The thing US dont understand at this point is that companies outside of US are willing to exchange IPs with Chinese, which means that companies that are not dependent on US technologies will benefit greatly from this ban. Too impulsive decision by the US but they are too focused to be not outrun. Well only the time will tell
ARM memo tells staff to stop working with Huawei
191–200 of 256 posts
Re: ARM memo tells staff to stop working with Huawei
#192> He said it would greatly affect the firm's ability to develop its own chips, many of which are currently built with ARM’s underlying technology, for which it pays a licence. Maybe China could just change its laws to void ARM's patents. Then Huawei wouldn't need to worry about licensing. Extreme, I know. But China will very likely, at some point, need to counter this somehow. Edit: I wonder if China could afford a t…
If I read it correctly the patents aren't the main problem, more that no one from ARM is allowed to work with Huawei anymore. No support with problems, no influence on the design of future ARM products, no custom modifications. These things are probably as valuable - or even more - than the licensed tech itself.
Maybe so. But there are ways to get support off-the-record, if you're willing to pay enough.
Re: ARM memo tells staff to stop working with Huawei
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is one critical difference between America and China here. American companies have for the most part not been engaging in wholesale state sponsored theft of Chinese IP. Whatever you may think of the wisdom of a trade war, no one can really argue that China hasn't given the US all the ammunition it needed to give political cover to engaged in one.
When you're advanced enough, there is no need for you do to IP. Maybe the risk is not worth it or there is nothing to gain from it. It's the same argument with the open markets. When you're already a developed economy, open markets benefit you since you have the best products, your production facilities are in place and you can offer both quantity, quality and reasonable prices. But when you are a developing nation,…
By this logic, one could justify chattel slavery in a modern country with an agrarian economy because that was US practice in 1787.
Re: ARM memo tells staff to stop working with Huawei
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
The EU is trying to assert extraterritorial jurisdiction as well with the GDPR and its like. If all countries start doing this sort of thing with any degree of success, international and online business as we know it won't be possible.
No it doesn't. It only applies if you operate within the EU, and if you do business with (the data of) EU citizens. I'm not sure what else you can reasonably expect there.
It's actually not clear that GDPR only affects EU citizens:
> Here’s the issue: the law uses the term “data subject” but doesn’t define the term. Some may assume that data subjects are EU citizens, but that analysis seems to exclude the explicit language of the law and practical considerations. There’s tourism, travel, residencies, students abroad, and much more to consider. Because GDPR uses inconsistent qualifiers when referring to data subjects and informal descriptions of who a data subject is, the public has been left with varying interpretations and significant challenges. [1]
In some interpretations, a US citizen who is traveling in the EU and orders something from a US company would be considered a data subject, and the company they ordered from would need to comply with the GDPR.
So how would that be enforced? Either through treaties or by requiring non-EU companies to establish a representative entity in an EU member state. [2]
[1] https://kirkpatrickprice.com/blog/what-is-gdpr-personal-data...
Re: ARM memo tells staff to stop working with Huawei
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt it. Chinese system only works when they are playing catch up. There is no incentive for being a pioneer in a culture where IP is not protected. The system doesn't work when they need to push above everyone else.
> There is no incentive for being a pioneer in a culture where IP is not protected. And yet mobile payments are integrated into Chinese e-commerce with the frictionlessness that Apple Pay and the others can only dream of. Who defines what "pioneer" is? Is SV not "pioneering" because the vast majority of its companies are trying to be Salesforce and not Uber?
Technology adoption is always easier when there aren't legacy systems.
Just see how long it's taking the US do adopt card chips & PINs while other countries that got their automated banking systems later are almost fully converted.
Mobile payments seem way easier to adopt in China and African countries because what existed before was so bad.
Re: ARM memo tells staff to stop working with Huawei
#196> He said it would greatly affect the firm's ability to develop its own chips, many of which are currently built with ARM’s underlying technology, for which it pays a licence. Maybe China could just change its laws to void ARM's patents. Then Huawei wouldn't need to worry about licensing. Extreme, I know. But China will very likely, at some point, need to counter this somehow. Edit: I wonder if China could afford a t…
> I wonder if China could afford a trade boycott against the US. Also, doesn't it own tons of US bonds? What if it had a fire sale on them? How would that affect the US?
Most people overestimate this. Of the $22T US Debt, only $6T is held by all foreign accounts combined, $1T of which is held by China. The majority of US Debt is held domestically.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_of_the_United_St...
Re: ARM memo tells staff to stop working with Huawei
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
My view is that IP is fundamentally a terrible idea and should be abolished. All it does is help incumbent companies and prevents competition.
This is a naive thinking. Advances in software industry are purely intellectual so it doesn't involve heavy cost, which is why open source idea can work and be argued that it promotes innovation. Say you are a pharmaceutical company developing a new drug, investing billions of dollars. If there is no IP, why do it? You need to wake up to reality.
Companies don't develop new drugs, they have no incentives to invest into research when it's vastly more profitable to just increase the price of old drugs, patent drugs someone else developed, pay doctors to promote their drugs, etc. Most of the actual medical research is funded by taxes.
Re: ARM memo tells staff to stop working with Huawei
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody is going to care about this in the long run, and it's pretty clear that China has already moved past US capabilities with tech like 5G. This will only spur more investment in domestic technology. China has a far better education system, a lot more people, and a government that's able to do long term planning. I expect them to leapfrog US within a decade or so.
I doubt it. Chinese system only works when they are playing catch up. There is no incentive for being a pioneer in a culture where IP is not protected. The system doesn't work when they need to push above everyone else.
>There is no incentive for being a pioneer in a culture where IP is not protected.
China has a different IP culture with some striking similarities to open source culture. Knowledge and expertise is shared through trusted peer networks (guanxi) for mutual benefit. I share what I know with you, on the expectation that you'll share what you know with me. Being particularly smart or innovative has real but intangible value, because it elevates your status within that peer network. Likewise, if you have a reputation as a parasite then you'll quickly find yourself being marginalised.
This culture powers a very rapid cycle of iterative improvement. You can't rest on your laurels, you can't milk one innovation for the duration of a patent, you can't use an IP portfolio to block new entrants to the market. You have to keep innovating to stay relevant, you have to build and maintain a reputation for quality and value with every product, otherwise someone will eat your lunch.
If Western companies can't get past the stereotype of Chinese companies as lazy copycats, they have no long-term future. Shenzhen is full of smart, motivated people who are moving up the value chain at an alarming pace with innovative products and an innovative way of doing business.
Re: ARM memo tells staff to stop working with Huawei
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's big news to major American companies like Amazon and Walmart that have completely embraced central planning.
We may not be talking about the same thing. I'm referring to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_economy
Re: ARM memo tells staff to stop working with Huawei
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, and Britain had full sovereignty to defend itself. If the British chose not to, it’s because they valued trade with the US over the cost of IP. The US may choose the opposite with China.
Well, that was immediately after the UK had lost the war of independence, so their options may have been rather limited.
Yes, one example was the power loom which was out of their control once it arrived in the USA:
“The Spies Who Launched America’s Industrial Revolution” https://www.history.com/news/industrial-revolution-spies-eur...
“Among those sniffing out innovations across the Atlantic was Harvard graduate and Boston merchant, Francis Cabot Lowell. As the War of 1812 raged on, Lowell set sail from Great Britain in possession of the enemy’s most precious commercial secret. He carried with him pirated plans for Edmund Cartwright’s power loom, which had made Great Britain the world’s leading industrial power.
Halfway across the Atlantic, a British frigate intercepted Lowell’s ship. Although the British double-searched his luggage and detained him for days, Lowell knew they would never find any evidence of espionage for he had hidden the plans in the one place they would never find them—inside his photographic mind. Unable to find any sign of spy craft, the British allowed Lowell to return to Boston, where he used Cartwright’s design to help propel the Industrial Revolution in the United States.”