Nvidia's Jensen Huang Says China 'Will Win' AI Race With US (ft.com)
- Reference: 0179982886
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/25/11/06/1117201/nvidias-jensen-huang-says-china-will-win-ai-race-with-us
- Source link: https://www.ft.com/content/53295276-ba8d-4ec2-b0de-081e73b3ba43
> In the starkest comments yet from the head of the world's most valuable company, Huang told the FT: "China is going to win the AI race." Huang's remarks come after the Trump administration maintained a ban on California-based Nvidia selling its most advanced chips to Beijing following a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping last week.
>
> The Nvidia chief said that the west, including the US and UK, was being held back by "cynicism." "We need more optimism," Huang said on Wednesday on the sidelines of the Financial Times' Future of AI Summit. Huang singled out new rules on AI by US states that could result in "50 new regulations." He contrasted that approach with Chinese energy subsidies that made it more affordable for local tech companies to run Chinese alternatives to Nvidia's AI chips. "Power is free," he said.
[1] https://www.ft.com/content/53295276-ba8d-4ec2-b0de-081e73b3ba43
winning is losing (Score:5, Insightful)
We just had this discussion last week. I'll yell it again. Winning AI means putting all your entry level people out of work and permanently damaging future generations of the ability to use logic. Congratulations. Social unrest comes next, followed by regime change, Chinese history is lubricated with blood.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe this is what he was talking about when he said there was a lack of optimism.
AI is inevitable. The only question is who is going to decide how it works, and how it affects their population. The choice of US billionaires or the CCP isn't a great one, but it could also be the EU or US government having a big say in it. At least in the case of the EU, that is likely to result in a smoother transition to whatever is the next stage, for us.
Re: (Score:1)
"China will win social unrest"
TutTut Chicken Little (Score:1)
Fuck off Huang. If China "wins" it will be because you sold them the technology.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, NVidia NOT selling to China (either because they don't want to buy - which is what they are now saying, or because of US restrictions) is going to ACCELERATE Chinese AI chip development out of necessity (even if imposed by Chinese government - maybe strategically accelerate to self-reliance).
The Chinese power advantage is real - huge amounts of hydro-electric, as well as solar. Trump is shooting US in the foot here by hampering Solar, and the AI co's themselves are talking about putting AI datacen
Re: (Score:2)
If China win it will be because NVidia didn't sell them GPUs so they built their own. Don't think they can't.
The US isn't in some magic permission where it wins everything. Remember the US lost the space race and only won round 2 by sinking massive amounts of time and effort into it.
Race to what? (Score:1, Insightful)
Race? What is this race "to"?
What are we racing about?
Current LLM based systems are very clever pattern finders and very good at generating output for certain tasks when trained on quality data.
Ok, great. Now what? Are we racing to true intelligence? Is anyone even working on such a thing? What does true intelligence even mean? And why would we want truly intelligent computers, anyway? To serve what purpose? We already have 8 billion people who arguably have true intelligence. We need to build comp
Re: (Score:2)
"What are we racing about?"
The usual - ever bigger bank balances for the tech bros, screw the rest of us who are put out of a job in the meantime. But hey don't worry - AI will generate new jobs! For maybe 1 in 100 people who get fired because of it in a best case scenario.
this isn't your choice (Score:2)
The race to surveil and market every human being on Earth. This only works at scale when we dedicate massive computing and energy resources to this bullshit. And governments and billionaires agree, this is what they want for us.
You as the target of this AI gets no choice. You don't get a say in the company board, as you don't hold voting shares. You don't get a say in your government because you didn't pay for a million dollar plates at a Mar-a-lago luncheon. And you don't get to refuse as a consumer becaus
Meanwhile (Score:3)
OpenAI is musing about a "federal backstop" to secure their expansion financing and this the circle of clowning takes another loop.
You're probably right Jenson but this is partly your fault, you and your pals wanted to throw down with this admin and now you can learn they are wildly incompetent and dont care beyond what they can line their pockets with. Trump will never take the measures China does, that requires a functioning government and they just don't believe in that as a concept. Maybe you should have stuck with cringe and woke so keep reaping.
Re: (Score:3)
I find the words "now you can learn" funny in that sentence. It has been obvious for years that Trump is incompetent and doesn't care beyond his own benefit. Are there people that are so dense that they are still only just learning that?
He's already walking that comment back a bit... (Score:2)
[1]https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/0... [cnbc.com]
Best,
[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/06/jensen-huang-says-china-will-win-the-ai-race-before-clarifying-in-a-statement-nvidia-trump-xi.html
Re: self interest (Score:2)
Do you think the Pentagon is going to stand by and let China unilaterally AI its military?
Re: (Score:2)
It's possible. The Chinese are working while the US is distracted with internal issues.
Nothing like spreading a little fear (Score:2)
Nothing like spreading a little fear to goose your sales, right? "Oh, you don't want to be left behind in the race for AI..."
It's only a race if you are the only one "running" (Score:2)
I think we're looking at the wrong metaphor when we talk about the Nvidia-China / US AI "race." There's *no* finish line in AI - it's more about innovation, system-building, and capacity than a single "winner". That matters because when we talk about one-side owinning, we assume: a) an endpoint, b) uniform criteria for a win, and c) that everyone plays by the same freaking rules.
In reality:
AI progress depends on many moving parts - hardware, software, data, talent, regs, infrastructure.
The US-China d
Re: (Score:1)
Someone might have said all the same things about the space race.. They'd have been mostly wrong. At least for some span of generations along the axis marked time.
Yes the USA might be matched or eclipsed in 'space' technology in the near future, and maybe already is. In the mean time we are still enjoying huge technical dividends and current economic receipts via Space-X etc.
Over the past two generations we enjoyed a clear advantage in the cold war, and enjoyed a lot of national and even global security.
Are they going to "win bitcoin" as well? (Score:3)
How about 3DTV? The way to "win" AI is to develop AI that actually works...not have the cheapest LLMs. AI will be "won" with algorithms and research, not raw compute. LLMs are limited in what they can do and I see no indication that will change. They are fancy autocomplete engines that are far more useful than one would expect given what they do, but far short of anything intelligent.
I use one daily, mandated by work. I can't remember the last time I prompted claude 4.5 to write something and it actually compiled, let alone ran without exception, let alone worked. Yet, listening to Huang, Altman, Zuckerberg, Benson, Nadella, Pichai, we should be firing all our junior engineers because their AI is so fucking good, you don't need them any more.
There's a MASSIVE gap between what AI vendors promise and what anyone can actually demonstrate. And we'll know when AI is intelligent because it will actually write code, not just promise to do it someday. IF...you had AI that could write working code from a prompt, you would generate unimaginable wealth...custom video games, custom ETL/data-processing code, services to rewrite legacy COBOL/Python apps to Rust, Java, or whatever the fashionable language....fucking Assembly for all I care. How about custom cartoons?...custom porn? (that look as good as the items they want to replace...not janky stuff with extra fingers or glitchy movements). I've seen interesting demos, but nothing beyond that.
It's been nearly 4 years...all we hear is promises and "someday." 4 years is an eternity in software, especially with so many trillions poured into these. All we have are tools, not solutions. Tools that are still "use at your own risk." Tools that "might" someday replace humans...that "might" actually save more time than they cost to use them. Tools that "may" make you more productive.
They're definitely fun to play with, but I I would personally pay more attention to researchers, not a country blindly imitating us. AI will be one by developing new algorithms, not brute forcing existing ones with subsidized power.
Translation (Score:2)
What he meant by "will win AI race" is as follows:
a. Automation of jobs resulting in decrease of living standards for the middle class.
b. Implementing systemic surveillance undermining citizen's rights to privacy, to dissent politically, and expose corporate wrongdoing.
c. Implementing 'social score' system that encompasses all aspects of individual activities that traditionally were off limits, finding further ways to penalize dissent.
Why would anyone want to win these stupdi prizes?
> "[The Japanese people]
Re: (Score:2)
Well, no .. that's not what he meant, even if those are some of the outcomes of the spread of AI.
Huang is clearly trying to boost Nvidia's, and his own, fortunes, by appealing to this supposed AI race with China, to get US policy changed to his own benefit.
He's obviously positioning winning of this "race" by the US as a desirable outcome, so going to be focusing on whatever aspects are seen as a positive by the US lawmakers he is trying to influence.
Ah yes, the missile gap lies (Score:1)
What possible motivation could the manufacturer of the bombs, erm GPUs, have for claiming that the other side will have more GPUs ?
Meanwhile, Mr President, there actually is an Electric Vehicle gap.
https://www.thespacereview.com/article/523/1
This is the wrong way to look at it (Score:2)
It should not be seen as a race to be won
We should not be restricting access to tech for the Chinese
The tech should all be open source
Cooperation is better than competition
If the tech is available to all, it will prevent the abuses that can occur if the tech is owned by monopolists or governments
Of course, none of this will happen, the insane race will continue
What does "winning" even mean? (Score:2)
Like, how do they "win". Will I be forced to use a Chinese made coding assistant?
AI is the new Strategic Defense Initiative (Score:2)
Make your enemy outspend you on something pointlessly stupid hoping they'll go bankrupt first.
It's a useless technology anyway (Score:4, Insightful)
At least for 90% of its current applications. We don't need to trade all our electricity and water for automating customer service and white collar jobs.
As for the cool stuff machine learning can do that gets done in public universities on their supercomputers. We don't need thousand acre data centers clogging up our towns and cities. Let China have that nonsense.
None of this is going to generate real GDP gains or better quality of life for the average person. It's just going to exasperate already large problems with our capitalist economies not able to generate enough quality jobs.
We are not ready to dismantle capitalism. And that's all AI is really being used for outside of a handful of the University research projects.
Re: (Score:1)
Capitalism is certainly ready to dismantle YOU.
Re: (Score:2)
AI will program faster, drive safer, analyze medical information, argue better, reference more data, and out-engineer any human being in almost no time. A long time ago, the best way to get somewhere was to run. Then someone invented the saddle and it was to ride. Now, you can get in a car and cross a continent in a weekend. AI is the car, our brain is the legs. Sure, it's the patent motor wagon or thereabouts right now, maybe a 1920s vehicle. But in a decade or two it will be a Bugatti veyron or a 18 wheel
Re: (Score:2)
Well said. The only reason there is so much investment in AI is because companies think they will be able to use it to get rid of massive amounts of workers. Literally they have no other reason to think they will have ROI. Let China have that problem.
Re: (Score:1)
Your post is a lot of nonsense. AI is probably a bubble and driven by the notion that there will be broad productivity across industry that is likely to never materialize, that much is true.
However, there is also the possibility that it will be an inflection point that rapidly advances material science, bio-science, and information sciences.
In our largely 'information economy' you know since we already outsourced a huge portion of the production of actual goods, the consequences of being left behind in tho
Re: (Score:2)
What percentage of investment money being thrown at AI is for purely scientific and discovery purposes? Is that what Microsoft is using it for?
Re: It's a useless technology anyway (Score:2)
What if a strong basic income (which entails getting rid of religious GDP fetishism) is the solution?
Basic income isn't enough (Score:2)
If you let the monopolies form they will just suck all the money out of anyone getting basic income by jacking up prices and limiting supply.
You need a comprehensive solution to the billionaires plan to dismantle capitalism.
Capitalism is a complex machine and it requires complex maintenance.
Re: Basic income isn't enough (Score:2)
If we have an indexed basic income can we make our own supply? What if engineers created 3d-printable vacuum cleaners that didn't data-collect because they didn't need to work for control freak bosses?
Re: (Score:2)
UBI is the solution, but there are too many powerful people that attribute their success to hard work instead of the fact that their parents own Emerald mines and therefore refuse to allow other people get anything for free.
Re: It's a useless technology anyway (Score:2)
That's all pretext anyway. The reality is that they do not want to share any market segments with any competitors, and they will attempt to destroy any and all competition through any means at their disposal. That may be rhetoric, regulatory capture, espionage, etc.
These companies aren't athletes that love competition, they are sharks that will eat their own young if they can get to them.
Fun fact: Sharks that have live births, such as the great white, usually only have one at a time because the eggs h
Re: It's a useless technology anyway (Score:3)
If a strong basic income is the right answer, we will try every other conceivable option first before getting to that one. The people in charge will wage a literal shooting war on the working class before agreeing to a slice of the profits, control, or property.
Re: (Score:2)
This whole speech of his seems like
"AI isnt profitable, so we'll need you to raise electricity prices on voters so you can give us free power".
Maybe, radical suggestion I know, but maybe they can just fuck off....
The faster the bubble bursts so all these shitbirds lose all their money the happier I will be.
They're going to try to trick you (Score:2)
With culture war bullshit. It's what they always do when they want to pick your pocket and steal your property.
You need to be ready for that so that you can see through it and focus on pocketbook issues.
When they come for your electricity and water they aren't going to just say gimme gimme gimme.
They're going to tell you that some big bad is coming for your children and for the things you love and for your hobbies and for everything you like to do and enjoy.
And only they can save you from t
Re: It's a useless technology anyway (Score:2)
What if the US is already a surplus energy producer (see eia.gov) with administered retail rates that are raised independently of actual supply and demand conditions because people like you ignorantly hallucinate scarcity?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I don't know that I fully agree with that. The current AI technology is not that useful compared to the cost of running it. And don't think it is going to cross into useful in the next couple of years. So it feels like we are at the top of the hype cycle where the bubble is about to burst.
But in the long run (10y or so), I think we will have figured out the correct integration of the tools in the situations where it is actually helpful. So I don't think we want to be too behind in the technology.
Now,
Re: (Score:2)
The classic sour grapes reaction. You can't do it, claim it's rubbish anyway.