Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
Exactly! I just can’t understand, how it is possible, that there are still people who don’t see that
Not everybody in the world reads and is foolish enough to believe right wing propaganda. Some prefer reality.
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
You certainly don't know about ARM either, but it is absolutely true that the U.S. wants a TMSC fab in the U.S. for National Security reasons, number one of which, China is constantly threatening Taiwan. My speculation is that ARM IP will not be allowed into China beyond what is already there, and since you do not have any of the facts to dispute that, I'll stick with my speculation. TMSC's plant in China only provides chips for foreign companies.
It is also true that the Trump administration is blocking technology sales to many Chinese Companies, see entities list, including Huawei, but you don't seem to be concerned about those other companies.
The U.S. and the West likely wouldn't be disengaging with China if it wasn't for Xi Jinping, so no matter how much I detest Trump, this policy is broadly supported by both parties, especially after the enactment of the Security Law in Hong Kong, and the Human Rights violations in the Xinjiang region. On top of that, many Western countries, including all of the Five Eyes, have suspended their extradition treaty with China.
When Arm sold its stake in Arm China, one assumption in the US was that part of the motivation was to allow Arm, a British firm owned by a Japanese conglomerate, to continue licensing IP to Huawei. Like every other chip designer, Huawei relies heavily on Arm. And there are concerns that the US government will prevent Arm from supplying Huawei. In the first round of Huawei restrictions last year, Arm made it known that they were only providing Huawei IP from current licenses and were cutting off access to future improvements. With Arm’s complex China holding structure, we can think of a half dozen loopholes that may allow Huawei to continue to access Arm IP. Maybe they take advantage of those, maybe not."
Now it is true that Huawei may attempt to get around that, but the JV may not get the improvement either.
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
You certainly don't know about ARM either, but it is absolutely true that the U.S. wants a TMSC fab in the U.S. for National Security reasons, number one of which, China is constantly threatening Taiwan. My speculation is that ARM IP will not be allowed into China beyond what is already there, and since you do not have any of the facts to dispute that, I'll stick with my speculation. TMSC's plant in China only provides chips for foreign companies.
It is also true that the Trump administration is blocking technology sales to many Chinese Companies, see entities list, including Huawei, but you don't seem to be concerned about those other companies.
The U.S. and the West likely wouldn't be disengaging with China if it wasn't for Xi Jinping, so no matter how much I detest Trump, this policy is broadly supported by both parties, especially after the enactment of the Security Law in Hong Kong, and the Human Rights violations in the Xinjiang region. On top of that, many Western countries, including all of the Five Eyes, have suspended their extradition treaty with China.
When Arm sold its stake in Arm China, one assumption in the US was that part of the motivation was to allow Arm, a British firm owned by a Japanese conglomerate, to continue licensing IP to Huawei. Like every other chip designer, Huawei relies heavily on Arm. And there are concerns that the US government will prevent Arm from supplying Huawei. In the first round of Huawei restrictions last year, Arm made it known that they were only providing Huawei IP from current licenses and were cutting off access to future improvements. With Arm’s complex China holding structure, we can think of a half dozen loopholes that may allow Huawei to continue to access Arm IP. Maybe they take advantage of those, maybe not."
Now it is true that Huawei may attempt to get around that, but the JV may not get the improvement either.
Ah! So your affirmation turns out to be pure speculation.
You are right, I am not really knowledgeable on the current or future state of ARM IP in China. However, how could you not be aware of that seeing as I myself told you! LOL.
Let me insist. There is no race to disengage. My comments above, demonstrate that clearly.
You throw in your human rights accusations as usual, even though they have no bearing on this thread.
ORAN has completely vanished from your argument, I see. I'm not surprised.
Anyway, here's a fun look at what's going on and where China/Huawei took the right moves years ago. If the US had taken the right moves a decade ago, it wouldn't be in its current predicament.
You know, 20kg can be installed by one person unassisted. That saves a ton of money on deployment. Competitors are running at 40kg. It's not only weight though, it's volume too, and of course the aforementioned efficiency gains.
And when you start pairing those advances with other advances in associated technologies you begin to understand why Huawei is where it is. Why not take a look at something like the OptiXtreme H7 with capacity to run 48 T/bits over a single fiber.
Ah! It's all stolen, right? But from who if no one has anything in the same league!?
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
You certainly don't know about ARM either, but it is absolutely true that the U.S. wants a TMSC fab in the U.S. for National Security reasons, number one of which, China is constantly threatening Taiwan. My speculation is that ARM IP will not be allowed into China beyond what is already there, and since you do not have any of the facts to dispute that, I'll stick with my speculation. TMSC's plant in China only provides chips for foreign companies.
It is also true that the Trump administration is blocking technology sales to many Chinese Companies, see entities list, including Huawei, but you don't seem to be concerned about those other companies.
The U.S. and the West likely wouldn't be disengaging with China if it wasn't for Xi Jinping, so no matter how much I detest Trump, this policy is broadly supported by both parties, especially after the enactment of the Security Law in Hong Kong, and the Human Rights violations in the Xinjiang region. On top of that, many Western countries, including all of the Five Eyes, have suspended their extradition treaty with China.
When Arm sold its stake in Arm China, one assumption in the US was that part of the motivation was to allow Arm, a British firm owned by a Japanese conglomerate, to continue licensing IP to Huawei. Like every other chip designer, Huawei relies heavily on Arm. And there are concerns that the US government will prevent Arm from supplying Huawei. In the first round of Huawei restrictions last year, Arm made it known that they were only providing Huawei IP from current licenses and were cutting off access to future improvements. With Arm’s complex China holding structure, we can think of a half dozen loopholes that may allow Huawei to continue to access Arm IP. Maybe they take advantage of those, maybe not."
Now it is true that Huawei may attempt to get around that, but the JV may not get the improvement either.
Ah! So your affirmation turns out to be pure speculation.
You are right, I am not really knowledgeable on the current or future state of ARM IP in China. However, how could you not be aware of that seeing as I myself told you! LOL.
Let me insist. There is no race to disengage. My comments above, demonstrate that clearly.
You throw in your human rights accusations as usual, even though they have no bearing on this thread.
ORAN has completely vanished from your argument, I see. I'm not surprised.
Anyway, here's a fun look at what's going on and where China/Huawei took the right moves years ago. If the US had taken the right moves a decade ago, it wouldn't be in its current predicament.
You know, 20kg can be installed by one person unassisted. That saves a ton of money on deployment. Competitors are running at 40kg. It's not only weight though, it's volume too, and of course the aforementioned efficiency gains.
And when you start pairing those advances with other advances in associated technologies you begin to understand why Huawei is where it is. Why not take a look at something like the OptiXtreme H7 with capacity to run 48 T/bits over a single fiber.
Ah! It's all stolen, right? But from who if no one has anything in the same league!?
LOL,
Keep on believing what you will, but the times, they are a changing, and not in China's, nor Huawei's, favor.
"For months, most EU countries hid behind the U.K. government’s confident assertion that it could manage the risk of allowing Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant, to help build its 5G networks. They hoped this would let them have it both ways: get a swift, cost-efficient cellular telephony upgrade from China, while avoiding trouble with their U.S. ally. But now that Britain has moved to block Huawei’s participation, Europeans find themselves deprived of cover, and both the US and China are breathing fire down their necks."
Americans and Europeans used to fight about whether there was a “smoking gun” indicating that Huawei’s equipment was being used for espionage. This is still not proven, but it is plausible. No Chinese company is exempt from pressure by the Chinese party-state.
Today, the national security case against Huawei is made by the shift in China’s behavior: its hardening authoritarianism and persecution of minorities at home; its drive for regional hegemony; its aggressive pursuit of physical, economic and digital assets in Europe; and its crackdown on the autonomy of Hong Kong, in flagrant breach of international law.
Most recently, Beijing has ramped up what Asia expert Andrew Small describes as predatory “attempts to exploit political and economic vulnerabilities in Europe.” Its methods range from disinformation operations to support for populists and threats by senior diplomats. This changes the context of permitting China to provide key components of Europe’s digital ecosystem.
Europeans, in fact, had already shifted from their earlier embrace of China to a more guarded posture of balancing and limiting Chinese influence. An official EU document from 2019 calls China a “systemic rival.” The EU’s latest industrial, connectivity and digital strategies reflect these concerns. While resisting outright bans, many of the EU’s 27 states are overhauling their network security standards. France’s cyber security agency told operators this month to avoid switching to Huawei. The Italian government has issued guidelines that might lead to the exclusion of Huawei.
But Mr Morawiecki was thinking of a particular European neighbor, which now finds itself in an unpleasant dilemma: Germany. It is China’s chief interlocutor in the west after the U.S. It is Europe’s pivotal power and largest telecoms market. China is also its biggest trade partner. German critics of China have pounced on the opportunity arising from the U.K. decision. “It’s Berlin’s turn to move!” tweeted Reinhard Bütikofer, a Green member of the European Parliament.
In Germany’s parliament, critics of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s circumspect stance on Huawei and China range from the Greens, Free Democrats and hard-right Alternative for Germany to her Social Democrat coalition partners, who have published forceful strategy papers on China and 5G. They also include many of her own Christian Democrats, led by Norbert Röttgen, chairman of the Bundestag’s foreign policy committee.
Arrayed in defense of Huawei and Beijing are economics minister Peter Altmaier, the head of the network regulatory agency, the cellular provider Deutsche Telekom, and the powerful chemical and car industries, desperate for Chinese market access to lift them out of coronavirus-induced recession.
For Merkel, whose fourth and last term will end in autumn 2021, all this could not come at a worse time. Germany has just taken on the rotating EU presidency for six months. She had hoped to sign an EU-China investment deal at a summit in Leipzig in September. But the deal is not ready, and the summit is postponed. Instead, Ms Merkel has pledged to lead the EU out of economic crisis by putting Germany’s wealth behind an unprecedented €1.8tn recovery package.
U.S. president Donald Trump’s bullying of allies is unhelpful at a time when Washington and Brussels should be working together. Beijing’s China First policies require a firm, principled European response. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has observed, the US and China too have been diminished by the pandemic. In an interdependent world, the US needs allies and China needs markets. Germany, like the U.K., is no more than a middle power. But Europe has real leverage, if it is united.
Merkel, as she considers her legacy, might do well to recall that it was in Leipzig that tens of thousands of her fellow East Germans stared down heavily armed police and marched for liberty in 1989.
U.S. president Donald Trump’s bullying of allies is unhelpful at a time when Washington and Brussels should be working together. Beijing’s China First policies require a firm, principled European response. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has observed, the US and China too have been diminished by the pandemic. In an interdependent world, the US needs allies and China needs markets. Germany, like the U.K., is no more than a middle power. But Europe has real leverage, if it is united.
Merkel, as she considers her legacy, might do well to recall that it was in Leipzig that tens of thousands of her fellow East Germans stared down heavily armed police and marched for liberty in 1989.
Perhaps it is time to take the side of those marching for freedom and democracy in Asia today."
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
You certainly don't know about ARM either, but it is absolutely true that the U.S. wants a TMSC fab in the U.S. for National Security reasons, number one of which, China is constantly threatening Taiwan. My speculation is that ARM IP will not be allowed into China beyond what is already there, and since you do not have any of the facts to dispute that, I'll stick with my speculation. TMSC's plant in China only provides chips for foreign companies.
It is also true that the Trump administration is blocking technology sales to many Chinese Companies, see entities list, including Huawei, but you don't seem to be concerned about those other companies.
The U.S. and the West likely wouldn't be disengaging with China if it wasn't for Xi Jinping, so no matter how much I detest Trump, this policy is broadly supported by both parties, especially after the enactment of the Security Law in Hong Kong, and the Human Rights violations in the Xinjiang region. On top of that, many Western countries, including all of the Five Eyes, have suspended their extradition treaty with China.
When Arm sold its stake in Arm China, one assumption in the US was that part of the motivation was to allow Arm, a British firm owned by a Japanese conglomerate, to continue licensing IP to Huawei. Like every other chip designer, Huawei relies heavily on Arm. And there are concerns that the US government will prevent Arm from supplying Huawei. In the first round of Huawei restrictions last year, Arm made it known that they were only providing Huawei IP from current licenses and were cutting off access to future improvements. With Arm’s complex China holding structure, we can think of a half dozen loopholes that may allow Huawei to continue to access Arm IP. Maybe they take advantage of those, maybe not."
Now it is true that Huawei may attempt to get around that, but the JV may not get the improvement either.
Ah! So your affirmation turns out to be pure speculation.
You are right, I am not really knowledgeable on the current or future state of ARM IP in China. However, how could you not be aware of that seeing as I myself told you! LOL.
Let me insist. There is no race to disengage. My comments above, demonstrate that clearly.
You throw in your human rights accusations as usual, even though they have no bearing on this thread.
ORAN has completely vanished from your argument, I see. I'm not surprised.
Anyway, here's a fun look at what's going on and where China/Huawei took the right moves years ago. If the US had taken the right moves a decade ago, it wouldn't be in its current predicament.
You know, 20kg can be installed by one person unassisted. That saves a ton of money on deployment. Competitors are running at 40kg. It's not only weight though, it's volume too, and of course the aforementioned efficiency gains.
And when you start pairing those advances with other advances in associated technologies you begin to understand why Huawei is where it is. Why not take a look at something like the OptiXtreme H7 with capacity to run 48 T/bits over a single fiber.
Ah! It's all stolen, right? But from who if no one has anything in the same league!?
LOL,
Keep on believing what you will, but the times, they are a changing, and not in China's, nor Huawei's, favor.
"For months, most EU countries hid behind the U.K. government’s confident assertion that it could manage the risk of allowing Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant, to help build its 5G networks. They hoped this would let them have it both ways: get a swift, cost-efficient cellular telephony upgrade from China, while avoiding trouble with their U.S. ally. But now that Britain has moved to block Huawei’s participation, Europeans find themselves deprived of cover, and both the US and China are breathing fire down their necks."
Americans and Europeans used to fight about whether there was a “smoking gun” indicating that Huawei’s equipment was being used for espionage. This is still not proven, but it is plausible. No Chinese company is exempt from pressure by the Chinese party-state.
Today, the national security case against Huawei is made by the shift in China’s behavior: its hardening authoritarianism and persecution of minorities at home; its drive for regional hegemony; its aggressive pursuit of physical, economic and digital assets in Europe; and its crackdown on the autonomy of Hong Kong, in flagrant breach of international law.
Most recently, Beijing has ramped up what Asia expert Andrew Small describes as predatory “attempts to exploit political and economic vulnerabilities in Europe.” Its methods range from disinformation operations to support for populists and threats by senior diplomats. This changes the context of permitting China to provide key components of Europe’s digital ecosystem.
Europeans, in fact, had already shifted from their earlier embrace of China to a more guarded posture of balancing and limiting Chinese influence. An official EU document from 2019 calls China a “systemic rival.” The EU’s latest industrial, connectivity and digital strategies reflect these concerns. While resisting outright bans, many of the EU’s 27 states are overhauling their network security standards. France’s cyber security agency told operators this month to avoid switching to Huawei. The Italian government has issued guidelines that might lead to the exclusion of Huawei.
But Mr Morawiecki was thinking of a particular European neighbor, which now finds itself in an unpleasant dilemma: Germany. It is China’s chief interlocutor in the west after the U.S. It is Europe’s pivotal power and largest telecoms market. China is also its biggest trade partner. German critics of China have pounced on the opportunity arising from the U.K. decision. “It’s Berlin’s turn to move!” tweeted Reinhard Bütikofer, a Green member of the European Parliament.
In Germany’s parliament, critics of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s circumspect stance on Huawei and China range from the Greens, Free Democrats and hard-right Alternative for Germany to her Social Democrat coalition partners, who have published forceful strategy papers on China and 5G. They also include many of her own Christian Democrats, led by Norbert Röttgen, chairman of the Bundestag’s foreign policy committee.
Arrayed in defense of Huawei and Beijing are economics minister Peter Altmaier, the head of the network regulatory agency, the cellular provider Deutsche Telekom, and the powerful chemical and car industries, desperate for Chinese market access to lift them out of coronavirus-induced recession.
For Merkel, whose fourth and last term will end in autumn 2021, all this could not come at a worse time. Germany has just taken on the rotating EU presidency for six months. She had hoped to sign an EU-China investment deal at a summit in Leipzig in September. But the deal is not ready, and the summit is postponed. Instead, Ms Merkel has pledged to lead the EU out of economic crisis by putting Germany’s wealth behind an unprecedented €1.8tn recovery package.
U.S. president Donald Trump’s bullying of allies is unhelpful at a time when Washington and Brussels should be working together. Beijing’s China First policies require a firm, principled European response. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has observed, the US and China too have been diminished by the pandemic. In an interdependent world, the US needs allies and China needs markets. Germany, like the U.K., is no more than a middle power. But Europe has real leverage, if it is united.
Merkel, as she considers her legacy, might do well to recall that it was in Leipzig that tens of thousands of her fellow East Germans stared down heavily armed police and marched for liberty in 1989.
U.S. president Donald Trump’s bullying of allies is unhelpful at a time when Washington and Brussels should be working together. Beijing’s China First policies require a firm, principled European response. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has observed, the US and China too have been diminished by the pandemic. In an interdependent world, the US needs allies and China needs markets. Germany, like the U.K., is no more than a middle power. But Europe has real leverage, if it is united.
Merkel, as she considers her legacy, might do well to recall that it was in Leipzig that tens of thousands of her fellow East Germans stared down heavily armed police and marched for liberty in 1989.
Perhaps it is time to take the side of those marching for freedom and democracy in Asia today."
Yeah, things are wonderful for Huawei.
So you once again try to derail a thread.
It's geopolitics. Not national security. Live with it.
I have never said things are wonderful for Huawei.
But do you really think this ARM, ASML, Extra territorial Sanctions etc will actually achieve anything save for acceleratong the obvious?
And you say I'm delusional for stating the facts (which I see as irrefutable BTW).
Now, I will admit there is a possible geopolitical angle to this nVidia story but let's not go overboard.
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
You certainly don't know about ARM either, but it is absolutely true that the U.S. wants a TMSC fab in the U.S. for National Security reasons, number one of which, China is constantly threatening Taiwan. My speculation is that ARM IP will not be allowed into China beyond what is already there, and since you do not have any of the facts to dispute that, I'll stick with my speculation. TMSC's plant in China only provides chips for foreign companies.
It is also true that the Trump administration is blocking technology sales to many Chinese Companies, see entities list, including Huawei, but you don't seem to be concerned about those other companies.
The U.S. and the West likely wouldn't be disengaging with China if it wasn't for Xi Jinping, so no matter how much I detest Trump, this policy is broadly supported by both parties, especially after the enactment of the Security Law in Hong Kong, and the Human Rights violations in the Xinjiang region. On top of that, many Western countries, including all of the Five Eyes, have suspended their extradition treaty with China.
When Arm sold its stake in Arm China, one assumption in the US was that part of the motivation was to allow Arm, a British firm owned by a Japanese conglomerate, to continue licensing IP to Huawei. Like every other chip designer, Huawei relies heavily on Arm. And there are concerns that the US government will prevent Arm from supplying Huawei. In the first round of Huawei restrictions last year, Arm made it known that they were only providing Huawei IP from current licenses and were cutting off access to future improvements. With Arm’s complex China holding structure, we can think of a half dozen loopholes that may allow Huawei to continue to access Arm IP. Maybe they take advantage of those, maybe not."
Now it is true that Huawei may attempt to get around that, but the JV may not get the improvement either.
Ah! So your affirmation turns out to be pure speculation.
You are right, I am not really knowledgeable on the current or future state of ARM IP in China. However, how could you not be aware of that seeing as I myself told you! LOL.
Let me insist. There is no race to disengage. My comments above, demonstrate that clearly.
You throw in your human rights accusations as usual, even though they have no bearing on this thread.
ORAN has completely vanished from your argument, I see. I'm not surprised.
Anyway, here's a fun look at what's going on and where China/Huawei took the right moves years ago. If the US had taken the right moves a decade ago, it wouldn't be in its current predicament.
You know, 20kg can be installed by one person unassisted. That saves a ton of money on deployment. Competitors are running at 40kg. It's not only weight though, it's volume too, and of course the aforementioned efficiency gains.
And when you start pairing those advances with other advances in associated technologies you begin to understand why Huawei is where it is. Why not take a look at something like the OptiXtreme H7 with capacity to run 48 T/bits over a single fiber.
Ah! It's all stolen, right? But from who if no one has anything in the same league!?
LOL,
Keep on believing what you will, but the times, they are a changing, and not in China's, nor Huawei's, favor.
"For months, most EU countries hid behind the U.K. government’s confident assertion that it could manage the risk of allowing Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant, to help build its 5G networks. They hoped this would let them have it both ways: get a swift, cost-efficient cellular telephony upgrade from China, while avoiding trouble with their U.S. ally. But now that Britain has moved to block Huawei’s participation, Europeans find themselves deprived of cover, and both the US and China are breathing fire down their necks."
Americans and Europeans used to fight about whether there was a “smoking gun” indicating that Huawei’s equipment was being used for espionage. This is still not proven, but it is plausible. No Chinese company is exempt from pressure by the Chinese party-state.
Today, the national security case against Huawei is made by the shift in China’s behavior: its hardening authoritarianism and persecution of minorities at home; its drive for regional hegemony; its aggressive pursuit of physical, economic and digital assets in Europe; and its crackdown on the autonomy of Hong Kong, in flagrant breach of international law.
Most recently, Beijing has ramped up what Asia expert Andrew Small describes as predatory “attempts to exploit political and economic vulnerabilities in Europe.” Its methods range from disinformation operations to support for populists and threats by senior diplomats. This changes the context of permitting China to provide key components of Europe’s digital ecosystem.
Europeans, in fact, had already shifted from their earlier embrace of China to a more guarded posture of balancing and limiting Chinese influence. An official EU document from 2019 calls China a “systemic rival.” The EU’s latest industrial, connectivity and digital strategies reflect these concerns. While resisting outright bans, many of the EU’s 27 states are overhauling their network security standards. France’s cyber security agency told operators this month to avoid switching to Huawei. The Italian government has issued guidelines that might lead to the exclusion of Huawei.
But Mr Morawiecki was thinking of a particular European neighbor, which now finds itself in an unpleasant dilemma: Germany. It is China’s chief interlocutor in the west after the U.S. It is Europe’s pivotal power and largest telecoms market. China is also its biggest trade partner. German critics of China have pounced on the opportunity arising from the U.K. decision. “It’s Berlin’s turn to move!” tweeted Reinhard Bütikofer, a Green member of the European Parliament.
In Germany’s parliament, critics of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s circumspect stance on Huawei and China range from the Greens, Free Democrats and hard-right Alternative for Germany to her Social Democrat coalition partners, who have published forceful strategy papers on China and 5G. They also include many of her own Christian Democrats, led by Norbert Röttgen, chairman of the Bundestag’s foreign policy committee.
Arrayed in defense of Huawei and Beijing are economics minister Peter Altmaier, the head of the network regulatory agency, the cellular provider Deutsche Telekom, and the powerful chemical and car industries, desperate for Chinese market access to lift them out of coronavirus-induced recession.
For Merkel, whose fourth and last term will end in autumn 2021, all this could not come at a worse time. Germany has just taken on the rotating EU presidency for six months. She had hoped to sign an EU-China investment deal at a summit in Leipzig in September. But the deal is not ready, and the summit is postponed. Instead, Ms Merkel has pledged to lead the EU out of economic crisis by putting Germany’s wealth behind an unprecedented €1.8tn recovery package.
U.S. president Donald Trump’s bullying of allies is unhelpful at a time when Washington and Brussels should be working together. Beijing’s China First policies require a firm, principled European response. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has observed, the US and China too have been diminished by the pandemic. In an interdependent world, the US needs allies and China needs markets. Germany, like the U.K., is no more than a middle power. But Europe has real leverage, if it is united.
Merkel, as she considers her legacy, might do well to recall that it was in Leipzig that tens of thousands of her fellow East Germans stared down heavily armed police and marched for liberty in 1989.
U.S. president Donald Trump’s bullying of allies is unhelpful at a time when Washington and Brussels should be working together. Beijing’s China First policies require a firm, principled European response. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has observed, the US and China too have been diminished by the pandemic. In an interdependent world, the US needs allies and China needs markets. Germany, like the U.K., is no more than a middle power. But Europe has real leverage, if it is united.
Merkel, as she considers her legacy, might do well to recall that it was in Leipzig that tens of thousands of her fellow East Germans stared down heavily armed police and marched for liberty in 1989.
Perhaps it is time to take the side of those marching for freedom and democracy in Asia today."
Yeah, things are wonderful for Huawei.
So you once again try to derail a thread.
It's geopolitics. Not national security. Live with it.
I have never said things are wonderful for Huawei.
But do you really think this ARM, ASML, Extra territorial Sanctions etc will actually achieve anything save for acceleratong the obvious?
And you say I'm delusional for stating the facts (which I see as irrefutable BTW).
Now, I will admit there is a possible geopolitical angle to this nVidia story but let's not go overboard.
Geopolitics IS National Security, and infrastructure absolutely has National Security aspects.
But you've never shied away from ignoring National Security, because you don't actually want to have to deal with it in your arguments.
News;
Australia is concerned about its power infrastructure incorporating too many China origin transformers, as China may be able to control those remotely.
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
You certainly don't know about ARM either, but it is absolutely true that the U.S. wants a TMSC fab in the U.S. for National Security reasons, number one of which, China is constantly threatening Taiwan. My speculation is that ARM IP will not be allowed into China beyond what is already there, and since you do not have any of the facts to dispute that, I'll stick with my speculation. TMSC's plant in China only provides chips for foreign companies.
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
Exactly! I just can’t understand, how it is possible, that there are still people who don’t see that
Not everybody in the world reads and is foolish enough to believe right wing propaganda. Some prefer reality.
Believe me, I know what I am talking about. I have spent forty years of my life in such a country. So don’t tell me about reality. You are living in a dreamland. Follow your own advice, and try to read more, and what is more important: to understand what are you reading. Don’t hide your incompetence behind words like “propaganda”
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
You certainly don't know about ARM either, but it is absolutely true that the U.S. wants a TMSC fab in the U.S. for National Security reasons, number one of which, China is constantly threatening Taiwan. My speculation is that ARM IP will not be allowed into China beyond what is already there, and since you do not have any of the facts to dispute that, I'll stick with my speculation. TMSC's plant in China only provides chips for foreign companies.
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
You certainly don't know about ARM either, but it is absolutely true that the U.S. wants a TMSC fab in the U.S. for National Security reasons, number one of which, China is constantly threatening Taiwan. My speculation is that ARM IP will not be allowed into China beyond what is already there, and since you do not have any of the facts to dispute that, I'll stick with my speculation. TMSC's plant in China only provides chips for foreign companies.
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
You certainly don't know about ARM either, but it is absolutely true that the U.S. wants a TMSC fab in the U.S. for National Security reasons, number one of which, China is constantly threatening Taiwan. My speculation is that ARM IP will not be allowed into China beyond what is already there, and since you do not have any of the facts to dispute that, I'll stick with my speculation. TMSC's plant in China only provides chips for foreign companies.
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
You certainly don't know about ARM either, but it is absolutely true that the U.S. wants a TMSC fab in the U.S. for National Security reasons, number one of which, China is constantly threatening Taiwan. My speculation is that ARM IP will not be allowed into China beyond what is already there, and since you do not have any of the facts to dispute that, I'll stick with my speculation. TMSC's plant in China only provides chips for foreign companies.
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
Exactly! I just can’t understand, how it is possible, that there are still people who don’t see that
Not everybody in the world reads and is foolish enough to believe right wing propaganda. Some prefer reality.
Believe me, I know what I am talking about. I have spent forty years of my life in such a country. So don’t tell me about reality. You are living in a dreamland. Follow your own advice, and try to read more, and what is more important: to understand what are you reading. Don’t hide your incompetence behind words like “propaganda”
LOL.... Propaganda is propaganda. And the right wing crazies live and breath by it. It's a different world, a different universe that's become their new reality. They have heard it shouted so loud and so often it has replaced truth, facts and actual reality for them and they get very confused and angry when the actual reality crashes up against their fake one.
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
You certainly don't know about ARM either, but it is absolutely true that the U.S. wants a TMSC fab in the U.S. for National Security reasons, number one of which, China is constantly threatening Taiwan. My speculation is that ARM IP will not be allowed into China beyond what is already there, and since you do not have any of the facts to dispute that, I'll stick with my speculation. TMSC's plant in China only provides chips for foreign companies.
It is also true that the Trump administration is blocking technology sales to many Chinese Companies, see entities list, including Huawei, but you don't seem to be concerned about those other companies.
The U.S. and the West likely wouldn't be disengaging with China if it wasn't for Xi Jinping, so no matter how much I detest Trump, this policy is broadly supported by both parties, especially after the enactment of the Security Law in Hong Kong, and the Human Rights violations in the Xinjiang region. On top of that, many Western countries, including all of the Five Eyes, have suspended their extradition treaty with China.
When Arm sold its stake in Arm China, one assumption in the US was that part of the motivation was to allow Arm, a British firm owned by a Japanese conglomerate, to continue licensing IP to Huawei. Like every other chip designer, Huawei relies heavily on Arm. And there are concerns that the US government will prevent Arm from supplying Huawei. In the first round of Huawei restrictions last year, Arm made it known that they were only providing Huawei IP from current licenses and were cutting off access to future improvements. With Arm’s complex China holding structure, we can think of a half dozen loopholes that may allow Huawei to continue to access Arm IP. Maybe they take advantage of those, maybe not."
Now it is true that Huawei may attempt to get around that, but the JV may not get the improvement either.
Ah! So your affirmation turns out to be pure speculation.
You are right, I am not really knowledgeable on the current or future state of ARM IP in China. However, how could you not be aware of that seeing as I myself told you! LOL.
Let me insist. There is no race to disengage. My comments above, demonstrate that clearly.
You throw in your human rights accusations as usual, even though they have no bearing on this thread.
ORAN has completely vanished from your argument, I see. I'm not surprised.
Anyway, here's a fun look at what's going on and where China/Huawei took the right moves years ago. If the US had taken the right moves a decade ago, it wouldn't be in its current predicament.
You know, 20kg can be installed by one person unassisted. That saves a ton of money on deployment. Competitors are running at 40kg. It's not only weight though, it's volume too, and of course the aforementioned efficiency gains.
And when you start pairing those advances with other advances in associated technologies you begin to understand why Huawei is where it is. Why not take a look at something like the OptiXtreme H7 with capacity to run 48 T/bits over a single fiber.
Ah! It's all stolen, right? But from who if no one has anything in the same league!?
LOL,
Keep on believing what you will, but the times, they are a changing, and not in China's, nor Huawei's, favor.
"For months, most EU countries hid behind the U.K. government’s confident assertion that it could manage the risk of allowing Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant, to help build its 5G networks. They hoped this would let them have it both ways: get a swift, cost-efficient cellular telephony upgrade from China, while avoiding trouble with their U.S. ally. But now that Britain has moved to block Huawei’s participation, Europeans find themselves deprived of cover, and both the US and China are breathing fire down their necks."
Americans and Europeans used to fight about whether there was a “smoking gun” indicating that Huawei’s equipment was being used for espionage. This is still not proven, but it is plausible. No Chinese company is exempt from pressure by the Chinese party-state.
Today, the national security case against Huawei is made by the shift in China’s behavior: its hardening authoritarianism and persecution of minorities at home; its drive for regional hegemony; its aggressive pursuit of physical, economic and digital assets in Europe; and its crackdown on the autonomy of Hong Kong, in flagrant breach of international law.
Most recently, Beijing has ramped up what Asia expert Andrew Small describes as predatory “attempts to exploit political and economic vulnerabilities in Europe.” Its methods range from disinformation operations to support for populists and threats by senior diplomats. This changes the context of permitting China to provide key components of Europe’s digital ecosystem.
Europeans, in fact, had already shifted from their earlier embrace of China to a more guarded posture of balancing and limiting Chinese influence. An official EU document from 2019 calls China a “systemic rival.” The EU’s latest industrial, connectivity and digital strategies reflect these concerns. While resisting outright bans, many of the EU’s 27 states are overhauling their network security standards. France’s cyber security agency told operators this month to avoid switching to Huawei. The Italian government has issued guidelines that might lead to the exclusion of Huawei.
But Mr Morawiecki was thinking of a particular European neighbor, which now finds itself in an unpleasant dilemma: Germany. It is China’s chief interlocutor in the west after the U.S. It is Europe’s pivotal power and largest telecoms market. China is also its biggest trade partner. German critics of China have pounced on the opportunity arising from the U.K. decision. “It’s Berlin’s turn to move!” tweeted Reinhard Bütikofer, a Green member of the European Parliament.
In Germany’s parliament, critics of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s circumspect stance on Huawei and China range from the Greens, Free Democrats and hard-right Alternative for Germany to her Social Democrat coalition partners, who have published forceful strategy papers on China and 5G. They also include many of her own Christian Democrats, led by Norbert Röttgen, chairman of the Bundestag’s foreign policy committee.
Arrayed in defense of Huawei and Beijing are economics minister Peter Altmaier, the head of the network regulatory agency, the cellular provider Deutsche Telekom, and the powerful chemical and car industries, desperate for Chinese market access to lift them out of coronavirus-induced recession.
For Merkel, whose fourth and last term will end in autumn 2021, all this could not come at a worse time. Germany has just taken on the rotating EU presidency for six months. She had hoped to sign an EU-China investment deal at a summit in Leipzig in September. But the deal is not ready, and the summit is postponed. Instead, Ms Merkel has pledged to lead the EU out of economic crisis by putting Germany’s wealth behind an unprecedented €1.8tn recovery package.
U.S. president Donald Trump’s bullying of allies is unhelpful at a time when Washington and Brussels should be working together. Beijing’s China First policies require a firm, principled European response. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has observed, the US and China too have been diminished by the pandemic. In an interdependent world, the US needs allies and China needs markets. Germany, like the U.K., is no more than a middle power. But Europe has real leverage, if it is united.
Merkel, as she considers her legacy, might do well to recall that it was in Leipzig that tens of thousands of her fellow East Germans stared down heavily armed police and marched for liberty in 1989.
U.S. president Donald Trump’s bullying of allies is unhelpful at a time when Washington and Brussels should be working together. Beijing’s China First policies require a firm, principled European response. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has observed, the US and China too have been diminished by the pandemic. In an interdependent world, the US needs allies and China needs markets. Germany, like the U.K., is no more than a middle power. But Europe has real leverage, if it is united.
Merkel, as she considers her legacy, might do well to recall that it was in Leipzig that tens of thousands of her fellow East Germans stared down heavily armed police and marched for liberty in 1989.
Perhaps it is time to take the side of those marching for freedom and democracy in Asia today."
Yeah, things are wonderful for Huawei.
So you once again try to derail a thread.
It's geopolitics. Not national security. Live with it.
I have never said things are wonderful for Huawei.
But do you really think this ARM, ASML, Extra territorial Sanctions etc will actually achieve anything save for acceleratong the obvious?
And you say I'm delusional for stating the facts (which I see as irrefutable BTW).
Now, I will admit there is a possible geopolitical angle to this nVidia story but let's not go overboard.
Geopolitics IS National Security, and infrastructure absolutely has National Security aspects.
Using the "National Security' excuse to defend injecting government into free, open markets and corporate affairs? Really? You know -- like blocking kids from using TicToc!
I have to chuckle when you right wingers defend and support Trump for doing exactly what you and he accuse China of doing!
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
Nvidia will have no issues getting this approved.
A stipulation of the sale will almost certainly be that new ARM IP will not be made available to Chinese companies, due to China's use of civilian technology for the PLA.
Also due to the fact nothing is made in china without the chinese government having complete control of it.
Bahahahaha....
... That's what your right wing overlords want you to think....
The rest of the world knows that is nonsense.
"There's technology transfer: Chinese regulations often require foreign companies to partner with a state-run Chinese firm if they're going to open shop there. That's happened to GM, Volkswagen, Qualcomm, and Intel, for instance. And that intrinsically involves sharing intellectual property and technology with the Chinese partner. There's good old-fashioned copyright violations: Chinese companies brazenly copy patents, brands, logos, and such. (Nor, as mentioned above, can foreign companies always rely on Chinese courts to shutdown this behavior.) Finally, there's outright commercial espionage: Chinese actors physically breaking in or hacking into foreign companies — either on foreign soil or within China — and making off with trade secrets."
I just looked it up. Last I had heard, and I was going off VERY old information, Intel had bought NVIDIA. I also talked to my IT manager, here, to be sure, and he agreed. Turns out we were both wrong, because I can't find confirmation of the purchase.
1. nVIDIA is not Intel. They are two separate companies and have nothing to do with each other. 2. Intel IS NOT China. They are an American company based in Santa Clara, CA U.S.A. (Actually just "down the road" from nVIDIA). 3. Maybe you're thinking of AMD buying ATI/Radeon? Even then AMD is an American company -and ATI was a Canadian company.
Looking at the fact you quoted what I previously stated, I can only hope it made you feel better to make your absolutely useless comment.
Just the wait time of approval from various government will likely kill the deal.
We can only hope.
As I said before, this is not only a mistake, putting control of the ARM architecture directly in the hands of China (NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China), but it's going in the exact direction I expected it to go.
I called this when it was first reported, and everyone said I was being Chicken Little.
What now, brown cow?
"NVIDIA is Intel, and Intel is pretty much China"
Intel has no significant discernible stake in NVIDIA and Intel is majority owned by institutional investors, the two biggest by far being Vanguard and Blackrock - both American.
The right's fear of China knows no boundaries in reality.
Nor does your posturing, which is no-nothing, if not entirely supportive of the CCP.
I think that New Zealand has had enough of Chinese Influence operations in New Zealand, as have many other countries, including Australia and the U.S.
As for Taiwan, no it doesn't belong to China, no matter how much the CCP state so, and though China will ultimately weigh having to invade Taiwan, most Western countries support Taiwan's right to exist independently of Mainland China. The question will be, whether those Western Nations will support Taiwan militarily.
Maybe, just maybe, Mainland China belongs to the democracy that we know as Taiwan.
LOL.... No....
I'm not "pro-CCP" (Whatever the hell that is!)
But I am against smear campaigns and wars fought to distract from internal abuses and deficiencies.
China has been a boon to the U.S. consumer producing great, high quality, low cost products. It's not their fault that U.S. industry lost its competitive edge. If those industries hadn't moved to Japan, China and Korea it would have been other countries.
And no, don't go there on Huawei: that's 100% Trump smear campaign. Even the UK admitted that Trump pressured them into (temporarily) pushing Huawei out. It had nothing to do with Trump's claims -- which all proved to be bogus.
Huawei 5G is banned in the UK. All existing Huawei 4G must be removed by 2027.
Meng Wanzhou will be extradited to the U.S. to face trial.
For the record;
CCP is the Chinese Communist Party; they run Mainland China. If you are "pro" CCP, as it appears, then you are for the authoritarian government of China. PRC is the People's Republic of China; ie Mainland China, governed by the CCP.
See how easy that was?
Hmmn!
But the ban is political. No national security grounds involved and could be short lived if Trump is not re-elected.
As I stated, the tipping point might have been the passing of the Security Law that took effect in Hong Kong on June 30 at midnight.
Either way, the UK won't be removing the ban in the future. The ban was actually very popular with Parliament.
"The government’s private admissions are out of kilter with public statements last week by ministers, who said Huawei had been banned because of new security concerns raised by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), which is part of GCHQ."
"In the Commons, Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, said new sanctions forbidding the sale of US-produced components to Huawei – meaning the Chinese company will have to source them from elsewhere – had changed the balance of security risk."
You might consider actually reading the whole article that you linked to. It's hardly what you portray, but I'll bet that Boris Johnson would hint that, since the UK's economy depends on new trade relations, due to Brexit. Still, I doubt that Biden will back off of a Huawei ban either, assuming he wins the Presidential Election. It has broad support within Congress.
If you would actually watch the video that I posted at the link, you could educate yourself to the Huawei issues that the U.S. has. There is a necessary leveling of the playing field due to the subsidies that Huawei has received from the PRC, which have been and are used to undercut competition; Huawei's close association with the PLA; and, the matter of China stealing our IP, not to mention the problem with Huawei having to answer in the affirmative if the Chinese Government requests data on Huawei telecom networks.
You really are not at all educated on the Huawei issues, and Huawei has been an issue with the U.S. since the Bush II administration.
Believe me. I'm well educated on the Huawei issue.
Did you know that in the original filings, the US government included a company that had nothing at all to do with Huawei?
This really is Keystone Cops level and it has gone beyond that level.
They have nothing and now the world knows it and has taken note.
The damage Trump is causing to US business and foreign business interests is off the scale.
The US was already losing out in certain areas ARM/Fabs, 5G etc and things won't get better.
Over 130 US companies requested licences to do business with Huawei because they want to. And Google is likely to be the one which suffers more in the mid to long term.
"Believe me, I am well educated on the Huawei issue"
Hubris.
You avoid anything that is negative on Huawei, so be definition, you aren't well educated.
Absolute nonsense.
How about we begin by providing evidence of the accusations brought by the US first?
No company is perfect. Some are worse than others but that really isn't the issue and you know that.
When you have some real evidence to offer, point it out to me. The reality is it simply doesn't exist and now the whole world knows it.
This isn't new. Huawei offered to sell its 5G to an American bidder so they could have a company at least in the running. When that offer was rejected it cemented the idea that the whole national security angle was a smokescreen.
So, you should let this go. This thread has little to do with what you are bringing in (again and again).
No, I won't let it go, but thanks for playing.
I have stated that the issue with Huawei is the close connections with the Chinese Government, and even you must realize that the world has woken up to China's authoritarianism on full display.
You certainly seem okay with China, but I certainly am not, so of course, I'll not "let this go".
But to get back to ARM, one of the conditions of sale is that ARM IP will no longer be available to China, nor will U.S. sourced lithographic equipment that HiSilicon and SMIC need. nor will Electronic Design Automation software sourced from the U.S., all necessary for current and next generations of silicon. China will attempt to hack these companies in the West, as they have in the past, to jump start their technologies, no different than the advantage that Huawei gained from the hacking of Nortel and Cisco.
You seem to think that this is all Trump, but the truth is, Xi Jinping has been bent on recreating the Mao era, and rolling back any liberalizations that occurred in previous governments.
What happened to ARM mini China and the JV which saw the Chinese take a 51% stake?
Nothing will be hacked. It will just take time. Less time now, thanks to Trump. The Chinese have been on the road to silicon self sufficiency for years and are now simply accelerating things.
I also mentioned RISC-V which is picking up incredible steam across the board.
ARM China will be stuck with whatever ARM IP they have currently; they won't get future generations. RISCV seems like a good match for where China is today, and thank the University Of California, Berkeley for that while you're at it.
Lithographic equipment and EDA software are non-trivial, and yes, for a fact, China will try and hack its way to self sufficiency, same as China and Russia have been attempting to hack the West's COVID-19 vaccine programs.
Hacking and stealing technology and IP is exactly what China does, so much so, that even Russia feels the effect of that.
Dish network is building out the first major 5G network in the U.S. using OpenRAN technology, using disaggregated hardware and software and standardized interfaces.
Of course, Huawei benefits from complete and proprietary installs, that are especially popular with 3rd world countries, due to Chinese Government financing.
I would imagine that future ARM IP is already baked into the JV deal.
AFAIK, and I don't know much about this aspect, that was part of the reasoning behind the JV.
Maybe, maybe not, but without EDA updates, or the most up to date lithographic equipment, how is that going to actually work?
Watch the video; learn something, even if you don't agree with it.
So you don't know about the future of ARM IP in China. You presented that claim as if it was an absolute. You said they wouldn't get future ARM IP, so which is it?
As for ORAN, you sound as if you've only just found out about it.
It is impossible to know where ORAN will end up but we do know that if it makes any kind of impact it will take years to do so.
Right now, which is where the relevance is, it is not up to the task of matching Huawei. ORAN is an interface and has to run on something and that something has to be efficient on many levels. Huawei is ruling the roost when it comes to efficiencies and efficiency means money. The US might be ok with slower, inefficient (and by definition, more expensive) solutions but if you have access to Huawei equipment, there are big attractions there, and the more rural the setting, the more important efficiencies are.
The question is if more efficient radio hardware (massive MIMO) can be brought to market by the likes of Nokia and Ericsson. They are behind in this area because both of them haven't invested well enough to improve efficiencies while Huawei has.
In fact, Huawei's lead in gallium semi conductor production doesn't look like being cut back any time soon.
As for fabbing, I already answered that. It just needs time and Trump has accelerated China's plans to achieve semi conductor self suffiency (yes, including fabbing).
You keep making the case of why the West needs to source outside of China, but you don't even realize it.
Yeah, the West put much of its technology production in China, but there is now a race to disengage from China, and move production to other countries, all driven by China's authoritarianism. That will also reduce the transfer of technology to China.
Do you really think that China is going to come out on top over this, because if you do, you are delusional.
Ah! It's me who is delusional! Thanks for telling me.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
You certainly don't know about ARM either, but it is absolutely true that the U.S. wants a TMSC fab in the U.S. for National Security reasons, number one of which, China is constantly threatening Taiwan. My speculation is that ARM IP will not be allowed into China beyond what is already there, and since you do not have any of the facts to dispute that, I'll stick with my speculation. TMSC's plant in China only provides chips for foreign companies.
It is also true that the Trump administration is blocking technology sales to many Chinese Companies, see entities list, including Huawei, but you don't seem to be concerned about those other companies.
The U.S. and the West likely wouldn't be disengaging with China if it wasn't for Xi Jinping, so no matter how much I detest Trump, this policy is broadly supported by both parties, especially after the enactment of the Security Law in Hong Kong, and the Human Rights violations in the Xinjiang region. On top of that, many Western countries, including all of the Five Eyes, have suspended their extradition treaty with China.
When Arm sold its stake in Arm China, one assumption in the US was that part of the motivation was to allow Arm, a British firm owned by a Japanese conglomerate, to continue licensing IP to Huawei. Like every other chip designer, Huawei relies heavily on Arm. And there are concerns that the US government will prevent Arm from supplying Huawei. In the first round of Huawei restrictions last year, Arm made it known that they were only providing Huawei IP from current licenses and were cutting off access to future improvements. With Arm’s complex China holding structure, we can think of a half dozen loopholes that may allow Huawei to continue to access Arm IP. Maybe they take advantage of those, maybe not."
Now it is true that Huawei may attempt to get around that, but the JV may not get the improvement either.
Ah! So your affirmation turns out to be pure speculation.
You are right, I am not really knowledgeable on the current or future state of ARM IP in China. However, how could you not be aware of that seeing as I myself told you! LOL.
Let me insist. There is no race to disengage. My comments above, demonstrate that clearly.
You throw in your human rights accusations as usual, even though they have no bearing on this thread.
ORAN has completely vanished from your argument, I see. I'm not surprised.
Anyway, here's a fun look at what's going on and where China/Huawei took the right moves years ago. If the US had taken the right moves a decade ago, it wouldn't be in its current predicament.
You know, 20kg can be installed by one person unassisted. That saves a ton of money on deployment. Competitors are running at 40kg. It's not only weight though, it's volume too, and of course the aforementioned efficiency gains.
And when you start pairing those advances with other advances in associated technologies you begin to understand why Huawei is where it is. Why not take a look at something like the OptiXtreme H7 with capacity to run 48 T/bits over a single fiber.
Ah! It's all stolen, right? But from who if no one has anything in the same league!?
LOL,
Keep on believing what you will, but the times, they are a changing, and not in China's, nor Huawei's, favor.
"For months, most EU countries hid behind the U.K. government’s confident assertion that it could manage the risk of allowing Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant, to help build its 5G networks. They hoped this would let them have it both ways: get a swift, cost-efficient cellular telephony upgrade from China, while avoiding trouble with their U.S. ally. But now that Britain has moved to block Huawei’s participation, Europeans find themselves deprived of cover, and both the US and China are breathing fire down their necks."
Americans and Europeans used to fight about whether there was a “smoking gun” indicating that Huawei’s equipment was being used for espionage. This is still not proven, but it is plausible. No Chinese company is exempt from pressure by the Chinese party-state.
Today, the national security case against Huawei is made by the shift in China’s behavior: its hardening authoritarianism and persecution of minorities at home; its drive for regional hegemony; its aggressive pursuit of physical, economic and digital assets in Europe; and its crackdown on the autonomy of Hong Kong, in flagrant breach of international law.
Most recently, Beijing has ramped up what Asia expert Andrew Small describes as predatory “attempts to exploit political and economic vulnerabilities in Europe.” Its methods range from disinformation operations to support for populists and threats by senior diplomats. This changes the context of permitting China to provide key components of Europe’s digital ecosystem.
Europeans, in fact, had already shifted from their earlier embrace of China to a more guarded posture of balancing and limiting Chinese influence. An official EU document from 2019 calls China a “systemic rival.” The EU’s latest industrial, connectivity and digital strategies reflect these concerns. While resisting outright bans, many of the EU’s 27 states are overhauling their network security standards. France’s cyber security agency told operators this month to avoid switching to Huawei. The Italian government has issued guidelines that might lead to the exclusion of Huawei.
But Mr Morawiecki was thinking of a particular European neighbor, which now finds itself in an unpleasant dilemma: Germany. It is China’s chief interlocutor in the west after the U.S. It is Europe’s pivotal power and largest telecoms market. China is also its biggest trade partner. German critics of China have pounced on the opportunity arising from the U.K. decision. “It’s Berlin’s turn to move!” tweeted Reinhard Bütikofer, a Green member of the European Parliament.
In Germany’s parliament, critics of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s circumspect stance on Huawei and China range from the Greens, Free Democrats and hard-right Alternative for Germany to her Social Democrat coalition partners, who have published forceful strategy papers on China and 5G. They also include many of her own Christian Democrats, led by Norbert Röttgen, chairman of the Bundestag’s foreign policy committee.
Arrayed in defense of Huawei and Beijing are economics minister Peter Altmaier, the head of the network regulatory agency, the cellular provider Deutsche Telekom, and the powerful chemical and car industries, desperate for Chinese market access to lift them out of coronavirus-induced recession.
For Merkel, whose fourth and last term will end in autumn 2021, all this could not come at a worse time. Germany has just taken on the rotating EU presidency for six months. She had hoped to sign an EU-China investment deal at a summit in Leipzig in September. But the deal is not ready, and the summit is postponed. Instead, Ms Merkel has pledged to lead the EU out of economic crisis by putting Germany’s wealth behind an unprecedented €1.8tn recovery package.
U.S. president Donald Trump’s bullying of allies is unhelpful at a time when Washington and Brussels should be working together. Beijing’s China First policies require a firm, principled European response. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has observed, the US and China too have been diminished by the pandemic. In an interdependent world, the US needs allies and China needs markets. Germany, like the U.K., is no more than a middle power. But Europe has real leverage, if it is united.
Merkel, as she considers her legacy, might do well to recall that it was in Leipzig that tens of thousands of her fellow East Germans stared down heavily armed police and marched for liberty in 1989.
U.S. president Donald Trump’s bullying of allies is unhelpful at a time when Washington and Brussels should be working together. Beijing’s China First policies require a firm, principled European response. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has observed, the US and China too have been diminished by the pandemic. In an interdependent world, the US needs allies and China needs markets. Germany, like the U.K., is no more than a middle power. But Europe has real leverage, if it is united.
Merkel, as she considers her legacy, might do well to recall that it was in Leipzig that tens of thousands of her fellow East Germans stared down heavily armed police and marched for liberty in 1989.
Perhaps it is time to take the side of those marching for freedom and democracy in Asia today."
Yeah, things are wonderful for Huawei.
So you once again try to derail a thread.
It's geopolitics. Not national security. Live with it.
I have never said things are wonderful for Huawei.
But do you really think this ARM, ASML, Extra territorial Sanctions etc will actually achieve anything save for acceleratong the obvious?
And you say I'm delusional for stating the facts (which I see as irrefutable BTW).
Now, I will admit there is a possible geopolitical angle to this nVidia story but let's not go overboard.
Geopolitics IS National Security, and infrastructure absolutely has National Security aspects.
Using the "National Security' excuse to defend injecting government into free, open markets and corporate affairs? Really? You know -- like blocking kids from using TicToc!
I have to chuckle when you right wingers defend and support Trump for doing exactly what you and he accuse China of doing!
Is everything with you all about politics? We could probably have a thread about muffins and somehow you'd find a way to interject how far the US is behind every other muffin baking country all 'cause a'dem nasty 'rhaht-wangers, and you going on to tell us how China had it right all along.
Gosh, you'll be lost finding something to talk about next year with a change in administration. Maybe discussing what China does in the name of "national security" will help fill your time.
Comments
Not everybody in the world reads and is foolish enough to believe right wing propaganda. Some prefer reality.
Before you go scuttling off to another point, how about you answer the one I brought up first?
Or replying to my point on ORAN and gallium nitride semiconductors.
You said China wouldn't get future ARM IP and then said 'maybe they would or maybe they wouldn't' . To me, that sounds as if your first claim was simply not true.
As I said I get the impression you have little understanding of what ORAN is and probably only heard of it recently.
There is no 'race' to disengage from China.
When I spoke of the US losing billions in Huawei revenue, I made it clear that 130+ US tech companies had requested licences to do business with Huawei!
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
That lost business has already gone, but gone directly to US tech competitors in Europe and Asia (of course including China).
Does that sound like a race to disengage?
The global supply chain, remains, erm, global.
It is Trump who, unable to get his way with groundless accusations and using the global system, is now trying to destroy it, as well as trying to reduce China's influence in the next industrial revolution by trying to destroy Huawei.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/31/tech/tsmc-intel-semiconductors-hnk-intl/index.html
It is also true that the Trump administration is blocking technology sales to many Chinese Companies, see entities list, including Huawei, but you don't seem to be concerned about those other companies.
The U.S. and the West likely wouldn't be disengaging with China if it wasn't for Xi Jinping, so no matter how much I detest Trump, this policy is broadly supported by both parties, especially after the enactment of the Security Law in Hong Kong, and the Human Rights violations in the Xinjiang region. On top of that, many Western countries, including all of the Five Eyes, have suspended their extradition treaty with China.
https://semiwiki.com/ip/287846-tears-in-the-rain-arm-and-china-jvs/
"And then there is the matter of Huawei
When Arm sold its stake in Arm China, one assumption in the US was that part of the motivation was to allow Arm, a British firm owned by a Japanese conglomerate, to continue licensing IP to Huawei. Like every other chip designer, Huawei relies heavily on Arm. And there are concerns that the US government will prevent Arm from supplying Huawei. In the first round of Huawei restrictions last year, Arm made it known that they were only providing Huawei IP from current licenses and were cutting off access to future improvements. With Arm’s complex China holding structure, we can think of a half dozen loopholes that may allow Huawei to continue to access Arm IP. Maybe they take advantage of those, maybe not."
Now it is true that Huawei may attempt to get around that, but the JV may not get the improvement either.You are right, I am not really knowledgeable on the current or future state of ARM IP in China. However, how could you not be aware of that seeing as I myself told you! LOL.
Let me insist. There is no race to disengage. My comments above, demonstrate that clearly.
You throw in your human rights accusations as usual, even though they have no bearing on this thread.
ORAN has completely vanished from your argument, I see. I'm not surprised.
Anyway, here's a fun look at what's going on and where China/Huawei took the right moves years ago. If the US had taken the right moves a decade ago, it wouldn't be in its current predicament.
https://www.lightreading.com/5g/the-peoples-front-of-open-ran-vs-the-open-ran-peoples-front/a/d-id/761822
You know, 20kg can be installed by one person unassisted. That saves a ton of money on deployment. Competitors are running at 40kg. It's not only weight though, it's volume too, and of course the aforementioned efficiency gains.
And when you start pairing those advances with other advances in associated technologies you begin to understand why Huawei is where it is. Why not take a look at something like the OptiXtreme H7 with capacity to run 48 T/bits over a single fiber.
Ah! It's all stolen, right? But from who if no one has anything in the same league!?
Keep on believing what you will, but the times, they are a changing, and not in China's, nor Huawei's, favor.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/07/17/europe-faces-a-fateful-choice-on-huawei/
"For months, most EU countries hid behind the U.K. government’s confident assertion that it could manage the risk of allowing Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant, to help build its 5G networks. They hoped this would let them have it both ways: get a swift, cost-efficient cellular telephony upgrade from China, while avoiding trouble with their U.S. ally. But now that Britain has moved to block Huawei’s participation, Europeans find themselves deprived of cover, and both the US and China are breathing fire down their necks."
Americans and Europeans used to fight about whether there was a “smoking gun” indicating that Huawei’s equipment was being used for espionage. This is still not proven, but it is plausible. No Chinese company is exempt from pressure by the Chinese party-state.
Today, the national security case against Huawei is made by the shift in China’s behavior: its hardening authoritarianism and persecution of minorities at home; its drive for regional hegemony; its aggressive pursuit of physical, economic and digital assets in Europe; and its crackdown on the autonomy of Hong Kong, in flagrant breach of international law.
Most recently, Beijing has ramped up what Asia expert Andrew Small describes as predatory “attempts to exploit political and economic vulnerabilities in Europe.” Its methods range from disinformation operations to support for populists and threats by senior diplomats. This changes the context of permitting China to provide key components of Europe’s digital ecosystem.
Europeans, in fact, had already shifted from their earlier embrace of China to a more guarded posture of balancing and limiting Chinese influence. An official EU document from 2019 calls China a “systemic rival.” The EU’s latest industrial, connectivity and digital strategies reflect these concerns. While resisting outright bans, many of the EU’s 27 states are overhauling their network security standards. France’s cyber security agency told operators this month to avoid switching to Huawei. The Italian government has issued guidelines that might lead to the exclusion of Huawei.
But Mr Morawiecki was thinking of a particular European neighbor, which now finds itself in an unpleasant dilemma: Germany. It is China’s chief interlocutor in the west after the U.S. It is Europe’s pivotal power and largest telecoms market. China is also its biggest trade partner. German critics of China have pounced on the opportunity arising from the U.K. decision. “It’s Berlin’s turn to move!” tweeted Reinhard Bütikofer, a Green member of the European Parliament.
In Germany’s parliament, critics of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s circumspect stance on Huawei and China range from the Greens, Free Democrats and hard-right Alternative for Germany to her Social Democrat coalition partners, who have published forceful strategy papers on China and 5G. They also include many of her own Christian Democrats, led by Norbert Röttgen, chairman of the Bundestag’s foreign policy committee.
Arrayed in defense of Huawei and Beijing are economics minister Peter Altmaier, the head of the network regulatory agency, the cellular provider Deutsche Telekom, and the powerful chemical and car industries, desperate for Chinese market access to lift them out of coronavirus-induced recession.
For Merkel, whose fourth and last term will end in autumn 2021, all this could not come at a worse time. Germany has just taken on the rotating EU presidency for six months. She had hoped to sign an EU-China investment deal at a summit in Leipzig in September. But the deal is not ready, and the summit is postponed. Instead, Ms Merkel has pledged to lead the EU out of economic crisis by putting Germany’s wealth behind an unprecedented €1.8tn recovery package.
U.S. president Donald Trump’s bullying of allies is unhelpful at a time when Washington and Brussels should be working together. Beijing’s China First policies require a firm, principled European response. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has observed, the US and China too have been diminished by the pandemic. In an interdependent world, the US needs allies and China needs markets. Germany, like the U.K., is no more than a middle power. But Europe has real leverage, if it is united.
Merkel, as she considers her legacy, might do well to recall that it was in Leipzig that tens of thousands of her fellow East Germans stared down heavily armed police and marched for liberty in 1989.
U.S. president Donald Trump’s bullying of allies is unhelpful at a time when Washington and Brussels should be working together. Beijing’s China First policies require a firm, principled European response. As Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister, has observed, the US and China too have been diminished by the pandemic. In an interdependent world, the US needs allies and China needs markets. Germany, like the U.K., is no more than a middle power. But Europe has real leverage, if it is united.
Merkel, as she considers her legacy, might do well to recall that it was in Leipzig that tens of thousands of her fellow East Germans stared down heavily armed police and marched for liberty in 1989.
Perhaps it is time to take the side of those marching for freedom and democracy in Asia today."
Yeah, things are wonderful for Huawei.
It's geopolitics. Not national security. Live with it.
I have never said things are wonderful for Huawei.
But do you really think this ARM, ASML, Extra territorial Sanctions etc will actually achieve anything save for acceleratong the obvious?
And you say I'm delusional for stating the facts (which I see as irrefutable BTW).
Now, I will admit there is a possible geopolitical angle to this nVidia story but let's not go overboard.
But you've never shied away from ignoring National Security, because you don't actually want to have to deal with it in your arguments.
News;
Australia is concerned about its power infrastructure incorporating too many China origin transformers, as China may be able to control those remotely.
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/government-warned-on-chinese-state-involvement-in-australian-power-grid-20200801-p55hje.html
That's a perfect example of National Security aspects of infrastructure, which you won't attempt to understand.
in a dreamland. Follow your own advice, and try to read more, and what is more important: to understand what are you reading. Don’t hide your incompetence behind words like “propaganda”
I expected, but had not seen that.
Mr. Wu is a US citizen and has been at ARM since 2004.
LOL.... Propaganda is propaganda. And the right wing crazies live and breath by it. It's a different world, a different universe that's become their new reality. They have heard it shouted so loud and so often it has replaced truth, facts and actual reality for them and they get very confused and angry when the actual reality crashes up against their fake one.
https://theweek.com/articles/788219/what-like-business-china
I'm pretty sure I don't have to say it.
I'm absolutely sure we all know what you are.
Gosh, you'll be lost finding something to talk about next year with a change in administration. Maybe discussing what China does in the name of "national security" will help fill your time.