[pvg]

the decision to concede and start copying computer systems designed by the "evil capitalists" likely wasn't done lightly.

It's not really how the Soviet Union operated, this sort of "technology transfer" was fundamental to Soviet development from the start. It was so ingrained in Soviet leadership that it was sometimes counterproductive - one famous example is Beria's insistence on strictly following the atomic bomb designs lifted from the Manhattan project which probably didn't make the bomb makers' jobs any easier. A down-to-the-last-rivet replica of the B-29 was also not what Tupolev would have done without orders from the top.

[rdtsc]

> It was so ingrained in Soviet leadership that it was sometimes counterproductive - one famous example is Beria's insistence on strictly following the atomic bomb designs lifted from the Manhattan project which probably didn't make the bomb makers' jobs any easier.

That's because because they had realized they were behind already. And it's not like the Americans and the Soviets were going to open their nuclear bomb blueprints so they world got to laugh at the copy-cat design.

> It's not really how the Soviet Union operated, this sort of "technology transfer" was fundamental to Soviet development from the start.

As far as computers went in the 1950s and 1960s the Soviets initially did pretty well. Their BESM-1 machine was the fastest in Europe for some years. They even had revolutionary designs like the Setun with its famous ternary logic. So they had the brains and the capability do build them. But due to planning and political hubris they lost their lead.

But once they were behind it was considered better to copy than not have the technology at all, but yes, those were made by political appointees and people who did not listen or take the scientists' or engineers' opinions seriously.

[pvg]

The point is that they didn't suddenly realize they were behind and on such occasions looked to imitate foreign technology, shamefaced and with great ideological trepidation, as you were suggesting. This was fundamental Soviet policy from the get-go, the Soviet state would not have survived without it and Soviet leadership recognized that.

It was obvious they were copied.

Obvious to whom counts. It's not like every Lada came with a 'licensed from Fiat' sticker on the bumper. "Half the cars on the street" tells you a great deal about how much the Soviets cared about the visibility and appearance of copying things to the world at large.

[rdtsc]

> The point is that they didn't suddenly realize they were behind and on such occasions looked to imitate foreign technology, shamefaced and with great ideological trepidation,

Bashir Rameev and Victor Glushkov disagreed from https://www.sigcis.org/files/SIGCISMC2010_001.pdf

They wrote that:

> Copying foreign work excludes the possibility of utilizing our own collective experience of computer research, and in the immediate future, will hinder our ability to employ new principles. This will bring the development of computer technology in our nation to an end

They wanted to co-develop a new system with ICL. But you're right, the political and military leaders where the ones wanting to quickly copy the IBM-360 to catch up.

> Obvious to whom counts. It's not like every Lada came with a 'licensed from Fiat' sticker on the bumper.

They did a better one, and renamed a whole city where the cars were built after the Palmiro Togliatti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolyatti