6 ms·
> It’s bandits all the way down, so adding a little smuggling to that doesn’t surprise me. Implying it’s *morally* wrong for a Chinese company to bypass US sa
by ComputerGuru 10mo ago
> It’s bandits all the way down, so adding a little smuggling to that doesn’t surprise me.
Implying it’s *morally* wrong for a Chinese company to bypass US sanctions is hilarious. You really say that with a straight face when even the president admits this is only protectionism?
- qoez 10mo ago[flagged]
- Spooky23 10mo agoIs it morally OK as long as they pay their 25% vig to POTUS? The concept of morality in this context is absurd.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- behringer 10mo agoI like how you're careful to use the "west" because if you had said US your argument would have been laughable.
- forinti 10mo agoMost European countries did awful things during their colonial years, some late into the XX century. Some still do shady things in Africa right now. And they all welcome money siphoned off peripheral countries by crooks. Nobody can claim moral superiority.
- platevoltage 10mo agoGive me 1 reason why the USA, the (for now) leader of "the west", is morally superior to China?
- nish__ 10mo ago[flagged]
- whatevermom3 10mo agoI see Chinese citizens traveling abroad every day. Doesn't look like they cannot travel. Freedom of what exactly? Are you really free in America when you have to toil away 12 hours per day to make ends meet? Honestly funny to see people falling for American propaganda.
- nickthegreek 10mo agoVery few Americans commenting here have to toil away for 12 hours to make ends meet.
- nish__ 10mo agoThey only let some of them out. And it's hard to get a passport. Most other countries work the opposite way. You need approval to enter. In China, you need approval to exit.
- amanaplanacanal 10mo agoPersonally, I'm against both of those.
- nish__ 10mo agoSo just no borders? That's fair I guess.
- amanaplanacanal 10mo agoOne way to think about it: if every country prevents people from entering, the effect is exactly the same as one country preventing people from leaving.
- 10mo ago
- jyscao 10mo agoProjection. China does not even try to export their ideologies to the rest of the world who they see as clearly different culturally. The “west” OTOH does not have a good track record of that.
- knowitnone3 10mo agoChina certainly does export their ideologies by telling the world Taiwan is part of China and telling others to not recognize Taiwan as a country. They also have major if not direct influence on Myanmar's civil war. North Korea. Let's not forget the taking land(India, tibet) and extending their borders with man-made islands so they can extend their fishing territories. that's a great track record. you're not biased at all.
- pedroma 10mo agoIt's interesting how this sounds like projection to me as well, from the perspective that China does export their ideology. Your post itself seems to be a form of that, whether you're Chinese or not.
- higginsniggins 10mo agoHow about and.... this might be too radical for you but here me out...... no one with "dominance for humanity overall"
- echelon 10mo agoIt's the moral imperative of every country to optimize for its citizens' economic prospects. The CIA (and every other intelligence org.) is literally a weapon designed to operate in the grey area to fit the mandate of the policy makers and elected leadership. Many of the things they do are questionable or worse. In the case of the DoD, they do these things at the behest of democratically elected leadership. Of course US and China will operate in their own best interests. Of course they will both play chess, both name call, both sanction and impede. When it's not a hot war, it is still a never-ending battle for each country's total economic, soft, and hard power market share. This is every country. It's geopolitics.
- yannyu 10mo agoThis is just "might makes right" but modern. I don't know that this is the consistent, wide-held belief that you seem to think it is. Plenty of people would rather our governments not engage in clandestine disruption and undermining of foreign governments. Competition is inevitable, especially between geopolitical rivals, but we don't have to engage in Minitrue-style "the enemy has always been our enemy" rhetoric.
- echelon 10mo agoWe live under economic conditions created by a government that does intervene. And a greater world order established by a hegemon that does intervene. It would be interesting to see what life would be like today had that not happened. It might be better, it might be worse. Probably a little of both for different groups of people. As the world returns to multi-polarity, there are signs of increases in violence. The last time the world had multi-polarity, we had far more wars. Including the worst wars the world has ever seen.
- yannyu 10mo ago> The last time the world had multi-polarity, we had far more wars. Including the worst wars the world has ever seen. Citations? Simply saying that World War 1 happened during a time of multi-polarity is just begging the question. Multi-polarity of varying degrees has always been the case throughout human history, and often times single-polarity is achieved only through extreme violence.
- voidnap 10mo agoYes. The bans are export controls. They are not banned in china. They are just banned from export in the US. Using them in china is legal in china.
- ignoramous 10mo ago> Yes. The bans are export controls. These export controls increasingly look like "tax". The White House said the US government would take a 25 percent cut of the chip’s sales, similar to a deal with AMD and Nvidia earlier this year that allowed them to sell lower-powered AI chips to China while paying the US government 15 percent of the proceeds. > Using them in China is legal in China. Technically, yes. The CCP, though, wants to incentivize Chinese firms to use domestically-manufactured chips. https://www.silicon.co.uk/e-innovation/artificial-intelligence/china-nvidia-h200-627924 https://www.silicon.co.uk/e-innovation/artificial-intelligen... / https://archive.vn/B2pah https://archive.vn/B2pah
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- htek 10mo agoThat's Corporatism. It's from the fascist playbook where the state takes partial or complete ownership of private companies. Where does that money go, to some slush fund for the president? The reason for the export controls is to keep our potential adversaries from being on the bleeding edge of frontier AI. It goes against the US's interests to give China a leg up with advanced chips. It's almost laughable, of course, as the Nvidia chips are already manufactured in a country that China claims as their own. If they ever pressed the issue, we could find ourselves without the most advanced chips.
- parodysbird 10mo agoThis is not at all what is meant by fascist corporatism, nor corporatism more generally. Corporatism is more about collective bargaining by professional trades, and is not the sense of corporation as used for private companies.
- Dylan16807 10mo agoSmuggling or buying from a smuggler is on the "banditry" side whether you think it's moral or not.
- tmnvix 10mo agoHypothetical: I buy a product imported legally from the US and later sell it on the local used market to a Chinese tourist who takes it back to China with them. Where is the crime, smuggling, or 'banditry' here? US law is just that - US law.
- Dylan16807 10mo agoIf the importer didn't have the intent of it going to the tourist, then things are fine for that one-off GPU. If they did have that intent we quickly get to smuggling territory, with or without you as a middleman. And for GPU trips without a country in between, the plausible deniability is close to zero.
- justatdotin 10mo agoI think it's not.
- seizethecheese 10mo agoHmm, the way I read “bandit” here was to be implying illegality not necessarily immorality.
- dominotw 10mo agoyes stealing is morally wrong?
- thiagoharry 10mo agoThey did not subtract anything from anyone.