China Bars Purchases of Micron Chips, Escalating US Conflict (msn.com) 175
"China delivered the latest salvo in an escalating semiconductor war with the U.S.," reports Bloomberg, "announcing that Micron Technology Inc. products have failed to pass a cybersecurity review in the country."
In a statement Sunday, Beijing warned operators of key infrastructure against buying the company's goods, saying it found "relatively serious" cybersecurity risks in Micron products sold in the country. The components caused "significant security risks to our critical information infrastructure supply chain," which would affect national security, according to the statement from the Cyberspace Administration of China, or CAC...
Chinese officials privately say that the probe of Micron is part of a broader trend toward the dominance of "pro-retaliation" voices in Beijing, where national security concerns increasingly trump economic arguments. "No one should understand this decision by CAC as anything but retaliation for the US's export controls on semiconductors," said Holden Triplett, founder of Trenchcoat Advisors and a former FBI counterintelligence official in Beijing. "No foreign business operating in China should be deceived by this subterfuge. These are political actions pure and simple, and any business could be the next one to be made an example of." The move brings fresh uncertainty to the other US chipmakers that sell to China, the world's biggest market for semiconductors.
The article notes pointedly that memory chips "aren't usually considered a cybersecurity risk because they don't require any specific software or run code. They're mostly basic grids of transistors used for storing data and, as such, haven't typically been a vector of attack for hackers." The Associated Press describes China's move as "stepping up a feud with Washington over technology and security," adding that Chinese officials "appear to be struggling to find ways to retaliate without hurting China's smartphone producers and other industries and efforts to develop its own processor chip suppliers," which import more than $300 billion in foreign chips every year. An official review of Micron under China's increasingly stringent information security laws was announced April 4, hours after Japan joined Washington in imposing restrictions on Chinese access to technology to make processor chips on security grounds. Foreign companies have been rattled by police raids on two consulting firms, Bain & Co. and Capvision, and a due diligence firm, Mintz Group. Chinese authorities have declined to explain the raids but said foreign companies are obliged to obey the law.
Chinese officials privately say that the probe of Micron is part of a broader trend toward the dominance of "pro-retaliation" voices in Beijing, where national security concerns increasingly trump economic arguments. "No one should understand this decision by CAC as anything but retaliation for the US's export controls on semiconductors," said Holden Triplett, founder of Trenchcoat Advisors and a former FBI counterintelligence official in Beijing. "No foreign business operating in China should be deceived by this subterfuge. These are political actions pure and simple, and any business could be the next one to be made an example of." The move brings fresh uncertainty to the other US chipmakers that sell to China, the world's biggest market for semiconductors.
The article notes pointedly that memory chips "aren't usually considered a cybersecurity risk because they don't require any specific software or run code. They're mostly basic grids of transistors used for storing data and, as such, haven't typically been a vector of attack for hackers." The Associated Press describes China's move as "stepping up a feud with Washington over technology and security," adding that Chinese officials "appear to be struggling to find ways to retaliate without hurting China's smartphone producers and other industries and efforts to develop its own processor chip suppliers," which import more than $300 billion in foreign chips every year. An official review of Micron under China's increasingly stringent information security laws was announced April 4, hours after Japan joined Washington in imposing restrictions on Chinese access to technology to make processor chips on security grounds. Foreign companies have been rattled by police raids on two consulting firms, Bain & Co. and Capvision, and a due diligence firm, Mintz Group. Chinese authorities have declined to explain the raids but said foreign companies are obliged to obey the law.
Business With China (Score:5, Interesting)
The sooner the world stops doing business with China, the better. I would LOVE to see China retaliate by banning the import of ALL foreign goods and services. Maybe the world would finally learn its lesson.
Re:Business With China (Score:4, Informative)
The sooner the world stops doing business with China, the better. I would LOVE to see China retaliate by banning the import of ALL foreign goods and services. Maybe the world would finally learn its lesson.
According to a quick Google search, about 75-80% of all goods sold at Walmart are imported from China and Walmart has the largest share of US retail sales at 6.3%, followed by Amazon and is the leading retailer worldwide by revenue [statista.com], also followed by Amazon.
Re:Business With China (Score:5, Interesting)
According to a quick Google search...
And the ONLY reason for that is the prices match the Chinese-like wages being paid to the workers in the Free world. Eliminating China (and not allowing a similar successor) would require wages to increase accordingly. China's advantages are that they can treat their workers like crap (due to overpopulation), and they completely avoid environmental and related costs of production (among other things) by which other countries must abide.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
So you are implying that workers never get treated like crap, and factories never have environmental problems in the U.S? Both things are catastrophic, nation-threatening problems here - the worker one at least being clearly potentially worse, since we have no healthcare system for people who aren't rich.
Re:Business With China (Score:4)
So you are implying that workers never get treated like crap....
-sigh-
Re: (Score:3)
So you are implying that workers never get treated like crap....
-sigh-
I know, right? Can't even have a simple conversation anymore with this idiocy.
Re: Business With China (Score:5, Informative)
We are grading on a curve here.
In the US, we don't see:
-Workers expected to live at the work building for the entire workweek at the best of times. Only able to see their family in the weekend, sometimes.
-When COVID detected at a workplace, the works becoming a detention center keeping the workers at work and forbidding them from going home. If course they were allowed to keep working if they were well enough, but not see family until the infection passed. I think this is no longer happening, but that it did happen soaks to their general strategy.
-Forced labor from blatantly ethnic camps feeding into the private sector.
There are others all over the place, and the US may be worse than some Western Europeans in this regard, however China does things that even the US left behind about a century ago. We can point out all sorts of BS in the US, but at least some China laborers have it worse.
Re: (Score:2)
Reminds me of the factory that made cards:
https://www.theguardian.com/bu... [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Funny thing is my job involves working with folks in China most days of the week. Some of them admittedly have it pretty good, but with 1.4 billion people there's plenty of room to have that on offer for some and some pretty dystopian work experiences for most.
US has problems to be sure, I never said otherwise. China has some things taht US does not, and there are other western nations that have even other things better and other things off.
Re: (Score:2)
A Chinese sock puppet comparing factory jobs that never change locations to farm work that requires relocating every few weeks - and you think it's comparable?
Re: (Score:2)
You don't see suicide nets at factories in the United States.
Re: (Score:2)
Pfft. Not the same thing. Most people who are going ham at the workplace could just as easily have done so at a bar, church, or retail outlet.
Those people are suffering for reasons not necessarily related to their work. But hey, keep trying to move the goalposts to make your false equivalence hold up.
Re: (Score:3)
You didn't just compare work conditions in the US with those of China with a straight face.... right?
or maybe the millenial view of china as a giant sweatshop and copycat has become a bit out of touch with reality.
cheap labor is only one reason why china can produce cheaper. they produce literally everything which allows for a full local supply chain. in comparison, western companies have to import 80% of their components abroad, mostly from, guess where, china. they also are subject to ruthless competition which means very small operating margins: chinese companies make actually less money than their west
Re: (Score:2)
i did warn one needs to get rid of their millennial mindset. that's a over decade old. and those "facts" are actually big headlines about specific incidents, e.g. that was mostly foxconn and most of that workforce are robots now anyway.
also i haven't denied that work conditions are harder in china than in the west. i tried to explain why that workforce (for the most part) hasn't rebelled and seems to be mostly ok with it, and why the whole set of circumstances allows for more efficient manufacturing and che
Re: (Score:2)
or maybe the millenial view of china as a giant sweatshop and copycat has become a bit out of touch with reality.
China is a giant sweatshop, and copycat.
These are facts.
It hasn't changed in the last decade, that's a narrative you invented.
What is new, is that there is a local effort to fight the culture you say doesn't exist [wikipedia.org].
Like I said, stop spreading misinformation.
Re: (Score:2)
You [business-humanrights.org] are a [reuters.com] fucking liar. [reuters.com]
yeah, well, that's shein, the chinese version of inditex. you know, kid slave labor all over asia, very much like all top fashion/sport clothing brands in the west ... just cheaper. much, much cheaper.
i'm a bit bemused of how upset you get by "my narrative". struck a chord? anyway, be my guest, you can happily keep yours. it's outdated, but the world doesn't really care and neither do i, i have not the slightest interest in convincing you otherwise. it's fine to disagree and your insults only speak for your
Re: (Score:2)
It's only outdated in the sense that you seem to have embraced the postfactual world we now seem to live in.
very much like all top fashion/sport clothing brands in the west
In no way would I begin to argue that the west doesn't profit off of the "kid slave labor".
But the fact is, they're paying Chinese companies to do that shit.
Tell you what.
Why don't you provide some evidence that the viewpoint that China is not the largest source of counterfeit goods and has literally the worst working conditions in the
Re: (Score:2)
I eagerly await your rebutting evidence.
But more likely, what you're going to do, is fail (for what, the 5th correspondence?) to provide a single piece of evidence backing up your assertion, just continually making it so that it sticks into the minds of those who read it.
You said it. You don't give one squirt of piss for what the truth is. You've got a narrative that you can't back up, but it doesn't matter because it's yours. Others, true or not,
Re: (Score:2)
Can he not read English or something? I'd think your supervisor could tell if you were simply arguing against strawmen.
Parent brought up: working conditions in factors, work culture, and quality of products produced.
Christ, I hope you troll farm workers aren't paid very fucking much.
Re: (Score:2)
Or can we agree that you were full of it?
You cherry picked a couple of factories that got busted and moved to automation where they could.
In no fucking way does that represent the norm.
It is certainly the direction it's going, and another decade... maybe 2... your claims will become true (most likely)
But for right now? Complete and utter horseshit.
Re: (Score:2)
You think it changed in a decade? lol.
Re: (Score:2)
Counterfeit and pirated goods from China, together with transshipped goods from China to Hong Kong, accounted for 75% of the value of counterfeit and pirated goods seized by U.S. Customs and Border Protection in 2021
SHANGHAI (Reuters) - More than 40 percent of goods sold online in China last year were either counterfeits or of bad quality, the official Xinhua news agency said, illustrating the extent of a problem that has bogged down the fast-growing online sector.
Shill says what about labor conditions? [cnbc.com]
Fuck off, bot.
Re: (Score:2)
"China leads the world in counterfeit products"...Fails to comprehend China leads the world in just about all products.
Fails to comprehend no such thing.
40% of everything made in China is counterfeit.
Factor that in, and China doesn't lead the world in shit in products anymore... just counterfeits.
How is it even related to work conditions?... It isn't.
Shill says what about labor conditions? [cnbc.com] (Try clicking the link this time, you fucking moron)
But wait, there's more. [chinalaborwatch.org]
And more. [business-humanrights.org]
And more. [wikipedia.org]
Fuck off, bot.
Re: (Score:3)
But we still have a long fucking way to go before we revert far enough back into the 19th century for a comparison to be worthwhile.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a bit dated. China's wages are going up, so much so that Chinese manufacturers are moving production overseas. Some of them are abandoning China entirely given the recent trade spat between China and the United States/the rest of the Free World(tm).
Re: (Score:2)
I understand some of the manufacturing is moving out of China to Vietnam and other places because the wages in China have increased alot over the years.
So it may just be a bit of time that instead of one "factory to the world" we will have many "factories to the world" with each concentrating on different sectors.
Re:Business With China (Score:4, Funny)
eyes rolling (Score:3)
Add to that art, poetry, beauty, medicine, and generally caring for others. Did you forget about those?
Re: (Score:2)
You are thinking too small. Apple gave reasons for why it is not easy to move out of China. Mostly these were about the engineering infrastructure. China can throw thousands of engineers at a problem, and the supply chains are not about just the final widget but all the multiple widgets that go into the final widget. And China has engineers for all of them ready to go. That's not an easy thing to replicate in, say, Vietnam and the other Asian low cost countries.
Now if the U.S. had started paying attention t
Re: Business With China (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And your plan to deal with the unemployed masses and ensuing economic collapse is? how many lives is your plan worth?
Re: Business With China (Score:2)
True that tribalism by itself is a dangerous sentiment, but at least you want a level paying field with respect to environmental protections and general treatment of labor. For many industries, China does not provide that at present.
Re: Business With China (Score:2)
Level playing field? Rofl. It seems some think it's only level when it is to their advantage. Some countries have gained their advantage by using the same techniques and worse, and by getting the world into it's current ecological position, and yet they blame China, or any one else, for not complying with rules made up specifically to maintain the advantage of said countries.
China is rightly saying, "piss off" and can do as it likes.
Re: (Score:2)
but at least you want a level paying field
Absolutely. That's what tariffs are for. Remind people that the next time they promote a free trade agreement as a good thing.
Re: (Score:2)
China is not a 'token' evil country, it's the real fucking deal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seems good in theory. China is an anti-democratic nation that is quickly gaining influence in the world. But in terms of geopolitics, it is a huge mistake to cut off trade with other nations. Backing any nation into a corner historically leads to conflict.
Re: (Score:2)
The sooner the world stops doing business with China, the better.
The shareholders of the vast American corporation I work for would be very annoyed if that happened, due to the $ billion or so in profits they get from China every year.
You're blaming the wrong people.
Re: (Score:2)
China is Confused! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How? they just helped YMTC.
DRAM != Memory Products (Score:5, Interesting)
From TFS:
"[Memory Chips] aren't usually considered a cybersecurity risk because they don't require any specific software or run code. They're mostly basic grids of transistors used for storing data and, as such, haven't typically been a vector of attack for hackers."
Trouble is, Micron not only sell Memory Chips, but also memory products. Those are Flash Drives, Flash DIMMs, and (in the future) CLX modules. And all three of those have microcontrollers, that run software and, among other things, handle the native encription of said devices.
Conceptually, Micron could weaken the encription of their devices at the behest of the 3 letter agencies of their home countries.
Having said that, I believe that Micron is a much threat to cybersecurity as Huawei and ZTE are threats to cyeber security. Or, to put it in other words, China is using the same excuse to punish ONE USoA company that the USoA has used to punish MANY chinese companies (Huawei, ZTE, YMTC, SMIC, Tik-Tok, etc).
PS: I live in Venezuela, I'll happily use Huawei, ZTE, CISCO, Micron et al. I have no particular beef in the USoA vs. China in either direction.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, RAM can be vector of attack, when used by government actors. For example, memory chip can detect I wrote some specific sequence of values and dump me entire RAM to some region accessible by me.
Fucking nonsense.
It's time to brush up the knowledge on what page tables are.
If you aren't accessing RAM through a page table, then you already have access to all of RAM.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:DRAM != Memory Products (Score:5, Informative)
RAM chips don't just not know what's in the MMU's head- they don't even know their own fucking address with respect to the physical address space of the CPU, much less the virtual address space of any process- and that blindness goes both directions.
Don't try to church some reality into this nonsense.
Note, I'm not for a second saying that you can't exploit hardware problems in RAM chips. RowHammer and the very clever ways it's been used are great examples. But still, that veil has never been pierced, and it relies on blasting garbage across RAM until the system reboots, or you get lucky and hit a PTE.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You could have thought a bit before replying.
Na, I'm pretty sure I'm good. Let's see, though.
Page size is finite and the absolute address is irrelevant for an attack that goes like this: "Hmm, this 4K area (or 2MB area) just got written with the signature of an interesting traffic header - I shall leak the rest of this information in that page via my side channel".
This would be a fascinating development, indeed.
So, our 4K CPU page is filled- let's say with the buf of an skb- right off the wire.
Which DRAM does your signature end up in?
Do these DRAMs also have magical side channels to talk to each other?
Let's say all DRAMs *can* magically talk to each other and re-assemble said signature, and then dump a 4K page to some side channel... A confusing concept for them, of course, since DRAMs don't have page tables, and t
Re: (Score:2)
RAM can be vulnerable to things like Rowhammer attacks, or it can be designed to resist them. I wouldn't be surprised if similar issues exist for flash memory.
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure where you're going with those assertions, but the current discussion is about
Also, RAM can be vector of attack, when used by government actors. For example, memory chip can detect I wrote some specific sequence of values and dump me entire RAM to some region accessible by me.
being nonsensical due to how logical RAM access gets turned into physical alterations of address and data lines on a group of DRAMs.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a REASON, not an "excuse." I guess we see where your bias leans.
Re: (Score:3)
Having said that, I believe that Micron is a much threat to cybersecurity as Huawei and ZTE are threats to cyeber security.
Really? You’d put black box networking equipment that routinely deals with data from massive sums of people and is, by its nature, Internet-connected and thus would have a far easier time exhilarating data, hijacking connections, or reporting on who is talking to whom on par with memory?
I agree that both can be used for nefarious purposes, and I certainly don’t blame China for playing the game by engaging in some tit-for-tat, but the threat posed by the former is far greater.
Re: (Score:2)
Shouldn't they be banning all CPUs/GPUs manufactured outside China as well? Intel, AMD, Nvidia, all the various ARM variations made by TSMC, Samsung, etc outside China?
After all those chips are for sure having logic built in, unlike general RAM / memory which does not really have much in the way of logic circuits, if at all any.
That would make more sense, compared to banning Micron. Of course that will also kill alot of China's progress as well.
Would be interesting to watch, at the least.
Theater and Theatrics. (Score:2)
Hello, Micron? (Score:2)
Yeah, mmmm hmm, this is China. Yeah, um, you're black. The answer to the question "Can this be any more black?" is none. None more black.
One side effect of all this (Score:2)
The US' has always implied it'd defend Taiwan against attack (well, until Biden actually said it more or less on the record). But the hotter this trade war gets, the more it is certain the US would *have* to respond militarily to any attempt by China to conquer Taiwan.
Re: (Score:2)
The beef was with the Communist boogeyman, not the dictators.
Taiwan was a military dictatorship until 1987.
Re: (Score:2)
A real gem, you must be.
Re: (Score:2)
Person I replied to is attempting to rewrite history into some stupid fucking trope about China hating "them freedumbs", and us protecting Taiwan "for teh Democracy!", when the fact is, Chinese and Taiwanese relations are 1000x better since Taiwan became a democracy (unsurprising, since it was no longer controlled by a military dictatorship that ideologically wanted the Chinese dead), and the US has stationed the 7th Fleet to protect Formosa since the 1950s
Re: (Score:2)
China is all about destroying freedom; it drives everything they do.
You ridicule that, but what you seem to miss is that the CCP philosophy is about both world domination (the "China Dream"), AND about extreme control of every aspect of everyone's life. The latter is motivated by a deathly fear of the populace (Tiananmen Square and the collapse of the Soviet Union are their boogeymen). CCP propaganda is intense and is all about how democracy is decadent and evil, and slavish devotion to the state.
So it's
Re: (Score:2)
China is all about destroying freedom; it drives everything they do.
Idiot comment. Don't be an idiot. Nobody like an idiot.
You ridicule that, but what you seem to miss is that the CCP philosophy is about both world domination (the "China Dream"), AND about extreme control of every aspect of everyone's life. The latter is motivated by a deathly fear of the populace (Tiananmen Square and the collapse of the Soviet Union are their boogeymen). CCP propaganda is intense and is all about how democracy is decadent and evil, and slavish devotion to the state.
Eh, CCP philosophy is about staying in power. No more, no less.
Let's evaluate some actual facts.
Taiwan was a military dictatorship until 1987.
A state of open warfare (literal artillery exchanges across the straight for decades) existed.
Then, the military dictatorship who's stated goal was to re-unify the mainland under ROC rule fell, and was replaced by a democratic government.
Know what happened next? The shells stopped falling. For the first tim
Re: (Score:2)
China wants it because they hate freedom
More US wank. China wants it because it was Chinese territory that it inherited from the fall of the Qing and the Republican government, and was then stolen by Japan in a genocidal war. Stupid yanks got to stop eating their own dogshit.
Russian troll much? Or maybe you're Dutch. The dumbest shit ever here seems to be posted by people from those 2 places.
Just so you know, the Chinese Communist Party has not for one day ever controlled Taiwan. Ever. So the idea that it "belongs" to them is straight up not true. Yes everybody who says that China only wants it to destroy its democracy is correct.
Re: (Score:3)
the Chinese Communist Party has not for one day ever controlled Taiwan. Ever. So the idea that it "belongs" to them is straight up not true.
It's irrelevant. They inherited it from the downfall of the Qing and the Republican government.
Yes everybody who says that China only wants it to destroy its democracy is correct.
Only American dickheads seem to think people wage wars because "they hate freedom".
Geopolitical and economic aims are the only reasons countries actually go to war for.
Re: (Score:3)
But in this case, the cool heads have analyzed the China/Taiwan situation and theyve concluded that a big part of China’s massive hate boner for Taiwan is because it’s a functioning democracy that’s truly Chinese. Xi and the CCP present their Emperor-style government as the only viable option for Chinese people. All those other government types are for evil foreigner devils, and inferior as well. But, while they t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wish I could upvote your comment a thousand times.
Re: (Score:2)
American analysts continue to make wrong assessments about China. They're anything but "cool heads". Whatever side you're on about the issue, none of it is helped when people like hdyoung's analysts invent narratives that have nothing to
Re: (Score:2)
You might do better with better arguments, rather than demeaning people.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I've been replying to the wrong comments. My eyes are going, unfortunately.
Re: One side effect of all this (Score:2)
Singapore is far from being a democracyâ¦
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, Singapore is a functioning Westminster Parliamentary Democracy.
But Singapore also greatly demonstrates one of the superiorities of the US system.
Singapore is a borderline despotic democracy, because there's no real constitutional limit on a Westminster Parliament's power.
Any standard Freedom index you look at is going to place the US *far, far, far* above Singapore.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need to bring up Singapore; it's obvious that the CCP hates freedom, heck they thwart freedom in every single thing they do, domestically and in foreign policy, just like their allies Iran, N. Korea, and Russia.
TheEvilAtheist seems to think policy can't stem from more than one place. In most things, China acts to dominate and control, and democracy is the one thing that gets in the way of that, as it functions best in the light of day, where they can't use bribery and violence to get and maintain
Re: (Score:2)
How about I do anyway?
Re: (Score:3)
Taiwan was a military dictatorship until 1987.
China doesn't hate your freedumbs, and their beef with Taiwan extends because that's where the "Republicans" ran away to, a word I use very loosely since calling Chiang Kai-shek a Republican is like calling Mao Zedong the second coming of Gandhi.
Re: (Score:2)
The Chinese Fascists fled to Taiwan and set up an alternative government there. Both they and the CCP claimed to be the legitimate government of all of China.
Eventually Taiwan overcame fascism and became a democracy. Good for them. At that point they largely stopped claiming to be the government of all of China, but of course the CCP didn't.
The CCP is wedded to the idea and can't let it go without losing face.
Re: (Score:2)
In no way am I trying to argue that the Taiwanese aren't in fact "the good guys now".
I'm arguing that narratives like:
But in this case, the cool heads have analyzed the China/Taiwan situation and theyve concluded that a big part of China’s massive hate boner for Taiwan is because it’s a functioning democracy that’s truly Chinese.
Are horseshit, as the Chinese hate-boner for Taiwan predates democracy in Taiwan by almost 40 years, and relations have never been better *since* democracy came to Taiwan, which makes sense, since democracy allowed them to move away from being fascist pricks with stated goals of destroying the PRC, alllowing the PRC to
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, you are right. The CCP doesn't hate democracy anyway. It's not like it tries to effect "regime change" in other countries to become communist, not that the CCP is communist either.
It's just the same shitty old propaganda, these people hate our way of life and are an existential threat to us, no co-existence is possible...
Re: (Score:2)
At some point in the future, the ROC will either dissolve itself and reform as "Taiwan" or some such, or remove the portion of its Constitution that sets the nature of the non-legal State as the government of All of China. At that point, I think it will be a lot harder for the international community to continue to deny them real Statehood. And I think that's a good thing.
It doesn't solve the problem with China not evolving far enough to do that yet, but there's a chance we may get there
Re: One side effect of all this (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just so you know, the Chinese Communist Party has not for one day ever controlled Taiwan. Ever. So the idea that it "belongs" to them is straight up not true. Yes everybody who says that China only wants it to destroy its democracy is correct.
A truly bizarre claim, since as a course of international law, the PRC has sovereignty over the island of Taiwan, and the ROC is a rogue state in control of PRC territory.
Further, relations between Taiwan and China were a state of near open warfare prior to the existence of Taiwanese democracy (1987) and have improved fucking immeasurably since the institution of democracy in Taiwan.
I.e., literally every fucking thing you said was wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
since as a course of international law
How is Ukraine doing, using international law to get Russia out of its territory?
the PRC has sovereignty over the island of Taiwan,
No one recognizes the PRC as having sovereignty over Taiwan, merely that it has a territorial claim. World nations merely recognize that China is in an inactive state of war with the local people of Taiwan. They chose to diplomatically recognize the Chinese gov't and not formally recognize the ROC gov't. No one recognizes China as having a "right" to militarily impose themselves on the governance of resident Taiwanese people
Re: (Score:2)
How is Ukraine doing, using international law to get Russia out of its territory?
Huh? lol.
No one recognizes the PRC as having sovereignty over Taiwan, merely that it has a territorial claim.
Flatly incorrect.
China has sovereignty over Formosa. The PRC is the (current) successor state to China, having been internationally recognized as the winner of the civil war.
This means that China has de jure sovereignty over Formosa.
Of course, de facto sovereignty is exercised by the ROC. But the ROC has no existence in international law, making the matter entirely internal.
World nations merely recognize that China is in an inactive state of war with the local people of Taiwan.
Very much no.
The nails started going in the coffin in the 50s, started getting very serious when most of Europe cut off di
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it was the FORMER rulers of China (ROC) who took control of Taiwan during the civil war. The CCP never ruled it one day, and it has never been recognized internationally to rule it.
Technically speaking, by your logic, the ROC in Taiwan has a stronger claim on the rest of China!
Re: (Score:2)
Your claim that "and it has never been recognized internationally to rule it" is a meaningless statement.
The PRC is the sovereign entity over the territory known as Taiwan in international law.
Of course the reality on the ground is far more complicated than that, both domestically in Taiwan and China, and internationally. But legally, the ROC
Re: One side effect of all this (Score:2)
And until the 1970s Taiwan used to be the internationally recognised ruler of all China.
Re: (Score:2)
However, internationally speaking, the world was split with more and more countries recognizing the PRC as the sole representative of China over time, starting in the 50s.
In 1971, the US stopped being able to marshal the votes in the UN to prevent the PRC from taking the ROCs seat. However, even major powers in the west (United Kingdom, France, Canada, Italy and the Scandinavian countries) had moved their diplomatic relations from the
Re: (Score:2)
Or are you saying because they are less dependent, now they can make war?
Both. Sort of.
The US doesn't really have much choice but to help in Taiwan's defense if China invades it. People are not giving up their iPhones. Billionaires are not giving up the billions they put into Taiwan that's now being seized by the CCP.
But the US will never initiate a land war with China. It would be hegemonic suicide on many levels. But the US can now participate in preventing a Chinese invasion from reaching Taiwan. Or placing a naval embargo on China at the Malacca Strait, and South Pacif
Engage China or Contain? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can only "engage" with a nation that assiduously adheres to its agreements with other nations, and adheres to the framework of international organizations that it chooses to be a party to (WTO/UN).
Seriously? (Score:3)
Quote: The article notes pointedly that memory chips "aren't usually considered a cybersecurity risk because they don't require any specific software or run code. They're mostly basic grids of transistors used for storing data and, as such, haven't typically been a vector of attack for hackers."
So much to unpack here... First, as others have pointed out, this is not just the memory chips but memory PRODUCTS. Micron makes RAM and NAND chips but they also make controllers, memory sticks and SSDs. The ban is on PRODUCTS.
Second and most importantly: "memory chips aren't usually considered a cybersecurity risk" wait WHAT!? Yeah most memory issues may not originate in chip or RAM flaws, but most security flaws are usually related to memory. Be it memory access (e.g. to get keys/passwords), memory replacement (e.g. to perform arbitrary execution of code, usually by escalating its privilege when replacing existing privileged code), and even the simple act of knowing partial memory data can induce in predictions that can be used for the above.
Re: (Score:2)
but most security flaws are usually related to memory.
They're related to memory, in the sense that all data is accessed through memory, but security flaws are originating usually from software code, not memory chips. If China want's to protect itself from computer exploits, they need to regulate the code or Intel/AMD based CPUs. Banning US manufactured memory chips is not going to accomplish that.
Memory is an attack vector (Score:2)
Memory chips contain control logic now, they are not just a dumb transistor grid, and Micron also sells things like SSD that are mini-systems with a CPU that can run code. I guess it would be possible to have a memory controller detect a known sequence of bytes and modify it in-memory to introduce an exploit.
And as for RAM not being an attack vector, rowhammer was quite a big deal a few years ago.
It doesn't mean it is not bullshit for the trade war, but it is plausible bullshit.
Chinese chips (Score:2)
China provided no evidence of risk! (Score:2)
I mean the USA didn't either when they made their decision but that's not the point. China are going after Micron here, how dare they do this so unilaterally and unprovoked!
Honestly jokes aside I don't know what anyone thought was going to happen here. China has a long history of tit-for-tatting when it comes to sanctions, tariffs, trade barriers, and even just diplomats engaging in the usual multinational smack-talk.
Re: (Score:2)
What's good for the goose is good for the gander (Score:2)
Micron sued Chinese DRAM maker JHICC claiming it had "stolen" their IP. The US put sanctions on JHICC so they could not get any US manufacturing equipment or equipment support. That "stolen" "Micron" IP was provided by former Taiwanese workers in Taiwanese DRAM companies which Micron acquired and fired. After they were fired they went to work for Taiwanese UMC who was subcontracted by JHICC to develop their DRAM process. i.e. Micron basically bought Taiwanese DRAM makers to close them down.
Now the US put sa
Re: (Score:2)
Here is a link to a news snippet about Micron's acquisition of Taiwanese DRAM company Inotera.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/m... [wsj.com]
Re: (Score:2)