""Speaking of computers it looks like those Chinese thieves have put all that stolen information to good use. They should be made to pay patents infringement costs.kit wrote:http://www.techtimes.com/articles/16099 ... ackers.htm
""they certainly has the NSA in mind
The quantum communications satellite is expected to further supply power to China's 2,000-km (1242-mile) quantum computer network, which is currently under construction.
This computer network, which connects Shanghai and Beijing, will be fully operational by the end of 2016. The government and financial institutions will test the system before it is opened to the public.
- See more at: http://www.techtimes.com/articles/16099 ... on0tb.dpuf
China Tops Supercomputer Rankings with New 93-Petaflop Machine
Michael Feldman, June 20, 2016, 8:34 a.m.
A new Chinese supercomputer, the Sunway TaihuLight, captured the number one spot on the latest TOP500 list of supercomputers released on Monday morning at the International Supercomputing Conference (ISC) being held in Frankfurt, Germany. With a Linpack mark of 93 petaflops, the system outperforms the former TOP500 champ, Tianhe-2, by a factor of three. The machine is powered by a new ShenWei processor and custom interconnect, both of which were developed locally, ending any remaining speculation that China would have to rely on Western technology to compete effectively in the upper echelons of supercomputing.
http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-02-18/u ... as-historyMANNY K wrote:Speaking of computers it looks like those Chinese thieves have put all that stolen information to good use. They should be made to pay patents infringement costs.kit wrote:http://www.techtimes.com/articles/16099 ... ackers.htm
""they certainly has the NSA in mind
The quantum communications satellite is expected to further supply power to China's 2,000-km (1242-mile) quantum computer network, which is currently under construction.
This computer network, which connects Shanghai and Beijing, will be fully operational by the end of 2016. The government and financial institutions will test the system before it is opened to the public.
- See more at: http://www.techtimes.com/articles/16099 ... on0tb.dpuf
http://www.top500.org/news/china-tops-s ... p-machine/
China Tops Supercomputer Rankings with New 93-Petaflop Machine
Michael Feldman, June 20, 2016, 8:34 a.m.
A new Chinese supercomputer, the Sunway TaihuLight, captured the number one spot on the latest TOP500 list of supercomputers released on Monday morning at the International Supercomputing Conference (ISC) being held in Frankfurt, Germany. With a Linpack mark of 93 petaflops, the system outperforms the former TOP500 champ, Tianhe-2, by a factor of three. The machine is powered by a new ShenWei processor and custom interconnect, both of which were developed locally, ending any remaining speculation that China would have to rely on Western technology to compete effectively in the upper echelons of supercomputing.
I don't quite understand, are you saying that America stole actual machines from the British, or are you saying that they stole the designs? If they stole the designs, then I don't really see a difference. Those designs the Americans stole were just as cutting edge then as the techs China is stealing now. Keep in mind that just having manufacturing capability at all is already cutting edge in the 1700's, considering most of the world have yet the industrialize at that point of time.TSJones wrote:....if you are attempting to use 17th and 18th century British Mercantilism and America's response to it, as justification for modern day Chinese *theft* then you are way off base. it is in no way similar to what was was happening back then when the US could not get the equipment it needed to develop its economy. we were used as a source material commodity supply and that was IT.
fact is China has all the manufacturing capacity it needs. what China doesn't have is inventiveness or originality.
so they steal it.
No need to be so antagonistic, I'm not here to pick fights, I'm here to share and learn, or else I wouldn't have lasted this long here as a Chinese poster. I've shared my thoughts, I'd love to learn from you the differences between what America did to what the Chinese are doing. Care to drop the snarky 'tude and explain your position a bit?TSJones wrote:thank you for admitting that you don't understand historical British Mercantilism and its application to frontier America.
1) China is currently under an outside restrictive foreign policy whereby China is treated as a low-cost goods supplier where it could not get the tools, implements, and machinery it needed for its development. How different is this context compared to what America faced?TSJones wrote:you gave an example of idea/invention/property theft committed in the US an example of forgotten hypocrisy of the US public. without historical context.
my point is this:
1. Pobody is Nerfect. the US was under an outside restrictive foreign policy whereby the US was treated as a commodity supplier colony/nation where it could not get the tools, implements and machinery it needed for its development. so yes individuals sometimes stole them. the brits would otherwise not allow it.
and occasionally down through history until better legal relations were established, it still happened from time to time.
2. it was never a US government policy/program to steal these foreign inventions. unlike in China.
when the US needs something, it usually invents it or out right buys it publicly.
the major area of US government grab of foreign inventions were spoils of WW2 in which the US took whatever inventions it felt it needed from nazi germany and japan. but it was no cheap bargain. gazillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of US lives lost to WW2 was a national tragedy.
3. I don't mind if somebody copies a look alike design as long as it is properly labeled as such. in fact when China copies a C-17, or any other plane look alike, I feel it's a matter of pride. imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
3) I agree, just take the complimentHistorian Doron Ben-Altar describes Hamilton's campaign as "unabashed, state-sanctioned flouting of British law."
You get your butt kissed, the Chinese become richer, everyone wins! they were not born uber tfta as wellI do know that, I just wanted to point out that plagiarism was not looked down upon and punished in the U.S. when it wasn't convenient to do so.indranilroy wrote:It was not always the case. For many examples exist to the contrary post WWII. You could say that they are spoils of the conqueror of war, but certainly they were not US inventions. I agree with you on one thing though: In general, plagiarism is looked down upon and punished in US, but it is encouraged in China. David knows this too. So, let's move on.
China’s New Supercomputer Puts the US Even Further Behind
This week, the China’s Sunway TaihuLight officially became the fastest supercomputer in the world. The previous champ? Also from China. What used to be an arms race for supercomputing primacy among technological nations has turned into a blowout.
The Sunway TaihuLight is indeed a monster: theoretical peak performance of 125 petaflops, 10,649,600 cores, and 1.31 petabytes of primary memory. That’s not just “big.” Former Indiana Pacers center Rik Smits is big. This is, like, mountain big. Jupiter big.
But TaihuLight’s abilities are matched only by the ambition that drove its creation. Fifteen years ago, China claimed zero of the top 500 supercomputers in the world. Today, it not only has more than everyone else—including the United States—but its best machine boasts speeds five times faster the best the US can muster. And, in a first, it achieves those speeds with purely China-made chips.
Think of TaihuLight, then, not in terms of power but of significance. It’s loaded with it, not only for what it can do, but how it does it.
The Super Supercomputer
If you think of a supercomputer as a souped-up version of what you’re playing EVE Online with at home, well, as it turns out you’re not entirely wrong. “At one level they’re not very different from your desktop system,” says Michael Papka, director of the Argonne Leadership Computing Facility (home to Mira, the world’s sixth-fastest supercomputer). “They have a processor that looks very similar to the one in a laptop or desktop system—there’s just a lot of them connected together.”
Your MacBook, for example, uses four cores; Mira harnesses just under 800,000. It uses those them to simulate and study everything from weather patterns to the origins of the universe. The faster the supercomputer, the more precise the models and simulations.
On that basis alone, TaihuLight is a singular accomplishment. Its 10.6 million cores are more than three times the previous leader, China’s Tianhe-2, and nearly 20 times the fastest U.S. supercomputer, Titan, at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. “It’s running very high rates of execution speed, very good efficiency, and very good power efficiency,” says University of Tennessee computer scientist Jack Dongarra. “It’s really quite impressive.”
If anyone’s qualified to say so, it’s Dongarra. He created the benchmark by which supercomputers were first compared in 1993 by TOP500, the organization that still ranks them today, and published the first independent evaluation [PDF] of TaihuLight’s capabilities.
Still, hardware’s not everything. Because supercomputers run specialized tasks, they require specialized software. “You can use a factory as an example,” says Papka. “A lot of people are working on putting a car together at the same time, but they’re all working in a coordinated manner. People who write programs for supercomputers have to get all of the pieces working together.”
TaihuLight passes that test, too. In fact, three of the six finalists for a prestigious high-performance computing award are applications built to run on TaihuLight. Aside from relatively slow memory—a conscious trade off to save money and power consumption—this rig is ready to go to work. “This is not a stunt machine,” says Dongarra. And it’s years ahead of anything the US has.
A Command Line Lead
TaihuLight is faster than anything scheduled to come online in the US until 2018, when three Department of Energy sites will each receive a machine expected to range from 150 to 200 petaflops. That’s ahead of where China is now—but two years is half an eternity in computer-time. That the lead has gotten so large galls some lawmakers for reasons both political and practical. Legislation exists calling for a supercomputer funding boost, but has spent the last year mired in the Senate.
“Massive domestic gains in computing power are necessary to address the national security, scientific, and health care challenges of the future,” says Rep. Randy Hultgren, a Republican from Illinois whose American Super Computing Leadership Act has twice been passed by the House of Representatives. “It is increasingly evident that America is losing our lead.” Meanwhile the DOE is working on innovating with the budget it has.
The other significant TaihuLight achievement stings US interests even more, because it’s political. China’s last champ, Tianhe-2, had Intel inside. But in February of 2015, the Department of Commerce, citing national security concerns—supercomputers excel at crunching metadata for the NSA and their foreign equivalents—banned the sale of Intel Xeon processor to Chinese supercomputer labs.
Rather than slow the rate of Chinese supercomputer technology, the move appears to have had quite the opposite effect. “I believe the Chinese government put more research funding into the projects to develop and put in place indigenous processors,” Dongarra says. “The result of that, in some sense, is this machine today.”
A Race Worth Winning
Broadly, it’s true that better supercomputers benefit the whole world, assuming scientists get to work on them. It doesn’t exactly matter what flavor the chips are. “On some level, it’s a trophy that you put on your mantel,” Dongarra says. “But what’s more important is what kind of science it does, what kind of discoveries you make.”
TaihuLight’s stewards tell Dongarra that they’re putting all that power toward advanced manufacturing, Earth-system modeling and weather forecasting, life science, and big data analytics. That sounds like a broad range, but it’s just a small slice of what supercomputers’ capabilities. “Each time we make an increase, we can add more science to the problem,” Papka says. “For the foreseeable future, until we can model the real world on a quark-for-quark basis, we’ll need more powerful computers.”
And those computers are coming—especially if the US gets serious about catching up.
Quite a good example of the U.S. denying China the tools it needs for development, no?MANNY K wrote:The US is doing something about it.
http://www.wired.com/2016/06/fastest-su ... aihulight/
The other significant TaihuLight achievement stings US interests even more, because it’s political. China’s last champ, Tianhe-2, had Intel inside. But in February of 2015, the Department of Commerce, citing national security concerns—supercomputers excel at crunching metadata for the NSA and their foreign equivalents—banned the sale of Intel Xeon processor to Chinese supercomputer labs.
shameless hypocrisy by the Chinese.DavidD wrote: The other significant TaihuLight achievement stings US interests even more, because it’s political. China’s last champ, Tianhe-2, had Intel inside. But in February of 2015, the Department of Commerce, citing national security concerns—supercomputers excel at crunching metadata for the NSA and their foreign equivalents—banned the sale of Intel Xeon processor to Chinese supercomputer labs.
Quite a good example of the U.S. denying China the tools it needs for development, no?
Russia and China learn from each other as military ties deepen
Charles Clover in Beijing
Russia and China staged a bold new series of military manoeuvres last month. Not a single ship left port, nor did any tank fire up its engine. Instead, a team from China’s People’s Liberation Army sat with their Russian counterparts in Moscow, running a five-day computer simulation of a joint response to a ballistic missile attack.
Held in the Central Research Institute of Air and Space Defence in the Russian capital, the drill “was not directed against any third country”, according to Russia’s defence ministry. But few were under any illusion that the “aggressor” in the simulation was anyone other than the US.
The exercise — which analysts note involved sharing information in an extremely sensitive sphere — was highly significant because it indicated “a new level of trust” between the two former adversaries, says Vasily Kashin, an expert on China’s military at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow.
“The ability to share information in such a sensitive area as missile launch warning systems and ballistic missile defence indicates something beyond simple co-operation,” he says.
Very interesting. Could we Extrapolate that if the Best of the PLAAF are better than the Western Avg then the PLAAF average would be similar to the Western Avg Pilot in skill?Here's an interesting read on the China-Thailand exercise from last year:
China says a branch of its coast guard is holding live-firing exercises in the Tonkin Gulf amid tensions among disputants to territory in the South China Sea
The Maritime Safety Administration said ships and boats were barred from the area between the southern province of Hainan and the northern coast of Vietnam from Monday to Wednesday.
China has held several military exercises in surrounding waters since an international arbitration panel last month issued a ruling invalidating China's claim to virtually the entire South China Sea.
On Sunday, China said its planes and ships held war games in the Sea of Japan last week, during which it deployed its latest-generation frigate.
China plans joint naval exercises with Russia in the South China Sea next month in a move criticized by U.S.
China has designed nuclear missiles and blasted astronauts into space, but one vital technology remains out of reach. Despite decades of research and development, China has so far failed to build a reliable, high performance jet engine.
This may be about to change. China's aviation sector is striving for a breakthrough that would end its dependence on Russian and Western power plants for military and commercial aircraft.
Beijing is evaluating a 100 billion yuan plan to galvanize a disjointed and under-funded engine research effort, aviation industry officials say. The giant, state-owned Aviation Industry Corporation of China AVIC.L, China's dominant military and commercial aviation contractor, has been lobbying hard for the extra money, officials familiar with the details say.
AVIC, with more than 400,000 employees and 200 subsidiaries including 20 listed companies, has already set aside about 10 billion yuan of its own funds for jet engine development over the next three years.
The engine financing plan is under high-level discussion in Beijing, said Zhao Yuxing, an official at the securities office of Shanghai-listed Xi'an Aero-Engine Plc (600893.SS), a key military engine-making unit of AVIC. "What we know is our company has been included in the strategic programme, which is designed to greatly develop and support the engine industry," he said by phone from his company's headquarters in the northwestern city of Xi'an.
China's military industry as a whole has suffered from Tiananmen-era bans on the sale of military equipment from the United States and Europe. Moreover, foreign engine-makers have been loath to transfer technology. That has prevented China from taking its usual route to closing a technology gap: copying it.
Some Chinese aviation industry specialists forecast that Beijing will eventually spend up to 300 billion yuan on jet engine development over the next two decades.
"China's aircraft engines have obviously been under-invested," said Wang Tianyi, a defence sector analyst with Shanghai's Orient Securities. "One hundred billion yuan is not a huge amount of money in the engine world."
JEALOUSLY GUARDED SECRETS
While AVIC's long term priority is to develop high performance engines for military aircraft, it is also trying to design power plants for passenger aircraft in the world's fastest growing civil aviation market. Based on projected demand from Western aircraft manufacturers, engines for new passenger aircraft delivered in China could be worth more than $100 billion over the next 20 years.
"Historically, all major players in aerospace have possessed both airframe and engine design capabilities," said Carlo Kopp, the Melbourne, Australia-based founder of Air Power Australia, an independent military aviation think tank. "Until China can design and produce competitive engines, the performance and capabilities of Chinese aircraft designs will be seriously limited by what technology they are permitted to import."
For China's aviation engineers, the traditional short cuts of extracting intellectual property from foreign joint venture partners or simply copying technology from abroad have so far delivered minimal results.
Foreign engine manufacturers including General Electric (GE.N), Snecma, a subsidiary of French aerospace group Safran (SAF.PA), Rolls Royce Plc (RR.L) and Pratt & Whitney - a unit of United Technology Corp (UTX.N), jealously guard their industrial secrets, limiting the transfer of know-how and opportunities for intellectual property theft.
However, China may be poised to win access to technology from an expanding range of commercial aviation joint ventures with these companies. China's ability to develop engines for passenger aircraft could have considerable potential for technology transfer to the military, experts say.
THE BOTTLENECK IN ENGINES
Under AVIC's plan, fragmented engine research and development would be consolidated to minimize competition and duplication of effort.
A legacy of Maoist-era dispersal of defence industries, engine research institutes and aerospace manufacturing companies are scattered about the country in cities including Shenyang, Xi'an, Shanghai, Chengdu and Anshun.
AVIC plans to inject its major engine related businesses into Xi'an Aero- Engine as part of this consolidation, the listed company said in its 2011 annual report. "There is widespread consensus that engines have become a bottleneck constraining the development of China's aviation industry," the report said.
China faces a daunting challenge. Only a handful of companies in the United States, Europe and Russia have mastered this expertise.
"Modern jet engine technology is like an industrial revolution in power," said Andrei Chang, a Hong Kong-based analyst of the Chinese military and editor of Kanwa Asian Defence Magazine. "Europe, the U.S. and Russia have hundreds of years of combined experience, but China has only been working on this for 30 years."
Established manufacturers have laboured on research and development since the 1950s to build safe and reliable engines with thousands of components that function under extremes of temperature and pressure. This involves state-of-the-art technologies in design, machining, casting, composite materials, exotic alloys, electronic performance monitoring and quality control.
Since then, the big players have collected vast stores of performance and operational data from existing engines that gives them a head start in designing new versions with improved fuel efficiency and reliability that airlines now demand. And, for commercial engines, all of the design and manufacturing processes must be carefully coordinated and exhaustively documented to satisfy aviation certification authorities.
"The reason so few can do it is because it is really, really difficult," says Richard Margolis, a former regional director of Rolls Royce in northeast Asia.
High performance military jet engines are crucial to Beijing's long term plan to increase the number of frontline fighters and strike aircraft in its air force and naval aviation units. These aircraft are a key element of a long term military build-up aimed primarily at securing military dominance over Taiwan and a vast swathe of disputed maritime territory off China's east and southern coasts.
Due to the export bans on military equipment to China, Beijing has been forced to rely on imported fighters from Russia, reverse engineered copies of these Russian aircraft, and some home-grown designs. This strategy has delivered rapid results. Since 2000, China has added more than 500 advanced fighters and strike aircraft with capabilities thought to equal all but the most advanced U.S. stealth aircraft. At the same time, it has also sharply reduced the number of obsolete aircraft based on Soviet-era designs, military experts say.
MANUFACTURING PROCESS
A clear example of this progress was on display recently when a Chinese-made J-15 jet fighter practiced "touch and go" circuits on China's first aircraft carrier, the newly commissioned Liaoning. These manoeuvres suggest that J-15 pilots and crews will soon master take-offs and landings from the carrier at sea.
Foreign and Chinese military experts were quick to point out that the J-15, one of China's newest military aircraft, was powered by a pair of Russian Al-31 turbofans - they power almost all of China's frontline aircraft. Reports in the Russian media say Moscow has sold more than 1,000 engines from the A1-31 family to China with further, substantial orders in the pipeline.
While Chinese engineers have been able to reverse-engineer Russian airframes, the engines have been much more difficult to copy without access to the complex manufacturing processes. AVIC subsidiary and China's lead military jet engine maker, Shenyang Liming Aero-Engine Group Corporation, has been working on a homegrown equivalent, the WS-10 Taihang, but this power plant has so far failed to meet performance targets after testing on the J-15 and other fighters, Chinese and Western military experts say.
The Chinese military is expected to introduce another 1,000 advanced fighters over the next two decades, according to Chinese defence sector analysts. However, anger over reverse engineering and wariness of China's growing military power has made Moscow reluctant to supply engines more advanced than the Al-31. Without imported or locally built versions of these engines, China will be unable to build aircraft that could compete with the latest U.S. or Russian stealth fighters, experts say.
While military jets are strategically important, the commercial market is potentially much bigger. Boeing (BA.N) forecasts China will need an extra 5,260 large passenger aircraft by 2031. Bombardier Inc. (BBDb.TO) projects demand for business jets will reach 2,400 aircraft over the same period. With each aircraft requiring at least two engines plus spares, total demand could reach 16,000 engines with an estimated average cost of $10 million each at current prices.
China plans to compete for some of these aircraft orders with two locally built passenger aircraft, the 90-seat ARJ21 regional jet and the 150-seat C919. GE (GE.N) will supply engines for the ARJ21. CFM International, a joint venture between GE and France's Snecma, won the contract to develop new engines for the C919. Some of these engines will be assembled at joint ventures in China.
Despite the intensified research effort and potential for technology transfer from these ventures, some experts say foreign engines will continue to rule the skies in China. "This won't change for 10 or 15 years," says Chang from Kanwa Asian Defence Magazine. (Editing by Bill Tarrant)
That confidence level is interesting. Now, 10-15 years ago, back in the late 1990s, we in India were told that China is in the cusp of all things good in hi-tec engines. That they are patient, well funded, has huge number of patents, focused, knows how to manufacture thin thingies and most importantly "has no western or russian vested interests" influencing their decision makers. Yet we have been hearing that the WS-10 starts thrust vectoring its turbine blades after a few 100 hours and becomes a ramjet if left untended.Kailash wrote:Amazing - they know it takes so much investment, they know there wont be any tangible benefits for the next 10-15 years. I am already confident they will deliver a world class engine within next 2 decades. Investment,patience and realistic expectations - something Indians should learn.
they will deliver a world class engine within next 2 decades
So if Natasha or Natalie has never been a factor that the chinese had dealt with decisively, what does Indians (who has transparent consultancy agreements with American and Europeans for Kaveri++) need to learn from them?Investment,patience and realistic expectations
This post is worth remembering. For the last decade I have been reading on BRF and Chinese sites thathnair wrote: In that context, these two statements, particularly the bolded parts seem to fight against each other like a corruption accused City Mayor and Shree Xi's clique.
they will deliver a world class engine within next 2 decadesSo if Natasha or Natalie has never been a factor that the chinese had dealt with decisively, what does Indians (who has transparent consultancy agreements with American and Europeans for Kaveri++) need to learn from them?Investment,patience and realistic expectations
