[petesergeant]

> She said traditionally Commerce drew a "cutline" and companies like Nvidia would create a new chip "just below" that line ... "That's not productive," Raimondo said

That seems ridiculous at first glance? I'm assuming a "cutline" here is what the maximum performance is allowed to be, and asking companies to add in a fuzzy "extra" bit there, instead of building right to the line is bizarre?

[bbor]

They want them to self-enforce the administrations decision to not enable Chinese AI work. I don’t think they want them to be taking the Chinese professional market into account at all, thus the snarky statement.

[nvm0n2]

This kind of lawmaking seems obvious insane to logical programmer types, but it happens regularly in government. They don't have to implement anything in code, right?

Another example is anti-money laundering laws. They drew a cutline at $10k cash per deposit, so of course criminals started depositing $9,999 at a time. The legislative answer was to say that avoiding the $10k limit is a new crime called "structuring". So what's the actual limit then? There isn't one, you just have to not seem too suspicious. Attempting to follow the law whilst also using a lot of cash is itself a crime.

The other fun one is the suspicious activity reports banks are required to file if a customer does something, er, suspicious. What that means isn't defined anywhere. But eventually the regulators advised that knowing SARs exist is itself suspicious, so merely asking if the bank has filed a SAR on you can trigger the filing of a SAR on you.

[leereeves]

> Attempting to follow the law whilst also using a lot of cash is itself a crime.

The intended way to follow the law is to deposit large sums of cash and report them, which is not a crime.