Rather, the US wants its worker coming up with the concept of drones to begin with.

Which is how China gets to make drones to begin with. You don't seem to have any understanding of what a service economy is.

▲

palmotea 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> Rather, the US wants its worker coming up with the concept of drones to begin with.

Sure, but that idea is too stupid and arrogant to event consider. China's not going to cede that kind of high-level work forever. They'll learn how to do it, and when that happens what will the US do?

And then, in the conflict, can your "concept makers" get their implementation done by the hamburger assemblers, with their hamburger assembler skills and hamburger assembly equipment?

	▲	mullingitover an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> They'll learn how to do it, and when that happens what will the US do? Continue coming up with even more advanced ideas. This is like the Winklevoss Twins getting mad at Zuckerberg for 'stealing their idea', and the dean of Harvard lecturing them about how they're Men of Harvard and as such they'll simply come up with another idea, because that's what Men of Harvard do. They don't just one and done with one good idea. The US built the world's most advanced idea factory, but the people who hate smart people got into power and now they're stripping the copper out of the walls. > And then, in the conflict There won't be a hot conflict between nuclear powers. Or there will, and whoever can make the most drones will be irrelevant in the first 24 hours.