6 ms·

This is a great move. It is time to punish countries that impose restrictions on technology. I don't want to be a prisoner in a place where technology is simply

This is a great move. It is time to punish countries that impose restrictions on technology. I don't want to be a prisoner in a place where technology is simply considered "illegal" because it doesn't further the interests of the ruling class.

onepointsixC 7y ago
This specifically furthers the interests of a ruling class, the Chinese Communist Party. It is explicitly giving the CCP an American funded and developed technology which they can use for further development of racially profiled mass surveillance for the continued genocide of the Uyghurs. This is an awful move.
- DethNinja 7y ago
  lol that’s a huge jump from developing open source cpu without backdoors to genocide of Uyghurs.
  - onepointsixC 7y ago
    It's not at all. RISC-V Foundation can develop open-source CPU's in the US as they have thus far. They are moving explicitly to circumvent US export restrictions to China. The CCP's mass surveillance in Xin Jiang is incredibly sophisticated[1]. It is simply not possible for them to accomplish this computationally without state of the art hardware which they will now have a new avenue to acquire. [1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/world/asia/china-surveillance-xinjiang.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/world/asia/china-surveill...
    - wsy 7y ago
      The impact on China's mass surveillance capabilities is negligible, because RISC-V work is open source already. What the foundation avoids by moving to Switzerland is fragmentation of their ecosystem due to US foreign policy decisions. Note that China is already among the technology leaders in the world. Even if cut off from the remaining world, they would have no issue in manufacturing and operating sophisticated surveillance infrastructure. So I can't see how the foundation would help suppressed minorities in China by staying in US.
jacobwilliamroy 7y ago
I think standards development should be open, so Switzerland is the ideal host in any geopolitical situation. Otherwise, I do think the American economy could benefit from restrictions on imports. It's called import substitution economics, which worked very well for american steel back in the late 19th century. Not sure if it'll work again though. Things are different now.
- pjc50 7y ago
  The mistake is categorising things like iPhones as simple "imports", when both the parts and the software and most of the profits are from American companies. I work for an iPhone-part-supplying US headquarters company with offices around the world. We spent some considerable effort working out who was allowed to continue talking to Huawei.
  - jacobwilliamroy 7y ago
    How have things changed for you all over the past few years?
    - pjc50 7y ago
      I've only been working there for a year, but the company has been on a general upward curve it seems.
- stjohnswarts 7y ago
  It would definitely work. The USA is a -huge- market, it just wouldn't be as economically "good/efficient" as free trade is in a strictly classical economics sense.
  - onepointsixC 7y ago
    That's only true if the global order continues. The only reason why you can set up shop across the street from a US factory and import some goods from halfway across the world and sell it for cheaper is because the United States Navy made the risk of shipping those goods negligible. That wasn't the norm for most written history and is a function of the post WW2 order. If the US elects a pacifist president who cuts the DoD budget in half, or even if the current POTUS continues on his isolationist path then this will no longer be the case.
gok 7y ago
> It is time to punish countries that impose restrictions on technology Definitely. Next up should be punishment for the EU nations with those restrictions on cookies and tracking technology in general.
- outside1234 7y ago
  Or at least for the cookie popups - those should be charged as war crimes. :)

onepointsixC 7y ago

This specifically furthers the interests of a ruling class, the Chinese Communist Party. It is explicitly giving the CCP an American funded and developed technology which they can use for further development of racially profiled mass surveillance for the continued genocide of the Uyghurs. This is an awful move.

DethNinja 7y ago
lol that’s a huge jump from developing open source cpu without backdoors to genocide of Uyghurs.
- onepointsixC 7y ago
  It's not at all. RISC-V Foundation can develop open-source CPU's in the US as they have thus far. They are moving explicitly to circumvent US export restrictions to China. The CCP's mass surveillance in Xin Jiang is incredibly sophisticated[1]. It is simply not possible for them to accomplish this computationally without state of the art hardware which they will now have a new avenue to acquire. [1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/world/asia/china-surveillance-xinjiang.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/world/asia/china-surveill...
  - wsy 7y ago
    The impact on China's mass surveillance capabilities is negligible, because RISC-V work is open source already. What the foundation avoids by moving to Switzerland is fragmentation of their ecosystem due to US foreign policy decisions. Note that China is already among the technology leaders in the world. Even if cut off from the remaining world, they would have no issue in manufacturing and operating sophisticated surveillance infrastructure. So I can't see how the foundation would help suppressed minorities in China by staying in US.

jacobwilliamroy 7y ago

I think standards development should be open, so Switzerland is the ideal host in any geopolitical situation. Otherwise, I do think the American economy could benefit from restrictions on imports. It's called import substitution economics, which worked very well for american steel back in the late 19th century. Not sure if it'll work again though. Things are different now.

pjc50 7y ago
The mistake is categorising things like iPhones as simple "imports", when both the parts and the software and most of the profits are from American companies. I work for an iPhone-part-supplying US headquarters company with offices around the world. We spent some considerable effort working out who was allowed to continue talking to Huawei.
- jacobwilliamroy 7y ago
  How have things changed for you all over the past few years?
  - pjc50 7y ago
    I've only been working there for a year, but the company has been on a general upward curve it seems.
stjohnswarts 7y ago
It would definitely work. The USA is a -huge- market, it just wouldn't be as economically "good/efficient" as free trade is in a strictly classical economics sense.
- onepointsixC 7y ago
  That's only true if the global order continues. The only reason why you can set up shop across the street from a US factory and import some goods from halfway across the world and sell it for cheaper is because the United States Navy made the risk of shipping those goods negligible. That wasn't the norm for most written history and is a function of the post WW2 order. If the US elects a pacifist president who cuts the DoD budget in half, or even if the current POTUS continues on his isolationist path then this will no longer be the case.

gok 7y ago

> It is time to punish countries that impose restrictions on technology Definitely. Next up should be punishment for the EU nations with those restrictions on cookies and tracking technology in general.

outside1234 7y ago
Or at least for the cookie popups - those should be charged as war crimes. :)