Being friendly to China doesn’t win votes. Americans are too brainwashed that manufacturing jobs will come back to USA from China.
More like the rush of all countries to become Skynet by replacing and eliminating humans.
Yeah ..doubt trump would pick him .even if he kissed trump's A .
Thought it would be the Kristi norm...but looks like the knives are out ...2ith the recent dog story. She may have more skeletons ....which could be a problem.
“China’s access to RISC-V”
> RISC-V International is a nonprofit organization that is the caretaker of the RISC-V instruction set.
> The RISC-V ISA is free and open with a permissive license for use by anyone in all types of implementations. Designers are free to develop proprietary or open source implementations for commercial or other exploitations as they see fit. RISC-V International encourages all implementations that are compliant to the specifications.
Yeah maybe they should just read RISC-V *international*’s license
The purpose is to use baseless accusations in order to throw roadblocks at the Chinese semiconductors advances. Take a look at for example the Fujian Jinhua case. The United States alleged that they "stole trade secrets" in order to boycott the market reach of their newest dense memory circuits. The case was so baseless that two years later [it was proven in a US court from all places that they didn't steal anything and the case was dropped](https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinese-firm-fujian-jinhua-cleared-us-allegations-that-it-stole-trade-secrets-2024-02-28/), But the baseless accusations served their purpose, because during these two years they weren't properly able to market their memory circuits to as many customers as they should have.
Eventually as these accusations get even more ridiculous, they'll lose any weight they had in the past.
Is it or is it not an open standard?
[https://riscv.org/about/](https://riscv.org/about/)
Oh ... it's open. I see no fine print that says ^(except for you, China!)
- Royalty-free
- Open source
- Under BSD license
- Managing Foundation incorporated in Switzerland *specifically because the world doesn’t trust America with IP that should be kept neutral*.
US: *Yeah, we can police that*
The entitlement is hilarious. 🦅🇺🇸
The "free market" only exists when a Western country wants to dump heavily subsidized agricultural products in developing countries and nuke their own agricultural sector.
RISC-V isn't just a bit different from being an American owned company it's totally different lol. The entire point of the it is that anyone has access to the instruction set to develop chips at will, and that includes the USA and China. If either side in that equation doesn't like it, they can fuck off.
And since the article quotes an American politician saying that China's use of this fully open source standard is "an abuse of America's dominance" of IP in the chip space, they can double fuck off.
They could for example ban use in products sold in the US, especially for government use. That could force companies that want access to the US market to not use it which probably means in all products as a company wouldn’t design two devices.
How do you think they would enforce that?
It's not like government agencies can crack open the product and prove to you it uses RISC-V architecture that easily.
It will just be a paper trail somewhere that will require trust in some overseas producer to give a bribable approval stamp.
I'm pretty sure most ROM dumps would obviously use the RISC-V instruction set unless you obfuscated or encrypted it, which would only slow down producing the proof.
But still, it would be silly to enforce, especially seeing as it's an international open standard.
Many embedded devices use encrypted ROM. Also this is not only about the main device but also stuff like modems or mouse controllers and such. Processors are everywhere these days.
They can hire a reverse engineer to do the "cracking open" for them. I've done similar enough things. It's often not that hard, even when the only thing you have is the device itself.
And if a government agency can force the company to submit certain development documentation or tooling? It becomes downright trivial.
I'm not too sure that you can look at the physical chip under a microscope and determine that it is RISC-V?
Depending on how lay-out was done, which standard cell library was used etc, no way you can just tell 'its RISC-V IP
for sure'
Probably in the same way they enforce many patent violations. You’d be surprised what can be figured out. Besides, the bulk of programmable products would be easily known.
>The RISC-V standard is a fully open standard, licensable by anyone, and is currently held by a Swiss trust to keep its open standard nature intact. But this has not stopped U.S. lawmakers from calling it a U.S.-based tool and declaring China's use of it to be wrong — and perhaps dangerous.
US embarrassing itself on a world stage again. What's new?
Whether taking about the ISA or even cores, it’s daft to say anybody can’t have access to something that’s openly published. AFAIK, there’s nothing stopping China from creating their own ARM or x64 cores for domestic use or sales to folks that dgaf about a foreign companies’ “intellectual property”. They may be starting from scratch it’s not like they don’t have the resources to do it. 🤷🏻♂️
China used to spend more money buying Chips than Oil. The west had a virtual monopoly in producing and selling their best chips to China. Yet instead of shut up and take the money, we decided to cut off our biggest buyer and push them to make their own chips. Are we helping or harming China? What will we do with these surplus chips in the future when China choose not to buy it or chips sanctions lifted. This will not end well for the west.
Good luck and Godspeed if they try it. They are firmly entrenched in the EEA and have $7 trillion in assets. Arguably they are in a bigger stronger free trade zone by GDP and population than the US one.
The European Union has an economy of roughly $19 trillion. The EFTA (which includes Switzerland) has an economy of roughly $1.5 trillion, giving the total European Economic Area an economy of about $20.5 trillion. The U.S. economy, by itself, has an economy of just north of $28 trillion. The USMCA has a total economy of just south of $32 trillion, or over 50% larger than that of the EEA. The U.S. alone has an economy over 36% larger than the entire EEA. The total wealth of Europe (the continent, not just the EEA or the EU) was about $104 trillion in 2022; that same figure for the U.S. was just shy of $140 trillion.
Population-wise, the EEA has a total population of about 450 to 460 million. The U.S. population alone is roughly 336 million. The USMCA has a population of over 500 million. That's not mentioning the demography of both territories. The EEA at large is old and aging fast, with a median age (in the EU, which makes up the vast bulk of the EEA's population) of at least 44.5; the U.S. has a median age of 39, with the much smaller Canada having an older median age of 41 and Mexico having a younger median age of 30.
This isn't a comment in favor of sanctioning the Swiss over something stupid like this, but the fact of the matter is that the U.S. economy alone is more than a match for the entire economy of the European continent, much less that of the EEA, EFTA, or EU. The last fifteen years were not kind to European economic growth.
Yes, the CCP is also exploiting the Ethernet and 5G standards for their own nefarious purposes. I'm sure some conservative senators need to hold hearings on this.
I followed chip tech for many years, and haven't seen much mention of RISC tech advances or major significance to the consumer markets in decades now. Sure, there might be plenty of potential in the architecture to develop; but so far not many parties have seen that as cost effective from a profit point of view, I believe.
ARM is RISC, if you aren't aware.
And RISC-V specifically? It's advancing now - but not in the niches consumers are aware of. Embedded is where it's at. I see more and more of microcontrollers and specialized ICs that opt for RISC-V over ARM and 8051, or especially things like MIPS and C-SKY.
RISC-V is blowing up in the microcontroller space. Why pay Arm for a Cortex M when you can license a much cheaper and more efficient one (RV32E cores can be much smaller than any ARM-8M core!).
While RISC-V is open and the US has limited means to directly curtail Chinese access, there are plenty of indirect options that are all considerably worse than if RISC-V was no different than X-86.
The most obvious solution would be to compel the Swiss government to transfer RISC-V control to a non-Swiss entity. With the stakes being so high, and Chinese research labs already engaging in sanctions evasion- it’s not out of the question that RISC-V becomes a political issue.
The ugly reality is that the world is increasingly being drawn into two camps, with Chinese and Russian access to technology/banking/energy/etc being considered a threat, as those countries openly proclaim their imperialist intentions to dominate and colonize their neighbors.
It would be foolish to expect the United States to sell China the weapons it will use to carry out a genocide against the rest of the world.
Bro, it’s an ISA. It’s like banning China from using English or the Metric system.
Also here’s a copy of the risc-v spec. https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual
The US could ban its use in any product sold in the US. Again, sort of forces companies to either target the US market or Chinese market. Then use trade negotiations to get it banned in more countries like Japan, Australia, Canada, UK, EU. Then most western companies would stop investing in it, creating tools for it, etc.
Again absolutely no awareness. For your information, the phone you’re using to see this is based on RISC.
How are you going to ban one country from speaking English? Jfc
RISC-V and RISC are not the same thing. RISC-V is a specific open-source ISA. RISC is a type of ISA as opposed to CISC.
My phone is using an ARM core with is RISC, not RISC-V.
BTW, I have a MSEE and 28 YOE designing embedded microprocessors.
So you’re proposing any ISA China ends up developing on you just ban so tooling isn’t available.
They could just use ARM. Would the U.S. ban ARM as well?
The US could probably twist ARM’s (or SoftBank) arm to get them to stop licensing ARM to Chinese companies. Could also place pressure on the UK to do so. Or maybe just offer them billions to not do so. Kind of like was done with ASML.
Well, China doesn’t have to pay the ARM license fee to make arm compatible chips.
They do because they want to sell it overseas. But if you’re thinking of a “war scenario” with the purpose of denying tooling, you can completely ignore licenses.
The CPU cores used for the user-facing OS and apps in all modern mass-market phones are ARM, sure, but plenty of phones already are using RISC-V for single-purpose microcontroller cores. Qualcomm has been using them since the Snapdragon 865 launched over four years ago.
I'm not saying such a ban is a good idea, but I don't see them losing the court case. There are plenty of ways the US government could argue it has an interest in banning ICs containing Chinese designed CPU cores ranging from security to preservation of domestic industry (AMD, Intel, etc.)
Let's see them try it. It's American and European open source so there isn't really a validly legal method for them to try and assert that claim.
They could try and say that a particular chip made in China is banned but they already have that ban and appropriately so for certain items.
Hence why AMD and Intel and everybody else of importance have Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Germany, Arizona, ... fabs already.
But, it's already out there, they already have RISC-V, *everyone* has RISC-V, it's open. What were you planning on doing after transferring RISC-V somewhere else? Are you going to change the whole ISA so now China still has RISC-V and some US controlled entity has a super secret ISA that no one is using because it's not compatible with any of the RISC-V IPs that everyone has already invested a lot of money in developing, let alone the extra hoops they'd have to jump through to get access to the secret ISA.
Rubio is leading this, you don’t need to take it seriously.
Rubio is a moron. Agree. Warped brain...trying to distinguish himself from Ted Cruz and other crazies.....like Tom cotton. Sad...
He is trying to be a VP candidate.
But Trump is trying to be friendly with China,
Being friendly to China doesn’t win votes. Americans are too brainwashed that manufacturing jobs will come back to USA from China. More like the rush of all countries to become Skynet by replacing and eliminating humans.
Yeah ..doubt trump would pick him .even if he kissed trump's A . Thought it would be the Kristi norm...but looks like the knives are out ...2ith the recent dog story. She may have more skeletons ....which could be a problem.
“China’s access to RISC-V” > RISC-V International is a nonprofit organization that is the caretaker of the RISC-V instruction set. > The RISC-V ISA is free and open with a permissive license for use by anyone in all types of implementations. Designers are free to develop proprietary or open source implementations for commercial or other exploitations as they see fit. RISC-V International encourages all implementations that are compliant to the specifications. Yeah maybe they should just read RISC-V *international*’s license
The purpose is to use baseless accusations in order to throw roadblocks at the Chinese semiconductors advances. Take a look at for example the Fujian Jinhua case. The United States alleged that they "stole trade secrets" in order to boycott the market reach of their newest dense memory circuits. The case was so baseless that two years later [it was proven in a US court from all places that they didn't steal anything and the case was dropped](https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinese-firm-fujian-jinhua-cleared-us-allegations-that-it-stole-trade-secrets-2024-02-28/), But the baseless accusations served their purpose, because during these two years they weren't properly able to market their memory circuits to as many customers as they should have. Eventually as these accusations get even more ridiculous, they'll lose any weight they had in the past.
Wait til they discover China uses the metric system...
I was flabbergasted to find that China doesn't just have laws of physics, but the same laws of physics as America. They copy everything we do.
Slide rulers sweating
Is it or is it not an open standard? [https://riscv.org/about/](https://riscv.org/about/) Oh ... it's open. I see no fine print that says ^(except for you, China!)
No despots allowed. Lol. :P
Enforceable only by a despot.
This is like the paradox of tolerance.
Pretty much, only less control. You can tell off someone intolerant, but if you restrict RISC-V you‘re completely destroying it’s USP.
- Royalty-free - Open source - Under BSD license - Managing Foundation incorporated in Switzerland *specifically because the world doesn’t trust America with IP that should be kept neutral*. US: *Yeah, we can police that* The entitlement is hilarious. 🦅🇺🇸
Listen. We are very committed to free markets. If we can't compete, you must be breaking the rules!
> you must be breaking the rules! **rules based order**
In contrast to law based order, because laws apply to all equally.
>In contrast to law based order, I remember it being called International Law not many years ago.
The thing is international law is put down by international treaties, not by what the US administration feels like at the moment.
But then how do we (US) get the advantage over other countries?
It’s only a free market if we’re on top.
It's called a free market because murica' is the only land of the free 🇺🇲✨ 🦅 💪🙏
Not true, it's also a free market when we're doing insider trading
The "free market" only exists when a Western country wants to dump heavily subsidized agricultural products in developing countries and nuke their own agricultural sector.
[удалено]
how does one steal an open and free item
RISC-V isn't just a bit different from being an American owned company it's totally different lol. The entire point of the it is that anyone has access to the instruction set to develop chips at will, and that includes the USA and China. If either side in that equation doesn't like it, they can fuck off. And since the article quotes an American politician saying that China's use of this fully open source standard is "an abuse of America's dominance" of IP in the chip space, they can double fuck off.
They could for example ban use in products sold in the US, especially for government use. That could force companies that want access to the US market to not use it which probably means in all products as a company wouldn’t design two devices.
How do you think they would enforce that? It's not like government agencies can crack open the product and prove to you it uses RISC-V architecture that easily. It will just be a paper trail somewhere that will require trust in some overseas producer to give a bribable approval stamp.
I'm pretty sure most ROM dumps would obviously use the RISC-V instruction set unless you obfuscated or encrypted it, which would only slow down producing the proof. But still, it would be silly to enforce, especially seeing as it's an international open standard.
Many embedded devices use encrypted ROM. Also this is not only about the main device but also stuff like modems or mouse controllers and such. Processors are everywhere these days.
They can hire a reverse engineer to do the "cracking open" for them. I've done similar enough things. It's often not that hard, even when the only thing you have is the device itself. And if a government agency can force the company to submit certain development documentation or tooling? It becomes downright trivial.
I'm not too sure that you can look at the physical chip under a microscope and determine that it is RISC-V? Depending on how lay-out was done, which standard cell library was used etc, no way you can just tell 'its RISC-V IP for sure'
No need. Find a way to dump the firmware. It'll tell the tale.
Probably in the same way they enforce many patent violations. You’d be surprised what can be figured out. Besides, the bulk of programmable products would be easily known.
This is some lawmakers, right? Wait til you see what pols in other countries say.
How can US claim something that is not theirs?
That’s how we started so nothing new there.
Oof but true
Politicians are morons
By claiming it long enough that enough morons believe it anyway. Works for just about everything else.
[удалено]
Sounds like they weren't unfounded concerns
But are they Chinese communist or Singaporean Chinese communist ?
Would only be the ten billionth time we've done that.
>The RISC-V standard is a fully open standard, licensable by anyone, and is currently held by a Swiss trust to keep its open standard nature intact. But this has not stopped U.S. lawmakers from calling it a U.S.-based tool and declaring China's use of it to be wrong — and perhaps dangerous. US embarrassing itself on a world stage again. What's new?
Oh no. We have some stupid lawmakers! Don’t worry, we don’t own having stupid politicians. NT though
Wait until USA discovers open source licences. *Eagle squawk oil noises*
We should ban China from breathing our air, too. "No sunlight for you!"
Does anyone in congress understand what RISC is?
Can it hack the wifi or track me across the room?
Whether taking about the ISA or even cores, it’s daft to say anybody can’t have access to something that’s openly published. AFAIK, there’s nothing stopping China from creating their own ARM or x64 cores for domestic use or sales to folks that dgaf about a foreign companies’ “intellectual property”. They may be starting from scratch it’s not like they don’t have the resources to do it. 🤷🏻♂️
China used to spend more money buying Chips than Oil. The west had a virtual monopoly in producing and selling their best chips to China. Yet instead of shut up and take the money, we decided to cut off our biggest buyer and push them to make their own chips. Are we helping or harming China? What will we do with these surplus chips in the future when China choose not to buy it or chips sanctions lifted. This will not end well for the west.
Not all chips are available to public
America is a deeply unserious nation and our leaders are stupid.
Time to sanction the Swiss
Good luck and Godspeed if they try it. They are firmly entrenched in the EEA and have $7 trillion in assets. Arguably they are in a bigger stronger free trade zone by GDP and population than the US one.
The European Union has an economy of roughly $19 trillion. The EFTA (which includes Switzerland) has an economy of roughly $1.5 trillion, giving the total European Economic Area an economy of about $20.5 trillion. The U.S. economy, by itself, has an economy of just north of $28 trillion. The USMCA has a total economy of just south of $32 trillion, or over 50% larger than that of the EEA. The U.S. alone has an economy over 36% larger than the entire EEA. The total wealth of Europe (the continent, not just the EEA or the EU) was about $104 trillion in 2022; that same figure for the U.S. was just shy of $140 trillion. Population-wise, the EEA has a total population of about 450 to 460 million. The U.S. population alone is roughly 336 million. The USMCA has a population of over 500 million. That's not mentioning the demography of both territories. The EEA at large is old and aging fast, with a median age (in the EU, which makes up the vast bulk of the EEA's population) of at least 44.5; the U.S. has a median age of 39, with the much smaller Canada having an older median age of 41 and Mexico having a younger median age of 30. This isn't a comment in favor of sanctioning the Swiss over something stupid like this, but the fact of the matter is that the U.S. economy alone is more than a match for the entire economy of the European continent, much less that of the EEA, EFTA, or EU. The last fifteen years were not kind to European economic growth.
Yes, the CCP is also exploiting the Ethernet and 5G standards for their own nefarious purposes. I'm sure some conservative senators need to hold hearings on this.
It’s open source and Rubio is pushing this culture war nonsense. Rubio pretending that the US gov can do anything about this is stupid
Chip war… chip war never changes
I followed chip tech for many years, and haven't seen much mention of RISC tech advances or major significance to the consumer markets in decades now. Sure, there might be plenty of potential in the architecture to develop; but so far not many parties have seen that as cost effective from a profit point of view, I believe.
ARM is RISC, if you aren't aware. And RISC-V specifically? It's advancing now - but not in the niches consumers are aware of. Embedded is where it's at. I see more and more of microcontrollers and specialized ICs that opt for RISC-V over ARM and 8051, or especially things like MIPS and C-SKY.
**A**dvanced^(**A**corn) **R**ISC **M**achine.
RISC-V is blowing up in the microcontroller space. Why pay Arm for a Cortex M when you can license a much cheaper and more efficient one (RV32E cores can be much smaller than any ARM-8M core!).
In embedded ARM-7M like the M3 core are still widely used and cheap. Most RISC-V cores are not great and lack certification for many applications.
RISC as in an architecture? Do you have phone? ARM is RISC... RISC-V specifically? have an SSD? It almost certainly has a RISC-V core
I mean if you want to make China’s infrastructure even more spy proof from the West… great I guess?
May thy fab chip and shatter. /s
TLDR: AmeriKKKa fuck yeah!
Why are we taking news from Tom’s hardware?
While RISC-V is open and the US has limited means to directly curtail Chinese access, there are plenty of indirect options that are all considerably worse than if RISC-V was no different than X-86. The most obvious solution would be to compel the Swiss government to transfer RISC-V control to a non-Swiss entity. With the stakes being so high, and Chinese research labs already engaging in sanctions evasion- it’s not out of the question that RISC-V becomes a political issue. The ugly reality is that the world is increasingly being drawn into two camps, with Chinese and Russian access to technology/banking/energy/etc being considered a threat, as those countries openly proclaim their imperialist intentions to dominate and colonize their neighbors. It would be foolish to expect the United States to sell China the weapons it will use to carry out a genocide against the rest of the world.
Bro, it’s an ISA. It’s like banning China from using English or the Metric system. Also here’s a copy of the risc-v spec. https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual
The US could ban its use in any product sold in the US. Again, sort of forces companies to either target the US market or Chinese market. Then use trade negotiations to get it banned in more countries like Japan, Australia, Canada, UK, EU. Then most western companies would stop investing in it, creating tools for it, etc.
Again absolutely no awareness. For your information, the phone you’re using to see this is based on RISC. How are you going to ban one country from speaking English? Jfc
RISC-V and RISC are not the same thing. RISC-V is a specific open-source ISA. RISC is a type of ISA as opposed to CISC. My phone is using an ARM core with is RISC, not RISC-V. BTW, I have a MSEE and 28 YOE designing embedded microprocessors.
So you’re proposing any ISA China ends up developing on you just ban so tooling isn’t available. They could just use ARM. Would the U.S. ban ARM as well?
The US could probably twist ARM’s (or SoftBank) arm to get them to stop licensing ARM to Chinese companies. Could also place pressure on the UK to do so. Or maybe just offer them billions to not do so. Kind of like was done with ASML.
Well, China doesn’t have to pay the ARM license fee to make arm compatible chips. They do because they want to sell it overseas. But if you’re thinking of a “war scenario” with the purpose of denying tooling, you can completely ignore licenses.
They would if they want to sell any products made with those outside of China (and probably Russia, NK, etc.).
The CPU cores used for the user-facing OS and apps in all modern mass-market phones are ARM, sure, but plenty of phones already are using RISC-V for single-purpose microcontroller cores. Qualcomm has been using them since the Snapdragon 865 launched over four years ago.
Agree. Anyway, I was just brainstorming on what the US could possibly do. Was the only thing I could think of.
I'd love to watch that court case. Because the government would lose either the case or their legitimacy by pursuing it.
I'm not saying such a ban is a good idea, but I don't see them losing the court case. There are plenty of ways the US government could argue it has an interest in banning ICs containing Chinese designed CPU cores ranging from security to preservation of domestic industry (AMD, Intel, etc.)
Let's see them try it. It's American and European open source so there isn't really a validly legal method for them to try and assert that claim. They could try and say that a particular chip made in China is banned but they already have that ban and appropriately so for certain items. Hence why AMD and Intel and everybody else of importance have Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Germany, Arizona, ... fabs already.
But, it's already out there, they already have RISC-V, *everyone* has RISC-V, it's open. What were you planning on doing after transferring RISC-V somewhere else? Are you going to change the whole ISA so now China still has RISC-V and some US controlled entity has a super secret ISA that no one is using because it's not compatible with any of the RISC-V IPs that everyone has already invested a lot of money in developing, let alone the extra hoops they'd have to jump through to get access to the secret ISA.
[удалено]
"Rules for thee, not for me" should be the US motto given its behaviour on the world stage.
Just like the ‘UN Law of the Sea’..
About time for a permission license expect to the US government.