China Morning Missive Slowly, ever so slowly, the realities of altering global supply chain dependencies are beginning to breach the public zeitgeist. The American “can do” spirit is running up against some very hard truths. Both in terms of the literal limitations of physics and that of obstacles from an overly ossified system. For the first time, these very issues are raised and addressed in a rather detailed expose from the New York Times. Before continuing it needs to be stressed that high end chips, and TSMC in particular, were considered atop all priorities when it came to the renewed focus on reshoring. Two birds, one stone went the thinking. America would have access to domestically made chips and the supposed China threat to Taiwan would be taken off the game board. Put very bluntly, America wanted high-end chips and wanted TSMC. What is now becoming increasingly clear is that boundless ambitions are running head long into a wall of limited capabilities. Dare I even suggest that this would be the first time America leadership (both corporate and political) is waking up to this new reality. The entire TSMC Arizona plant example is emblematic of just how complicated the entire reshoring thesis is in terms of actual execution. Furthermore, this TSMC example can be fully extrapolated to just about every other dependency now facing the hegemon. While America most certainly has the money, not capital mind you just money, to throw at the various problems, it lacks the physical inputs required to address those issues. It is also a game of relativity meaning that China built a supply chain fortress over three decades and continues to improve upon its position. To play catch up, America will need to run at twice the speed and that’s were problem number two comes into play. As addressed in this NYT’s piece, the primary issues are that of regulations and labor. Suffocating under the weight of the former and scrambling to source the latter. Neither of these obstacles can be easily overcome in the short run. Taiwan TSMC shows the real-world implications of having to navigate these issues and the same will be required of all foreign groups planning to build production facilities in the United States. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and, it would seem, all of these global groups which have committed billions in investment to America are well on their way to a nightmarish end.
A sign of times to come. While not all that popular in the US, I’d still expect RedNote to get the “under national security concerns” approach and with it be banned. Even more likely, if not an outright certainty, once the TikTok deal is finally concluded. Whenever that might be. Taiwan bans Chinese social media app RedNote for one year on fraud risks
They all bend the knee eventually. Interesting timing too. BRB. Need to grab some tinfoil.
China Morning Missive With the announcement of the “Genisis Mission”, the Trump administration has made dominating the AI ecosystem a national priority. While there have certainly been a host of differing opinions on possible ulterior motives, from a geopolitical standpoint the decision makes perfect sense. So too, however, could this move end up directly impacting – inadvertently – a diaspora of Silicon Valley companies. Over the past month there’s been increased media coverage of how American startups are fully leveraging the Chinese open-sourced AI models. After all, that is sort of the point of having access to open-source software. Take what’s already available and then iterate and improve upon that original source code. The issue is the point of origination of that that source code; China. Any time a competing Chinese software solution, or hardware offering for that matter, gains ground on all available American alternatives, Washington policy wonks step in on the grounds of “national security”. Not to say that such concerns aren’t warranted, rather that the issue here is the wide spread in usage (and, now, dependency) on Chinese AI models. Rhetorically speaking, is there anyone who thinks the American government will permit home grown platforms build on Chinese source code? Much as the NBC article highlights, “while models from American companies continue to set the pace of progress at the frontier of AI capabilities, many Chinese systems are cheaper to access, more customizable and have become sufficiently capable for many uses over the past year.” It is the use of the word “customizable” which should stand out to all readers. It goes to the primary – I would say existential – issue facing the entire American AI theater. The dogmatic pursuit of closed source architecture, the building of silos (competitive moats), remains the greatest threat to America’s position. Basically, you have five large dogs all chasing after a single bone. The likelihood is that the dogs will attack each other viciously long before catching the bone. You see this in the perversion of all incentives, mainly in the rapid acceleration of CAPX spending. What this then leaves is the Chinese AI scalers to just continue moving forward building better software and directing all efforts to addressing the issue of compute.
China Morning Missive My new obsession is the concept of myopia. The more I continue to compare and contrast the bilateral rivalry between America and China the more you’ll see the pure definition of myopia come into play; “a lack of foresight or discernment; a narrow view of something.” Not all that dissimilar to the contrast in how each country goes about building and executing overall geopolitical policy, one having a low time preference and the other having a high time preference. The perfect example of this was put on display yesterday with all the headlines discussing how Google “leap frogged” OpenAI in the LLM race. In all the media coverage, there wasn’t any attempt to even introduce the role of China into the competitive theater. Just consider that it hasn’t even been a year since Deepseek first burst into the spotlight. Since then, the likes of QWEN, Kimi K2 , GLM and a host of others have entered the competitive field, iterated quickly and have continued to produce increasingly improved platforms. The fact that a growing number of Silicon Valley players are openly admitting to using Chinese AI models at the base layer for development should tell you everything. Again, Deepseek first came to market in January of this year. What is presented here is but a single example of China’s continued dominance across the entire “future tech” space. The drive is relentless. To think of where China will be in a year’s time, especially when compared to American competitors, should frighten all American commercial interest. For now, however, myopia reigns. The entirety of focus is domestic. It is as though the entire American strategy is to simply ignore the problem and wish for it to go away. https://www.axios.com/2025/11/25/google-gemini-openai-chatgpt-anthropic-claude
For those interested, jumped on CNBC Asia last week. Video (unfortunately it’s linked) is provided below.
China Morning Missive (Part II) Couldn’t let this one go as it hits directly on a host of issues I’ve been attempting to raise albeit with very little success. Mentioned in a note yesterday that China had already won the robotics race no matter the urgency stressed by Marc Andressen for American policy to prioritize resources. Well, now we have just out a very detailed piece from the Wall Street Journal which aligns with many of the points made in various Notes here over the past several months. Reducing the dynamic to its most simply form, the American AI titans want to create “God in a box”. The Chinese AI titans want to build deeper/wider economic moats. The latter has already achieved a massive lead on the former. Here are some choice outtakes from the article. “At one of China’s biggest ports, shipping containers whiz about on self-driving trucks with virtually no workers in sight, while the port’s scheduling is run by AI.” I’ve been to the world’s largest port, Yangshan, here in Shanghai. The entire operation is automated. The crane, the trucks, all of it. “It could further enable the spread of “dark factories,” with operations so automated that work happens around the clock with the lights dimmed.” The concept of “dark factories” is rapidly expanding. No workers, 24-hour a day operations and facilities where there is no need for lighting. “China installed 295,000 industrial robots last year, nearly nine times as many as the U.S. and more than the rest of the world combined, according to the International Federation of Robotics.” The ability to scale remains a top comparative advantage throughout China. No need for any additional commentary here. The quote above speaks for itself. “One risk is that AI could destroy more factory jobs than China expects, leaving it with too many unemployed workers.” This one made me laugh. So much for all the Peter Zeihan and the others claiming that China posed no long-term geopolitical threat given the demographic timebomb. So it is rather clear that the industrial robotics industry is now dominated by China. Now the focus turns to humanoid robotics. The evidence here, however, strongly suggests that there is no race. The only outstanding variable is timing. How quickly will we all see China rolling out these sorts or robots at scale? Based on my experience, I’d say before the end of 2027. https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/ai-robots-china-manufacturing-89ae1b42?st=anYykK&reflink=article_copyURL_share