• qyron@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

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

        • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          16 days ago

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

            • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              16 days ago

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

              • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                16 days ago

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

            • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              16 days ago

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

    • boonhet@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      16 days ago

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

  • Derp@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    15 days ago

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

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

  • breakingcups@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    16 days ago

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

  • andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    16 days ago

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

  • Mango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    16 days ago

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

  • Jumi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

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

  • hash@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    16 days ago

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

    • moody@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      16 days ago

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

      • Wade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

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

        • theonlytruescotsman@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

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

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