One of these things is not like the others.
Isn't that a massive giveaway to a relatively small number of model makers, at the cost of the huge number of copyright holders, including international copyright agreements?
If this was legislation, I would assume that someone bribed and/or horse-traded for it to be tacked on.
Copyright would be the single pillar of the international rules-based order to survive this dumpster fire.
The shift from 2027 to 2030 is the first material slippage -- and reflects one or two things (or both!): 14A process technology timeline and/or soft foundry demand from the fabless firms.
This is so absurd it's getting to the point where it's laughably evil.
No, the US has far simpler and completely free methods to do this. For example, look at how travel works. You can't use any US federal dollars to fly on non-US airlines unless it's impossible to do so (with some other caveats we won't go into here).
What the US should do is simply declare, no US federal dollar can go to any AI chip that's not produced in the US. No US federal dollar can go into running training or inference for any model that isn't using GPUs produced in the US.
That's it. An instant massive market is created. Without taxpayer dollars. Without subsidies.
But we can either make things cost a little more or give away massive piles of money while getting maybe nothing in return and have everything cost more anyway.
Have those funds all been dispersed?
It’s spent over 50B.
But this plan from Ben Thompson is laughable.
The biggest issue is that there isn't sufficient demand for an Intel fab, which is causing them to slow play opening it. Ben Thompson has written at length on Intel's struggles over the years and advocates that the U.S. step in and help guarantee sufficient volume of orders from US customers to make the fab financially work:
Source: https://stratechery.com/2025/ai-promise-and-chip-precariousn...