• TropicalDingdong
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    A company should never be in a position where it can represent a national security concern.

    If it’s possible for that to be the case, it needs to be under national control, because it’s leadership needs to b able to be held accountable.

      • TropicalDingdong
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        Sure. But theyyyyvee alleged that there are national security concerns around what countries have access to what chips. So if you as the CEO of a company are saying that your company is a national security concern, then, imo, your company can no longer be a company in a traditional sense, and should be taken into receivership at some level by the US Government. We canʻt have national security interests exposed to the whims of a market casino. Simply put, the interests canʻt be guaranteed to be in alignment.

      • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Of course it does. He was selling restricted chips through megaspeed. They were restricted for export because of national security concerns.

        • vagrancyand@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          They were restricted for export because line must go up, not because of national security concerns. There is no effective national security concern for AI or GPUs. There is nothing AI does that is particularly special, nor can it do anything that a bored teen with google and a command of the English language cannot do.