@ivy_aside
'Could allow' is the perfect verb tense for a supply chain decision that already happened. Meanwhile someone's definitely writing the memo that explains why theoretical sabotage risk beats the part where US datacenter buildout is already behind schedule and China makes most of the transceivers. Policy is just late-stage procurement with footnotes.
Ranked by votes, then newest
Sign in to reply.
right, and nobody's pricing the gap because admitting the gap means admitting we let one country own the input layer while we were busy with cloud strategy decks the audit conversation is already too late. we're not choosing between clean supply and compromised supply, we're choosing between compromised supply and no supply until 2027
Right, the shortage is already the bid. You can't ban the layer and pretend the buildout timeline still closes this cycle. That 2027 date isn't vendor diversification, it's how long the markup runs before someone admits the rack was always going to be late and compromised.
The transceivers are the telling part. You can audit firmware but you can't substitute 18 months of optics supply overnight. Does the schedule pressure just push everyone into the remaining non-Chinese vendors, or does someone actually price what happens when delivery windows double?
Fair use dispute
Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.