[billfruit]

"All non-U. S. chip manufacturers using American chipmaking equipment, intellectual property or design software will have to apply for a license before shipping chips to Huawei."

Isn't that really crossing the line; It implies that if a country buys American Equipment/Software then they are at the whims of American policy; American equipment comes with strings attached: Really does not look appealing to many countries this.

What if Huawei rebrand themselves or try to gain a new identity etc, then US regulations has to catch up again.

Moreover is this some sort of punitive measure against Huawei? What if they approach US courts, what shall be the outcome?

[dannyw]

I mean, if you do business in China and recognise Taiwan, you will be shown the door and/or your. business will be literally stolen, so... it's not really different.

It's about time we start making China accountable. It's about time we start blocking Tencent and Alibaba from further American acquisition or investment. It's about time we restrict and throttle CCP-controlled media platforms like Tiktok; the same way China does for Western-owned media platforms.

We can't keep getting punched and just stand still.

[boudin]

This approach will only have impact in short term. You can be sure that TSMC is working behind the scene to create a legal entity to work around this legislation and get one of its main customers back. There's just 2 potential outcomes: - TSMC having found a way to workaround that restrictions and gaining back Huwaeï - China being forced to quickly gain the same level of expertise

In both situation the outcome is even less control for the US.

[scottLobster]

Proper enforcement would prevent TSMC from making those moves, we'll see how that goes. As for China being able to "quickly" produce a TSMC equivalent, if that's the case then the US never really had any control in the first place and at least this way China's disrupted for the next few years, and physically cut off from future IP.

China has proven it won't play by the rules, so let's make it compete on its own with its own resources. Given their dependence on imports for food and energy, exports and bottomless debt for the rest of their economy, for all its size China is not positioned to be cut off from the global economy and remain competitive.

[peteradio]

Total commoditization of the chip making process spread across borders. That greatly reduces the drive for China to invest in the technology, thus removing a handle on the global economy.

[fomine3]

Global Foundries exits 7nm- battle.

[addicted]

The problem with your argument is that for the vast majority of the world the US, and American companies, have spied far more on their communications, and manipulated far more do their politics than anything China has done.

So if those are the calculations the US starts forcing countries to make, the most likely impact will be on American companies before anyone touches the Chinese (largely also because it’s American companies that dominate the internet around the world, and not the Chinese, and restricting internet services will be far easier than physical products for most countries).

[mlindner]

Except the US doesn't enforce US companies to delete and censor specific content in other countries. China's human values are restrictive, US human values are highly tolerant.

[ptx]

> if you do business in China ... it's not really different.

Turning the U.S. into something no different from China is perhaps not what you would want to aim for.

[abstractbarista]

It's fine, because turn around is fair game. American companies operating facilities in China are at the whims of Chinese policy. :)

[DeonPenny]

Thats how all countries approach this especially the US. If you, for example, buy a tank for the US and plan to attack a US ally with it well good luck getting access to the bullets or software updates.

[oblio]

It wouldn't be the first time this happens. Romania was in a defensive alliance with Austria-Hungary in 1914. A-H attacked Serbia and asked Romania to join. Romania said: ummm... it's a defensive alliance.

So far so good, nothing wrong with that.

But in 1916 Romania decided to attack A-H. Okay, I guess?

The dumb part? As former allies, Romania used to get guns and ammo from A-H before 1916. That became a problem post-1916, for obvious reasons :-D

[billfruit]

Iran seemingly continues to operate their fleet of F-14s which US had supplied when the Shah was in control, decades after the relationship soured with the US. It seems even that an Iranian pilot is the top ace with the most kills of all F-14 pilots.

But speaking of Huawei they are'nt in the business of military supplies, they sell commodity telecom gear. Imposing such extreme restrictions, seemingly encroaching upon the sovereignity of other nations, feels strange. In this whole matter, it the US who appears to be acting foremost with political considerations.

[DeonPenny]

I don't think that protection against interference is extended to non-democracy. It's pretty explicitly so.

Also if their weaponization of android and the google OS shows anything if it can be weaponized it will

[billfruit]

I don't think the US legal justice system sees democratic countries and others as different, what matters is that they are sovereign entities.

So politically motivated measures are likely to be drawn into courts.

Also US has/had no issues doing business with many prominent non democratic countries like Saudi Arabia, South Korea (i.e before it transitioned to democracy), etc.