41–50 of 202 posts
Site is partially hugged to death. It has a copy of a letter that Andrew ‘bunnie’ Huang sent > Regarding Proposed US Restrictions on RISC-V > A bipartisan group of 18 lawmakers in the US Congress have recently amplified a request to the White House and the Secretary of Commerce to place restrictions on Americans working with RISC-V (see also the initial request from the Senate) in order to prevent China from gaining…
It blows my mind that the US keeps treating China, its biggest trade partner, as an enemy. There is no way that China would ever initiate a war against the US. It feels like, if anything, this insistence on treating China as an enemy increases risk for the US.
The assumption is that they will initiate a real war against Taiwan at some point. The result of that assumption is to prepare by slowly phasing out trade where possible rather than waiting for it all to happen at once when they do invade.
Anyway, the chain of who-started-it doesn't have a first link. There is no value-free way to assess it all..
The numbers aren't large, but it's worth noting that 7 out of 18 signatories of the original letter received donatations from Intel's PAC in 2022 [0]: Mike Gallagher: $6000 Marco Rubio: $2500 Haley Stevens: $2000 Carlos Gimenez: $5000 Darin LaHood: $7000 Andy Barr: $2000 Ashley Hinson: $10000 Total: $34500 [0] https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs...
I sure hope they aren't that cheap.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SiFive launched a chinese subsidiary (StarFive) in 2017/2018. And they just announced they were giving designs for some of their high-end cores to Sophgo (a company out of Beijing.) My guess is US administrators want SiFive to apply for export licenses before they do this again. I pretty much agree w/ Bunnie on this one. I lived through the Crypto(graphy) Wars of 90s and still have my "Sink Clipper" poster around her…
Samsung and TSMC may be in foreign countries, but the key thing is both South Korea and Taiwan are very closely aligned with the United States for defense. This concern is less about the chips being made here, but controlling the ability for enemy powers to get a hold of them. Consider that "bombing the TSMC facilities" has been considered a possible plan if Taiwan is invaded, because a key goal is ensuring China doe…
Do you trade with the enemy? That's a traitor's domain. Or they're rather competitors you are not happy with and scared that they beat you at the game? Get off you butt and do something productive then.
It blows my mind that the US keeps treating China, its biggest trade partner, as an enemy. There is no way that China would ever initiate a war against the US. It feels like, if anything, this insistence on treating China as an enemy increases risk for the US.
The thing that blows my mind is that you're blaming the US for the situation. Google China's behavior in the South China Sea to get an idea of the problem. Or it using trade as retaliation against Australia, Lithuania and others. The list goes on from there. Trade with China has always thought to be a democratising force, instead US has funded is country that is aggressively arming itself against it and becoming a th…
OTOH, the US should be blamed, since we backed the communists past KMT to victory in the civil war... Play stupid games and so on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The assumption is that they will initiate a real war against Taiwan at some point. The result of that assumption is to prepare by slowly phasing out trade where possible rather than waiting for it all to happen at once when they do invade.
And the result of that preparation is that both sides are less entangled with one another and thus (theoretically) more ready to be at war with one another. Anyway, the chain of who-started-it doesn't have a first link. There is no value-free way to assess it all..
It's amazing that the move of RISC-V Foundation to Switzerland (as RISC-V International) was actually called for. Even more amazing is US lawmakers continuing to try & shoot the US in the foot. RISC-V is now globally developed, that ship has sailed. Same for products based on it. The US can't prevent its 'proliferation'. Only reduce the degree to which US entities are part of, and profit from that. Are US lawmakers t…
It's amazing that the move of RISC-V Foundation to Switzerland (as RISC-V International) was actually called for. Even more amazing is US lawmakers continuing to try & shoot the US in the foot. RISC-V is now globally developed, that ship has sailed. Same for products based on it. The US can't prevent its 'proliferation'. Only reduce the degree to which US entities are part of, and profit from that. Are US lawmakers t…
I posted the numbers as a top level comment here [0], but the short version is that a lot of the signatories of this letter received (small) donations from Intel in the last election cycle.
My best guess is that Intel is actively lobbying against RISC-V using China as the boogeyman, and that these lawmakers were persuaded (sincerely or otherwise) to treat RISC-V as a threat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The practical question is, do US lawmakers believe their voters are that dumb? (Mostly yes)
Nah, they really are this uninformed for the most part (there are notable exceptions of course). Story time! I went to law school in DC. One of my classmates worked as a staffer in the office of a prominent (leadership-level) congressperson (she was from his district). She had also done an internship with the UN. This congressperson had made public statements about defunding the UN and blah blah blah. He took her out…
The numbers aren't large, but it's worth noting that 7 out of 18 signatories of the original letter received donatations from Intel's PAC in 2022 [0]: Mike Gallagher: $6000 Marco Rubio: $2500 Haley Stevens: $2000 Carlos Gimenez: $5000 Darin LaHood: $7000 Andy Barr: $2000 Ashley Hinson: $10000 Total: $34500 [0] https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs...
I sure hope they aren't that cheap.