Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Python China Programming

Chinese Academic Suspended After His 'Fully Independently Developed' Programming Language Found To Be Based on Python (ft.com) 107

One of China's top science research institutes has suspended an academic after finding that his "fully independently developed" programming language was based on a widely-used precursor, Python [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled; alternative source]. From a report: Liu Lei, a researcher at the Institute of Computing Technology (ICT) at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, announced last week that his research group had "independently" developed a new programming language, named Mulan after the legendary heroine, and touted as having "applications for artificial intelligence and the internet of things." Days later, Mr Liu wrote an apology to domestic media for "exaggerating" his achievements. Mr Liu admitted that Mulan was based on Python, a programming language whose components are freely available under an "open-source" licence, and that it was primarily designed for teaching programming to children, not for AI applications.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Chinese Academic Suspended After His 'Fully Independently Developed' Programming Language Found To Be Based on Python

Comments Filter:
  • A good first step (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ElectronicSpider ( 6381110 ) on Wednesday January 22, 2020 @12:10PM (#59644314)
    Now tackle the rest of your knockoff market, China.
    • Are you telling me this [cultofmac.com] is not a real iPhone? (SFW)

    • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      I heard they improved on the F-35, making it better and cheaper to manufacturer. Let's swipe it back.

      • Nah - they stole the plans before the issue with the F-35 losing altitude in turns was fixed. At the first public demo, many western observers quietly laughed to see the Chinese had *not* fixed the issue. Even though, at this point, the US had.

        The question of whether the Chinese version will have the same cracking issue is up for debate ... since the engine propelling their copy of the US p.o.s. is substantially less powerful, the stresses are going to be less, too.

    • by TWX ( 665546 )

      This knockoff is bad because it's a poor knockoff and has caused embarrassment, therefore it needs to be expunged.

      Good knockoffs are advantageous for the technological advancement they contribute to the nation, and therefore should be pursued.

      At least this is how I imagine it would work in a semi-closed nation.

    • ... what did people think would happen?

      An idiot suit from Intel/Apple/IBM/whoever:
      "Here Mr Chinese Factory Owner are the specs for our latest advanced chips we spent 10 years and $$$$ developing. Please manufacture them. You won't steal the IP will you? No? Good, thats all sorted then."

      A few months later in Chowmein province: "Honourable Mr Chairman, we have made a million copies of the Western pigs chips but have changed the stamp on the chip packaging. Shall we sell them for 50% less or 75% less? And ther

      • Consequence isn't a word in their dictionary. They only know that more money in the bank=good, to hell with the future.
      • by Kjella ( 173770 )

        You're assuming the CEOs are stupid but your timeline is off. It doesn't happen in a matter of months, they rack up several years worth of very profitable quarters with low production costs, rising stock price and huge bonuses. They don't get punished by investors because most of those are short-sighted too, many are speculating and just looking to time their exit anyway. The attitude of employees is mostly to collect their paycheck and stay while it's good and move on if it's not. Who really cares where th

        • by sjames ( 1099 )

          You're assuming the CEOs are stupid...

          That's Hanlon's razor. The alternative is that the captain and top officers are deliberately steering for the iceberg with plans to cast off in the only lifeboat 30 seconds before impact with all of the emergency supplies and washing up on a tropical beach a couple weeks later with steamer trunks full of cash. Leaving passengers and crew to sink or swim when the ship goes down.

          Stupid or criminal, take your pick.

          • The Executive suite types are the criminals, the investors are the stupid ones.

            And the US is the long term victim of both.

      • by bws111 ( 1216812 )

        IBMs chips are manufactured in the US, not China

    • by Pimpy ( 143938 )

      Yes, because supply exists totally in a vacuum, and it's not other countries that are driving the demand.

    • Now tackle the rest of your knockoff market, China.

      Oh, you misunderstand, this isn't about the market. This isn't about protecting the people who would be duped. This is merely about Academic concerns; he was receiving a paycheck for doing this, and they're mad they had to pay for it.

      When a factory steals IP, nobody gets paid separately for that work. Engineers are not valued, they're seen as draftsmen. Any payments are related to selling the parts used by the stolen IP.

      This guy isn't in trouble for stealing IP. He's in trouble for receiving a paycheck by f

  • PAYWALL (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Joviex ( 976416 ) on Wednesday January 22, 2020 @12:14PM (#59644328)
    Nice article no one can read without paying. gg.
  • by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Wednesday January 22, 2020 @12:17PM (#59644332) Journal

    If he got rid of white-space blocks, give him a Nobel instead of firing him.

  • by ZoomieDood ( 778915 ) on Wednesday January 22, 2020 @12:24PM (#59644352)

    You culturally insensitive slob.

  • I'm seeing a ton of articles about Chinese "innovation" that turns out to be based on someone else's work, quite heavily at that. Is there something in their culture that discourages originality?

    • by jythie ( 914043 )
      Maybe, but I see it more as selling stories to a western market. The idea that China just steals and the US 'innovates' is really treasured by a lot of Americans, but when you look at American innovation, it is alway rooted in existing things that people have patched together and improved on. The myth of the isolated, revolutionary inventor is near and dear to the audience's heart, and such stories serve as a way to bolster 'we are great, they suck, don't worry too much about them'.

      The flip side of this,
    • Yes, there is. Watch this for more insight in Chinese culture from a westerner's perspective https://youtu.be/9loDBwp5ST0?t... [youtu.be]
    • by Pimpy ( 143938 )

      That's because it's a common line of propaganda in the west. China does, of course, innovate, and is now much better at playing well with others since the overhaul of its IP laws and office some years back. That doesn't change the fact that a lot of Chinese companies got their initial start by reverse-engineering western-made products and shipping cheaply produced clones domestically and to the developing world (markets that the big western companies typically ignored). This is how companies like Huawei sta

    • They have been a culture for centuries of master and apprenticeship. They believe that you must do something 10,000 times to achieve mastery. Theyâ(TM)re very training process is to do it exactly the way it was shown to them 10,000 types. No deviations, no interpretations. Thinking outside of the box is very difficult when your society came from this underlying concept.

    • by jimbo ( 1370 )

      Probably a number of factors but anecdotally one person I talked to said his school in a big city is so full of talented middle class kids that if you want to not just stand out but even just make it as an average performer you have to press every advantage. Cheating is just business as usual to make it in a fiercely competitive society where the new number one new year greeting is about prosperity and profit, not health.

  • Was he suspended because he lied about its origins when he said it was "homegrown"?

    Was he suspended because it was a copy of something else in the first place when it was supposed to have been developed by him?

    Or was he suspended because he copied a crappy language [hackerfactor.com]?

    • homegrown was not the issue, it was that he said they had developed it independently and was a language designed for building AI and IoT.
      • by mark-t ( 151149 )

        So basically, he was suspended just for lying about it?

        If only the USA truly held its president to the same standard.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    ... Liu Lei Lied?

  • Remember YACC? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Wednesday January 22, 2020 @12:48PM (#59644450) Homepage

    Remember Yet Another Compiler-Compiler (YACC). People have been developing "new" programming languages for decades. Implementing compilers or interpreters is actually a lot of fun - I've done at least two myself.

    The thing is, there isn't actually much need for new languages. What there is, is a need to whack all the cruft off of existing languages. Which is nearly impossible, so people invent new ones that are essentially older languages minus the cruft. The problem is that extensive libraries are what make a language really productive to use - and a new language generally won't have libraries. At best, it can "borrow" them (like Scala does with Java).

    For me, the real question is: Why do maintainers insist on adding more and more stuff to existing languages? PHP was a better language without OO bolted on. Java was a cleaner without lambdas, which are a pretty horrible imitation of functional programming. Etc.

    Now, get off my lawn /rant

    • by Pimpy ( 143938 )

      That's because languages invariably have to deal with pulls from two different directions: (1) supporting existing / legacy systems; and (2) supporting new features. As compilers age, this gap becomes increasingly large, and the amount of tooling required to allow both to co-exist gets increasingly more complex. While it's relatively easy to come up with a shiny new lightweight/toy compiler, it will invariably pile on more complexity as the gaps between (1) and (2) grow, especially if it gets any kind of ac

    • I used to be surprised about how few people who build new languages were willing to seek feedback first, using a rough draft with code samples.

      Then I went about seeking feedback on a draft idea, and learned three lessons. First, everybody wants different things. There is probably no way to make everybody happy. The trick may be pissing off the least amount of people, or finding a niche.

      Second, people are resistant to new ideas*. They tend to defend either their favorite language, and/or the status quo. I sa

      • by narcc ( 412956 )

        I still think it's a great concept and wonder why many dismissed even the idea

        I think I can answer that. Despite being one of the more interesting thinkers when it comes to programming and programming languages, you've slaughtered one too many sacred cows over the years. You've been branded a heretic and were dismissed on that basis alone.

        • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

          Thanks for the encouragement!

          you've slaughtered one too many sacred cows over the years. You've been branded a heretic and were dismissed on that basis alone.

          It does seem that way. I enjoy specific criticism of my suggestions because I learn from such and improve my suggestions, or discard them if they truly stink. And I have tossed a couple.

          But specific criticism is really hard to come by, and the dismissals do indeed resemble argumentum ad verecundiam to me, where the "authority" is either themselves or t

      • How is it different than the idea of .Net (any language can compile to it) or IO language (which lets you dynamically redefine the syntax to match basically any language)?
    • by bigpat ( 158134 )

      Seems like the primary purpose of creating new languages is so you can sell books and training and get rid of highly paid experienced software engineers because they have the same amount of experience in that new language as teenagers who took a 6 week course over the Summer.

    • I have to differ with you. There are plenty of reasons for developing new languages. Lots of new concepts get developed all the time and a new language can make these easier.
  • Why is everyone always so impressed with every new programming language? Creating a programming language isn't that hard, and is a "solved" problem in computer science. Anybody can create a language in one afternoon of coding with lex and yacc.

    A new programming language doesn't actually have any value, the value of a programming language lies in how much actual usable library code it has available.

    • by mark-t ( 151149 )

      Actually, anyone can create a progamming language even without lex or yacc if its LL(1) parsable. I have written countless recursive decent parsers from scratch in my career for assorted custom scripting languages.

      I far prefer writing parsers and lexers by hand than using lex or yacc because the source code is human-readable, and isn't hidden behind a layer of complexity, often requiring additional libraries that have nothing to do with solving whatever problem I might be working on.

    • by Misagon ( 1135 )

      And you know, there is no need for any innovation whatsoever because everything that can be invented has already been invented. /s

  • It's all Nixon's fault. Had he not paved the path for "normal" trade relations with China imagine how different things would have worked out.

  • Many programming languages have copied from each other, inherited syntax, etc. the bigger issue is whether they've simply taken the whole codebase, slapped a different name on it, and presented it as their own (which this article seems to be suggesting). I'm unable to find any specific link to the developed language, though.

  • So smart to fool others :P
  • China's political and cultural environment demands results, and that basically means taking shortcuts.....and that means copying. It's not that Chinese people can't be creative, but they just don't have the environment to do it. Changing that will be painful. Some people have this weird idea China will take over from the US as the world's major economy.
    • It's not that Chinese people can't be creative, but they just don't have the environment to do it.

      Well, duh. Collectivist culture can't be creative. That's not the part of the individual people, and yet, the collectivism is built from the sum of individuals choosing it.

      Change the culture, change the results. In future generations. But it is their culture to choose, currently this is who they are, at a deep level.

    • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      China's political and cultural environment demands results, and that basically means taking shortcuts.....and that means copying. It's not that Chinese people can't be creative, but they just don't have the environment to do it.

      US companies also demand results; that's why we get crap like "ghost add-ons" from Wells Fargo, Comcast, AT&T, etc.

      I suspect the difference is that capitalism grew faster in China than the ability of the gov't to regulate it, and people just got into the habit of cheating. The

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Anonymous Coward

    OH MY GOD STOP THE PRESSES!!!

    I can't believe it. It is a red letter day. Someone in China has stolen someone else's intellectual property. Un-fucking-believable. Who would have ever thought it could happen???

  • No, say it is not so.
    I would like to think that Trump's recent deal will matter, but I seriously doubt it.
  • Python [...] (is) primarily designed for teaching programming to children.

    So there it is. Python is the new Basic.

  • (takes a look at it for a moment, tosses it into the pile)

      How about just refining what we have now? Does this wheel really need to be reinvented for the 10 billionth time?

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." - Bert Lantz

Working...