,
44 tweets,
6 min read
Read on Twitter
A Coffee With Ren starts in 15 minutes and I have instructions to watch it. Would you like to watch it with me? huawei.com/en/press-event…
Wow check out this truly top-shelf brown-tonguing. 
My comments on the last of these: “Huawei ramps up its technological Cold War propaganda: Huawei’s founder Ren Zhengfei positions himself as a humble student of American science and innovation, and his company as a servant of humanity” (24 Jun) zdnet.com/article/huawei…
It’s just like being there. There are no flowers on the front of the stage this time.
Ren is implying there’s limits to electronic technology sub-nanometre, but instead links the future to bio- and genetic technology, and materials science.
And of course AI. “AI will start to get applied at a very large scale to drive the society forward.” [That’s the simultaneous translator’s words.]
“You shouldn’t feel hesitant about this new world. You should welcome this new world with open arms.”
[Generic futurism sentences.]
Jerry Kaplan is asserting that the pace of change is actually slower than in the past.
Peter Cochrane is asked who will lead in the AI future? Will it be AI? Cochrane says it’s be the AI. Moves on to talk about sustainable societies, which will include transformation. Nanotech, biotech, robotics, and the Internet of Things.
“We have to stop producing more and more for the few” and have to start producing sufficient for all, says Cochrane.
Ren is finally asked why people don’t trust him and 5G. Ren responds by talking about textile machines, so we’re playing the Luddite card. Also, trains used to travel slower than horse-drawn carriages then, now they carry heavy loads.
Says there was an accident with high-speed rail and people were “disapproving” but now they trust high-speed rail. We used to have hunger, now we have a surplus of supplies.
5G is just a tool, a supporting platform, like textile machines and high-speed rail. People should trust new things.
Distrust in 5G is caused by a lack of knowledge, etc etc.
Ren says Huawei should license 5G only to one company in the west, exclusively, probably in the US, so it has the scale and can compete with Huawei. That’s only on Earth, not the Moon or Mars. But it should be a level playing field on Earth. [I think this is a new statement?]
[This is different from how patents have usually been handled under ITU rules for 4G, 3G, and all the other things beforehand. Curious.]
Cochrane is speaking out against the fear of 5G and cancer etc.
Back to Ren, this 5G package to a single US company would include hardware, software, plans, production techniques, the whole thing. If they need it, they can also license the design of the chipsets.
Ren seems confident that Huawei would maintain the lead over this hypothetical competitor because they could roll the license fees back into R&D.
Kaplan says that in English “trust” is a fraught word. Is it all about trust? It’s like love. You can have a marriage without love. It helps, but what a successful marriage needs is respect.
Ren is clarifying statements that he’s looking at signing a “no back doors” agreement with some European [companies? nations?]. Says he’s willing to work with telco vendors around the world and sign “no back doors” contracts.
Kaplan says that one standard in China, one in the US, can be dealt with, with things like dual-chip devices, but it isn’t optimal.
Cochrane says the politicians don’t understand the technology or the globalisation that happening, otherwise they wouldn’t be making such “stupid” decisions.
Railway gauges!
Ren is onto the Harmony operating system now. Says it’s designed for IoT with low latency.
Kaplan is kicking off about standards and how “5G” is about a whole lot of things.
Moderator is insistent with her question, who would win in a dual tech world, US or China? Cochrane butts in ahead of Ren it’ll be China and its customers because population.
Ren says the possibility of such a dual world is “very slim” because we all get to see the science and the products.
Something about Mount Everest.
Cochrane says there isn’t a single time in history where isolationism has worked.
Kaplan says AI is (currently) just mining big data. US data might not work in China, and vice versa, because the environments are different.
Hah! Panel’s mention of fifth-generation computing as a precursor to big-data exceptionalism echoes my “Why big data evangelists need to be reprogrammed”. zdnet.com/article/why-bi…
Moderator asserts that locking down data with privacy laws will mean the west will lag behind [!] and then Cochrane says GDPR is not fit for purpose. [Are these guys all bug-data maximalists?]
Ren has used the phrase “with regional characteristics” with respect to AI, but also says that the datasets will not be the issue.
Ren is doing the whole “young people are happy to post their photos online” argument about privacy not being such a concern any more.
Ren in summary: Surveillance reduces crime and society is improved, and there are protocols for data to be used, so people are protected. [Also mentions gun crimes in US shopping malls. Ouch.]
[There’s an interesting discussion here on privacy laws and regional variations. I might re-listen to this section tomorrow.]
Further Ren: Atomic bombs bad, nuclear energy (potentially) good. Whether new technologies are bad, or of benefit to mankind, can only be determined through practice.
I think Ren just said that we* don’t research the social impact of technology, we just develop the technology, and society and laws and such decide its use. [Terrible paraphrase, check the official translation.]
* Not sure if “we” was Huawei or humanity in this context.
* Not sure if “we” was Huawei or humanity in this context.
[I’m also not sure whether he was merely describing current practice, or whether he was criticising it. Definitely one to check again.]
Oops I’ve kinda zoned out there for a bit.
Cochrane is giving quantum competing such an enormous rap right now. “With 1000 qubits we can become gods, effectively.” JFC I want some of what he’s on.
Done. And done.
