| |
| ▲ | yoz-y 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Yes and no. Having more competition in the space is excellent news. However I am sad that the world interdependence is eroding as most other countries seem to sit on their hands and happily outsource every bit of manufacturing to a single country. | | |
| ▲ | Brybry 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Xiaomi's Xring O3 is manufactured by TSMC N3P process in Taiwan. [1] MediaTek Dimensity 9500 is also manufactured by TSMC N3P process in Taiwan. [2] There was no world interdependence change (unless one considers China and Taiwan to be the same countries). [1] https://www.notebookcheck.net/Xiaomi-launches-XRing-O3-claim... [2] https://www.notebookcheck.net/MediaTek-Dimensity-9500-Proces... | | |
| ▲ | gnfargbl 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > unless one considers China and Taiwan to be the same countries The fact that the CCP is relaxed about core Chinese companies running their manufacturing in Taiwan might suggest that the CCP considers that it can make China and Taiwan one country, at a time of the CCP's choosing. | | |
| ▲ | m00x 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I've lived in Taiwan for a large part of my life. They would lose all of TSMC if they do any military actions. It's not the fact that the CCP thinks that they can make Taiwan and China a country, it's the the fact that most of China does in fact consider them as one country. Taiwan is ready to defend themselves, but are very happy keeping their relationship with China the way it is. | | |
| ▲ | decimalenough 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | "Very happy" is a bit of a stretch, since a significant proportion of Taiwan would prefer to jettison the current pretence of being "One China" and become fully independent. But I agree that pretty much everybody will happily take the status quo over armed invasion. | |
| ▲ | palata an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Isn't there some kind of "if you invade us we bomb our strategic factories" strategy? Like "if we can't have them, nobody can"? | | |
| ▲ | wongarsu 21 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I think the plan is to defend, with allies motivated by the goal of saving TSMC facilities. If you destroy them the moment China declares war, Taiwanese allies might be much less invested But at the same time everyone understands that the Taiwanese would destroy the facilities before they fall into Chinese hands |
| |
| ▲ | axus 39 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | As a resident of Taiwan, would you say the average person there is comfortable obeying a strong central government, whoever that currently is? As an American, I found the deference to authority very strange. | | |
| ▲ | RussianBot9580 4 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | As an American, what are ways in which you can not defer to an authority - in a way that actually matters? Sure, you can choose to go outside dressed in gaudy colors, or not dressed at all if you are in SF. Or choose to flip the Democrat/Republican bit once every 4 years (usually without any effect on domestic or foreign policy, though not lately). But in a regular person's life, what authority do you want to opt out of? The average person can't do a thing about their HOA board, let alone a government representative. | |
| ▲ | actionfromafar 3 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Really? Surely it can't be unfamiliar at least. So many GOPs anxiously mentioning Dear Leader every chance they get. |
| |
| ▲ | YetAnotherNick 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | My bet would be that invasion wouldn't look like quick war, but slow control of political power either through light force like economic blackmail, or through something similar to what US did with Venezuela. Now that US has already opened the gate to labelling nation head as drug seller, this just eases things for China. | | |
| ▲ | conception an hour ago | parent [-] | | Also the US has very publicly shown they don’t have the ability to effectively wage war over any period of time. | | |
| ▲ | sailfast 29 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Yes and no. The Iran war is deeply unpopular and won’t even pass congressional approval for money. It’s being fought from pocket change budgets because they know they can’t pass a funding bill for it. Also not the same kind of war. Any period time? US waged war for 20+ years in Afghanistan. Pretty effectively! To what end? Not an end an army can really achieve so… there you are. But a war that might actually be popular? To save the world from communist dictators and make sure we have chips for our precious devices? I wouldn’t count out the United States. Or nuclear weapons, which still exist and are a thing. | | |
| ▲ | wongarsu 14 minutes ago | parent [-] | | And it'd be the kind of war the US is best at. Boots on the ground, against conventional military, with a civilian population that is on the side of the US forces No guerilla warfare, no insurgents, no need for extended beyond-visual-range warfare that depletes missile stockpiles | | |
| ▲ | fc417fc802 3 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > no need for extended beyond-visual-range warfare that depletes missile stockpiles Was with you until that last one. If you haven't noticed missiles, drones, and interceptors have played a central role in ukraine. |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | bdhdhduuyd 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | They already consider it as one country. The CCP sees Taiwan as a province of China. | | | |
| ▲ | amelius 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That act could throw us all back into the dark ages, though. | |
| ▲ | pydry 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | They're intentional about economic integration because it will in theory make unification easier without a war. | |
| ▲ | yieldcrv 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Its the opposite China isn’t going to invade China until after we get our semiconductors up and running in Arizona for real (because US won’t have to think about that situation ever again) removing dependence imperils that island, CCP already has an EUV machine so the inevitable sanctions and export controls on ASML’s in Europe won’t matter either | | |
| ▲ | 0cf8612b2e1e an hour ago | parent [-] | | It technically does not matter today. Sure the SOTA fabs only exist in a few places, but it’s not like a 2010/2015/2020 era chip is unusable trash. All of which are more geographically distributed. | | |
| ▲ | cgio 20 minutes ago | parent [-] | | For any critical workload a chip is considered trash after 5-7 years. They still run , of course, but increased incidents on platforms that are supposed to be 99.99 are hard to work with. Now if you mean there’s unused stock of those , that would maybe work, but I am not aware of significant unused stocks. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | szatkus 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | MediaTek is a Taiwanese company. Xiaomi could put any backdoor that the government tell them to install and TSMC won't be able to catch that. | | |
| ▲ | linkregister 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm unaware of any actual hardware backdoors introduced by primary manufacturers in practice, especially those installed in Xiaomi hardware. There are accounts of interdiction and post-manufacturing compromises, such as those revealed in the Snowden leaks (2013) and most recently by reporting about the Israeli security services' sabotage of Hezbollah pagers and 2-way radios. These projects didn't expose primary manufacturers to the reputational and legal risk of association. Until there's evidence of backdoors implanted by these companies, it's better to adopt a "trust but verify" approach and use standard layered security practices to detect intrusion. Conventional network intrusion and insider threat campaigns carry less risk of failure and are simpler and cheaper to execute. | | |
| ▲ | szatkus 44 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm only aware of some software backdoors in Chinese devices, but times when you could've reverse engineered a chip with microscope are long gone. If there are any it would be really difficult to find them. | |
| ▲ | codersfocus 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Intel management engine | | | |
| ▲ | sundbry 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | RiverCrochet 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Get off the short bus twin. CPU backdoors do no good unless there is cooperation with network driver code or the CPU itself has full operating system with a full network stack. Intel's ME comes really close to that, but I don't think Intel's ME has drivers for every possible NIC and bus a NIC can appear on in its little Minix. So, just put a Broadcom NIC in a PCIe slot and leave the Intel onboard NIC empty, or LAN facing only. Xiaomi may get Chinese 4G/5G baseband chip manufacturers to put in backdoors in Chinese phones, but they're not needed - the Chinese government pretty much already has total control of its Internet. For other countries, how are they going to make Qualcomm provide something undocumented CPU instructions can access. | |
| ▲ | qmr 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You can refute their statement without personal attacks. Not knowing a thing makes someone uninformed, not retarded. | |
| ▲ | linkregister 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | My retardation status is unrelated to my statement. You assert there are top secret register values but without any evidence beyond your most recent psilocybin trip. The existence of undocumented hardware behavior isn't proof of anything. |
| |
| ▲ | theteapot 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Everyone relax. This guy on the Internet is unaware of any. | | |
| ▲ | Dylan16807 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | And are you aware of any? If nobody can find evidence then it's probably not a widespread risk. |
|
| |
| ▲ | Dah00n 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Do you say the same about Intel, Amd, etc. or is it only big bad China? | | |
| ▲ | InTheArena 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | There's been 40 years of documented push back when western governments try to backdoor things - starting with clipper. Pushback is not always successful - but it's far more transparent then China. | | |
| ▲ | linkregister 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Are there any documented cases of backdoors being present in Chinese hardware at time of manufacturing? | | |
| ▲ | hedora 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Probably, but you are asking the wrong question: Is it legal to produce non-backdoored networked devices or services in China? The answer to that question in the US is within epsilon of “no” thanks to the cloud act. Europe and China have passed similar laws. However, China has a reputation for passing laws then selectively enforcing them. Maybe if you get on the right side of the right party member, the answer might still be “Yes” there. Anyway, the next question to ask is: Who would I rather backdoor my device? I doubt the Chinese government cares much about me, and unless I vacation there it’s an international incident if they, say, hack my car and murder me by aiming it at a tree at 95mph, like the CIA apparently does now: https://www.motor1.com/news/138679/wikileaks-claim-cia-hack-... Of course, the US government banned cars from China. Presumably this is because they do not have the mandated remote murder network port open, or, if they do, the US doesn’t have the necessary permissions to access it. | |
| ▲ | bryant 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Two just this year, CVE-2026-66747 and CVE-2026-11405. | | |
| ▲ | linkregister 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Those are both great examples. I think this doesn't obliterate my point, though it weakens it. The manufacturer in CVE-2026-11405 is already out of business, and the one in CVE-2026-66747 is unlikely to continue as a going concern. Would Xiaomi or the CCP accept the reputational and legal risk of getting caught with a backdoor? Recall the CCP considered the arrest of the Huawei executive in Canada as an offense against itself. |
|
| |
| ▲ | holoduke 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Too many propoganda leads to expressions like yours. Sorry your story has zero foundation and is fox news quality. | | |
| ▲ | hedora 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Like a stopped clock, Fox News is right once or twice a day. For instance election tampering in the US is a well-documented thing: However it almost always favors republicans in districts with electronic voting machines that do not generate paper trails. As for the person you are replying to, their claims have been documented by most media outlets, places like wikileaks, and their claims are backed by US legal requirements to backdoor stuff (like the US Cloud act). |
|
| |
| ▲ | szatkus 40 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | My opinion about Trump is as bad as the next guy's, but we still have better relation with the USA than with China. And it's not like we have much choice. |
| |
| ▲ | BiteCode_dev 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | There are already American backdoors on intel and AMD chips everywhere, we call them ME and PSP. Switching to chinese tech won't make it worse. Now, if the EU would start make to make chips that have no subsystem to screw me over, that would be something. | | |
| ▲ | graemep 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Now, if the EU would start make to make chips that have no subsystem to screw me over, that would be something. Why would they not do the same? They are very pro-surveillance for a start. | | |
| ▲ | tensor 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Hopefully the same pushback that has so far stopped the worst of chat control would help. But even if not having more western alternatives would be very welcome. If you're in the US it may not resonate with you, but as a Canadian currently reading ongoing rhetoric about being annexed by the US I'd love to have options if things continue to go south with the status quo. |
| |
| ▲ | eigenform an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | It's good to be skeptical about how we implement the idea of a "root of trust" in these machines, but matter-of-factly characterizing ME and PSP as "backdoor" is misleading and not useful. |
| |
| ▲ | well_ackshually 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | TSMC doesn't care what you put in your CPUs. Apple could tell them they want to build a CPU where 90% of the transistor footprint is for a new CIA Engine that takes pictures of your feet every three seconds to trace where you've been from the smell and TSMC's response would be "how many wafers do you want?". |
|
| |
| ▲ | deadlast2 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I don't think it's by choice just ask all those extinct manufacturers | | |
| ▲ | saturn8601 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Maybe new companies can spring up and be competitive with AI assisted design. Im assuming the cost was too high for those old companies to survive right? Small nimble companies could theoretically compete in some segments vs large bloated slobs (even if they have AI as well). This is all just hypothetical thought. | |
| ▲ | RobotToaster 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It was a choice, western oligarchs handed China the means of production on a silver platter in the pursuit of short term profits. |
| |
| ▲ | Grombobulous 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think Western people still call this situation “outsourcing” when in reality what is happening is that China is better at manufacturing than everyone else, and they’re starting to be better than everyone else at design and engineering, too. When we buy software from Silicon Valley or a nice Mercedes Benz from Germany we don’t use this same language “outsourcing.” Colloquially, outsourcing implies low quality or cheap price. No, what’s happening here is that China makes the best products in numerous categories and we are choosing to import them, because the best products are the most desirable. | | |
| ▲ | Danox 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The west is interested in funneling most of the money to the top no matter what for the last 60 years that has been the drum beat/cry It can’t be done. It can’t be done. In America, there is one fast food place that does it differently than everyone in the market they don’t franchise and they don’t lease/rent. They own everything as they expand (the land and the building), which means it’s a little bit slower when you expand, but they don’t care but they are very profitable. The owner probably gets a call every other week from large equity companies trying to sell them on doing it like everybody else and their pitch they can make you a worldwide company if you just let them in to f you. | |
| ▲ | throwaway63467 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Well at this point they are probably the only country in the world that can produce a car end to end starting from the raw iron ore and other elements up to the chips and software that runs on them (I’m sure they will still need to import some small stuff probably like Rhodium or Iridium maybe), who is going to compete with that? Everything done in country, no tariffs at all throughout the entire production cycle. That said some of these industry especially metallurgical ones will never return to Europe or US as they basically destroy and pollute the environment on a large scale, in China that still seems acceptable but also might change promoting them to outsource to other countries which they already do in some areas I think. | | |
| ▲ | geysersam 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I find it quite strange en people take a development that has happened over the last ~50 years, little more than half a lifetime, and confidently state that now "it will always stay like this". Things always change. Imagine what those kinds of people would have said in China in the 70s, with western industries being vastly more advanced and efficient. "It's over, we will never catch up." they would probably have said. Wrong then, more wrong now. | |
| ▲ | coliveira 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > China that still seems acceptable China has made a tremendous effort to move to a clean(er) industrial system, using a lot of renewables and clean energy and improving environmental standards. At this point production in China is probably the best for the environment compared to most countries, including the US that is deeply invested in oil production. | | |
| ▲ | Danox 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | China evidently is pushing to move to sodium ion batteries. They didn’t have to. They could’ve stuck with lithium. I’ll let you guess what what would’ve happened in the United States they would’ve said we don’t have to this lithium already works. Why do you want to upset the Apple Cart. They are also moving close to a point where they will bring Thorium Reactors on line they don’t have to. They could just stick with uranium, but they’re not. Is this part of the fact that they have engineers running a lot of of the things at the top of their government instead of lawyers? They seem to be building a lot of infrastructure they are in the process of building several dams on the Brahmaputra River. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medog_Hydropower_Station | | |
| ▲ | UltraSane 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | It does seem that China is run by engineers who like to build cool stuff. |
| |
| ▲ | UltraSane 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | United States: 384 gCO2/kWh China: 525 gCO2/kWh https://ourworldindata.org/electricity-mix | | |
| ▲ | AngryData an hour ago | parent [-] | | But we do have to consider how the speed in which it is dropping. China uses about the same percentage of fossil fuels for energy production as the US right now, but more of it is coal so it is dirtier. However they are aggressively installing and promoting renewables and nuclear power, built themselves, and their pollution standards are rapidly increasing. While in the US renewable and nuclear investment is and has been pretty crappy. | | |
| ▲ | Grombobulous 18 minutes ago | parent [-] | | The fact that China is not that far above the US while being the world's factory and having 4x the population is pretty impressive. And like you said, China is putting a real effort in. I don't see the US trying to reduce domestic short hop flights with electric high speed rail. I don't see the US trying to replace gasoline cars with EVs. I don't see the US curtailing structural incentivization of pickup trucks and SUVs. The main US policy seems to be "spend trillions on wars for oil" rather than accepting the inevitable decline of oil and planning around it. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | yoz-y 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Fair point. Outsourcing was not the right word to use, China today makes products over all quality ranges and almost always they are cheaper than any other alternative. “Giving away” would be a better word. | |
| ▲ | rayiner 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think it’s a matter of perceptions catching up to reality. 15 years ago China was definitely still ripping off american products down to the english silk screening. | |
| ▲ | smallmancontrov 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | China didn't get that way by magic. They ran the same playbook that allowed Alexander Hamilton to snatch manufacturing from Great Britain to the US, and the US gave up manufacturing for the same reason the UK gave up manufacturing (suppression of labor interests). It will be interesting to see what China does. They aren't ideologically committed to exclusively serving the interests of the wealthy, but they still have lots of rich people in the (ahem) Communist Party, so who knows. | | |
| ▲ | xanthor 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | China and Vietnam are the only countries worldwide which have executed bankers for corruption in recent decades. No ahem necessary. | | |
| ▲ | geysersam 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's striking that they recently arrested one of the richest men in the country, the Evergrande founder, for fraud. Seems unthinkable in the US/Europe right now. | |
| ▲ | applicative 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Were they guilty? | | |
| ▲ | Danox an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | The people in China that made the decision on that antifreeze in toothpaste, and the 300 pigs in the river or that graffiti tower in Los Angeles across from the Staples Center. I don’t think those people walked. That is not to say that in time they’ll start to do many of things that happens in the west where those at the 1% or 2% walk away, in time China may drop down to that level, on the other hand, I would like to believe the United States will start to have the same reaction that the country had when Sputnik went around the Earth and change course and I don’t mean sanctions, tariffs, wars, and threatening neighbors to the north and to the south. | |
| ▲ | xanthor 44 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Do you find that far-fetched? |
|
| |
| ▲ | peezd 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I can't imagine it going any other way than what we've seen from every other country in your set of examples, honestly. | | |
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | faitswulff 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | China actually penalizes, imprisons, and even executes its billionaires, so that’s different. |
| |
| ▲ | applicative 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The industrialization of USA comes after the civil war, thus long after e.g. Charles Dickens, to say nothing of Hamilton. | | |
| ▲ | smallmancontrov an hour ago | parent [-] | | Hamilton set the strategic agenda. Do you want to argue that US industrialization didn't follow the broad strokes of this plan? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Report_on_Manufactures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_School_(economics) Parallel: the industrialization of China for the most part happened after Deng Xiaoping, but are people wrong to credit him for setting the course? | | |
| ▲ | andelink 21 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I mean, Deng Xiaoping is/was a huge influence in _our_ lifetimes. It was only the 1970s, just fifty years ago, when he was effectively the head of state. That’s like yesterday. I’m not saying Hamilton doesn’t have the influence you’re describing, but it’s not really an equal comparison given the huge difference in timeframes. Late 1700s is a ways away vs the 70s. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | saati 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It's manufactured in Taiwan. |
| |
| ▲ | TSiege 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think describing what's happening "other countries seem to sit on their hands and happily outsource every bit of manufacturing to a single country" is disingenuous. It's been dubbed China Shock 2.0 and it's being taken very seriously by the EU. The US admin is a joke and too busy shooting itself in both feet to have coherent policy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Shock_2.0 | | |
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | kroaton 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | As if our EU leaders aren't a complete joke as well. Pushing ChatControl, fascism and gambling everywhere. We're just as much of a joke. | |
| ▲ | pydry 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's not disingenuous. It was obvious this was happening 15 years ago and the US and EU could have done something about it back then. The tendency to protect corporate profit margins is the western Achilles heel and China knew they could exploit that. | |
| ▲ | 1234letshaveatw 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | yet somehow the outcome for the US has been much better. EU wins on paper though, yay! | | |
| ▲ | Dah00n 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Sure if you are Bezos or Musk. Otherwise, no. | | |
| ▲ | holoduke 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Gdp grew much faster in the US than in the EU. I believe the EU is the worst performer of the planet. No joke. And not surprising with the self destructive actions. | | |
| ▲ | Sohcahtoa82 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This doesn't really refute what Dah00n said. Sure, GDP in the USA is growing faster than the EU, but the question is who is benefiting from the increased GDP? The answer is in Dah00n's comment. The rich are getting richer, while the population gets scraps. Meanwhile, people in the EU get guaranteed healthcare, paid time off, maternity leave, better worker's rights, etc. | |
| ▲ | preg_match 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The GDP growing faster while quality of life doesn’t meaningfully improve is a bad, bad sign. It means we’re burning extra money just to stay afloat and break even. That’s worse than if the GDP didn’t grow. | | | |
| ▲ | well_ackshually 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Because as everyone knows, GDP is _the_ indicator for well being of its citizens. Nobody in the US is in catastrophic health related debt, because the US's GDP grew so much <3 |
|
| |
| ▲ | oblio 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > outcome for the US has been much better Is this better outcome for the US in the room with us? | | |
| ▲ | nxm 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Compare any measurable economic and investment stat in EU vs US | | |
| ▲ | makingstuffs 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | What happens when you compare quality of life? Or workers rights? Pretty sure that your average person cares more about those two data points… | | |
| ▲ | saturn8601 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | That might be a mirage temporarily made reality by outsourcing defense to the US, manufacturing to China and the work required for GDP growth to refugees. All three will be going away sooner or later. | | |
| ▲ | AngryData an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | How is locally producing military equipment versus buying extremely expensive US uberl33t overkill hardware suppose to hurt the EU? It not like the US was just giving Europe free armaments. Yeah sure they won't be producing any F35s or million dollar per shot missiles, but was that a good idea to start with? Are they worth the money when once again lots of inexpensive arms are shown to be more useful in modern wars than a few handfuls of expensive ones? Both Iran and Ukraine have shown that one side being a few steps ahead in military technology and willing to dump money on equipment still has limited returns. There is no "I win" technology apart from indiscriminately killing most of the entire population, which just makes you an existential enemy to the rest of the planet and erases 95% of the value in taking that territory. | | |
| ▲ | saturn8601 23 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Its really not that obvious to you? Because not having US bases on site and technology sharing and agreements takes money away from entitlements. France tried to cut entitlements by a tiny bit and the yellow vest movement was born. In the long run the Yellow Vests might end up losing everything as a result. Regardless of the tech stack the work still needs to be done and now the EU has to do it. The Eu does not have infinite money, in fact they have less than the US so there will be cuts elsewhere. |
| |
| ▲ | anon48293 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Pretty sure almost every European would celebrate any of these things | | |
| ▲ | saturn8601 21 minutes ago | parent [-] | | If they did, they would have done it already. Instead when there was an attempt, some protested wearing yellow vests. There will be more. Whether or not the governments force the issue or they lose to the voters does not matter: Either way quality of life will suffer. |
| |
| ▲ | oblio an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Before outsourcing defense to the US... sorry, but have you ever read a history book? Europe was "exporting defense" around the world before the US got involved in the world wars :-)) Before outsourcing manufacturing to China Europe was making a third of all industrial things on this planet, so Europe will be just fine. > the work required for GDP growth to refugees I don't get this one. Do you think the European economy is propped up by refugees? I think there are 5 million of them in total in Europe, most of them Ukrainians and it's likely Ukraine will become a EU member at some point in the future... | | |
| ▲ | saturn8601 16 minutes ago | parent [-] | | >Before outsourcing defense to the US... sorry, but have you ever read a history book? Europe was "exporting defense" around the world before the US got involved in the world wars :-)) And they will continue to do so. Just at a higher cost with no US to maintain bases and do technology cost sharing. That extra money has to come out from somewhere...it will be entitlements. Combine that with terrible demographics and that remaining manufacturing base will be built on a bed of sand. :) >Before outsourcing manufacturing to China Europe was making a third of all industrial things on this planet, so Europe will be just fine. Europe can insource everything that China makes. They are not stupid people. You mistake the benefit westerners got from outsourcing. It held back inflation in products because the value came from the living standards difference between chinese and EU people. Remove that disparity by bringing back everything and EU will be living with a lower quality of life because all those products will be significantly more expensive with no alternatives. >I don't get this one. Do you think the European economy is propped up by refugees? I think there are 5 million of them in total in Europe, most of them Ukrainians and it's likely Ukraine will become a EU member at some point in the future... Same point I have been making. The consequences of demographic collapse can be hidden away by having young tax paying peoples do the shit jobs that run the economy at low wages. Same thing the US does with illegal migrants. Remove that and the hidden costs are now dumped onto the population. Result: Lower living standards for those who remain. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | markdown 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This is what was sold to – and often forced on – countries by the US and their allies via the IMF and World Bank. Global free trade meant that you only produced what you had an advantage in and bought what others could produce at lower cost. | |
| ▲ | csomar 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | So same as before? | |
| ▲ | cromka 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Except this trend is actually reversing now, with fabs being built outside of Taiwan? | | |
| ▲ | cubefox 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's not reversing, it's continuing the trend of more and more manufacturing moving to Chinese companies. It already happened to TVs and it's currently happening with RAM. | | |
| ▲ | etse 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | By Chinese company, do you mean Taiwan is Chinese in the same way China is Chinese? | | |
| ▲ | cubefox 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Xiaomi may manufacture their chips in Taiwan (by tsmc) but Xiaomi is still a Chinese hardware company, similar to how Apple or Qualcomm are US American hardware companies. | |
| ▲ | 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | mschuster91 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | No. The problem is that TSMCs new capacity is already hogged by AI peddlers for years to come (in fact, AI BS is the reason why these new non-Taiwanese fabs got the massive US and EU subsidies), and so everyone else not flush with cash from the AI hypetrain has no alternative than to go to China - and deliver all their secrets to the CCP. And eventually, just like the Western solar, battery, pharma and car companies all have learned, the CCP will use that knowledge to surpass and undercut everyone else. | | |
| ▲ | Dah00n 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Do they also deliver all their secrets to US/EU/Taiwan/etc or is it only with China that it goes from ordering some products manufactured to "deliver all their secrets"? Strange how almost everyone points their fingers at the CCP when we know for a fact (hey Snowden etc) that the US does what we say we think China does. I guess China bad > facts. | |
| ▲ | dopa42365 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Goddamn turbocapitalist commies! How dare they! |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | plutomeetsyou 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Countries and institutions should always produce things where they are excellent at producing, in forms of specialization and compete in terms of comparative advantages. | | |
| ▲ | xphos 10 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | While I agree in passing. I think saying you'll export all your work to places with worse labor laws is short-term thinking. Chinese companies are successful yes but they also don't necessarily compete fairly. We still can export large portfolios of goods to China. So to just say they are best because they have a government protected market, plus subsidies so we should abandon local is a bad optimization in the long term | |
| ▲ | melasadra 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | We surely cant be this naive after the recent history of: - China weaponizing the world's dependence on rare earth - The US weaponizing the world's dependence on SWIFT - Russia weaponizing Europe's dependence on natural gas - Iran weaponizing the the world's dependence of oil supply through strait of Hormuz | |
| ▲ | kridsdale1 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This is true until you add a layer of geopolitics to your analysis. | |
| ▲ | yoz-y 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Supply chain advantages make the country that produces most of the stuff progressively better at doing everything. | | |
| ▲ | saturn8601 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Only if you have the people to do it. China has some of the worst birth rate in the world. In ~20 years that manufacturing capacity either goes to robots or goes away. Then what? | | |
| ▲ | don_esteban 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | One of the (many) areas in which China is doing great is industrial robotics. Not the fancy dancing dogs, but robots that replace workers in factories. | | | |
| ▲ | Yiin 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | how is that different from the rest of the world? | | |
| ▲ | saturn8601 28 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Rest of the world does not rely on manufacturing as a large chunk of its economy. Yes it will be painful for all, entire classes of products might just go away if they dont make sense in the new inflationary environment but countries will still likely suffer less than China overall. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | geysersam 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Those thing are not static! Changing them can be a political decision. It was a political decision in China to become excellent at manufacturing. | |
| ▲ | dymk 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That depends on if everybody gets along and is willing to trade | |
| ▲ | adwn 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This attitude, if followed without qualifications, is dangerously naive and shortsighted, as the last few years of geopolitical events have shown. | | |
| ▲ | PowerElectronix 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes, and no. Yes because you are vulnerable to supply chain disruption by illwilled countries. But illwilled countries that disrupt supply chains greatly incentivise others to diversify supply away from them. China could have the monopoly of rare earth production and refinery for all of eternity. But because of their reaction towards all the us allies when the us increased tariffs, I don't expect them to be relevant enough to disrupt markets with rare earths sanctions in 10-20 years. | | |
| ▲ | kstenerud 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > But illwilled countries that disrupt supply chains greatly incentivise others to diversify supply away from them. ... Except when they can't in any meaningful span of time. |
|
| |
| ▲ | goodluckchuck 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Families should always eat at the restaurants that produce the most excellent cuisine. /s |
|
| |
| ▲ | speed_spread 3 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If the Linux drivers aren't up upstreamed and the chips aren't sold to anyone else, meh. | |
| ▲ | catigula 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Lol, no. This is so stupid. China itself uses the "dominate and corral" model for their industries, and had severe tariffs to grow their various industrial bases, such as automotive. | | |
| ▲ | xanthor 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Same is true of US, Germany, Britain, etc | | |
| ▲ | catigula 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | The US had open markets and low tariffs for a long time; China's automotive tariffs were amongst the strongest in the entire world. | | |
| |
| ▲ | germandiago 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | From the outside, it is still competition. If they go too far to impose their system, we stop buying :) | | |
| ▲ | catigula 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Except they've now ground your native industry under their boot and have total monopoly control because you've given up your critical infrastructure. You can no longer stop buying. That isn't an option. This is geopolitics 101; your fantasy version is decades out of date. |
|
| |
| ▲ | mschuster91 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | No. Chinese dumpers undercutting everyone else and destroying the competition is never good. | | |
| ▲ | Dah00n 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Was it bad when it was the US doing it against the UK? Or is it only when the people doing it eat more rice than us that it is bad? People said the same thing about the Japanese (they steal designs, they copy, it is bad quality, they are stealing our jobs, and so on). | | |
| ▲ | chasd00 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Was it bad when it was the US doing it against the UK? Or is it only when the people doing it eat more rice than us that it is bad? dumping is always bad. |
| |
| ▲ | AngryData an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I will agree that dumping is probably just bad overall. But the US, and much of the rest of the world, allows it to happen both within and outside of their countries, sometimes even financially supporting it with government programs. So I really don't see why I should care that someone in China is doing it. We can't hold others to standards significantly higher than we hold for ourselves. |
|
|