Semiwiki on LinkedIn Semiwiki on Facebook Semiwiki on Twitter Register / Log in 
Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/dutch-export-rules-on-china-in-focus-ahead-of-asml-results.17359/page-2
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021370
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Dutch export rules on China in focus ahead of ASML results

blueone said:
The Patriot Act is mostly about searches and investigations, and mostly about spying on people in the US. Here is an independent analysis of the law:


Can you post an equivalent explanation of the Chinese law in English for those of us unfamiliar with it?
Click to expand...

Apparently，under Patriot Act the US government can force companies to hand over data

www.wired.com

PATRIOT Act Gives Foreigners Good Reason to Avoid US Clouds

Politico is running a fantastic piece on the problems that the PATRIOT Act is raising for American cloud companies in the market for overseas customers. The piece details how foreign cloud customers are worried that the US government will use its expanded surveillance powers to snoop on any data...
www.wired.com www.wired.com
 
tonyget said:
Apparently，under Patriot Act the US government can force companies to hand over data

www.wired.com

PATRIOT Act Gives Foreigners Good Reason to Avoid US Clouds

Politico is running a fantastic piece on the problems that the PATRIOT Act is raising for American cloud companies in the market for overseas customers. The piece details how foreign cloud customers are worried that the US government will use its expanded surveillance powers to snoop on any data...
www.wired.com www.wired.com
Click to expand...
You keep moving the goal posts. I don't want to play anymore.
 
Last edited:
The export controls seem to suffer from the lack of understanding of what makes a module or system an "advanced node" item, when the advanced nodes are well known to have up to 90% reuse. This actually begs the question of why there wasn't a blanket (node-independent) ban in the first place. So I assume this means the US is still getting key parts from China but at "non-advanced" nodes.
 
These “golden shares” often require the state to buy only 1% of a company and yet confer the right to appoint board members and veto important decisions.
Click to expand...
www.economist.com

China’s tech crackdown starts to ease

Firms can breathe more easily
www.economist.com www.economist.com

By the way, heard that Snowden got honor citizenship directly from Putin. It was expected that propaganda machine will start refreshing this topic.

tonyget said:
Really？According to statistics，Xiaomi and Realme's market share increased in 2022 Q3 in Europe

www.counterpointresearch.com

Europe Smartphone Market Down 16% YoY in Q3 2022; Sequential Growth Hints at Stabilisation - Counterpoint

- Europe Smartphone Market Down 16% YoY in Q3 2022; Sequential Growth Hints at Stabilisation - Counterpoint
www.counterpointresearch.com www.counterpointresearch.com
Click to expand...
Try it with more data, it appears to be selection bias...
gs.statcounter.com

Mobile Vendor Market Share Europe | Statcounter Global Stats

This graph shows the market share of mobile vendors in Europe based on over 5 billion monthly page views.
gs.statcounter.com gs.statcounter.com
 
blueone said:
I can see the cycle you describe happening in consumer goods, perhaps even airliners (COMAC), but can you name even one example where it's happened in chip design or manufacturing? Huawei, for example, perhaps China's best example of a high-tech manufacturer, developed their own products. They often used other technologies in their products, like Android to name one, but they don't seem to me to be an example of your cycle. Many Huawei products were just good, to my knowledge. Their telecom equipment is not trusted due the perception that the Chinese government can control them and use their equipment to spy on other countries, but by all accounts they are lower-priced and good performers, and not copies or derivatives.
Click to expand...
I agree. I'll add that "reverse engineer" often just means repairing old stuff bought on the cheap, fixing it up somewhat, maybe using a better battery or screen. By the standards of Samsung or Apple, any repair that improves the phone is an IP violation. But this is how competition is supposed to work, and IP as well: Patents frequently build one small improvement on an existing technology, carving out a small space. I think that for the most part, Huawei is guilty of competition with Apple and Samsung.

Huawei also has a defense division. And that is a red line. For the US, it's a bit like if the Soviet defense industry built phones for AT&T in the 1960s. The Soviet phones were 100% tapped, but they didn't trade these tapped phones with the USA, there was no Internet to transmit the intelligence back then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top