#techwar

15 posts loaded — scroll for more

Text
beauila-blog
beauila-blog

China Tightens Rare Earth Export Controls Amid Escalating Tech Tensions

China tightens rare earth export rules amid rising US tensionsALT

China has unveiled a new set of export regulations on rare earth elements, tightening control over critical materials used in advanced technologies, defence systems, and semiconductor manufacturing.

The Ministry of Commerce said the measures were introduced “to safeguard national security” and formalise existing restrictions on the export of rare earth processing technologies and overseas cooperation. The new rules are expected to curb exports to foreign arms manufacturers and select semiconductor firms, further intensifying ongoing trade frictions with the United States.

The decision comes ahead of a highly anticipated meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Donald Trump later this month, where trade and technology issues are set to dominate the agenda.

Tightened Licensing and Technology Controls

Under the new regulations, mining, refining, magnet manufacturing, and recycling technologies related to rare earths can only be exported with explicit government approval. Chinese firms are also prohibited from collaborating with foreign entities in these areas without prior authorisation.

Beijing had already placed several rare earths and related materials on its export control list in April, sparking supply disruptions in global markets. The latest move, however, clearly identifies restricted technologies and processes — including smelting, magnetic material production, and maintenance or upgrading of related equipment.

Experts say the new framework mirrors Washington’s own export curbs on advanced chip-making tools bound for China.

“Beijing is hitting back at U.S. vulnerabilities in electronics and defence supply chains,” said trade analyst Alex Capri, noting the timing of the announcement as “strategically calculated.”

Impact on Global Supply Chains

The policy could have significant implications for the U.S. and allied nations, which possess rare earth deposits but rely heavily on China for refining and processing. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), China controls about 61% of global rare earth production and a staggering 92% of processing capacity.

Rare earth elements — including neodymium, yttrium, and europium — are vital components in electric vehicles, smartphones, wind turbines, and fighter jets. While these elements are not scarce in nature, their extraction and refinement are costly and environmentally hazardous, giving China a dominant position in the global supply chain.

Geopolitical Undercurrents

Western governments have long accused Beijing of leveraging its rare earth dominance for strategic advantage, particularly amid allegations that China permits dual-use exports — materials usable for both civilian and military purposes — to reach Russia. China has firmly denied those claims.

Analysts view the latest export tightening as a direct response to Western restrictions on China’s access to semiconductor technology. As the world’s two largest economies prepare for renewed talks, the rare earth dispute underscores the deepening divide in the global tech and trade landscape.

Text
ohre2018-blog
ohre2018-blog
Text
techinewswp
techinewswp
Text
techinewswp
techinewswp
Text
startupmac
startupmac

The U.S. is preparing new regulations to prohibit Chinese-made equipment from being used in submarine internet cables, which carry nearly all global data. Officials cite espionage risks and national infrastructure protection.

Text
techinewswp
techinewswp
Text
alltimeupdating
alltimeupdating
Text
vbsemi-mosfet-manufacturers
vbsemi-mosfet-manufacturers

【China’s Semiconductor Equipment Industry Undergoes Major Consolidation! 200 Companies → 10, Breaking Through U.S. Sanctions with Full Force 🔥】

In response to the strong sanctions from the Trump administration, China is driving the largest-ever consolidation in its semiconductor equipment industry! The plan aims to streamline over 200 companies into 10 leading enterprises, pooling resources to overcome “chokepoint” technologies and accelerate self-sufficiency.

Can this strategic restructuring turn the tide in the chip war?

Text
betorodriguez
betorodriguez

Spy vs. Spy: Cyberpunk Chaos

“In a world of endless hacks and glitches, the only certainty is… THEY BOTH LOSE!”

Two cyber-spies, locked in a battle of pure stupidity, scream “I WIN!” as they out-sabotage themselves. One’s high-tech hacking device explodes in his face, while the other’s cloaking suit fails spectacularly, leaving him half-invisible—just enough to look ridiculous. In the background, neon-lit chaos unfolds: glitchy billboards flicker between “FREEDOM” and “SURVEILLANCE ZONE,” a drone aggressively sells overpriced oxygen, and a bystander argues with their hoverboard about an overdue subscription. In this high-tech dystopia, the only real winner is the algorithm laughing in the shadows.

Photo
istartyourbusiness
istartyourbusiness

https://discover.hubpages.com/business/The-Fall-of-China
The Trade War, Tech War, or Fintech, Crypto Currency, what will make China Fall.
Hong Kong
Uighurs
Human Rights

The Sanction can slow down China’s Rise. But Can not make it Fall
Non of these.
The Real Challenge is Ageing Population, the single biggest threat to China

#China #tradewar #techecosystem #TechWar #ColdWar #fintechs
(at Salmiya)
https://www.instagram.com/p/CJ6KP62ru0U/?igshid=102cxea0i8162

photo
Video
owlsounds
owlsounds

Gunna tell my kids this was

Cyberpunk 2077

Photo
aaron1389
aaron1389

What’s Next?

#GoOnline #GoogleMalaysia #GoogleBusiness #ClickTRUE #OnlineBusiness #NextStep #TechWorld #TechWar (at Google Malaysia HQ)

photo
Video
thebodiespolitic
thebodiespolitic

Part one of a 1987 conversation about James William Gibson’s excellent The Perfect War: Technowar in Vietnam (1986). Part two is here. The video is long, and heavy on talking heads, but provides an excellent and comprehensive analysis not just of the application of technology to battle, but of the war itself. Includes devastating details. As in this recollection of a veteran:

“When we kill a pregnant woman, we count it as two VC one soldier, and one cadet”.

All from a community ‘alternative’ show.

Quote
thebodiespolitic
thebodiespolitic
<p>In one sense, we can view these developments as the continuation of the “anatomo-politics of the human body”, the origin of which Foucault located in the seventeenth century and the modern disciplinary techniques of the military. If the microphysics of power instantiated through the martial drill of Frederick the Great’s soldiers had as their primary object the kinematics of the human body and sought to govern its posture, gait and articulations, technoscientific developments now allow this power to penetrate and shape the brain’s electro-chemical structure and cognitive processes.</p> <p>Attempts to alter and ‘enhance’ the state of mind of warriors are of course not in themselves new. Since the dawn of recorded history, the need to overcome the potentially paralyzing effects of fear and fatigue has led fighting men to absorb various disinhibiting mind-altering substances, from alcohol and opiates to coca leaves and amphetamines. Yet all of these past neurological hacks may come to be seen as incredibly crude and primitive in comparison to the possible military applications of contemporary neuroscience and the neuropharmacological arsenal it promises to unlock. A whole galaxy of both naturally-occurring and synthetic agents is coming online with the tasks of supporting alertness, concentration, memory, and even in-group bonding and cooperation in the case of oxytoxin.</p>
Antoine Bousquet on the latest frontiers of neuroscience and war, the dissolution between the voluntary human agent and extended technological capacities and the idea of ‘neurological hacks’.
Video
thebodiespolitic
thebodiespolitic

P. W. Singer’s 2009 survey of techwar and its transformation of battlespace. Like others, his focus is on the bold and often shocking shifts in the practice of violence. Singer sees this as reinforcing the power of individual insurgents against governments, and as expanding the power of non-state terrorists. That particular twist seems intended more to drive the point home to his audience than to really account for the coming balance of forces but, like James Der Derian, he illuminates the confluence of the Military-Industrial-Media-Entertainment Network (e.g. ‘war porn’).

Beyond the policy speak directed at the concerns of the Pentagon and the American elite, wider questions arise. Who controls and determines the direction of techwar? How do drones interact with conceptions of justice? As well as helping to 'win’ war, does it also make it easier to embark on? And how does the techwar network enable resistance, a new body politic even, as well as enlarging the capacities of states? What, after all, does an ethic of techwar even look like?