12 ms·

Or Lithuania, arguably[0] the most anti-China member of NATO. That's the NATO ally (!) they chose to blacklist, with their anti-China chip export ban? [0] ht

Or Lithuania, arguably[0] the most anti-China member of NATO. *That's* the NATO ally (!) they chose to blacklist, with their anti-China chip export ban? [0] https://apnews.com/article/business-china-beijing-global-trade-taiwan-4f242182421d1fc864ee751d158c046c https://apnews.com/article/business-china-beijing-global-tra... ("EU launches WTO action against China over Lithuania dispute")

belter 2y ago
Maybe we just admit they are incompetent.... :-)
throwaway48476 2y ago
I doubt Lithuania has the budget to buy enough chips for the cap to matter.
qwytw 2y ago
> Or Lithuania, arguably[0] the most anti-China Also one one of the biggest resellers of various products to Russia and other economically affiliated countries they don't even produce locally. e.g. https://www.tridge.com/news/strange-news-of-the-day-lithuania-is-the-leader-in https://www.tridge.com/news/strange-news-of-the-day-lithuani... Also countries like Lithuania are not blacklisted. They are still allowed to buy GPUs/etc. below a certain cap. Realistically their domestic demand is nowhere near the cap. So what's' the problem exactly? (unless they want to resell those chips to third parties)
- xdennis 2y ago
  The problem is putting US allies like Lithuania and Poland in the same tier as communist countries like Laos or Vietnam. I'd put it another way, if demand is below the cap, then why have the cap? Why destroy relations for free? It's not like you can't do something if they are found to sell chips to China.
  - qwytw 2y ago
    So that companies in less reliable countries like Lithuania couldn't purchase high numbers of GPU and resell them to Russia/China/etc. through countries like Kazakhstan etc. (like they do now with other products). > if demand is below the cap, then why have the cap? It might be for Lithuania. But the same 50,000 cap applies to Poland. Anyway: > Individual companies headquartered in tier two countries—for [...] can access significantly higher limits if they apply for their own national validated end user status. That process involves making verifiable security commitments, [...]. If a company obtains this status, its chip imports won’t count toward the country’s overall maximum cap So this isn't an export ban as such.
davidlt 2y ago
This isn't a problem. See article [EN][0]. Simply put we are significantly below the cap. If somehow we would manage to hit the cap it definitely should be an alarm for investigation. I feel more folks are unhappy because EU was divided into two parts with this. [0] https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/2461209/will-lithuania-be-affected-by-us-chip-export-controls https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/2461209/will-lithua...

Or Lithuania, arguably[0] the most anti-China member of NATO. *That's* the NATO ally (!) they chose to blacklist, with their anti-China chip export ban? [0] ht

belter 2y ago

Maybe we just admit they are incompetent.... :-)

throwaway48476 2y ago

I doubt Lithuania has the budget to buy enough chips for the cap to matter.

qwytw 2y ago

> Or Lithuania, arguably[0] the most anti-China Also one one of the biggest resellers of various products to Russia and other economically affiliated countries they don't even produce locally. e.g. https://www.tridge.com/news/strange-news-of-the-day-lithuania-is-the-leader-in https://www.tridge.com/news/strange-news-of-the-day-lithuani... Also countries like Lithuania are not blacklisted. They are still allowed to buy GPUs/etc. below a certain cap. Realistically their domestic demand is nowhere near the cap. So what's' the problem exactly? (unless they want to resell those chips to third parties)

xdennis 2y ago
The problem is putting US allies like Lithuania and Poland in the same tier as communist countries like Laos or Vietnam. I'd put it another way, if demand is below the cap, then why have the cap? Why destroy relations for free? It's not like you can't do something if they are found to sell chips to China.
- qwytw 2y ago
  So that companies in less reliable countries like Lithuania couldn't purchase high numbers of GPU and resell them to Russia/China/etc. through countries like Kazakhstan etc. (like they do now with other products). > if demand is below the cap, then why have the cap? It might be for Lithuania. But the same 50,000 cap applies to Poland. Anyway: > Individual companies headquartered in tier two countries—for [...] can access significantly higher limits if they apply for their own national validated end user status. That process involves making verifiable security commitments, [...]. If a company obtains this status, its chip imports won’t count toward the country’s overall maximum cap So this isn't an export ban as such.

davidlt 2y ago

This isn't a problem. See article [EN][0]. Simply put we are significantly below the cap. If somehow we would manage to hit the cap it definitely should be an alarm for investigation. I feel more folks are unhappy because EU was divided into two parts with this. [0] https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/2461209/will-lithuania-be-affected-by-us-chip-export-controls https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/2461209/will-lithua...