Seagate hit with $300M penalty for selling sanctioned storage to Huawei

Re:Seagate hit with $300M penalty for selling sanctioned sto... by dboreham on Thursday April 20, 2023 @10:41AM (#35640816)

There were pdp-11s everywhere in the 1970s, and the designs were published (I have the schematics in my desk drawer here on microfiche). They were built from off the shelf TTL chips that again could be bought everywhere (things like UARTs often did use an LSI chip, bit harder to get hold of but still readily available) So it's inconceivable that a state level actor couldn't easily produce clones, even without ever having seen one! All the stories about "campaign to get its hand on American minicomputers" etc is theater.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Seagate hit with $300M penalty for selling sanctioned sto... by tivert on Thursday April 20, 2023 @11:00AM (#35641152)

There were pdp-11s everywhere in the 1970s, and the designs were published (I have the schematics in my desk drawer here on microfiche). They were built from off the shelf TTL chips...

> All the stories about "campaign to get its hand on American minicomputers" etc is theater.

The stories might be true, but not so much about acquiring the designs as quality implementations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_computing_in_the_So...:

> Soviet industry was unable to mass-produce computers to acceptable quality standards[6] and locally manufactured copies of Western hardware were unreliable.[7] As personal computers spread to industries and offices in the West, the Soviet Union's technological lag increased.[8]

> ...

> Since computers were considered strategic goods by the United States, their sale by Western countries was generally not allowed without special permission.[39] As a result of the CoCom embargo, companies from Western Bloc countries could not export computers to the Soviet Union (or service them) without a special license.[84]

[ Parent | on HN ]