SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
No requests for licenses to sell to the Chinese telecom have been issued to date, Reuters reports.
More than 130 applications have been submitted to the Commerce Department for licenses to sell US goods to Huawei, Reuters reported Tuesday. The report comes nearly two months after the Trump Administration said some sales to the embattled Chinese telecom would be allowed.
President Donald Trump effectively banned US companies from doing business with Huawei in May out of national security concerns that the company is too closely tied to the Chinese government. Huawei has repeatedly said those fears are unfounded.
Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross confirmed the process in July, but the Trump Administration has yet to issue any licenses, Reuters reported, citing people familiar with the matter. The number of applications exceeds the 50 or so Ross said the department had received in July.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 29 2019, @12:50PM (4 children)
After bootstrapping China's supply chain by pushing manufacturing over there,
will cutting off access to the US higher tech supply chain:
A) Help move parts of the chain back to the US
or
B) Force China to create the last bits of chain, making the US less interesting?
It remains to be seen if it will help A, but it seems likely to speed up B.
The plan could work if the US actually had a monopoly on making new stuff, but only an arrogant person would think that.
For some reason, I am drawn to the definition of arrogant:
having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 29 2019, @03:44PM
Overoptimizing profits is the fundamental cause of loss of technology in United States. In computer technology, it all started with intentional destruction of Sperry Univac, and proliferation of cheaper, but technologically inferior IBM, when the MIC owners invented the concept of making more profits by selling cheap weaponry to state for high quality prices. The real quality of weaponry did not matter to them because they expected to never go to a war with a real opponent, only against some socially engineered factions which are no military threat, so poor weapons are good enough. The same happened again and again, to U.S.Robotics, DEC, SUN, now it is Boeing... I observe this is a cultural result of imperial superiority. It is a relief the strategists on other part of the globe thinks otherwise, finally.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 29 2019, @03:50PM
China, Taiwan have whole groups of electronic components that are produced and used only within China. Take, for example, microcontrollers that cost less than 10 cents each [hackaday.com]. Myself, a few years ago I was struggling to find some Japanese memory that seems to exist only for Japanese consumption (datasheets weren't translated.)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 29 2019, @11:01PM (1 child)
You're missing another piece of the puzzle. Innovation and the new manufacturing for that.
Unless China can step up their innovation, the US still have a lead there. Any new manufacturing that comes out of that space plays into the longer game.
So yes, if you only care about short term status quo it looks quite a gamble - but longer term maybe not.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday August 29 2019, @11:44PM
Innovation is why so many Chinese people are studying at western Universities.
In my view they are not really innovating anything yet, but probably will at some point.