China Tells Telecom Carriers to Phase Out Foreign Chips in Blow to Intel, AMD

Post by The_Colonel » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:16 PM UTC

hylaride wrote: post #22

zeroCalories wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is in a weird place that is hard to predict. They have some troubling economic and demographic problems as you said, but also have built up strong tech and manufacturing capabilities. We could easily see China continue to grow in power, even if the middle class continues to be poor.

China also has large swaths of it's population still in a lower income bracket, especially the further you get from the coasts (though the demographics there are not much better). It's going to be very interesting to see what happens over the next few decades (and by interesting I hope in not a terrible way). One of the theories of China's recent, intense sabre rattling is that demographically they'll be in no positi…

Post by Qwertious » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:21 PM UTC

causi wrote: post #76

lowenergyphoton wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no way they invade Taiwan in a controlled manner, it's too easy to sink a navy over that distance. Sure they could do a long range bombardment but then there's nothing left to take.

Sure they could do a long range bombardment but then there's nothing left to take. This is irrelevant. Not because you're wrong, but because you're thinking of terms of what a rational, reasonable person would do. Taking Taiwan has about as much to do with helping China as the Iraq War had to do with avenging 9/11: nothing whatsoever. If China attacks Taiwan it will be for the sole reason that Xi Jinping has and is u…

Post by vouwfietsman » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:26 PM UTC

causi wrote: post #72

ajb wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they are not that far behind. You're thinking of Longsoon I guess, but they have a 7nm process at SMIC and Hisilicon designing ARM-based server processors on it[1]. Sure, ARM is western, but guess what, they have the IP anyway, as they required ARM to do business through a subsidiary in China. China is serious about semiconductors. Hisilicon is competitive in many markets. [1] https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-comp…

It's also a "so what" situation. If China's economy is severed from the rest of the world's, competitors can't take its market share. Being five or even ten years behind on chips is irrelevant when your consumers can't go elsewhere. What did people use their smartphones for ten years ago? Recording themselves and watching cat videos. What do they do now? You don't need 2nm chips to do anything except take market shar…

Post by vundercind » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:34 PM UTC

lupusreal wrote: post #45

vundercind wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Autarky , not autocracy. It’s an economic goal of having an economy that can continue to operate fairly well even if foreign trade is restricted. It’s associated (perhaps not exclusively) with fascist movements, which emphasized national independence from the broader world. (I don’t agree that hedging against potential action by a single major strategic adversary is a strong move toward autarky, however—if, say, Cana…

Not having your country days away from starving if international shipping were disrupted isn't fascism, it's just common sense. Every country that can practically manage to have sufficient domestic food production will do so.

Post by hackerlight » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:43 PM UTC

qvrjuec wrote: post #11

pi-e-sigma wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this way of thinking everything is vital for "security purposes" and you end up with a full autarchy. Food is vital because you can't rely on others to feed your population. And so is energy. And so on. What is really going on though is that the US started a trade war with China and it's just another salvo in this war. Soon the US will declare electric cars from China as a "threat" and ban them, too. Probably the…

...What? There is a spectrum of importance to national security, food and energy are very much on the side of more important, so not sure why you chose those as an example. It's extremely reductive to say any country that imposes limits on trade for its own strategic benefit is an autocracy.