17 ms·

US blocks shipments of semiconductors to Huawei

171 points by novaRom 6y ago

Udik 6y ago
This is nothing else than the US panicking over losing their technological and economic supremacy, and using brute force to damage a competitor. Disgusting and very dangerous for the whole world.
- saystupidthings 6y ago
  Chances someone named "Udik" is a Chinese shill? 100% Edit: also paid by damore lmao what a terrible person
- 0xfaded 6y ago
  I'd say it's an unnecessary dilution of national brand power. I know people who refuse to buy things directly from China, yet are perfectly happy buying the same items through a western distributer. That price delta is directly measurable brand equity that ends up as taxable money spent in western economies with no real value add. Pulling this crap only incentives China to develop their own silicon. Since the west can't compete on manufacturing cost or quality, Chinese products will continue to dominate. But the importance of incorporating western technologies will deminish since there will be no legal alternative. The end result is just plain brand dilution, since not using western technology will become the new norm. I'm not really personally concerned, the west will learn sooner or later that it actually needs to build something to remain competitive. A service based economy is simply everyone serving each other coffee, while gradually eroding existing equity so we can keep buying coffee beans.
  - LegitShady 6y ago
    >Pulling this crap only incentives China to develop their own silicon. Operating under the assumption this isnt already a priority to them, which I would say is a big assumption. You're looking at this as if it was in absence of the rest of the trade footings of the two countries. The west is building stuff in this industry - semi conductors. The east is operating heavy industrial espionage to try and steal all the secrets of it so they can take it from the west. I'm not sure why you think this trade war situation is indicative of the US not making things - its exactly a heavily US industry where China steals technology to leapfrog actual competition. If China steals all your research you're going to have trouble affording coffee beans. If they steal your research and then open factories up you're going broke. So the importance of producing is true, but its tied to the importance of protecting your advantages, national and otherwise.
    - 0xfaded 6y ago
      If you're scared of cheap knockoffs, it's exactly the perception that your product is somehow superior that you want. Part of that might be less risk exposure to lawsuits for incorporating stolen IP. But if you eliminate the legal option, the grey area alternative becomes normalized. IP is also a highly artificial construct. If all documents were suddenly in the open, and your competitors are suddenly able to build a better product, how comfortable can you be that you can actually compete on quality?
      - nsporillo 6y ago
        It would simply devolve into whichever nation decides to put the most money into subsidies, removing environmental protections, and facilitating slave-like labor conditions.
    - luckylion 6y ago
      > The west is building stuff in this industry - semi conductors. The east is operating heavy industrial espionage to try and steal all the secrets of it so they can take it from the west. Let's not forget that a good part of the NSA's business is industrial espionage, allegedly also heavily in Western Allies.
- micromacro 6y ago
  Americans spreaded fake new 2 years ago stating that there are SPY-chips hiddenly built into Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and Google products by Chinese. The companies investigated their chips and didn't find anything. Americans lost any credibility.
- AndyMcConachie 6y ago
  Don't know why you're downvoted given that you're correct. The end result of this is to ensure that China develops their own semi conductor industry. Besides the short term loss of sales, in the long term new companies will emerge that compete with the American semi conductor industry. It's just a dumb move all around.
  - micromacro 6y ago
    unpleasant truth
  - ericmay 6y ago
    > The end result of this is to ensure that China develops their own semi conductor industry Seems to me that's happening either way and probably always was. Why wouldn't they?
    - rjzzleep 6y ago
      It actually was fast tracked by the trade war. Government mandated domestic development of certain things after the US made it clear to China that they're not trustworthy trading partner. Not that China is, but kind of besides the point. Similar to how the google ban fast tracked Huawei working on google free systems e.g. buying third party map services like TomTom. Bad for Google good for competition. Basically the US has lost its standing thanks to Trumps bully diplomacy[1]. “Some if not all regional countries may harbour concerns about the security ramifications of using Huawei, but there are real pragmatic considerations,” said Collin Koh Swee Lean, a research fellow at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore. “Cost-wise in particular, Chinese offers for infrastructure development present more attractive propositions.” https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southeast-asia/article/3012820/huawei-ban-why-asian-countries-are-shunning-trumps https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southeast-asia/article/301282...
      - ericmay 6y ago
        > It actually was fast tracked by the trade war. Government mandated domestic development of certain things after the US made it clear to China that they're not trustworthy trading partner. Not that China is, but kind of besides the point. I'm not sure why that's besides the point? The U.S. for years worked to invest in China and build them as a great trading partner and the CCP continued to just steal trade secrets and do everything in their power to undermine the U.S.. And it's probably true that this development was fast tracked by the trade war... but so what? This was coming since the CCP didn't want to be a partner with the West, so why wait around to cut the ties? It's going to happen either way, why not happen on your terms? W.r.t Trump's "bully" diplomacy - I mean, playing nice certainly didn't work. We don't need to and shouldn't be trading partners with China so long as they're acting against U.S. and western interests in general. The U.S. tried to engage and endured years of malevolent activity by the CCP only to have the actions worsen over time. So... I'm not really sure what the advantage to the U.S. is besides having a big market. Ban Chinese products in the U.S. and China can ban U.S. products. Whatever. > Cost-wise in particular, Chinese offers for infrastructure development present more attractive propositions Sure. For now. And if you only want to look at cost. Maybe you want to look at other factors, like maybe you're Vietnam and concerned about the Chinese ramming your fishing boats? [1] [1] https://www.news.com.au/world/south-china-sea-tensions-at-new-high-after-vietnamese-boat-rammed-and-sunk/news-story/10188f3d7c1d7336bcaffafd742defab https://www.news.com.au/world/south-china-sea-tensions-at-ne...
- stareatgoats 6y ago
  Yes, this is correct, it's the sign of the US losing its post WW2 grip on world affairs. But the normally balanced and insightful HN crowd is drowned out on topics like these. Pre-WW1 style national pride and competition for markets and raw materials is back with a vengeance it seems, and it's not only the US who got it; Russia, China, the EU and more got it too. It doesn't bode well.
  - luckylion 6y ago
    > Pre-WW1 style national pride and competition for markets and raw materials is back with a vengeance it seems I don't think those are the reasons, they are consequences. The reason, in my opinion, is just money. Your income depends on your job and the success of your company, which largely depends on the economy at large and, in case of large powers, on their world-wide power projection. People understand this instinctively, it's pure tribal behavior. I believe most world-politics interpretation is just motivated reasoning, and you can change somebody's worldview by making them the beneficiary of a trust that's invested in whatever country they dislike. When they draw dividends from their enemy's success, they'll come to see them in a different light.
luckylion 6y ago
I guess TSMC got a courtesy call so they were able to announce their intention of building a new fab in the US? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23187698 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23187698
- harpratap 6y ago
  TSMC is the golden goose. The entire world will lose if something happens to them.
  - someguydave 6y ago
    Yeah I speculate that tsmc has gotten some sweetheart deals as part of this policy change.
geogra4 6y ago
How many foreign companies actually use US Chipmaking equipment? Will this stop european chipmakers like ASML from selling to china too?
- adventured 6y ago
  > How many foreign companies actually use US Chipmaking equipment? In the semi industry, nearly all of them. You can hardly make anything in the semiconductor industry without using several of the major US companies. The US still dominates the semiconductor equipment industry. Of the six major players, half of them are US companies. > The $412bn global semiconductor industry rests on the shoulders of just six equipment companies, three of them US-based. Together, the companies make nearly all of the crucial hardware and software tools needed to manufacture chips, meaning an American export ban would choke off China’s access to the basic tools needed to make their latest chip designs. > "You cannot build a semiconductor facility without using the big major equipment companies, none of which are Chinese," said Brett Simpson, the founder of Arete Research, an equity research group. “If you fight a war with no guns you’re going to lose. And they don’t have the guns.” > "ASML cannot do without Applied Materials and the other way around. If you take even one out of the value chain, that may hamper Chinese fabs," said a former ASML executive. https://www.ft.com/content/4a8553a6-f3b2-11e8-ae55-df4bf40f9d0d https://www.ft.com/content/4a8553a6-f3b2-11e8-ae55-df4bf40f9...
  - brennanpeterson 6y ago
    Mostly true, but you could come pretty close with ASML, ASM, TEL,ebara, hitachi and a couple others (particularly the Korean companies) I don't think it is quite so widely understood that there are close seconds in every market. It is pretty easy to imagine ASML giving up on Intel, cutting HMI, and all the chipmakers going outside of Lam, Applied, and KLA for their next tools. The industry would be a bit disrupted but outside the US...fine. and it would destroy the US industry. This will also tend to pressure the Chinese to keep pushing their own supplier industry, rather than just integrators.
    - sabas123 6y ago
fallingfrog 6y ago
It’s pretty hilarious that the grounds for the block is that China will use the chips to spy on people, given that the United States is certainly doing that already.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- jaywalk 6y ago
  Yeah, US spying and Chinese spying are totally the same and used for the same purposes. I don't like spying period, but to try and equate what the US does to what China does is simply ludicrous.
  - shmel 6y ago
    It might feel different depending where you live. If one lives in Europe, I don't see why US or Chinese spying should be perceived differently.
    - isatty 6y ago
      Maybe because there are human rights in the US?
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - logicchains 6y ago
        The US judicial system doesn't protect the human rights of anyone who's not in America. Just ask the thousands of brown people killed as collateral damage from drone strikes without any chance of a trial in court.
      - Mindwipe 6y ago
        America's human rights laws don't apply to non-US citizens outside of the US's landmass. America has been exceptionally clear that US intelligence and immigration agencies consider non-Americans to be fair game for hacking, non-judicial imprisonment, torture et al. So if I'm not American I might acknowledge that America treats it's own citizens slightly better than China treats theirs from a human rights perspective, but as someone who's British neither nation has a stellar track record of actions that effect me and my country personally or give me any rights protection.
VWWHFSfQ 6y ago
This after previous indictments of Huawei for RICO violations and theft of trade secrets from USA companies T-Mobile, Qualcomm, and Cisco. Including theft of 5G technology that is now being used in equipment sold to EU countries. [0] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunications-conglomerate-huawei-and-subsidiaries-charged-racketeering https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunications-co... [1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunications-device-manufacturer-and-its-us-affiliate-indicted-theft-trade https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunications-de... Whatever happened to arresting Huawei’s Chief Financial Officer Wanzhou Meng? Was she ever extradited from Canada after being captured in Vancouver, BC?
- mempko 6y ago
  There are a couple of points a) The deal china made with US companies is bring us your technology and we will manufacture for you cheaply. b) Giving technology as part of a deal and then retroactively calling it stealing is, well, strange. c) America because what it was because it "stole" technology from Europe during the industrial revolution. American companies understood what they were getting into and what the deals were and took them. China didn't force US companies to make those deals.
  - Icathian 6y ago
    You seem to be under the rather odd impression that all of the limitations you agree to when you enter into contract with another entity are supposed to be ignored. Just because you're doing business with someone who has a reputation of breaching faith doesn't mean it's appropriate that they do so, and you certainly don't have to like them for it.
    - thoughtstheseus 6y ago
      China actually ranks high in adherence to contracts. It’s what’s not in the contracts that creates problems. The issues are a bit more nuanced. Harris Bricken is a law firm with a great blog on related legal topics.
    - 6y ago
madengr 6y ago
Huawei is screwed for RF front end components, specifically integrated PA, switching, and BAW filtering. I don’t believe there is a domestic supplier of those.
- jotm 6y ago
  Yet. That's the good news about this. New competition will just bring affordability and innovation.
bergstromm466 6y ago
I implore anyone to check out ‘Trade is War’ by Yash Tandon: “ Globalization has reduced many aspects of modern life to little more than commodities controlled by multinational corporations. Everything, from land and water to health and human rights, is today intimately linked to the issue of free trade. Conventional wisdom presents this development as benign, the sole path to progress. Yash Tandon, drawing on decades of on-the-ground experience as a high level negotiator in bodies such as the World Trade Organization, here challenges this prevailing orthodoxy. He insists that, for the vast majority of people, and especially those in the poorer regions of the world, free trade not only hinders development—it visits relentless waves of violence and impoverishment on their lives.”
- luckylion 6y ago
  Can we please stop flagging comments like these? It's annoying and imho should lead to revoking flagging privileges for everyone part of the "ring". Deplatforming by mass-flagging is shit on Twitter and it's shit on HN as well.
jtdev 6y ago
With the perspective of COVID19, China seems like a threat to the global community. I support any efforts to restrict China’s ability to expand their footprint, global reach, ability to reach into and influence the affairs of other nations. I’m completely exhausted with the deeply flawed “Golden Arches” b.s. at this point.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  >With the perspective of COVID19, China seems like a threat to the global community This does not make any sense to me. Though I do not approve of all of the actions China took at the start of the pandemic, I can not understand how you can consider them a threat over it. Also McDonald's?
  - jtdev 6y ago
    Have you not considered that China made an exerted effort to withhold information about COVID19 from the world... How is that not an act of aggression? Hundreds of thousands dead... Golden Arches Theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lexus_and_the_Olive_Tree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lexus_and_the_Olive_Tree
    - Udik 6y ago
      China seems to have reacted to the epidemic quicker and more effectively than the rest of the world did. Acts of aggression are voluntary: like dropping bombs on Iraq, financing civil wars or reneging a signed agreement and imposing an embargo on a foreign country.
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      >Have you not considered that China made an exerted effort to withhold information about COVID19 from the world? How is that not an act of aggression? Though I have issues with some of the early reporting, I do not think their aim was to attack the rest of the world. At worst, which I'm still not convinced of, it was prioritizing their own citizens over others. Hardly an act of aggression. >Hundreds of thousands dead. Presumably you live in the US. If killing hundreds of thousands makes you a threat unworthy of influence you might want to look at our actions. Or consider what the results of your desired actions against the Chinese might be.
roenxi 6y ago
I doubt this will be my most popular comment on HN but Trump really has to be congratulated for being the first President to actually do something about the growth in strategic strength of the absolutely terrifying regime that currently controls China. I know the Obama administration made some noises but I don't recall them actually inconveniencing China in a serious way. To me this is all naked geopolitics, hardly fair and extremely risky. But finally America is transitioning to worrying about real problems rather than, say, the policy of treating shepherds in Afghanistan as a major threat in the Bush era.
- jraby3 6y ago
  I agree 100%. Trump has done a ton of terrible things, but he deserves credit for his stance on China.
- krapp 6y ago
  >Trump really has to be congratulated for being the first President to actually do something about the growth in strategic strength of the absolutely terrifying regime that currently controls China He might deserve congratulations if his strategies made sense, but they seem more likely to hurt the US than China in the long run.
  - corebit 6y ago
    There are no sure things. We don't like the current situation because its risky. But no risk no reward. If we wanted less risk our only option was to have done it way earlier - under Bush 1 or Clinton.
    - krapp 6y ago
      I'm fine with risks, so long as they're calculated from a position of expertise. I don't trust Trump to take smart risks, given his business history, narcissism and well documented disdain for expert advice. Someone who ignores intelligence briefings because he thinks he's too smart to need them shouldn't be acting like a maverick on the world stage. Simply doing something, anything, for the sake of having something be done is even worse than the status quo.
predictmktegirl 6y ago
I think we should all keep something in mind before we go celebrate the end of globalization. If we go on a rampage pulling manufacturing and capital out of China while simultaneously blaming them for the pandemic, in a few years we’ll end up seeing a nation with a shattered economy, a pissed off populace, and the largest and most well supplied army on Earth. Rhetoric tends to devolve into a limited decision matrix when we should be trying to expand the tree instead. Diplomacy works, anger doesn’t.
- draw_down 6y ago
  Who is “we”? I don’t make any decisions about where any factories operate.
- spangry 6y ago
  On the other hand, it's difficult to be diplomatic when one side is so belligerent, sensitive and petty. China has started imposing trade sanctions on my country (Australia) because our Prime Minister had the audacity to suggest there should be an independent inquiry into the origin of COVID-19. Meanwhile, they see fit to interfere in our domestic and political affairs through various front organisations, bribery and even directly through their embassy and ambassador in Australia. People are fast growing tired of China's aggressive and abusive approach to 'diplomacy'.
  - luckylion 6y ago
    That's fair-ish for Australia (but then again, Australia is part of the five eyes, so essentially a part of US global policy), but less so for the US. I believe most people see US <=> China in conflict, they don't really consider China <=> Australia, Vietnam or Japan.
    - ladyanita22 6y ago
      The world (and the west) is not us only
      - 6y ago
LatteLazy 6y ago
Trump is starting to drum up campaign "donations"...
ilaksh 6y ago
What is it that is actually preventing this from escalating to a hot war? It feels like we are just waiting for China to manufacture enough warships and nukes or killer drones or AGI with spiking neural networks or whatever can give them an edge so that a real war can start. It's even a war in the comments section. I don't think it's safe. How do we really know it can't progress to some kind of overt military activity? Why are people not more concerned about this? I get the impression that people think the best way to prevent a war is to keep doing things to hold them down. But that seems to be escalating tensions and not actually limiting them. What is the plan for getting out of this? I hope that Elon hurries up with his Mars rockets so I can emmigrate before the whole planet turns into a complete bloody (literally) science fiction nightmare.
- jotm 6y ago
  Nothing's preventing it from escalating to war. The national defense agencies in all countries probably have plans if that happens... I believe and really hope that an actual war won't happen. There's too much to lose, and little to gain. A technological cold war will likely happen, Huawei and other Chinese companies will just continue R&D and manufacturing on their own. In a way, the US is letting go of whatever control they had left and making it easier for them to form their own alliances in this matter. It will just polarize the world more... again, as always.
- logicchains 6y ago
  >What is it that is actually preventing this from escalating to a hot war? The same thing that's always prevented nuclear-armed countries from going to war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction
  - jotm 6y ago
    Uh, yeah, as long as it's not on their own lands, they could fight some real wars...
- emiliobumachar 6y ago
  I'm all for colonizing Mars, but it will remain less hospitable than Earth even if we descend into total nuclear war.
jrochkind1 6y ago
> Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross told Fox Business “there has been a very highly technical loophole through which Huawei has been in able, in effect, to use U.S. technology with foreign fab producers.” Ross called the rule change a “highly tailored thing to try to correct that loophole.” This is very vague. Does anyone understand what they are talking about?
- evancox100 6y ago
  The “loophole” was this: “Under the new rule, any foreign company that uses American technology to produce microchips would need a license to sell to Huawei. That makes it difficult for major chip contract manufacturers like Taiwan’s T.S.M.C. to sell to Huawei, because its supply chains rely heavily on American manufacturing tools. It could also clamp down on sales by makers of semiconductor equipment, like Applied Materials and KLA, and chip design software companies like Cadence.” https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/15/business/economy/commerce-department-huawei.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/15/business/economy/commerce...
  - jrochkind1 6y ago
    I don't really understand why they are requiring a license to sell to Huawei in the first place. That this is all such a string of vagueness makes me suspect it's a bunch of bullshit, more about politics (in the 'optics' sense) or business competitiveness than actual national security.
    - billme 6y ago
      Pure speculation... All of this is about national security. US & Taiwan’s TSMC are in talks to open a TSMC factory in the US. Chairman of TSMC has publicly stated if the US gives them enough money, they’ll do it. Appears US (Trump) is telling TSMC if they do not open the factory for free, they’re going to have trouble making money at all. Taiwan wants to keep TSMC because it’s an insurance policy, China & the US both need TSMC. That or it is a plausible way for TSMC to deny they’re cutting off China. ...any thoughts?
logicchains 6y ago
I wonder if this will be good for open source. Is there a RISK-V-like equivalent of whatever it is that's being blocked?
- evancox100 6y ago
  No, free/open-source semiconductor design software and equipment is non-existent, especially for modern nodes.
  - MayeulC 6y ago
    Well, that's definitely not the case, a lot of labs are on this (including Berkley's hammer/chisel [1]). I've seen some tools presented at RISC-V conferences, but the major closed-source component nowadays is the PDK, I'm afraid. Hopefully, inkjet-printed transistors or some other fabless technology will make open source ICs a lot more feasible. One of the major issue is costs, when you look at more than 40k/mm² for multiproject wafers in advanced nodes and contrast that with the anemic budget most open source software has to do with. You don't need to be on the very latest node, if you can afford going slower, on bigger, cheaper dies. A lot of open source "hardware" project seem to focus on FPGAs, since that's more approachable, and the costs are nowhere as high. [1]: https://github.com/ucb-bar https://github.com/ucb-bar
    - MayeulC 6y ago
      Just something I didn't make clear in the above comment: I expect that Hardware-description-language-to-layout pipelines will improve a lot in the upcoming years, so if a process becomes viable for open hardware, projects that were developed on an FPGA (here is a wi-fi chip, for instance: https://github.com/open-sdr/openwifi https://github.com/open-sdr/openwifi) might be transferable with a lot less effort than doing everything from scratch. I would also like to point out that these tools will likely help us juice up a bit more performance from the existing processes, but we aren't really likely to see a lot more of Moore's scaling, going forward. So the door is open to new processes, that may or may not be open hardware-friendly. And current, top-end processes might also become cheaper over time. While I doubt a lot of new foundries will catch up with the end of Moore's scale, it might actually become easier to get there, while disruptive technologies get some time to play catch-up. Together with innovative synthesis tools.
amd-bull 6y ago
pretty shocking how biased these hn comments are against china. it's clear the US has lost leadership in the crucial technology of 5g and is trying everything it can to stop the leader, huawei. while i'm no china-phile, the US actions is just silly and will have far reaching consequences that will just quicken the demise of our technological prowess. and if you're gonna argue from the point of view that huawei broke the law, then let them have their day in court. we're acting like judge, jury and executioner. how is that right?? shows up hn as a bunch of biased tech bros! let the downvotes begin
- Udik 6y ago
  > pretty shocking how biased these hn comments are against china. And it took only a few years of media campaigns- the first one I remember was the announcement of spy chips in China-made boards, which turned out to be fake. It's scary how quickly you can steer public opinion to suit your needs.
  - whytaka 6y ago
    It's actually been a long time coming: Tiananmen, South China Sea, Hong Kong protests, threats against Taiwan, Uyghurs, Tibet, Surveillance State, Authoritarian ruler for life, IP thefts, currency manipulation, shooting down satellites, lop-sided market access and more.
- mardifoufs 6y ago
  How is that a bad thing? Would you rather see HN support a country with literal ethnic cleansing policies? Or one that executes dissenters or makes them disappear? Btw, China does not have the technical lead in 5G. Just the cheaper equipment. And chinese tech is barely able to reproduce 8-10 years old semiconductor technology on it's own, so it's very very far from technological lead. Unless you believe the CCP narrative that they will magically outpace America/the west by barely being able to catch up despite the enormous scale of their industrial espionage.
theredbox 6y ago
As someone who is not an american nor a chinese nor from a big European nation this is all frightening to watch. It's an invisible war of nations and we dont really have a clue about allegiances nor what is right or wrong. Sure as a european I feel more connected to the US but at the same time I feel very much excluded from that larger sphere protection and benefits. The US needs a framework for smaller nations where we can build better relations.
- rumanator 6y ago
  > It's an invisible war of nations and we dont really have a clue about allegiances nor what is right or wrong. I don't see any doubt regarding "allegiance". The Chinese regime is a totalitarian nightmare that not only became a massive surveillance state but also has a long track record of human rights abuse and extrajudicial assassinations. Between what the West enjoyed in the past half century and the oppressive hell that countries have endured in the hands of the Chinese regime, the choice is pretty clear, even if we take into account Putin's pull on Trump.
- cryptonector 6y ago
  Between the end of WWII and now, Western Europe, and now Eastern as well, have enjoyed American defense and economic benefits. Europe almost as a monolithic whole has been fixated on a different economic model than the American model, but that's its own choice -- the U.S. did not impose its model on Europe. > The US needs a framework for smaller nations where we can build better relations. What could that be? We've had the U.N., NATO, the WTO, and what not.
amd-bull 6y ago
the last time we effectively blocked china from acquiring tunneling machines, they ended up building their own, a mean feat, and now they're looking to start exporting them! disrupting the market economy has a vicious way of getting back at ya [0] http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1121448.shtml http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1121448.shtml
- pureagave 6y ago
  That sounds boring to me.
- gardaani 6y ago
  They are already building their own chips. Huawei has started to use 14nm chips manufactured by Shanghai-based SMIC. They plan to replace TSMC's chips with SMIC's chips in their phones. TSMC blocking will just accelerate their plans. https://www.gizmochina.com/2020/05/12/huawei-kirin-710a-smic-mass-production/ https://www.gizmochina.com/2020/05/12/huawei-kirin-710a-smic...
- pinkfoot 6y ago
  A military UAS. Swathes of the developing world now use Chinese UAS.
intheshadows01 6y ago
It is very interesting reading all the comments from you guys, some from tech prospective others from policical ones. But from my angle, a normal Chinese guy working in the field of material research in China for a decade and deep inside the system, my points would be: 1. you guys really worry too much about our ability to innovate, seriously. There is no room for real innovations. But at the same time the system rewards stealing and copying. The system, the education, the overall political environment are not designed with innovations in mind but to help a few to stay in power. My personal take on this is that Chinese "innovation" is now built upon: Chinese with foreign education/working background bringing back technologies, CCP buying foreign companies with OUR everyday people's money, and of course hacking/stealing directly. I don't believe we have a change winning the innovation war, not in the long run. 2. for a "private" company like huawei, isn't it weird that it's always backed by CCP? Lots of Chinese private companies get balls kicked everyday and why only huawei get treatment worthy of a state owned business? Even us Chinese knows better. 3. please think about us everyday Chinese citizens. we are currently under direct information warfare and systematic repression waged by CCP for decades, and our lives/future squeezed out in order to found companies like huawei and projects like one belt one road, without a fking vote. It's much bigger than us vs huawei, at least from our side. btw it is not my field of expertise but I'd like to call for experienced software/hardware engineers from the west, help us bring down the CCP's GFW system before it's too late. If it is built by man it can be broken. thanks and apologize for my broken English.
- chance_state 6y ago
  Thanks for you comment. It's too rare that we hear from people with your perspective. Is HN not blocked/censored in China?
simonblack 6y ago
Very dumb move by the US. In business, there is the perennial question of "Do I "buy built" thus taking advantage of economies of scale within the supplier while at the same time making myself dependent on the good intentions of that supplier? Or do I "go to the cost and effort and time wasted in making it myself", which means I don't get dependent on that supplier, puts me behind for a year or two, and then possibly may be able to take away his business and keep it for myself in the future? Most administrators find it's better overall to "buy built". But if forced to, they will "roll their own". If Huawei starts making its own semiconductors, the US can wave goodbye to its own semiconductor companies like Intel, AMD, Radeon and Nvidia. Just like GM, Ford and Chrysler are there in name only today- when once they made over 50% of the entire world's cars back in the 1960s. In the words of that famous hair product: "It may not happen overnight, but it will happen!"

171 points by novaRom 6y ago

Udik 6y ago

This is nothing else than the US panicking over losing their technological and economic supremacy, and using brute force to damage a competitor. Disgusting and very dangerous for the whole world.

saystupidthings 6y ago
Chances someone named "Udik" is a Chinese shill? 100% Edit: also paid by damore lmao what a terrible person
0xfaded 6y ago
I'd say it's an unnecessary dilution of national brand power. I know people who refuse to buy things directly from China, yet are perfectly happy buying the same items through a western distributer. That price delta is directly measurable brand equity that ends up as taxable money spent in western economies with no real value add. Pulling this crap only incentives China to develop their own silicon. Since the west can't compete on manufacturing cost or quality, Chinese products will continue to dominate. But the importance of incorporating western technologies will deminish since there will be no legal alternative. The end result is just plain brand dilution, since not using western technology will become the new norm. I'm not really personally concerned, the west will learn sooner or later that it actually needs to build something to remain competitive. A service based economy is simply everyone serving each other coffee, while gradually eroding existing equity so we can keep buying coffee beans.
- LegitShady 6y ago
  >Pulling this crap only incentives China to develop their own silicon. Operating under the assumption this isnt already a priority to them, which I would say is a big assumption. You're looking at this as if it was in absence of the rest of the trade footings of the two countries. The west is building stuff in this industry - semi conductors. The east is operating heavy industrial espionage to try and steal all the secrets of it so they can take it from the west. I'm not sure why you think this trade war situation is indicative of the US not making things - its exactly a heavily US industry where China steals technology to leapfrog actual competition. If China steals all your research you're going to have trouble affording coffee beans. If they steal your research and then open factories up you're going broke. So the importance of producing is true, but its tied to the importance of protecting your advantages, national and otherwise.
  - 0xfaded 6y ago
    If you're scared of cheap knockoffs, it's exactly the perception that your product is somehow superior that you want. Part of that might be less risk exposure to lawsuits for incorporating stolen IP. But if you eliminate the legal option, the grey area alternative becomes normalized. IP is also a highly artificial construct. If all documents were suddenly in the open, and your competitors are suddenly able to build a better product, how comfortable can you be that you can actually compete on quality?
    - nsporillo 6y ago
      It would simply devolve into whichever nation decides to put the most money into subsidies, removing environmental protections, and facilitating slave-like labor conditions.
  - luckylion 6y ago
    > The west is building stuff in this industry - semi conductors. The east is operating heavy industrial espionage to try and steal all the secrets of it so they can take it from the west. Let's not forget that a good part of the NSA's business is industrial espionage, allegedly also heavily in Western Allies.
micromacro 6y ago
Americans spreaded fake new 2 years ago stating that there are SPY-chips hiddenly built into Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and Google products by Chinese. The companies investigated their chips and didn't find anything. Americans lost any credibility.
AndyMcConachie 6y ago
Don't know why you're downvoted given that you're correct. The end result of this is to ensure that China develops their own semi conductor industry. Besides the short term loss of sales, in the long term new companies will emerge that compete with the American semi conductor industry. It's just a dumb move all around.
- micromacro 6y ago
  unpleasant truth
- ericmay 6y ago
  > The end result of this is to ensure that China develops their own semi conductor industry Seems to me that's happening either way and probably always was. Why wouldn't they?
  - rjzzleep 6y ago
    It actually was fast tracked by the trade war. Government mandated domestic development of certain things after the US made it clear to China that they're not trustworthy trading partner. Not that China is, but kind of besides the point. Similar to how the google ban fast tracked Huawei working on google free systems e.g. buying third party map services like TomTom. Bad for Google good for competition. Basically the US has lost its standing thanks to Trumps bully diplomacy[1]. “Some if not all regional countries may harbour concerns about the security ramifications of using Huawei, but there are real pragmatic considerations,” said Collin Koh Swee Lean, a research fellow at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore. “Cost-wise in particular, Chinese offers for infrastructure development present more attractive propositions.” https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southeast-asia/article/3012820/huawei-ban-why-asian-countries-are-shunning-trumps https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southeast-asia/article/301282...
    - ericmay 6y ago
      > It actually was fast tracked by the trade war. Government mandated domestic development of certain things after the US made it clear to China that they're not trustworthy trading partner. Not that China is, but kind of besides the point. I'm not sure why that's besides the point? The U.S. for years worked to invest in China and build them as a great trading partner and the CCP continued to just steal trade secrets and do everything in their power to undermine the U.S.. And it's probably true that this development was fast tracked by the trade war... but so what? This was coming since the CCP didn't want to be a partner with the West, so why wait around to cut the ties? It's going to happen either way, why not happen on your terms? W.r.t Trump's "bully" diplomacy - I mean, playing nice certainly didn't work. We don't need to and shouldn't be trading partners with China so long as they're acting against U.S. and western interests in general. The U.S. tried to engage and endured years of malevolent activity by the CCP only to have the actions worsen over time. So... I'm not really sure what the advantage to the U.S. is besides having a big market. Ban Chinese products in the U.S. and China can ban U.S. products. Whatever. > Cost-wise in particular, Chinese offers for infrastructure development present more attractive propositions Sure. For now. And if you only want to look at cost. Maybe you want to look at other factors, like maybe you're Vietnam and concerned about the Chinese ramming your fishing boats? [1] [1] https://www.news.com.au/world/south-china-sea-tensions-at-new-high-after-vietnamese-boat-rammed-and-sunk/news-story/10188f3d7c1d7336bcaffafd742defab https://www.news.com.au/world/south-china-sea-tensions-at-ne...
stareatgoats 6y ago
Yes, this is correct, it's the sign of the US losing its post WW2 grip on world affairs. But the normally balanced and insightful HN crowd is drowned out on topics like these. Pre-WW1 style national pride and competition for markets and raw materials is back with a vengeance it seems, and it's not only the US who got it; Russia, China, the EU and more got it too. It doesn't bode well.
- luckylion 6y ago
  > Pre-WW1 style national pride and competition for markets and raw materials is back with a vengeance it seems I don't think those are the reasons, they are consequences. The reason, in my opinion, is just money. Your income depends on your job and the success of your company, which largely depends on the economy at large and, in case of large powers, on their world-wide power projection. People understand this instinctively, it's pure tribal behavior. I believe most world-politics interpretation is just motivated reasoning, and you can change somebody's worldview by making them the beneficiary of a trust that's invested in whatever country they dislike. When they draw dividends from their enemy's success, they'll come to see them in a different light.

luckylion 6y ago

I guess TSMC got a courtesy call so they were able to announce their intention of building a new fab in the US? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23187698 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23187698

harpratap 6y ago
TSMC is the golden goose. The entire world will lose if something happens to them.
- someguydave 6y ago
  Yeah I speculate that tsmc has gotten some sweetheart deals as part of this policy change.

geogra4 6y ago

How many foreign companies actually use US Chipmaking equipment? Will this stop european chipmakers like ASML from selling to china too?

adventured 6y ago
> How many foreign companies actually use US Chipmaking equipment? In the semi industry, nearly all of them. You can hardly make anything in the semiconductor industry without using several of the major US companies. The US still dominates the semiconductor equipment industry. Of the six major players, half of them are US companies. > The $412bn global semiconductor industry rests on the shoulders of just six equipment companies, three of them US-based. Together, the companies make nearly all of the crucial hardware and software tools needed to manufacture chips, meaning an American export ban would choke off China’s access to the basic tools needed to make their latest chip designs. > "You cannot build a semiconductor facility without using the big major equipment companies, none of which are Chinese," said Brett Simpson, the founder of Arete Research, an equity research group. “If you fight a war with no guns you’re going to lose. And they don’t have the guns.” > "ASML cannot do without Applied Materials and the other way around. If you take even one out of the value chain, that may hamper Chinese fabs," said a former ASML executive. https://www.ft.com/content/4a8553a6-f3b2-11e8-ae55-df4bf40f9d0d https://www.ft.com/content/4a8553a6-f3b2-11e8-ae55-df4bf40f9...
- brennanpeterson 6y ago
  Mostly true, but you could come pretty close with ASML, ASM, TEL,ebara, hitachi and a couple others (particularly the Korean companies) I don't think it is quite so widely understood that there are close seconds in every market. It is pretty easy to imagine ASML giving up on Intel, cutting HMI, and all the chipmakers going outside of Lam, Applied, and KLA for their next tools. The industry would be a bit disrupted but outside the US...fine. and it would destroy the US industry. This will also tend to pressure the Chinese to keep pushing their own supplier industry, rather than just integrators.
  - sabas123 6y ago

fallingfrog 6y ago

It’s pretty hilarious that the grounds for the block is that China will use the chips to spy on people, given that the United States is certainly doing that already.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
jaywalk 6y ago
Yeah, US spying and Chinese spying are totally the same and used for the same purposes. I don't like spying period, but to try and equate what the US does to what China does is simply ludicrous.
- shmel 6y ago
  It might feel different depending where you live. If one lives in Europe, I don't see why US or Chinese spying should be perceived differently.
  - isatty 6y ago
    Maybe because there are human rights in the US?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - logicchains 6y ago
      The US judicial system doesn't protect the human rights of anyone who's not in America. Just ask the thousands of brown people killed as collateral damage from drone strikes without any chance of a trial in court.
    - Mindwipe 6y ago
      America's human rights laws don't apply to non-US citizens outside of the US's landmass. America has been exceptionally clear that US intelligence and immigration agencies consider non-Americans to be fair game for hacking, non-judicial imprisonment, torture et al. So if I'm not American I might acknowledge that America treats it's own citizens slightly better than China treats theirs from a human rights perspective, but as someone who's British neither nation has a stellar track record of actions that effect me and my country personally or give me any rights protection.

VWWHFSfQ 6y ago

This after previous indictments of Huawei for RICO violations and theft of trade secrets from USA companies T-Mobile, Qualcomm, and Cisco. Including theft of 5G technology that is now being used in equipment sold to EU countries. [0] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunications-conglomerate-huawei-and-subsidiaries-charged-racketeering https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunications-co... [1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunications-device-manufacturer-and-its-us-affiliate-indicted-theft-trade https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunications-de... Whatever happened to arresting Huawei’s Chief Financial Officer Wanzhou Meng? Was she ever extradited from Canada after being captured in Vancouver, BC?

mempko 6y ago
There are a couple of points a) The deal china made with US companies is bring us your technology and we will manufacture for you cheaply. b) Giving technology as part of a deal and then retroactively calling it stealing is, well, strange. c) America because what it was because it "stole" technology from Europe during the industrial revolution. American companies understood what they were getting into and what the deals were and took them. China didn't force US companies to make those deals.
- Icathian 6y ago
  You seem to be under the rather odd impression that all of the limitations you agree to when you enter into contract with another entity are supposed to be ignored. Just because you're doing business with someone who has a reputation of breaching faith doesn't mean it's appropriate that they do so, and you certainly don't have to like them for it.
  - thoughtstheseus 6y ago
    China actually ranks high in adherence to contracts. It’s what’s not in the contracts that creates problems. The issues are a bit more nuanced. Harris Bricken is a law firm with a great blog on related legal topics.
  - 6y ago

madengr 6y ago

Huawei is screwed for RF front end components, specifically integrated PA, switching, and BAW filtering. I don’t believe there is a domestic supplier of those.

jotm 6y ago
Yet. That's the good news about this. New competition will just bring affordability and innovation.

bergstromm466 6y ago

I implore anyone to check out ‘Trade is War’ by Yash Tandon: “ Globalization has reduced many aspects of modern life to little more than commodities controlled by multinational corporations. Everything, from land and water to health and human rights, is today intimately linked to the issue of free trade. Conventional wisdom presents this development as benign, the sole path to progress. Yash Tandon, drawing on decades of on-the-ground experience as a high level negotiator in bodies such as the World Trade Organization, here challenges this prevailing orthodoxy. He insists that, for the vast majority of people, and especially those in the poorer regions of the world, free trade not only hinders development—it visits relentless waves of violence and impoverishment on their lives.”

luckylion 6y ago
Can we please stop flagging comments like these? It's annoying and imho should lead to revoking flagging privileges for everyone part of the "ring". Deplatforming by mass-flagging is shit on Twitter and it's shit on HN as well.

jtdev 6y ago

With the perspective of COVID19, China seems like a threat to the global community. I support any efforts to restrict China’s ability to expand their footprint, global reach, ability to reach into and influence the affairs of other nations. I’m completely exhausted with the deeply flawed “Golden Arches” b.s. at this point.

boomboomsubban 6y ago
>With the perspective of COVID19, China seems like a threat to the global community This does not make any sense to me. Though I do not approve of all of the actions China took at the start of the pandemic, I can not understand how you can consider them a threat over it. Also McDonald's?
- jtdev 6y ago
  Have you not considered that China made an exerted effort to withhold information about COVID19 from the world... How is that not an act of aggression? Hundreds of thousands dead... Golden Arches Theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lexus_and_the_Olive_Tree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lexus_and_the_Olive_Tree
  - Udik 6y ago
    China seems to have reacted to the epidemic quicker and more effectively than the rest of the world did. Acts of aggression are voluntary: like dropping bombs on Iraq, financing civil wars or reneging a signed agreement and imposing an embargo on a foreign country.
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    >Have you not considered that China made an exerted effort to withhold information about COVID19 from the world? How is that not an act of aggression? Though I have issues with some of the early reporting, I do not think their aim was to attack the rest of the world. At worst, which I'm still not convinced of, it was prioritizing their own citizens over others. Hardly an act of aggression. >Hundreds of thousands dead. Presumably you live in the US. If killing hundreds of thousands makes you a threat unworthy of influence you might want to look at our actions. Or consider what the results of your desired actions against the Chinese might be.

roenxi 6y ago

I doubt this will be my most popular comment on HN but Trump really has to be congratulated for being the first President to actually do something about the growth in strategic strength of the absolutely terrifying regime that currently controls China. I know the Obama administration made some noises but I don't recall them actually inconveniencing China in a serious way. To me this is all naked geopolitics, hardly fair and extremely risky. But finally America is transitioning to worrying about real problems rather than, say, the policy of treating shepherds in Afghanistan as a major threat in the Bush era.

jraby3 6y ago
I agree 100%. Trump has done a ton of terrible things, but he deserves credit for his stance on China.
krapp 6y ago
>Trump really has to be congratulated for being the first President to actually do something about the growth in strategic strength of the absolutely terrifying regime that currently controls China He might deserve congratulations if his strategies made sense, but they seem more likely to hurt the US than China in the long run.
- corebit 6y ago
  There are no sure things. We don't like the current situation because its risky. But no risk no reward. If we wanted less risk our only option was to have done it way earlier - under Bush 1 or Clinton.
  - krapp 6y ago
    I'm fine with risks, so long as they're calculated from a position of expertise. I don't trust Trump to take smart risks, given his business history, narcissism and well documented disdain for expert advice. Someone who ignores intelligence briefings because he thinks he's too smart to need them shouldn't be acting like a maverick on the world stage. Simply doing something, anything, for the sake of having something be done is even worse than the status quo.

predictmktegirl 6y ago

I think we should all keep something in mind before we go celebrate the end of globalization. If we go on a rampage pulling manufacturing and capital out of China while simultaneously blaming them for the pandemic, in a few years we’ll end up seeing a nation with a shattered economy, a pissed off populace, and the largest and most well supplied army on Earth. Rhetoric tends to devolve into a limited decision matrix when we should be trying to expand the tree instead. Diplomacy works, anger doesn’t.

draw_down 6y ago
Who is “we”? I don’t make any decisions about where any factories operate.
spangry 6y ago
On the other hand, it's difficult to be diplomatic when one side is so belligerent, sensitive and petty. China has started imposing trade sanctions on my country (Australia) because our Prime Minister had the audacity to suggest there should be an independent inquiry into the origin of COVID-19. Meanwhile, they see fit to interfere in our domestic and political affairs through various front organisations, bribery and even directly through their embassy and ambassador in Australia. People are fast growing tired of China's aggressive and abusive approach to 'diplomacy'.
- luckylion 6y ago
  That's fair-ish for Australia (but then again, Australia is part of the five eyes, so essentially a part of US global policy), but less so for the US. I believe most people see US <=> China in conflict, they don't really consider China <=> Australia, Vietnam or Japan.
  - ladyanita22 6y ago
    The world (and the west) is not us only
    - 6y ago

LatteLazy 6y ago

Trump is starting to drum up campaign "donations"...

ilaksh 6y ago

What is it that is actually preventing this from escalating to a hot war? It feels like we are just waiting for China to manufacture enough warships and nukes or killer drones or AGI with spiking neural networks or whatever can give them an edge so that a real war can start. It's even a war in the comments section. I don't think it's safe. How do we really know it can't progress to some kind of overt military activity? Why are people not more concerned about this? I get the impression that people think the best way to prevent a war is to keep doing things to hold them down. But that seems to be escalating tensions and not actually limiting them. What is the plan for getting out of this? I hope that Elon hurries up with his Mars rockets so I can emmigrate before the whole planet turns into a complete bloody (literally) science fiction nightmare.

jotm 6y ago
Nothing's preventing it from escalating to war. The national defense agencies in all countries probably have plans if that happens... I believe and really hope that an actual war won't happen. There's too much to lose, and little to gain. A technological cold war will likely happen, Huawei and other Chinese companies will just continue R&D and manufacturing on their own. In a way, the US is letting go of whatever control they had left and making it easier for them to form their own alliances in this matter. It will just polarize the world more... again, as always.
logicchains 6y ago
>What is it that is actually preventing this from escalating to a hot war? The same thing that's always prevented nuclear-armed countries from going to war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction
- jotm 6y ago
  Uh, yeah, as long as it's not on their own lands, they could fight some real wars...
emiliobumachar 6y ago
I'm all for colonizing Mars, but it will remain less hospitable than Earth even if we descend into total nuclear war.

jrochkind1 6y ago

> Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross told Fox Business “there has been a very highly technical loophole through which Huawei has been in able, in effect, to use U.S. technology with foreign fab producers.” Ross called the rule change a “highly tailored thing to try to correct that loophole.” This is very vague. Does anyone understand what they are talking about?

evancox100 6y ago
The “loophole” was this: “Under the new rule, any foreign company that uses American technology to produce microchips would need a license to sell to Huawei. That makes it difficult for major chip contract manufacturers like Taiwan’s T.S.M.C. to sell to Huawei, because its supply chains rely heavily on American manufacturing tools. It could also clamp down on sales by makers of semiconductor equipment, like Applied Materials and KLA, and chip design software companies like Cadence.” https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/15/business/economy/commerce-department-huawei.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/15/business/economy/commerce...
- jrochkind1 6y ago
  I don't really understand why they are requiring a license to sell to Huawei in the first place. That this is all such a string of vagueness makes me suspect it's a bunch of bullshit, more about politics (in the 'optics' sense) or business competitiveness than actual national security.
  - billme 6y ago
    Pure speculation... All of this is about national security. US & Taiwan’s TSMC are in talks to open a TSMC factory in the US. Chairman of TSMC has publicly stated if the US gives them enough money, they’ll do it. Appears US (Trump) is telling TSMC if they do not open the factory for free, they’re going to have trouble making money at all. Taiwan wants to keep TSMC because it’s an insurance policy, China & the US both need TSMC. That or it is a plausible way for TSMC to deny they’re cutting off China. ...any thoughts?

logicchains 6y ago

I wonder if this will be good for open source. Is there a RISK-V-like equivalent of whatever it is that's being blocked?

evancox100 6y ago
No, free/open-source semiconductor design software and equipment is non-existent, especially for modern nodes.
- MayeulC 6y ago
  Well, that's definitely not the case, a lot of labs are on this (including Berkley's hammer/chisel [1]). I've seen some tools presented at RISC-V conferences, but the major closed-source component nowadays is the PDK, I'm afraid. Hopefully, inkjet-printed transistors or some other fabless technology will make open source ICs a lot more feasible. One of the major issue is costs, when you look at more than 40k/mm² for multiproject wafers in advanced nodes and contrast that with the anemic budget most open source software has to do with. You don't need to be on the very latest node, if you can afford going slower, on bigger, cheaper dies. A lot of open source "hardware" project seem to focus on FPGAs, since that's more approachable, and the costs are nowhere as high. [1]: https://github.com/ucb-bar https://github.com/ucb-bar
  - MayeulC 6y ago
    Just something I didn't make clear in the above comment: I expect that Hardware-description-language-to-layout pipelines will improve a lot in the upcoming years, so if a process becomes viable for open hardware, projects that were developed on an FPGA (here is a wi-fi chip, for instance: https://github.com/open-sdr/openwifi https://github.com/open-sdr/openwifi) might be transferable with a lot less effort than doing everything from scratch. I would also like to point out that these tools will likely help us juice up a bit more performance from the existing processes, but we aren't really likely to see a lot more of Moore's scaling, going forward. So the door is open to new processes, that may or may not be open hardware-friendly. And current, top-end processes might also become cheaper over time. While I doubt a lot of new foundries will catch up with the end of Moore's scale, it might actually become easier to get there, while disruptive technologies get some time to play catch-up. Together with innovative synthesis tools.

amd-bull 6y ago

pretty shocking how biased these hn comments are against china. it's clear the US has lost leadership in the crucial technology of 5g and is trying everything it can to stop the leader, huawei. while i'm no china-phile, the US actions is just silly and will have far reaching consequences that will just quicken the demise of our technological prowess. and if you're gonna argue from the point of view that huawei broke the law, then let them have their day in court. we're acting like judge, jury and executioner. how is that right?? shows up hn as a bunch of biased tech bros! let the downvotes begin

Udik 6y ago
> pretty shocking how biased these hn comments are against china. And it took only a few years of media campaigns- the first one I remember was the announcement of spy chips in China-made boards, which turned out to be fake. It's scary how quickly you can steer public opinion to suit your needs.
- whytaka 6y ago
  It's actually been a long time coming: Tiananmen, South China Sea, Hong Kong protests, threats against Taiwan, Uyghurs, Tibet, Surveillance State, Authoritarian ruler for life, IP thefts, currency manipulation, shooting down satellites, lop-sided market access and more.
mardifoufs 6y ago
How is that a bad thing? Would you rather see HN support a country with literal ethnic cleansing policies? Or one that executes dissenters or makes them disappear? Btw, China does not have the technical lead in 5G. Just the cheaper equipment. And chinese tech is barely able to reproduce 8-10 years old semiconductor technology on it's own, so it's very very far from technological lead. Unless you believe the CCP narrative that they will magically outpace America/the west by barely being able to catch up despite the enormous scale of their industrial espionage.

theredbox 6y ago

As someone who is not an american nor a chinese nor from a big European nation this is all frightening to watch. It's an invisible war of nations and we dont really have a clue about allegiances nor what is right or wrong. Sure as a european I feel more connected to the US but at the same time I feel very much excluded from that larger sphere protection and benefits. The US needs a framework for smaller nations where we can build better relations.

rumanator 6y ago
> It's an invisible war of nations and we dont really have a clue about allegiances nor what is right or wrong. I don't see any doubt regarding "allegiance". The Chinese regime is a totalitarian nightmare that not only became a massive surveillance state but also has a long track record of human rights abuse and extrajudicial assassinations. Between what the West enjoyed in the past half century and the oppressive hell that countries have endured in the hands of the Chinese regime, the choice is pretty clear, even if we take into account Putin's pull on Trump.
cryptonector 6y ago
Between the end of WWII and now, Western Europe, and now Eastern as well, have enjoyed American defense and economic benefits. Europe almost as a monolithic whole has been fixated on a different economic model than the American model, but that's its own choice -- the U.S. did not impose its model on Europe. > The US needs a framework for smaller nations where we can build better relations. What could that be? We've had the U.N., NATO, the WTO, and what not.

amd-bull 6y ago

the last time we effectively blocked china from acquiring tunneling machines, they ended up building their own, a mean feat, and now they're looking to start exporting them! disrupting the market economy has a vicious way of getting back at ya [0] http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1121448.shtml http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1121448.shtml

pureagave 6y ago
That sounds boring to me.
gardaani 6y ago
They are already building their own chips. Huawei has started to use 14nm chips manufactured by Shanghai-based SMIC. They plan to replace TSMC's chips with SMIC's chips in their phones. TSMC blocking will just accelerate their plans. https://www.gizmochina.com/2020/05/12/huawei-kirin-710a-smic-mass-production/ https://www.gizmochina.com/2020/05/12/huawei-kirin-710a-smic...
pinkfoot 6y ago
A military UAS. Swathes of the developing world now use Chinese UAS.

intheshadows01 6y ago

It is very interesting reading all the comments from you guys, some from tech prospective others from policical ones. But from my angle, a normal Chinese guy working in the field of material research in China for a decade and deep inside the system, my points would be: 1. you guys really worry too much about our ability to innovate, seriously. There is no room for real innovations. But at the same time the system rewards stealing and copying. The system, the education, the overall political environment are not designed with innovations in mind but to help a few to stay in power. My personal take on this is that Chinese "innovation" is now built upon: Chinese with foreign education/working background bringing back technologies, CCP buying foreign companies with OUR everyday people's money, and of course hacking/stealing directly. I don't believe we have a change winning the innovation war, not in the long run. 2. for a "private" company like huawei, isn't it weird that it's always backed by CCP? Lots of Chinese private companies get balls kicked everyday and why only huawei get treatment worthy of a state owned business? Even us Chinese knows better. 3. please think about us everyday Chinese citizens. we are currently under direct information warfare and systematic repression waged by CCP for decades, and our lives/future squeezed out in order to found companies like huawei and projects like one belt one road, without a fking vote. It's much bigger than us vs huawei, at least from our side. btw it is not my field of expertise but I'd like to call for experienced software/hardware engineers from the west, help us bring down the CCP's GFW system before it's too late. If it is built by man it can be broken. thanks and apologize for my broken English.

chance_state 6y ago
Thanks for you comment. It's too rare that we hear from people with your perspective. Is HN not blocked/censored in China?

simonblack 6y ago

Very dumb move by the US. In business, there is the perennial question of "Do I "buy built" thus taking advantage of economies of scale within the supplier while at the same time making myself dependent on the good intentions of that supplier? Or do I "go to the cost and effort and time wasted in making it myself", which means I don't get dependent on that supplier, puts me behind for a year or two, and then possibly may be able to take away his business and keep it for myself in the future? Most administrators find it's better overall to "buy built". But if forced to, they will "roll their own". If Huawei starts making its own semiconductors, the US can wave goodbye to its own semiconductor companies like Intel, AMD, Radeon and Nvidia. Just like GM, Ford and Chrysler are there in name only today- when once they made over 50% of the entire world's cars back in the 1960s. In the words of that famous hair product: "It may not happen overnight, but it will happen!"