Yes, lots of other companies would be affected to a greater or lesser extent (even non-tech stocks), but specifically any company that relies on manufacturing all their product in Taiwan will be affected most of all.
I'd be curious how many of the design and verification (using computer vision) tools used at TI and Intel rely on on farms of stock GPUs thus chips still made in Taiwan. They might have in house chips just for such part of their workflows though, any insight appreciated.
The whole economy will crash. Probably won't be due to China invading Taiwan though. More likely because the president decided to delete their country's world reserve currency status (which is another word for a trade deficit).
A million times, this. Sometimes they luck into the intent, but much more frequently they end up in a ball of mud that just happens to pass the tests.
"8 unit tests? Great, I'll code up 8 branches so all your tests pass!" Of course that neglects the fact that there's now actually 2^8 paths through your code.
What makes you think the next generation models won't be explicitly trained to prevent this, or any other pitfall or best practice as the low hanging fruit fall one by one?
if you can steer an LLM to write an application based on what you want, you can steer an LLM to write the tests you want. Some people will be better at getting the LLM to write tests, but it's only going to get easier and easier
You had a year of flip-flopping on tariffs, and a lot of noise. Serious threats are coming out just now, and may get cut abruptly closer to November. It's going to be a while before this presidency gets reflected by the market.
The same reason Intel worked on OpenCV : they want to sell more hardware by pushing the state of the art of what software can do on THEIR hardware.
It's basically just a sales demonstrator, that optionally, if incredibly successful and costly they can still sell as SaaS, if not just offer for free.
People HAVE to somehow notice how hungry for proper data AI companies are when one of the largest companies propping the fastest growing market STILL has to go to such length, getting actual approval for pirated content while they are hardware manufacturer.
I keep hearing how it's fine because synthetic data will solve it all, how new techniques, feedback etc. Then why do that?
The promises are not matching the resources available and this makes it blatantly clear.
At the pace every PC component is becoming quite expensive it's not entirely out of the realm of possibilities that my next CPU will be RISC-V based. /s (kind of)
PS: for those still hesitating to tinker with RISC-V the workflow is becoming quite convenient already, to the point you can "just" boot and install Linux (as mentioned in the article) on it to get a headless server running in minutes.
> to the point you can "just" boot and install Linux (as mentioned in the article) on it to get a headless server running in minutes.
This is basically what I've been waiting on. Besides the mentioned Milk-V Titan, what are some other good boards people here tried out and could vouch for being good? Ideally European, but happy to receive any recommendations as long as you've actually tried it yourself :)
You may know this already, but here's the obligatory clarification. The open/free part is the RISC-V ISA. The actual implementation, the microarchitecture IP, may not be. Most of the higher end RISC-V IPs are proprietary.
It may still have a slight price advantage compared to proprietary ISAs like ARM, due to the latter's ISA licensing costs. But it remains to be seen how much of this advantage will be passed to us, the end users.
I am a pretty big RISC-V booster but RISC-V is going to cost way more for a while. It is simple economics of scale.
The license cost of the ISA is not that much per chip. It is not nearly enough to equal the extra cost per unit that is going to be added to any upcoming RISC-V chip due to the small production runs compared to x86-64 or ARM.
On the microcontroller side, we are seeing what you are saying. RISC-V has taken over the microcontroller world and chips are being produced in the billions. Scale, combined with the lack of licensing, means that you can get RISC-V microcontrollers for a couple of bucks.
The other thing is that there will still be license fees for RISC-V. You are not paying RISC-V International. But somebody designed the RISC-V chip and board you are buying and they will want to get paid. Instead of paying ARM, you will be paying SciFive, or SpaceMIT or Andes, or Tenstorrent, or UltraRISC (for the Titan board this story is about).
But compare this to ARM where your choices are licensing from ARM or purchasing hardware from Qualcomm or Apple. Or compare to x86-86 where there is only Intel and AMD to choose from. There will be dozens of RISC-V suppliers and competition will drive innovation up and prices down.
Of course, you can of course always design your own! Or use an Open Source design. No license fees required. But the chips you will actually want to use as a consumer will probably come with licensing fees.
But 3-5 years from now, things may be different. I hope and believe that RISC-V will be successful. As RISC-V chips with competitive performance appear, volumes will go up and we will see the same pattern we have seen in microcontrollers. Many of the niches that are currently filled by ARM will start to be filled by RISC-V. This will include the SBC space and the server space for sure. We may see tablets and phones. With luck, it will also start to fill the periphery of the laptop and desktop space. Prices will be higher at first and then come down.
RISC-V is inevitable. And the competition that will bring will pay dividends to all of us.
> I am a pretty big RISC-V booster but RISC-V is going to cost way more for a while. It is simple economics of scale.
Yes. That's exactly my concern too. That can be expected to last until RISC-V application processors are a few magnitudes of order more popular. But it isn't as improbable as it sounds. Just a matter of time.
> But somebody designed the RISC-V chip and board you are buying and they will want to get paid.
Yes, that will be the licensing cost of the proprietary IP, excluding the hardware costs.
> RISC-V is inevitable. And the competition that will bring will pay dividends to all of us.
I hope so too. I'm just saying that it's too early to celebrate right now. It will probably take another half a decade as you mentioned.
That should demonstrate sufficient performance for building products around it, and is ultimately one of many RVA23 options that will show up in chips this year.
It is not that I expect that Ascalon is going to be faster than Apple Silicon or cheaper than ARM. The price/performance is still likely to be such that these kinds of threads will be dominated with critics still saying that other options are better. Many will continue to wonder what the hype is about.
But what I fully expect and hope for is that Ascalon will put to rest the idea that RISC-V is some sort of toy platform or that it will be decades if ever before it can compete. Specifically, people will not be able to say that there are no RISC-V chips that can even compete with a Raspberry Pi 5.
After Ascalaon, it will not be fringe to propose that RISC-V makes sense for some use cases. Few will see RISC-V as a competitor to Intel, but many more will understand that RISC-V is a viable competitor to ARM.
And for us RISC-V supporters, Ascalon/Atlantis may be fast enough to actually use on the desktop. I have Intel based laptops that I still use daily that may not be any faster than Ascalon. That means that, for me at least, Ascalcon will already be fast enough. That is, if I will be able to afford it or even able to buy one. Fingers crossed.
I can dream of an Ascalon or Babylon based Framework mainboard.
Regardless, the rubicon will have been crossed. RISC-V will only get cheaper and faster after Ascalon. And, while x86-64 and ARM64 will too, there will be many, many RISC-V suppliers. There will be governments directly backing RISC-V research. The better RISC-V gets, the more players there will be and the more momentum the ecosystem will get.
My thesis is that it will be hard for ARM and Intel to stay ahead of all these other players. Certainly it will be hard to out-compete them all in every market. Which means that RISC-V will not only become viable but start to lead. And that is a radically different world than the one we live in now.
RISC-V is the hardware equivalent of the Linux kernel. And we know how that turned out.
> throwing shit at the wall with Johnny Ive and hardware.
Damn, I already forgot about that. You'd think a company who has the smartest people on Earth building a "product" that is "intelligence" would be able to... you know, make something out of it. Somehow despite ALL that, despite all the press too, they can't ship? Something does not add up, it's as if, and I know I'm going to sound like a crazy person, they were just... a normal company! /s
> I was initially rooting for OpenAI hoping it can challenge google and Apple. However they showed to being unscrupulous and seem to have a moral compass at the same level as meta.
OK ok well this is weird to me, I didn't think I'd be the one to defend Meta here ... but Meta at least never hid it's intention : it was a for-profit VC backed startup which only goal was to make money from day 1. OpenAI though started as a non-profit, collected goodwill from everyone to get the best talent because it's 1 thing, what made it special : it's mission WAS safety. Then they did 1 thing that actually got popular, GPT2, thanks to some pretty damn good marketing "Oh no, it's too risky to release!... but ok OK here it is anyway, but like don't destroy the World please." then exclusive partnership, etc, etc. Meta was "We want money." so at least they didn't lie about it.
reply