China reportedly discouraged purchase of NVIDIA AI chips due to 'insulting' Lutnick statements
The US, if you'll recall, blocked NVIDIA from selling its H20 chips to China back in April out of concern that the Chinese military would use them to develop AI technology. When the US government reversed its decision in July and allowed the company to start shipping its chips to China, Lutnick told CNBC : "We don't sell them our best stuff, not our second best stuff, not even our third best. The fourth one down, we want to keep China using it... The idea is the Chinese are more than capable of building their own. You want to keep one step ahead of what they can build, so they keep buying our chips. You want to sell the Chinese enough that their developers get addicted to the American technology stack. That's the thinking." To note, a previous Times report stated that the government allowed NVIDIA to ship its products to China again after agreeing to hand over 15 percent of its profits.
As a response to Lutnick's remarks, the Times says Chinese authorities sought ways to prevent local companies from buying H20 chips. CAC issued an informal notice instructing China's biggest tech firms, such as ByteDance and Alibaba, to stop new orders for H20 chips until the government is done conducting a national security review. The companies are compelled to comply, because they could face substantial fines from the CAC if they don't. Meanwhile, NDRC also issued an informal notice, asking local tech companies not to purchase any NVIDIA chip.
Reuters recently reported that NVIDIA is developing a new chip for the Chinese market that's more powerful than the H20, perhaps driven in part by China's move to discourage its purchase. It will be based on the company's Blackwell architecture, but will only be capable of half the computing power of NVIDIA's Blackwell Ultra GPUs. Their regulatory and export approval aren't guaranteed, but the president previously implied that he was aware of the project and said he expects NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang to talk to him about it.
If you buy something through a link in this article, we may earn commission.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
a minute ago
- Axios
What historians say is at risk if Trump expands his culture war beyond Smithsonian
Politics & Policy A White House official told Axios that President Trump intends to expand his review of American museums for "woke" ideology beyond the Smithsonian Institution. Why it matters: The size and scope of Trump's inquiries represents an unprecedented level of museum oversight in the nearly 250 years of American democracy, historians say. It also represents an escalation of the president's attack on cultural institutions. Here's what historians and curators fear could happen if Trump reframes museums through his perspective. What exactly does the president have in mind? Trump said that the "Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL" on Truth Social earlier this week. He then directed his attorneys to conduct a comprehensive review of the museum system, similar to the process officials have conducted at colleges and universities. What they're saying:"President Trump will explore all options and avenues to get the Woke out of the Smithsonian and hold them accountable," a White House official told Axios. "He will start with the Smithsonian and then go from there," they continued. Reality check: The Smithsonian is not a federal agency under control of the president, according to the institution. It's an independent institution, governed by a Board of Regents, which is composed of seventeen members, including the Vice President. Trump has no authority over private museums. Yes, but: The president could freeze the federal funding that some private museums receive, the way he has for schools that don't align with his anti-diversity views on education. What does Trump's perception of American history look like? Trump claims that there has been a "widespread effort to rewrite our Nation's history" over the past decade. He insists that these efforts "undermine" America's achievements by casting its founding principles as "inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed." Historians say the administration's singular, sanitized approach to the past, focusing solely on America's positive moments misses out on the nuance of American history and excludes the lived experiences of Black, Indigenous, Latino, and LGBTQ+ people. Friction point:"That is anti-democratic," Beth English, executive director of the Organization of American Historians told Axios, referring to the administration's push to stifle and sanitize information, debate and historical facts. "It's not education, right?" English questioned. "It begins to kind of veer into the space of indoctrination, selecting, sort of a selective memory of what is and isn't going to be part of our national story." Why is Trump's push to install political appointees to review museums problematic? Curators said distilling history into accurate, engaging examples that the public can understand requires a level of expertise that an untrained political appointee likely lacks. The majority of curators at national museums have PhDs, or have been trained in museum studies through rigorous degree programs and research. "It's not like people are creating exhibitions to tell a story, to win a political agenda," Omar Eaton-Martinez, former board president of the Association of African American Museums said. "People are actually curating exhibitions based on scholarship that is supported by evidence," he continued. Don't museums reframe and reevaluate history all the time? Historians say museums expanding their collections isn't evidence of nefarious behavior, but rather, it's simply how the static nature of history grows. Zoom out: Collections have increasingly included the perspectives of sociologists, psychologists and other social scientists over the past few decades, in addition to more thorough reviews of census records, genealogy, oral histories, archeology, objects, and images. "We're constantly building on prior scholarship to help ask more nuanced questions about a topic," Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association said. "We're always peeling back the layers of the onion, so to speak." Black, Indigenous and Latin scholars have been digging into their respective histories for centuries, and those experiences have been recognized and incorporated into museums in recent decades. That includes history that was once ignored, such as the burning of records in thriving Black neighborhoods such as the massacres in Tulsa, Oklahoma or Rosewood, Florida; the forced removal of Indigenous nations from one part of America to another during the " trail of tears"; and urban renewal projects to upgrade cities that ultimately gentrify communities of color. What funding and programs has Trump already taken aim at? The Trump administration has taken aggressive action to reduce the staffing and funding available for the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS,) the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the National Endowment for the Arts. Stunning stat: IMLS's acting director testified in court that the administration cancelled roughly 92% of the agency's Grants to States. Only 100 grants remain out of the original 1,200 managed by the institute prior to Trump's executive order. The president also attempted to fire Kim Sajet, the director of the Smithsonian's National Portrait Gallery, earlier this year due to her support of diversity initiatives, despite not having the authority to do so. The Smithsonian has legal authority over personnel decisions, but Sajet eventually decided to step down in the weeks following Trump's announcement. What other times has an American museum pivoted after political influence? An exorbitant amount of debate goes into exhibit decision-making, so museums have already determined the best way to display potential controversies. When museums modify exhibits, it's typically due to public pressure, and has never been under significant force from the president. Case in point: The Smithsonian's 90s exhibit on Enola Gay, the B-29 bomber that dropped the atomic bomb, sparked opposition from veterans and members of Congress on how to interpret the bomb's dropping and America's role in World War II. The bottom line:"These kinds of controversies exist frequently, and that's a good thing, because public debate about the nation's past is healthy," James Grossman, former executive director of the American Historical Association told Axios. "But the President of the United States has no business telling museums what to exhibit, telling teachers what to teach, and has no business telling Americans what to think," Grossman continued.
American Press
a minute ago
- American Press
James Dobson, Focus on the Family founder, dies at 89
James Dobson, a child psychologist who founded the conservative ministry Focus on the Family and was a politically influential campaigner against abortion and LGBTQ+ rights, died on Thursday. He was 89. Born in 1936 in Shreveport, Louisiana, Dobson launched a radio show counseling Christians on how to be good parents and started Focus on the Family in 1977. He became a force for pushing conservative Christian ideals in mainstream American politics in the 1980s alongside fundamentalist giants like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. At its peak, Focus on the Family had more than 1,000 employees and gave Dobson a platform to weigh in on legislation and serve as an adviser to five presidents. His death was confirmed by the Dr. James Dobson Family Institute. He is survived by his wife of 64 years, Shirley, as well as their two children, a daughter-in-law and two grandchildren. 'Mount Rushmore' of conservatives Dobson interviewed President Ronald Reagan in the Oval Office in 1985, and Falwell called him a rising star in 1989. Decades later, he was among the evangelical leaders tapped to advise President Donald Trump. in 2016. In 2022, he celebrated the overturning of Roe v. Wade — including Trump's conservative appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court credited with the landmark decision that allowed states to ban abortion. 'Whether you like Donald Trump or not, whether you supported or voted for him or not, if you are supportive of this Dobbs decision that struck down Roe v. Wade, you have to mention in the same breath the man who made it possible,' he said in a ministry broadcast. He belongs on the 'Mount Rushmore' of Christian conservatives, said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, another group Dobson founded. 'Very few people have had such a positive impact in the shaping of the American family, from what we would describe as a biblical standpoint,' said Perkins, promoting ideas that pushed back against progressive parenting of the 1960s. Weighing Dobson's legacy John Fea, an American History professor at Messiah College in Pennsylvania, has been critical of Dobson's politics and ideas but recounts how his own father was a better parent after becoming an evangelical Christian and listening to Dobson's radio program. Fea's dad was a tough Marine who spanked his children out of anger, which Dobson opposed. 'Even as a self-identified evangelical Christian that I am, I have no use in my own life for Dobson's politics or his child-rearing,' he said. 'I've been critical of it most of my career. But as a historian what do you do with these stories? About a dad who becomes a better dad?' Possible presidential run After developing a following of millions, Dobson considered running for president in the 2000 election, following in the footsteps of former television minister Pat Robertson's surprise success in 1988. 'He had a big audience. He was not afraid to speak out. He became a very important voice and there was even talk that he might run for president,' said Ralph Reed, a Christian conservative political organizer and lobbyist who founded the Faith and Freedom Coalition. 'If Jim had decided to run, he would have been a major force.' Despite their close association later in life, Reed's enduring memory was as a younger political organizer traveling through rural America with Dobson's voice as his sole companion. 'I'd be out there somewhere, and I could go to the AM dial and there was never a time, day or night when I couldn't find that guy,' Reed said. 'There will probably never be another one like him.' Dobson left Focus on the Family in 2010 and founded the institute that bears his name. He continued with the Family Talk radio show, which is nationally syndicated and is carried by 1,500 radio outlets with more than half a million listeners weekly, according to the institute.
The Hill
a minute ago
- The Hill
Trump to patrol DC streets with police and military
President Trump said he plans to go out on patrol with the Metropolitan Police Department and National Guard troops around Washington, D.C., on Thursday night amid a federal crackdown on crime. 'I'm going to be going out tonight, I think, with the police and with the military, of course. So we're going to do a job,' Trump told conservative radio host Todd Starnes on his show. 'The National Guard is great. They've done a fantastic job.' A White House official told The Hill that details of what Trump would be doing were forthcoming. The Trump administration earlier this month began surging federal law enforcement across parts of the District to crack down on what the White House said was an unacceptable level of crime, despite statistics showing violent crime has declined in the city. Last week, Trump took federal control of the Metropolitan Police Department and deployed hundreds of National Guard troops across the city to further the crack down on crime. White House officials said earlier Thursday that there had been more than 600 total arrests made since federal officers were deployed around the city on Aug. 7. Of those, 251 were arrests of immigrants in the country illegally, the White House said. Critics of Trump's aggressive crackdown across D.C. have pointed to statistics that show the city's violent crime rate fell in 2024 and is down again 2025. And some local residents have expressed their disapproval, protesting federal officers stationed in their neighborhoods. A Washington Post-Schar School poll of 604 D.C. residents published Wednesday found 65 percent do not think Trump's actions will make the city safer. Roughly 80 percent of residents said they opposed Trump's executive order to federalize the city's police department. But White House officials have been adamant that statistics do not accurately capture the state of crime and decay in the nation's capital. Vice President Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller met with National Guard troops at Union Station on Wednesday to thank them for their work. The officials were greeted with protests at the transportation hub, which Miller mocked. 'We're going to ignore these stupid white hippies that all need to go home and take a nap because they're all over 90 years old,' he said. 'And we're going to get back to the business of protecting the American people and the citizens of Washington, D.C.'
