Slashdot Mirror


Alibaba To Set Up New Chip Company Amid Fear of US Tech Dependency (cnn.com)

hackingbear shares a report from CNN: China's biggest tech firm announced Wednesday that the new [semiconductor] business will develop artificial intelligence chips for cloud computing, internet-connected devices and other sectors. Alibaba's chief technology officer, Jeff Zhang, said the e-commerce company's advantages in algorithms and data put it in "a unique position to lead real technology breakthroughs in disruptive areas, such as quantum and chip technology." "The market for chips is controlled by America ... and suddenly if they stop selling, what that means, you understand," Alibaba Executive Chairman Jack Ma told university students in Tokyo in April. "That's why China, Japan and any country -- you need core technologies." Ma's remarks came shortly after the U.S. Commerce Department blocked American companies from selling parts to ZTE, a Chinese tech company that relied on U.S. suppliers, including chipmakers, to manufacture smartphones and telecommunications equipment. Slashdot reader hackingbear adds: "The since-lifted ban woke up China to the (political) risks of dependence on American technologies, just like the U.S. is afraid of dependency on Chinese rare earth products which account for ~80% of world's supplies."

37 of 60 comments (clear)

  1. Ma said several things by rmdingler · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Paraphrase: "Trade should not be used for war, but should instead foster peace."

    This does shed some light on the full ramifications of protectionist trade policy... much like thermonuclear war, there are no winners.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re: Ma said several things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The winner is Putin.

    2. Re:Ma said several things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Says the guy setting up a company to benefit from protectionist trade policy.

    3. Re:Ma said several things by TomBauserman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Agreed and that's why trump's "If I can't win I'm taking my toys and going home" attitude is going to send this whole country down the shitter. He's using trade and economic policies as a way to say HA HA SO THERE! HOW DO YOU LIKE THAT?? HUH HUH! We elected a 3rd grader to be our president.

    4. Re:Ma said several things by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're both ignorant of what's going on here.

      China, for decades, has been engaging in very severely "protectionist" trade policies, which the prior 2 administrations just bent over for and didn't do a damned thing.

      In particular, China engages in "hidden" barriers to trade, rather than tariffs. But they are no less barriers.

      For example, China may say there is no tariff on imported steel. But will order the semi-state-controlled automobile manufacturers to use only Chinese steel in their factories.

      So even though there is not a "tariff", per se, they still aren't buying American steel.

      (That's just an illustration, by the way. I'm not talking about steel in particular. They've done similar things all across their centrally-planned economy.)

      Trump realizes that... but you didn't. He's negotiating, using tariffs, to get China to bring down those other trade barriers. In an attempt to ultimately remove trade barriers and move closer to free trade.

      Honestly. Learn a little about the subject you are discussing. He may be using tariffs, but only as a lever to eventually remove trade barriers.

      It's not possible for Trump to start a "trade war" with China. They've been at trade war with us for decades. You just didn't know it, and past administrations were sitting on their thumbs.

    5. Re:Ma said several things by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Those are called "non-tariff barriers".

      China hasn't been having a trade war with the US, that's nonsense. China is/was an emerging economy and had seen how the US fucked with other similar economies in the region, and did what it thought was right. You can argue that it wasn't the right thing (I would) but now China has reached the stage where it is looking to do trade deals that remove such barriers anyway. CSTPP did it, and it's been talking to the EU about it.

      Trump blundered in at just the wrong moment, just the time where all the efforts of his predecessors were bearing fruit and trade deals were a possibility.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:Ma said several things by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      This does shed some light on the full ramifications of protectionist trade policy... much like thermonuclear war, there are no winners.

      Yeah, like when you have to partner with a Chinese company to do business there. China has been the most protectionist nation literally for all of recorded history, except maybe a brief moment when you could have given that name to Japan.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. Re:huh? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

    dont they already have the fabs and plans for everything anyway????

    No. The big modern fabs are in Taiwan, not PRC.

  3. Rare Earth Monopoly Nonsense by DatbeDank · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The rare earth metal monopoly the Chinese have is only predicated on their propensity to rape their environment with horrific processing of said metals.

    Before China, the US was the biggest producer. It just so happened a Chinese company bought out the US one thanks to Billy "didn't inhale" Clinton administration's inability to understand long term plans.

    The second they decide to screw with sales is the second another producer will come out and usurp them (like the Japanese recently did).

    It just means that companies like Apple will have to take a 950% markup over their usual 1000%.

    1. Re:Rare Earth Monopoly Nonsense by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      China is no longer the lowest labour cost country, those jobs are now moving. All it would take is some country in Africa deciding to priortize their infrastructure and education and they become the new China.

    2. Re:Rare Earth Monopoly Nonsense by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      All it would take is some country in Africa deciding to priortize their infrastructure and education

      Can you let us know when that happens?

    3. Re: Rare Earth Monopoly Nonsense by Synonymous+Homonym · · Score: 1

      It is already happening. Chinese companies are inveyting heavily in infrastructure and education in several low--cost African countries.

    4. Re:Rare Earth Monopoly Nonsense by psycho12345 · · Score: 1

      Already happening, and the ones forcing the issue are the Chinese. Basically bribing African countries to take these seriously.

    5. Re:Rare Earth Monopoly Nonsense by dhaen · · Score: 1

      And of course western countries don't bribe African countries to do their thing? No, we called it aid!

  4. Excess Bitcoin capacity by m00sh · · Score: 1

    China developed this huge industry around bitcoin ASICs and mining.

    The excess capacity can now be used to make AI chips.

    As the cliche goes, "every future product will have a little bit of AI in them"

  5. Extra popcorn, please by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    I enjoy watching this trade war for some twisted reason. It's like a slow-motion showdown at the Not O.K. Corral. I might change my mind when our collective eye gets put out, but for now the show is bigly great.

    China is acting really nervous, while Mr. Orange is giddy jabbing sticks into their beehive (and all beehives for that matter).

  6. Turns out acting batshit insane politically... by AmazingRuss · · Score: 1

    ... has a chilling effect on our trade. It's so unfair!

    1. Re: Turns out acting batshit insane politically... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Don wasn't elected as a man, but as a weapon to fuck up globalism that has eviscerated rural America.

      Payback is a bitch!

  7. How many times has this been threatened/Rumored ? by Crashmarik · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Really nothing like using a threat instead of action. Not even the Russians were silly enough to fall for that, and always made us deploy before they would negotiate a reduction.

    In this case I can't even count the number of times China is going to develop it's own OS, it's going to Develop it's own X86 clone. You know what it's true. They will do it as soon as they figure they can steal what they need to make it happen and it's in their interest to do so. If you think otherwise you haven't been paying attention since Nixon opened up China.

  8. Re:huh? by AlanObject · · Score: 2

    dont they already have the fabs and plans for everything anyway????

    No. The big modern fabs are in Taiwan, not PRC.

    Actually, each of the big fab houses have larger facilities in the mainland as opposed the island. Labor is cheaper there.

  9. Re:How many times has this been threatened/Rumored by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

    So knowledgeable. Except as reported right here on Slashdot numerous times this year, China has already licensed x86 from AMD and are in fact producing their own chips which are almost identical to Epyc.

    Yeah what's your point ? That just reinforces what I said an you were too dense to understand. China is doing things that make sense for China, when they make sense for China displacing dependence on western IP by hook or by crook has always been their game.

    It's only dimwits like you that believe it when they say things like "Oh we wouldn't of done this really we wouldn't but you forced our hand, how bout kissing our ass to make it right"

  10. Re:How many times has this been threatened/Rumored by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

    Yeah what's your point ? That just reinforces what I said an you were too dense to understand.

    Obviously my point was that it's already happened. Yeah, I feel so stupid.

    Yeah seeing as you can't distinguish an ongoing process from one time events.

  11. Re:How many times has this been threatened/Rumored by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

    It's like how Germany and the rest of the NATO "allies" are threatening to increase their defense spending to the required 2% by 2024. It'll never happen, but it sounds good.

    Can anyone tell me why we have a military alliance with them? To have a military alliance, you have to have a military. They're just free riding on us and laughing all the way to the bank. They have nice things because they don't have to pay for defense. Then they sneer at us because we're militarist fascist baby-killers. Why do we not bring this to an end? It is clearly not an advantageous situation.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  12. Re:huh? by currently_awake · · Score: 1

    I suspect that China has seen what happened to Japan (become economic powerhouse, dominate entire industries, watch jobs go to low wage countries) and wants to move their economy to the higher wage jobs.

  13. Re: How many times has this been threatened/Rumore by Synonymous+Homonym · · Score: 1

    Officially NATO was founded as a way to be prepared for when Germany rises again and starts anotger world war.

    Also officially, Soviet Russia applied for membership, and was denied. Shortly after, Germany itself became a member of this alliance against themselves.

    And they pay for their own weapons. So far there has been only one NATO member who has ever been tardy with their payments (and it's not Germany).

    You tell me why you have this alliance.

  14. Re: How many times has this been threatened/Rumore by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

    I don't know, man. That's a really good question. Why the hell are we in the business of defending Europe from...the Germans? Why isn't it Europe's responsibility? Why aren't they paying for themselves? They can't even pay the minimum 2%. They're cheapskates, and ungrateful ones at that. They repay our generosity with hateful rhetoric about how we are baby-killing monsters who need to get out of Europe. Yaknow, I agree with them.

    Do we really have something to lose as Americans if we pull back our external activity? The Cold War is over, and it seems the more fingers we have in pies like NATO, the Middle Eastern countries, and so forth, the more problems we create.

    Let Europe defend Europe. They are not incapable nascent and fragile democracies anymore. Giving Europe its self-determination is the mark of a true ally. Granted, it might mean compromises to their various social welfare states or tax increases because military might is expensive, but it is their decision to make.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  15. Re:huh? by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    They have facilities there to soothe the Chinese government. But the thing is, they are two process generations behind because of trade restrictions.

  16. Re: How many times has this been threatened/Rumore by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    Your whole argument is flawed. One of the most social welfare states in Europe is Sweden and they aren't even in NATO. So you can have both. You Americans don't have it because you simply don't want to.

    Back in the Cold War the countries now in the EU had vastly more military spending and in fact had more social benefits than they have now, where much of it has been privatized.

  17. Re:Looking forward to neural accelerators by pezezin · · Score: 1

    Random trivia: "dian nao" () is the chinese word for computer, it literally translates as "electric brain". A very appropiate name for an AI chip, I think.

  18. Re:How many times has this been threatened/Rumored by ole_timer · · Score: 1

    china already makes their own chips (memory, cpu) and has their own os (kylin). that's not the issue here. AI on a chip is.

    --
    nothing to see here - move along
  19. Re:How many times has this been threatened/Rumored by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

    china already makes their own chips (memory, cpu) and has their own os (kylin). that's not the issue here. AI on a chip is.

    And China has been pursuing it's own AI strategy all along. Given its military and economic importance (scale of 1 to 10 it's about a 90) is there a chance in hell they will willingly be dependent on any outside nation for the tech ?

  20. Re:How many times has this been threatened/Rumored by ole_timer · · Score: 1

    and cloud (cloud city) and supercomputer, gps, hyper-speed weapons, airplanes, etc., etc....we have more money and know-how for now...but it won't be for long

    --
    nothing to see here - move along
  21. Re: How many times has this been threatened/Rumore by Synonymous+Homonym · · Score: 1

    Why the hell are we in the business of defending Europe from...the Germans? Why isn't it Europe's responsibility?

    And how come Germany is part of the defense against itself? How does that make sense?

    Why aren't they paying for themselves?

    They are. Every NATO member has to pay for the upkeep of the NATO.

    They can't even pay the minimum 2%.

    Nobody can without going into ever increasing national debt. And the Maastrict criteria for the Euro's stability don't allow that.
    I know that 2% doesn't seem like much, but it's of the GDP, not of tax revenue. So these 2% can be a multiple of a government's entire budget.
    Especially when only a small percentage of the budget goes to the military, as is the case is most countries.

    They're cheapskates

    As I said: There is only one NATO member who has ever been late with their payments. And it is not a European one.

    They repay our generosity with hateful rhetoric about how we are baby-killing monsters who need to get out of Europe. Yaknow, I agree with them.

    What generosity? Nobody invited you.
    There wouldn't even have been a Cold War if not for the military's fear mongering so that they could keep riding the gravy train of a war-time economy.
    As General Eisenhower put it: Every war ship is bread stolen from a number of families.

    That Germany was not a threat after it had been occupied was blatantly obvous when it was made a member of the alliance that was ostensibly against itself.
    So what is it really about?

    Do we really have something to lose as Americans if we pull back our external activity? The Cold War is over, and it seems the more fingers we have in pies like NATO, the Middle Eastern countries, and so forth, the more problems we create.

    I see it the same way.

    The USA are spending more money on the military than the next five biggest spenders combined. That is insane.
    That is a lot of starving American families.

    Giving Europe its self-determination is the mark of a true ally.

    You say that as if you were in a position to give that.
    As if you owned Europe.
    You don't.

    Europe is self-determined, and always has been.
    The oldest democracies in the world are all European countries. Even the word itself is from a European language.

    You are not in a position to grant them anything, and, sadly, you have nothing of value left to offer.

    Granted, it might mean compromises to their various social welfare states or tax increases

    Quite the opposite.
    NATO is expensive to maintain. More expensive than a purely domestic military. Every member country could save a fortune if they dropped out.

    But the military is adamant about the importance of maintaining a military to protect us from the military.
    It is a parasite, a leech on the world's economy that latches onto weak countries and bleeds them dry.

    Japan and South Korea aren't even bordering the North Atlantic.
    Why don't you grant them independence?

  22. Re: How many times has this been threatened/Rumore by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

    So you don't have a problem with us disbanding NATO then. As it is obviously not needed.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  23. Re: How many times has this been threatened/Rumore by Synonymous+Homonym · · Score: 1

    Correct. I fully support the disbanding of NATO.

  24. Re: How many times has this been threatened/Rumore by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

    LOL. Putin's panzers would be in Paris in no time. Europeans won't fight for their countries and their militaries are an underfunded joke. Biting the hand that feeds you. Nice.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  25. Re: How many times has this been threatened/Rumore by Synonymous+Homonym · · Score: 1

    Putin's panzers would be in Paris in no time.

    Unlikely. Not only has Putin never started a war, France is also an important business partner for Russia. And there are a few countries between Russia and France.

    Europeans won't fight for their countries and their militaries are an underfunded joke.

    No, they are busy fighting for your country, and paying for it with their own taxes.