Trade War with China

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hendrik_2000

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Josh Luo said:
I think Maxton does make a point about China's great vulnerabilities. Maybe China is just not in a position to challenge the U.S.-led world order. Becoming isolated like the former USSR is simply unthinkable. Nearly all of the modern-day technologies (chips, engines, operating systems, etc.) are in the hands of the U.S. and its allies. Unfortunately, China is not a Jedi, yet (it may never be one). Being able to lay thousands of miles of high-speed tracks does not mean the country could become the British Empire of the 21st Century. I' afraid there are simply so many nuts and bolts (and their combinations) that must be put in the exact places (and by chance and luck, too) before China becomes a superpower, and it may never be able to figure out or have a chance to do so.
Click to expand...

I think you are wrong there is so much momentum now in Chinese technology sector that from now on China can develop their own basic science and technology .
I think this is the silver lining in Chinese technology for a long time a lot of Chinese captain of industry were blinded by the west and they never give a chance to domestic technology

And to many of them are too lazy to invest in their technology preferring the easy way out of using off the shelve technology from the west
And too stingy to invest in their own technology by skimping R& D and pocketed the big profit
They rather invest in real estate and software industry where is the profit is quick and easy to be had

Now that the gate is close they have no other choice This author is typical of western hubris and does not know that the golden age of western technology is coming to a close
Semiconductor is important but that is not the only one technology. The reason China was behind because as I said above they don't want to invest big money in building big fab which is very expensive . but now the government get into the act and provide the capital. that is why the west is scared

China has one ace in the sleeve the large population of STEM graduate and now improve research facilities and money. Sooner or latter they will overcome the bottle neck.

That is why SOE is important in China development they are doing what nobody else want to do
 
Last edited:
FriedRiceNSpice

FriedRiceNSpice

Captain
gelgoog said:
Strategically, X86 can be replaced by some other RISC processor design with an emulation layer on top.
Click to expand...

Why is emulation layer need? There would be a performance overhead, ideally the lower level system APIs should be reimplemented on whatever new instruction set that gets adopted. Also, do we know what kind of x86 licenses China currently possess? I believe AMD had sold licenses for its chip designs before, does anyone have more information about the types of licenses involved?

Oh and small minor technical nitpicking: x86 is CISC ISA, not RISC :p
 
SteelBird

SteelBird

Colonel
Trump threats more tariff if no deal at G20. I remember last time Trump said he's not ready to sign a deal with China but what I read here seems he wants a deal badly. Further, he seems to feel that Xi doesn't want to sign any deal with him and even not want to meet him that he threats if Xi doesn't attend G20, more tariff will be imposed and immediately.

Trump: If President Xi does not attend G-20, more China tariffs will go into effect immediately

  • President Trump threatened more tariffs on Chinese imports if President Xi Jinping is not at this month’s G-20 meeting.
  • The president previously threatened to put levies on another $300 billion in Chinese goods if an agreement is not reached soon.
President
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
confirmed on Monday that additional tariffs on Chinese goods will be levied if Chinese President Xi Jinping does not attend this month’s G-20 meeting.

When asked during a telephone interview if that means the new tariffs would go into effect immediately, Trump told CNBC’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, “Yes, it would.”

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
 
S

SpicySichuan

Senior Member
Registered Member
manqiangrexue said:
If China could only use Chinese chips, China would still function AND Chinese chips would develop even faster.
Click to expand...
I totally agree with you that China has the capacity to live off its own technologies, but progress could slow down if the U.S. and allies stop sharing their newest designs. I worry that the worst case scenario would be if China were to be cut off from the U.S., EU, Japan, and South Korea (all U.S. treaty allies), China could be isolated just like the former USSR and Iran today. Under such isolation, there are certainly domestic technologies to survive off, but the gap measured against the West, South Korea, and Japan could increase. Even the USSR has no choice but to secretly purchase submarine technologies from "enemy" Japan by the 1980s. As long as the world's greatest research institutes and scientists remain in the West, I think "isolation" and "decoupling" are the strategic weapons of the West China should be afraid of. This is because the West (especially Anglo-Saxon countries) holds the golden ticket in technologies, institutions, trade, and dominant political discourse. When you compare Russian passenger planes and trains to those of Western Europe, that's the difference between being isolated and not isolated. I am not saying the Russian passenger planes don't work. They are just not as competitive as those made by Boeing and Airbus. Same could be said of China if China were to be isolated and decoupled from the West. Yes, in the short run, EU might not decouple China, but if American pressure tactics persist, EU could have little choice. Ultimate, the U.S. guarantees the EU's security and is a significant market. Having said that, China's current vulnerability is that it can't even produce its own TU-154 or IL-96 without Western inputs (also, you REALLY want to avoid riding on Russian passenger jets for your personal safety). I can imagine a C919 with 100% domestic engine and avionics by 2025, but like what you said, certifications would be highly problematic. A C919 with 100% domestic input would also be for domestic consumption only and possibly remain inferior even to 737 MAX. Ultimately, a so-called technological "bifurcation" is exactly what the Trump Administrations aims to achieve because a "bifurcation" would prohibit Chinese scientists from exchanging ideas with Western ones, slowing down China's progress.
 
Hendrik_2000

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Josh Luo said:
How many decades do you think this will take?
Click to expand...

What do you mean China already has 14 nm technology which is the same as INTEL Which american FAB has 7 Nm tell me
You read too much of western propaganda and has very bad inferiority complex You must be very young guy.

Necessity is the mother of all invention and China has faced much more grave challenge and this. China was under economic and technical embargo from 1949- 1974 Does China keel over and beg for mercy from US NO!
 
Last edited:
manqiangrexue

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Josh Luo said:
I totally agree with you that China has the capacity to live off its own technologies, but progress could slow down if the U.S. and allies stop sharing their newest designs. I worry that the worst case scenario would be if China were to be cut off from the U.S., EU, Japan, and South Korea (all U.S. treaty allies), China could be isolated just like the former USSR and Iran today. Under such isolation, there are certainly domestic technologies to survive off, but the gap measured against the West, South Korea, and Japan could increase. Even the USSR has no choice but to secretly purchase submarine technologies from "enemy" Japan by the 1980s. As long as the world's greatest research institutes and scientists remain in the West, I think "isolation" and "decoupling" are the strategic weapons of the West China should be afraid of. This is because the West (especially Anglo-Saxon countries) holds the golden ticket in technologies, institutions, trade, and dominant political discourse. When you compare Russian passenger planes and trains to those of Western Europe, that's the difference between being isolated and not isolated. I am not saying the Russian passenger planes don't work. They are just not as competitive as those made by Boeing and Airbus. Same could be said of China if China were to be isolated and decoupled from the West. Yes, in the short run, EU might not decouple China, but if American pressure tactics persist, EU could have little choice. Ultimate, the U.S. guarantees the EU's security and is a significant market. Having said that, China's current vulnerability is that it can't even produce its own TU-154 or IL-96 without Western inputs (also, you REALLY want to avoid riding on Russian passenger jets for your personal safety). I can imagine a C919 with 100% domestic engine and avionics by 2025, but like what you said, certifications would be highly problematic. A C919 with 100% domestic input would also be for domestic consumption only and possibly remain inferior even to 737 MAX. Ultimately, a so-called technological "bifurcation" is exactly what the Trump Administrations aims to achieve because a "bifurcation" would prohibit Chinese scientists from exchanging ideas with Western ones, slowing down China's progress.
Click to expand...
First of all, living off your own technologies like the Soviets is far better than living like someone else's dog.

Secondly, a bifurcation is what the US wants when China is premature for it and unable to advance its own technologies. The US played this card way too late; China has more engineers, more ace students, more money, more momentum, more will, and enough experience to become technologically independent and competitive in not too many years. The US played this card in fear-induced panic of imminent take-over, not at the strategically-correct time.

You need to know your worst case scenario but not be limited by it. The worst case scenario, I think you have correctly outlined, but what is also correct is that the trends are moving in the opposite direction of it. Should they start to move towards Chinese isolation, the strategy may need to be slightly revised, but right now it is actually moving towards US isolation. It would be a huge mistake to give up when you're on the verge of success just because you are scared of some far off worst case scenario.

You've highlighted some dangers that are not currently pressing, and they may never be. What is the point of your writing? Do you wish to advise a change in course on China's part? Or do you just wish to make people aware of the existence of this worst case scenario?

PS. I'd rather ride Russian than Boeing 737 Max.

Josh Luo said:
How many decades do you think this will take?
Click to expand...
LOL You mean how many years you think this will take? 1, maybe 2.
 
Last edited:
S

Shaolian

Junior Member
Registered Member
Red Moon said:
This is not quite right. Linux uses the GNU license and this means anything based on it must use it as well. So no version of Android is proprietary. All of it must be open source and all of it must be free (0$ price). But the GNU license does not obligate Google to update anybody's phone... this is a service they provide on their own. So is the app store (Google Play). As well, their apps and other services are their own, so they can be blocked. Of the latter, to my mind Google maps is the most important thing that needs to be replicated.
Click to expand...

So, that's why AOSP is always available, no matter what. And this also means that there's no such thing as "Google's" Android, so much as just AOSP with Google's apps and services slapped on. Google can block those apps and services, but not Android itself. Google of course is not obligated to update anyone's phones, except their own Pixel brand, but they are required by the GNU license to release the (sourse codes?) latest version of AOSP to the public.

But having said that, Google does indeed drag their feet when it comes to releasing the latest versions of AOSP.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top