1. Tariff actions and long term harm to "allies" relationships... they will all be back as many already are because how does any country ignore the largest consumer market in this world? This is not about person A dissing person B and person B will not ever be friends with A again. This is world business. Countries (eventually) look out for their best interests.
2. the "brains" will come back selectively because so much of the world wants to be in the US. And those coming back will be selected more carefully to assist what the US needs once all settles down qnd we have coherent HB-1 and general immigration policy.
3. $$Trump coin...oh yeah, that one is a bad look definitely. No one is going to support everything any admiinistration does though, never has happened, never will.
4. Law firms that supported setting up the russia-gate scandal, or the 4 years of lawfare during 46 and then after 2020? Maybe there could be some consequences. Media outlets? If one does not have problems with media's current role in society one has not been looking around much for any alternate views. And DOJ could be lumped in with law firms except they have traditionally been the "wing men" of administrations so maybe we can excuse them. Or maybe we should not because it might be better to hold them accountable too and change the course of future DOJs.
5. House of cards, yes it might all fall apart I guess. But that strikes me as another example of the general fear mongering the opposition has been able to use so effectively. I think this country will hold together as it has through other very trying times. We all know those historic moments. And I think we all know and have known for a long time that there are many foundational issues that needed addressing. And that NO ONE has been able to do anyting about those issues. I am not sure where any of this will end up. But already much has happened on many fronts that is moving things in the right direction. None of us likes all of it. But when do we get all of what we want? I am grateful for the well organized action we have seen, even in the face of organized attempts to stifle it with federal judges at least temporarily slowing the progress with over half of the admin's EOs being delayed in court, some cases with some merit but many of them just political lawfare. Maybe some substantive change will come out of all this, maybe not. I will wait and see before I judge what is happening. The anticipated fearful hand waving may be understandable but is an unwelcome distraction.
It is typical short term thinking and in this case the focus of Trump is playing to his base - but all of this is at a superficial level - which is a characteristic of short term thinking.
This highlights the deep shortcomings of the current administration best illustrated through Hans Christian Andersen's - "The Emperor Has No Clothes" - no-one dares challenge Trump, no-one looks beyond the superficial to dig deeper to look at the potential iterations of policy or worse still Trump's Executive Orders - at the end of the day - will the US become a 'house of cards' because of Trump?
It would seem that you could look at all the incredible activity that has been going on since inauguration And realize that this did not happen without an incredible amount of planning both in terms of policy and in terms of appointment of people to help enact the policies. The kinds of deep shortcomings that you reference are only the picture painted by the media. If you take time to dig a little bit, you can find people like liberal award-winning former guardian reporter and intercept founder and now independent observer Glen Greenwald and others who have taken the time to dig into the workings of the Trump administration wher, in policy discussions, he sees not Yes Men but virulent opposition over ideas.
I look at situations from a very straight forward perspective first - actions speak louder than words.
The tarrifs - I am not arguing about the intent - it is the actions, especially with long-term allies that, for me, a tell tale signs that support my comment.
The attacks on universities, students, funding, & NIH - I am not commenting on the intent but the potential long-term outcomes - brain drain, where do all of the engineers go?, again supports my comment.
The actions around $$TRUMP coin, action against law firms, media outlets & the justice department - are rather transparent and as you say, "that this did not happen without an incredible amount of planning both in terms of policy and in terms of appointment of people to help enact the policies." I stand by my comments without reservation - the US will become a 'house of cards'.
1. Tariff actions and long term harm to "allies" relationships... they will all be back as many already are because how does any country ignore the largest consumer market in this world? This is not about person A dissing person B and person B will not ever be friends with A again. This is world business. Countries (eventually) look out for their best interests.
2. the "brains" will come back selectively because so much of the world wants to be in the US. And those coming back will be selected more carefully to assist what the US needs once all settles down qnd we have coherent HB-1 and general immigration policy.
3. $$Trump coin...oh yeah, that one is a bad look definitely. No one is going to support everything any admiinistration does though, never has happened, never will.
4. Law firms that supported setting up the russia-gate scandal, or the 4 years of lawfare during 46 and then after 2020? Maybe there could be some consequences. Media outlets? If one does not have problems with media's current role in society one has not been looking around much for any alternate views. And DOJ could be lumped in with law firms except they have traditionally been the "wing men" of administrations so maybe we can excuse them. Or maybe we should not because it might be better to hold them accountable too and change the course of future DOJs.
5. House of cards, yes it might all fall apart I guess. But that strikes me as another example of the general fear mongering the opposition has been able to use so effectively. I think this country will hold together as it has through other very trying times. We all know those historic moments. And I think we all know and have known for a long time that there are many foundational issues that needed addressing. And that NO ONE has been able to do anyting about those issues. I am not sure where any of this will end up. But already much has happened on many fronts that is moving things in the right direction. None of us likes all of it. But when do we get all of what we want? I am grateful for the well organized action we have seen, even in the face of organized attempts to stop them with federal judges at least temporarily slowing the progress with over half of the admin's EOs being delayed in court, some cases with some merit but many of them just political lawfare. Maybe some substantive change will come out of all this, maybe not. I will wait and see before I judge what is happening. The anticipated fearful hand waving may be understandable but is an unwelcome distraction.
Now D.C. has frozen all student visa interviews. Just like that, the fall cohort of foreign grad students—tomorrow’s CUDA coders and today’s tuition cross-subsidy—has vanished.
These moves play great on the rally stage. But they slice off cash and talent right now and knock loose another brick in the long-term foundation.
Short-term wins. Structural losses. That’s the wobble you’re talking about. Thanks for the deep observation!
You must read past the headlines about visas and everything else. The Trump administration is reimagining the financial world order and immigration, as well as many other policies that don't apply to this discussion. Many times during the election Trump said he wanted to choose the people immigrating so that the United States could bring in immigrants who were capable of helping build the country. Yes, the current Visa situation might seem counterintuitive. But the immigration system will will be built completely new and to do that most easily and quickly has to be torn down first.
I completely agree with the strategic intention. Take the trade imbalance — no country can finance its spending forever by issuing Treasury bonds or drawing down foreign reserves. That’s spot on, and it’s a big reason why addressing the trade deficit truly matters over the long haul.
That said, my main concern is with how these policies are being executed. The rollout feels chaotic and nearly impossible to enforce, which ends up creating all kinds of perverse incentives. Companies treat it like a treasure hunt for loopholes — as I pointed out in this earlier piece. (https://howardyu.substack.com/p/easter-egg-hunt-how-trumps-trade)
When rules shift overnight and enforcement is patchy, businesses naturally start gaming the system. A well-intentioned strategy gets undermined by poor tactical follow-through. Strong incentives to cheat, combined with limited customs capacity to inspect every container, mean the actual impact often falls short.
They’ll reroute shipments, relabel products, tweak specs — whatever it takes to stay one step ahead. It turns into a giant game of trade-policy whack-a-mole, and customs agencies just can’t keep up.
All this unpredictability makes it harder for businesses of all sizes to plan ahead. If the government's role is to provide a stable playing field, then this constant churn does the opposite. It shifts the focus from growth to guesswork.
So again, I appreciate your perspective. Strategically, we’re aligned. It’s the execution that gives me pause. Thanks for helping to keep this conversation going.
Agree with much above...chaos leading to corporate loophole mining. Disagreement comes at "strong incentives to cheat". While there may be more zebras in the early chaos for the lion to hunt, the lion will always hunt and always has hunted. And over some period of time the chaos will settle down as the agreements are hammered out. This country is relatively densely populated by lions who are always on the lookout for an edge and they're hunting. That is just the nature of a lion. And if he gets a few more free meals for a short period of time but the kingdom ends up with a completely new structure that greatly benefits the kingdom as a whole, then I think it is worth a few easy kills for a short period of time. Trump is just the big mouth organizer frontman for this whole experiment and somehow destiny has put him in that position. Behind the scenes is Scott Besent who I think I can trused to be working for the good of the country. A man who deeply understands the importance of a middle class, for example. And a man who calmly and competently defends his positions when challenged by aggressive media and economists. Introduation to that there is a great war behind the scenes between Old London and Old Europe and the United States. Very specifically with the United States finally finishing cutting the tires with old London. The job was begun by Jerome Powell with his changing of the pricing of our money from London to the US through changing libor into sofr, just completed. And I think that Trump has finally understood that battle and is also on board, hence his softening rhetoric towards Powell. Trump may be in delicate but he is not stupid and it could just turn out that his chaotic tactics were exactly the right strategy for the intellectual delicacy of besent and crowd. Another view that perhaps digs a little further under the surface?
The Nvidia decision was not about the chipmaking wars. It was about the artificial intelligent war. Geopolitically, the AI war is generally seen as an existential war. I think the Trump administration sees it that way and likely China does also. In that war any help that the United States technology can give China does not serve the interests of the United States and works against that interest. Seen from that vantage point the decision to not sell Nvidia chips to China is to not give China any help in the existential war. I don't think your points about making China stronger with this decision are incorrect. Of course they are right on. But the decision by the United States has bought time in the AI race and that time bought at this point in the existential war is likely time bought that is yes, very expensive, but will certainly be seen as money well spent if it makes a contribution to the United States winning this war.
I like your "pushed to Independence" concept. But China has many many examples of not being pushed but borrowing technology, a generous verb for their actions I think, In all the categories you mentioned above and in the entire tech world, really, I think. That is the foundation of the American Business world's complaints about China. But still yes, in the world of AI, China is being pushed into development of the basic foundations. The chips and accompanying software. And Huawei will progress rapidly I am sure. But it does give the US some kind of window of opportunity which you describe as maybe 1 to 2 years. So let's accept that. I think it may be longer actually. But I think deepseek was a very large red flag for the US. Although the founder said they used low quality chips at the beginning of deepseek Revelations later analyzes indicated they were using Nvidia h100 chips which means cuda also. So "boom!&$!!?", building on America's technology China almost totally catches up with AI. So now the chips can be bootlegged or China Huawei develops its own chips and software. Bulky and cranky for some period of time. Slowing everything down. Newer chips from Nvidia will be harder to get because of various devices being used for tracking etc. More slowing down. If deepseek had not had the h100 chips, they probably would not exist right now. If the US keeps allowing China free access to all the intellectual property developed here, it is hard for me to see how they will not be greatly helped in their pursuit of AI dominance. And at the same time of course they will be developing their own ai and software solutions while they are building on the existing foundations. Perhaps with less enthusiasm and fewer entities working on this harder and environment of clunky hardware and software, never the less brilliant minds will be seeking world-class solutions. So now I realize a little more about why I think the way I do thanks to your pushback.
BTW I just read your article on byd and Tesla and BMW. Very interesting. I thought. My understanding is that currently BYD sales are a little bit below Tesla's worldwide. But BYD total square meters of factories is a little above Tesla's. Byd estimated at 18 million and Tesla 12 to 15 million. So maybe Tesla is a little more efficient with greater sales and smaller factory overhead. I own a 2017 Tesla model S and have driven the BMW and don't think there's any comparison. Have not driven byd but I'm curious. Also wondering if either byd or BMW has challenged the nurburgring track record that Tesla said for a sedan. And wonder if BYD or BMW has the kind of smooth ride demonstrated on the internet with a glass of water sitting on the driver 's door with a window open while the car is driving totally automatically and the water never spills. And where are both companies with self-driving? But your comparison of the hoopla of musk with the quiet determination of byd was right on. It did make me realize that the mind behind byd might be much more focused on just one company. I don't think musk could ever be that unless his relentless drive finally shuts his physical body down and he has to back out of some things. BYD had open source Tesla to build upon and they have done a great job certainly. Also wonder what percentage of BYD is selling in China where they are the home team. A market that is certainly somewhat underdeveloped, but nevertheless is by far the largest market in the world along with India that just surpassed China maybe? Musk's attempts to help revitalize America on top of everything else he is doing unfortunately has been negatively impacting Tesla sales, at least in the United States and Europe. I don't know about China. So maybe those are some more comparisons to throw on the pile that you started. I appreciate this dialogue also.
This is very interesting. We differ from the beginning on this one. It is possible that there is no way to keep China from learning from us and subsequently surpassing us in different fields. But the fields you mentioned starting with EV, which by the way, I don't think that the BYD has surpassed Tesla in technology, although they have almost equaled them in sales, this is an example of a field where Tesla was the first mover and open sourced everything at least at first. The question I have is whether or not byd would be as far along had Tesla not been so open and had in fact been very closed about what they were doing. I don't know where China got its high-speed rail tech, but I don't think it was from us so I'm going to bypass that one. But it was probably very similar to the Tesla open source concept. I don't know of restrictions on wind turbines or solar panels regarding technological breakthroughs in the west. So maybe this is another example of how the open source idea gives China a tremendous advantage.
So the phone analogy... Your assumption is that Huawei would not have happened had we not cut off China. In that instance, what we have is at least a couple of very developed phone technologies in Android and Apple. That expanded to cover the whole planet making their technologies pretty easy to copy. And while I don't know this industry as well as you might, I would suspect that they were to a great extent copied. And very successful.
Really appreciate you laying out your point so clearly—it’s a thoughtful take, and I think we actually agree on the end goal. It’s just the tactics where we diverge.
Yes, this is an existential AI race. No argument there. But if buying time is the goal, I’d argue the best tactic isn’t shutting off Nvidia access in China—but extending it. CUDA is the moat. Right now, most Chinese AI companies want to stay on Nvidia. The export restrictions just corner them into building with Huawei, which (as history shows) can eventually lead to independence.
Just look at how this played out in EVs, high-speed rail, wind turbines, solar panels. Once China breaks free, it doesn’t look back. But independence doesn’t happen unless it’s forced. Xiaomi, Oppo, Vivo—they’re all still using Android. Huawei only built HarmonyOS because it had to.
Same story here: if Chinese developers stay tied to CUDA, the U.S. keeps its edge longer. But sanctions push them to create alternatives—and once that ecosystem matures, Nvidia loses its grip. And then we’re in a world where China not only catches up but sets its own standards.
So yeah, we want the same outcome—I just think we need smarter tactics to get there. Thanks again for engaging—these convos are exactly what we need more of.
What do you think? Am I missing something in how this plays out over the next few years?
My last comment meant to be in Reply to Andrew Moore interesting note below:
"I look at situations from a very straight forward perspective first - actions speak louder than words."
1. Tariff actions and long term harm to "allies" relationships... they will all be back as many already are because how does any country ignore the largest consumer market in this world? This is not about person A dissing person B and person B will not ever be friends with A again. This is world business. Countries (eventually) look out for their best interests.
2. the "brains" will come back selectively because so much of the world wants to be in the US. And those coming back will be selected more carefully to assist what the US needs once all settles down qnd we have coherent HB-1 and general immigration policy.
3. $$Trump coin...oh yeah, that one is a bad look definitely. No one is going to support everything any admiinistration does though, never has happened, never will.
4. Law firms that supported setting up the russia-gate scandal, or the 4 years of lawfare during 46 and then after 2020? Maybe there could be some consequences. Media outlets? If one does not have problems with media's current role in society one has not been looking around much for any alternate views. And DOJ could be lumped in with law firms except they have traditionally been the "wing men" of administrations so maybe we can excuse them. Or maybe we should not because it might be better to hold them accountable too and change the course of future DOJs.
5. House of cards, yes it might all fall apart I guess. But that strikes me as another example of the general fear mongering the opposition has been able to use so effectively. I think this country will hold together as it has through other very trying times. We all know those historic moments. And I think we all know and have known for a long time that there are many foundational issues that needed addressing. And that NO ONE has been able to do anyting about those issues. I am not sure where any of this will end up. But already much has happened on many fronts that is moving things in the right direction. None of us likes all of it. But when do we get all of what we want? I am grateful for the well organized action we have seen, even in the face of organized attempts to stifle it with federal judges at least temporarily slowing the progress with over half of the admin's EOs being delayed in court, some cases with some merit but many of them just political lawfare. Maybe some substantive change will come out of all this, maybe not. I will wait and see before I judge what is happening. The anticipated fearful hand waving may be understandable but is an unwelcome distraction.
It is typical short term thinking and in this case the focus of Trump is playing to his base - but all of this is at a superficial level - which is a characteristic of short term thinking.
This highlights the deep shortcomings of the current administration best illustrated through Hans Christian Andersen's - "The Emperor Has No Clothes" - no-one dares challenge Trump, no-one looks beyond the superficial to dig deeper to look at the potential iterations of policy or worse still Trump's Executive Orders - at the end of the day - will the US become a 'house of cards' because of Trump?
It would seem that you could look at all the incredible activity that has been going on since inauguration And realize that this did not happen without an incredible amount of planning both in terms of policy and in terms of appointment of people to help enact the policies. The kinds of deep shortcomings that you reference are only the picture painted by the media. If you take time to dig a little bit, you can find people like liberal award-winning former guardian reporter and intercept founder and now independent observer Glen Greenwald and others who have taken the time to dig into the workings of the Trump administration wher, in policy discussions, he sees not Yes Men but virulent opposition over ideas.
I look at situations from a very straight forward perspective first - actions speak louder than words.
The tarrifs - I am not arguing about the intent - it is the actions, especially with long-term allies that, for me, a tell tale signs that support my comment.
The attacks on universities, students, funding, & NIH - I am not commenting on the intent but the potential long-term outcomes - brain drain, where do all of the engineers go?, again supports my comment.
The actions around $$TRUMP coin, action against law firms, media outlets & the justice department - are rather transparent and as you say, "that this did not happen without an incredible amount of planning both in terms of policy and in terms of appointment of people to help enact the policies." I stand by my comments without reservation - the US will become a 'house of cards'.
1. Tariff actions and long term harm to "allies" relationships... they will all be back as many already are because how does any country ignore the largest consumer market in this world? This is not about person A dissing person B and person B will not ever be friends with A again. This is world business. Countries (eventually) look out for their best interests.
2. the "brains" will come back selectively because so much of the world wants to be in the US. And those coming back will be selected more carefully to assist what the US needs once all settles down qnd we have coherent HB-1 and general immigration policy.
3. $$Trump coin...oh yeah, that one is a bad look definitely. No one is going to support everything any admiinistration does though, never has happened, never will.
4. Law firms that supported setting up the russia-gate scandal, or the 4 years of lawfare during 46 and then after 2020? Maybe there could be some consequences. Media outlets? If one does not have problems with media's current role in society one has not been looking around much for any alternate views. And DOJ could be lumped in with law firms except they have traditionally been the "wing men" of administrations so maybe we can excuse them. Or maybe we should not because it might be better to hold them accountable too and change the course of future DOJs.
5. House of cards, yes it might all fall apart I guess. But that strikes me as another example of the general fear mongering the opposition has been able to use so effectively. I think this country will hold together as it has through other very trying times. We all know those historic moments. And I think we all know and have known for a long time that there are many foundational issues that needed addressing. And that NO ONE has been able to do anyting about those issues. I am not sure where any of this will end up. But already much has happened on many fronts that is moving things in the right direction. None of us likes all of it. But when do we get all of what we want? I am grateful for the well organized action we have seen, even in the face of organized attempts to stop them with federal judges at least temporarily slowing the progress with over half of the admin's EOs being delayed in court, some cases with some merit but many of them just political lawfare. Maybe some substantive change will come out of all this, maybe not. I will wait and see before I judge what is happening. The anticipated fearful hand waving may be understandable but is an unwelcome distraction.
Andrew—you nailed the “house-of-cards” dynamic.
Now D.C. has frozen all student visa interviews. Just like that, the fall cohort of foreign grad students—tomorrow’s CUDA coders and today’s tuition cross-subsidy—has vanished.
These moves play great on the rally stage. But they slice off cash and talent right now and knock loose another brick in the long-term foundation.
Short-term wins. Structural losses. That’s the wobble you’re talking about. Thanks for the deep observation!
You must read past the headlines about visas and everything else. The Trump administration is reimagining the financial world order and immigration, as well as many other policies that don't apply to this discussion. Many times during the election Trump said he wanted to choose the people immigrating so that the United States could bring in immigrants who were capable of helping build the country. Yes, the current Visa situation might seem counterintuitive. But the immigration system will will be built completely new and to do that most easily and quickly has to be torn down first.
I completely agree with the strategic intention. Take the trade imbalance — no country can finance its spending forever by issuing Treasury bonds or drawing down foreign reserves. That’s spot on, and it’s a big reason why addressing the trade deficit truly matters over the long haul.
That said, my main concern is with how these policies are being executed. The rollout feels chaotic and nearly impossible to enforce, which ends up creating all kinds of perverse incentives. Companies treat it like a treasure hunt for loopholes — as I pointed out in this earlier piece. (https://howardyu.substack.com/p/easter-egg-hunt-how-trumps-trade)
When rules shift overnight and enforcement is patchy, businesses naturally start gaming the system. A well-intentioned strategy gets undermined by poor tactical follow-through. Strong incentives to cheat, combined with limited customs capacity to inspect every container, mean the actual impact often falls short.
They’ll reroute shipments, relabel products, tweak specs — whatever it takes to stay one step ahead. It turns into a giant game of trade-policy whack-a-mole, and customs agencies just can’t keep up.
All this unpredictability makes it harder for businesses of all sizes to plan ahead. If the government's role is to provide a stable playing field, then this constant churn does the opposite. It shifts the focus from growth to guesswork.
So again, I appreciate your perspective. Strategically, we’re aligned. It’s the execution that gives me pause. Thanks for helping to keep this conversation going.
Agree with much above...chaos leading to corporate loophole mining. Disagreement comes at "strong incentives to cheat". While there may be more zebras in the early chaos for the lion to hunt, the lion will always hunt and always has hunted. And over some period of time the chaos will settle down as the agreements are hammered out. This country is relatively densely populated by lions who are always on the lookout for an edge and they're hunting. That is just the nature of a lion. And if he gets a few more free meals for a short period of time but the kingdom ends up with a completely new structure that greatly benefits the kingdom as a whole, then I think it is worth a few easy kills for a short period of time. Trump is just the big mouth organizer frontman for this whole experiment and somehow destiny has put him in that position. Behind the scenes is Scott Besent who I think I can trused to be working for the good of the country. A man who deeply understands the importance of a middle class, for example. And a man who calmly and competently defends his positions when challenged by aggressive media and economists. Introduation to that there is a great war behind the scenes between Old London and Old Europe and the United States. Very specifically with the United States finally finishing cutting the tires with old London. The job was begun by Jerome Powell with his changing of the pricing of our money from London to the US through changing libor into sofr, just completed. And I think that Trump has finally understood that battle and is also on board, hence his softening rhetoric towards Powell. Trump may be in delicate but he is not stupid and it could just turn out that his chaotic tactics were exactly the right strategy for the intellectual delicacy of besent and crowd. Another view that perhaps digs a little further under the surface?
The Nvidia decision was not about the chipmaking wars. It was about the artificial intelligent war. Geopolitically, the AI war is generally seen as an existential war. I think the Trump administration sees it that way and likely China does also. In that war any help that the United States technology can give China does not serve the interests of the United States and works against that interest. Seen from that vantage point the decision to not sell Nvidia chips to China is to not give China any help in the existential war. I don't think your points about making China stronger with this decision are incorrect. Of course they are right on. But the decision by the United States has bought time in the AI race and that time bought at this point in the existential war is likely time bought that is yes, very expensive, but will certainly be seen as money well spent if it makes a contribution to the United States winning this war.
I like your "pushed to Independence" concept. But China has many many examples of not being pushed but borrowing technology, a generous verb for their actions I think, In all the categories you mentioned above and in the entire tech world, really, I think. That is the foundation of the American Business world's complaints about China. But still yes, in the world of AI, China is being pushed into development of the basic foundations. The chips and accompanying software. And Huawei will progress rapidly I am sure. But it does give the US some kind of window of opportunity which you describe as maybe 1 to 2 years. So let's accept that. I think it may be longer actually. But I think deepseek was a very large red flag for the US. Although the founder said they used low quality chips at the beginning of deepseek Revelations later analyzes indicated they were using Nvidia h100 chips which means cuda also. So "boom!&$!!?", building on America's technology China almost totally catches up with AI. So now the chips can be bootlegged or China Huawei develops its own chips and software. Bulky and cranky for some period of time. Slowing everything down. Newer chips from Nvidia will be harder to get because of various devices being used for tracking etc. More slowing down. If deepseek had not had the h100 chips, they probably would not exist right now. If the US keeps allowing China free access to all the intellectual property developed here, it is hard for me to see how they will not be greatly helped in their pursuit of AI dominance. And at the same time of course they will be developing their own ai and software solutions while they are building on the existing foundations. Perhaps with less enthusiasm and fewer entities working on this harder and environment of clunky hardware and software, never the less brilliant minds will be seeking world-class solutions. So now I realize a little more about why I think the way I do thanks to your pushback.
BTW I just read your article on byd and Tesla and BMW. Very interesting. I thought. My understanding is that currently BYD sales are a little bit below Tesla's worldwide. But BYD total square meters of factories is a little above Tesla's. Byd estimated at 18 million and Tesla 12 to 15 million. So maybe Tesla is a little more efficient with greater sales and smaller factory overhead. I own a 2017 Tesla model S and have driven the BMW and don't think there's any comparison. Have not driven byd but I'm curious. Also wondering if either byd or BMW has challenged the nurburgring track record that Tesla said for a sedan. And wonder if BYD or BMW has the kind of smooth ride demonstrated on the internet with a glass of water sitting on the driver 's door with a window open while the car is driving totally automatically and the water never spills. And where are both companies with self-driving? But your comparison of the hoopla of musk with the quiet determination of byd was right on. It did make me realize that the mind behind byd might be much more focused on just one company. I don't think musk could ever be that unless his relentless drive finally shuts his physical body down and he has to back out of some things. BYD had open source Tesla to build upon and they have done a great job certainly. Also wonder what percentage of BYD is selling in China where they are the home team. A market that is certainly somewhat underdeveloped, but nevertheless is by far the largest market in the world along with India that just surpassed China maybe? Musk's attempts to help revitalize America on top of everything else he is doing unfortunately has been negatively impacting Tesla sales, at least in the United States and Europe. I don't know about China. So maybe those are some more comparisons to throw on the pile that you started. I appreciate this dialogue also.
This is very interesting. We differ from the beginning on this one. It is possible that there is no way to keep China from learning from us and subsequently surpassing us in different fields. But the fields you mentioned starting with EV, which by the way, I don't think that the BYD has surpassed Tesla in technology, although they have almost equaled them in sales, this is an example of a field where Tesla was the first mover and open sourced everything at least at first. The question I have is whether or not byd would be as far along had Tesla not been so open and had in fact been very closed about what they were doing. I don't know where China got its high-speed rail tech, but I don't think it was from us so I'm going to bypass that one. But it was probably very similar to the Tesla open source concept. I don't know of restrictions on wind turbines or solar panels regarding technological breakthroughs in the west. So maybe this is another example of how the open source idea gives China a tremendous advantage.
So the phone analogy... Your assumption is that Huawei would not have happened had we not cut off China. In that instance, what we have is at least a couple of very developed phone technologies in Android and Apple. That expanded to cover the whole planet making their technologies pretty easy to copy. And while I don't know this industry as well as you might, I would suspect that they were to a great extent copied. And very successful.
Really appreciate you laying out your point so clearly—it’s a thoughtful take, and I think we actually agree on the end goal. It’s just the tactics where we diverge.
Yes, this is an existential AI race. No argument there. But if buying time is the goal, I’d argue the best tactic isn’t shutting off Nvidia access in China—but extending it. CUDA is the moat. Right now, most Chinese AI companies want to stay on Nvidia. The export restrictions just corner them into building with Huawei, which (as history shows) can eventually lead to independence.
Just look at how this played out in EVs, high-speed rail, wind turbines, solar panels. Once China breaks free, it doesn’t look back. But independence doesn’t happen unless it’s forced. Xiaomi, Oppo, Vivo—they’re all still using Android. Huawei only built HarmonyOS because it had to.
Same story here: if Chinese developers stay tied to CUDA, the U.S. keeps its edge longer. But sanctions push them to create alternatives—and once that ecosystem matures, Nvidia loses its grip. And then we’re in a world where China not only catches up but sets its own standards.
I actually dive into this logic more in this piece on how BYD outmaneuvered Tesla: https://howardyu.substack.com/p/the-strategy-musk-missed-how-byd
So yeah, we want the same outcome—I just think we need smarter tactics to get there. Thanks again for engaging—these convos are exactly what we need more of.
What do you think? Am I missing something in how this plays out over the next few years?
Howard you misunderstand the steps Trump has taken. As does Andrew.
Very interesting stuff, Howard!
☝️🎯🥳
Thank you Marijana!