Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that electronics/computers by itself do not have much to do with with the fall of soviet union. USSR fell because: 1. its economic model was dysfunctional and a failure 2. Its moderate leaders (aka Gorbachev and his allies), decided to dismantle it, as they realized the model was a failure, and their only other option was to become extremely repressive, roll out tanks and kill people. (north korea is an examp…
When there was a referendum asking the people in all reoublics whether to keep the Soviet Union or dismantle it, the overwhelming majority, 70+ percent, voted to keep it. The leadership dismantled it anyway. When asking why, it usually is useful to ask cui bono.
Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips
151–160 of 208 posts
Re: Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that electronics/computers by itself do not have much to do with with the fall of soviet union. USSR fell because: 1. its economic model was dysfunctional and a failure 2. Its moderate leaders (aka Gorbachev and his allies), decided to dismantle it, as they realized the model was a failure, and their only other option was to become extremely repressive, roll out tanks and kill people. (north korea is an examp…
It’s amazing to me, and deeply concerning, that you’re being downvoted for this. Those of us who work in tech are so firmly ensconced in that bubble that we actually think microchips defeated the USSR.
Re: Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're apparently just far enough away from the Berlin wall falling that now people want to re-litigate that the Soviet Union was bad and it was a good thing it collapsed.
I have seen people who dislike the democratic party in the US on both the left and the right adopt this stance in the context of the Trump-Russia question. The argument goes that all the former Soviet, but current NATO/EU states (and states with factions who might want to join, like Ukraine) never wanted to leave Russian control. I disagree with this, but I would note that it's too simple to say something is simply g…
You mean "conspiracy theory".
I know you're pointing it out as a dubious argument, but stuff like this is what impressionable minds latch onto on the internet.
Re: Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
>And obviously it's not so great for the US. There's a lot of confusion, I think, about how you "win" a trade war; as far as I can tell, autarchy is pretty bad for all involved; trade wars seem like a thing where everyone loses and the 'win' comes from winding down the trade war and trading again.
It's seems uncommon for people to consider if our trade with China before this "war" was fair. It seems like most people just parrot: "War. Bad." I'm not saying this administration is doing everything right on trade, or that it's even doing anything right on trade. It just seems like people think that what was before "the trade war" was the default, and that the default was fair.
So, I'm not an expert, but... my understanding is that China is accused of subsidizing domestic manufacturing. Analogous to the sort of dumping that uber and lyft do, really; Much like how Softbank subsidizes my ride to work in the hope that they can jack up prices once I get really used to it, the Chinese government is subsidizing my consumer goods purchases, with the hope that manufacturing will decline elsewhere to the point where they can some day jack up prices to market-clearing levels.
I mean, is that fair? no. Is this something the market does on the regular, even without government having a hand in it? yes. Is this bad for the USA? If we lose manufacturing ability, probably... but this has been going on for a generation now. How long would it take us to re-gain or move the manufacturing of our consumer goods? (we already keep manufacturing of defense goods in the USA, for exactly this reason. My own guess is that if there was economic reason to move more high-touch human labor intensive manufacturing in-house, we'd make like BMW and build plants in South Carolina and similar places with fewer unions, and we already do a bunch of automated manufacturing here.) - the implication here is that just like Uber and softbank, I am not sure this is a long-term profitable thing for China to do, and I have the (controversial) opinion that the market in the USA is healthy enough that if we needed to build more manufacturing here, we could do it pretty quickly)
(I mean, the other side of this, the complex part that I personally don't entirely understand is that the USA subsidizes a lot of domestic industry, too... most famously the agriculture sector. As a us citizen, I totally support my tax dollars being used to make sure that we overproduce food. That seems like an extremely reasonable thing to do. (it does get more complex when that food is sold elsewhere, but I am not an expert) - My understanding is that the US also subsidizes a lot of US manufacturing... I mean, my feelings on that are more mixed... but I personally don't see subsidies as inherently evil or incompatible with doing lots of trade with another country.)
>It seems like most people just parrot: "War. Bad."
We're talking about a trade war here, which is a different sort of animal.
Please understand that I'm saying "Trade: good" - a subtle difference. And I do think that trade is usually good, even trade with someone who is subsidizing their goods.
(I have... very different feelings about trade sanctions, about restrictions on trade as a way to get a country, say, to respect human rights. But I don't think that's what the trade war with China is about; the trade war with China, as I understand it, is about tariffs and subsidies)
Re: Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
No... that's pure hyperbole. But 10x faster (or capable) and 2x the cost? That's not outrageous. BTW that's where we currently are.
10x faster and more capable at what? The tech in phones might be progressing but the use cases aren't. What most people do on their phones now is the same as they did 10 years ago. Eventually people will realise they don't need more speed, and the focus will switch to things like power effeciency and weight. Just like laptops.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_Atrix_4G#Webtop
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Touch
Re: Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips
#156I'd be curious to know if Huawei phones and network devices are currently being used for surveillance in Hong Kong.
Re: Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
>And obviously it's not so great for the US. There's a lot of confusion, I think, about how you "win" a trade war; as far as I can tell, autarchy is pretty bad for all involved; trade wars seem like a thing where everyone loses and the 'win' comes from winding down the trade war and trading again.
You mean autarky, full economic self-sufficiency. China is certainly big enough to operate as an autarky. The US used to, up to about 1980 or so. This is a current goal of the government of China. It's called "Made in China 2025", and was announced in 2015.. "The goals of Made in China 2025 include increasing the Chinese-domestic content of core materials to 40 percent by 2020 and 70 percent by 2025.[5] The plan focu…
You think the US is less industrially capable than in 1980? that... seems unlikely. Sure, we import and export a lot more of our stuff now than we did then, but that's because we live a lot better when we trade (and because the technology of trade has improved vastly.)
I mean, certainly, both the US and China could survive without trade. hell, there are a bunch of people who could pull it off just by themselves. But... in all cases, all involved would be a lot poorer; they'd work a lot harder for a lot less.
Re: Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips
#158I'd be curious to know if Huawei phones and network devices are currently being used for surveillance in Hong Kong.
Backdoors in the phones seems highly unlikely. Considering that the government can simply listen in at the cell towers and data centers there is no reason to risk the reputation and thus influence and reach of a Chinese company like that.
Re: Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips
#159The be honest, American companies never had a monopoly in any of the parts needed to build a commercially viable phone. Unlike say in the PC world, where the dominant OS/Software stack has an almost impenetrable reliance on x86, phones were mostly ARM based (in an attempt to prevent Intel's chokehold). And communication standards require FRAND patent grants allowing anyone to build for the spec. That said, even as re…
> Unlike say in the PC world, where the dominant OS/Software stack has an almost impenetrable reliance on x86 Huawei also makes its own x86 chips, GPUs, and even FPGAs (e.g. TPU-like systems), and while Huawei Cloud still runs other vendors hardware, it's becoming more and more "Huawei-hardware only" each quarter. I think the US has not realized yet how good it had it, and how much it has screwed things up. The EU, R…
Re: Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
>And obviously it's not so great for the US. There's a lot of confusion, I think, about how you "win" a trade war; as far as I can tell, autarchy is pretty bad for all involved; trade wars seem like a thing where everyone loses and the 'win' comes from winding down the trade war and trading again.
It's seems uncommon for people to consider if our trade with China before this "war" was fair. It seems like most people just parrot: "War. Bad." I'm not saying this administration is doing everything right on trade, or that it's even doing anything right on trade. It just seems like people think that what was before "the trade war" was the default, and that the default was fair.
It was heavily weighted in favor of the US which is why the US became the richest country in the world and benefited the most from international trade.
Classic example are the complaints about Apple products being manufactured in China. However, as study after study has shown, a $600 iphone probably leads to economic activity of about $40-$50 in China at most, with a further $50 or so in the rest of the world, and the remaining $500 being generated in the US.
The US had a massive problem which is that this tremendous wealth that was generated was thanks to a variety of reasons concentrated amongst a few people right at the top, and unlike in decades in the past the benefits stopped trickling down to the rest of the country. But the real problem was an internal distribution one, which the current administration only served to exacerbate.