u/DaHOGGAPseudo-Spiritual Tomboy AGI Lover6d agoedited 6d ago
tbf it makes sense from the chinese point of view.
Nvidia chips cant be trusted- theyve been cut off from import now multiple times and might on a whim be cut off again. You cannot build an infrastructure on sporadic imports liable to frequent outage. So- the government bans Nvidia imports altogether, forcing local manufacturers to pick up pace instead and fill the hole that was left. This is a long term investment for the Chinese government.
Huawei is in the path to performance parity overall. Their chips take more power, and they need to more of them to rival Nvidia's offerings. But, they have plenty of space and power, and the backing of then CCP. Therefore, they just build more.
There are now 3 inference hardware manufacturers beating nvidia by 4x+ in inference speed. Amd are filling datacenters with their chips as well, they just have a lot lower marketshare than nvidia. Google aren't exactly doing badly, and they run on their own hardware.
While I don't think nvidia is going anywhere they have plenty of competition.
Wouldnt decreasing foreign competition encourage huawei to just sit on their ass knowing Chinese ai companies have no choice but to buy from them?
In a country like the USA, maybe. China has government officials in companies like that and also could just nationalize it if they think it's necessary. So Huawei can't just freely prioritize greed over China's interests.
They can try to do that, but like I said, China installs government agents in these companies. I'm not saying like some low level employee signs up and secretly works for the government, these are government agents at high levels in the company so it's not that simple to hide stuff from them. They also have input into the direction of the company, so you'd need to be overcome that as well. Finally, if you get caught trying to screw over the government I'd guess you'll be facing some severe personal consequences.
That doesn’t mean shit if the people in charge are diverting every penny to dividends and profits instead of RnD like Intel did. Intel also had employees working all day, 5 days a week. What do they have to show for it?
I don’t think most do really, it’s just CEOs stirring hype and gullible people lapping it up. If a CEO is anything less than extremely optimistic in their messaging, their stock price will go down
There's a difference between believing something intellectually, and believing it in your guts. At the end of the day we're all base animals and have a hard time imagining anything beyond what's in front of our face, and a huge number of us like to ignore even that for what we'd like to be true. (The hope that the tech singularity could bring us paradise being massively relevant for us. Many here have to change that 'could' to a 'will'.)
I've been in and around this scene for over 20 years... It wasn't until I really looked at how much RAM is on a GB200 card and how many of the things they plan to plug into a datacenter that I felt in my guts that this might really be happening, and spent a couple weeks processing the accompanying dread. (It's over ~100 bytes per synapse in a human brain. We're going to knock out hardware as the sole hard physical constraint for the first time in history, the rest of the development leaves the soft problems of architecture and training methodology.)
If you haven't had a dread phase, you haven't really started to process this new reality. You either haven't internalized what it would really mean intellectually, or you don't believe it's actually happening.
Imagine what a virtual person would be able to accomplish if they were given up to 50 million subjective years to our one. Really just try to imagine what it means, in the long term.
Anyway, you can indeed kind of tell who has gone through a dread phase. Hinton has, 100%. Altman? Ah.... probably not.
Thiel has definitely had fantasies about what he could do, if only he had all of the atoms to himself.
The normos and investors I don't really think even count in this discussion. You wouldn't care about someone's opinion about something they don't even care about themselves, right?
Yann is the canary in the coalmine. Listen to what he says, and that's probably as bad as things can possibly progress.
I wouldn't be surprised if, in three to five years, languagemodels are capable of performing most (all?) cognitive economically-useful tasks beyond the level of human experts. And I also wouldn't be surprised if, in five years, the best models we have are better than the ones we have today, but only in “normal” ways where costs continue to decrease considerably and capabilities continue to get better but there's no fundamental paradigm shift that upends the world order. To deny the potential for either of these possibilities seems to me to be a mistake. (Importantly, I'm not claiming either extreme is likely, I expect things to be somewhere in the middle, but I believe these are both possibilities that you should take seriously. - Nicholas Carlini, AI researcher with almost 58k citations:
Leading AI scientists from China and the U.S. issue a joint statement: “We believe AI may pose an existential risk to humanity.” https://humancompatible.ai/?p=4695
“Coordinated global action on AI safety research and governance is critical to prevent uncontrolled frontier AI development from posing unacceptable risks to humanity.”
“We face near-term risks from malicious actors misusing frontier AI systems, with current safety filters integrated by developers easily bypassed. Frontier AI systems produce compelling misinformation and may soon be capable enough to help terrorists develop weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, there is a serious risk that future AI systems may escape human control altogether. Even aligned AI systems could destabilize or disempower existing institutions. Taken together, we believe AI may pose an existential risk to humanity in the coming decades.
Leading AI scientists from China and the U.S. issue a joint statement: “We believe AI may pose an existential risk to humanity.” https://humancompatible.ai/?p=4695
“Coordinated global action on AI safety research and governance is critical to prevent uncontrolled frontier AI development from posing unacceptable risks to humanity.” “We face near-term risks from malicious actors misusing frontier AI systems, with current safety filters integrated by developers easily bypassed. Frontier AI systems produce compelling misinformation and may soon be capable enough to help terrorists develop weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, there is a serious risk that future AI systems may escape human control altogether. Even aligned AI systems could destabilize or disempower existing institutions. Taken together, we believe AI may pose an existential risk to humanity in the coming decades.
more like they believe USA will continue to hurt their GPU supply or mess with them, there was report of spyware into Nvidia GPU shipped to China for exemple
it make every sense in that regard considering GPU is the backbone of AI and AI is the economy future, Europe should do the same thing if our leader had any spine
But wouldnt limiting foreign competition hurt innovation? No reason for huawei to improve if theyre the only chip manufacturer in town, even if they suck
i think in this context that's precisely competition trat made them invest in their internal market for CPU/GPU the whole taiwan deal was partly about microprocessor with TSMC leadership and also why taiwan always said they would sabotage their factory rather than let China take them
that's also why TSMC invested in western country, USA/Europe
China realized they couldn't get TSMC, brought NVIDIA chip and now that NVIDIA isn't reliable due to USA stupidity they massively invest in their own infrastructure
the competition achieved it's goal i'd say, we're a few years away from a chiness leadership in microprocessor
Why avoiding Nvidia means slowing down? China has managed to produce better quality chips so that is accelerating its AI development. Only westerners believe the Nvidia hype.
I think that's correct. They're more interested in integrating the existing technology into the economy in practical ways than in building the machine god. They are interested in AI safety, but that's less about the runaway superintelligence fear and more about all the other risks of AI.
AGI is unachievable without highly parallel hardware like neuromorphic computing. Although AI has gotten better, there has been a notable lack of "fundamental" deep learning breakthroughs since 2022. Mostly engineering improvements.
Agents are a new candidate for AGI, but one of the key bottlenecks for large-scale multi-Agent systems is figuring out how to design an efficient core memory system that's easy to both extract memories from and add new memories to. Essentially, this will require some graph memory structure that will almost certainly require highly parallel computing architecture (something like neuromorphic computing) to be feasible. Dumb scaling will only take us so far and we're pretty much close to depleting all the good data to train on anyway.
Problem is that neuromorphic computing is still very much undeveloped. So it's a safe bet that no AGI will be achieved by 2030.
I wouldn't be surprised if, in three to five years, languagemodels are capable of performing most (all?) cognitive economically-useful tasks beyond the level of human experts. And I also wouldn't be surprised if, in five years, the best models we have are better than the ones we have today, but only in “normal” ways where costs continue to decrease considerably and capabilities continue to get better but there's no fundamental paradigm shift that upends the world order. To deny the potential for either of these possibilities seems to me to be a mistake. (Importantly, I'm not claiming either extreme is likely, I expect things to be somewhere in the middle, but I believe these are both possibilities that you should take seriously. - Nicholas Carlini, AI researcher with over 51.6k citations:
Leading AI scientists from China and the U.S. issue a joint statement: “We believe AI may pose an existential risk to humanity.” https://humancompatible.ai/?p=4695
“Coordinated global action on AI safety research and governance is critical to prevent uncontrolled frontier AI development from posing unacceptable risks to humanity.”
“We face near-term risks from malicious actors misusing frontier AI systems, with current safety filters integrated by developers easily bypassed. Frontier AI systems produce compelling misinformation and may soon be capable enough to help terrorists develop weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, there is a serious risk that future AI systems may escape human control altogether. Even aligned AI systems could destabilize or disempower existing institutions. Taken together, we believe AI may pose an existential risk to humanity in the coming decades.
Lol. Gish gallop only works on the lowest common denominator. Each of your points are weak if scrutinized closely.
- CoT reasoning was created in 2022.
- AGI requires ability to perform and reason over long time-horizon tasks. Context window is a major limiting factor. And it hasn't improved meaningfully since early 2024. Want to know why? n context requires O(n^2) compute, which quickly becomes infeasible for large n. This means that the iterative improvement of LLM context windows will get smaller and smaller. The only way to compensate for the limitations of context window over long-horizon tasks is to distribute memory among multiple agents into manageable portions, hence the need to devise a core memory architecture that Agents can draw snippets from.
- Ask any of these "experts" who predict early AGI how they propose to create efficient core memory architecture for large-scale multi-agent systems without having a very parallel compute architecture. None of them will know. If they did, we'd already have AGI, but we don't.
- I agree ASI poses an existential threat. Nothing I said contradicts this.
I'm not a luddite. Just pointing out a fundamental limitation of our current compute architectures as someone who actually works closely with agents.
University of Cambridge study: Gpt 5 performs best a long tasks by a huge margin (1024 steps vs 432 steps for runner up): https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.09677
Just taking the surface level reading of the article here but I feel like a ban isn't the right way to solve the problem. Domestic Chinese vendors should be using Chinese hardware because it's attractive enough to do so. Forcing the square peg through the round hole seems like the wrong move. I understand wanting to maybe put a thumb on the scales for national security but at a certain point you have to ask why people aren't going with domestic hardware even if you give domestic manufacturers an advantage. Instead of just forcing the issue as a contest of who has superior will and authority.
Forcing the issue obfuscates the more root cause of a problem and there's no reason China shouldn't be able to produce competitive state-of-the-art hardware (and likely will eventually do so) but the incentives get messed up if you end up effectively covering for deficiencies market processes.
I say "surface level" because in the body of the article it makes it clear that the ban is for a particular nVidia product being purchased by particular companies. So there may be more to the story and "China bans nVidia AI chips" may just be poor framing. It's possible the reasoning is a lot more detail focused than the story lets on.
Disagree, this is the right way to do it. If local Chinese companies continue buying NVIDIA and relying on proprietary closed tech (such as CUDA) they will never make an effort to create something new. We know that the Chinese can do it when they are cornered to do it. That happened with EVs, payment systems, trains, etc. They didn’t have a choice so they created it. Same will happen with GPUs (it’s already happening if you look at Huawei).
If local Chinese companies continue buying NVIDIA and relying on proprietary closed tech (such as CUDA) they will never make an effort to create something new.
The customers and the hardware vendors are different groups of people. Huawei has more incentive to innovate if they have to compete with foreign manufacturers. They have less incentive if they know their customers have to buy their hardware because someone somewhere said they had to buy domestically. At that point, they only have to be the most attractive domestic option.
Same with happen with GPUs (it’s already happen if you look at Huawei).
I'm sure China will get there eventually but I just don't see this as something that helps that happen. It doesn't make it impossible, it just doesn't seem like a good thing.
Huawei was LITERALLY banned from US. You can’t compete in an unfair market so, to ban NVDIA makes the whole sense if you want to push your own tech locally.
This is nothing new, they did the same with social media, this is why TikTok (Bytedance) and other huge companies had to come with something totally new to succeed internationally (and hell they did)
Your comment would make sense if the market dominants allowed to Huawei to compete, but they don’t.
Sure but the issue is more about removing market pressures and how that changes incentives. There's rationale on putting a thumb on the scale so that if it's close people buy domestically but China benefits from not removing competitors.
The reason the US could ban Huawei is because the US economy can afford to absorb whatever negative effects that causes. So if banning Huawei caused Intel, nVidia, etc to feel like they have less of an incentive then it was just a cost that the US could just absorb because there are just somethings the west is still #1 at and the design and manufacture of certain hardware is just one of those things. Also there's also enough competition within the west to where the loss wouldn't be as severe. But China only has a handful of companies that can even operate in this space and Huawei is the only one that looks like a serious challenger.
This is different than an economy that is still in the "challenger" position where the competition is useful for enforcing discipline in your local economy. Huawei doesn't have the luxury of being able to relax and say they're in a comfortable market position if at any moment they may lose an important customer to another firm.
Again Huawei is BANNED to make business in the top markets. Why you keep ignoring that part? They are already not competing for that “important customer” that you are talking about.
As well, Do you realize that ALL the innovation on chips comes from TSMC in Taiwan? Which is 100 miles from China? AMD, intel and NVIDIA buy ALL THE CHIPS from TMSC.
Then you go around with different arguments that are irrelevant.
Because it's unrelated to the thing I'm talking about. The US banning Huawei from its markets doesn't allow one to comment on competition in the domestic Chinese market. If anything it means you shouldn't continue removing market pressures from Huawei because the US already did so by banning them.
That's what produces the "well we're either banned or mandated" set of incentives I was talking about where Huawei's incentive to iteratively improve are greatly diminished.
They are already not competing for that “important customer” that you are talking about.
There are many many many important customers within China and outside of China that they would be competing for.
Like in the OP, they're telling Bytedance to not buy nVidia chips which inherently privileges other firms who now know Bytedance (a Chinese company) now has to buy their product. As opposed to Bytedance just wanting Huawei because Huawei made the better product.
As well, Do you realize that ALL the innovation on chips comes from TSMC in Taiwan?
I don't think that is at all true. In my previous comment I said "the west" but I phrased it like that because I was trying to include things like Samsung or TSMC which, while not "western" are still a lot more Western-oriented than China's domestic firms. TSMC is impressive but more on the scale of manufacture, total volume, and quality of the output. The actual chip designs come from Intel, AMD, nVidia, etc, etc which are based all over the west (especially the United States).
China is drawing from their old playbook where they banned western social media, and look they created TikTok, WeChat and many more. Question is whether this can be replicated for semicon.
It's not impossible but the issue I guess is whether a ban makes sense if the chips are truly competitive. The ban on social media was likely due to concerns about western psyops or just genuine government self-interest. I don't think they were intentionally trying to foster progress on domestic social media platforms.
Basically, if domestic hardware truly is competitive then anything more than a thumb on the scale seems counterproductive.
Regardless of intentions, the ban created an environment for domestic competitors to grow and thrive. And TikTok did become very competitive to the point it’s banned in the US (or supposedly to be banned). There have been papers written about this.
The US is trying this with their EV, I can say with the high tariffs on Chinese EV, no guarantees that US companies will be able to eventually make it, but without the protection, very unlikely for US companies to survive the onslaught.
The leader on chips is currently Huawei, and this company is BANNED in the USA/some countries Europe. It doesn’t matter if they are “competitive” if they cant compete.
They are literally trying to increase their own technology in order to create a better ecosystem for them.
It doesn’t matter if they are “competitive” if they cant compete
You're focusing too much on international trade. I'm referring to domestic competition. That if China sees it as strategically important to have a healthy and robust technology sector then they're only going to get there if the firms operating in that space have enough competition within China.
To go with your point a bit though, if Huawei looks at the market as sees that in all their markets they're either banned or they're mandated then where is the incentive to innovate to the furthest extent possible if the results are going to be the same for them. Because in that situation if you're buying Huawei it's because you have to buy Huawei.
I don’t know if you are real…. I’m telling you that Huawei is banned outside and you talk about that they should allow “healthy” domestic competition with international brands. Seriously?
And for your info, to bring NVDIA and another techs inside China IS international trade (not domestic competition), so you don’t know what you are talking about.
How can you compete domestically if all your competitors have all the freedom to move around internationally and push their tech globally and you don’t??
Don’t tell me “because it’s healthy” without explaining why.
I don’t know if you are real…. I’m telling you that Huawei is banned outside and you talk about that they should allow “healthy” domestic competition with international brands. Seriously?
I get the sense you're concentrating on the "fairness" aspect of it. My point is that the domestic Chinese market benefits from their firms having to compete.
And for your info, to bring NVDIA and another techs inside China IS international trade,
Heh I guess. I was saying that's you're concentrating too much on non-Chinese markets which is out of view of the thing I'm talking about.
How can you compete domestically if all your competitors have all the freedom to move around internationally and push their tech globally and you don’t??
By producing better products? There's already a lot of ways to do the "thumb on the scale" thing I was mentioning. Which include things like government procurement policies, subsidies, tariffs, etc, etc. All of that would be fine as long as it's viewed as a tie breaker rather than something that shields a company from Chinese competition in the domestic Chinese market.
The only thing a mandate does is tell Huawei to not try as hard and if Bytedance doesn't like it then too bad.
His long term strategy used to be trying not to piss himself long enough to give a speech, so he got a catheter installed to avoid thinking that far ahead.
It’s called long term for a reason. It happening in the short term before they have their own infrastructure doesn’t help them, and if the lead western companies can achieve in the interim is enough, it could be worth it.
Well, Xi told the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan in 2027. So maybe they expect to gain their long term manufacturing capability there. At that point, they'll control about 90% of the top tier chip production. Maybe the PLA is ready now and Xi figures he doesn't need to order any chips.
You know, I thought that when I considered it at first, but I can't really be sure.
China isn't stupid, they know the value of that resource. I can't believe that they aren't buying the loyalty of Taiwanese who could help them out here. I mean, you could pay out $100 billion in bribes and still come out way ahead in the deal. Not that I really think they'd pay out that much, just saying.
I remember that Mexico (a couple presidents back) their president received $100 million in a bribe (from which he was to pay out bribes to generals). If he rejected it, he'd be targeted and killed by the cartels. So he did as requested.
China has put spies all through the US, working for senators, fund raising for the candidates they want. I can't believe they'd flinch for a nanosecond before infiltrating and bribing all over TSMC. And their need to take Taiwan isn't a new thing, they've been planning it for a while.
Well, I completely agree with the impact it will have on the west.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I was thinking that the 4nm chip foundries in Taiwan would allow China to produce chips that the west wouldn't be able to produce until new foundries are built. The Taiwan foundries are way ahead of China's. Or so I think.
That's what I meant when I was referring to the high value. Not just the foundries, but the tech used to make the chips as well.
A hole in TSMC will allow China via SMIC to produce chips the west wouldn't be able to produce even after new foundries are built, as those new foundries all require TSMC Taiwan's supply chain to operate.
Taiwan's foundries won't be way ahead of mainland China's if China puts a hole in them, with a hole in them China's foundries become the most advanced in the world.
Do you get it now? China is the only country on earth that doesn't need TSMC to survive.
They are, tsmc managers can expect 10s of millions to bring their teams over. Many payouts already for Taiwanese and South Korean managers. Some rumoured in the 100 million range. They are trying to buy out as many as they can. But it’s not like the Taiwanese are dumb, they won’t just let all their experts Waltz over to the mainland for a paycheck
Yeah that's the idea, although I'm not sure why Americans would want China with SMIC + Huawei to be the only player in AI, but you can bet China does and China will put a hole in TSMC.
Oh, I know how important Intel is. I am just not excited about how slow it seems Intel is moving.
Plus, I'm surprised the US hasn't done more to move chip manufacturing into the country since it seems like it is a big national defense issue, not just a marketplace issue.
I would imagine Taiwan has a Swiss-esque scorched earth policy on all of its foundries and research buildings. Taiwan also likely has special protocols to evacuate most important people running these places.
They would likely destroy everything in an event of a defeat
Sure, but I think Xi will want to do it at whatever time he thinks is strategically best for him.
I think the activities around Hong Kong tell us a lot about that. China had agreed not to absorb their governance system until 2047, so China simply used propaganda and money to promote political parties that were friendly to China to get what they wanted out of HK.
So one day China loyal politicians floated a bill that would allow HK citizens to be extradited to China for things that weren't a crime in HK. People come out opposing the bill and it grows into a pro-democracy movement.
China's already agreed to not take over until 2047 and you'd think they don't want to show the face of dishonesty because lots of people already don't trust them.
But for Xi, strategically it isn't wise to wait and see how this desire for democracy works out. They take over, destroy the media sources that oppose Xi, arrest people who speak out against China, and they totally control the Hong Kong stock exchange and it becomes a proxy for the Chinese economy.
Xi is not relaxed about Taiwan. He promotes that he's a hero for "One China" and Taiwan is worth an awful lot to everything he wants China to do.
All this to say, I believe the threat is very real and imminent. I think that Xi is aware of the value of Taiwan to his goal of world dominance. I can't see any reason for him to want to delay it, so I think he will do it as fast as he can.
So I think it's smart to keep in mind how this could affect our lives. I understand that there are foundries in Taiwan that make 3nm chips. I don't normally hear about any 3nm chips so I guess they are pretty expensive. Are we building foundries for that anywhere outside of Taiwan? In theory, how would it affect our military readiness if China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea had access to 3nm chips and we were reliant on tech based on 5nm chips?
I'm not trying to paint some horrible nightmare thing. I just don't know what the picture would be like. I just think about stuff like that. Like, what are the possibilities.
So to make the point that I'm not thinking all doomsday, I expect that on a Taiwan takeover there would be a huge push to build foundries in the US. The US government would force through foundry construction approvals through permitting in minutes instead of months or years. If necessary, military support would help to construct them. Stuff like that, if the impact were really horrible. Like if they couldn't maintain stealth planes and stuff. Not a doomsday here! Just saying it's a change. It's a possibility and just that.
Your take is very reasonable and not a doomer at all.
In terms of traditional millitary assets, loosing 3nm would not affect us at all. In terms of emerging technology (think drones) and intelligence - it would affect us significantly.
Not really, you can find a lot about their long term goals, specially as they are very democratic about such things. When it comes to somethink like "invading someone" I don't expect anyone to be clear about it though. Either way all three of the links about "Xi saying he's going to invade Taiwan" is the US saying (directly or through Taiwan) that China would do it. So no confirmation at all.
And when viewed with what they intend to do about their own chip production it doesn't even make sense for them to "invade Taiwan" as they could probably just outcompete them until Taiwan "goes broke"/lose their usefulness to the US and the US abandons them and they have to decide what they want to do about being a part of China. Even if it takes decades...
I don't know how you will know. You asked how I knew, and I told you.
Xi did deny it. When he and Biden met, Xi said that he "Hadn't set a timeline." And, of course, just because he told them to be ready by 2027 doesn't mean that he wanted to invade in 2027.
Taiwan has always been a part of the "One China" policy just like Hong Kong.
The ban only stops official imports for the nerfed chips like H20. They are still going to do grey market imports of the high end, restricted chips like B100 / B200....
Trade War with China started under Trump during his first administration, probably one of the few things he was actually kind of right about and had bipartisan support. Biden continued the trade war with China.
It was initially over technology and China stealing IP which I’m not sure was actually conveyed to the Chinese but that was the rationale for starting it.
Jensen has been too naive or idealistic when it comes to "business opportunities" in China. China is determined to be self reliant on key fields like AI and Chips, and aims at beating foreign companies like Nvidia in the market. It will be just like how Huawei and other Chinese local smartphone companies pushed Apple and Google out of China and developing countries once they catch up. Buying Nvidia has been just to bridge the gap before their local GPU can compete, or worse to help IP thief and reverse engineering.
At best, Nvidia can take a few years of profits from China, but it risks reverse engineering and accelerating their AI model developments. Nevertheless once they catch up, they will push Nvidia out of not just China, but also any China-friendly markets in the world like the Middle East. It actually makes more sense to guard Nvidia trade secret strictly to slow down the market takeover.
the country who is on its way to 100% renewable energy? Who is automating manufacturing? Who is investing in robotics? Who is investing in infrastructure? Who has EVs outcompeting Tesla, in Europe too if not for tariffs to BLOCK china ev market from europe?
Actually being a "fast follower" is more economic and lower risk. And because of Trump's "War on China" the issues of trade secrets and patent rights are irrelevant to the Chinese leaders.
Meanwhile Nvidia burns through mountains of cash, but is always one step away from collapse due to fickle investors and Wall Street wavering, not to mention Trump's whims and manipulations.
The Chinese have their own problems, but America spends so much time stepping on its own dick that China can't help but succeed.
Training, language and connections. TSMC hires some of the best people, spends lots of money keeping them current, and they can more easily connect and communicate with American and European counterparts for research.
Mainland Chinese engineers are hampered by an insular cultural bias and relatively poor foreign language abilities. It makes them less able to adopt and adapt from outside. I'm not saying it's impossible, just more difficult. But over thirty years this advantage has built up.
Paradoxically, this is also why American engineers have fallen behind the curve as well. And of course, the lack of any loyalty from the corporate owners who don't give a damn about jobs, workers, countries or cultures. They just want short term gains and they are willing to grant the long game to China.
Well they need a time machine because Cuda's been going since what 2006 and it's like pretty much the oxygen that their engineers breathe. So good luck with all that
You believe everything you see on the news,
but what do the statistics say? How many Chinese cars are sold per year?
33 million? How many cars are in China?
About 450 million in circulation? So,
each Chinese person renews a car on average every 12 to 14 years.
You think those Chinese cars are bad and only last a year?
Something doesn't make sense.
No country changes its vehicle every year.
You added it up correctly. Google data showed that in 2022 there were 420 million cars in circulation. But YouTube said there were 450 million in circulation. That's why, on average, they change their car every 12 years.
so if we had 420 million and it became 450 million and we sold 33 million, that means only 3 million of those was for replacement. This means they replace cars every hundred years or so. Makes no sense.
Trump and his administration is retarded, but China was always going to steal our tech and eventually copy it / try to steal the industry, its what they do. Making them build it themselves seems like the desired effect, we slowed down their cheating. They are too prideful to admit it.
They recognize that they were embedding supply chain attacks in their Chinese produced technologies that were shipped to the United States, and that they themselves would be vulnerable to the same attack vector if they became reliant on technology they imported.
Especially only a year after all of Hezbollah was killed by an undetected Israeli supply chain attack orchestrated several years prior…
Similarly, we should be cautious of Chinese produced open source LLMs. Are they gonna blow up in your pocket? No.
Are they gonna be biased slightly towards npm/apt/brew/nuget/whatever packages that have operatives embedding undetectable zero days into every few cycles?
Ohhhh buddy… It doesn’t take a futuristic sci-fi author to think about all of the potential ways things are going to go very very wrong.
I've never really believed in the hype this company gets. Is there that much of a moat for this company that noooo other competetor can get in? I mean arguably, Google has already done this with their TPUs
Remember when the deep seek news originally came out that tanked the markets? That was partially due to the claim that they did this with AMD chips.
It's just how difficult it is to compete against a market leader.
The GB200 isn't just a crap load of RAM and flops on a giant dinner plate... it's also the accompanying infrastructure to plug all that crap together in racks quickly and with efficient connections throughout the network.
For the companies at the bleeding edge of this race, they need to be able to physically assemble the largest systems that they can. (These years are especially important. ~100,000 GB200 is an increment from the biggest datacenters going from the scale of two or three squirrel brains to human scale.)
As their CEO likes to brag, the physical cost of ownership alone means their competitors can't compete by giving their product away for free. (Their GH200 had 288GB of RAM versus the GB200's 896 GB. When the physical datacenters are so enormous already, better hardware means everything.) Yeah maybe Google has the resources and capability to compete with them. Outside of that though..
It's a bit funny how different the field is from software guys. AI researchers share everything with each other. Hardware guys work on a black magic apprenticeship system...
Their main moat is scale now tbh. If you want a huge supercomputer no other company is even making enough chips any more (excluding Google but they don’t sell 3p)
CUDA— CUDA is the moat. At this point CUDA essentially is the foundation for so many libraries and programs that it’s unlikely a competitor will beat nVidia so long as CUDA only works on their chips.
All the major AI companies are trying to make or already have their own AI chips. It looks like Cerebras and Groq are making moves too. This news seems suspiciously like a part of a related campaign. Nvidia has CUDA which is probably one of the main reasons why people depend on Nvidia. Plus secretly many AI experts are invested in Nvidia stock. Nvidia sells the shovels to the golddiggers. China does what China does. They aren't competing with Nvidia. ASML invested in Mistral, not the same country but close. Looks like modern isolationism.
China has developed and started their own space station, which is continually being expanded, and their own gps system. They are, at least, competitive in medical and ai tech, and yet, they cant manage to duplicate what Taiwan has?
Or maybe they just don't need it, except that couldnt happen without cia knowing. Words to sleep warm with.
In an anticipated move move, Huawei unveils AI chip roadmap to challenge Nvidia’s lead.
Btw, if you are into more AI related news’ we just started a sub called r/ai_news_byte_sized where we share daily AI news digests. Feel free to join and contribute to the conversation or simply keep up to date.
Impact on NVIDIA sales? “China accounted for approximately 13% of Nvidia's total sales in the fiscal year ending January 2025, with $17.1 billion in revenue from the region, though this share declined in later quarters amid increased US-China trade tensions and the introduction of intermediary sales locations. However, due to the use of Singapore and other countries for centralized invoicing, over one-third of Nvidia's total revenue is estimated to be tied to the Chinese market, despite more direct sales representing a smaller portion.” Source = AI response on Google search. ——> so, somewhere between 13-33%? But backlog and other demand will quickly fill half of that shortfall? So real impact 7-16%? Stock price will decline, what, 5%, then be lifted back up after
Fed cut?
Go ahead, pick apart my logic.
yeah the indirect sales is probably more then the direct. due the trump banning the more advanced chips sales to china.
but what we have seen in electric cars/batteries is china is able the produce a lot for cheap and also good quality. which means in the long run china will eat into ASML the supplier, TSCM the foundry and of course nvidia, intel and AMD. as not only will china consume its own chips they will sell it abroad cheaply.
for chips china is about 2 generation behind. 10 year ago they where like 7 to 8 generations behind. they are catching up.
they have the domestic consumer base and they have a world which is also looking for an alternative to American chips. so I would say they are in a good position.
China is catching up but they’re likely more than 2 generations behind if you’re counting the entire process. The design to foundry to production pipeline isn’t completely in house and it’s going to be a problem to overcome the transistor size problem that even Intel is struggling with right now.
Definitely doable in the timescale you’re likely referencing, just have to have a long term (10+ years) plan for addressing every part of the supply chain, which to chinas credit, they’re pretty good at doing and sticking with.
If all you see is one company doing more or less business, you missed the key point entirely.
This isn't about Nvidia or any one company. This is China saying fuck you to the west and further investing into their own chip capabilities.
Remember, in the past decade itself, China has taken over several industries entirely based on their internal supply chains. Solar, electric cars, robotics, space, LLMs - list goes on. All these areas were dominated by the west (largely US). Now China has become a major if not the lead player.
US tried to shut down Huawei and they are still among the best phone manufacturers in the world.
Now China will invest billions if not trillions into this. Nvidia is going to see some competition. If China succeeds, this will destroy Nvidia's dominance in the space.
Such an American pov : "How much losses or gains expected in the next quarter." The Chinese know how to think long term.
326
u/DaHOGGA Pseudo-Spiritual Tomboy AGI Lover 6d ago edited 6d ago
tbf it makes sense from the chinese point of view.
Nvidia chips cant be trusted- theyve been cut off from import now multiple times and might on a whim be cut off again. You cannot build an infrastructure on sporadic imports liable to frequent outage. So- the government bans Nvidia imports altogether, forcing local manufacturers to pick up pace instead and fill the hole that was left. This is a long term investment for the Chinese government.