@HPC Podcast Archives - OrionX.net - @HPCpodcast-99: Dr. Handel Jones on Geopolitics of Technology – In Depth

Episode Date: March 7, 2025

Dr. Handel Jones, author of the book When AI Rules the World: China, the U.S., and the Race to Control a Smart Planet, and CEO of International Business Strategies, Inc.  joins us again to discuss the geopolitics of technology. Dr. Jones was a specia; guest of this podcast in episode 48 in January 2023. Fast moving technologies matched with big changes in global politics and policy creates a potent mix. So we were delighted to have the opportunity to revisit many of the topics we covered last time and explore new topics. [audio mp3="https://orionx.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/099@HPCpodcast_ID_Dr-Handel-Jones_Geopolitics-of-Tech_20250307.mp3"][/audio] The post @HPCpodcast-99: Dr. Handel Jones on Geopolitics of Technology – In Depth appeared first on OrionX.net.

So competition is intense between China and the US in AI. But in terms of the data center part of it, the US is actually right now significantly ahead of China. And our assessment is that with the talent in India, India could be a global leader in AI. Unfortunately, though, right now some of the strategies of the government of India is to focus on manufacturing. And I think that digital health is going to be the major beneficiary of AI in the 2030

to 2040 timeframe. From Orion X in association with InsideHPC, this is the At HPC podcast. Join Shaheen Khan and Doug Black as they discuss supercomputing technologies and the applications, markets, and policies that shape them. Thank you for being with us. Hi everyone, this is Doug Black. Welcome to the At HPC podcast. I'm at Inside HPC.

With me is my co-host Shaheen Khan of OrionX.net. And we're delighted to have as our special guest today, Dr. Handel Jones. He is the founder and CEO of the International Business Strategies Consulting firm, IBS. Dr. Jones was on with us a little over two years ago at the time of the issuance of his book called When AI Rules the World, China, the U S and the Race to Control a Smart Planet. So to a degree, Handel, we're hoping to get an update on your views around these issues over the intervening two years. But first, just want to say thank you for joining us and welcome.

My pleasure. Thank you for having me. Okay. I know at the time we spoke with you, you were concerned that there was the potential for China to move ahead of the U S on AI, just speaking AI big picture. So much has happened since then. Why don't we start there? If you could give us your broad perspective

on where things stand, US, China, AI. Sure. So competition is intense between China and the US in AI. But in terms of the data center part of it, US is actually right now significantly ahead of China. And there are a couple of reasons for that. One is the performance of Nvidia. And Nvidia revenues in Q1 of fiscal year 2023 in data centers was about 3.7, 3.8 billion.

This latest quarter, which will come out today, they're gonna be about 38 billion to 40 billion revenue in data centers. And that's a 10X increase. And what has happened is the emphasis on training and training being done with the high performance processes of Nvidia. So the US government has limited the ability of Chinese companies to have access

to these high performance processes or GPUs. So that has in some ways slowed down the ability of China to train large models. Now China has responded by developing new technologies for training. The example of this success is DeepSeq. And DeepSeq just came out about a few weeks ago, and their training is much more efficient from an energy point of view, computing power point of view than we have right now in the US. But of course, DeepSeq is open source, so US companies can adopt some of those technologies.

But in terms of the adoption of capabilities around 5G, etc., China's moved ahead of the US. So in some areas, data centers, US is ahead of China. In other areas, I said China is actually ahead of the US. And examples would be transactions on smartphones, also in some of the sensitive security areas. So it's really strong competition, which is good for innovation. And so I think during the last two years, we've actually now seen the importance of AI. And another example for you is that the KPEX in data centers of Microsoft, Amazon, Google Meta, this year will be up about 38% compared to the expenditure in 2024. Now, we are expecting,

by the way, a slowdown in 2026, but the expenditures of these companies, maybe $380 billion this year in terms of data center expenditures because of the potential of AI. It's so interesting. I know part of your perspective is to take in a comparison, comparative views of the US entrepreneurial kind of market driven system versus China's more centrally controlled government driven. By the same token, you talk about 38, these enormous capex budgets for big tech, they're as big as government budgets. I mean, they dwarf what our public sector is spending. Yeah, so China is a combination of government guidance, government funding, but also a very strong entrepreneurial streak in China. And innovation is coming from that entrepreneurial streak. So China went through a phase where they tried to limit the influence and maybe even positions of entrepreneurs like Jackie Ma and so on.

But I think they realized that is not going to that doesn't work. You know, governments, government organizations generally don't innovate. So now they basically they have they have the, as I mentioned, in the session in Beijing last week, where they have two major initiatives. One initiative is to encourage big companies like Alibaba and these other companies to spin off businesses that have potential but are too small or maybe too narrow, maybe even different from the core businesses and have entrepreneurs basically drive the growth of those businesses. And then, you know, maybe the parent corporation might own 80 percent,

the investors and the employees maybe own 20 percent or could be 60, 40. And then you could have an IPO, you could have basically the parent corporation would buy them back in future. Now that's been done in the U S Cisco did that GE have done that. So it's not original, but it's clever. And the other one is to basically encourage young people to start companies and to provide funding support. So China graduates about four million STEM

graduates every year and they're having trouble finding jobs. There's way too many graduates that are fully qualified. So again, that's an attempt to basically have them take some initiatives. How it will work out is unclear, but they do take a long-term, Charlie does take a long-term perspective on many industries, and we see that right now in terms of their automobile industry, where their automobiles are now world-class, but what they have also is the supply chain for batteries. So basically the materials and so on and also manufacturing batteries. And the goal right now is to have thousand kilometer range, charging time of under 10 minutes

and battery cost of $50 per kilowatt hour. And of course, adoption of L3 ADAS right now, L5 ADAS in the next few years. And of course, L3 ADAS includes AI, L5 ADAS will obviously next few years. And of course, L3 ADAS includes AI. L5 ADAS will obviously include a huge amount of AI. So we do see the balance in China in terms of government and entrepreneurs. But again, it's the entrepreneurs that are creative.

Entrepreneurs are the ones that really build the industries. And again, hopefully in the US, we'll have a similar kind of structure because many of these industries need long-term investments. Again, I think corporations sometimes are too short-term focused. So the combination of the government market support, market generation support, is also going to be a key part of the success in adoption of AI.

Handel, how do you see all of this in the global scene? Clearly, China and the US are two of the big pillars globally, but there's also India that is not only rapidly emerging, but has all the demographics and many other trends in its support as well as the rest of the world. And of course, Europe, if they manage to gain alignment while keeping their structure, they could be suddenly a bigger force than they are now. We did a project on India regarding what India should be doing in terms of electronics.

And our assessment is that with the talent in India, India could be a global leader in AI. Unfortunately, though, right now some of the strategies of the government of India is to focus on manufacturing. And manufacturing creates jobs, but it should be very difficult for India to be a global leader in manufacturing. But in terms of the talent in software development, India is fantastic. And again, so hopefully they will compliment what they're doing in manufacturing

with the strong emphasis on AI. You know, in Silicon Valley where we're based, a significant amount of the talent is Indian. And basically, the education system, Indian Institute of Technology, the mathematics, so on, outstanding. The Middle East, though, is very focused on AI. And there's an organization called MGX, which is in Abu Dhabi, and they're working with Microsoft, BlackRock and so on.

So they have 30 billion in equity and raising 70 billion in debt. So they'll have a hundred billion to build data centers. Nvidia will help them with building data centers. One of the end markets they're focusing on is digital health. Energy, of course, energy management, energy optimization is another one, but digital health. And I think that digital health is going

to be the major beneficiary of AI in the 2030 to 2040 timeframe. But the Middle East, which includes Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, Qatar, and so on, is also focused heavily on AI and the benefits that AI can generate, but also, of course, profits. Many of these activities are profit generated. The issue is what timeframe do you have for profits? Is it gonna be next quarter? Is it gonna be a year from now?

Is it gonna be 10 years from now, whatever? But I think one has to have the need to have payback in some form or other, whether it's better quality of life, whether it's going to be better profits, some kind of benefit to justify the investments. On the technology aspect, of course, TSMC is such an important factor in AI advanced chip manufacturing. And I follow the at least the headlines on the South China Morning Post. And some of them in regard to a potential and, you know, invasion or blockade of Taiwan by China are truly alarming. I'm curious your views on where that all stands,

what direction you think that's going in. You know, TSMC revenues last year were $91 billion. They grew 30% from the year before. In 2030, TSMC revenues will be 250 billion to 280 billion. That's amazing. They control about 95% of the advanced technology with a supply for semiconductors. And the gap between TSMC and Intel and the gap between TSMC and Samsung is increasing rather than decreasing. And one can estimate maybe it's two years, three years right now.

And there are two parts to it. One part are the wafers, which get the high profile. The other part is packaging. So it's called advanced packaging. And the revenues of TSMC in advanced packaging in 2020 was maybe a billion dollars, one billion dollars. In 2030, the revenues of TSMC in advanced packaging will be maybe 70 billion dollars, maybe 80 billion dollars. And the advanced packaging technology gap is actually opening at a faster rate than the wafer technology

gap. So TSMC is putting reasonably advanced manufacturing in Arizona for wafers. Right now it's four nanometers. In Taiwan it's three nanometers. And by the end of this year, Taiwan would be two nanometers. And maybe Arizona will be three nanometers. But they haven't put packaging there. And why not? Because packaging is more complicated than wafer processing in the advanced technologies.

So the gap between TSMC and Samsung and Intel is opening, getting bigger. And so, yeah, if supply chain from Taiwan is disrupted, the whole global economy will be dramatically disrupted. And to give you some more numbers, TSMC is putting capacity in Taiwan for 2,900 meters, about 165,000 wafers a month. That's starting right this year and maybe going on till maybe 2027, 2028 and then they'll add more capacity. In Arizona the plan is probably maybe 30,000 wafers a month. So by 2030 in Taiwan they probably have 300,000 wafers a month, Taiwan, they probably have 300,000 wafers a month. In Arizona, 30,000, 10X difference. So Intel is going to be adding some capacity, but not that much. Samsung is not sure to add capacity in the US.

If Taiwan is disrupted, the whole global economy will be a disaster. Would you like to comment on the increasing decreasing likelihood of China taking action or not? Well, based on again, this is again, obviously, situation is dependent on what kind of relationship US has with China. The analysis we've done is the probability of any military damage to Taiwan is very low, and I have been spending a reasonable amount of time in China. Part of the reason for that is the public opinion of China or Chinese is there should not be any loss of life of Chinese. of Chinese. And they regard maybe the Taiwanese won't agree with this, but they regard Taiwan as China. In terms of some kind of trade restrictions or trade slowing down, I think probability is relatively high if the US continues to put increasing pressure on China. So I was

interviewed by AP about two or three years ago on what China would do regarding the US. And we talked at the time about limitations in terms of battery technology for EVs. So that is happening. However, though, what has changed is that now with the emphasis of Trump administration on oil and gas, the EVs are not as important strategically in the US today as they were two or three years ago. So there'll be an extension of the combustion engine vehicles. But I think the US will increase pressure on China, and China will respond. And I think they'll respond, respond obviously more in terms of the trade issues,

but the probability of a military invasion, you know, blockade, I don't know, but invasion of Taiwan by China, we think is very low. But again, you know, what we've seen in the last two years, many changes have occurred. You know, we did not predict this dramatic growth of Nvidia, by the way. And how long will Nvidia continue this growth? You know, Jensen, the guy's brilliant. And, you know, in most cases, when you look at the success and failure of corporations or countries, it really depends on the capabilities of the leaders. or countries, it really depends on the capabilities of the leaders. Broadcom is doing very well because of Hocktand. TSMC is doing very well because of Morris Chang. And of course, right now, CC Wei is a very good leader. And if you look at the weakening of Intel, it's because of a succession of leaders that really did not understand

what customers were doing and then had the wrong opinion of technology positioning. So now we have a new leader in the White House. We were the leader in China is the same and probably will stay the same for past 2027 or 2028. But yeah, I think we're in for interesting times and many surprises will come up. Do you see any other powers emerging in the world besides the U S China? We talked a little bit about India, or is this really going to be the scene? So when you look at the field that we really focus on semiconductors is

becoming like a jet engines. The cost of participation is increasing for each technology node. So the barriers to entry increase. So if you look at the scanners, the steppers, it's ASML, only ASML. If you look at design, It's ASML, only ASML. If you look at design, it's Cadence, Synopsys, and Siemens, three companies, and Ansys is being acquired. If you look at the accelerators, it's Nvidia, just by themselves right now. And then Broadcom is doing the custom designs, custom accelerators for Microsoft and so on, and maybe Marvell. So the barriers to entry

are increasing. So we don't see from a hardware point of view any breakthrough that will change the ecosystem. Quantum computing is coming in, but the big investments are in the US and China. But the big investments are in US and China. And we look at the new communications protocols. Again, US is the leader and the barrier to entry is very high. So China is really being hurt by not getting access to advanced process technologies. So basically right now, 14 nanometers is maybe the best they can get. You know, they're trying to manufacture seven nanometers in China and with difficulty. But this year, two nanometers will come in the US from TSMC and, you know, Opera will be using and so on.

So you have seven, you have five, you have four, you have three, and you have two. So if you count each of those as a generation, China is being really limited right now by not getting access to that advanced technology. So they've cobbled things together to remain reasonably competitive in some areas, but the gap is going to increase. Right. So will China then respond? Our feeling is yes.

If US is a two nanometers from Taiwan and China is a seven, and they can't do the training for the multi-trillion parameter models, they will do something. So that's a threat that I think we have to monitor and I think manage also because it's going to be dependent on what kind of pressure the US puts on China. Are there other technologies that if that ship has sailed for some of the technologies we've talked about, are there other technologies that they could focus on where the barriers

to entry are not as bad or maybe even favorable to them and then parlay that into competitive advantage? Yeah, photonics is one. Basically, the use of light to transmit and in terms of the long haul communications, Huawei is the global leader. And in terms of short haul, you know, these are complete Broadcom and Nvidia and so on, but that's a technology that China has and they can utilize that in terms of specialty packaging. The other areas basically is a packaging is one area. Again, quantum computing, as I mentioned,

that basically will come in maybe 2035. They do have quantum communications already. And then new device structures, 3D DRAM technology is being developed and SHAN is actually quite active in 3D DRAM. So maybe they can't get the most advanced HPM right now, but they can utilize in the future 3D DRAM and special packaging. And then the memory capabilities can be comparable or maybe even superior to what we have. They can also do different process architectures, very wide architectures, and that's being worked on. So, yeah, there are ways of potentially getting around these advanced technologies. ways of potentially getting around these advanced technologies. But for them, I think quantum computing, which is maybe 10 years away,

that's going to be potentially a big game changer. Right. In our pre-call, we also mentioned physical AI. And of course, that also raises Japan, which had an early lead and potentially even a lead now in that world. How do you see that evolving? OK, physical AI is going to be a big rope area for AI.

Physical AI basically is using imaging. So yes, Sony has the image sensors, but the key company in imaging AI is going to be Nvidia. And the data, the amount of data you have in physical AI, but they call it physical AI, what we call also physical AI. The amount of data you have, physical AI is a thousand times, maybe 10,000 times, maybe even a million times more than you have a generative AI. And so the first area of focus of Nvidia on physical AI is self-driving, autonomous driving.

The second area of focus is robotics, but the big market for physical AI is digital health. And basically where you have the wearables that measure health markers. China has already commercialized the ability to measure blood sugar without drawing blood. Oh, wow. Yeah. Basically they're starting to use it. It's a box now, maybe two feet by one feet and so on by two feet. And you put your hand into a kind of a glove,

but it's working quite well. And of course, Apple is also working on that technology. Their box is quite a bit smaller, but in terms of blood sugar measurement, that's an area that obviously is gonna become a huge opportunity. I was told recently that 25% of young people in the Middle East have high blood sugar. But obviously, we know it's a global phenomenon. So that's an area where you don't need the most

advanced technology. And again, you can actually have, it's going to be tied into smartphones. What you need is something small to tie into smartphones. So whether it's going to be individual or whether you go to a center like a pharmacy to check your blood sugar and so on, but the real opportunity is where you measure your blood sugar after each meal and see what food you're eating and so on. Those kinds of opportunities, Berkeley is working on the skin analysis with imaging and it's coming along. And of course, you're going to have the big MRI type data centers with high bandwidth skin analysis with imaging and it's coming along.

And of course you're gonna have the big MRI type data centers with high bandwidth communication. And then physical AI technology will do the analysis. And Nvidia is gonna be the global leader in that arena. Japan, you know, the image sensors of Sony are really good. However, though, we're seeing right now Samsung gaining market share in image sensors. And the new Xiaomi smartphone that's going to be announced soon, that's got the Samsung 200 million pixel image sensors. So image sensors are going to

be important technology, but then the analysis of the information is going to be key. And that's an area where Nvidia is very good. You know, they've been doing the AIDAS stuff for a while, but I think the digital health in 2030 to 2040 will be the biggest market for electronics in the world. And that's an area again that's where China is putting a lot of money in because their medical system today in the big hospitals is actually quite good, but in the rural hospitals is actually quite good, but the rural area is very

weak. But that technology also applies to military. And of course, the military aspects are really important. Israel, by the way, continues to be superb in military, but the US has fallen way behind in terms of military technology and also in terms of competitiveness. And hopefully that will change in the next few years. Handel, I know you have thoughts about DeepSeq, sort of a retaliatory strike, looked at in one way to USAI. What are your thoughts about DeepSeq?

I was in China back in November and exposed to some of the capabilities similar to DeepSeq, but DeepSeq itself, and couldn't talk about it. I think it shows that Chinese engineers can be very innovative. We talk about, oh, they copy. Yeah, they do copy, but they copy the best aspects of many things.

But DeepSeq is a breakthrough in terms of how to do training, how to do inference more effectively. The big growth opportunities that we see in DeepSeep right now is for personal computers and the supercomputer on the desk that Nvidia has is an example of where you're going to have that kind of capability, but also smartphones. And so what you need in smartphones then you need was called an NPU, Neural Processor Unit. And today they basically are pretty weak. But, you know, I talked, we talked to somebody who is an expert in this arena yesterday,

and they said 50 tops, 200 tops will become common in the next two or three years, and then maybe 150 tops to 200 tops by the year 2030. And that's going to change the function of the smartphone to become both a hub for collecting information from wearable devices and so on, but also processing information. But I think everybody's in deep seek, accelerate that and we'll give that credibility in terms of what's going to be possible in the future. So some of these things are really exciting in terms of the way they're going to change how we do things.

So the function or the basic premise of AI is society will change with AI. And physical AI is another piece of that change. But of course, in addition to having new applications and new companies, new industries, we're gonna have mass unemployment. Unemployment is gonna become a huge issue with AI. So we have to build industries to compensate for the loss of people in different industries.

So I was just reading yesterday about a bank in Asia that's eliminating 3000 people because of use of AI. Now again, this is, you know, the tip of the iceberg, but many jobs that people do routinely are going to be replaced by AI. So we have this huge opportunity in terms of growth, in terms of how society is going to change. And the military is going to change dramatically, by the way. The world, the positioning in world power from military perspective would change dramatically with AI. And hopefully the US is finally realizing that. But again, it's going to cause huge upheaval in terms of too many people in too many jobs.

So it's going to mean for new training, new skills, and also new industries. So the next 10 years are going to be really exciting with where there'll be dramatic changes in how society operates. One thought about Deep Six and Shaheen, you've shared this thought, is that for the big AI companies, Anthropic OpenAI, DeepSeq, it was a thing. But by the same token, those companies are aiming to the next thing. And eventually, their ultimate goal is AGI, artificial general intelligence. So large language models, reasoning models, great, but they're moving on a longer term path, which of course AGI has direct implications for things like employment, universal basic income

type of issues, as you're saying. Yeah, and again, I think the access to huge computing power which the US has is a key factor. I think the other issue is the access to talent. And so the number of people in China is potentially that can work on these things is 10x what we have. Yeah. And, you know, again, when AGI comes in, what's that going to do to what skill sets people have? So you're still going to need people to basically control and manage and determine what's sets people have. So you're still gonna need people to basically control and manage and determine what's good for society.

But how many people do you need? One thing that we're publishing right now is the change from training to inference in data centers. So if you go back to maybe 2019, basically training was like 93% of the load in data centers, inference was 7%. In 2030, training will be about 15%, inference will be 85%. So those kinds of changes are going to change the workload of people and functions of people. So in agreement with you, Handel, I see it exactly the same way.

I think this will be a major disruption. And while it will not eliminate everything, it will reduce the need for almost everything. But that also tells me that if society is not careful, it can cause disruptions that could be counterproductive. And I don't really do you see signs of such policies being discussed or made around the world that would allow a smooth transition from where we are to AI nirvana without sort of all the bad stuff? You know Musk obviously understands this. And I think having him in Washington

seems to have pluses and minuses. We're not going to discuss those right now, but at least he knows AI very well. And so I think, again, I don't know how long he's gonna be in Washington, how much influence he has, but again, I think having this understanding in Washington is important.

What can be done in the US is basically unclear. China clearly understands it. And they see the risk of the potential unemployment, especially when they're graduating like 12 million or 13 million people a year. Exactly what they'll do, how they'll do it. I don't know. Europe seems to be oblivious. I mean, they were very smart people there, but in terms of emphasis on AI, pretty

much nothing. And again, I think India could be the giant that changes things. Japan, pretty much oblivious again. So we have the visionary people in the US. I think what OpenAI has done is great. What Microsoft is doing right now is very interesting. What Google is doing. So Silicon Valley is really exciting. But how you change society, and again, whether we're talking 10 years minimum, maybe 20 years maximum, that's very difficult.

Yeah. And you're going to have to change the education system. You're going to have to change basically a whole bunch of things, how people think. So China is going to have huge problems. I mean, huge problems. But I think the leadership understands it. The US is going to have huge problems. And again, I think the US basically has the talent, but again, how well are the threats recognized? So on to me is still unclear. So we could have, you know, a religion, we could slow things down, or we could basically, if you look, for example, the EV market, if you don't, if you don't have trade barriers, the US automobile industry will be destroyed.

European automobile industry will be destroyed, and that'll create huge unemployment. But right now we're putting up tariffs, we're putting up trade barriers to protect the industry, so we're slowing down the adoption of EVs. That was a good thing or bad thing, that's just my opinion. So maybe the same thing will happen in terms of AI. But from what we can see right now, though, the future of China, according to the leaders, is based on digital information. I mean, the security, the cameras in China are amazing. So you feel very safe, but you're watched all the time. So we prefer that to being able to walk down the street in a big city in the US where you could get mugged. Again, that's a personal choice decision, right?

But I think you're right. I think we're going to have the potential for huge disruption. And I think with your radio show highlighting this, hopefully you have a big audience and hopefully the audience basically becomes aware of both the threats and the opportunities. Well, we know, I recall it was 2017, Elon Musk said AI is the scariest thing and it was all around mass unemployment. And as far as China and AI, certainly their facial recognition, AI, apparently is the best in the world as part of their

entire surveillance aspect. Well, you get good at what you practice a lot. I guess so. You know, I keep really thinking about the model and then the people who execute the model. And I believe that what we are seeing around the world, you know, China, one example, obviously heavily government driven, while trying to maximize entrepreneurship, as well as they probably can. And you see India, as you mentioned, having other priorities at the moment, but

generally being set up quite nicely for the future in almost all dimensions and also being a bit of a beneficiary of all the friction that happens around the world because they get along well with everybody, at least on the surface it seems. And then Europe struggling to herd the cats and be separate while unified and maybe what's happening right now will compel them to be motivated to be more unified. And then you see the US where it is a lot more market economy, a lot more private money rather than public money, but also companies that are highly competitive like Nvidia, like OpenAI, but also

companies that have fallen behind arguably because of the same model. So do we have a model issue in the West is the question. Does our model need to shift, especially at a time where social norms have been challenged and economic advance sometimes means compromising other you know, other traditional values that maybe were more visible. Any comments on this handle? I think in the past, when you didn't have a relatively successful from a GDP perspective, competitor that had the government plus industry in the game. The market-driven models seem to be reasonably successful.

Now, the US basically put a lot of emphasis on having control over supply chains of oil. And that was because of the combination of the large internal demand, but also the impact of oil in terms of war. And of course, basically, but in terms of the recent events, such as for batteries, which is replacement for oil, U.S. basically has been non-existent.

And again, I was involved in some of the military activities when I worked for Rockwell. And we basically, you know, did the B-1 bomber, which maybe has some issues, but technically it was very powerful and allowed the B-2 bomber to be built with the space shuttle, with the GPS. And the technology in the military was maybe one generation behind commercial. And, but today the military technology is maybe four or five generations behind. military technologies may be four or five generations behind. And so I think the government organizations have to become involved in the long-term survival

of the country, both from an economic competitiveness point of view, as well as for the military security. And so an example right now is quantum computing. Basically, progress is being made within the corporations, you know, Microsoft just announced something interesting and so on, but this is gonna be a fundamental capability 10 years from now, 15 years from now,

but the US should have a major investment in quantum computing. When I was at Rockwell, we actually were working on millimeter wave. There was no millimeter wave in the commercial segment of the market at the time. And of course, that became Skyworks. The government has to have a vision of how to be economically viable from a technology supply chain, a whole range of things on a long-term basis rather than being overly focused on the short-term. And then basically where so many of the decisions are based on getting votes, which is basically short-term based. So the China model which is basically short-term based.

So the China model has allowed China to grow dramatically over the last few years. Will it allow China to grow over the next few years? It's questionable. China still needs to have significant exports. They have to find job opportunities for the graduates, you know, the 12, 13 million a year, but at least they have focus on supply chain and at least they have a focus on trying to address growth issues and providing funding support

for those industries. So if you look at the 5G in China, companies developing 5G technology knew they would have a market. 5G in the US is still pathetic. It's not really 5G. We basically don't have low latency. So again, high bandwidth communication is critical. So how effective is ATT? How effective is Verizon and so on? Well, they're trying to satisfy their shareholders. And if the CEO doesn't satisfy shareholders, they get changed. So again, we have to have this balance, in my opinion, between a government that understands the future and also the encouragement of entrepreneurship and then access to the funding required to grow the industries. Yeah, I think with AI coming in, the ability to have a different business model

and monitor it would be a lot easier than we've had in the past 20 or 30 years. Great, great discussion. Very thought provoking as always, and very enjoyable. Very much, thank you, Handel. Glad we were able to catch up and sync up with you. I think it's great to be able to check in like this. And it had been just over two years, I think.

For our audience, if you want our previous episode that Dr. Jones was a special guest of, that's episode number 48. Please go look that up. And thanks again, really delightful conversation. Thanks so much. Okay. Appreciate it. Thank you. That's it for this episode of the

At HPC Podcast. Every episode is featured on InsideHPC.com and posted on OrionX.net. Use the comment section or tweet us with any questions or to propose topics of discussion. If you like the show, rate and review it on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen. The At HPC Podcast is a production of OrionX in association with Inside HPC.

Thank you for listening.