alternatehistory.com

The very best ComBloc electronics tech was in East Germany, who were a generation behind the west. IIRC, East Germany was producing experimental 64K chips when the West Germans were doing 256K and the Japanese 1M.

Some quick thoughts.

First, I dont believe the bandwidth, modem, and router technology was available back in the 80s to develop what you are suggestion [the thread is titled "Computerized Communism/Central Planning?"]. Second, the Soviets severely lagged the West in semiconductor development as they never really mastered transistor technology. So their system would have lacked comparable processing speeds and memory capabilities.

As I recall, there was a NATO general who visited a Russian radar station a few years ago, last decade, and was amazed they were using vacuum tube technology in leiu of transistors on their radar. It was impressive vacuum technology but still not transistors.

Even if they were able to accomplish this, they still have software issues. One of the defining features of the west is the role competition played in software development. Oracle, SAP, Microsoft, IBM, and others all complemented and competed with each other. In the mode of Capitalist dogma, I believe competition likely would have created superior software.

The one area the Soviets might have been superior is in the mode of developing standards such as IP (internet protocol), web software standards (html), and other equivalents. But here, the west was fairly successful in overcoming this despite not having central planning.

I am sure there are those who will disagree my views, particularly on the role of competition. But I would suggest that software is one of the few areas where a guy in an office working with a blank piece of paper has an advantage over the incumbent. Microsoft succeeded IBM. Google, Adobe, and Intuit all succeeded despite big bad Microsoft. And a successful business strategy in Silicon Valley is to develop corporate application software that kicks Oracle, IBM and SAP's butt and then sell out to Oracle. Peoplesoft, Siebel, and Cognos are just a few examples of such companies. Meanwhile companies like Workday, Salesforce.com and others are doing it yet again. So, I would suggest small, decentralized generally beats big, centralized in software.

As to the impact on their society and economy if they could accomplish this, I have to think about it more.

AFAIK the Communists canceled Cybernetics because Marx & Engels teached that the Communist state has to be centrally organized, but Cybernetics is about net-like systems, which by their very nature don't have an allmighty center. So they scrapped the idea as "anti-Communist".

In Bulgaria, they tried to make their country the Eastern European "Silicon Valley", reverse-engineered Western computers and developed some computer science. they didn't really succeed, but after 1989, many crackers came from Bulgaria.

And then, there was the infamous Robotron microelectronics from East Germany. They made this joke about them: "Unsere Mikroelektronik ist die größte" (which can be understood both as "our microelectronics are the greatest" and "our microelectronics are the biggest") :-D

This is why I don't get people who advocate the "fully automated (luxury gay space) communism" meme. What is the exact reason for the Soviets not being able to develop transistors and is there any way they could have out-done countries in the Western bloc in terms of electronic performance?
Top