197
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FuryMaker@lemmy.world 65 points 1 month ago

Sooo, all chips basically.

[-] xkbx@startrek.website 80 points 1 month ago

those fools forgot about lays 😎

[-] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 month ago

Lays makes good chips. It's too bad that they're really only good for the data center market, since you can't have just one.

[-] arin@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
[-] rumba@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 month ago

Raspberry pies and MacBooks across the realm.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Except for the ones made by the Chinese government.

[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz 39 points 1 month ago

Maybe they will be investing towards RISC-V chips?

[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 month ago

Good. Pump that up. I want to be able to run my favorite open OS on open hardware.

Worth noting that just because a CPU uses the RISC-V instruction set does not make it open hardware; it just makes it possible for it to be open hardware, but it's still up to the copyright holder to release the source files and design as open source.

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago

Fair, but it means devs will write software that can one day run on open hardware.

That's true, but open source software is generally written in high level, portable languages that can be compiled to multiple CPU architectures without changing the code, so proprietary software is really what would have any problems running, and even then, there are x86 emulators like Box86/64 and FEX out there and can even work transparently using systemd-binfmt.

[-] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

At the application level? Yes. At the OS / package level? It's still a work in progress. And you need the latter to use the former.

[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 month ago

Still, better than fully proprietary hardware.

[-] refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

In a small way, yes, in that the software ecosystem built around it would work on future open hardware, but the hardware could absolutely still be fully, 100% proprietary.

[-] boonhet@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

Woule be best case scenario for pretty much everyone except, well, all the companies currently in the space. And western global hegemony.

[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 month ago

All empires will tumble

[-] Derp@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 month ago

This reads like fake news. No publication date, no sources listed, very vague and self-contradictory on the details. How is no other news outlet corroborating this?

I'd take this one with a huge grain of salt.

[-] allo@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 month ago

in... creasing?

better than outcreasing i guess

[-] breakingcups@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

That's going to make things very difficult for them short-term. Medium-term too. Bets are still off on long-term.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

Down with AI art

[-] YaDownWitCPP@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

I laugh at your decadent Western technology!

[-] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

I can't read the article for it opens some 1x1 gif at loading, but I suspect they'd only need to write a long form proof of why they need to use exactly that foreign brand for their work etc, and probably if they also have the leverage to do so (so many get filtered out, maybe). That's how it works in Russia for plenty of years after we proclaimed we'd replace imported goods with something we don't even produce lol.

[-] sit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 month ago
[-] Mango@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

I mean... They're not exactly wrong for this, especially with Intel.

[-] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

In other news, Zilog stock sees unprecedented growth.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Precisely. They've finally stolen enough IP to make replicas of these banned chips and keep all the profits.

[-] randombullet@programming.dev 4 points 1 month ago
[-] BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk 2 points 1 month ago

While I appreciate the joke, they're technically nVidia now

[-] Jumi@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

This must mean that they're getting cheaper in the West now, right? Right?!

[-] f4f4f4f4f4f4f4f4@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago

Chinese rejection -> "Supply chain issues" -> Price goes up. Again.

[-] Nexy@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 month ago
[-] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

To play diablo immortal.

[-] hash@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago

Reflexively thought this was the onion. Can someone explain yo me how this isn't idiocy?

[-] moody@lemmings.world 22 points 1 month ago

China's a big market, and banning three major brands from being used means those brands will fight against Trump's trade war so they can get access to the market again. There's no way Intel, AMD, and Nvidia will be happy to lose all that money.

[-] Wade@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Will they really lose much money though? Chip makers (NVIDIA especially) have practically been able to sell everything they can produce since before the start of COVID, so I doubt they will lose a lot from this

[-] Jax@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

The answer is yes, they will lose a lot of money.

The Chinese consumer market is larger than the US and EU markets, and is growing, not shrinking. On top of that the Chinese business market is growing and is growing extremely quickly. The backbone of either market in the 21st century is computerized goods.

This is also a sign that the multiple domestic architectures are good enough to act as drop in replacements for at least government work, so business and consumer uses aren't too far behind.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

China has their own chip now built upon stolen R&D and they're going to make sure it's successful.

[-] almost1337@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago

I wonder how long it'll take for the next Stuxnet to hit Chinese and Russian lithography machines.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

Do they have x86 alternative? Or are consumers still allowed to buy x86 computers? Unclear in article if ban for "businesses" is ban for businesses that make computers using the chips/boards to sell to others.

Has arm gotten good enough for desktops?

[-] 31337@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

Apple uses Arm for their desktops, including the Mac Pro workstation. I don't know of anything upgradable/customizable like x86 Desktops though.

[-] refalo@programming.dev 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yes they have comparable CPUs from Zhaoxin, which is joint owned by VIA and Chinese government.

Russia also has Baikal.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Surprise surprise.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago
[-] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2024
197 points (95.4% liked)

Cybersecurity

6005 readers
148 users here now

c/cybersecurity is a community centered on the cybersecurity and information security profession. You can come here to discuss news, post something interesting, or just chat with others.

THE RULES

Instance Rules

Community Rules

If you ask someone to hack your "friends" socials you're just going to get banned so don't do that.

Learn about hacking

Hack the Box

Try Hack Me

Pico Capture the flag

Other security-related communities !databreaches@lemmy.zip !netsec@lemmy.world !securitynews@infosec.pub !cybersecurity@infosec.pub !pulse_of_truth@infosec.pub

Notable mention to !cybersecuritymemes@lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS