A Canadian and a Chinese Stole Tesla's Secret Battery Technology

"In New York,  a Canadian and a Chinese were arrested for selling secret Tesla battery production technology.

 

A Canadian and Chinese nationald were arrested on Long Island, New York. The New York Times (NYT) reports this, citing the US attorney's office in Brooklyn. The defendants tried to sell secret battery production technology owned by Tesla. The prosecutor's office applied for an arrest warrant for the theft of secret documents. According to the NYT, the court documents only named "the leading U.S. manufacturer of electric vehicles and battery systems."

 

During his visit to the gigafactory near Berlin, Elon Musk expressed his support for expanding the factory and launching the production of a cheap Tesla model and a Semi truck. However, the head of Tesla must take into account the resistance of activists.

 

The defendants allegedly stole secret battery cell production technology

 

The detained perpetrators are described as former employees of the Canadian company Hibar Systems, which specializes in, among others, in effective technology for the production of battery cells on an industrial scale. In 2019, Tesla acquired Hibar Systems and the company has since operated as Tesla Toronto Automation ULC. The defendants founded a company in China that was to sell batteries with secret technology developed by Hibar/Tesla. According to prosecutors, the defendants had access to drawings and other documents that allowed them to copy the production process. During the investigation, members of the operations team contacted them at CES in Las Vegas and expressed interest in purchasing them, which ultimately led to their arrest. According to media reports, the main defendant faces up to ten years in prison, and the prosecutor responsible for the case talks about a "potential risk to US national security."

 

 

Rinkos, o ne valstybė, dirbo Kinijai

  ""JAV slysta į Kinijos stiliaus kapitalizmą" (JAV naujienos, kovo 22 d.) iš esmės yra tikslus. Tačiau argumentas, kad "visas Kinijos ekonomikos modelis sukasi apie rinkos ekonomikos principų atrankinį nepaisymą", turėtų būti išnagrinėtas.

 

     Prieš Xi Jinpingui tampant prezidentu, Kinija daugiausia vadovavosi Deng Xiaoping plėtros modeliu, kuris pabrėžė rinkodaros ir atsivėrimo pasauliui naudą.

 

     P. Xi grįžo prie strategijos, priklausančios nuo klasių kovos, ir uždarė bet kokią galimybę laisvai idėjų rinkai.

 

     Kinijos sėkmę atnešė rinkos, o ne Mao.

 

     Kinija neprivertė Amerikos priimti valstybinį kapitalizmą. Deja, mes tai padarėme savo noru, pamiršdami, kad ankstyvą Kinijos sėkmę lėmė ne centrinis planavimas ir pramonės politika, o laipsniškas privačios nuosavybės ir rinkos principų priėmimas. Pavyzdžiui, 1978 m. valstybinės įmonės sudarė beveik 80 % Kinijos pramonės produkcijos; iki 2016 m. jų dalis sumažėjo iki 20 proc. Šios reformos paskatino spartų ekonomikos augimą, nors Kinijos bendrasis vidaus produktas, tenkantis vienam gyventojui, šiandien tebėra mažesnis, nei trečdalis JAV bendrojo vidaus produkto.

 

     2008 m., kai JAV pradėjo praktikuoti savo valstybinio kapitalizmo versiją, Kinijos rinkos liberalai liko klausę: „Kas atsitiko mokytojui?

     Jamesas A. Dornas

     Cato institutas

     Vašingtonas“ [1]

 

1. Markets, Not the State, Worked for China. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 01 Apr 2024: A.16.

Markets, Not the State, Worked for China

""U.S. Slides Into China-Style Capitalism" (U.S. News, March 22) is largely on target. But the argument that China's "entire economic model revolves around selectively flouting principles of the market economy" should be qualified. 

Before Xi Jinping became president, China was largely following Deng Xiaoping's development model, which emphasized the benefits of marketization and opening to the world. 

Mr. Xi has reverted to a strategy dependent on class struggle and has closed any opening for a free market in ideas. 

China's success came from markets, not Mao.

China hasn't forced America to adopt state capitalism. Unfortunately, we did it on our own accord, forgetting that China's early success wasn't due to central planning and industrial policy, but instead the gradual adoption of private ownership and market principles. In 1978, for example, state-owned enterprises accounted for nearly 80% of China's industrial output; by 2016 their share had declined to 20%. These reforms generated rapid economic growth, though per capita gross domestic product in China today remains less than one-third that of the U.S.

In 2008, when the U.S. began to practice its own version of state capitalism, China's market liberals were left asking, "What happened to the teacher?"

James A. Dorn

Cato Institute

Washington" [1]

1. Markets, Not the State, Worked for China. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 01 Apr 2024: A.16.