filloooo

DRAM rarely break, yes, I have bought cottage industry recycled DDR3 with no problem whatsoever.

The problem, however, is IO controller support has been dropped, many new CPUs don't even support DDR4 any more, especially mobile ones.

I don't think so, Lutnick just made sure the US wouldn't need to import DRAM with his newest threats.

Sure, if they've got production grade EUV, but right now they don't even have production grade DUV.

I'm also sure they can go as far as 5nm like SMIC if they really wanted to, since it's strategic for China, but the cost would only be justified if the current cycle lasts long enough.

Not 10nm, they are producing with 18.5nm and 17nm now, which technically already is in breach of US restrictions, the US government can blacklist them if they feel like it.

3D DRAM is no magic, it will only give them maybe 2 generations' breathing room if they got the required etching equipment figured out. But others will be doing 3D DRAM with EUV by then.

Their scale is simply too small to affect the market outside China, majority of their chips will be eaten up by HBM3 production with yet unknown yield rate.

They are forbidden to buy foreign equipment beyond their current process node, which is already obsolete, die size is 40% bigger than Samsung, not to mention lithography, the big 3 are using EUV while they are stuck with lobotomized DUV.

They can start making some decent money now, but vastly expanding capacity as is means enormous losses if the cycle went downward a few years later, that's how all previous makers went bankrupt.

They can squeeze out a bit more performance if they are ready to go beyond their current node using only domestic equipment and be blacklisted by the US government.

But the cap is there, unless they can make a working EUV machine in 5 years, they are doomed to be a minor player, if the current cycle even lasts that long.

Russia has always been selling it's oil and gas at a discount, that's why it had so much clout in the EU and CIS, nothing new, it's literally its geopolitical strategy since the Soviet Union.

All these talk of cutting off Russia won't last more than a year after the war, nobody refuses cheap energy, certainly not the cash strapped Europeans.

They'll probably be the world leader in critical metals and rare earth deposits if they invested more on prospecting and the ice melts.

Your geopolitical views are so naive it's hard to take seriously.

EU is now an unwilling dumping ground for China, hostility and paranoia are growing by the day now that China is no longer a lucrative market itself and is pursuing its interests outside commerce, the cordial days are numbered.

Russia would never be subservient to China, once the war ends Russia would be back being a geopolitical player because of its vast natural resources, and they are already import substituting even Chinese products.

Russia can turn to the west to be a real western country whenever they see fit, the eternal fear for China.

This is why China is going as far as it can to accommodate Putin, even souring it's relations with the EU which isolated itself.

In this sense, it is China being "subservient" to Russia.

The problem is that the EU and China are both looking for export markets to fund their economic growth, unless EU blows up it's welfare system and prints money like the US, the two are competitors.

But doing that would undermine Euro's credibility, as the EU is a loose union of countries with their distinct interests and politics, also member countries would compete on outspending each other as the Euro would have been essentially free money, a Euro debt crisis on turbocharge.

So, the EU can never print like the US. The EU and China will be rivals.

I think people are ignoring the reciprocity in the global trading system.

People and news articles always talk about goods trade deficits for rich countries, but never their almost universal services trade surpluses, and the profit margins are vastly different.

For manufacturing, a large part of the revenue goes to materials costs, but for services, almost all of it are net incomes.

Yes you can bring back manufacturing jobs, but your services surpluses would also shrink, because when you don't open your market, countries were not obligated to let you reap profits there too.

I think he suffers from a kind of protagonist's dilemma.

His words are literally taken as Bible by a huge part of the global audience, that he is compelled to keep the earth hopeful.

I think FUD is working on Meta coming from their archrival Bytedance.

Bytedance recently launched a similar product in China and caused quite a stir, local phone brands are jostling for partnerships, the AI agent phone.

Meta probably don't want to miss the next thing, even if it turned out to be a dud.

Because we are at a historic moment where governments are propping up fiat money using whatever they could.

All these crazy valuations is just a manifestation.

A 2% change, more likely this has something to do with the global rush for US tech stocks.

Some countries like South Korea are crazy on US stock trades.

Dollars' depreciation probably helped a bit too.