4 ms·

It's a good update, but the framing is that primary goal of the US was to ruin Huawei rather than to stop depending on their products. I'm not sure how true tha

It's a good update, but the framing is that primary goal of the US was to ruin Huawei rather than to stop depending on their products. I'm not sure how true that is.

gruez 2y ago
If all the US wanted to do was to "stop depending on their products", why would they seek to prevent US and foreign companies (if they're using US technology) from selling to huawei? That seems to go far beyond "stop depending on their products".
- skybrian 2y ago
  I think that’s sometimes framed as not wanting to help China improve in technologically advanced industries? But of course it will improve anyway. Maybe the article could have been framed in a less binary way: it didn’t slow them down as much as they hoped.
  - al_borland 2y ago
    >I think that’s sometimes framed as not wanting to help China improve in technologically advanced industries? If this was the case we'd pull all manufacturing out of China completely. The knowledge transfer from the US to China when it comes to manufacturing, from basic goods up to modern tech, has been wild. With that comes a lot of information on how to advance technology.
- quickthrowman 2y ago
  There are geopolitical and economic advantages gained by the west through denying China access to ASML’s semiconductor tooling. Western aligned semiconductor companies have the leading edge semiconductor market locked down, and forces China to use semiconductors that aren’t bleeding edge for their own internal use, militarily or otherwise. I’m speculating that the vast manufacturing knowledge transfer to China through offshoring is seen as a “bad thing” by western politicians, who then sought to limit China’s ability to do the same with semiconductors. China will likely figure out EUV eventually, by hook or by crook. There’s only so much you can do to keep that knowledge contained, considering the amount of people who have the knowledge.
throwaway4good 2y ago
The US is definitely out to kill Huawei.

It's a good update, but the framing is that primary goal of the US was to ruin Huawei rather than to stop depending on their products. I'm not sure how true that is.

gruez 2y ago

If all the US wanted to do was to "stop depending on their products", why would they seek to prevent US and foreign companies (if they're using US technology) from selling to huawei? That seems to go far beyond "stop depending on their products".

skybrian 2y ago
I think that’s sometimes framed as not wanting to help China improve in technologically advanced industries? But of course it will improve anyway. Maybe the article could have been framed in a less binary way: it didn’t slow them down as much as they hoped.
- al_borland 2y ago
  >I think that’s sometimes framed as not wanting to help China improve in technologically advanced industries? If this was the case we'd pull all manufacturing out of China completely. The knowledge transfer from the US to China when it comes to manufacturing, from basic goods up to modern tech, has been wild. With that comes a lot of information on how to advance technology.
quickthrowman 2y ago
There are geopolitical and economic advantages gained by the west through denying China access to ASML’s semiconductor tooling. Western aligned semiconductor companies have the leading edge semiconductor market locked down, and forces China to use semiconductors that aren’t bleeding edge for their own internal use, militarily or otherwise. I’m speculating that the vast manufacturing knowledge transfer to China through offshoring is seen as a “bad thing” by western politicians, who then sought to limit China’s ability to do the same with semiconductors. China will likely figure out EUV eventually, by hook or by crook. There’s only so much you can do to keep that knowledge contained, considering the amount of people who have the knowledge.

throwaway4good 2y ago

The US is definitely out to kill Huawei.