News on China's scientific and technological development.

shanlung

Junior Member
Registered Member
China is still not a strong innovator, with the bulk of its R&D spending going on short-term product development instead of basic research, according to a study released in November by the State Council’s policy think tank.

The study warned that the present level of basic research would not be able to support Beijing’s ambition of technological upgrade in the manufacturing sector.

Despite having an edge in terms of quantity, studies by Chinese researchers were not cited as often as the international average. The commercial value of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
was also low, with the revenue from Chinese intellectual property trade accounting for less than 5 per cent of the world’s total, the study said.

That point was underlined last week in the OECD’s Main Science and Technology Indicators report, which covered statistics up to 2018. The report said the US committed 2.8 per cent of its GDP to R&D expenditure, while Germany earmarked 3.1 per cent and Japan 3.3 per cent. Mainland China spent 2.1 per cent in the area for the same period, compared with Taiwan’s 3.5 per cent.

The contrast is even clearer when basic research spending is expressed as a percentage of GDP. The US commitment stood at 0.47 per cent in 2018, while China’s share was 0.12 per cent only.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The point here is not to denigrate China's efforts but to point out China still has a long way to go.

How many planes and battleships with 16 inch guns and Ma Dueces and artillery and unlimited ammo USA got in Korean war?
How many single shot bolt action rifles China got in Korean War?
Compare the budget USA used in Korean War and budget of barely stone age China at that time?

Who was driven down from Yalu river to south of the parallel in about 3 weeks?

1598763743149.png

Budgetting all that matters?
Budgetting the one all and end all?

Any more comparisons you like to put up?
 
Last edited:

machupicu

Junior Member
Registered Member
This Navarro guy is the clown who encouraged Trump to take malaria drug hydroxychloroquine for covid-19 eventhough there is no inidication that it is effective. Imagine an economic "advisor" giving medical recommendation.
Navarro is racist and he has contempt for Chinese ppl. In his book he invented an imaginary Harvard-educated economist named Ron Vara (anagram of his name) who said something that a person has to be nuts to want to eat Chinese food lol. Navarro was talking to himself as inside the book he would then asked an opinion from this Vara guy about economics.. When the book publisher found out a few years ago, it later put out a statement that that book is now classified as fiction.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Huawei focuses on cloud computing to secure its survival

Chinese company’s fast-growing unit still has access to US chips despite sanctions


Huawei is focusing on its budding cloud business, which still has access to US chips despite the sanctions against the company, to secure its survival.

The Chinese group’s cloud computing business, which sells computing power and storage to companies, including giving them access to AI, is far behind Alibaba and Tencent, the market leaders in China. But it is growing rapidly and in January Huawei put the unit on an equal footing with its smartphones and telecoms equipment businesses.

A person at a Chinese supplier to Huawei said the cloud business was key to Huawei stabilising in its domestic market because Beijing would increasingly support the company through public cloud contracts.

Several people involved in Huawei’s cloud business said the unit was stepping up its offerings. “We will continue to provide customers with a package of [cloud] services and products,” said a person at Huawei familiar with the strategy. “The quality of the chips in it may not be as good as before, but for the other products that are not impacted, we will offer something with a little better quality, and the customers can accept it.”

The change in focus was needed because the outlook for Huawei’s smartphone and other consumer products unit was “hopeless” in the face of a US ban that will choke off its access to mobile chips, said a person familiar with the business. The consumer unit was responsible for half of Huawei’s $122bn revenue last year.

Meanwhile industry executives and analysts said that suppliers of semiconductors needed in cloud computing were still allowed to ship to Huawei, and other components were available on the open market.

“Intel has been the supplier of the main [central processing unit] for Huawei servers as it secured a licence last year that allows it to continue to sell to Huawei,” said a semiconductor industry executive who declined to be named because he is not authorised to speak to the media.

After the US Department of Commerce added Huawei to a list of companies barred from doing business with US companies last year, hundreds of enterprises applied for temporary licences exempting them. Despite rules that the US government imposed in May and on August 17 prohibiting the sale of any chip designed or manufactured using US technology or equipment in any transaction involving Huawei, those licences remain in force.

“The rule has no effect on licences issued prior to Aug 17,” a Department of Commerce official told the Financial Times. “The scope of the rule did not change for those previously issued licences.”

Last year, most companies applying for licences were focused on chip design and software because the industry did not expect Washington to crack down on the entire supply chain, including manufacturing.

Industry experts said that for those Huawei suppliers, the exemption had become meaningless because the latest rule bars the companies that manufacture the chips from shipping to Huawei. But some chipmakers with fabrication plants of their own got licensed. The industry executive and two analysts said Intel was among them.

The Department of Commerce does not publicise which companies receive licences. Intel confirmed it has licences to ship to Huawei.

If Intel CPUs remain available, Huawei could use them to replace the Kunpeng and Ascend, its cloud CPUs developed in-house based on designs from British chip company ARM which can no longer be manufactured because of the recent bans.

Other electronic parts including integrated circuits for power management, memory chips and passive components could be obtained through traders, analysts said. “Channels such as WPG have those on offer,” said YC Yao, a chip analyst at Trendforce, the industry research firm, referring to Asia’s largest distributor of semiconductor components. “I do not think that such transactions could be monitored to the extent that you could prevent sales to a particular end-customer such as Huawei.”

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
I understand where you're coming from, and wouldn't disagree with you in spirit. But ByteDance is backed by a group of privater investors for the most part, a lot of them international, particularly American ones. From some of the leaks, it appears Zhang Yiming is under tremendous pressure to sell at least TikTok US, if not the entire TikTok to the US companies/investors.

I guess it's hard for ByteDance to walk away from TikToc US and just launch a lawsuit against the Trump administration, when there are at least some significant offers on the table.
Not to argue against what you are saying, but want to further elaborate my thought.

The bold texts part is what makes me disappointed with ByteDance. I know and have said that for capitalist money is important, so it is hard for them to stand against the robbery. That is also why I said someone need to grow a spine. There is a Chinese saying " 割肉饲虎" meaning feed one's flesh to the tiger, it will never end, useless. Why the Chinese stereo-type in western movie is weak? Why Chinese tourists look like easy prey? It is because of people like ByteDance who choose to pay ransom instead of fight to death. If my disappointment and anger on ByteDance alike do not wake them up, then the state should step in, basically put a gun at their back of head and say "you will fight and tell Trump what is a Chinese". If Zhang Yiming can't bare the pressure from other investors, now it is time for him to feel the pressure from China as a whole. He should remember that he is a Chinese citizen and is responsible not only to the money but also to the Chinese people.

For the American or international investors, I don't blame them because they won't bare the consequences that I said above, they only want money back, that's fine by me. But as an American they should remember their legal right, isn't that what they usually say?
 

Weaasel

Senior Member
Registered Member
I think with the issues with Huawei, there will be pressure to speed up the development of the EUV machine, so 2022 is very likely. They can press the machine into service with the DPP Light source and gradually improve the life span of the light source.

If they go ahead with the DPP EUV Light Source, the Manufacturing speed will be less than the ASML Machine but the resolution should be similar.

But if they can produce the machines at a significantly lower cost then they can have two or more machines still producing effectively...
 

Pkp88

Junior Member
Registered Member
China's development on IC Fab Equipment is becoming more/more like the Aircraft engine story - endless research development snipits from weibo/wechat with a supposed targeted launch date next year but nothing ever emerges in terms of mass production. Is there even a simple table that tracks commercially successful product development at every step of the IC fabrication process? The country is facing a very bleak future where a simple entity list extension could zero all of its tech champions.
 

latenlazy

Brigadier
Also aircraft engines are probably the worst combination of technologies for China to catch up on...materials were both a field China was deficient in *and* had long development cycles, applied in a type of technology that *also* required long testing cycles and very unforgiving margins for tolerance and reliability. In comparison, China is actually decently strong on the basic science and research needed to make IC equipment, and the development cycle for this field itself is much faster. It’s just that the market moves so fast and is so expensive to capture that all those scientific and technical capabilities in the fundamentals of the field are difficult to translate into competitive products and marketshare, because the market is saturated with competitors and thus unforgiving to unpolished products. This explains the pattern of why China is always about 2-4 years behind state of the art, but also never falls behind. IC is a field that’s easy for China to make progress in but difficult for China to grab the lead, in part because the inability to capture marketshare to get the opportunity and capital to build products at scale makes it hard to get into a position that lets them go at a more intensive pace than just keeping up with the trend.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
China's development on IC Fab Equipment is becoming more/more like the Aircraft engine story - endless research development snipits from weibo/wechat with a supposed targeted launch date next year but nothing ever emerges in terms of mass production. Is there even a simple table that tracks commercially successful product development at every step of the IC fabrication process? The country is facing a very bleak future where a simple entity list extension could zero all of its tech champions.

Which rock have live under all this time. Let see there are at least 180X J11B using WS 10 that mean 360 WS 10 engine Then there are 170 X J16 =340 WS10 engine Total 700 engine flying since roughly 2000
20 years of accumulating experience with 1 single known accident

I say that is complete success It take 20 years for engine to mature I don't think WS 15 reach that time limit yet development is sometime mid 1990's
 
Top