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

UK Has ‘No Chance in Hell’ of Making Its Own Tech Champs: ARM Founder

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 129 posts

Re: UK Has ‘No Chance in Hell’ of Making Its Own Tech Champs: ARM Founder

#81

Post by hosh »

foobarian wrote: post #70
smcl wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would Russia not be a more natural source of this? I know they're not exactly best pals but China is maybe one of the closer countries to Russia outside of Belarus and Syria rn.

I wonder how they would pay for it. The world market operates in US dollars so presumably they'd have to set up some kind of bilateral arrangement and I doubt Russians would accept Yuan.

Yes they would. Russia was one of countries working with China to create an alternate reserve currency. (https://coercioncode.com/2022/07/25/russia-and-china-announc... ) Sanctions on Russia over Ukraine is accelerating this.

This isn’t the first attempt. Yuan is already increasingly held by central banks (https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/currencies/dollar-v...) but I was thinking of a composite currency that included the Yuan. I don’t remember the article talking about this

Also keep in mind that Russia is not a part of OPEC, though they had historically worked with OPEC until the sanctions over invading Ukraine.

Re: UK Has ‘No Chance in Hell’ of Making Its Own Tech Champs: ARM Founder

#82

Post by bobthepanda »

SilverBirch wrote: post #4

It sounds to me like he doesn't actually say that. In the article: >The UK has “no chance in hell” of becoming technologically sovereign Well which is it, having our own Tech champs or being technologically sovereign? Because they're totally different things. To be honest I'm not sure any country apart from China stands any chance of becoming technologically sovereign. Like what does that mean? Do we need to mine our…

I would say even China isn’t technologically sovereign, depending on how broad the definition of technology is.

As a general example, even the Chinese attempt at building a commercial airliner still uses Western engines and other avionics.

Re: UK Has ‘No Chance in Hell’ of Making Its Own Tech Champs: ARM Founder

#83

Post by prottog »

kypro wrote: post #64
t43562 wrote: post #44

Well, the nerds aren't the super rich here. It's still about public schools and old money and people who studied law or the classics or at least graduated from Oxbridge. The big money in software is all from the world of finance and there's nothing tech about them - no heart or vision except how to make a faster trade. So who will foster a company that's not going to make money for 10 years? I think there's also an a…

Yes, you're completely right. Not that I'm in favour of the wealth inequality in the US, but in some ways it's one of the US's biggest assets. There are a lot of people in the US who are so excessively wealthy they're willing to throw money at moon-shot companies (and sometimes simply ideas) that will almost certainly never yield them a return. You don't get companies like Space X and Blue Origin without extremely am…

I'm in favor of a system of free(ish) markets operating well, with big fortunes made from value creation and not rent-seeking behavior. If that results in wealth inequality, so be it; the old idea that a rising tide lifts all boats has not been invalidated yet.

Re: UK Has ‘No Chance in Hell’ of Making Its Own Tech Champs: ARM Founder

#84

Post by [deleted] »

smcl wrote: post #68
foobarian wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 7. China needs to secure a supply of crude oil Wonder how that's coming along. I'm sure those African countries will stand up for China even when they can't get any oil.

Would Russia not be a more natural source of this? I know they're not exactly best pals but China is maybe one of the closer countries to Russia outside of Belarus and Syria rn.

[deleted]

Re: UK Has ‘No Chance in Hell’ of Making Its Own Tech Champs: ARM Founder

#85

Post by mensetmanusman »

giobox wrote: post #27
SilverBirch wrote: post #4

It sounds to me like he doesn't actually say that. In the article: >The UK has “no chance in hell” of becoming technologically sovereign Well which is it, having our own Tech champs or being technologically sovereign? Because they're totally different things. To be honest I'm not sure any country apart from China stands any chance of becoming technologically sovereign. Like what does that mean? Do we need to mine our…

I think it's a huge stretch to say the two concepts aren't related. To take the example of the military; we have the "military industrial complex" which is the collection of private companies that form the vital part of the state's war functions. To become technologically sovereign will require a similar basket of private companies based in your own State, unless you expect the government to be capable of all of thes…

Also, it may be soon economically viable to harvest lithium from the ocean :)

Re: UK Has ‘No Chance in Hell’ of Making Its Own Tech Champs: ARM Founder

#86

Post by somenameforme »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #15
fooker wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> China has one formal alliance. This is a geopolitical trope about 20 years out of date. Don’t be surprised when dozens of African and Asian countries choose China over Western interests if push comes to shove.

> Don’t be surprised when dozens of African and Asian countries choose China over Western interests if push comes to shove. And don't be surprised if they don't. Even if China has a lot of frenemies on its border in Asia, every country in Asia has some fear over China, and this often pushes them to improve their relationship with the USA (e.g. Vietnam). Even Russia and North Korea have some antagonism with China. Non…

I see China's soft power quite a bit differently. China has an increasingly large presence throughout all of Asia. There are obviously the government initiatives but in many ways the non-governmental stuff is far more visible. 1.4 billion people + rapidly growing middle class = Chinese are absolutely everywhere. Chinese tourists are playing an increasingly large role in the economies of nations throughout Asia, even including Japan with whom China has poor relations. There are also large numbers of students from China that are living/studying abroad (Gaokao), and so on.

This is all creating an increasing intermingling of cultures and economies that's improving relations in a meaningful way. It's easy to discount this sort of stuff, but I think it is what really changes the world in the longterm. When people themselves are able to change their own views gradually over time, without effort at "directing" them, those resultant views tend to be quite difficult to ever change. It's in this domain that we were once unrivaled.

Re: UK Has ‘No Chance in Hell’ of Making Its Own Tech Champs: ARM Founder

#87

Post by ethbr0 »

registeredcorn wrote: post #55
shubb wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mind explaining more clearly the difference between your understanding of what the article means, and what the GP wrote? They seem pretty similar?

I'm in the same boat as you. I'm not sure exactly what, "whether they have all the critical technologies needed to run a country and its economy", means. When I think "critical technologies" I think of a lot of what SilverBirch was bringing up. When I think of, critical technologies [...] to run a country and its economy , I think of things like: EMS, traffic lights, the stock market, electricity, etc. Similarly, say…

I think you're reasoning about it from the wrong end.

The implied precursor I took from the article was that another nation suddenly decides to remove access to a critical technology, via coercing or ordering the company supplying that technology.

"Technological sovereignty," in the context of the article and quotes, would mean a country has the means to continue without that access.

This doesn't mean creating a commercially-viable, world-leading industry (there can only be so many of those!), but does mean having a plan and emergency suppliers who can make functional substitutes.

As an example, the US's strategic petroleum reserve made it sovereign in the matter of energy (effectively, and pre-recent production increases). Which is also a good example because it didn't mean 1:1 replacement of 100% of supply volume, but rather replacing enough so that alternate suppliers can be switched to and restricting access lost its power.

But that was my read. Ymmv.

Re: UK Has ‘No Chance in Hell’ of Making Its Own Tech Champs: ARM Founder

#88

Post by distortedsignal »

oblio wrote: post #77
sgt101 wrote: post #74

I've spoken with Hauser about this - his point (in 2012 when I had the conversation) was that the UK simply did not have access to a market big enough to support a global champion. I said (given the date) but what about the EU and he said no, because in fact the single market is fractured and filled with barriers. I asked well, what about French and German Tech companies? Hauser looked at me and said : yes.

> I've spoken with Hauser about this - his point (in 2012 when I had the conversation) was that the UK simply did not have access to a market big enough to support a global champion. Samsung, Hyundai/Kia, TSMC, Toyota, etc. A lot of local brands have figured out that you can bootstrap a product locally and then just focus relentlessly on the American market, after which you can practically conquer the world. Asian co…

The South Korean companies that you're thinking of (Samsung, LG, Hyundai) might have had a leg-up from some friendly government policies. Check out the history of Chaebol [1] in S. Korea.

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

Re: UK Has ‘No Chance in Hell’ of Making Its Own Tech Champs: ARM Founder

#89

Post by [deleted] »

Zigurd wrote: post #6
SilverBirch wrote: post #4

It sounds to me like he doesn't actually say that. In the article: >The UK has “no chance in hell” of becoming technologically sovereign Well which is it, having our own Tech champs or being technologically sovereign? Because they're totally different things. To be honest I'm not sure any country apart from China stands any chance of becoming technologically sovereign. Like what does that mean? Do we need to mine our…

No nation, anywhere on the planet, is by itself technologically sovereign. The ability to get by in the world is a cooperative venture for everyone, even the US. What makes first tier technological nations different is the alliances of which they are active contributing members. Those alliances make trade flow smoothly and securely. That is what creates prosperity in an interconnected world. That is especially import…

[deleted]

Re: UK Has ‘No Chance in Hell’ of Making Its Own Tech Champs: ARM Founder

#90

Post by dirtyid »

Zigurd wrote: post #6
SilverBirch wrote: post #4

It sounds to me like he doesn't actually say that. In the article: >The UK has “no chance in hell” of becoming technologically sovereign Well which is it, having our own Tech champs or being technologically sovereign? Because they're totally different things. To be honest I'm not sure any country apart from China stands any chance of becoming technologically sovereign. Like what does that mean? Do we need to mine our…

No nation, anywhere on the planet, is by itself technologically sovereign. The ability to get by in the world is a cooperative venture for everyone, even the US. What makes first tier technological nations different is the alliances of which they are active contributing members. Those alliances make trade flow smoothly and securely. That is what creates prosperity in an interconnected world. That is especially import…

US was near tier1 technologic autarky post war until 90s, it had unrivalled STEM talent pool (by virtue of others having relatively very little) as well as FP tools to constrain foreign high tech competition while feeling her own via favourable immigration / brain drain policies. US crushed JP semi in 80s, but chose not to continue crushing other east asian tech ambitions / indy policy in 90s-10s because it was deemed acceptable cost of feeding alliances in era of US primacy. Now US is desperately trying to reshore semi and other strategic supply chains now that she realized sensibly that interconnected world is increasingly not secure, especially in potential future frontlines of allied soil. Ultimately what likely will prevent US from recreating tech soveriengty according to analysis is lack of talent - domestic doesn't produce enough, nor can current immigration policy close gap.

> especially important in evaluating China

Not particularly. PRC doesn't need alliances to leech off, because she has the demographics headroom to generate massive talent and governance power to systematically build academic / R&D / S&T institutions to harness said talent to be directly competitive with US + co. Mostly indigenously with big bux programs to recruit critical foreign talent and espionage to fill gaps. There's a reason PRC is rapidly catching up to tier1 tech levels on almost every sector within the last 10 years now that it's producing comparable STEM talent than ALL OECD countries combined, with lagging indicator of # of PhDs undergoing similar explosion that will ultimately drive PRC to tier1 levels. PRC has the most prospects and extremely strong advantages going forward simply because it will have the most skilled workers working off a relatively comprehensive industrial/tech chain and can souly focus on achieveing technologic sovereingy without stepping on toes. Unlike US whose has to balance providing advanced allies both security and prosperity. It's increasingly unable to do the former in PRC's back yard and now the latter is being harvested/reshored to US soil

As for PRC's neighbourhood... was US at height of primacy threatened by Cuba / South America? There was some fucking around and finding out. Folks in the neighbour hood can see which way the winds are shifting. PRC's growing power has already pushed most of region into neutrality and hedging, while actual US alliances are giving nothing but platitudes - very little concrete actions that actually boostered US defense position within 1st island chain. Also PRC has massive blue water navy with expanding replenishment fleet, it just doesn't choose to project outside of 1st island chain much, but it does regularly. Aleutian Islands this week.

Post reply on HN