The chip restrictions may accelerate things, but China was already moving in this direction. The chip restrictions were relatively recent, and the chip production capabilities took years to develop. The chip restrictions mainly made it obvious how far along China already was.
Good point. I think things would have naturally gone this way eventually but direct market manipulation forced Chinese companies and government to focus more.
The premise that it was intended to kill Chinese chipmakers is, if not outright wrong, exaggerated.
The connection to the recent stock dip of nVidia and friends seems dubious. Trying to interpret the stock market when there is no major news story is basically reading tea leaves. Most seem to credit cooling off of AI hype.
They nuked ZTE and Huawei back in 2018 so that they couldn't compete with Western high-tech firms.
Then banned ASML tech and such like so that Chinese chip-makers couldn't step in to help. That's not exaggeration, that's official US foreign policy.
Urging companies to de-risk. The CHIPS act to onshore semiconductor tech is another prong in an attack on who? Not on Europe, not on Taiwan … on China of course.
I agree with the video that stock market is waking up to the back-firing. Same back-firing as Western sanctions on Russia over Ukraine.
Gross under-estimation and rank Western hubris in both cases.
The CHIPS act isn’t an attack on anybody. It’s a recognition that it’s ridiculous for the. US to depend on a foreign country for a fundamental product on which every individual, every household, every business, every government and the entire military is dependent on.
And as a side benefit it’s also good old fashioned industrial policy.
> The premise that it was intended to kill Chinese chipmakers is, if not outright wrong, exaggerated
> The connection to the recent stock dip of nVidia and friends seems dubious. Trying to interpret the stock market when there is no major news story is basically reading tea leaves
Why would the motivation for the chip ban be in question because of dubious stock market readings _after_ the fact? The effectiveness (or lack of it) doesn't retroactively change the initial intent.
I'm not saying you're wrong about the motive being misrepresented, but it seems like a strong claim that could use some more explanation.
China already made low-end/low-cost/low-margin, now they're moving up the semi-conductor value chain (as in every other tech business segment) to mid-range/mid-cost/mid-margin and high-end/high-cost/high-margin.
Are you agreeing or disagreeing with the video's thesis or clarifying?
Putting stress on a living system will either make it collapse or make it grow stronger by time if pressure is bearable. Relieving stress from a living system will make it lazier and more complacent. Whole evolution theory is based around that.
