US Mulls Cutting Huawei Off From Global Chip Suppliers (reuters.com) 137
The Trump administration is considering changing U.S. regulations to allow it to block shipments of chips to Huawei from companies such as Taiwan's TSMC, the world's largest contract chipmaker. Reuters reports: New restrictions on commerce with China's Huawei are among several options to be considered at high-level U.S. meetings this week and next. The chip proposal has been drafted but its approval is far from certain, one of the sources said. The measure would be a blow to the world's no. 2 smartphone maker as well as to TSMC, a major producer of chips for Huawei's HiSilicon unit and mobile phone rivals Apple and Qualcomm.
"What they're trying to do is make sure that no chips go to Huawei that they can possibly control," the second source said. To target global chip sales to Huawei, U.S. authorities would alter the Foreign Direct Product Rule, which subjects some foreign-made goods based on U.S. technology or software to U.S. regulations. Under the draft proposal, the U.S. government would force foreign companies that use U.S. chipmaking equipment to seek a U.S. license before supplying Huawei -- a major expansion of export control authority that could anger U.S. allies worldwide.
"What they're trying to do is make sure that no chips go to Huawei that they can possibly control," the second source said. To target global chip sales to Huawei, U.S. authorities would alter the Foreign Direct Product Rule, which subjects some foreign-made goods based on U.S. technology or software to U.S. regulations. Under the draft proposal, the U.S. government would force foreign companies that use U.S. chipmaking equipment to seek a U.S. license before supplying Huawei -- a major expansion of export control authority that could anger U.S. allies worldwide.
hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:hmmm (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:hmmm (Score:4, Informative)
Huawei doesn't need to create its own TSMC competitor. It can just do deals with the Chinese-owned and Chinese-based SMIC who have fabs all over China (and if SMIC did replace TSMC as a supplier of chips to Huawei, the US wouldn't be able to do a thing about it short of destroying the fabs via either a Stuxnet style cyber attack or a direct military assault)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think the US can missile attack billion-dollar facilities in China without a full-scale war between China and the US.
Try telling a toddler he can't break his bottle without the milk spilling all over the place. He'll look you right in the eyes as he breaks his bottle then blame you or his sister for the milk being spilt.
Re: hmmm (Score:2)
Re:hmmm (Score:4)
Chinese-based SMIC who have fabs all over China
No PRC fab has even close to the advanced capability of TSMC.
US wouldn't be able to do a thing about it short of destroying the fabs
The US controls the world's financial system. America can cripple any company's ability to conduct international transactions.
By weaponizing the financial system, America is pushing the rest of the world to build an alternative system, but that will take time.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No PRC fab has even close to the advanced capability of TSMC
.
The "T" in TMSC stands for Taiwan. As in, TMSC is a Taiwanwse corporation. This kind of action by the US very much sets up Taiwan to be invaded and taken over by China. There are probably even significane forces within TMSC who would go over to reunification.
Re: (Score:3)
No PRC fab has even close to the advanced capability of TSMC
.
The "T" in TMSC stands for Taiwan. As in, TMSC is a Taiwanwse corporation. This kind of action by the US very much sets up Taiwan to be invaded and taken over by China. There are probably even significane forces within TMSC who would go over to reunification.
Nobody credited the PRC with the ability to dominate the 5G market and yet, here we are. So lets not underestimate the PRC's ability to set up their own top of the line chip fabs.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody credited the PRC with the ability to dominate the 5G market and yet, here we are.
Chinese companies like HiSilicon have designed 5G chips, but they are fabbed by TSMC in Taiwan.
So lets not underestimate the PRC's ability to set up their own top of the line chip fabs.
There are only three companies in the world that can fab under 10nm: Intel, Samsung, and TSMC.
If the Chinese want to do the same, they can't just go out and buy a photolithography stepper from ASML. They will need to build everything from scratch.
Re: (Score:2)
There are only three companies in the world that can fab under 10nm: Intel, Samsung, and TSMC.
If the Chinese want to do the same, they can't just go out and buy a photolithography stepper from ASML. They will need to build everything from scratch.
What people were saying 10 years ago before sitting down and resting on their laurels:
There are only <N> companies in the world that can make state of the art telecommunications equipment: <insert company list of length N>. ... >If the Chinese want to do the same, they can't just go out and buy a telecommunications equipment manufacturing facility off the shelf. They will need to build everything from scratch.
What the new (orange) voice of the Washington establishment is now saying aft
Re: (Score:2)
"If the Chinese want to do the same, they can't just go out and buy a photolithography stepper from ASML. They will need to build everything from scratch."
Exactly, and that includes figuring out what they are building from scratch as well. Those companies fall very short of revealing enough about their processes for a clean room replication.
Re: (Score:2)
That distinction usually only matters when someone is foolish enough to have made in china stickers on their gear. I doubt that is the case here.
Re: (Score:2)
Invading Taiwan would mean war with the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Develop the next generations of technology here, and this time protect it. While we are at it, try to fight against the cult of anti-intellectualism prevalent and growing.
Protecting the next gen tech adequately would likely require the development to be done under government oversight, and even then the generals and the spooks might not be able to stop it from being stolen.
As for anti-intellectualism, that's difficult to fight when so much of the country's 'leadership' seems happy not to be smarter than yer average turnip. Especially when unethical high-tech bastards like Zuck, who could be intellectual beacons, are too busy getting over on the whole world by taking advantag
Re: (Score:2)
The US controls the world's financial system. America can cripple any company's ability to conduct international transactions.
By weaponizing the financial system, America is pushing the rest of the world to build an alternative system, but that will take time.
Yet another side effect of the Trump admin's trade war on everybody else. That, and the way the US is motivating the Chinese to set up their own home grown state of the art chip fabs.
Re: hmmm (Score:2)
Re: hmmm (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"America can cripple any company's ability to conduct international transactions." That they know about, you mean. There are a million ways to cover shipments to China. The U.S. has a blanket ban on stuff for N. Korea and that looks like a sieve.
This alleged administration is incapable of calculating secondary and ternary effects. And then there's the Trump Axiom: he destroys everything he touches.
Re: (Score:3)
The US doesn't control the world's financial system. And they certainly cannot just cripple a companies ability to conduct international transactions, that's where trade laws come in.. It would seriously hamper the US in it's trade ability as most countries wouldn't accept such behaviour of the US.. Also China owns a lot of debt and comanpies of the US, they have been working on such a scheme for decades, it's still not used as leverage, but if China wants, it could pull the rug right out of the US and dump
Re:hmmm (Score:4)
It's not like TSMC is dependent on US technology or something. TSMC is a word leader in chip fabrication and that's largely due to their own engineering and R&D talent. One of the reasons they are so successful is that their process is better than everyone else's so if you are a high end or low cost fabless chip designer you either use TSMC or the second best option.
Re:hmmm (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not like TSMC is dependent on US technology or something. TSMC is a word leader in chip fabrication and that's largely due to their own engineering and R&D talent.
Meh. They, like everyone else utilizing EUV lithography are 100% dependant on the only company that makes EUV machines (ASML, a Dutch company). They didn't invent it, neither did the US (Intel), or the Koreans (SAMSUNG). And TSMC may be the largest by volume, but that's more a consequence of agressive expansion and pricing rather than tech. SAMSUNG is arguably more advanced than TSMC, and Intel is only lagging due to late adoption of EUV. Expect to see them leapfrog back to the top of process tech once they implement EUV.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I would like to see them try to create a competitor to TSMC. That would cost more than their entire company is worth, and also requires brainpower that they clearly lack, because they have to steal everything else.
No, they might look for an alternative to TSMC that the US might not be able to influence, or bank that their business to TSMC is worth enough to be compelling, but I doubt it. TSMC supplies so many chips to so many industries and regions it's not obvious they'd bother with a low margin operator l
Re: (Score:2)
You clearly don't know a thing about China or its people.
Last time I was there (about 15 years back), I travelled through all the 'off the track' areas that tourists don't normally see. On one of the journies, I asked the taxi driver what was being built (it looked as though they were building a whole new city, because of the sheer size and scope).
The answer? It was a technology universsity. One of many that were being built.
These are being built with the latest and greatest tech, and no expense being sp
Re: (Score:2)
It was a technology universsity. One of many that were being built.
These are being built with the latest and greatest tech, and no expense being spared (a PhD in the US is usually relatively poorly paid; in China, you can live VERY well with one).
That's just false. US assistant professors make $50k-130k yearly. The Chinese ones make $15k-60k. Even $60k is only good pay if you live out in the countryside where the cost of living is low. In places where you might actually get the higher end salary, such as in Shanghai or Beijing, the housing price is the same as that of San Francisco (on the order of $1 million for 1500 sqft).
Re: (Score:2)
You do know China prints its own money...
I can buy paper at the grocery store, but that won't cause buildings to be built, buy the very cutting edge equipment, or the largely foreign super nerds to engineer the process. This takes an enormous amount of money, enormous by the standards even of major players like Amazon, Apple or Google. None of these places have their own fabs, they use others and they drive far higher margin than Huawei.
You do know they are leading in 5G
Leading doesn't mean what you thi
Outlaw Chinese fabs, yeah, that's it! (Score:2)
I think you [saloomy] were headed towards insight, but the AC clown led you into a rat hole. However the general solution would still be a mechanism for deliberately selecting better first posts.
Of course the Chinese response is going to be to change their priorities. America is NOT a reliable source of components, so they will stop relying on America. Even worse, if the American market is not a reliable source of customers, they will focus on selling in other directions.
I think Huawei is big enough to buil
Re: (Score:2)
"Plus, I don't know how they would disallow TSMC from using equipment and software it already acquired. Aren't those assets now the property of TSMC on its own?"
A vendor can always revoke your software licensing after the fact and in the case of chip fabrication equipment it is essentially worthless without the software. Unlike other industries china would be facing a very steep battle to build a replacement for chip vendors in any reasonable amount of time.
"Lastly, I don't know how various Chip IP companie
Chip-making Machinery (Score:2)
I suspect the exact same thing will happen for chip manufacturing equipment which I am sure is going to benefit China considerably since
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Not seeing what relevance that had to the parent.
The AC had it about right; supply chains need to be protected. If the supply chain is shown to be at a political whim, then corporations will search for a more reliable chain (or at least guarantee multiple vendors adhering to the same spec from different political areas).
Re:Chip-making Machinery (Score:5, Informative)
That US equipment will not be that hard to replace. Also, the question is never where the equipment comes from and always who else makes it and how hard it is to replace it. Getting rid of US dependencies may take a while, but the US cannot make 7nm chips at scale regardless of what equipment manufacturers it has these days. TMSC can. And that means something to anybody smart.
Trump does not understand how the economy or how technology works. I suspect he does really understand nothing except how to create a show of himself being the great Zampano.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ASML's EUV lithography machines contain licensed US technology; part of the license conditions is that the US can block export to non-Western countries. The already US did that with export of EUV machines to China, about a month ago (not sure whether the block has been lifted in the meantime). Calling "able to pressure" is an understatement.
Re: (Score:2)
And again, that is the wrong thing to look at. The question is whether there are alternatives and how difficult it is to develop a replacement independently.
Face it, Trump is completely wrong about how important the US here is and he is hard at work making the US completely irrelevant in this sector. Nobody wants to be dependent on an unreliable actor. If you take a gamble like he is doing, you need at least a basic understanding of the actual facts.
Re: (Score:2)
BS. This is about Trump getting his knickers in a knot over China.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Trump, but he is able to put considerably more pressure on TSMC than you're asserting and it's highly unlikely he won't
Re: (Score:2)
Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Trump, but he is able to put considerably more pressure on TSMC than you're asserting and it's highly unlikely he won't get four more years in office come November.
Even if he doesn't get 4 more years, Sanders is also anti-globalization, assuming the DNC doesn't torpedo his campaign again.
Shh don't tell him (Score:2)
a major expansion of export control authority that could anger U.S. allies worldwide.
Don't tell him that. Now Trump is sure to do it.
Plus it will just force America's competitors to compete harder anyway and further marginalize the US.
Re:Shh don't tell him (Score:5, Interesting)
Other non-US OEMs that rely on TSMC would see this as a heightening in the risk profile of relying on supply chains spanning the Iron Curtain v2.0. The result is likely to be further investment in other fabs (such as those owned by Samsung), as well as other manufacturing capacity outside of US reach. This has ramifications for just about any US company that enjoys a leadership role in its respective industry. No longer will US suppliers be looked at as a premium supply source, rather, they will now be looked at as a liability.
This isn't 1997. The Asian Tigers are big enough to bite back by developing their own manufacturing for anything the US decides to cut off. Plus, for the majority of the cheap shit US consumers buy from Asia, US resources and supply chains aren't even required, so a retaliatory trade war does not really favour the US, if the gloves really do come off.
Gone are the days when the US was the only place you could buy advanced products manufactured to a high standard, and the US could leverage that to dictate which economies had access to the advanced tools needed to develop, and which economies were starved of resources.
If Trump thinks he can do to Asia in 2020 what the US did to Latin America in the 1980s, he's in for a rude shock. Well, his country is, anyway.
Re: Shh don't tell him (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There are already 3 departments controlling US exports: the department of Commerce, the State department, and the Treasury department. Adding another agency is simply adding cost and another layer of bureaucracy to "organize their efforts", much as the Department of Homeland Security has "coordinated" other security agencies. That department has experienced a dangerous centralization of over-reaching power, and it has produced very little indeed.
Re: (Score:1)
"department has experienced a dangerous centralization of over-reaching power, and it has produced very little indeed"
Anyone who, at the time, did not see that the creation of the DHS was actually intended to do just that, was naive. Anyone who, by now, still does not see that, is either totally fucking stupid, or in on the gig.
Re: (Score:3)
The party of small government strikes again.
Re: (Score:2)
The party of small government strikes again.
The Libertarians had nothing to do with this.
Further proof (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Further proof (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. Even if the cave-man does not follow through with this threat, everybody will start looking at alternate sources for their US equipment now and give preference to the non-US alternatives if they are viable. And there really is nothing the US has a monopoly on. Hence this move is just completely staggeringly stupid and can only be done by somebody that does not understand economics at all.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The whole trade war has really boosted investment in China. Instead of relying on the US they are building their own home grown stuff to replace it.
It would have happened eventually anyway but Trump has accelerated the process. It's come at the worst possible time too, e.g. Android was poised to be the de-facto OS for the entire world but now Huawei and Samsung have alternatives that are making headway in developing markets like India and South America.
Given more time there could have been more partnerships
Re: (Score:2)
So what you're saying is Trump has done the world a favor by spurring more competition and blocking monopolies?
Re: (Score:2)
So what you're saying is Trump has done the world a favor by spurring more competition and blocking monopolies?
As long as you don't mind China dominating everything instead of the US.
Six of one half a dozen of the other.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
In the same way that if you are hungry and I punch you in the gut you are not hungry any more and should thank me, yeah.
Re: (Score:2)
He's causing an irritation, not much more. China's already good to go on fab fronts, just people buy US made for the established supply chain. ,when he doesn't need to do that.
Yes, it's spurring competition on the world stage (good for the rest of the world), but absolutely painting the US (wrongly, in my opinion) as a huge risk,
It's a gamble, as most things are. He's gambling that China won't back Huawei and enter a disruption to their markets (and the world markets). Classic brinksmanship.
The problem w
Re: (Score:3)
The whole trade war has really boosted investment in China. Instead of relying on the US they are building their own home grown stuff to replace it.
It would have happened eventually anyway but Trump has accelerated the process. It's come at the worst possible time too, e.g. Android was poised to be the de-facto OS for the entire world but now Huawei and Samsung have alternatives that are making headway in developing markets like India and South America.
Pretty much. I would add though that it hasn't just been tech that has been affected. This diversification has occurred in every sector from tech to food to farm equipment. Having participated in the world wide trade game, China has now seen that they are still vulnerable enough to outside economic pressure. They are no doubt taking steps to fix that.
Even if tariffs are reversed and new trade deals signed, the Chinese would be fools to go back to the same amount of U.S. reliance as before.
Trump may have
Re: (Score:2)
China has been preparing for decades for the possibility that the US would block their trade. The country is extremely dependent on both import of raw materials and export of finished products. All their railway, road and sea expansion is aimed at making it more and more difficult to blockade them.
I doubt China planned this, but US strongarm trade tactics are playing quite well for them. The more the US tries to control everyone else's trade the more China looks like not the bad guy.
I don't think it's a matter of reliance (Score:2)
Sure, we might start WWIII, but hey, things turned out fine after WWII, right? And the sort of folks who vote for war tend to be older and shielded from the effects of it. The kids who get drafted either don't vote or couldn't
Re: (Score:2)
you forget how large our military is and how willing we are to use it.
I can imagine TSMC would be one of the first factories flattened by China if that was the case. Just out of spite.
Don't think for a second Taiwan doesn't also know this. They might not be as willing as China and the US if they are the ones taking the brunt of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump is an idiot (Score:1)
Oh for fuck's sake America! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's the US national security establishment that is pulling out all the stops. They have simply become accustomed to spying on everyone's communications. It's normal for them. They feel safe, they are able to disrupt threats to their power before they get started.
With Huawei, suddenly they won't be able to effortlessly spy any more. They will be blind to people organizing against them, and this outcome must be prevented at all costs. Remember how they snarled about Snowden, who told us the truth abou
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile in Canada they run commercials about how great and life changing they are.
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus, you want the alleged president to tell the Navy to give him a commission when his last bright naval idea was to use steam powered catapults on their new air craft carriers?
Re: (Score:2)
Uuum, how would that work? (Score:4)
TSMC and Huawei are outside the US, and couldn't care less what the big baby is demanding this time.
Big baby has to learn it isn't the godking of the world, and mommy and daddy are gonna starve the delusions of grandeur outta him if they have to.
An actual world leader would be such a wise and trusted role model, that he would make China *want* to be our ally.
All this does, is harm everyone, including America.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On the contrary.
Trump wants to stop the sales of the CFM LEAP engine to power the new Chinese airliner (Comac C919), which will result in this airliner using older, less efficient engines. This will have a negative impact on climate change.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except it won't slow economic growth, just reshuffle it a bit. Chinese airlines will have to replace their aging single aisle fleets with new ones. If they can't buy American engines for their upcoming airliner they will use either a domestic engine or buy from Russia.
It won't slow growth of CFM International either because the production lines for the LEAP 1C will simply be modified to manufacture LEAP 1A for the Airbus A320Neo which sells so well that an order today will be fulfilled in 7 years.
So if the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree in the abstract, but have the trade wars actually slowed economic growth? China's manufacturing numbers are down yet the U.S. continues to import at the same pace as before. So shoes / electronics / subpar household crap is still being made somewhere. An article I saw in NPR late last year suggested that production has merely shifted from China to non-tariffed countries such as Vietnam and Singapore.
Re: (Score:2)
It's hard to say. The current economic environment is pretty unprecedented. Economic growth in much of the world is decent, but would it be better without a trade war? What would it look like with a more severe trade war?
Historically, trade wars slow down economic growth. If they go too far, they can slow it down a lot.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps then we're about to see a new chapter added to macro-economic textbooks: "What happens when capital is mobile and multiple countries can make widgets."
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps then we're about to see a new chapter added to macro-economic textbooks: "What happens when capital is mobile and multiple countries can make widgets."
That's already in the old chapters.
It's already the case now. The Country with the better infrastructure wins, China.
If you want to force widget making out of China, it will go to the next country on the list with the infrastructure capable of exporting the widgets. No small feat, and not just from the shear size of China. China's infrastructure is just better than most of the other places you may want to make widgets.
Just look at the places you want to move to. If you just moved your factory tomorrow, h
Re: (Score:2)
In part of the alleged administration's effort to screw with the environment, they are going to remove some the mercury emissions requirements on coal power plants because everybody wants more mercury in their diet.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with your conclusion, but I wanted to address this particular line, since I think you're missing an obvious answer for how they think they can control things.
TSMC and Huawei are outside the US, and couldn't care less what the big baby is demanding this time.
The US federal government has no authority to set a nationwide drinking age, yet 21 is the drinking age nationwide. The feds have no authority to mandate the nationwide use of seatbelts, yet using seatbelts is mandatory in every state. Why? How? Because the federal government provides carrots to states or businesses that are contingent on them
Re: (Score:2)
Nations like the UK, Canada, New Zealand, Australia got a lot out of that sharing with the NSA for free.
All nations like the UK, Canada, New Zealand did was offer the USA land around the world for shared sites.
All those nations had to do was ask 'how high' when America told them to jump.
Re: (Score:2)
Your US-centric view of history seems to overlook at least two important points: the UK contributed a lot of the tech side (the Americans took the design of the bombe back from Bletchley to Washington and started manufacturing them en masse; and unlike the Brits, they didn't destroy them at the end of the war); and the other nations traded HUMINT for SIGINT, because the US is a lot stronger on the latter than the former.
They will probably just stop selling to the US (Score:3)
I mean, it is a major part of their sales, but the rest of the world is more important. Then the US would find out that they cannot replace what Huawei and TMCS makes.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Cisco's hardware is filled with US government spyware and backdoors.
Do you have any evidence for that?
Didn't think so.
I doubt the Chinese government would have allowed Huawei to clone that.
If it made them money they probably would.
What about the back doors? (Score:1)
I thought the idea was Huawei were sneakily inserting back doors into their chips. Now at the moment that would need TSMC's collaboration. But if America forces Huawei to build their own fab (and you can be certain they will), there'll be no US oversight, and the NSA won't be able to get their back doors inserted....
Re: (Score:2)
And we know Huawei are sneakily inserting back doors, because it is our law enforcement agencies that demand it.
Washington is addicted to sanctions (Score:2)
So let's say the US succeeds in cutting off China's largest tech companies from their western partners and markets, just like the US is now using sanctions to restrict Russian arms exports or to cut off Russian natural gas supply to Europe. What's going to happen next? I think any idiot can predict that this will simply push Russia and China (who historically were not big friends, except the brief time of Mao-Stalin relationship) to form a single finance, trading, and technology sharing block that will rema
Re:Washington is addicted to sanctions (Score:4, Interesting)
This is why a large part of the US foreign politics was to keep Russia from becoming too friendly with China ever again. That would be the combination of the near limitless resources of Russia coupled with the limitless supply of humans from China. No matter what they'd do with that combination, from military to economy, you wouldn't stop it.
This is what it must have looked like when Napoleon III "helped" Bismarck to reunite Germany...
Economic Imperialism? (Score:2)
One has to wonder whether it is just the security threat that Huawei supposedly poses or whether there is an element of economic imperialism to the US' efforts as well.
Posting from the UK, where the US has threatened not to make a trade deall if we buy from Huawei.
Re:Economic Imperialism? (Score:4, Informative)
The funny thing is that there is no US source for 5G equipment. Somebody has no clue what he is doing...
Re: (Score:2)
"where the US has threatened not to make a trade deall if we buy from Huawei." - that pleases me.
Re:Economic Imperialism? (Score:4, Interesting)
There are 3 main reasons the US hates Huawei:
1.The US has the ability to backdoor gear from western manufacturers like Cisco (we know this from the likes of the Snowden leaks). They probably don't have the same ability to backdoor gear from Huawei and are worried that if countries like the UK install Huawei gear, it will be a lot harder to spy on everyone
2.As a Chinese company Huawei has to do whatever the Chinese government wants. Regardless of what they SAY about backdoors (or the lack thereof) if the Chinese government wants backdoors in Huawei gear, the Chinese government will get backdoors in Huawei gear (especially when that request says "do what we want or else we put the top Huawei executives and their families in front of a firing squad").
and 3.Thanks to industrial espionage, IP theft, government assistance and other things, Huawei is currently the world leader in 5G technology and without all the sanctions and pressure it would be VERY difficult for any of the western telecom manufacturers to be able to beat Huawei in this space.
So the US is trying to stop Huawei because A.It wants to be able to continue spying on everyone, B.It doesn't what the Chinese to be able to spy on people and C.It wants to prevent China gaining an unbeatable lead in the production of 5G technologies and equipment.
Do as I say, not as I do. (Score:5, Insightful)
Is this what republicans mean with "the free market" will solve all the problems and the government should not be involved in picking winners?
American attitude on IP is pretty amusing consider the US's wholesale disregard for IP after WW2.. which is what allowed the US to become, at least for a while, the global production powerhouse.
Re: (Score:2)
This reminds me of quote from that horrible 80's movie Tango & Cash:
"I don't wanna get killed by this limey, immigrant JERKOFF. I wanna get killed by an AMERICAN jerkoff."
Indeed, if there's spying to be done we're the ones to do it dammit!
Re: (Score:2)
To put it another way, in this instance the Chinese government is like a known convicted c
That'll end well (Score:3, Interesting)
Where is this US? (Score:2)
I don't know but already hate it.
What a piece of click bait (Score:2)
Not good . . . (Score:2)
U.S. allies worldwide (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing legitimate about any business based in China to begin with.