no, you need to explain why you thought the Soviet connection was important enough to mention. you could have said you agreed with the number or you thought it was too high for reasons or too low for reasons.
Its origin is important to know, to interpret that specificity. Did Feynman derive five years for innovations. No? Does the Chinese calendar have five years per “year week”? No.
So where did “5” come from? The Soviet Union.
Now questions about how well 5 years works can focus on historical successes and failures, instead of “where the heck did that number come from?”.
Ok. Well don't be coy, show your work.
What kind of purity test bullshit rhetoric are you using here? Whenever you find yourself saying, “you need to explain yourself”, step back and question things.
Have you tried reading the thread instead of jumping on a guy for wrongspeak?
The Soviet connection is really not that hard to follow. They were discussing development cycles. Whether China, which is a communist country with a “5 year economic plan”, is successful due to that 5 year plan.
So it’s very relevant to mention the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was a communist country, it “invented” the 5 year economic plan, and it failed spectacularly.