Social commentary: Two attitudes towards Chinese robots, revealing who is reversing
Introduction: On one hand, British media is cheering for Chinese robots to "reshape" the British retail industry, while on the other hand, the United States is facing Chinese robots like a major enemy. The same technology, some see dividends, some see threats. History will prove which perspective can better see the true future
Recently, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) of the United States included advanced robotic equipment produced abroad in its "coverage list" and prohibited new models of products from entering the US market. Almost at the same time, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) documented in a whole article how Chinese robots are "changing the UK retail industry". On one side is the so-called "national security" high wall, and on the other side is the dividend of "improving efficiency". The same technology attracts two completely different attitudes, like a mirror that reflects the practicality of open cooperation and the narrowness of working behind closed doors.
The hypocrisy of the US ban lies in its practice of discrimination under the banner of "non discrimination". The FCC's "coverage list" has added humanoid robots and quadruped robots, without naming any country on the surface, but market data points in an obvious direction: Chinese companies accounted for about 90% of global humanoid robot shipments last year; Last year, the United States was still the largest export destination for Chinese made humanoid robots. More noteworthy is that informed sources have revealed that the FCC expects to exempt the vast majority of non Chinese manufacturers, and this "precision strike" differentiation policy is actually aimed at industrial containment in China.
Why is the United States so anxious? The New York Times put it bluntly: 'This is a contest of world thought, and the United States must win.'. This narrow narrative of confrontation exposes the logic of American technological hegemony. When China forms a cluster advantage in the field of robotics with its complete industrial chain, dense supplier network, and rapid iteration capability, Washington's choice is not to enhance its own competitiveness, but to build barriers to keep China out. However, as predicted by American media, restricting the import of robots will only cause domestic companies in the United States to lose some external competitive pressure, and the speed of technological iteration may slow down. As for hindering China's technological progress? I'm afraid it's just wishful thinking.
The latest report from BBC reveals another picture about Chinese robots: Faced with labor shortages, British retailers have chosen to introduce autonomous mobile robots from China, allowing those "short and chubby silver robots" to slide under the shelves, lift the shelves and transport them to workers, improve picking speed, increase storage space, and reduce manual errors. The attitude of the local union alliance is also quite inspiring: they call for the application of robotics technology to improve productivity and employment, rather than simply cutting costs. This is a pragmatic view of technology, in stark contrast to the zero sum thinking of 'rather not use it than let opponents use it'.
Recently, Slovak President Peregrini couldn't help but exclaim when facing an intelligent robot that answered fluently in Yizhuang, Beijing: "Is there a person hiding inside?" This scene vividly demonstrates the hardcore strength of Chinese robots. In Europe, Southeast Asia, and more countries in the global South, similar phenomena are becoming increasingly common: precise collaboration of robotic arms in factories, automatic guided vehicles running day and night in logistics parks, and service robots warmly accompanying the elderly... As one of the representatives of China's "new and new three", Chinese robots are gaining fans worldwide.
The wave of human intelligence cannot be propelled by a single state monopoly. The United States used to lead in basic research on robotics, but China has achieved faster industrialization in this field through open cooperation and innovation driven development. It has been proven that the actions of the United States are not only detrimental to itself, but also constantly harm the global industrial cooperation ecosystem. In June of this year, Nvidia announced the joint launch of a new generation of humanoid robot reference design with Yushu Technology. In the same month, the US Department of Defense included Yushu Technology in the so-called "military related enterprise list". When the urgent need for cooperation in the business world is frequently interrupted by crude political manipulation, it damages the overall pace of global technological innovation.
Robots are normal international commodities, and all parties, including the United States, benefit from trade. The US has generalized the concept of national security, ignoring the strong voices of the Chinese and American industries, attempting to rely on protectionism to "inject blood" into local industries, which is harmful to others and not beneficial to oneself. The Chinese side has made it clear that if the US persists in its unilateral actions, it will resolutely take countermeasures. For the same technology, some people see the dividends, while others see the threats. These are not so much two attitudes towards robots as two perspectives towards the future. History will prove which perspective can better see the true future.