The chances of this merger taking place have passed the zero mark and are into negative territory -- there are just too many hurdles from every corner of the globe in its path -- and not enough incentive to ignore them or override them.
But the fact that the UK does not trust the U.S. is both hilarious and telling.
... The U.S. must address that concern -- not with respect to this failing merger, but from its underlying basis.
Trust is the foundation that both companies and countries rely on. When that fails everything begins to fail.
You are completely misreading why the UK is stating that the sale of ARM is a "national security concern", and it isn't about Nvidia being a U.S. company, so much as the UK wants to retain its "technical sovereignty".
Concerns over national security have led the government to consider blocking the deal, according to Bloomberg, while another source stated that it would welcome another review into the merger.
In response to suggestions of a government block, Cambridge MP Daniel Zeichner said: “I would urge the government to listen carefully to the findings of the Competition and Markets Authority and other experts in the field.
“I have always called for legal guarantees on Cambridge jobs, but this proposed deal also has far wider implications.
“There are potential risks to national security as I pointed out when I secured a debate in parliament, and the important issue of tech sovereignty.
“Arm is a strategic national asset and a UK company with global dominance. Semiconductors underpin our critical national infrastructure.
“I am pleased after two long years ministers seem to be coming round to these arguments but they need to come to a decision because endless delay is sapping morale among staff and risks setting Arm back as global competitors move forward.”
Well, the company is in the UK but it belongs to the SoftBank Group; a Japanese company. Moreover, Apple's chip designs are already more advanced than ARM so...
I think that the UK government were caught off-guard when Softbank bought ARM in 2016, not realising the implications. So now they'd rather it be a sovereign UK company again.
Unlikely...
Softbank is a known entity and ran ARM in a completely neutral way leaving its ip open to all to use.
That could potentially end with this purchase.
Not only could the UK lose a national asset but the world cannot trust that ARM will remain open to all.
Very simply: for a number of reasons, you can't equate Nvidia to Softbank.
Once it's a U.S. corporation, the U,S, could declare that allowing another country to use its ip was a "National Security threat". And THEN we get to Nvidia itself --- which does not have a stellar reputation.
The chances of this merger taking place have passed the zero mark and are into negative territory -- there are just too many hurdles from every corner of the globe in its path -- and not enough incentive to ignore them or override them.
But the fact that the UK does not trust the U.S. is both hilarious and telling.
... The U.S. must address that concern -- not with respect to this failing merger, but from its underlying basis.
Trust is the foundation that both companies and countries rely on. When that fails everything begins to fail.
You are completely misreading why the UK is stating that the sale of ARM is a "national security concern", and it isn't about Nvidia being a U.S. company, so much as the UK wants to retain its "technical sovereignty".
Concerns over national security have led the government to consider blocking the deal, according to Bloomberg, while another source stated that it would welcome another review into the merger.
In response to suggestions of a government block, Cambridge MP Daniel Zeichner said: “I would urge the government to listen carefully to the findings of the Competition and Markets Authority and other experts in the field.
“I have always called for legal guarantees on Cambridge jobs, but this proposed deal also has far wider implications.
“There are potential risks to national security as I pointed out when I secured a debate in parliament, and the important issue of tech sovereignty.
“Arm is a strategic national asset and a UK company with global dominance. Semiconductors underpin our critical national infrastructure.
“I am pleased after two long years ministers seem to be coming round to these arguments but they need to come to a decision because endless delay is sapping morale among staff and risks setting Arm back as global competitors move forward.”
Well, the company is in the UK but it belongs to the SoftBank Group; a Japanese company. Moreover, Apple's chip designs are already more advanced than ARM so...
I think that the UK government were caught off-guard when Softbank bought ARM in 2016, not realising the implications. So now they'd rather it be a sovereign UK company again.
Unlikely...
Softbank is a known entity and ran ARM in a completely neutral way leaving its ip open to all to use.
That could potentially end with this purchase.
Not only could the UK lose a national asset but the world cannot trust that ARM will remain open to all.
Very simply: for a number of reasons, you can't equate Nvidia to Softbank.
Once it's a U.S. corporation, the U,S, could declare that allowing another country to use its ip was a "National Security threat". And THEN we get to Nvidia itself --- which does not have a stellar reputation.
Nvidia does have a "stellar reputation" in cloud and AI processing, and owning Arm would allow it to keep its advantage. That the U.S. could in theory force Nvidia to disallow Arm iP use to China, as an example, is will known, but the UK has the ability to do that as well.
Perhaps if China wasn't in the world's crosshairs over both human rights violations and militarization, they wouldn't have to be concerned about ownership of Arm.
The chances of this merger taking place have passed the zero mark and are into negative territory -- there are just too many hurdles from every corner of the globe in its path -- and not enough incentive to ignore them or override them.
But the fact that the UK does not trust the U.S. is both hilarious and telling.
... The U.S. must address that concern -- not with respect to this failing merger, but from its underlying basis.
Trust is the foundation that both companies and countries rely on. When that fails everything begins to fail.
You are completely misreading why the UK is stating that the sale of ARM is a "national security concern", and it isn't about Nvidia being a U.S. company, so much as the UK wants to retain its "technical sovereignty".
Concerns over national security have led the government to consider blocking the deal, according to Bloomberg, while another source stated that it would welcome another review into the merger.
In response to suggestions of a government block, Cambridge MP Daniel Zeichner said: “I would urge the government to listen carefully to the findings of the Competition and Markets Authority and other experts in the field.
“I have always called for legal guarantees on Cambridge jobs, but this proposed deal also has far wider implications.
“There are potential risks to national security as I pointed out when I secured a debate in parliament, and the important issue of tech sovereignty.
“Arm is a strategic national asset and a UK company with global dominance. Semiconductors underpin our critical national infrastructure.
“I am pleased after two long years ministers seem to be coming round to these arguments but they need to come to a decision because endless delay is sapping morale among staff and risks setting Arm back as global competitors move forward.”
Well, the company is in the UK but it belongs to the SoftBank Group; a Japanese company. Moreover, Apple's chip designs are already more advanced than ARM so...
I think that the UK government were caught off-guard when Softbank bought ARM in 2016, not realising the implications. So now they'd rather it be a sovereign UK company again.
Unlikely...
Softbank is a known entity and ran ARM in a completely neutral way leaving its ip open to all to use.
That could potentially end with this purchase.
Not only could the UK lose a national asset but the world cannot trust that ARM will remain open to all.
Very simply: for a number of reasons, you can't equate Nvidia to Softbank.
Once it's a U.S. corporation, the U,S, could declare that allowing another country to use its ip was a "National Security threat". And THEN we get to Nvidia itself --- which does not have a stellar reputation.
Nvidia does have a "stellar reputation" in cloud and AI processing, and owning Arm would allow it to keep its advantage. That the U.S. could in theory force Nvidia to disallow Arm iP use to China, as an example, is will known, but the UK has the ability to do that as well.
Perhaps if China wasn't in the world's crosshairs over both human rights violations and militarization, they wouldn't have to be concerned about ownership of Arm.
Most knowledgeable people seem to disagree with you.
And, while the UK tends to follow the U.S.'s lead, they aren't crazed the U.S.
Architectural Licensees are free to design their own custom cores and extend the ISA as needed. However, it must remain fully backwards compatible with the originally licensed ISA. (Although, Apple only uses their designs in-house, so they may actually be exempt from that stipulation.)
The chances of this merger taking place have passed the zero mark and are into negative territory -- there are just too many hurdles from every corner of the globe in its path -- and not enough incentive to ignore them or override them.
But the fact that the UK does not trust the U.S. is both hilarious and telling.
... The U.S. must address that concern -- not with respect to this failing merger, but from its underlying basis.
Trust is the foundation that both companies and countries rely on. When that fails everything begins to fail.
You are completely misreading why the UK is stating that the sale of ARM is a "national security concern", and it isn't about Nvidia being a U.S. company, so much as the UK wants to retain its "technical sovereignty".
Concerns over national security have led the government to consider blocking the deal, according to Bloomberg, while another source stated that it would welcome another review into the merger.
In response to suggestions of a government block, Cambridge MP Daniel Zeichner said: “I would urge the government to listen carefully to the findings of the Competition and Markets Authority and other experts in the field.
“I have always called for legal guarantees on Cambridge jobs, but this proposed deal also has far wider implications.
“There are potential risks to national security as I pointed out when I secured a debate in parliament, and the important issue of tech sovereignty.
“Arm is a strategic national asset and a UK company with global dominance. Semiconductors underpin our critical national infrastructure.
“I am pleased after two long years ministers seem to be coming round to these arguments but they need to come to a decision because endless delay is sapping morale among staff and risks setting Arm back as global competitors move forward.”
Well, the company is in the UK but it belongs to the SoftBank Group; a Japanese company. Moreover, Apple's chip designs are already more advanced than ARM so...
I think that the UK government were caught off-guard when Softbank bought ARM in 2016, not realising the implications. So now they'd rather it be a sovereign UK company again.
Unlikely...
Softbank is a known entity and ran ARM in a completely neutral way leaving its ip open to all to use.
That could potentially end with this purchase.
Not only could the UK lose a national asset but the world cannot trust that ARM will remain open to all.
Very simply: for a number of reasons, you can't equate Nvidia to Softbank.
Once it's a U.S. corporation, the U,S, could declare that allowing another country to use its ip was a "National Security threat". And THEN we get to Nvidia itself --- which does not have a stellar reputation.
Nvidia does have a "stellar reputation" in cloud and AI processing, and owning Arm would allow it to keep its advantage. That the U.S. could in theory force Nvidia to disallow Arm iP use to China, as an example, is will known, but the UK has the ability to do that as well.
Perhaps if China wasn't in the world's crosshairs over both human rights violations and militarization, they wouldn't have to be concerned about ownership of Arm.
Most knowledgeable people seem to disagree with you.
And, while the UK tends to follow the U.S.'s lead, they aren't crazed the U.S.
You are aware about Brexit, yes?
So how about posting a link that proves that "most knowledgeable people seem to disagree" with my position? Or did you just make the up.
Comments
Quite the opposite -- troll
Nvidia does have a "stellar reputation" in cloud and AI processing, and owning Arm would allow it to keep its advantage. That the U.S. could in theory force Nvidia to disallow Arm iP use to China, as an example, is will known, but the UK has the ability to do that as well.
Perhaps if China wasn't in the world's crosshairs over both human rights violations and militarization, they wouldn't have to be concerned about ownership of Arm.
Architectural Licensees are free to design their own custom cores and extend the ISA as needed. However, it must remain fully backwards compatible with the originally licensed ISA. (Although, Apple only uses their designs in-house, so they may actually be exempt from that stipulation.)
So how about posting a link that proves that "most knowledgeable people seem to disagree" with my position? Or did you just make the up.