throwaway4good

I am still struggling to understand “safe”. What is it we need to be kept safe from? What would happen if it is unsafe?

And the opium trade. Lots of great jobs there.

I guess it spread peacefully … the British on the other hand …

Former Malysia PM Dr Mahathir Mohamad wrote the following on Twitter on the Ukraine war:

https://twitter.com/chedetofficial/status/162898188067786342...

In particular the follow up (European's love of war) is hilarious and not an uncommon view in that part of the world.

So it is autocratic nuclear vs democratic nuclear now? Perhaps we could instead work together to tackle climate change and seek common prosperity ...

If you look at the list of the corporate sponsors for this think tank, it is pretty obvious that tech has awoken to what the state can do to foster "innovation and advance".

Sullivan said that in later speeches - have them freeze at current levels and get a forever growing lead.

Far more Chinese leaders have spent time in the US than vice versa. Many top Chinese communists have degrees from US universities. I don't think you can find a single US politician or top civil servant with a degree from a Chinese university.

I am not saying that US politicians should go and study in China but the claim of equivalence in counter party understanding is just not true at all.

The Chinese hawkishness today is reaction to the changed attitude of Americans, they were (naively) hoping for the better all the way up to the Biden admin; the experiences of 90es/early 2000es drove China closer to the west regardless of the events you mentioned.

We in the west are also extremely good at projection - seeing our own aggression in whatever the Chinese are doing. The interpretation of made in China 2025, that being used as key justification for the tech war, is a good example of this.

Also just in simple things like “lack of mutual understanding”. I don’t think that is true. I think the Chinese understand the mechanics of western government and politics quite well, whereas we in the west have very little understanding of the Chinese ditto - simply because we don’t bother as we are the top dog.

The report with 37 out of 44 referred to in the article is from the Australian anti-China think tank ASPI. Which gets most of its money from the US defense industry.

The idea of a race, a zero sum game when it comes to development, is an uniquely Western way of thinking. This is how we drive ourselves. We won't go to the moon - who cares about that? Unless of course the Soviets are trying to get there ... then we will spare no expense.

In other words it is a ploy that pundits promote in order to get money to their military industrial backers.

The GDP pr person in China is between 1/6 to 1/3 of the US (depending on how you measure). Any Chinese leader, including Xi, will tell you that the China will be developing, catching up, for the next many decades.

The October 7 sanctions seem to be a change to a shock and awe strategy. I am not sure that it worked for the bigger players. Both YMTC and SMIC seem to be making new technological breakthroughs still.

The US is definitely out to kill Huawei.

Oracle is prohibited from selling to Huawei - that is why they have built an alternative.

And OpenGauss is based on Postgres:

https://gitee.com/opengauss/openGauss-server

It will come from the rest of the world. A 10 mio people city in Africa needs just as many 5G base stations as a 10 mio people city in the US.

The story of the Moonies - anti-communist Korean cult - running the Washington Times. And the story of Falun Gong - anti-communist Chinese cult - running The Epoch Times. Are two great examples of US clandestine operations now propagandizing the US population.

"And in February, the contractor that worked on the anti-vax campaign – General Dynamics IT – won a $493 million contract. Its mission: to continue providing clandestine influence services for the military."

So basically this campaign was just one of many?!

The NVDIA stock has had a huge AI-related run over the past year while Apple has barely moved.

This basically says that only a tiny bit of the AI will done on NVDIA hardware for the billions of Apple users.

The market is not pricing that in.

Yeah. It will be interesting the day that Intel starts buying SSMB EUVL from Huawei. :-D

ASML is going to remain a monopoly and whatever Chinese alternative that there may be is going to stay in China for the foreseeable future.

However because the Chinese electronics industry is so big and they rely so much on imports, when they are building alternatives to the US-controlled semiconductor supply chain (ASML, Applied Materials, TSMC etc.), it will matter at one point for ASML even if the Chinese tools and final products are never exported.

Could if been interesting if the article included price in some manner; as I understand it the total cost pr. transistor is still lower at 28 nm lithography and will be so in the foreseeable future.

There are none in the sense that all high volume production of high-end chips uses ASML. With the possible exception of what Huawei is doing.

No. They just loose their funding and job.

The M2 is a chip designed to be in a laptop (and it is quite powerful given its low power consumption). Presumedly they have a different chip or at least completely different configuration (RAM, network, etc.) in their data centers.

Maybe. It is not really obvious how much you for the AI accellerator part of their offerings. For example the chips in iPhones are quite powerful even adjusted for price. However for some cases - like the max chip in the macbooks or the extra ram - their pricing seems high - maybe even nvidia high.

I think NVIDIA has the highest hardware markup at the moment.

I thought the news of them using Apple Silicon rather than NVIDIA in their data centers was significant.

Perhaps there is still hope of a relaunch of xserve; with the widespread use of Apple computers amongst developers Apple has a real chance of challenging NVIDIA's CUDA moat.

The Novo employed researcher Lotte Bjerre Knudsen is widely credited as being the key creator of Ozempic:

https://politiken.dk/danmark/art9703359/%C2%BBJeg-g%C3%A5r-i...

And she is a woman. So maybe being a woman is not the reason that this particular researcher is not being credited.

"Luckily we're bigger now, and crucially have a lot of money to pay for top lawyers now if we're forced to go that route."

As a top dog CEO you may think that. But it is incredible stupid, arrogant, and immature to put that in writing when dealing with one of the little people.