And any individuals involved. Unless it is a full blown covert operation run by the intelligence service of a country under embaego. In that case some of the ivvolved people will get decorations and promotions, if successful.
That's not true. At least not in the US. It gives legal over sight so that investigation can occur, and places legal responsibility on builders and buyers such that they'd be culpable if they are connected even accidentally to exporting restricted items.
Honestly I think efficient market hypothesis is overreaching here
Isn't this the motto of security in general? "There are no roadblocks, only speed bump." (obviously you can make pretty powerful speed bumps that make you essentially stop but hey, you could try to crack AES256 if you're willing to spend astronomical time)
Yeah, they can. But then that is illegal and the authorities are on the lookout for it.
One among the leaked wikileak messages was a communication from the state department to their german counterparts to warn them that a company trying to buy fiber optic gyroscopes from a german company is actually north korea.
When my friends were building a micro satelite as a university project in Hungary the local secret service showed up uninvited. They were absolutely friendly, geeked out with them about the project, and asked the group to upgrade their alarm system. Even recommended a brand. They also gave them tips on which countries better to avoided when they travel with the satelite to the launch pad.
How did they hear about their project? In short we don’t know. The speculation is that they got a tip that someone is buying space related hardware at this adress from a partner agency and they have been asked to check them out if they are a legit operation or a shell company smuggling parts.
Watchers be watching, and there is an extensive aparatus for this.
As a creator of something restricted you are responsible for not selling to shell companies. You are required to do due diligence on everyone you sell to, and who they sell to ensure things never get to a shell company. Convince the courts you did your best and you are okay, but you need to be able to show you tried hard to prevent it.
This can be tricky. As an American I can sell to Canada but not Cuba. I cannot sell to someone in Canada who resells to Cuba. Someone in Canada is legally required to lie to me if I ask if they will resell to Cuba. Therefore asking Canadians if they resell to Cuba is not enough to show I did due diligence to ensure my stuff doesn't go to Cuba. (My information on US/Cuba relations are 10-15 years out of date, but the example is good even though I'm not sure if it applies anymore)
This isn't about stopping them all but Frontier was built with 37,888 GPUs. Have fun sourcing export controlled GPUs at that scale. By the time you do you're two generations behind.
Do they people making these decisions not know that Huawei offers A100 equivalent GPUs and CUDA like framework called Mindspore that has over 2 million developers ?
Pushing the Chinese tech giants like Alibaba, Tencent and Baidu to work and grow this platform is the opposite of what these sanctions intend to achieve.
What an own goal!
Completely agree, tbh both decisions (sanctions and no sanctions) have certain bad implications. But imho sanctions are much more dangerous in the long run for the US foreign policy.
As an armchair observer, China and businesses within it seem to have the general upper hand when it comes to production of most of anything. One popular tag line is that they lack true innovative IP type work but I'd say that's highly debatable. When it comes to pretty much any sort of physical production, the US seems at a disadvantage largely due to leadership and ownership direction starting from many decades ago.
I disassemble most things I get from china. There is a lot of engineering innovation, but the innovation isn't aimed at the user of the device. The innovation is in ways to make a functional device with fewer manufacturing steps, cheaper.
However, one day those engineering minds will divert their attention from making devices cheaper and more efficient towards making the same devices perform better and have more features. At that point, the consumer will see the innovation.
Both the US and China are working to decouple their economies long term, starting with the most critical sectors first. Both sides are aware that there are short term consequences and some of their businesses may suffer but that in the long run decoupling will be better for their respective countries.
>> in the long run decoupling will be better for their respective countries
Globalization and collaboration making a huge difference in pace of the progress. Segregation and compartmentalization are very bad for everyone in a long run.
probably yes. although that's a bit of an article of faith. in analogy, I wonder how much progress and innovation, and general world progress, has resulted from opening the internet to include Russia, for example. Sometimes including actors that do not conform to certain ethical standards and trust worthy behaviors, leads to spreading infection and danger to the world.
Another analogy: Incorporating cancer cells into the body rather than sanctioning their growth, is a sure path to death.
this is not a directly equate China to cancer, especially the Chinese people to cancer. That's clearly incorrect. however, I do think it is correct to expect our trading partners to eventually establish trust with each other, on the geopolitical sphere, and if that fails to appear, it makes sense to diversify our strategic resources and partnerships
> Sometimes including actors that do not conform to certain ethical standards and trust worthy behaviors, leads to spreading infection and danger to the world.
The Chinese people are fine. You can see some great projects on GitHub for example. I hear Shenzen is something special.
Like most people not in China, I never deal with individual people, just the country. I see nothing inappropriate about my generalization, please go into more detail so I can figure out what you are talking about.
"I wonder how much progress and innovation, and general world progress, has resulted from opening the internet to include Russia, for example."
Off the top of my head -- nginx which is by some metrics the most popular web server[0]. Or Kotlin -- the programming language that Google recommends for writing Android apps[1].
"Sometimes including actors that do not conform to certain ethical standards and trust worthy behaviors, leads to spreading infection and danger to the world."
Could you tell how have you come to this way of thinking about a whole nation?
> in the long run decoupling will be better for their respective countries.
That's populism seeping into the mind. Globle trade and collaboration have raised many people from poverty. It's how China and the US got to where they are today.
Decoupling increases the likelihood of confrontation. The US did similar to this with Japan just before WW2
True, but what can you do. China is not showing signs today of being a good long term partner, so the US feels forced to escalate, and in return China does more. 15 years ago I thought that China would improve, but with Xi in power I no longer do. Only time will tell, but things are not looking: in the worst cases coupling would be even worse.
Coupling means the cost of war is much hirer, especially for the people's daily lives
Coupling has a big impact on deterrence and not going to war in the first place. If you want war, then advocate for the regressive isolationist polices. If you don't want war, then look for places where we can collaborate, like climate change and trade
Yes. But also the U.S. sees no way to influence the faction of China to the ways of the U.S. influence traditionally worked in China (unlike how China can influence the U.S. politics). So the cooperation game quickly becomes a game of one benefactor. It is a bad situation we are in but the U.S. cannot solely determines the outcome. China must have some structural changes to convince otherwise influence is possible.
Perhaps still 30 years away... but I think it will happen, and a war between two nuclear nations won't be pretty (although I doubt it'll actually be a nuclear war)
The minorites who will be the majority will not be committed to imperialism and empire building like the current Caucasians who are in charge of the US.
I don't think a 2050 war between developed economies will involve many people... It'll be drove vs drone mostly.
It'll be a test of the economies of the nations to see who can build most high tech drones quickest and who can do R&D fastest to outclass the enemies inventions. Drone aircraft, ships, missiles, bombs.
I hope that as soon as one side has clearly better and more drones, the other will surrender, ideally before substantial loss of life.
Do you know that AMD makes powerful GPUs that even have a general purpose programming interface called ROCm? Now try to persuade ML practitioners to switch to that ftom NVidia GPUs and CUDA.
My understanding is that while it is theoretically supported, the vast majority of random pytorch projects you find on GitHub will need tweaks before they'll run in ROCm
it's good that the US is now using sticks, not just carrots when dealing with China and it's growing geopolitical power. I just hope that we still give thrift to carrots, the stick makes carrots look better. we'd all do better in a more liberal China
With all these restrictions, I begin to wonder: where is this “free market” economy that we so advocate to other countries? I get the need for regulations and restrictions, sure, but at some point, where is free in all of this? Also, do these sanctions even work on large, diversified economies? Eventually, the local substitutes will be developed and, at that point, it will cut off the (large) market for western companies.
The Free Market does not exist. It has been shown that the big banks can do whatever they want and if they make bad decisions and take risks that end up costing them billions the government will come and bail them out.
80 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 146 ms ] threadhttps://www.akingump.com/en/insights/alerts/doj-focuses-on-c...
Honestly I think efficient market hypothesis is overreaching here
One among the leaked wikileak messages was a communication from the state department to their german counterparts to warn them that a company trying to buy fiber optic gyroscopes from a german company is actually north korea.
When my friends were building a micro satelite as a university project in Hungary the local secret service showed up uninvited. They were absolutely friendly, geeked out with them about the project, and asked the group to upgrade their alarm system. Even recommended a brand. They also gave them tips on which countries better to avoided when they travel with the satelite to the launch pad.
How did they hear about their project? In short we don’t know. The speculation is that they got a tip that someone is buying space related hardware at this adress from a partner agency and they have been asked to check them out if they are a legit operation or a shell company smuggling parts.
Watchers be watching, and there is an extensive aparatus for this.
This can be tricky. As an American I can sell to Canada but not Cuba. I cannot sell to someone in Canada who resells to Cuba. Someone in Canada is legally required to lie to me if I ask if they will resell to Cuba. Therefore asking Canadians if they resell to Cuba is not enough to show I did due diligence to ensure my stuff doesn't go to Cuba. (My information on US/Cuba relations are 10-15 years out of date, but the example is good even though I'm not sure if it applies anymore)
https://www.nu.nl/economie/6285728/drie-jaar-cel-geeist-tege...
The USA is at least as good at discovering these tricks as the Dutch are.
Pushing the Chinese tech giants like Alibaba, Tencent and Baidu to work and grow this platform is the opposite of what these sanctions intend to achieve. What an own goal!
Perhaps they think that Huawei / smic is constrained on how much they can produce.
However, one day those engineering minds will divert their attention from making devices cheaper and more efficient towards making the same devices perform better and have more features. At that point, the consumer will see the innovation.
Globalization and collaboration making a huge difference in pace of the progress. Segregation and compartmentalization are very bad for everyone in a long run.
Another analogy: Incorporating cancer cells into the body rather than sanctioning their growth, is a sure path to death.
this is not a directly equate China to cancer, especially the Chinese people to cancer. That's clearly incorrect. however, I do think it is correct to expect our trading partners to eventually establish trust with each other, on the geopolitical sphere, and if that fails to appear, it makes sense to diversify our strategic resources and partnerships
The Chinese people are fine. You can see some great projects on GitHub for example. I hear Shenzen is something special.
The CCP is the problem, not the Chinese generally
You don't think there are Chinese that want a different governance model for their country?
I know many Chinese are not happy with their government. However I cannot do anything to help them.
Its the CCP that is the problem. I will say this plainly: Freedom for Hong Kong. Freedom for Taiwan.
I think I said that clearly, but apologies if it came out that way.
Freedom for China would be nice too.
Off the top of my head -- nginx which is by some metrics the most popular web server[0]. Or Kotlin -- the programming language that Google recommends for writing Android apps[1].
"Sometimes including actors that do not conform to certain ethical standards and trust worthy behaviors, leads to spreading infection and danger to the world."
Could you tell how have you come to this way of thinking about a whole nation?
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nginx
[1] https://developer.android.com/kotlin/first
That's populism seeping into the mind. Globle trade and collaboration have raised many people from poverty. It's how China and the US got to where they are today.
Decoupling increases the likelihood of confrontation. The US did similar to this with Japan just before WW2
Coupling has a big impact on deterrence and not going to war in the first place. If you want war, then advocate for the regressive isolationist polices. If you don't want war, then look for places where we can collaborate, like climate change and trade
Perhaps still 30 years away... but I think it will happen, and a war between two nuclear nations won't be pretty (although I doubt it'll actually be a nuclear war)
It'll be a test of the economies of the nations to see who can build most high tech drones quickest and who can do R&D fastest to outclass the enemies inventions. Drone aircraft, ships, missiles, bombs.
I hope that as soon as one side has clearly better and more drones, the other will surrender, ideally before substantial loss of life.
Do you know that AMD makes powerful GPUs that even have a general purpose programming interface called ROCm? Now try to persuade ML practitioners to switch to that ftom NVidia GPUs and CUDA.
That's probably what's going to happen in China.
But it will take time. Buying time is what this ban is trying to achieve. Slowing down the rivals.
If Nvidia was banned tomorrow, I think within 6 months another leader would emerge and be supported by all the big libraries.
https://cset.georgetown.edu/publication/new-chinese-ambition...
That being said, decoupling increases the chances of a hot war. All this stuff is a lot like the 30s that scored humans a second world war.
the idea fits in a digital format.
they're literally building scarcity for the future, right now.
Because today's A100 is going to be used for playing video games tomorrow.
Who says that there's "free market"? it does not exist
Free market ends when important stuff starts being affected unless actors arent rational.