Astral Codex Ten

Huawei

4 min read

Huawei

Article

Huawei is a recurring brand in the Astral Codex Ten archive, appearing 2 times across 2 issues between November 26, 2025 and February 25, 2026. The archive places it in contexts such as “the government will make Huawei sell at minimal profit margins”; “useful it is in dealing with Huawei”. It most often appears alongside Anthropic, Claude, Dean Ball.

Metadata

  • Category: Brands
  • Mention count: 2
  • Issue count: 2
  • First seen: November 26, 2025
  • Last seen: February 25, 2026

Appears In

Source Context

Recovered passages from the original issue text. When the raw archive preserved outbound links inside the source passage, they are listed directly under the quote.

Why AI Safety Won't Make America Lose The Race With China
November 26, 2025 · Original source
Future developments may threaten these people’s China hawkery even further. NVIDIA has a 90% profit margin on every advanced chip sold in the US. China is still working on developing advanced chips, but once they get them, the government will make Huawei sell at minimal profit margins, to support the national interest of winning the AI race. That means that at technological parity, US chips will cost 10x Chinese chips, and it may become a live topic of debate whether the US government should force NVIDIA to cut its own profit margins. I can only vaguely predict who will take which side of these debate, but I bet it won’t line up with current levels of China hawkery.
The Pentagon Threatens Anthropic
February 25, 2026 · Original source
the nuclear option, designating Anthropic a “supply chain risk”. This would ban US companies that use Anthropic products from doing business with the military2. Since many companies do some business with the military, this would lock Anthropic out of large parts of the corporate world and be potentially fatal to their business3. The “supply chain risk” designation has previously only been used for foreign companies like Huawei that we think are using their connections to spy on or implant malware in American infrastructure. Using it as a bargaining chip to threaten a domestic company in contract negotiations is unprecedented.
Inline links: 2, 3
Isn’t Hegseth just doing his job of trying to ensure the military has the best weapons possible? The idea of declaring a US company to be a foreign adversary, potentially destroying it, just because it’s not allowing the Pentagon to unilaterally renegotiate its contract is not normal practice. It’s insane Third World bullshit that nobody would have considered within the Overton Window a week ago. It will rightly chill investment in the US, make future companies scared to contract with the Pentagon (lest the Pentagon unilaterally renegotiate their contracts too), and give the Trump administration a no-legal-review-necessary way to destroy any American company that they dislike for any reason. Probably the mere fact that a government official has considered this option is reason to take the “supply chain risk” law off the books, no matter how useful it is in dealing with Huawei etc, since the government has proven it can’t use it responsibly. Every American company ought to be screaming bloody murder about this. If they aren’t, it’s because they’re too scared they’ll be next.