Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Android Ported to RISC-V

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 98 posts

Re: Android Ported to RISC-V

#41

Post by phkahler »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #26
AlexAltea wrote: post #8

Related: https://www.cnet.com/news/chip-designer-arm-ditches-huawei-b... Unsurprisingly, this has been done by Alibaba-owned T-Head Semiconductor. The obvious result if Chinese vendors start facing obstacles to obtain licenses to manufacture ARM-based chips (or any other non-Chinese architecture). How can anyone expect that software/hardware-bans to global superpowers can result in anything but their software/hardwar…

The irony is that the Chinese strategy is the make the West dependent on it for various goods, while the US strategy is to ensure China is not dependent on it for the key goods the US has a competitive advantage over. Given that necessity is the mother of invention you can imagine that with China's economies of scale and cheap labor that they will have a competitive advantage sooner than later and the US will become…

>> the US will become dependent on them for advanced semiconductors.

The US is already dependent on them. Some debate weather Taiwan is part of China, but either way the US is very dependent on TSMC and has lost its lead in semiconductors.

Re: Android Ported to RISC-V

#42

Post by phkahler »

varispeed wrote: post #22
littlestymaar wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot legally ban them from using Android. Google play store and other proprietary apps, sure, but the actual android OS is free software. > The same goes with the RISC-V as well - the law could be written to allow only certain countries to use it freely And how would the US enforce such a law abroad? Even admitting that European countries (UK included), Japan, South Korea, and most of latin America decided to p…

They could copy and paste laws that are used for illegal drugs enforcement - just replace drugs with Android from China and then force other countries to support that.

So you want the US to nationalize Android.

Its copyrighted software, how is this supposed to work? What are the implications for other copyrighted works?

Re: Android Ported to RISC-V

#43

Post by CivBase »

einpoklum wrote: post #5

It is actually worrying that there will be a push to run a Google-dependent platform on RISC-V's. After all, we know that a lot of functionality is closed into Google Play Services, so that AOSP is to a great extent a bait for being fully tied to Google. Even without relying on closed-source components, you're still relying on Google's interest and good will in maintaining that project. Instead, it's much more import…

From the article, I assume T-Head only ported the open-source Android operating system to RISC-V and not the closed-source Google Play Services. Android itself is not dependent on GPS, although it is certainly less useful - even with a replacement like MicroG.

Re: Android Ported to RISC-V

#44

Post by 3395810 »

kls wrote: post #31
literallycancer wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slavery resulted in zero pressure to innovate and industrialize and was the number 1 reason why the South had a garbage economy.

was the number 1 reason why the South had a garbage economy I am not sure what the implication of garbage economy is, but the south was fairly wealthy antebellum. So much so that they supported a large tax base for the federal government which they resented, it lead to the nullification crisis in 1832 and started the long road to the civil war. Southern universities where also considered to be some of the best in the…

There is a contemporary books that explains this called The Impending Crisis of the South[1]. It was banned throughout the south and men were executed for distributing it in Arkansas.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Impending_Crisis_of_the_So...

Re: Android Ported to RISC-V

#45

Post by sudosysgen »

numpad0 wrote: post #20
varispeed wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know that nothing stops them from rounding up engineers are move them to a camp with an order to develop certain technology in exchange for bread and water and that their families will live? Soviet Union for example used to build entire cities where they crammed engineers from all over the Union, however rather than being exploited, the engineers had special privileges. But that easily could change with a stro…

There is sense of mystique associated with the Soviet Union but the best they managed to build were AKs, Soyuz, Chernobyl, all interesting and robust in its own ways but not all that competitive in terms of performance, so,

Soyuz is still, to this day in 2021, the cheapest and most reliable way to get people in LEO. By any performance metric it was and still is the best tool for the job.

Same for the AK, it was reliable and accurate at a fraction of the cost which is why it is so popular still today.

There is a lot more to engineering than top performance. Reliability and cost is just as important. When you factor that in, it's clear that Soviet engineering was excellent, and frankly could hardly have been better. Production though? Yes, not that great. But the engineers were able to meet their goals brilliantly.

Re: Android Ported to RISC-V

#46

Post by sudosysgen »

varispeed wrote: post #22
littlestymaar wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot legally ban them from using Android. Google play store and other proprietary apps, sure, but the actual android OS is free software. > The same goes with the RISC-V as well - the law could be written to allow only certain countries to use it freely And how would the US enforce such a law abroad? Even admitting that European countries (UK included), Japan, South Korea, and most of latin America decided to p…

They could copy and paste laws that are used for illegal drugs enforcement - just replace drugs with Android from China and then force other countries to support that.

The only reason China follows the patent and copyright system even somewhat is because of international agreements. There is no international agreement that allows for this.

As a result China will simply ignore the US and do whatever they want.

Re: Android Ported to RISC-V

#47

Post by simonh »

d3ckard wrote: post #11
AlexAltea wrote: post #8

Related: https://www.cnet.com/news/chip-designer-arm-ditches-huawei-b... Unsurprisingly, this has been done by Alibaba-owned T-Head Semiconductor. The obvious result if Chinese vendors start facing obstacles to obtain licenses to manufacture ARM-based chips (or any other non-Chinese architecture). How can anyone expect that software/hardware-bans to global superpowers can result in anything but their software/hardwar…

That's good though. That means they have to invest in R&D instead of depending on exploiting cheap labour to brute-force their way into the market. If they invest in R&D, they need creative people who are up to date. Such people tend to bring change to the society at large(I'd say democracy is really good for creativeness to flourish). Basically, the goal is not to expunge them from the market, the goal is to make th…

Is it democracy that is good for creativeness, or capitalism?

I think what China has shown is that democracy and capitalism can be decoupled. Ive always believed that capitalism and democracy are synergistic forms of freedom. The individual freedom to own property and trade with each other on the one hand, and our freedom as sovereign individuals to have a say in the organisation of society. The CCP has established that these do not depend on each other.

Re: Android Ported to RISC-V

#48

Post by coldtea »

sharpneli wrote: post #37
coldtea wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's good though. That means they have to invest in R&D instead of depending on exploiting cheap labour to brute-force their way into the market. Using cheap labor, copying foreign products, and bypassing copyright worked for the US, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan when they were in their own economic rise, and thus far has been working for China. > Basically, the goal is not to expunge them from the market, the goal is…

> Using cheap labor, copying foreign products, and bypassing copyright worked for the US, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan when they were in their own economic rise, and thus far has been working for China. That's what makes the arguments from USA so amusing. I mean they basically nicked, against British law, the designs how to mass manufacture textiles. Is US willing to repay, with interest, all the economic damage that did…

>I mean they basically nicked, against British law, the designs how to mass manufacture textiles.

And used slaves to pick the cotton! Talk about "cheap labor".

It might sound quaint now, but textiles then where one of the engines of industry growth. The world didn't have mass textiles/clothes production until the industrial revolution.

It's like "Yeah, my ancestors bootstrapped this country doing that, and I benefit massively from them doing so, but you shouldn't do it now to bootstrap your country's economy, because I'm all about being legit now - well, aside when I'm not, but we're talking about you now, not me. Heck, no I ain't giving any of those ill granpa's gains back either" - aka "kicking the ladder".

Re: Android Ported to RISC-V

#49

Post by varispeed »

phkahler wrote: post #42
varispeed wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could copy and paste laws that are used for illegal drugs enforcement - just replace drugs with Android from China and then force other countries to support that.

So you want the US to nationalize Android. Its copyrighted software, how is this supposed to work? What are the implications for other copyrighted works?

I don't want that, I am only saying how this could be done. For example certain technologies could be permitted only in NATO countries and if you want to market your product that uses it you will have to prove it that it does not originate from China.

Re: Android Ported to RISC-V

#50

Post by stjohnswarts »

AlexAltea wrote: post #8

Related: https://www.cnet.com/news/chip-designer-arm-ditches-huawei-b... Unsurprisingly, this has been done by Alibaba-owned T-Head Semiconductor. The obvious result if Chinese vendors start facing obstacles to obtain licenses to manufacture ARM-based chips (or any other non-Chinese architecture). How can anyone expect that software/hardware-bans to global superpowers can result in anything but their software/hardwar…

That's a good thing though. More processors/hardware means more competition and it spurs innovation as opposed to one state committing espionage to get another state's industrial R&D! It leads both to being more independent in case of a war between them which is almost inevitable at this point (probably a proxy war)
Post reply on HN