← Back to context

Comment by em500

6 hours ago

Noteworthy that Z.ai, maker of the just released near-frontier GLM 5.2, has already been on the Entity List since Jan 2025[1]. Being on the Entity List does not mean all trade is forbidden. Broadly speaking it means American companies and individuals are not allowed sell them goods and services, but they are still allowed to buy from them and pay them.

AFAIK the Chinese AI companies barely depend on US goods and services, except for nVidia GPUs which were export restricted anyway, so it doesn't seem to be very consequential (see Z.ai). For the RAM maker CXMT it could be a lot more problematic though.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z.ai

How does that even work? If Z.ai wants to buy lets say GPUs for AI training, what's stopping them from going to a local reseller? Its not even circumventing the rules, its the natural thing to do.

For that matter, does (only) NVIDIA make datacenter cards? When I buy a gaming card, I dont buy from NVIDIA, I buy from an integrator, like Gigabyte, who work with a company like Foxconn to make the cards.

  • The export restrictions only apply to certain GPU models, which are the more recent powerful ones used for training tasks. So the H100, B100 etc. are banned along with 4090, 5090.

    Nvidia has downgraded chips that aren’t banned. H100 is banned, H800 is allowed. A100 is banned, A800 is allowed. But the sale has a tariff attached.

    That’s all how it’s supposed to work. In practice companies probably circumvent the restrictions.

  • The GamersNexus documentary (https://youtu.be/1H3xQaf7BFI) on the semi-underground GPU trade in China, while a little amateurish in terms of depth and general atmosphere, is an interesting watch and may answer some of your questions.

    Basically, those export controls make GPUs more expensive for affected parties in China, but don't effectively stop them from being acquired or used over there.

that is open to debate. Any commercial activity with a sanctioned entity has a pretty broad interpretation. Companies might not want to take the chance even if they are "still allowed".

What's the publicly stated/marketing reason for capitalist America to put companies on the Entity List? Genuinely asking. Because to me it screams 'we were only for the free market until there was no competition'

  • Free markets generally only make sense when at the same scope of the ruling government. When country A can manipulate markets in ways that country B can't or won't, eventually country B will attempt to make trade rules that level the playing field.

    Its also worth noting we don't really have free markets in the US anyway.

  • "First published in 1997 to inform the public on entities involved in disseminating weapons of mass destruction, the list has since expanded to include entities that engaged in "activities sanctioned by the State Department and activities contrary to U.S. national security and/or foreign policy interests"

    So RAM chip makers when there's a RAM shortage must be 'contrary to U.S. national security and/or foreign policy interests' i.e. the US government is trying to squeeze its citizens on RAM prices.

    Nice.

  • Free Market vs. planned economy was always mostly talking points, not a consistent ideology imo.

    Even during the Cold War, American farms were heavily subsidized. The abundant supermarkets were not a product of free markets, they were a propaganda piece.

    Today the US is pretty far from being a free market. Tax deductions are subsidies. Industry subsidies fund things on the front end, and bailouts are essentially subsidies after the fact.

    And on top of that there are plenty of (good and bad) regulations which distort the market. For example it is illegal to import foreign insulin even if it would be cheaper. In most parts of US metro areas it is illegal to build multifamily housing.

    • As an explicit example, major revenue streams that Tesla (used to) take advantage of are

      1. the EV tax credit, and

      2. carbon credits

      so the richest man in the world/the US had significant tailwinds for a central business venture of his via either directly taking money from the government, or taking money from other companies due to the government requiring they give him money.

    • > The abundant supermarkets were not a product of free markets, they were a propaganda piece.

      The US has abundant supermarkets to this day. It was overwhelmingly a product of the market economy and remains so. The US has between 45,000 and 75,000 supermarkets (75,000 if you include supercenter stores that also sell groceries). That's not counting smaller specialty food stores.

      It's a product of consumer spending capacity (net disposable income), of which the US has an enormous amount and has for over a century relative to other nations.

      1 reply →

  • DeepSeek rose to fame through stolen IP from U.S., and created shell companies to bypass U.S. law. Typical CCP-inspired behavior. The free world needs protection from abusers.

    I'm sure there's a ton of other abuses they've committed as they race to become China's preferred LLM.

    • The US should consider legalising some of this stuff, if I look at a leaderboard something like the top-10 models are built by companies facing serious accusations of copyright infringement. I assume the Europeans are obeying the law or whatever which is why they've so far only achieved peak-2024 performance or whatever and are making no particular contribution to the cutting edge, unlike the Americans and the Asians.

      Come again how these laws are promoting useful results? They seem to be economically crippling. The free world should consider embracing freedom from these laws as it seems that will bring greater prosperity.

  • The common thread here is that it is China. Before the 2010s and earlier, the US wasn't so concerned about China, but ever since then, China has been a big US concern for it being a technology and military rival

    e.g. the Investigative Report on the U.S. National Security Issues Posed by Chinese Telecommunications Companies Huawei and ZTE report from 2012:

    https://stacks.stanford.edu/file/druid:rm226yb7473/Huawei-ZT...

    From that point forward, that concern has only grown. So you can view these actions as screaming "we were only for the free market until there was no competition" but if you want to genuinely know the answer to your question, the publicly stated concern is "China is a national security threat"

  • > What's the publicly stated/marketing reason for capitalist America to put companies on the Entity List?

    “Capitalism” is (as a result of propaganda by its defenders after it was named and accurately described by its socialist critics) often mistaken for a dedication to free trade, but capitalism is a regime characterized first and foremost by society being organized around the interests of the capital-holding class, the first of which is the preservation of the situation in which society is organized around the interests of that class. The reasons companies are put on the Entity List is because they are broadly seen as a threat (long-term or immediate) to the continuation of that regime. That’s what the “foreign policy and national security interests” that form the official basis of the Entity List ultimately, generally, boil down to, in one way or another.

    (They don’t always boil down to that, because why the US is basically a capitalist system, it is not purely one, and even in a more pure capitalist regime, individual influential decision-makers may have other interests that they act on besides the implementation and preservation of capitalism that end up getting reflected in policy.)

  • It’s the same logic behind the Trump tariff regime: “We love capitalism and free markets, except when we’re losing at it”.

> except for nVidia GPUs which were export restricted anyway,

those export restrictions are a joke. when they were introduced, there was a sudden spike in NVIDIA GPU exports to surrounding Asian countries. and the US government knows this

CXMT memory maker will not be banned, because US AI labs are salivating at the idea of more RAM supply, and are lobbying hard to prevent restrictions