Two rather rare words in China
Your Linux based dream phone is not going to sell more than 10 units.
Your Linux phone statement is a fallacy.
Ask FuriLabs how many of their phones they have sold.[0] High confident it is more than 10.
FuriLabs moved their batman, battery monitoring application, from Python to C and it really improved performance. Native applications really do keep resource usage low and is beneficial.
Not these. They seem to be using ARM-designed cores that others already use and TSMC fabs in Taiwan.
Whether you're for or against China, seeing that they're outperforming or performing close to American-owned chipmakers seems like very relevant information.
And yes, it is known that they do steal tech as samsung discovered in their tech preview phone bust in korea.
I'm willing to pay double the cost of a MacBook Pro for anything that can run Linux, similar performance to M5, have a decent battery, good touchpad, be silent, have a good display, be light and portable.
It doesn't exist. MacBook's simply have the best hardware, but terrible software/philosophy of software.
So I'd say their moat is hardware in general. Performance, yes to an extent, but it's performance vs heat vs energy vs battery life and all their peripherals.
This is Zenbook A16 right now, with recent patches posted to Linux ARM mailing list that support it in full.
Ghastly was macOS on an Intel MacBook Air.
I was under the impression that there was still a trade export from TSMC to China [1]? Not to mention a near complete ban on ASML devices [2]? Maybe they exfiltrated a few chips into a lab, but can they really source production quantities?
> But it’s sorta like, let’s throw everything against the wall and get the biggest number we can. Do they show sustained performance over ten minutes? What’s the power draw when it’s doing 15K? What happens when you put it in an actual phone?
People using the same C1-Ultra core are struggling to get the same performance in applications where heat and power are important. It would be surprising if this is sustainable and not just a temporary boost.
> The Xring O3 will debut in the Xiaomi 18 Fold, the world's first foldable to use it, and the Xiaomi Pad 9 Pro Max, both launching in China in September 2026. Xiaomi also unveiled the Xring O100 AI chip and the Xring D100 smart-driving chip, the latter built to run models with up to 200 billion parameters locally, with commercial use planned for 2027. Reuters reports TSMC is producing the chips.
I guess we will find out very soon when Chinese customers get their devices. I don't know how they will even source enough LPDDR6 at reasonable prices.
[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/creve4x8drgo
[2] https://www.trendforce.com/news/2026/08/25/news-u-s-may-push...
"This will all turn out well," they said.
I'm too stupid or too mad a Trump to care.
That probably explains why there's so few of these CPUs around: the yields of the domestic Chinese lithography processes (non-EUV) are awful.
the a20pro and what not will match or beat it and the cycle will continue.
if this chip turns into a decent desktop chip then arm linux laptops might be very nice.
1) Pick a historically extremely innovative and disciplined culture which also happens to have massive human capital
2) Please arbitrary artificial ill-thought-out economic constraints on them
3) wait a while
4) get a bunch of magnificent spanking in return (AI, chips, etc...)
(as long as you take similar assumptions in die size, advanced packaging and power envelope).
> This is Zenbook A16 right now, with recent patches posted to Linux ARM mailing list that support it in full.
Including those two items I emphasised? This is usually where Apple's competition fail, mostly because they don't even consider it.
However, while ZenBook's touchpad is not haptic, it's at least a glass one and generally praised for being quite good in comparison. I asked a bunch of people. Notably I prefer to double tap than press on my touchpads, so I don't really care about the haptic feedback, but to each their own. Still, I think it's worth trying it. BestBuy should have them in store if you're in US, I haven't tried it myself yet.
And yes, it's surprisingly quiet. It's a bigger form factor (16") despite very low weight, so that helps with heat dissipation and X2 is very efficient.
Europe needs to acquire a nuclear arsenal that stands head-to-head with the Russian one quantitatively and independent from the U.S. or any other nation (including the French and British) for nuclear deterrence. This means many more European nations need to acquire a nuclear arsenal.
The frustrating part is that the U.S. doesn't want to give assurances whether it will come to Europe's aid if it were attacked, but at the same time doesn't want European nations to develop an independent nuclear capability. Many European nations (Poland, Finland, Sweden, Germany) are currently contemplating going nuclear. The U.S. is actively discouraging them to do so.
But it’s sorta like, let’s throw everything against the wall and get the biggest number we can. Do they show sustained performance over ten minutes? What’s the power draw when it’s doing 15K? What happens when you put it in an actual phone?
This was done in a cold room. It seems more like a proof of concept for what they could do than something that could actually ship in a phone and sustain those numbers.
> The biggest cores on the the Xring O3 are the C1-Ultra. C1-Ultra really powerful cores. They support SME2 (Scalable Matrix Extension 2) for matrix/AI acceleration, SVE2 for data parallelism (SIMD).
This is where the magic is happening (I believe). They have these ultra cores with additional extensions which they are pinning the benchmarks to.
Realistically, that sort of thing isn't useful as non-homogeneous architectures really suck for an application or OS to deal with.
I agree that if each core doesn't "support" the full ISA it's a huge pain (the one generation of Intel AVX-512-but-not parts were incredible), but that hasn't been common in years. Usually (and in this case, according to my reading) the small cores get a horrible slow/decoder-emulated implementation of every instruction, so that if you schedule on the "wrong" core you don't trap but just run really slowly instead.
Otherwise, heterogeneous architectures are the present and future of mobile and consumer desktops and have been for years. Desktop OSes are getting better and mobile OSes are just fine at scheduling across different core families (the higher level of abstraction everyone complains about in mobile apps actually helps a lot here).
It is still not a bad results though. And we are about to see MediaTek Dimensity 9600 based on ARM C2-Ultra.
From what I recall reading, the impressive performance of Apple mobile CPUs is partly attributable to throwing more silicon area at the problem while not being as cost sensitive (no need to share margin with SoC vendor)
(Also I'd recommend https://libredirect.manerakai.com/)
I don't think they have any angle with that.
The motivation for such messages may be greedy, but it doesn't mean the facts aren't wrong:
1. As a practical matter, no one can audit systems so thoroughly to determine a system built by an adversary won't act adversarially.
2. Free market incentives work counter to national security all the time, in many ways (e.g. causing domestic capabilities to wither and die).
Back in 2014, the central government set up the China National Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund. - https://www.scmp.com/tech/enterprises/article/2145422/how-ch...
Over the next decade, China plans to invest up to RMB 1 trillion (US$161 billion) into its domestic semiconductor industry as it seeks to become a global power in the sector. In recent years, Beijing has repeatedly stated that developing its own integrated circuit (IC) industry is of integral national strategic concern. - https://www.china-briefing.com/news/chips-all-in-investing-i...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Integrated_Circuit_Indus...
For example, if China can't install its hardware in Pentagon, why is it a threat to national security.
On the other hand, if you say, Intel will be in trouble because of these chips, then I would say, so what? Wasn't this a dream of MBAs, educated by the top US schools, to outsource everything in business to cheaper service providers (e.g. manufacturing to China, software development to India and etc,.)
Where is the threat and what is the threat?
Just seems like you're inventing things to be scared of.
It's generally a bad idea to use information-handling hardware from your main geopolitical rival.
This post serves Xiaomi because it implies competitiveness when the reality on the ground will remain unremarkable, and it helps fearmongers because they can latch on to Xiaomi's attempt to appear competitive.
They have proven countless of times by now that they are not to be ignored.
Current Apple hardware has a number of selling points for me, but the number of iPhones they've carelessly pumped into the world is not one of them. If anything, contemplating the amount of slave labor which Apple has contributed to leads to the opposite effect.
Additionally, in China, Apple maintains around a quarter market share vs Android's three-quarters share. The argument you are making is not even coherent.
I myself would be on a Xiaomi phone if GrapheneOS were able to support one.
You have a funny definition of "productive".
That was a 2016 article.
We're at the other end of that investment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZSvDYDfd78 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBhQrz9EJ40 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KrdcTsScKk
It did not quite turn out like china wanted.
This isn't to be dismissive of what they ARE delivering - china has the potential to be very big in RAM, and Storage in the comming decades. But I'm not sure that they met their industrial and geopolitical goals with these efforts.
Yeah, I agree. The US and its allies took the wrong lessons from the economic aspect of the cold war. They saw Western capitalism out-perform Soviet central planning, then let capitalist ideologues run amok.
China has the advantage: since it's not run by capitalist ideologues it better able to correct the deficiencies of capitalism AND it can exploit predictable capitalist behavior for strategic advantage.
Which brings me back to my point about totalitarianism.
The NPT was only useful when the lines were clear and larger nations would come to the aid of smaller ones when they were attacked. That's no longer the case.
Reputation is a fickle thing, so difficult to build, and so easy to lose.
I'm pretty sure the Trump Administration has made this clear to the Russians through diplomatic channels. A Russian attack is therefore unlikely.
The worst of Intel's processor core asymmetry was with Meteor Lake and Arrow Lake, where the two LP-E cores on the IO die had no L3 cache and really bad DRAM latency despite being directly adjacent to the DRAM controller, resulting in those two cores combined offering about as much performance as one of the E-cores on the CPU chiplet. And they used the same IO die across both generations, while updating the microarchitecture of the CPU chiplet, so things diverged even more. And because the performance of the LP-E cores was so bad, Windows wouldn't schedule any threads on them unless it was trying to operate exclusively on those LP-E cores with the CPU chiplet powered down entirely—but those two LP-E cores were still reported to software in the total thread count, so heavy multithreaded applications would launch two more threads than could actually be scheduled at once.
With Panther Lake, Intel still has three tiers of CPU cores, but the performance gap between E cores and LP-E cores is down to only about 10%.
Stop downplaying how big of an achievement this is.
Xiaomi has made the XRING 03 boast a larger die size than the XRING 01,
measuring 133mm² compared to its predecessor’s 109mm² dimensions This change
was deemed necessary as the flagship SoC features 16MB of SLC cache, not to
mention a new “6 + 4” CPU cluster that comprises two ARM C1-Ultra cores
running at 4.35GHz, four C1-Premium cores operating at 3.68GHz and lastly,
four C1-Pro cores running at 3.15GHz. [1]
1. https://wccftech.com/xiaomi-xring-03-official-tsmc-3nm-n3p-l...
I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt: in your mothertongue, the meaning of “design” is not as broad as in English?
A revision or other reply would benefit from explaining how their value chain x location correspondence is wrong - perhaps missing a step?
Though, in anticipation of a revision, I wonder if its simple as you thought the cores were custom-designed by Xiaomi instead of standard ARM.
>The biggest cores on the the Xring O3 are the C1-Ultra. C1-Ultra really powerful cores. They support SME2 (Scalable Matrix Extension 2) for matrix/AI acceleration, SVE2 for data parallelism (SIMD).
Looking now I see maybe tens of thousands of open orders still
If "China" decides it doesn't like me, my life really isn't going to change much. If my electric company decides it doesn't like me, I'm in big trouble.
I'm into funny electric vehicles and China makes some beauties!
While they plan 50 years ahead, we are stuck re-litigating the most basic "united we stand, divided we fall" logic, even while the consequences are all around us. But congratulations on your enlightened individualism.
[1] Apple CEO Tim Cook "secretly" signed an agreement worth more than $275 billion with Chinese officials, promising that Apple would help to develop China's economy and technological capabilities - https://www.macrumors.com/2021/12/07/apple-ceo-tim-cook-secr...
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33758673
[3] https://globalnews.ca/news/7275588/inside-the-chinese-milita...
[4] https://www.dw.com/en/from-solar-to-evs-how-china-is-overpro...
[5] EU: Anti-dumping probe into China solar panels - https://apnews.com/general-news-e16007adf4bd468d9acf849734d2...
[6] Mercedes-Benz apologizes to Chinese for quoting Dalai Lama - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mercedes-benz-china-gaffe...
[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_police_overseas_servic...
[8] FIPA agreement with China: What's really in it for Canada? - https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/fipa-agreement-with-china-wha...
[9] Posters depicting Hong Kong protests removed by Massey University within 12 hours - https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/116723925/posters-depicting...
[10] Businesses with Chinese connections gave Australia's major parties more than $5.5 million between 2013 and 2015, making them easily the largest source of foreign-linked donations. - https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-21/australian-groups-str...
[11] Apple Told Some Apple TV+ Show Developers Not To Anger China - https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/alexkantrowitz/apple-ch...
[12] Chinese students in Australia fear reprisals at home if they speak out, inquiry hears - https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/mar/12/chine...
[13] Perry Link, emeritus professor of East Asian Studies at Princeton University, says that [..] American scholars practice self-censorship about China and adopt the official narrative of the Chinese regime when talking about sensitive issues. “We don’t talk about ‘Taiwan independence.’ We talk about ‘the cross-Strait relations.’ We don’t talk about ‘the occupation of Tibet.’ We don’t call the June 4th Massacre ‘massacre.’ - https://www.theepochtimes.com/how-the-american-academy-misle...
[14] China pressured Concordia University to cancel event with Uighur activist - https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/chinese-officials-co...
[15] Leica Camera has sought to distance itself from a promotional video depicting photographers covering the deadly Tiananmen Square crackdown three decades ago, after it landed the German company in hot water in China. - https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3006817/lei...
[16] Mercedes-Benz apologizes to Chinese for quoting Dalai Lama - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mercedes-benz-china-gaffe...
[17] China gets German children's book about COVID withdrawn - https://www.dw.com/en/china-gets-german-childrens-book-about...
Edit as reply ("posting too fast", thanks HN) to all the "but the US also does bad things" "counterarguments":
> Seriously, Americans can do this chickenshit nonsense, but you are the worldwide problem.
I'm European, and not stupid enough to believe that because the US is acting poorly or even in some cases hostile to Europe (to say nothing of the Middle East or South America), that we should roll over and allow China to subjugate us instead. Neither should the US. This is "you are not pure and innocent enough for self-defense" logic. Please don't drag the rest of us down in some deluded attempt at atonement.
All of South America already feels that way about the USA. Add the EU if we include the duopoly of Visa and MasterCard.
Sadly Colombia just elected a US citizen as the new president. The "subordinate receivers of orders" status has been achieved.
As a Canadian, I am going to be honest and say that I thought at first you were describing the United States of 2026.
I mean, we have a much better opinion of China. As does almost the entire world. For extremely good reason.
There is one country bombing endless nations, stealing resources, engaging in sea piracy, undermining democracies, trying to destroy the West, and so on, and it is the United States of America under a juvenile halfwit self-dealing shitbag pedophile, working on behalf of an utterly deranged group of kleptocrats.
Seriously, Americans can do this chickenshit nonsense, but you are the worldwide problem.
I could see a dude in Ukraine having exactly the same perspective vis-a-vis Russia in 2013, and look how that turned out.
Myopically individualistic perspectives, focused on your individual wants and day-to-day experiences, miss a lot of stuff.
Nobody in Ukraine who wasn't already explicitly pro-Russian thought that in 2013, did they? Russia-aligned individuals poisoned the third president of Ukraine during his presidential campaign, very likely with direct assistance. You'd probably have to go back to Leonid Kuchma's term to find average Ukrainians not profoundly concerned about Russia, and that was a relative high point.
They're not an adversary in the same way that a guy demanding your wallet at knifepoint is, or a company able to cut off your electricity is.
China is an adversary in the sense that they're a totalitarian government, who, by the nature of that system, cannot brook any sort of opposition to their ideology, plans, or desires. All within the state, none without. That sort of system cannot exist in harmony with other systems for any extended length of time because doing so will suggest that the powers-that-be in China might not have all of the answers to the human condition. Either you fall in line, or you have to be eliminated.
If you're an American used to calling other Americans antagonistic, that's not going to work out well for you over the long run.
When you mark the scoresheet according to actual number of invasions, our capitalist liberal democracy has performed much worse than their mixed-economy authoritarian technocracy.
This is a lot of needlessly "ideology vibes"-based judgment on a matter where plenty of actual evidence (history, geopolitical incentives, culture) is readily available.
How in the world is the USA existing with other systems then? By taking it all over with force and subterfuge? It is obvious to those with eyes that China, despite being "totalitarian" has been the better actor (compared to the USA) on the world stage for decades now.
> If you're an American used to calling other Americans antagonistic, that's not going to work out well for you over the long run.
Yea, because Americans are fucking violent jerks and can only get what they want through threats and intimidation.
Especially when you compare it to the US, where our democracy and capitalism have led us to numerous wars and war-crimes.
Like, just this year, we've committed far more breaches of international law than china https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis_of_the_2026_Iran_war#...
In recent history, we performed dozens of violent coups and destroyed countries in the name of overthrowing communist regimes.
China has a totalitarian government, but it's existing more in harmony with the world than the US government has for all of my life, so I don't think you can say that the Chinese government will conflict with other countries while in the same breath implying the US government is better.
I wouldn't tell a Chinese company to buy from Cisco. I wouldn't tell an American one to buy from Huawei.
> Can we audit American corporations?
What's your point? Did you even read what I wrote? The five words of your comment seem to be pretty sloppy:
1. If you're taking about their products, which is probably what you meant: if you think they're your adversary, then the answer is no, it's pointless.
2. But your comment as written reads as if you're talking about auditing the corporations themselves, which does in fact happen (for tax and financial reporting purposes).
I do not think they are selling well. That seems to be the consensus here.
The only numbers I can find in a quick search of my own are the leaked numbers stating 30,000 orders placed from 10,000 customers, with nothing said about shipped orders.
Meanwhile look at the southchina sea shenanigans and the behavior of Chinese fishing fleets all over the world.
Countries change trade policy often as is deemed advantageous. For example, the UK decided to leave the customs union of the EU and start treating trade with the continent as it does everywhere else, and did so by no less than a direct popular vote, not a contrived set of executive orders facing court challenge. Does the EU crow on about how the UK is now an enemy? They would certainly have more long-term evidence for it than they would over changes in trade policy with the United States.
> threatening our actual allies
American military leadership was asked to consider plans for an attack on Greenland. American military leadership refused. [0]
I wonder how Chinese military leadership would do if ordered to invade Taiwan.
[0] https://www.firstpost.com/world/trump-asked-us-special-force...
And how many of those invasions have been of other countries with democratic-republican forms of government in the last 30 years?
> This is a lot of needlessly "ideology vibes"-based judgment on a matter where plenty of actual evidence (history, geopolitical incentives, culture) is readily available.
Then let's take a look at more of that evidence. How's Tibet doing these days? Did the CCP decide that they, too, need to follow international law and withdraw all forces and government infrastructure from the region after invading it in 1950? How about the agreement with Hong Kong? Have they stopped ramming fishing boats in the "disputed" parts of the South China Sea? I quote that because according to international law, there is no dispute; China is just enforcing piracy.
I'd also like to say, they're not an authoritarian technocracy. They're totalitarian. China's political, military, economic, and cultural institutions are all fundamentally guided by the cadre system, which is a version of the party vanguard system suggested by Lenin. A person is paid to be a professional revolutionary of sorts. That person's influence and prospects within the cadre system are not judged solely by merit; they're judged by adherence to a dogma, which is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics in this case. This isn't just "ideology vibes", it's a description of the system as it is as a practical matter.
Imagine having a person who is professionally Trumpist at your company constantly making sure that what you do is in line with what the GOP under Trump wants. For a practical example, let's think about tariffs. Does your business suffer because of the tariffs ordered by Trump? Well, no it does not, because that's not what the Trumpist cadre member would say. You wouldn't be filing lawsuits to try and lift those tariffs.
Furthermore, now imagine that the GOP in this case is the only party allowed to have majority control of the government, not just as a de facto matter, but as a de jure matter as well since it'd be a part of the constitution.
There will, sooner or later, be a Chinese Trump. It'll be very difficult to gauge from the outside, because of the restricted flow of information in and out of the country, but it will eventually happen. When that happens, there will be no putting the brakes on anything.
I'll agree that the US is regressing, but it's becoming more like China. You have an elite that are putting themselves beyond any sort of accountability. You need more and more connection to them in order to get anywhere in society. How long before you see them enshrine themselves in the constitution and create a cadre system?
Or maybe you can look into what happens to nations in China's immediate neighborhood that resist Beijing's designs.
North Korea, a prison camp masquerading as a country, exists solely because of China. Had Mao not intervened on behalf of the Kim family, UN forces would have asserted control up to the Yalu. To this day, the Chinese have been breaking international law by helping Pyongyang dodge sanctions over the DPRK's nuclear weapons program. Same with Russia, actually, despite them both sitting on the UNSC, which passed the sanctions.
China also illegally occupies Tibet and has for over 75 years.
All of this points to a country very much not existing in harmony with the world.
As far as the US government being better, it's not about any given government being better. It's about whether or not totalitarianism can continue on peacefully. It cannot. This is evident on its face.
You're being too literal. I'm sure Ukrainians weren't actually so stupid as many Americans can be.
My point is you could transplant that logic (elevate individual, myopic interests and gripes; lose sight of the community you're part of), into a situation that we've already seen play out (Ukraine v. Russia).
China is not a threat to the daily life of individual Americans in the way Russia has always presented a threat to Ukrainians.
China isn't even a threat to the the daily life of individual Americans in the way that Russia was (and arguably is)
My whole point is that looking at it from the perspective of the "daily life of individual Americans" is the wrong one.
Also, while no two situations are going to be exactly the same, I think it's false to say "China is not a threat to the daily life of individual Americans." It'd be happy to turn the US into a weak, low-tech country whose only exports are agriculture and natural resources. I can't find it right now, but I've read a quote from some high-level Chinese official to that effect.
But perhaps the most important thing, Xiaomi is now able to make chip similar to Mediatek. They are the third largest Smartphone manufacturer by shipment volume. And they are still growing.
This is bad news for Mediatek and Qualcomm.
If you are just using apps, 15 seconds is more than enough to launch and setup an app, for anything more it will be down graded a little.
Still dang impressive but the form factor becomes the limiting factor.
I’m now at the iPhone 16. The performance of those chips with 8GB in non throttled environment (Neo..) can run as a fully performant macOS.
Yet, as a phone I don’t feel upgraded performance since my SE 1st gen days.
Sometimes I get stuttering, basic browsing can get the device pretty warm, sometime camera lags to launch.
My usage profile didn’t change much over the years.
So I can only assume codebases became more bloated, websites became more heavy on resources. Because, if my device now throttles to what I was happy with years ago assuming the software would behave the same, I’ve expected my usage to give me at least cooler non stuttering performance.
But that was never the case.
I think this is a trait of all chips. As a general rule of thumb, both desktop chips and graphics cards come with a huge and noisy fan. Demand for aftermarket solutions is so great that it spawned quite a few specialized companies.
How many high-end laptops ship with at least one fan?
And good news for everyone else.
This is so stupid. China itself uses the "dominate and corral" model for their industries, and had severe tariffs to grow their various industrial bases, such as automotive.
I have some server CPUs laying around that can also beat Apple CPUs. But putting them in a compact, densely packed, sealed box (aka a phone) would result in a fireball and almost no battery life.
In multicore, sure. In most single threaded workloads as well? That'd be interesting enough on its own, regardless of wattage (though that'd make it even more interesting), as my A19 device gives my overclocked 9800X3D a run for its money (and some losses) in single threaded workloads. Considering that's the only thing the 9800X3D is really targeting, it's impressive beyond just whether or not it does so with less power.
Their next Fold phone (TBA September) will use O3. I guess we will find out very soon.
And multithreaded is 10 cores vs 6 cores.
I appreciate Apple being kept on their feet, but they're not dethroned yet.
That difference amounts to who, if anyone, gets the credit for being competitive with Apple.
XRing O3 AnTuTu: 5.5 million
---
M5 iPad Geekbench Single-Core: 3,556
M5 Max Geekbench Single-Core: 4,300
XRing O3 Geekbench Single-Core: 3,945
---
M5 iPad Geekbench Multi-Core: 15,285
M5 Max Geekbench Multi-Core: 29,200
XRing O3 Geekbench Multi-Core: 15,221
Of course it’s not perfect, but then, nothing is.
Modern processor without memory tagging for example is a little..... dated, given how much the new AIs accelerated the vulnerability discovery in all the apps and system components.
I’m sure Apple’s chips could do better in single core if they were willing to push the power envelope way higher too.
Multi-core is easy to beat, just add more cores until you win. There were already chips that beat the M series just by having way more threads/cores.
(Seriously, they rely on air cooling for Neo and MBA — these chips hit 105deg easily and throttle, intentionally)
Adding a thermal pad to a Neo or MacBook Air gives significant boosts peak and sustained performance; whether in benchmarks or real world video renders; but it also reduces your battery life by a little, as there’s less thermal throttling forcing wattage down.
And no, the battery is not connected to the chassis (heatsink), it doesn’t have increased temps.
Apple doesn't optimize for raw performance but rather perf/watt. So comparing only performance is not really useful.
For example, I consider Meta as bigger threat to society, than Xiaomi, DeepSeek, z.ai and other top Chinese companies (haven't used Chinese social media, so can't comment about its content)
Same is very difficult to do in China (look what happened to Jack Ma) or in Europe, because you have to follow some regulations
"WSJ
I Test Drove a Chinese EV. Now I Don't Want to Buy American Cars Anymore.
https://www.wsj.com/tech/personal-tech/chinese-ev-test-drive...
"
I’m pretty sure they will, as they have, like clockwork, in the same month, for over a decade.
Of course it will be in Android phones so it will be throttle hard past 4W and will have terrible drivers.
I wish phones moved to HPB packaging and active cooling so we could have sustained 10W and use them as light workstations.
It's still PoP with the RAM stacked on top in a plastic casing so you need a pretty big fan to cool it since you have to go through insulating plastic, then the RAM to get to the CPU.
With a HPB packaging you can cool the CPU directly and could theoretically get the same amount of cooling power with a much smaller fan that could be integrated into a thing smartphone (à la RedMagic).
This is a M5 level chip that runs slightly within a ballpark of M5 wattage (afaik M5 is between 15W max on an iPad and 30W max CPU+GPU on a cooled Mac)
This is running in a thermally unconstrained bench setup and has potentially worse power consumption with what will be lower than previous gen performance when this and the alleged M6 are truly out.
It gets M5-level numbers at 12-14W.
It gets about 30% better perf than the A19 Pro at equal wattage on the whole 4W - 8W range.
So no it's not worse power consumption than prev gen. This is ARM's stock GPU having finally caught up and being competitive with Apple and Qualcomm's mobile GPUs.
This is insane to me. Stay cynical if you want, I have the right to be excited about it.
I'd love to see what it looks like inside a production phone. I really hope for this to be true because we need more competition on the CPU front.
What OS will these chips run and what is the competition on that platform? He makes a lot of comparisons to AMD and Intel in the post, why not benchmark against them?
Do you want to compare to Intel/AMD? If these are destined for phones that’s not a useful comparison by your metric.
His current laptop is an Intel laptop.
> Xiaomi is the Chinese tech giant. Their phones compete with iPhones.
To the second: I summon my inner Aussie: "Yeah, nah." I think only peak Google Pixel or Samsung Galaxy phones are the only two that can possibly challenge iPhones. The rest are poseurs.
See eg LoongLeak and the Loongson processor: https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity26/presentat...
Edit: There are also memory latency charts
But it's also the same xiaomi and sends gold samples and hacks gaming benchmarks, but IRL an off the shelf model is merely 80% better instead of 100%. It's no different than Samsung, Apple, Nvidia curious powerpoint axis. Whatever advertised, reality is slightly worse, but rarely substantially.
https://carnewschina.com/2025/05/13/xiaomi-su7-finished-dead...
I really like how the car looks. But this and famous crash on track due to brakes issue…
Also, here's to hoping we get some relatively competitive Chinese DRAM flooding the consumer market someday soon.
We will have A20 vs C2-Ultra this year. Can't wait to see it .
I write this especially in the context of apple always being about The Look, so they might also describe their design process in a more optimistical light in advertisement material.
An insider take would be helpful.
Night and day.
Apples has in-house silicon dev groups starting (at least) 2008 w/ acquisition of PA semi for their low power CPUs, followed by the acquisition of Anobit in 2012(?). Apple does their own architecture, microarchitecture, etc, full cycle development.
Apple licenses ISA, not designs.
I'm right there with you questioning Meta's value for society, but I do believe it has less opportunity for abuse/manipulation
I don't care about internal politics of a state, as long as they are not killing people deliberately on a daily basis or invading other countries and killing their people.
How government is structured is up to Chinese people to decide
> Would you feel differently if scale was reversed and Meta was the upstart trying to compete with Xiaomi/etc?
It's not only about scale and upstart, it's also about how much are they harming society.
No idea about reliability or anything else but just as pure tech demos they seem incredible.
They know they are inferior, and choose not to compete, just lobby for more regulations to keep competitors out. Free market, haha.
250 billion in EV subsidies from China. 10 billion by the U.S.
Desktops can have plenty of cooling so you actually get the real speed of whatever you are using.
Outside was too bright for me to see my laptop screen even at full brightness, but by the time I had it outside and had discovered that my phone had overheated so much it refused to turn on until it cooled down.
At least my drink was still cold.
Try working in the shade. The max brightness isn’t helping either.
I think most children prefer to play on phones these days. Mobile gaming is huge. To the point where game loops on high-end games are optimized around thermal throttling.
What about forced cultural assimilation and re-education camps? Or, as long as it’s confined to the borders of a country doing so, it is fine?
> How government is structured is up to Chinese people to decide
Funny take given the events of 1989
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghurs#Human_rights_abuses_ag...
But it’s so much easier to just lobby the competition away so there is none. It’s the American way!
It's definitely different when the player doesn't even have to play by the market. Comparing US companies and Chinese companies is not apples to apples.
dumping is always bad.
Or maybe that security doesn't have a practical application?
And in being defensive, you jumped straight from the topic you were discussing (GPU perf) to CPU perf numbers to try and make a point.
There’s a difference between being cynical and pragmatic, just as there’s a difference between being hyped and realistic.
You haven’t seen this in a product. You’re seeing development board numbers. Be excited all you want but it’s a public forum, if you want to just post without any responses make a blog.
Also I explicitly acknowledged in my first comment that real devices won't be able to draw that kind of power. But 4 watts is 4 watts whether it's in a test bench or a phone.
See this video from chineese youtubeer geerkerwan:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_car_project
"around 5,000 employees were reported to be working on the project as of 2018."
I believe the theoretical maximum yield for multi-patterning DUV at 5nm and 7nm is 30-40%
It's not economically sustainable/viable long term. China is only doing it because they've been forced to by the trade war Trump started against them in his first term (Biden didn't really back down either and now Trump 2 tried to ramp it up even higher). China is okay with such low yields because its supposed to be a temporary solution until they achieve domestic EUV tech.
If a process has a defect rate of x, the probability of a die having a defect is A*x. The limit is then the defect rate for a die with the surface area of a transistor, you cannot really get any better than this. But that’s not very useful if you want to extrapolate what the defect rate would be on an improved or cheaper process.
If they go too far to impose their system, we stop buying :)
This is geopolitics 101; your fantasy version is decades out of date.
Kafka himself would be proud if their unlocking process[0], but technically sure, they allow it
> Press "Apply for unlocking" at exactly 12:00 AM GMT+8 (pressing it too late will cause the "application quota limit reached" error. Use this website to check the time) "Account Error" might show up. If that happens, retry after 10 days
[0] https://github.com/realdtn2/xiaomi-unlocking-rooting-guide
It is very much harder to do now. There is a lot of friction introduced now to it.
Take a look at the PostmarketOS Device Wiki[1], you'll see that even phones released 10+ years ago (like Xiaomi Redmi 4) still do not have 100% functionality.
In saying that, in this era of LLMs and reverse-engineering, it may not be long before some of these blockers are reverse-engineered and we might end up with a fully functional Linux distro on older phones like this.
How would you call decades of chinese state-sponsored industrial espionage of western IP? Benevolent act?
I want to share 3 things here, to think out loud:
1. lets not go too far to the past, because I will say industrial espionage is less harmful than imperialism. Imperialism costed millions of lives across India, Pakistan, African nations, Indonesia and even in China, we are talking about how the West got extremely rich, which allowed it to live in prosperity, when everyone else were struggling (impact of it is still ongoing for some nations). I am fine with lesser of 2 evils, which is an industrial espionage in this case.
2. I didn't say 'benelovent act'
3. this is not baked by a science, just a personal preference, I prefer if country supports companies to advance the country, rather than allowing companies get too rich and bail them out with taxpayer money if they fail because of their dumb actions. (not saying one is better than other, I like how CCP elevated China from 3rd world country to a level, even the US companies are scared, in very short time, without invading and extracting resources from other countries. But it obviously has its own problems (e.g. how competitive is the life in China for kids and so on), I am not saying China is perfect, but China became superpower in the last 30-40 years, which is an impressive accomplishment.
This is hilarious that this whole “west is bad” makes people blind.
> Imperialism costed millions of lives
Chinese policies resulted in 10s of millions of their own people dead, and many millions in labor camps today.
Sure, “west is bad” but China “has its problems”.
I'd call it a whataboutism
I would say that saying about anything “whataboutism” is a cheap way out.
China does industrial espionage for the same end goals as American companies work on new things: market domination. So, I find it funny when someone is mad about American companies but not Chinese, while both pursuit the same goals.
> Thinking there's no corruption
You see what you did here?
> is actually comical
Indeed.
Didn't Tesla essentially stay afloat for years via government subsidies (e.g. government-mandated carbon credits)?
Didn't the US only recently end its direct subsidies for EV buyers?
Don't US taxpayers provide an enormous ongoing subsidy to ICE vehicles by underwriting the security of the oilfields in the Gulf?
Don't US taxpayers in effect subsidize US automakers by ensuring they do not have to compete in the market with the best available vehicles?
More to the point: American free-marketeerism was never about the other side, it was about the US living its own professed values at home. We didn't shackle our press in discussions about the USSR because the USSR chose to shackle its own press. Our lockout of Chinese EVs rankles in part because it's a deviation, at home, from our own professed values.
EV incentives where also not limited to us companies.
Adding carbon credits the U.S. is close to 20 billion in EV subsidies.
The ENTIRE EU spent 125 billion.
China supplied 250 billion to a 400 billion dollar industry and is facing overproduction. It’s dishonest to say it’s the same.
Free market capitalism isn’t binary. If that’s what you think, you’re gravely misinformed.
The subsidies were around 25% of sales in 2018 and have dropped down to about 10%.
And of that 250 billion, half is a sales tax exemption and a quarter is purchase rebates. That bulk of the money doesn't lead to unfair competition.
https://www.csis.org/blogs/trustee-china-hand/chinese-ev-dil...
Direct producer subsidies for PRC EV was <100B, less than US injected into US auto, not much more than Euro auto. The latter just poorly, i.e. pork barrel / jobs programs that does not raise baseline competitiveness.
Most of CSIS muh PRC 200b-400b includes rebates/taxes AND subsidies to upstream, i.e. battery industry which used more than cars. AKA they bundled energy sector to skew PRC numbers.
For comparable you'd have to include all historic US/EU auto subsidies, AND ASSOCIATED upstream subsidies like MOST OF fossil industry, related diesel/fuel discounts... etc etc in which case US/EU have been rebating to the tune of trillions.
Strict auto-auto sector equivalence = PRC subsidized less to commoditize their car industry in fraction of time, which is not remotely "overproduction", they still barely exports 20%... they'd have to export 50/75%+ to reach shares of EU/JP/SKR etc and even then those absurd export%s not treated as overproduction. PRC would need to be exporting ~20m more cars then they do now to even qualify.
Auto+energy sector equivalence (the 200-400b figure), PRC not even on the axis in equivalence scenario.
E:cleaner language
I literally didn't say that it was?
In any case, the point is that the US also subsidizes markets, including the auto markets. China is far from unique in this. As you say, free market capitalism isn't binary, and in this case all parties are subsidizing to some degree.
That means the Chinese government is doing a really good job.
I really hate this argument where every government across the globe have to basically be a drag which sucks the life out of an economy and wastes extracted resources (taxes) on bullshit instead of putting them to good use.
This is what winning looks like fellas, and you're just losing. Get used to it as there's only going to be more of this.
Source: same as yours
Now this mostly isn't a big issue on the desktop/x86 world, because most drivers are open source, except for some exceptions like certain Broadcom drivers and old nVidia drivers. nVidia used to be a massive headache to deal with because the driver would frequently break with kernel updates, but thankfully that's mostly a thing of the past after they released an open driver, relegating most of the proprietary code to their GSP firmware.
Also, PCs and the x86 platform in general are much more open and hacker-friendly, making it relatively easier to reverse-engineer drivers, so as a result we also have a good chunk of drivers maintained by the community.
So the lack of ABI/API stability isn't a big issue generally in the desktop space.
Now in the embedded/ARM space however, things are very different. Unfortunately due to the precedence set by Google, Apple and earlier mobile vendors, chipset vendors generally don't release their sources; even their architecture documentation is closely guarded and hard to obtain, never mind the sources. And the chipset themselves (like the camera/ISP) are tiny black boxes and hard to debug and reverse engineer. So unless this situation changes (ie, official Linux support from the manufacturers themselves), a simple unlocked bootloader means nothing.
You're also ignoring the most important point, my last point about values. The comment is still up, feel free to re-read it.
> and in this case all parties are subsidizing to some degree.
Textbook false equivalence.
What is an equivalence here is, that the binary flag of "does subsidize" is true, and that equivalence holds.
I understand why, mind you; would VS Code or Slack have as much velocity of improvement if they had to individually manage GUI toolkits for each platform? Would VS Code be as extensible if the UI were built in Swift or Qt?o But the results are still there.
There are projects to try to make this /better/, like Tauri - Electron but using your system's built-in browser engine rather than shipping a new one, so that you don't have to have eight separate copies of Chromium loaded into memory - but they still need to reach feature-completeness and projects need to do a non-trivial migration, and then they need to test across multiple browser engines, etc., so it's still not the same.
Regardless, this is the situation we have right now; everyone figured that RAM capacity would continue to increase at the same rate as RAM usage, "it works on my machine" but it's a 32 GB Macbook, Chromium optimized for performance and not memory usage by assuming that each 'page load' would be short lived (browser behavior) rather than having one 'page load' run for hours or days (Slack, VS Code, Spotify).
Or at least, that's how it went where I work.
The only computer that's the exception is my macbook m4. This thing was and still is ridiculously snappy.
A very big portion of this is just Wirth's Law in motion. Software is getting worse rapidly, and AI is accelerating the decline in software quality, where performance is an aspect of quality.
But the other part of this is the latency vs throughput tradeoff. More and more of our systems are optimized for throughput, or worse are optimized for throughput in ways which causes significant experience degradation if you are unable to meet the throughput demands. There is a natural tension between throughput and latency, and we are seeing this play out across every aspect of both hardware and software system design. As a simple example, nothing you do to USB4 will ever match the latency of PS/2 connection for an input device, but a PS/2 port delivers around 7-12 kiloBITS/second of throughput vs USB4 delivering up to 120Gbps and a /minimum/ of 20 gigabits/second of throughput. PS/2 uses blocking direct hardware interrupts for input devices, vs asynchronous polling on USB. This architectural difference will never allow for USB to match PS/2 latency, regardless how "fast" USB gets.
This tradeoff is leaning more and more towards throughput everywhere you look. Just today, the new M5 Ultra is announced w/ 1.2TBs/ of memory bandwidth. The M5 Max had 14ns of memory latency while high-performance DDR4/DDR5 typically achieves 8-9ns of latency. That's 36% more latency (conservatively), but nearly 10x the throughput. When you stack up small changes like this at every layer of the system, including in our overreliance on micro services and networked data I/O vs local data in applications, and it adds up. There are so many places in modern software where there is some network connection required for something that could have been achieved without that connection, and waiting on that connection consumes a huge amount of wait time relative to the total time for the operation, and we all feel it.
I have been away from Android for a while, is it any better there?
Maybe if you want to use all of the big mainstream apps the experience might be different, but I tend to have a fairly minimal setup on my phone. On android I would disable animations, use Nova launcher, Firefox with UBO, and a bunch of fdroid apps. This all added up to a very snappy and efficient system that I haven’t been able to replicate on iOS.
Androids launched ≥2026 got a serious haircut in either memory or other features though. We'll see in 2028.
If we assume this is true, it at least meant if you didn't upgrade you'd get even worse performance.
The only use of a slow machine is it gives a point where you can say more optimization isn't worth it. Everything else I can do better on a fast machine than a slow machine.
Sure, but not the way West conducted it, by going and killing generations of people. Look at India, before British colonization they accounted for almost 25% GDP of the world (~1700s), now it is around 3-4%
Or lets look at China itself, before the opium wars and British colonization, it accounted for ~30% of the world GDP, by 1970s it dropped to 4-5%, now climbing back to 20%.
Indonesia would be another example.
You keep defending the West, even though its actions were much worse than "industrial espionage", because you probably live in the West and feel nice about your day to day life and regular things like education feels granted, and not seeing the enormous impact of the West's evil actions to the lives of billions of people around the world in the last 200 years. (US hasn't even stopped yet, see Cuba, Middle Eastern countries)
Ridiculous statement. China is doing it today — uighurs are actively erased bit by bit.
> Look at India, before British colonization they accounted for almost 25% GDP of the world (~1700s), now it is around 3-4%
This statement is rooted in “zero sum” logic, and based on the assumption that without colonization India should have stayed with its 25% or more share. Hypotheticals are hypotheticals, and nothing more.
> You keep defending the West,
I’m not defending anyone. I find it ridiculous that you are so high on “the west is bad, China good” horse and completely oblivious to so many things that China does, which are objectively worse.
Can you read what I have written? if not, let me copy what I wrote earlier here:
> I am fine with lesser of 2 evils
> But it obviously has its own problems (e.g. how competitive is the life in China for kids and so on), I am not saying China is perfect
I am not saying China is good, I am saying it is lesser of 2 evils with much less negative impact to the lives of human beings around the world, in my opinion.
But they did. Look at Xinjiang, Tibet, and the history of Manchuria, among others. They did it to themselves as well, like most backwards dictatorship. And "the West” does not really do genocide anymore, either. This is more a consequence of it being a terrible strategy than Chinese benevolence (or anyone’s, really). At some point we realised that direct administration is a burden and that it’s much more cost effective to bribe nominally independent governments without having to deal directly with local populations. China does this a lot, just like evil western imperialist countries. Empires look different in the 21st century than in the 19th, that’s all. And where would you put Russia in a neat west-rest of the world dichotomy?
> You keep defending the West, even though its actions were much worse than "industrial espionage"
“The West” is not a monolith. It’s made of several countries, some of them better than others, and each one of them with its good and bad sides. It is not useful to work with generalisations like that. It obscures any information or lesson we could get and leads to wrong conclusions. It’s also counter-productive because for all its evil, there is nothing “the West” did that is unique. Except in scale, but then it’s more a quirk of history than something being intrinsically evil in “western” people.
Don't want to get into the definition of genocide, but sure, you can think of whatever you want, but facts are different (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides):
* Gaza genocide (supported and enabled by West)
* Bosnian genocide
* Holocaust
* Vietnam war
* Afghanistan
* Iraq
* Libya
* endless sanctions and blockade against Cuban people
some wars on the list were joint operations between US, Britain and NATO, for others you can read this 20 page wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Uni...
Im sure there are many more things that add up to focus more on throughout over latency as mentioned above.
I do not understand this. It sounds like a cultist/religious position.
MediaTek Dimensity 9500 is also manufactured by TSMC N3P process in Taiwan. [2]
There was no world interdependence change (unless one considers China and Taiwan to be the same countries).
[1] https://www.notebookcheck.net/Xiaomi-launches-XRing-O3-claim...
[2] https://www.notebookcheck.net/MediaTek-Dimensity-9500-Proces...
The fact that the CCP is relaxed about core Chinese companies running their manufacturing in Taiwan might suggest that the CCP considers that it can make China and Taiwan one country, at a time of the CCP's choosing.
They would lose all of TSMC if they do any military actions. It's not the fact that the CCP thinks that they can make Taiwan and China a country, it's the the fact that most of China does in fact consider them as one country. Taiwan is ready to defend themselves, but are very happy keeping their relationship with China the way it is.
This whole idea of collapsing everything to some single semi-military geo-political concern is naive and not at all how the world works.
Of course there are people in China who would prefer Xiaomi did all their manufacturing inside China, and there are others who prefer to build stronger economic ties between Taiwan and China to make Taiwan economically dependent on China.
There are others who want Xiaomi to dominate world mobile markets by any means necessary. There are others who want Xiaomi to make the most profit possible, and still others who want Chinese firms to race to match US companies technology on every dimension.
These concerns are all interlinked and play out over years in lots of micro decisions.
China isn’t going to invade China until after we get our semiconductors up and running in Arizona for real
(because US won’t have to think about that situation ever again)
removing dependence imperils that island, CCP already has an EUV machine so the inevitable sanctions and export controls on ASML’s in Europe won’t matter either
I'm not so sure. I would say that perhaps it's an indication that the CCP is ok with the status quo.
The PR Chinese might be able to take Taiwan's land, but they can't conceivable take Taiwan's economy, at least not by force.
How do you make one country into one country? It's already one country and is treated as such by even countries that consider China an adversary
There are accounts of interdiction and post-manufacturing compromises, such as those revealed in the Snowden leaks (2013) and most recently by reporting about the Israeli security services' sabotage of Hezbollah pagers and 2-way radios. These projects didn't expose primary manufacturers to the reputational and legal risk of association.
Until there's evidence of backdoors implanted by these companies, it's better to adopt a "trust but verify" approach and use standard layered security practices to detect intrusion. Conventional network intrusion and insider threat campaigns carry less risk of failure and are simpler and cheaper to execute.
Now, if the EU would start make to make chips that have no subsystem to screw me over, that would be something.
When we buy software from Silicon Valley or a nice Mercedes Benz from Germany we don’t use this same language “outsourcing.”
Colloquially, outsourcing implies low quality or cheap price. No, what’s happening here is that China makes the best products in numerous categories and we are choosing to import them, because the best products are the most desirable.
Now Japan is known for quality electronics and options and Taiwan for state of the art semiconductors.
That's quite the odd statement. I don't think that it's in anyone's best interests to have a single country control access to chips. It might be in the US's interests to keep everyone out if the field, but the US is a single country among 195 countries.
And isn't the US's dominant ideology all about competition?
The tendency to protect corporate profit margins is the western Achilles heel and China knew they could exploit that.
- China weaponizing the world's dependence on rare earth
- The US weaponizing the world's dependence on SWIFT
- Russia weaponizing Europe's dependence on natural gas
- Iran weaponizing the the world's dependence of oil supply through strait of Hormuz
That said some of these industry especially metallurgical ones will never return to Europe or US as they basically destroy and pollute the environment on a large scale, in China that still seems acceptable but also might change promoting them to outsource to other countries which they already do in some areas I think.
Imagine what those kinds of people would have said in China in the 70s, with western industries being vastly more advanced and efficient. "It's over, we will never catch up." they would probably have said. Wrong then, more wrong now.
China has made a tremendous effort to move to a clean(er) industrial system, using a lot of renewables and clean energy and improving environmental standards. At this point production in China is probably the best for the environment compared to most countries, including the US that is deeply invested in oil production.
In America, there is one fast food place that does it differently than everyone in the market they don’t franchise and they don’t lease/rent.
They own everything as they expand (the land and the building), which means it’s a little bit slower when you expand, but they don’t care but they are very profitable.
The owner probably gets a call every other week from large equity companies trying to sell them on doing it like everybody else and their pitch they can make you a worldwide company if you just let them in to f you.
Part of what led me to believe this was waking up and realising they're also simply better at offering LLM inference: cheaper; faster; more innovative.
It's a horse of a very different colour from outsourcing where someone is simply chasing the lowest bidder.
The media to this day portrays China as if it was 80s. Yes, at that time it was an open-air manufacturing plant. You can run rudimentary floor operations with high school educated workers, but you still need trained engineers and managers to run the operations. Exporting engineers quickly became impractical, which led to local engineers getting trained. At some point the training became the bottleneck so local educators were trained. And so on.
Over the years, China has built the entire industrial pipeline: all the way from education and vocational training, to scientific research, to local engineering houses. Remember, the people who built Shenzen are now retired. Or to put it into perspective, China is currently at roughly similar age of industrial boom as post-WWII USA was in... the late 90s - early 00s.
"The West" had a head start with regards to IP and China is indeed fighting an uphill battle there, but they have a huge domestic market to grow the companies out. The proud "Designed in X, made in China" things are being replaced with white-label "made in China", where "designed in China" is implied.
Do you have a robot vacuum? It's probably Roborock / Dreame / Ecovacs, not even some western branding.
I feel you're trying too hard to make believe this is somehow unexpected or unnoticed. The fact that subcontracting work to external companies acts as an investment on said companies to develop skills and competences is something that is known since always. The argument that the reigning VC mentality is that this investment is an acceptable tradeoff due to reasons such as these investments being limited to non-critical business concerns.
It will be interesting to see what China does. They aren't ideologically committed to exclusively serving the interests of the wealthy, but they still have lots of rich people in the (ahem) Communist Party, so who knows.
China could have the monopoly of rare earth production and refinery for all of eternity. But because of their reaction towards all the us allies when the us increased tariffs, I don't expect them to be relevant enough to disrupt markets with rare earths sanctions in 10-20 years.
... Except when they can't in any meaningful span of time.
Your link does not say what you think it does. My guess is you read the first sentence and saw "one-China police" and stopped. But the US's one-China policy is not the same thing as China's one-China principle.
The US's one-China policy is that (continental) China is a single China governed by the PRC. It's silent on Taiwan. But, considering the laws we have on the books declaring our commitment to ensuring the sovereignty of Taiwan, it's a hard row to hoe to get to "the US considers Taiwan to be territory the PRC has a right to control."
The US has an unofficial relationship with Taiwan simply to shut the CCP up. It's like when your partner is complaining about something you did, silence doesn't mean you agree that you messed up. Sometimes it just means you don't want a fight right now.
Oh really?
https://2021-2025.state.gov/countries-areas/taiwan/
>The 1979 U.S.-P.R.C. Joint Communique switched diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing. In the Joint Communique, the U.S. recognized the Government of the People’s Republic of China as the sole legal government of China, acknowledging the Chinese position that there is but one China and Taiwan is part of China.
https://2021-2025.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-taiwan/
>The United States approach to Taiwan has remained consistent across decades and administrations. The United States has a longstanding one China policy, which is guided by the Taiwan Relations Act, the three U.S.-China Joint Communiques, and the Six Assurances. We oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo from either side; we do not support Taiwan independence
Doesn't sound like silence to me.
>But, considering the laws we have on the books declaring our commitment to ensuring the sovereignty of Taiwan, it's a hard row to hoe to get to "the US considers Taiwan to be territory the PRC has a right to control."
You're moving the goal posts. Sovereignty isn't the same as being a country. States in the US have some sovereignty and their own governance and international relations too, but it wouldn't be correct to say that the US consists of 50 independent countries.
Also, using the word right sounds a bit like muddying the waters. You could argue the United States government doesn't have the right to control their land, as it has been stolen from the indigenous people. But that doesn't mean United States is not an independent country that controls the area within its borders.
And eventually, just like the Western solar, battery, pharma and car companies all have learned, the CCP will use that knowledge to surpass and undercut everyone else.
Why would they not do the same? They are very pro-surveillance for a start.
They are backdoors, with not even very good plausible deniability.
It's so on the nose it's comical.
All three will be going away sooner or later.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Report_on_Manufactures
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_School_(economics)
Parallel: the industrialization of China for the most part happened after Deng Xiaoping, but are people wrong to credit him for setting the course?
If you "franchise" a CFA, you don't own the store, you don't own the land, they severely control your income, you are required to physically work at the store (in other words, they control you as a laborer), and you can't re-sell the franchise since you don't own it. You have no equity. They refer to you as an operator.
When you leave the business, CFA picks someone else to give it to. You get paid nothing because you never owned it.
They're also very weird in picking their operators. I can't speak for every CFA, but where I live all the operators are white evangelical Christians. This is probably a side-effect of CFA's policy of not letting anyone who has debt be an operator, and buying everything without financing is a big thing in the evangelical Christian community thanks to Dave Ramsey.
One can prefer a regime where it's very hard for people who abuse their power to avoid punishment if it's all public to one where the powerful are emboldened enough to be able to be shameless. Even worse when the shamelessness is seen as the purest display of power, and thus people compete in their public misbehavior. But still, understand that the real barrier to punishment in the first case is not to avoid doing bad things, but to make sure that the witnesses either don't exist, or are too scared to say anything.
A judicial system that actually has no sacred cows would be better in all cases, but the sacred cows everywhere do their best to make sure this doesn't happen.
In the west, billionaires are often able to get extremely favorable treatment by the law as an expression of the power money gives. This is not the case in China, in which the party stands at the top.
In practice that's just a difference of incentives that I'm not sure at all is beneficial for anything but an authoritarian regime.
yeah equity asset values are going to tank but US will get serious about the supply chain immediately (which is already very much in progress), plus all the older nodes to alleviate some pressure off of the active compute demands
That is not to say that in time they’ll start to do many of things that happens in the west where those at the 1% or 2% walk away, in time China may drop down to that level, on the other hand, I would like to believe the United States will start to have the same reaction that the country had when Sputnik went around the Earth and change course and I don’t mean sanctions, tariffs, wars, and threatening neighbors to the north and to the south.
They are also moving close to a point where they will bring Thorium Reactors on line they don’t have to. They could just stick with uranium, but they’re not.
Is this part of the fact that they have engineers running a lot of of the things at the top of their government instead of lawyers?
They seem to be building a lot of infrastructure they are in the process of building several dams on the Brahmaputra River.
China: 525 gCO2/kWh
And like you said, China is putting a real effort in. I don't see the US trying to reduce domestic short hop flights with electric high speed rail. I don't see the US trying to replace gasoline cars with EVs. I don't see the US curtailing structural incentivization of pickup trucks and SUVs.
The main US policy seems to be "spend trillions on wars for oil" rather than accepting the inevitable decline of oil and planning around it.
You don't have to replace 100% of workforce, replace just the ones whose work is the easiest to do by a robot.
Replacing 50% of workforce buys you enough time that by the time your available worker pool has shrunk 50%, robotics and AI will be much better and you will be able to replace another big chunk.
Production-wise, shrinking demographics are not such a big deal (they still have a lot of youth unemployment).
Shrinking demographics is a problem due to a) the ratio of workers vs seniors, b) shrinking overall demand pool -> shrinking economy c) smaller overall talent pool -> less diversity, less 'geniuses', i.e. the real drivers of innovation, and less capability to mobilize for great projects
Sure, GDP in the USA is growing faster than the EU, but the question is who is benefiting from the increased GDP?
The answer is in Dah00n's comment. The rich are getting richer, while the population gets scraps. Meanwhile, people in the EU get guaranteed healthcare, paid time off, maternity leave, better worker's rights, etc.
They had that 20 years ago? Since then the rich asset owners have been accumulating a bigger share of the pie in the EU as well, it’s just marginally less pronounced because there is less wealth to go about in the EU due to the multi-decade long stagnation (outside Eastern Europe and a handful of other countries). On the whole I find it extremely hard to view this as a positive without a huge amount of wishful thinking.
People in the EU need to start thinking about how to improve things rather than exclusively focusing on holding onto what they already have (which is slowly turning into scraps..). To a large extent the old EU countries just froze in time after the GFC.
The EU is not perfect and recently they took a turn for the worse with shit like ChatControl and the ppwr killing small businesses.
But economically it's not a problem. It's not a race to be the richest, though America always makes everything a contest. We just need enough to live comfortably.
A bit of selective memory necessary for that take given good old Crypto AG
The answer to that question in the US is within epsilon of “no” thanks to the cloud act.
Europe and China have passed similar laws. However, China has a reputation for passing laws then selectively enforcing them. Maybe if you get on the right side of the right party member, the answer might still be “Yes” there.
Anyway, the next question to ask is: Who would I rather backdoor my device?
I doubt the Chinese government cares much about me, and unless I vacation there it’s an international incident if they, say, hack my car and murder me by aiming it at a tree at 95mph, like the CIA apparently does now:
https://www.motor1.com/news/138679/wikileaks-claim-cia-hack-...
Of course, the US government banned cars from China. Presumably this is because they do not have the mandated remote murder network port open, or, if they do, the US doesn’t have the necessary permissions to access it.
For instance election tampering in the US is a well-documented thing: However it almost always favors republicans in districts with electronic voting machines that do not generate paper trails.
As for the person you are replying to, their claims have been documented by most media outlets, places like wikileaks, and their claims are backed by US legal requirements to backdoor stuff (like the US Cloud act).
Would Xiaomi or the CCP accept the reputational and legal risk of getting caught with a backdoor? Recall the CCP considered the arrest of the Huawei executive in Canada as an offense against itself.
Yeah sure they won't be producing any F35s or million dollar per shot missiles, but was that a good idea to start with? Are they worth the money when once again lots of inexpensive arms are shown to be more useful in modern wars than a few handfuls of expensive ones? Both Iran and Ukraine have shown that one side being a few steps ahead in military technology and willing to dump money on equipment still has limited returns. There is no "I win" technology apart from indiscriminately killing most of the entire population, which just makes you an existential enemy to the rest of the planet and erases 95% of the value in taking that territory.
Regardless of the tech stack the work still needs to be done and now the EU has to do it. The Eu does not have infinite money, in fact they have less than the US so there will be cuts elsewhere.
Before outsourcing manufacturing to China Europe was making a third of all industrial things on this planet, so Europe will be just fine.
> the work required for GDP growth to refugees
I don't get this one. Do you think the European economy is propped up by refugees? I think there are 5 million of them in total in Europe, most of them Ukrainians and it's likely Ukraine will become a EU member at some point in the future...
And they will continue to do so. Just at a higher cost with no US to maintain bases and do technology cost sharing. That extra money has to come out from somewhere...it will be entitlements. Combine that with terrible demographics and that remaining manufacturing base will be built on a bed of sand. :)
>Before outsourcing manufacturing to China Europe was making a third of all industrial things on this planet, so Europe will be just fine.
Europe can insource everything that China makes. They are not stupid people. You mistake the benefit westerners got from outsourcing. It held back inflation in products because the value came from the living standards difference between chinese and EU people. Remove that disparity by bringing back everything and EU will be living with a lower quality of life because all those products will be significantly more expensive with no alternatives.
>I don't get this one. Do you think the European economy is propped up by refugees? I think there are 5 million of them in total in Europe, most of them Ukrainians and it's likely Ukraine will become a EU member at some point in the future...
Same point I have been making. The consequences of demographic collapse can be hidden away by having young tax paying peoples do the shit jobs that run the economy at low wages. Same thing the US does with illegal migrants. Remove that and the hidden costs are now dumped onto the population. Result: Lower living standards for those who remain.
But I agree that pretty much everybody will happily take the status quo over armed invasion.
And a lot of people are sympathetic with the Chinese, just not their government.
I've only visited Taiwan once and I only have one friend there so perhaps what I'm hearing is not accurate.
and related to, with all that holds in an Eastern mindset. My adoptive grandmother was born in Shanghai in 1927. To my knowledge she never returned to Mainland China, partially because her relatives wen Telswhere when the communists came in.
edit: fixed one errant `t`
CCP is not threatening taiwan because it might go for independence. it is _ALL_ about kicking the US out of the west Pacific. because of that, it is never about what people in Taiwan believe/say/do.
It is only about the military balance of the west Pacific.
> And a lot of people are sympathetic with the Chinese, just not their government.
sympathetic of what?
20 years ago, you might be able to play the "CCP regime repressing the people in China" joke, you can't do it anymore especially in such topic of Taiwan. quality of life is significantly better in literally every aspect in China. Taipei in 2026 is getting more and more like a tier-3 Chinese city in 2016.
Certainly, somewhat understandable, given the "military exercises" at the doorstep happening every now and then, but also escalatory and idiotically not a good look either. Some of it is just spewed hatred, not taking a high lane when it comes to ethics.
But at the same time everyone understands that the Taiwanese would destroy the facilities before they fall into Chinese hands
The talent is still there, so they could rebuild, or recruit the talent to work for Chinese mainland fabs instead?
Now that US has already opened the gate to labelling nation head as drug seller, this just eases things for China.
Sounds like you've been fed the US anti-China propaganda for the large part of your life as well.
_China doesn't need to invade Taiwan_
1. 50%+ of Taiwan's workforce are white-collar workers [0].
2. There are 3-4 major underwater internet communication hubs in Taiwan [1].
3. There is a substantial opposition in Taiwan that want reunification (~20% of population support directly Li-Wun) [2].
4. China is close to producing industry-grade EUV [3].
China just can:
* Establish a total naval and air blockade of Taiwan using their fleets stationed in Ningbo and Zhanjiang.
* Cut underwater internet cables in those 3 locations.
* Achieve EUV.
They won't need TSMC soon, and with the blockade they can show the world that TSMC is not a reliable supplier.
Within months the political structure of Taiwan is going to crumble, as white-collar workers lose their jobs.
[0] https://www.cbc.gov.tw/dl-215893-af39cb14b0044d1cb05a60864ec...
[2] https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3350271/xi-...
[3] https://asiatimes.com/2025/12/made-in-china-euv-machine-targ...
As an American, I found the deference to authority very strange.
Are schoolchildren in the US still required to recite the pledge of allegiance...?
The Supreme Court ruled, in 1943, that it is unconstitutional to compel students to salute the flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/319/624.h...
Strongly pressured, yes.
How is that?
Is there an action movie style self destruct sequence?
Any period time? US waged war for 20+ years in Afghanistan. Pretty effectively! To what end? Not an end an army can really achieve so… there you are.
But a war that might actually be popular? To save the world from communist dictators and make sure we have chips for our precious devices? I wouldn’t count out the United States. Or nuclear weapons, which still exist and are a thing.
I feel like Russia thought the same of Ukraine, even though it is way bigger
Taiwan? All surface ships are sitting ducks. Troop transport ships would get absolutely decimated, and then the landing troops would get swarmed by drones all over again, and then they have to maintain logistics to the small minority that land (good luck with that). And that's without naval drones.
With naval drones? I have no idea how China gets anything across the strait.
And all the above is true for a competently organized Chinese invasion. Which it won't be.
The tactical situation in Taiwan is very different though. I think it would come down more to what’s happening in the air since the stalemate in Ukraine is in large because the Russian airforce is almost completely neutralized and can only be used to launch cruise missiles from a safe distance. I doubt China would invade unless they feel they can somehow achieve at least temporary air superiority and achieve their other objectives during that period.
Air defenses are probably much more important than drones overall.
China have more credible threat of bombing economically relevant building like TSMC, or capturing leaders and protestors like they already are doing in Hong Kong.
Russia didn't need to invade Ukraine either.
But nonetheless China is clearly preparing itself to be ready to be able to invade, with aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships, dual purpose roll-on/roll-off carriers. It doesn't mean it will, but that it wants to be able to.
So basically it will depend on a single dictator's whim if they do or don't.
> Establish a total naval and air blockade of Taiwan using their fleets stationed in Ningbo and Zhanjiang
Which would be considered an act of war, so it's the same scenario again.
> There is a substantial opposition in Taiwan that want reunification (~20% of population support directly Li-Wun)
20% is more than the % of people in the Donbass that wanted unification with Russia, and we can see how well that went. And it wasn't a dangerous amphibious assault against an island with shit terrain.
Arguable, they had to after the 2008 Buharest NATO summit and Ukraine's militarization going forward, and eradication of Russian language and Russian-speaking population in the east.
> Which would be considered an act of war, so it's the same scenario again.
China considers Taiwan their territory, who is there to protect Taiwan? US?
>20% is more than the % of people in the Donbass that wanted unification with Russia
20% plus part of those white-collar workers who are a backbone of the Taiwan's economy and politics and can be left jobless after China achieves EUV and puts TSMC out of monopoly.
Let's be real. Trump demanded TSMC to invest 100B into US factories and they complied [0].
[0] https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/03/tsmc-to-announce-100-billion...
All your points consider what China can do but not how others would respond. Blocking Taiwan when the whole AI economy is running on it will invoke lots of countries to go up in arms. There was a quote from US military that it'd cost less to fight than watch Taiwan fall (invasion or not).
> 4. China is close to producing industry-grade EUV
No where near close. At least not production grade at massive scale.
> * Establish a total naval and air blockade of Taiwan using their fleets stationed in Ningbo and Zhanjiang.
Doesn't work. If they do that the US, JP and others can also blockade around Shanghai, Hong Kong and the other ports.
> They won't need TSMC soon
Taiwan is not just TSMC. There are thousands to millions of things involving Taiwan you're likely not aware of and they might not even be AI or semi related.
US backed off last year when there were talks about protecting Taiwan. They pulled Patriot missiles from Taiwan and South Korea too.
China and Japan have a beef. Considering the atrocities Japan did in China, the conversation won't be friendly.
None of these are good for Taiwan, during the times when its political system is failing.
> No where near close. At least not production grade at massive scale.
It looks like you have knowledge of the status of that super-secret government project. Can you share some details then?
> Doesn't work. If they do that the US, JP and others can also blockade around Shanghai, Hong Kong and the other ports.
US cannot blockade Hormuz, as we've seen. JP cannot do that with their current constitution unless they change it (the current government is on the road to it, though).
What we've also seen is that Chinese fishing fleet had a military blockade exercise [0].
> Taiwan is not just TSMC. There are thousands to millions of things involving Taiwan you're likely not aware of and they might not even be AI or semi related.
All is around semiconductors.
[0] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/01/16/world/asia/ch...
I would not want to be maintaining a long-term naval blockade while constantly looking over my shoulder worrying about surprise attacks. Everyone knows where you are, and it would give plenty of time for a counter offensive to be planned. The US has something like 50 attack submarines, and a surprise attack from all of them at once would be a nightmare scenario for any fleet.
In the era of drones and missiles having your navy tied down in a blockade like that makes it all the more vulnerable.
US had 10,000 miles of power projection, while China prepared for 100 miles of it for the past 20 years, come on. The answer is EUV alternative that would render TSMC useless.
I understand that majority of people here cannot see the bigger picture, by design.
Effectively the semantics are like a game of chicken and hostage combined. Might as well be a Prisoner's Dilemma.
> To render inoperable sure, but invaders would surely be able to suss out some of their secrets from the remains.
Yes, but I have a suspicion the Taiwanese plans are a bit more involved than my sledge hammer idea.
>US cannot blockade Hormuz, as we've seen. JP cannot do that with their current constitution unless they change it (the current government is on the road to it, though).
If China really wants to fuck with Taiwan, they had better do it soon while the most incompetent US administration ever to hold office is still there. Because there is change coming to the US and the next president isn't likely to be such a complete moron.
How dare the countries threatened by Russia, who had seen how Russia invaded and brutalised multiple countries - Moldova, Checnya, Georgia twice - seek protection from Russia. This totally excuses Russia invading and brutalising again, of course.
> Ukraine's militarization going forward
The country was literally invaded (Crimea and Donbass), what the hell did you or the idiots in the Kremlin expect? That it will just sit and allow Russia to take more of its territory unopposed? That it will become a pliant vassal state again?
> eradication of Russian language and Russian-speaking population in the east
Such eradication that the country elected a Russian speaker to be president, on a platform of reconciliation with Russia. So much so, that his opposition called him a Russian puppet. That guy is Zelenskyy.
I'm sorry, but you're either out of your mind, or have been completely brainwashed. Russia chose to invade multiple of its neighbours, and did unspeakable atrocities every time. The only one to fault for all of this, and everyone around them seeking protection from this, is them. This imperialist nonsense brutality does not belong in the 21st century, and neither does its apologia. And no, I don't care about the whataboutism you're preparing to "defend" these actions with, it's beyond irrelevant. It's what the Russian state has been about since it came into being out of the ruins of the USSR. We should have never treated them as anything else.
That's literally a copy-paste from propaganda pamphlet. Can you back it up?
> The country was literally invaded
You seem to forget the amount of killings Ukraine did there and why it started in the first place.
Why should I discuss that with a person who seems to be unaware of facts?
Back what up? That Russia invaded and destroyed Chechnya? Or Georgia?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Chechen_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Grozny_(1999%E2%80%9...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War
What exactly do you want backed up? That countries across Eastern Europe saw how the russians operate and decided they don't want to be destroyed?
> You seem to forget the amount of killings Ukraine did there and why it started in the first place.
What killings did Ukraine make that resulted in russia invading Crimea? Or russia starting the invasion of the Donbass? MH17 maybe? Oh no, wait, that was the russians too.
That was an occupation and a low intensity “pacification” mission. Waging a prolonged war against a military peer on the other side of the continent is a bit more problematic (considering that US is/was on the brink of running out of advanced weaponry in Iran despite having aerial superiority which they won’t over Taiwan, Japan would have to get involved as well cause otherwise US would have to entirely rely on the fragile carrier fleet).
Using tactical nukes (even regardless of the extreme geopolitical downsides that might bring) wouldn’t necessarily give a great tactical advantage either, unless they are willing to do that over Taiwan itself to destroy the landing forces).
No guerilla warfare, no insurgents, no need for extended beyond-visual-range warfare that depletes missile stockpiles
Was with you until that last one. If you haven't noticed missiles, drones, and interceptors have played a central role in ukraine.
Last time used faced a conventional military that could actually challenge it was in Korea.
It won’t have complete areal superiority or entire division surrendering after running into contact with US forces like they in Iraq. “Shock and awe” of course can be very effective just probably not against China. Even now US is running out of materiel against Iran and can’t really sustain a prolonged intense conflict while being able to protect its gulf allies from ballistic missiles and drones.
Change the leadership (which will happen soon) and when there is actual support from congress to fund and intervene in a conflict in Taiwan, then you will see a vastly different US military response.
But if you mean in a metaphorical sense, how long until the 7th Fleet could get to Taiwan, the answer is 0 days for first response, 3 days for everything located in Japan, and less than a week for the full mobilization of the 7th Fleet (that's 50+ ships and nearly 30K soldiers). The entire Pacific fleet could be there in a week and a half.
(Granted, we're assuming competent US leadership, which is not the current administration.)
Would you voluntarily work in a country that invaded and taken over yours?
Would you ask the same about Russia recruiting Ukrainians?
Some are.
Some people also want to feed their families and not be unemployed.
P.S. A large number of Ukrainians moved to Russia. Including the ones who wanted to reunite with their relatives. Taiwanese have a lot of relatives on the mainland as well.
Citation very much needed.
maybe easier said than done but still
TSMC is not something you can rebuild with some brains in front of laptops.
I think you are underestimating Chinese nationalism here quite dramatically!
Chinese views of sovereignty are quite independent of other concerns. Take for example their actions against Vietnam in the South China Sea, forcing Vietnam closer to the Philippines and even the US: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?articl...
Hardly. It is all about Xi having declared that taking Taiwan by... I think it was 2049, but could be misremembering. Anyway, Xi made that a test of the legitimacy of the CCP, in some very public statements.
So, no, it's not about kicking the US out of the west Pacific. It's about Taiwan, and it's because if they don't, the CCP is illegitimate, by Xi's own word.
But that doesn't mean they plan to invade Taiwan by then. One common reading of it is that it was a plan to build up the military to that state with a definite goal date (in the same way the "600 ship navy" plan had a goal date).
https://www.reuters.com/world/cia-chief-says-chinas-xi-littl...
Even when a country other than the US does something to benefit Taiwan, Beijing is super offended.
And by sympathetic I mean feeling kinship. And the whole concept of bringing everything down to a matter of wealth is so American.
They said "quality of life". Even if they had said wealth that correlates with quality of life so that wouldn't be a very good gotcha by itself, but they didn't say that.
If you like to say what you think, then trust me, Taipei has much better quality of life. If you see people like Naomi Wu being arrested and gagged just for pointing out a vulnerability in software (which we all agree here is a good thing to do for everyone except the bad guys), that is terrible.
It's not impossible, but I feel as though if Trump decides that China is friends and Taiwan is enemies (as he seems to have done with North/South Korea lately) then Taiwanese refugees might not be as eager to move to the US as, say, Canada, Australia, or Europe.
If Xi had said "the CCP is illegitimate unless it takes Taiwan by 2025", he would be at real risk of being replaced in 2026. Anyone who opposed him (or just wanted power) would have a perfect reason to replace him.
When Xi makes a goal with a "deadline" he won't live to see, he takes no risk of personally failing to meet the goal. If his successor misses the deadline, he can say things changed, Xi failed to consider factors X,Y,Z, etc.
That's not how the CCP operates though.
They are not a country where the puppets matter so much, like in most of the western countries. You would very very rarely see a leader being critical of their predecessor even if they are changing policies (which Xi Jinping definitely did). Because they are the same party and thus they are attacking themselves. The party is really more important than whoever happens to be at the top. The party is always right. Even when the party is wrong. Which it is not because it's always right.
No, if this promise disappears it will be silently. Never to be mentioned again, or else. It just never happened.
2. https://data.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/117204 - 1.2 million.
This means people that have Ukrainian citizenship, which includes lots of families that were on both sides of the border. It does not mean people who were residents of Ukraine before the war, and decided to move to Russia. It does include the kidnapped children, and surviving people in occupied cities.
This is not a fact. This is bullshit trolling.
This pointless internet interaction is over.
Even senile Joe Biden was more competent than the current malicious moron in power.