There seem to be a lot of stories with a negative view of China on HN.
This isn't (or at least should not be) China vs USA, these are two private companies competing. It does feel like there's a narrative to make it feel like the space race where you had two nation states competing, but it's really not like that at all. The American people should feel little extra connection to SpaceX than they do to Landscape, after all, the people of America will not benefit SpaceX successes in the same way they would if NASA were to succeed.
Personally I don't appreciate nationalism and I think there's a huge element to this in the way many of us think about the world, which is reflected in our reporting of events.
Of course, you are right. But nationalism is way ingrained.
US multinational PR may be all about globalization and inclusiveness, but employees will always chant “USA”.
On the flip side, here is how SCMP introduced SpaceX:
> Tuesday's successful launch into orbit of private company SpaceX's unmanned Dragon capsule may have marked 'a new era in space exploration'
A friend of mine was in a Chinese high school for a year. Every Monday morning the whole school had to line up by class in formation and watch the flag being raised with their fists raised in a sort of salute. Then they would have to recite this kind of pledge/chant thing before listening to the school's party secretary talk about communism for 15 minutes.
I really don't get what effect it tries to achieve, or how it could ever manage to do anything other than make kids bored/misbehave.
- They are only allowed to hire US citizens and permanent residents
- They are not allowed to export their technology
- They derive a substantial fraction of their income from US government contracts. Most of which can only be won by american companies.
- NASA shares substantial amounts of information with them.
- Also the reverse.
- (I'm pretty sure the list goes on)
China is relevant not just as a "go <country>" sense but it's about what technology this group has access to. The regulatory regime they are part of (how many people are they allowed to risk killing). The funding options they have. How this technology affects politics. Etc.