Guangzhou Supercomputer Center Added to US Technology “Denial List” • Hacker News Board

Re: Guangzhou Supercomputer Center Added to US Technology “Denial List”

#51

Post by ethanbond » Thu, Apr 09, 2015, 7:47 PM UTC

sctb wrote: post #12

ryan-c wrote: post #9

Can we get a title change? It's misleading. > ... Uncle Sam has put this supercomputer centre, together with National University of Defense Technology in Changsha, the system’s creators, and Tianjin centre, among others, on so a so-called “Denial List”, which prevents any high technology from the USA to be sold to these sites. If I understand correctly Intel can't sell them any tech nor can anyone else in the US.

Thanks, we updated the title to something that's hopefully more accurate. We're open to suggestions for a better one.

"US regulates high-tech exports on Chinese defense research."

A lot less flashy and baity though.

Re: Guangzhou Supercomputer Center Added to US Technology “Denial List”

#52

Post by CHY872 » Thu, Apr 09, 2015, 7:51 PM UTC

icegreentea wrote: post #34

CHY872 wrote: post #31

I can't help but feel that not supplying processors to the "National University of Defense Technology" is basically a textbook use of export regs? I don't really understand why people are complaining about this one?

Denying the chinese access to Intel chips for their flagship supercomputing facility only promotes indigenous Chinese chip manufacturing. Given that there's no reason why Chinese chip design and manufacturing could not match and/or exceed western designs, this choice potentially accelerates the rate at which Western dominance over high tech goods is eroded. Furthermore, by denying Intel chips in such a high profile m…

This wouldn't have been a surprise for the Chinese. Intel would have been told a long time ago, and so likely would the university in question.

It also won't be a scenario that China hasn't planned for. The reason that China's been building up its chipmakers over the last few years is for precisely this scenario; reducing the reliance on American tech. They've been doing this quite successfully; Cisco now aren't able to do business with the Chinese government, iirc.

Lastly, Tianhe-2 was a $400 million computer. The decision to block American collaboration on a project valued at a considerable fraction of $1 billion isn't made by some office clerk; it will have been considered at the highest levels of at least the military, but most likely the government in general.

It's a diplomatic maneuvre specifically designed to hurt China. Intel's just been caught in the crossfire. They could easily be pacified (for example, by giving them a supercomputer contract in the US).

In terms of the Chinese reaction, antagonization is probably the point.

Re: Guangzhou Supercomputer Center Added to US Technology “Denial List”

#53

Post by LLWM » Thu, Apr 09, 2015, 7:54 PM UTC

icegreentea wrote: post #34

CHY872 wrote: post #31

I can't help but feel that not supplying processors to the "National University of Defense Technology" is basically a textbook use of export regs? I don't really understand why people are complaining about this one?

Denying the chinese access to Intel chips for their flagship supercomputing facility only promotes indigenous Chinese chip manufacturing. Given that there's no reason why Chinese chip design and manufacturing could not match and/or exceed western designs, this choice potentially accelerates the rate at which Western dominance over high tech goods is eroded. Furthermore, by denying Intel chips in such a high profile m…

More competition is good for consumers.

Re: Guangzhou Supercomputer Center Added to US Technology “Denial List”

#54

Post by CHY872 » Thu, Apr 09, 2015, 8:02 PM UTC

ethanbond wrote: post #46

CHY872 wrote: post #31

I can't help but feel that not supplying processors to the "National University of Defense Technology" is basically a textbook use of export regs? I don't really understand why people are complaining about this one?

Well, you know, free market etc.

And yet, the US won't sell Iran nukes or China F-22s.

The world we live in is far from free market, for everything from solar panels to textiles [0].

A really obvious place in which one might actually want the opposite of a free market is in military tech.

Exporting the tech behind a computer that'll presumably be used for mostly military purposes is something that could be expected to be frowned upon in certain circumstances.

[0] - http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-launches-new-trade-challenge...

Re: Guangzhou Supercomputer Center Added to US Technology “Denial List”

#55

Post by jjoonathan » Thu, Apr 09, 2015, 8:03 PM UTC

saganus wrote: post #43

I know this is nitpicking but... I really hate when journalists who I would presume have some studies in literature, confuse "then" and "than". I'm not a native English speaker and I know the difference, and for some reason this particular mistake and "their/they're/there" makes me choke. Like I said, totally nitpicking on an otherwise interesting article but still... "...with true blue CPUs possibly faster per socke…

This kind of thing can creep up when you least expect it. I'm a native speaker, I've had a solid and reliable intellectual understanding of these distinctions since grade school, and yet somehow on a paper a few years back I substituted "weather" for "whether" throughout the whole thing. Not because I had forgotten the distinction, but because I just wasn't paying attention.

Re: Guangzhou Supercomputer Center Added to US Technology “Denial List”

#56

Post by jeffbush » Thu, Apr 09, 2015, 8:05 PM UTC

ethanbond wrote: post #49

jeffbush wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not willing to give the government the benefit of the doubt anymore. I can't recall any instance historically where they have turned out to have been right based on some secret information, even though they often intimate that they have some.

Uh, all of the cryptographic efforts of World War II?

Haha. Fair enough. :)

Re: Guangzhou Supercomputer Center Added to US Technology “Denial List”

#57

Post by tuan5 » Thu, Apr 09, 2015, 8:08 PM UTC

It is interesting that even nobody think China should sue Uncle Sam at WTO. If it happened in the other direction, American will think go to court first for sure. just like the rare metal affair when China bannned it from US.

Re: Guangzhou Supercomputer Center Added to US Technology “Denial List”

#58

Post by CHY872 » Thu, Apr 09, 2015, 8:08 PM UTC

higherpurpose wrote: post #45

CHY872 wrote: post #31

I can't help but feel that not supplying processors to the "National University of Defense Technology" is basically a textbook use of export regs? I don't really understand why people are complaining about this one?

Here's what one of NSA's former chiefs, Michael Hayden, had to say just a week ago (probably unaware this was going to happen): > By the time I became NSA director in the late 1990s, however, the calculation was no longer that simple. We still wanted an MTOPS advantage, of course, but we were fast realizing that our preferred limits were undermining the global competitiveness of the U.S. computer industry — the very…

These are his views, and by extension were the views of the US establishment until at least 10 years ago, but probably until more recently, and are views presumably shared by at least some the people who made the decision - but they still decided to not let the export go ahead.

Which tells me that either the doctrine has changed in the last 10 years, or that this deal doesn't fit into his model, or that this is a diplomatic maneuvre. My guess is one of the latter two, although I could be wrong.

Re: Guangzhou Supercomputer Center Added to US Technology “Denial List”

#59

Post by jeffbush » Thu, Apr 09, 2015, 8:14 PM UTC

Kalium wrote: post #27

emn13 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of ban was never going to be silent, so I don't think it's reasonable to a serious selection bias here.

I read jeffbush's comment as a broad one, rather than narrowly about trade restrictions. The government is often right based on secret information, but selection biases are strong.

I agree about selection bias, although the magnitude of the screwups have been pretty enormous, so it's kinda hard not to.

Re: Guangzhou Supercomputer Center Added to US Technology “Denial List”

#60

Post by Kalium » Thu, Apr 09, 2015, 8:17 PM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #44

Kalium wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It happens quite a lot. The catch is that the whole thing end-to-end is secret, with the result being that you don't hear about it at all. All we really hear about on the outside is the screwups. The successes are silent.

Usually though most things are declassified eventually. Even Really Big Secrets like Enigma, CIA memos on the bay of pigs or similar eventually gets released - so you would think that we would know their old successes.

Many intelligence successes throughout history are known. Most of them are small, undramatic events like a particular military move being successfully anticipated and countered. Few of them are large, dramatic events.