How Silicon Valley turned China into its lifeline

At the beginning of the first term of Donald Trump, then the then Chairman of Alphabet, Eric SC HMIDT, helped change the American lens-although we didn’t know it at the time. I first heard Schmid’s propaganda, that is, the United States and China made a technical struggle at the Harry Fax International Security Forum at the end of 2017.

The main point is that Xi Jinping in China has just released his bold “Made in China” strategy. He also proposed three national targets about artificial intelligence-to catch up with the United States by 2020, to achieve a major AI breakthrough by 2025, and occupied the dominant position of the global AI from 2030 to 2030. For Schmidt, XI’s plan is a wake -up phone. The United States has participated in the supreme technology competition that China can win. Here, he issued the same warning at the New Security Center in the United States in November 2017.

I remembered Jeremiad of Schmidt this week. At that time, Chinese Deepseek at that time could be announced by the stunning good language learning model through the release of a stunning good language learning model. Not only did China make significant breakthroughs in its target year, but also made this breakthrough with a small part of the cost of American competitors. Whether this is because of the deep -shocked value, it is exaggerated by the market and technicians, and I have nothing to say. Each consensus is easy to correct. I really have the confidence that Deepseek’s announcement shocked the defense industry complex of Silicon Valley and Washington (considering how the mutual exchanges between the two today). My purpose is not to evaluate open source code and proprietary LLM, nor is it to project the projects that the United States-China competes from here. I don’t have enough knowledge. It is to point out the effectiveness of Schmidt.

Remember, 2017 is the infamous year of the Silicon Valley peak year. Companies like Facebook are well known that Google is called a new “large tobacco”. Some people talk about rewriting the monopoly method to decompose it. The mainstream Democrats are accepting the EU -style privacy law, even more powerful than the private law drafted in California. Large technology was observed by the large -scale repair framework of competition. Schmid then redefined “competition” as the US -China competition. I didn’t say that he was motivated to help his desire to help his Silicon Valley. I think he is-and still sincerely formulate the sincerity of formulating national security cases for large technology. He established a special competitive research project in the think tank, which briefed on the US -China competition.

In any way, 2017 is the bad boy in Washington’s Silicon Valley as a shield to China. Washington is far from regulating large -scale technologies, but decides to treat the West Coast Giant as a weapon of Democratic Arsenal. In recent years, this has been one of the huge market growth promoters of the huge seven large technology companies. It is believed that China and the United States are in the competition of the first artificial intelligence (AGI). The countries that prevail in AI will also win in the geopolitical war. Until Monday, the consensus was that the United States had been leading positions. We are not sure now.

As Ryan Grim and Waqas Ahmed (Waqas Ahmed) observed in this smart article, Deepseek also resumed a case of destruction monopoly. Joe Biden’s competition Tsar, Lina Khan, could not obtain a huge trust breakthrough in the four years of this job. Deepseek just reiterated her claim late: “Khan warns that protecting protectionism will not only hurt all of us, but also hurt them,” they wrote.

I want to add, the political funny movements of Elon Musk, Peter Thiel and others make large scientific leaders a new robber. Once upon a time, Mark Zuckerberg and Schmidt told us that social media will usher in a new global community and eliminate social obstacles. Since then, they flipped 180 degrees. The following is the three goals of the defense briefing of the Donald Trump administration recently.

1. Forging the most important combat effectiveness in the world

2. Hold and maintain command in artificial intelligence and digital warfare

3. Resurrection in the United States may ensure our technology and military advantages by establishing a 21 -century democratic weapon library.

I turned to DC -based scholar Henry Farrell, and his alternative Mutter was essential for these and related issues. Henry, I know you are skeptical of the idea of ​​the United States and China being participating in the AGI terminal. You regard the story of AI as a dramatic process of diffusion learning and innovation. I suspect you are a minority of Washington, which is biased against Manichean’s battle.

My question about you is two aspects: how much surprise is that dictatorship has created a start-up impact-and its tools are open source? Secondly, does today’s meta -letters and letters and terraces waste billions of dollars?

Recommended reading

• This week my column looked at Trump’s Strangelove experiments. “Trump is not crazy because of the strange way to be useful to him. This is his first 78 years,” I wrote.

• My colleague, Katie Martin, can see why Deepseek Shock can enjoy the US dollar bet during Trump’s term during his tenure. Most of the US dollar’s bullish thoughts are based on the deep moat around AI stocks, and now it looks shallow.

• Always read David Ignerus. He is the highest qualification of the United States in the United States on the Washington Post on Tulsi Gabbard on the Washington Post. Pete Hegseth screamed in some way to confirm his confirmation of the Pentagon. I am worried that Kash Patel is the choice of the Federal Investigation Bureau (FBI). The best opportunity for the Democratic Party to prevent nominations may be Gabad. David wrote: “Even according to Trump’s standards, she is a crazy choice.”

Henry Farrell answered

Ed (ED) has a good case. Eric SC HMIDT is the most influential American foreign policy thinker in the early 21st century. However, no one really explained what he did and how he did it. People written about Schmidt’s influence are mainly concentrated on possible conflicts of interest, but this seems to be secondary for me, as you said. Obviously, he is not interested in making money than to reshape the world. Over the past few years, Schmidt has reshaped the United States’ understanding of national security through negotiations as you heard and his leadership of the National Artificial Intelligence Council.

In the past, people often talked about the so -called “Washington Consensus” -the rules of economic new liberalism, and guided the ideas of the World Bank, IMF and other DC -based institutions. Since the economic new liberalism is killed, I think there is already a new Washington consensus, and Schmidt has done more than anyone else.

Now, you should study the assumptions of the new thinking fusion between Silicon Valley and national security policy, instead of multilateral institutions to understand how the United States wants to shape the world. These assumptions can be attributed to four claims: the competition between the United States and China is everything. AGI is at the corner. Anyone who first enters AGI may win. Powerful artificial intelligence.

Those who believe in these claims, including Bayon’s national security consultant Jake Sullivan, Trump Deputy National Security Counsel Matt Pottinger and Human founder Dario Amo Dario Amodei believes that the United States should focus on slowing down China’s accumulation, and by denying that it can enjoy specific powerful and powerful opportunities. If the United States can only enter AGI first, it will build an overwhelming long -term advantage. One of Trump’s first batch of execution orders talked about checking the semiconductor export control to find and eliminate the remaining loopholes.

Deepseek’s success in establishing a new model is disturbing this view, because it shows that Chinese companies can get rid of the chip clinging circles at least, although people like AMODEI believe that as long as the United States still has an overwhelming advantage, as long as the United States still needs With an overwhelming advantage, stay in the course.

I have doubts that it is because I do n’t believe that we are on the edge of AGI, and I suspect that the technology that controls future technology is more difficult than national security thinkers such as Sullivan. But there is another problem. Dan Wang Suggestion in the upcoming book BREAKNECK: China pursues the future,,,,, China is focusing on the establishment of future physical technology, such as renewable energy, while the United States is obsessed with the possibility and problems of virtual. If AGI was originally a half -body image and the Trump administration did its best to squeeze renewable energy, the United States may fall into real trouble.

Your feedback

The words of our marsh are now. Essence Essence

response “The winner and the loser of Trump 2.0”The
“It is confusing that American companies are putting all it into practice. If a political party in almost any other country adopts a method of stable methods involving tariffs, to Panama and Greenland’s certificateless immigration and potential military adventure It will be accused-not good for enterprises (or bad for enterprises), as we say now, “anti-development”). -Richard Lawes (Richard Lawes)

“Of course, the most disturbing development is ‘distorted speed’. American companies have demolished plans to encourage and develop minority group talents. Whether CEO really believes in helping women and minority ethnic groups is an active thing (from morality (from morality In other words, for their bottom line), is it always just a box dripping exercise? In the long run, I suspect that all Americans will become the loser, because this anger and revenge regime destroy the decentness and make us fight each other against each other. , Our ego is better. ” -Chris Millerchip (Chris Millerchip)