教材的失败早已消失在历史的长河里了。

[–]AMAInterrogator
The problem is that we are running as far we can with them on our backs, then they hop off with fresh legs and carry it farther. They also take it much more seriously, don't waste talent, have more smart people just by sheer population and don't waste the population's intelligence on ridiculous political discourse.
​
问题是我们辛辛苦苦在努力奔跑着，而他们站在我们背上轻轻松松一蹬就跑的比我们远了。且他们一点儿不浪天赋出众，人又比我们多，还不会把他们的聪明才智浪费在荒唐的党派斗争上。

[–]dawgz525
It's far too late. We've already been left behind we're just seeing the effects now. There's more than a billion of them and they have a state run economy. They are steps ahead of us and their government can much more easily adjust and change to the growing world than we ever will be.

我们已经落后太远了。当我们才刚注意到落后带来的影响时就已经晚了。他们比我们多了整整十亿人而且他们的经济是国家运行的能更容易的调整和改变自己的经济以应对市场变化。

[–]International_Way
lol state run govt(economy as chris_offner pointed out) as a good thing

国家管控经济居然是件好事（笑）

[–]International_Way
Which we've seen time and time again it isnt worth it.

时间会再次告诉我们这不是件好事的。

[–]chris_offner
At least economically the way China is doing it might turn out very differently from previous incarnations of state-run economy, in part thanks to technological progress.
The biggest and most frightening impact of the AI revolution might be on the relative efficiency of democracies and dictatorships. Historically, autocracies have faced crippling handicaps in regard to innovation and economic growth. In the late 20th century, democracies usually outperformed dictatorships, because they were far better at processing information. We tend to think about the conflict between democracy and dictatorship as a conflict between two different ethical systems, but it is actually a conflict between two different data-processing systems.
Democracy distributes the power to process information and make decisions among many people and institutions, whereas dictatorship concentrates information and power in one place. Given 20th-century technology, it was inefficient to concentrate too much information and power in one place. Nobody had the ability to process all available information fast enough and make the right decisions. This is one reason the Soviet Union made far worse decisions than the United States, and why the Soviet economy lagged far behind the American economy.
However, artificial intelligence may soon swing the pendulum in the opposite direction. AI makes it possible to process enormous amounts of information centrally. In fact, it might make centralized systems far more efficient than diffuse systems, because machine learning works better when the machine has more information to analyze. If you disregard all privacy concerns and concentrate all the information relating to a billion people in one database, you’ll wind up with much better algorithms than if you respect individual privacy and have in your database only partial information on a million people.
An authoritarian government that orders all its citizens to have their DNA sequenced and to share their medical data with some central authority would gain an immense advantage in genetics and medical research over societies in which medical data are strictly private. The main handicap of authoritarian regimes in the 20th century—the desire to concentrate all information and power in one place—may become their decisive advantage in the 21st century.
https://www.theatlantic.com/maga ... ogy-tyranny/568330/

至少在经济上，中国现在的做法可能会与以前的国有经济大不相同，这在一定程度上要归功于技术进步。

人工智能革命最大、最可怕的影响可能是民主和独裁的相对效率。从历史上看，专制政体在创新和经济增长方面面临着严重的障碍。在20世纪晚期，民主国家的表现通常优于独裁政权，因为它们在处理信息方面要出色得多。我们倾向于认为民主和独裁之间的冲突是两种不同伦理体系之间的冲突，但实际上是两种不同数据处理系统之间的冲突。



[–]cyptoracle
We should have gotten our priorities straight right after the “Great” Recession. America is a lot of things, but catching up to a country that has been patient to rise and based on their history, this may be the new normal.

我们本该在大萧条之后把重心优先转移到这些领域。美国是有很多东西要顾着，但显然追上一个历史悠久喜欢从长计议的国家才是该做而且成为常态的事。


[–]noman2561
The quality of Chinese research is also improving, though it currently remains below that of U.S. academics. A recent analysis suggests that, measured not just by numbers of papers but also by citations from other academics, Chinese scholars could become the global leaders in the near future.
China craps out academic papers all day long and they're often convincing enough to get past the judges (who are usually too busy to peer review). Sometimes they even reference each other but that doesn't speak to their quality. And the vast majority of their work doesn't come close to actually contributing to academia. Maybe they're putting in some effort but they've got a long way to go if they really want to catch up. This article is sensationalist bullshit made for people who aren't actually in the weeds.

中国整天都在制造垃圾论文，而且他们的大多数论文只是为了过审拿头衔而已(评委们通常太忙而无暇进行同行评审)。有时他们甚至互相提及对方，但这并不能表现出他们的学术质量。他们的大部分工作都没有真正为学术界做出贡献。也许他们付出了一些努力，但如果他们真的想迎头赶上，还有很长的路得走。这篇文章尽是些哗众取宠的屁话，是为忽悠那些不懂行的人而写的。

[–]dubmau5
Yup. Quality over quantity

对头，我们要质量不要数量。

[–]FatAssFrodo
Thank you. People don’t realize how much fraud and lies there is in academia.

说的好，人们不知道学术界有多少谎言和欺诈。

[–]RedZeroWolf
From anecdotes I keep seeing, cheating on tests is normal for them.

据我所知，考试上作弊对于他们来说是家常便饭。

[–]sethstorm
Only for censorship and making copies off of western research.

他们都是抄袭西方的研究论文求过了就好。

[–]lightningsnail
Its a lot easier to go from 0 to 60 than from 60 to 100.

从0到60分可比60到100分容易得多。



[–]fitzroy95
absolutely, and when that happens they can outsource work to India, or any of the nations of Africa that they are making nice to at the moment, but by then the USA will have already been in retreat for several years

绝对是啊，当他们的劳动力变得昂贵时，他们会把廉价工作外包给印度或者任何一个他们交好的非洲国家，那时候美国早就不知道退出世界舞台多少年了。