I’ve owned a lot of Gopro cameras, having done video capture for a variety of motorsports, and they just got too expensive for what you get.
You can be more expensive if you’re better, or you can be worse if you’re cheaper, but they’re both the downsides while living purely off brand recognition.
They also blew up in a time where there wasn’t any real competition. Sony had action cameras but they were bulkier and expensive, and didn’t have the features of GoPro.
These days other brands give better quality video in better quality hardware and more functionality, for cheaper.
GoPro is a US company designed in U.S. with manufacturing in Thailand, China, and Mexico.
Insta360 is a Chinese company designed in Shenzhen and built there, too.
People think this doesn’t matter, but GoPros are used all over in aerospace. If we replaced the brand with Insta360, that puts a big attack vector all over the place.
A similar pattern happened with drones with DJI, intentionally killing all non-Chinese drone brands. And with BambuLabs (founded by ex-DJI) with 3D printers (the only good non-Chinese printer that doesn’t cost 10-100x as much is Prusa, and they’re facing extremely strong headwinds).
Legitimately better Chinese products (incredible engineering) that have massive industrial policy support, probably industrial espionage support (as in the case of DJI for certain), massive influencer marketing campaigns, and near zero cost of capital. When China wants to deindustrialize non-Chinese industries for strategic and/or natsec reasons, they are incredibly good at it. (And note it’s not US-only, China targets basically ANY brand that isn’t Chinese. China absolutely does this to Europe as well… and you can see them doing it in real-time with automotive.)
The only surprising thing to me is how people just act like it’s not happening. I guess for people who don’t have any experience working on federal government adjacent aerospace stuff, the idea of natsec considerations for IT hardware seems entirely abstract, but it’s incredibly real if you do.
If your country’s industrial and defense policy relies on individual consumers making choices that are worse for them on almost all metrics, it’s time to think about on worse payroll your politicians are.
It's easy to get all high and mighty but there really doesn't have to be complex subterfuge behind "replacing the majority of our technical infrastructure with devices solely created within the borders of our primary military, industrial, and economic rival is not a good idea for security and sovereignty."
We cast aside local manufacturing for cheaper prices in another country and are going to pay the price one way or another.
Absolutely true. But China’s industrial dominance is also the government immiserating its people, just in a different way. Domestic consumption in China is famously low, work culture is famously bad (996,etc). And this is because of what their government, not the people of China, have chosen to do.
[delayed]
>But China’s industrial dominance is also the government immiserating its people
Didn't they bring hundreds of millions out of poverty, and built amazing cities and facilities in the past 30 years?
>Domestic consumption in China is famously low
Compared to what, the US? Compared to China is at a historical high, isn't it? And they're doing quite well even compared to like 70% of the world and rising.
Not as much as their East Asian neighbors, who had increasing democracy and fewer deaths to starvation…
> Didn't they bring hundreds of millions out of poverty, and built amazing cities and facilities in the past 30 years?
Yes, but China-bad ideology demands that we ask ”at what cost?”
I wonder if similar costs were paid when the West was industrializing?
Spoiler: Yes.
There was a real human cost to how China industrialized that isn’t “muh freedoms”.
China overproduced STEM grads so that their industries could hire them for pennies on the dollar. They had to withstand insane competition starting in elementary school, only to end up unemployed or doordashing.
This isn’t a PRC specific thing either, TSMC is infamous for having PhDs doing night shift lab tech work for pennies (comparatively).
> This isn’t a PRC specific thing either, TSMC is infamous for having PhDs doing night shift lab tech work for pennies (comparatively).
Engineers from Taiwan go to mainland China these days to earn more money. Taiwan was pretty brutal with personal sacrifice in its development as much or if more than the mainland. We could say similar about Korea, Japan, and Singapore as well. This is why Asia seems to be taking over the world now, but the people are about as happy as you’d expect.
> having PhDs doing night shift lab tech work for pennies
I don't know why people keep bringing this up as though it is surprising.
In almost any field other than AI PhDs are underpaid on average.
There are many, many bio PhDs working as lab technicians.
In general, I do think the East Asian nations have over-prioritized work for export and industrial policy at the expense of the well-being of their citizens.
China isn't bad, the CCP is.
That simplistic characterization is still essentially "China-bad." The CCP is the same government responsible for lifting historically unprecedented numbers of people out of abject poverty. Does it make up for other human rights violations? No. But "CCP bad" flattens a complex and powerful political organization into a fairy tale boogeyman.
> lifting historically unprecedented numbers of people out of abject poverty.
Basically true, but not much more than that for most Chinese. The urban modern success story presented to the world is a surprisingly small segment of a notably larger population and even for many in that smaller more fortunate segment the gravy days are long ago and no sign of returning yet.
https://eastasiaforum.org/2011/08/19/in-the-city-but-not-of-...
And chinese don't have full freedom of movement. China uses a system called called hukou which binds a persons rights and benefits to their birthplace. This has created a population of 350 million rural migrants who live in cities but still have a rural hukou and are treated like second class citizens in their own country.
https://borgenproject.org/chinas-hukou-system-restricts-mobi...
The worst part of the CCP is it's hatred for free speech
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jul/16/hong-kong-book...
Five arrested in Hong Kong bookstore raids in ‘seditious’ materials crackdown
Third round of arrests linked to independent bookshops widely regarded as clampdown on dissent in territory
Yes, their system has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty, but government policy is now making Chinese consumers poorer than they otherwise would be in order to support domestic industry. It seem’s to be for geo-strategic reasons rather than in the interests of the Chinese people, it’s also probably unsustainable.
WOW the classic yes...but..., where's these statement coming from? I'm Chinese and I don't get the point here at all, you guys seem living in vacuum with biased news, and know much much better than we people living here, that's really confusing everytime I see/read comments lie this.
China now is open freely for almost everyone, come and see by yourslef, if you not living poverty.
The world itslef does not work the propaganda way whether you dislike or hate the gov for whatever reason. And yes you can criticize the gov as you like with the news you read otr the party you pro with, but never assume how the people feel and belives if you are not the people, and if you do then that's the same mindset as Trump or any other war-bringing president the US had, and you know what they did and still doing.
Tell your neighbors, friends, and government bureaucrats about the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre.
Let me know how that goes.
For bringing people out of poverty, they had laminated placards attached to the doors of people who were poor, and the name of the government official who was responsible for lifting that family out of poverty, and if that government official failed at it, they wouldn't advance in their career.
>Didn't they bring hundreds of millions out of poverty, and built amazing cities and facilities in the past 30 years?
So did the western world.
Ask Poland, the Baltics and East Germany if they want communism back. I'll wait. :)
I am so tired of the praise of China online while condemning the west. Worst part is you probably live in the west.
*Nono, dont reply, just downvote instead :)
China is not Iron Curtain countries dominated by the USSR. to compare China to Poland has no merit.
China has built high speed rail, a quality universal health care system, and huge tech and mfg sectors. It most certainly is orders of magnitude above East Germany, and not even the same type of socialism.
There are good things about the West and good things about China, it’s not as simple as “our side good”.
China is still a dictatorship who massacred its own people despite building high speed rail...
They only got it good when the USA opened relations in the 80s something they never did with Soviet.
China does not have universal health care.
China helps Russia invade Ukraine. That is simple. Unless you like that too?
Also, where do people want to live? North EU. Yet when we keep our lands people call us racist.
And the US calls itself a democracy and kills innocent people abroad.
I don't see any merit in these simplistic world views.
The world isn't Lord of the Rings, it's more A Song Of Ice And Fire.
Did that comment indicate any condemnation of the west?
What I'm tired of is zero-sum jingoistic nationalism of any kind. Can we just be happy for all of the world to prosper?
edit: I didn't downvote you but it's probably the uncalled-for cynicism.
Nationalism is a cancer
>Ask Poland, the Baltics and East Germany if they want communism back. I'll wait. :)
We could, but don't expect the results to be as clear cut as you think :)
https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/homesick-for-a-...
https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/10/12/many-eastern-eur...
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2009/11/02/end-of-communi...
https://brnodaily.com/2023/11/20/news/poll-17-of-czechs-say-...
https://english.radio.cz/poll-less-25-feel-better-now-under-...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_nostalgia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostalgie
And of course 2026 China is the very opposite of some failing economy, like Eastern Bloc countries have been in 1989.
Work Culture is famously bad? Look I get 996. The Youth seem like they are either next level burned out or on a treadmill that never ends(due to the 25% youth unemployment, the deflation happening and the extreme overabundance of educated professionals). Both are not good. But the original comment listed stellar companies and products that wipe the floor with American made junk. You don't get that without some extensive hard work. Stealing only takes to so far, you gotta do a lot more on top of that.
Consumption is not just low, it’s intentionally suppressed.
> who’s payroll your politicians are on
It doesn’t even have to be foreign - it can just be corrupt self interest.
What other explanation is there for attacking Venezuela and Iran?
I don't even think it's corrupt self-interest. Just idiotic bravado and wanting to settle long held grudges.
Distraction from the Epstein files
You’re getting downvoted for this which is crazy.
Its more like lack of policy. To be clear, we are talking about China winning IoT hardware industry in this case. That’s not a policy.
You could ban Chinese IoT devices. Or spur local industry. But we aren’t talking about the military relying on Chinese hardware or something.
This is the idea behind a tariff
The "idea" of Trump's tariffs (if there ever was one) is to subvert the US constitution which places taxation under the control of congress, not the president.
The person you replied to did not mention a specific leader's policy.
False. Tariffs are a standard foreign policy tool used as an economic negotiating tactic.
The US government is literally refunding the tariffs because they were illegal.
That doesn’t respond to this comment.
Reads to me like it's free market doing its job, if you think of countries as companies. US just needs to step up its game.
It's not really a free market when one country is heavily subsidizing it's industries
It is not as though other countries could not choose do the same.
It seem to me that China choosing to subsidize industry it is not so different than the US choosing to subsidize Roads, Autos and OIL.
In both cases it does seem to work splendidly as intended.
Other than political inertia (or economic reasons far beyond my ability to fathom) there is nothing to stop the US from following suit.
I accept "free market" is a term of art probably from before global trade reality and could be narrowly redefined to mean whatever one wants (or wanted when it was coined) but in my ignorance I see it simply as free to choose actions and responses.
But I am far far away from opinions I am qualified to hold, think I will shut up now.
> roads
I think even the Chicago school would agree that roads should be public
> autos
I absolutely detest US policy with respect to autos so I will not refute this
> oil
Matter of strategic importance that isn’t related to spying or subterfuge. The Nazis probably would have won WWII if they hadn’t run out of diesel. I’m not sure digital cameras come close to this.
But you could imagine a country that invested, in addition to roads, cars, and oil, in public transportation, cities that you can get around on foot, and in renewable energy. Such a country might be better off that the US is now.
I think the overwhelming and undeniable success and prosperity of China is the biggest concern to the west, the neoliberals consistently predicted their immediate downfall that never came. Except we are all still led by the same neoliberals proven wrong about everything, the contradictions everywhere are driving us all into collective insanity. If we don't manage to purge our media and governments from these vile people the only path forward is collective decline, increased totalitarianism and our repression leading to a war with China. Wars don't always end in the right side winning, and the cold war was won by the wrong side.
Thanks, not to disagree but it may be best to use plain language as I do not know what a neoliberal is to me never mind what it means to you.
I do know liberal is used as a derisive term by the people we (US) are being led by which leads me to cognitive dissonance parsing your statement.
When Uber does it: good. When China does it: bad.
So ridiculous. So a bit of subsidy is ok, but no more than the US does? As a country that’s suffered from the US subsidising its own industries, my sympathy is zero.
> What country and what industries?
New Zealand. Meat exports and dairy.
I would assume that China is your biggest trade partner for both of those categories. Is the US a major trade partner for either of those categories? I find it hard to believe. The US (and most rich countries) have way too much domestic dairy farm capacity. As a result, there is lots of govt subsidies paid to dairy farmers.
and the US famously never subsidizes any of its industries...
> Between 2005 and 2024, Chinese firms received on average three to eight times more subsidies than competitors in OECD economies.
https://www.oecd.org/en/blogs/2026/06/industrial-subsidies-h...
I can't read this seriously while being unable to buy any Chinese EVs here in the US.
You can't buy Chinese EVs in the US because China is overtly running a dumping campaign for them. It's an interesting story, read up on it!
I read up on it, and it's not clear to me that it's actual dumping.
As in "selling below the cost of production".
I would say that China is trying to steer the car makers away from competing locally, as it's going to result in a price war. But that's not quite dumping per se.
That is (factually) a giant overstatement, and ignores domestic US politics.
It's almost like you believe the US remains interested in promoting free trade.
If it did, it wouldn't be levying illegal and constantly changing import tariffs, in violation of international trade agreements that it has signed up to.
Wait - what?
You cannot buy them because they are dumping them??????
"Dumping" is a term of art in international trade.
It's the thing that happens when a foreign exporter sells goods in your country below their production cost (or far below what they're charging domestic customers). It's done to fuck up the foreign markets for those goods, or, in China's case, as a relief valve for malinvestment.
China drastically overfunds EV production. There's a whole weird story where provinces apparently competed to get slices of the EV production business, which resulted in a large number of competing firms, producing far more vehicles than the Chinese domestic market could consume.
This isn't just a US thing. Europe tariffs the heck out of these cars.
Interesting that they are “dumping” them in Australia and other countries at prices that are competitive but far above what they cost in China.
Below cost of production my ass.
The only Western car company even competing with them is Tesla, who people love to hate for ideological reasons.
Calling what Chinese companies are doing “dumping” is pure cope for the utter failures of Western companies.
Look at my post history, I’m not pro-China at all, but I am a realist and can see the evidence with my own eyes since we can actually get the vehicles here.
I give it 5 years for Western and Japanese companies to be decimated in this market. Can’t say they don’t deserve it.
Yes, I am well aware of the definition of dumping - that fails to explain why people cannot buy them.
If they're being dumped there is an oversupply, and people are spoilt for choice. The market is awash with the dumped product.
Not being able to buy them is the exact reverse of that.
The entire point of anti-dumping actions is that left unregulated, people will buy these unsubsidized cars.
Right - your comment was very poorly articulated - and loaded with supposition.
Your claim is that the reason people cannot buy the vehicles ISN'T because they are being dumped BUT because the government SAYS they are being dumped and has therefore actively prevented them from being sold.
The supposition is that it's an accurate claim by the governments - there are reports that the Chinese manufacturers are being restricted by their government and that there has been a period of over production, but how much of that is true and how much is propaganda is very difficult to actually ascertain.
I don't know what you're trying to say here. I don't think there's a serious dispute about whether China is dumping EVs, and the US isn't the only place claiming that.
The whole SV is based on dumping. And was for decades.
I don't know how this is supposed to respond to what I just wrote. If an EU country restricted contracts or usage with Google or OpenAI, I wouldn't call them out for doing so. All I'm saying is that it's especially clear why Chinese EVs are impeded from selling in the US.
What’s the level of subsidy that’s ok?
I'll take a stab. How about something like not more than 50% greater than OECD average per industry? My point: It seems reasonable that some countries was to specialise in certain areas. For example: Taiwan and (East!) Germany chose to build-out their semiconductor industry starting in the 1980s. It has paid pretty good dividends with a healthy amount of industrial subsidies. I also think the OECD should be raising tariff rates to protect against ridiculous levels of Chinese subsidies.
Appeals to fairness are difficult to accept when the rest of us out here in the world have been hurt by the US imposing tariffs and sanctions on us over the past few decades, and with intense chaotic energy in the last few years.
How do we make a system everyone is to abide by when the US can just rewrite the rules when it suits? Order collapses when a huge country behaves this way.
Quite a few members of the OECD have already done so.
Which industries are the US leading in because of subsidies?
Arms, weapons, fighter jets and so on. The US sounds a trillion $ a year subsidizing the military industrial complex.
The US chose their market (arms). The Chinese chose consumer goods. Go figure.
Basically every "made in USA" consumer product has a DOD contract. The DOD is mandated by law to purchase from US companies, so there is a huge sector of small-to-medium businesses which only exist because there is a guaranteed order coming every quarter for uniforms or boots or other equipment that would likely be 1/3 the price if they were contract-manufactured in China or Vietnam.
Not saying this is uniformly bad, because without the law the number of businesses with the ability to manufacture this stuff would trend toward zero, but it is a form of subsidy.
I wonder if this pattern is true for all militaries in rich countries. I think it sounds like good economic policy. If you want to grow your military, then you need to make sure it is spent domestically. Also, the "finish good" may include lots of parts that were built overseas. Think about a Tomohawk missile: I am sure the microchips are all made overseas. That said, the intellectual property is developed domestically (or with very close allies) and final assembly is done domestically.
US Arms exports bring in around $13 billion a year. The military industrial complex is a domestic jobs program that sells the vast majority of what it makes domestically. The US is clearly not spending a trillion dollars a year subsidizing defense in order to make their products more competitive in other markets.
https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/arms_exports/
I'm not sure I agree. In the aircraft industry especially the US has strongly pushed for exports. Overseas programs (TRS2, Avro Arrow) were terminated for political reasons (and replaced with F111 etc). More recently see F35 impact.
That's before we discuss the advantage Boeing has in the commercial market thanks to DoD contracts.
Your link shows that the US exports the same as the next 20 countries added together. That suggests some market dominance.
I also suspect these numbers do not include "military aid" - where weapons and munitions are "given" by the US to Ukraine wherever[1]. (But they may, I don't know.)
I agree though that the primary benefit of this is not "sales". And even if it was these aren't consumer goods. So it's not easily compared to China's approach. I'm not suggesting it's a terribly good subsidy. But it's still a subsidy.
[1] there are a lot of political benefits to be gained by having bases in foreign countries, or by port visits by US ships. Unfortunately most of those benefits have been eroded in the last 2 years. The gutting of USAid (which saved basically nothing), leaving the WHO, the tarrif nonsense, bombing Iran - all have destroyed a benevolent reputation 75 years in the making.
Sadly, consumer goods are the new arms (drones, batteries, etc)
Oil, natural gas, corn (for fuel), soybeans (for cattle feed)
If a country hands out enormous subsidies but yet isn't leading in anything, then maybe it's time to consider what structural reasons are causing these subsidies to be squandered and whose bottom lines are being padded.
What US industries get anywhere near Chinese level subsidies.
I heard that when some country wants to pay in a different currency than USD for oil, a coup suddenly happens, or a helicopter comes and the president gets kidnapped
The US dollar being the global reserve currency makes exports more expensive though.
It basically means most of the world's currency wealth is held in the USA or backed by the USA. So the answer would be the finance sector - it's subsidized by the rest of the world.
Agriculture?
China spends close to 10x what the US does on agriculture subsidies.
Ever wondered why everything in the USA contains corn syrup? Because sugar is artificially expensive (roughly double the global price) due to import tariffs that protect US sugar cane farmers.
EVs, mobile phones, are two massive industries where Chinese competitors are not only way ahead, but also basically banned.
It's not much more of a free market when giant corporations do.
This particular complaint is tripple hypocritical. US whole deal is to sell under price until competition dies and only then bring up prices or remove offering.
It winner takes all econony is literally based on destroying the competition as such.
Ignoring foreign patents also played a big part in US industrialization.
Successful Chinese industries tend to be subsidized at the level of cities and regions. This creates fierce intra national rivalry that forces rapid evolution and excellence. Electric vehicles are an example.
Anything the federal government pumps money into tends not to do as well.
Every country including the US does that.
Does it matter? When has capitalism cared about fair or free
Or when one country can print endless money while threatening the rest of the world with all kinds of punishment if they stop using it as a reserve currency.
Stop crying already. US subsidizes a boatload of things.
Perhaps a huge tell about national strategy is the fact that the owner has $10s of millions to loan to the company? US economic structure in post WWII era has increasingly focused on return on capital (and value extraction). How can that compete in long term with an economy which prioritizes reinvestment *in industry*?
One would presume that the founder is investing their money into something, probably equities, that is an investment in industry. They could be either selling those equities for a loan here or taking a loan against those equities to loan to GoPro (if the cost of capital is lower for them than GoPro, which seems plausible.)
I generally agree with your point about value extraction vs. re-investment.
Equities aren't investment in industry except when there's an IPO or SPO. The rest of the time, it's zero-sum.
What you just said makes no sense. How can equities come into existence except via an IPO or similar mechanism?
Equities are literally investments in business. Equity is a line in the balance sheet for every corporation.
People know it’s happening. What do you expect an average consumer to do about it? Pay more out of pocket due to the potential national security risks?
You can't pay more to get a better drone than DJI's. You can pay more (although it's difficult) to get a worse drone. Much worse.
Right, because in an actual free market where DHI was not heavily subsidized, DJI drones would cost MUCH more, and the other drones would be competitive.
Same for BYD vs Tesla and every other car. It is easy to win in the "free market" when you give away your product.
Same for Uber and Lyft for many years — subsidized by VCs until they gained massive scale, effectively killed all the other competition, and now the prices have gone up when they have a lock on the market, a large moat, and the VCs want a return. In my area, what was a $30 ride to the airport a few years ago, far cheaper than any airport service, is now $89.
The entire concept of a "free market" is idealized to the point of fiction.
Next year you'll have a fair old choice of drones from Ukrainian manufacturers though, when they're no longer needed to defeat Putin.
I like that thought
And remember dear readers, China and Iran openly helps Russia in their invasion of Ukraine. It is like the cold war never ended.
China's covert military training of Russian forces last year was personally approved by President Vladimir Putin's defence minister and directly involved at least four Russian and Chinese generals, according to two European officials and documents seen by Reuters.
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/russia-ap...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Support_for_Russia_in_the_Russ...
One of EUs biggest trading partners wants Ukraine to lose to Russia...
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3316875/ch...
Iran helps with Shaeed Drones as known
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HESA_Shahed_136#Geran-2
With Chinese parts btw.
North Korea is in too with 10k troops at least and massive ammo. Traded for food and wheat from Ukraine.
I would pay more to have a product the US doesn’t have its hands in.
In today's environment people can't even make the choice to pay more. The productn are just priced out of reach!
> GoPros are used all over in aerospace. If we replaced the brand with Insta360, that puts a big attack vector all over the place.
What would the attack vector be? I’m not saying there isn’t any, I don’t know much about aerospace and this sounds interesting.
> What would the attack vector be?
The cameras. But quite how, I don’t know.
Any backdoored camera with wireless networking can take pictures remotely.
Cameras need to connect somewhere, somehow to offload their videos/photos. Whether that's network, USB, SD card, those are all attack vectors. Hell, even the files themselves can act as payloads.
they don't do that while flying though.
Simon Wardley has been shouting this from the rooftops, including detailed per industry timelines when China will take over, in 2015.
[flagged]
[flagged]
He’s good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory
Rather than actually getting real on China and their abuse of the postal system, it’s all about tarrifs on penguins.
Biden did far more with the chips act, but rather than building on that trunk failed to enact any meaningful change. And of course make billions in the side from bribery.
Imagine if he had effectively coordinated with Mexico, Canada and the EU to curb Chinese trade practices.
Also on Avinox motors on e-mtn bikes. Originally made by DJI, then spun off into their own company, and they are starting to eat the competition on all e-mtn bikes at this point. Bosch, TQ, Shimano, et al just can't compete, especially because Avinox is iterating at startup pace and all the rest are iterating at bike pace (slowly).
This is the key though: it’s not just supposed subsidies, because the Chinese companies are fundamentally just faster and more efficient
I would argue the real answer is world class supply chain for high tech manufacturing. And that supply chain is heavily subsidised.
> the only good non-Chinese printer that doesn’t cost 10-100x as much is Prusa
They hardly have time to compete, busy as they are with foot-shooting practice.
Not sure what you mean. Had a mk 4 or what the last one was - excellent. Now on core one (or what the name is for the enclosed one), also great.
Dunno, Prusa seems to have mostly forgotten about consumers as their industrial business is booming.
Stuff like this: https://sensofusion.com/dronefactory/
This is of course beyond stupid considering the pace of 3d printer vs one PET bottle blow molding machine that can produce same shape shells at thousand units /hour.
They're completely different niches. Blow molding helps you make a million of a thing, 3D printing helps you make a million different things. There's great for low volume items without significant strength requirements. That includes prototypes but also anything niche - like parts for blow molding machines.
Another comment mentioned you can CNC a blow mold. That's completely true and I'm not versed in it enough to know when you'd prefer subtractive or additive rapid prototyping. A 3D printer is a bit more flexible in the shapes it can make but it can only make them out of plastic, which is a huge tradeoff.
Is it? With a 3d printer you can print any piece on demand, change design without changing tooling and make pieces that are semi-hollow inside for lightness.
Edit - should add, early in the war Ukraine was crowd-sourcing drone parts from citizens with 3D printers at home. This likely grew from that.
This isnt endurance contest, interceptor drones are half battery half explosive with miniscule weight taken by motors electronics and packaging. We are talking 10KW power draw for around a minute.
You can rapid manufacture moulds too, cnc alu is good for 1K shots easily.
I'm not sure what stops some of these industries from essentially being more nationalist like China, but more centrist as a company like Palantir. If these risks are as big as you claim, a centralized authority should reverse engineer the things that work done in China or where-ever and use open source/build a better software stack that supplants what's out on the market currently.
I think the engineering is actually pretty irrelevant in terms of the competitiveness
100%. It would strongly behoove the US to encourage domestic 3d printer manufacture (or friendly countries like Japan), to the point of bannning Bambu and Chinese companies. Obviously we are doing fine for industrial 3d printers, but the small scale consumer stuff is very important too.
If and when AI commiditizes professional services, it would be good to have modern industry to fall back on. With 3d printing the gap isnt insurmountable yet.
However, our country is run by lawyers, not engineers, so I dont have too much hope. At least a lot of our billionaires started out as engineers...
The cost of your proposed policies to consumers, to the Americans who can create because of cheap great Chinese printers and wouldn't be able to create under your policy... is much greater than the abstract industrial policy benefit.
The western countries deindustrialized themselves though. That's just capitalism chasing ever increasing profits and moving production to where it's cheaper, i.e.from west to China. In fact this was cherished because it increased share holder profits.
For us living in "the rest of the world", we only have a choice of being spied on by chinese or american companies, and american ones can do a lot more damage to us than chinese.
So if we're getting spied on anyway, why not buy a better product?
If you’ve spent a life and the market being supreme then it’s a shock. China’s economic system is wiping the floor with the west.
The U.K. has just nationalised a steel plant which had been bought by China to stop it from being destroyed, and of course the economic right wing hate this as steel is far cheaper to import.
Britain is on a hell of a trajectory. First Brexit then the rise of Reform.
If that scam of a man wins the next election, it’ll be quite the show.
It's basically the same past trajectory of Germany, no? Many countries are on it right now.
Bailing out the EU was a big hit to the economy and not many countries have taken hits like that.
There are estimates as high as 10% of GDP, though 6-8% seem more agreed upon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_effects_of_Brexit
Reform reached 31% in the polls and have slipped to 26%. there’s a (slim) chance Farage will be beaten by a comedian in a bin.
Trump reached 55% and became president. Twice.
Pot. Kettle.
You're not wrong.
But unlike the USA, at least Britons realized Brexit was a mistake. And that Johnson was corrupt and a liar.
I am a citizen of both the UK and USA.
It is astonishing to me that Trump could be voted back in after attempting a coup.
As someone with both an Insta360 camera and a Bambu printer, I feel it, would love to buy GoPro and Prusa, but the value just isn't there.
For one, I had a GoPro whose sensor broke after about 20 minutes of recorded. I ended up getting 3 different replacements, all of which also broke. In the end I just forgot about it when my home burnt down in a wildfire. I got an Insta360 with better picture quality that's also been more reliable for a similar cost.
And I would have loved to buy a Prusa printer but I got a Bambu P1S combo for $600, an equivalent Prusa plus the $300 shipping to Canada would have been ~$2500 CAD. For making trinkets for my 3 year old son plus the few random other things I'd make it's not worth it to pay 4x the money.
Maybe it'll forever be this way due to the differences in cost of living but I do feel as though there's a million barriers to entry to building a business in North America, at least a business that's not fully online.
Unless Canadian prices are much much higher than US, the only Prusa that costs that much is a Core One L or a Prusa XL.
Neither one of those are equivalent to a P1S. They’re 2 tiers above it. Equivalent Bambu printers sell for about the same price.
I have printers from both companies. There are tradeoffs for each, but Prusa isn’t 4x more for an equivalent printer.
Core One+ is $1899 CAD, the MMU3 for the Core One+ is $579 CAD and shipping was quoted over $300 since they ship from Europe and not the US to Canada. Just put these into their shopping cart on their site, right now quoting $2887 (including shipping and duties).
I did get a particularly good deal on the P1S combo apparently, the price on their website already higher than what I paid and it's significantly less in Canada than the US with exchange rate. Are they exactly equivalent, dunno, but both are the cheapest Core XY models with enclosure + colour changer that either sell.
Prusa is also cheaper in the US and EU than Canada.
They’re not remotely equivalent though. That’s like saying that a raspberry pi and 16” monitor are equivalent to a MacBook Pro because that’s the cheapest 16” monitor Apple sells.
Okay so explain the difference to a normal consumer because I'm printing toys for my kid...
Both are enclosed and both do 4 colors in a variety of materials. Both are the cheapest version of that that each company offers.
IMO it's more like comparing a Honda to a Mercedes. I'm sure the Mercedes is better but a Honda gets you places all the same.
If GoPro is manufactured in China then it’s no more secure than Insta360.
Lol your country and your capitalism helped build China.
Wasn't that the thing like ~30 years ago? All the western companies pushing manufacturing into China for increased profit?
Capitalism and the west gave all that power away :), you deindustrialised yourselves.
> China wants to deindustrialize non-Chinese industries for strategic and/or natsec reasons,
No. Not even close
China wants its place at the table.
With Erope and USA
People seem to think a developed China is a threat. But they are not staying in rural poverty for ever for our sake. That is not a threat.
They are not trying to "deindustrialise" anybody, just finding a place amongst equals
China does not want to deindustrialize any country. Why do you think of everything in terms of war and domination ? China has built a industry capable of taking any product and make it better and cheaper. There is no psycho strategy behind it. They will do it till every chinese will live a comfortable life equal to an american. At that point america will be able to compete again.
The CCP has publicly explained that their strategy is indeed to dominate key sectors via gov subsidies, de-industrialize other nations and gain strategic leverage in the process.
Why doesn't America do that too? It seems to work really really well.
America does that for aerospace & some defense stuff. But the reason not to is that the industrial policy needed to do it like China does has the effect of reduced wages, longer work hours, and lower quality of life.
Two main reasons. It requires taking a lot of freedom / agency away from individuals, and redirecting much of the profits of successful enterprises to subsidies (and suppressing individual consumption and standard of living).
China has surpassed the US on standard of living, I'm not sure about individual consumption. To repeat myself, it seems to work really really well.
Median PPP adjusted income and disposable income tells a very different story.
government first intervened in British Steel last year to prevent its then-owner, the Chinese company Jingye Group, from shutting it down https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/16/business/britain-national...
boo hoo china bad, buy my more expensive and shitty american product
The biggest attack vector against the world is is Israel and Zionism, not China. Stop bashing China. Its getting silly and infantile.
>People think this doesn’t matter, but GoPros are used all over in aerospace. If we replaced the brand with Insta360, that puts a big attack vector all over the place.
In what way exactly? The camera will magically communicate to the mothership?
I’ve owned a lot of Gopro cameras, having done video capture for a variety of motorsports, and they just got too expensive for what you get.
Sounds very similar to another US company - Garmin. They are still popular, but have been raising prices a lot every generation, because for a long time there was no real competition [1]. At this point, Garmin watches that have mapping support have an introduction price of >600 Euro. Even at that price point, zooming or panning maps is excruciatingly slow (sometimes taking up to 10 seconds to re-render) because they have used the same CPU/MCU for multiple generations while increasing screen resolution. They also haven't really innovated a lot as of recently and are moving some new functionality behind a subscription.
This has opened a large gap for Chinese competition. Now you can get a Coros Nomad that goes head-to-head with models like the Garmin Enduro for 350 Euro. They don't have full feature parity yet, but they are so rapidly adding features that they will at some point. Also, in contrast to Garmin, they seem to be using modern microcontrollers, so panning or zooming a map is insanely fast in comparison, while still having ~20 days of battery for daily use.
[1] Of the traditional competitors, Apple Watch Ultra and Galaxy Watch Ultra have gotten closer, but are nowhere near the battery life, robustness, mapping support, mapping + workout support, etc.
Really considering Coros since Garmin introduced a subscription. It doesn't currently prevent me from using anything I want to use, it's just moving in the wrong direction, but I was annoyed by Garmin for a long time, and this is the last drop.
However, my understanding is that Coros just doesn't have an SDK. At all. So it's not really "lagging on features", it's a totally closed platform, that doesn't any have 3rd party apps at all, and will not have them, because it's impossible to write them. I don't know if it's enough of a reason to completely write them off as a competitor, but that does give me a pause. I mean, if I don't have a feature on Garmin, I can theoretically implement it myself, or even hope that somebody else did. If I don't have it on Coros, I will just have to make do.
> Garmin watches that have mapping support have an introduction price of >600 Euro. Even at that price point, zooming or panning maps is excruciatingly slow
I just got a Garmin Instinct 3 Solar. It does mapping, and cost me about $300 US.
You're right that it's slow due to a wimpy processor. But the processor isn't because they're too lazy to innovate, but because they have something sipping tiny amounts of power so that I can get a battery life of several weeks.
I just got a Garmin Instinct 3 Solar. It does mapping, and cost me about $300 US.
As a sibling commenter said, the Instinct 3 Solar only does breadcrumb navigation, it doesn't do topographic maps on the watch (there are some Connect IQ apps that can add mapping, but you don't get good integration with workouts).
I use them all the time when cycling. I often plan a route, but when some different direction looks more interesting, I can spot check whether it leads to bike paths that will eventually merge back into my grand plan, erm, route. Or sometimes even for following the route, you want to look ahead by quickly zooming out or get a lot of detail at some complex intersection, where having a full map gives you much better orientation.
Well, except on a Garmin, my Fenix 8 is often so slow that I had to pause cycling to zoom in/out (even more complicated by not being able to do gradual zooming because it does not have a crown).
Yes, I know I can also use a bike GPS or a more generic GPSr with a large screen. I have used their gpsmap line since 2010 or so and even have the gpsmap H1. But having to always carry it around when you have a break somewhere is a drag and I always have a watch on me anyway. So I primarily use the gpsmap for geocaching and switched to using a watch for other activities.
but because they have something sipping tiny amounts of power so that I can get a battery life of several weeks
Coros watches have several weeks of battery life and fast maps. It is laziness (or margin maximization), because they could reach the same power budget by moving to a processor that is on a smaller node.
> I know I can also use a bike GPS or a more generic GPSr with a large screen.
Their bike computers have a long lasting battery and are helpful for data. But wow are they frustrating. Software update regularly loses the config, the interface is just so painful (laggy touch screen or confusing buttons). The mapping is hard to follow.
Not that Strava mapping on a phone is any better. Why can’t Strava put arrows on the direction of travel?
Sounds like the perfect use-case for big-small processors. A power-sipper for routine 99.99% of operations and a more powerful beast for the CPU intensive ops.
It's mostly because Garmin wants to maximize profits by sticking to old CPUs. The Coros watches (from what I've heard, the same applies to Suunto and Polar) are fast.
This has been an issue across the whole Garmin product line. E.g. the Garmin eTrex 32x from 2019 still used the same CPU as the eTrex 30 from 2011. 8 years without a CPU update. And the eTrex was already had miserably slow map rendering in 2011 with maps from that year.
Although Coros watches are fast, the Coros DURA bike computer is pretty slow when re-rendering maps. Naturally, companies can still choose between how fast the CPU is versus how long the battery life is (100+ hours on the Coros DURA I believe).
> It's mostly because Garmin wants to maximize profits
I see people riding bikes worth tens of thousands regularly. They should try a top tier models and see what happens.
One of the benefits of these old eTrex models is that they run on AA's, so they're used for things like long distance cycling (across countries).
I don't know if there are top tier models that run on replaceable batteries you can get at any gas station.
They have solar ones, but judging by reviews, they get about 10 minutes extra battery life per hour in the sun.
Yes, this ships in basically every smartwatch since the Snapdragon Wear 3100 launched in 2018.
I think they meant watches that can show actual maps, not just a line or arrow with your route. That feature has always been reserved for the more expensive watches.
The more expensive watches (Fenix) also have long battery lives: lasting up to a month on a battery that can fit in a watch. The processors still have to sip power.
The Coros watches are less than half the price, have 22 days of battery life in smartwatch mode (in the Nomad) and render maps extremely fast. If they added solar, they could probably also last a month (the Coros Apex 4 does 24 days, also without solar).
The funniest thing is that earlier versions of the Coros even used the Garmin map format (though as many small files and not a single/small number of .img). Though they have switched to the open PMTiles format in later versions.
BTW, I had a Fenix 7x solar (before a Fenix 8 AMOLED) and it would usually 'only' last about two weeks. I think you can only reach Garmin's stated time if you disable a lot of functionality.
> The Coros watches are less than half the price, have 22 days of battery life in smartwatch mode
Garmin gets almost 30% more battery life in exchange of not being as fast (30 days)
> I think you can only reach Garmin's stated time if you disable a lot of functionality.
Turning off always-on Pulse ox gets you there. Turning everything off except telling time gets you 2.5x the battery life (69-71 days)
A modern powerful MCU should be able to do both due to advanced power saving modes. Or youcan even have a power MCU and very low power standby MCU.
This is correct. There are a number of excellent asymmetric multicore MCU platforms now. You don't have to choose between efficiency and performance today.
How do you like the Instinct 3 Solar? I'm considering one for the exceptional battery life.
It’s interesting that you mention Garmin - they’re a good example of pivoting from your original market (standalone gps units for cars) once you see a nimble competitor eating away at it (gps-enabled smartphones). Garmin would be dead if they had held fast on the standalone GPS market.
I'm not sure you are fully aware of the markets that Garmin is in. When it comes to marine, aviation and offroad, you simply cannot run a gps app on a phone. E.g.
https://www.garmin.com/en-US/c/aviation/general/
Yep, also, they had gpsr units way before their gpsunits for cars became popular. They started making GPS receivers in (I think) 1993:
https://static.garmin.com/pumac/GPS95AVD_PilotsGuide.pdf
Thanks! I’m clearly not aware.
[dead]
I have a love/hate relationship with Garmin.
As a motorcyclist and sailor, their hardware is second to none in terms of build quality and robustness. The ability to look down at my Zumo GPS on my motorcycle in a rain storm on a dirt road and have it respond to my wet dirty glove is a close to magic as you will get.
Then there's the watches, the Instinct range is ok but I have a button that doesn't pop back out, my wife's vivoactive suffered the well known touch failure.
However, as a UXer I will say that across all products the software interaction model sucks balls. "China" can and will produce hardware to meet a price point, its not that they can't build good products.
As soon as "China" figures out how to do good UX, the last moat western companies have will fall.
I think the only sports watch company that has an app that is worse than Garmin's is Polar. I have used Garmin devices since 2010, but their UX is (as you say) pretty quirky. They changed the UI/UX of the gpsmap H1 to look more like a smartphone, but it is still weird. Another issue is that their software has been very buggy the last few years, with software only stabilizing 1-2 years after the release. One the largest external source for Garmin information (gpsrchive) has actively recommended against purchasing the H1 because it has been so buggy. Similarly, earlier firmware releases of the Fenix 8 had a lot of issues. Also a lot of functionality of older units hasn't been implemented yet. These are often not small bugs, but of the type, "oopsie, your device froze or rebooted while you were navigating". They basically released an alpha version as a final product.
I don't know about UX, but I've had my Coros watch for a few weeks now and I didn't find it hard to understand. I think it's much easier than when I first learned to use a Fenix watch. It misses some Garmin features though that I'd really like to see like off-course rerouting. But like I said above, they have been adding features at a good pace and a drastically undercutting Garmin on price (most watches less than half the price of the closest Garmin watch).
'China' can do UX just fine, when the incentive is there. Part of the reason UX seems rough, outside of low quality products where it's a tertiary consideration, is cultural differences. User interfaces are part of culture, like everything humans touch. Those preferences shape the resulting tech. Sometimes those choices are less optimal for western users with their own preferences.
https://youtu.be/WSMFnJnY7EA?si=NMz0wd94gM5abxyj
About 10 years ago I was looking for a rugged small camera. Found some by Garmin that were on a closeout sale. Excellent quality, never owned a GoPro so can't compare but I used them in similar applications and they never had an issue.
According to a quick search, GoPro has an Enterprise Valuation of $160M. That would be chump change for a large tech company. The brand has name recognition value in excess of that figure. I suspect some big company will happily buy it but not sure who. It has to be a company that wants to get into the camera market. I don't think the brand name is as valuable to an existing camera company-though I could be wrong.
Apple, Google, and Amazon could all make sense. Google would see the business as an opportunity to strengthen its existing IoT portfolio. Apple an opportunity to add to its integrated consumer electronics offering. Amazon would be more a play to improve GoPro's margins. They could easily push it with prime deals, etc.
I could also see Samsung getting in.
Regardless, expect to see more integration, AI features, etc, after acquisition.
One cool feature I've read about is that (at least some) GoPro cameras can save high-resolution IMU measurements to the recorded video files, timestamped and interleaved with video frames. This can be useful for mapping applications, e.g. https://joshi-bharat.github.io/projects/gopro/
Are there any competitors on the market that also have this feature? I've looked around a few times in the past and haven't found any. Many cameras say that they have an IMU, presumably for image stabilization, but they don't seem to record or expose that data.
> These days other brands give better quality video in better quality hardware and more functionality, for cheaper.
I had a GoPro many years ago. Eventually sold it because I needed the money for other things.
Been thinking about buying a new action camera eventually.
Got any recommendations?
The one that interests me the most of the ones I’ve seen is the Insta360 X4 Air plus an underwater case for it.
I want to be able to bring my camera swimming, bicycling, hiking, etc. And I think 360 degree cameras are pretty cool. Hopefully it’s not just a gimmick that loses its appeal after a few hours.
As someone who watches a reasonable amount of PoV outdoor activity footage shot on helmet cams and the like (base jumping, mountain biking, skiing, snowboarding, etc)… I don’t love watching 360 videos uploaded in the raw because of the perspective distortion.
I’m assuming it must be possible, if the resolution is good enough, to post process a portion of each overall frame into an undistorted 1080p (or better) view of the key view of the action, but a lot of people don’t do this (perhaps it’s much more difficult or time-consuming that I’m imagining, or perhaps many viewers enjoy the distorted 360 view more than I do).
Just my two cents, YMMV, etc.
part of this is by design, which unfortunately also makes very steep terrain not look as terrifying, but gives you huge FOV. I find in all but the latest Instas its the worse low-light quality that is most notable. More annoying is that everyone is trying to compete on weird angles and perspectives, andY YT shills push attachments and niche features vs. photographic quality
Yes it's possible, and yes it's time-consuming.
If you're willing to put a little time into video editing, a 360 cam is great. The insta360 tools can make that a little easier if you want something simple.
If you just want to store a snapshot of the moment as it was captured, a regular camera that you pointed in the right direction is better.
The downside is the 360 editing tools are kind of sluggish and not great to work with, and even at 8k res in-camera, the export for a 'normal' looking FoV is pretty low quality compared to a normal action cam recording in 4k.
I have an insta360 X5, it's neat and there's a lot of flexibility, but it does have downsides.
The app is also a pile of crap, it's crammed full of ads, social media junk I don't want, it's slow as molasses, and the size of the app is massive.
Have you tried resolve's 3d editing?
I'd love to film in 3d. But being dependent on a single app of a single company (that is not even a good app right now) is literally the worst feature for a hardware I could imagine.
Why are you dependent on a single app? Pretty much any NLE has ability to edit 3D footage.
I didn't know that. I've got told it's a proprietary format while got shown the insta360 app.
Good to know, and reconsider!
>other brands give better quality video in better quality hardware and more functionality, for cheaper
Would you mind providing a recommendation you have first hand experience with?
It's mostly FUD and/or paid reviewers. Both DJI and Insta have good products, but also very good at sponsoring in a way where things get reviewed very in their favor, making people have an impression that doesn't quite match reality. So the meme one constantly read online about how gopros are so much worse is false. They have their issues, but mostly trade offs.
I bought one back in 2018, curious what brand would you recommend today? I wouldnt mind upgrading to something more modern but I dont care about GoPro for brands sake. Would love something I could take in the water like the GoPro.
A gopro isn't worse than the competition, nor at a premium.
What makes gopro the standard in proper productions (and science etc) is that they're so hackable with the gopro labs software. With that, all the other cameras are toys in comparison for professional usage.
The bulk of the market is toys for aspiring content creators. Professional usage is pocket change subsidised by tiktokers.
It also doesn’t help that you could probably get by with a hero 4 black even today lol
Man I still can’t believe how bad the rollout of the karma was. I remember at the time everyone in my professional circles was buzzing about it. Then they started literally falling out of the sky. Feel like they never recovered
Eh, I have a Hero 4 black. And if you as the other commenter only think about resolution it can look like that, but the difference is enormous.
4k on a gopro 13 is far far far clearer. And the stabilization is night and day. Half my hero4 videos are mostly blurry shakes and quite jarring to watch, with a bad fov. The stabilization on modern gopros is magical. The bitrate and quality is orders of magnitude better. You can now pull good quality stills from the video if you want. Hero4 can't handle anything but perfect blue sky in the middle of the day. Etc etc
> Then they started literally falling out of the sky.
Yep, something must have gone horribly wrong with QA.
Apparently (checked with AI), Hero 4 Black was the first camera with 30 fps 4k video and was released 12 years ago already (how time flies)
Frankly, after 4k/30 and 1080p/60, there are strong diminishing returns, because most people these days watch videos on their phones in suboptimal conditions (or older desktops that may still be on 1080p), so what are they going to do with your 5k/6k video?
Sure, you can keep doing minor improvements to sensors and optics, but for a consumer it will not justify getting a new model for $500.
Also, competing with smartphone cameras which have gotten better over the years. I bet 99% of people would not be able to tell a gopro video from a phone video.
Transparency on AI use is a sin now, I guess.
Admitting your sins to your competitors has always been a sin.
The greatest advantage of greater resolution is that you can cut for a better framing. But who has time to go through good of video for editing?
That larger image size allows for more aggressive image stabilization as well.
> These days other brands give better quality video in better quality hardware and more functionality, for cheaper.
Such as?
DJI Osmo cameras are good, I still have my original Osmo action and while the quality is a bit behind now, the battery life and general stability and menus are better than GoPro IMO.
I've found DJI cameras also don't discharge their batteries when sitting, my gopro 11 black is somehow always dead when I grab it even after a few weeks, but my osmo action is still at ~70% after a year.
Insta360 also has some neat offerings, but their software/app is absolutely abysmal, it's crammed full of ads and takes up several GB of space. It also requires an account login.