> I wonder how a truly open project like that could be affected by geopolitics interests, and also, if it would really be effective.
Or in this case, the other way around: how open ISA may affect geopolitics.
RISC-V being free-for-all is a given at this point. But politicians-being-stupid also is. So who knows what they come up with.
Export stops on specific high-perf implementations won't do anything. China would just license from elsewhere, or make their own (which they are perfectly capable of doing).
Not to mention it works both ways: what China contributes to the RISC-V ecosystem, also benefits US interests. Frustrating that with export bans, just creates a lot of hostility for near-0 gain. Read: pointless.
Or in this case, the other way around: how open ISA may affect geopolitics.
RISC-V being free-for-all is a given at this point. But politicians-being-stupid also is. So who knows what they come up with.
Export stops on specific high-perf implementations won't do anything. China would just license from elsewhere, or make their own (which they are perfectly capable of doing).
Not to mention it works both ways: what China contributes to the RISC-V ecosystem, also benefits US interests. Frustrating that with export bans, just creates a lot of hostility for near-0 gain. Read: pointless.