Tech
China Chips Away At Micron: The Impacts of The Tech Giant Ban

The Chinese government has ordered owners of crucial national infrastructure to stop purchasing products from US chipmaker Micron Technology.
The Cyberspace Administration of China stated in a statement on its website that its products entail “serious network security risks” that endanger China’s information infrastructure. This will then have an impact on national security.
This ban is seen as a move as tensions between China and America begin to increase. Therefore, this ban will have a huge impact on the tech industry, as new competitors could take over Micron.
In this article, we will discuss the impact of China banning the tech giant, Micron.
What Is Micron Technology?
Micron technology has been around for over 40 years. This company has been an integral part of the advancements in technology. In particular, this establishment is known for providing powerful storage and memory systems, which are used in a wide variety of products.
This company supplies goods all over the world making it one of the biggest chip makers found in the world. It is known that micron technology accounted for almost 23% of the whole world DRAM market in 2022.
Therefore, by China banning the sale of these goods, this will have a big impact on the company.
Where Will China Turn To Next?
China has partially banned sales of micron products, which means the country will need to look elsewhere. Instead of micron technology, China may look towards businesses in South Korea. This could include SK Hynix and Samsung Electronics.
Both companies could stand to gain a lot from this simple ban. How much they can benefit will vary depending on the details surrounding any restrictions on micron products.
Impact From The Ban
Recently, there have been growing tensions between China and America, thus this ban has sent shock waves around the world. The impacts of this ban will hit the tech company hard, and they will have to find ways to bounce back.
The following are the main impacts this ban is having.
Technology Independence
This ban might be a sign of China attempting to achieve technological autonomy. Supporting domestic chip producers like International Corp (SMIC), Semiconductor Manufacturing, and Tsinghua Unigroup.
If they do achieve this, then they wouldn’t have to rely on any other countries when it comes to their technology.
Volatility Within The Chip Market
The restriction might cause market volatility for chips worldwide. For a long time, Micron was known as the leading business for memory chips. Therefore, this restriction could lead to price fluctuations. Also, this could result in supply issues as well.
This possible volatility might affect SMEs in the supply chain down the road as well, especially for major technology companies that depend on Micron’s goods.
More Competition
This development might increase competition in the market since other chip makers see an opening to fill Micron’s void in China’s expanding technological market.
For a long time Julia Vorontsova, the CEO of Innovation Park has highlighted the“ importance of maintaining a balanced, competitive, and collaborative global tech ecosystem.” Thus, this competition may not be a bad thing for other companies as the competition could promote innovation.
Future Of Micron
Innovation Park has been closely watching the effects of this ban. While it may provide the “opportunity to advance new alliances and partnerships,” as Vorontsova adds. It does have a damaging effect on Micron right now.
While the company itself hasn’t commented on how the ban will alter the company. However, it is known that around 11% of Micron’s revenue came from mainland China in 2022. Although this number could be increased to 16% if you also include sales from Hong Kong.
Hence, almost a quarter of Micron’s revenue used to come from China. Even though the ban currently only impacts major Chinese institutions like banks and telecom networks. It may harm Micron’s reputation there and delay demand from a wider range of consumers.
As a result, the future of Micron is looking a bit unknown at the moment. Therefore, unless they find a way to rectify this ban and form new partnerships, this company may not be a leading chip manufacturer for much longer.
Conclusion
The ban from China has had a massive impact on Micron, as it opens the doors for other competitors to take over. This ban sees a decrease in demand and sales, which affects the growth of the company overall.
We hope this article has made clear the impact this ban has on Micron.
SEE ALSO: Tor Browser Download: Your Gateway To Online Privacy

Tech
US: A Judge Mandates that Google Allow Competing App Stores to Access Android

(VOR News) – The ruling is that Google, the greatest technology firm in the world, is required to make its Android smartphone operating system available to merchants that supply applications that are in direct rivalry with Google’s. This decision was reached by a judge in the United States of America.
The Android Play store, which is owned and operated by Google, was found to be an example of an illegal monopoly arrangement by a jury in the state of California on Monday. The finding was reached by a jury. Monday is the day that this decision was come to.
An earlier federal judge ruled Google’s search engine illegal.
This finding, which came after that decision, has forced the company to suffer yet another setback. As a result of the corporation having already encountered its initial obstacle, this decision has been established. This particular decision was made by the judge during the month of August, when the month was in progress.
In light of the fact that the decision was made, what exactly does it mean that the choice was accepted?
In accordance with the verdict, Google is obligated to make it possible for users to download Android app stores that are offered by third-party competitors. For a period of three years, the corporation is prohibited from imposing restrictions on the usage of payment mechanisms that are integrated into the application.
In addition, it is important to keep in mind that Google does not possess the right to impose restrictions on the utilization of ways to make payments online.
Additionally, the verdict makes it unlawful for Google to give money to manufacturers of smartphones in order to preinstall its app store. Smartphone manufacturers are prohibited from doing so.
Furthermore, it prevents Google from the possibility of sharing the revenue that is generated by the Play store with other companies that are in the industry of delivering mobile applications.
In addition to this, the court has mandated the establishment of a technical committee that will be made up of three different people chosen at random.
The committee will be responsible for monitoring the implementation of the reforms and finding solutions to any disagreements that may occur as a consequence of the implementation of the reforms while they are being implemented. This task will fall under the committee’s purview so that it may fulfill its duties.
However, certain components were allowed to be put into action until July 1st, despite the fact that the judge’s statement suggested that the ruling would take effect on November 1st. The statement was the basis for the ruling, which ultimately became effective.
Particularly, I wanted to know what Google’s reaction would be.
There is a fact that Google does not adhere to this directive, which has been brought to their attention. This document argued that the alterations that the judge had ordered to be made would “cause a range of unintended consequences that will harm American consumers, developers, and device makers.”
The judge had ordered the modifications to be implemented. The alterations were to be carried out as indicated by the judge’s ruling. The judge made it clear that he expected these revisions to be carried out in accordance with his guidance.
The company’s regulatory affairs vice president, Lee-Anne Mulholland, provided the following statement: “We look forward to continuing to make our case on appeal, and we will continue to advocate for what is best for developers, device manufacturers, and the billions of Android users around the world.”
On average, over seventy percent of the total market for smartphones and other mobile devices is comprised of mobile devices that are powered by the Android operating system. Both smartphones and other small mobile devices are included in this category.
In the event that the Play app store continues to be shown on the home page and that other Google applications are pre-installed prior to the installation of the Android application, smartphone manufacturers are entitled to install the Android application at no cost at their discretion.
Additionally, the Android application can be installed on devices that are manufactured for smartphones.
SOURCE: DWN
SEE ALSO:
Over The Planned “Link Tax” Bill, Google Threatens to Remove NZ News Links.
Tech
WhatsApp Now Features a “Mention” Tool for Status Updates and Stories.

(VOR News) – Those who use WhatsApp now have the ability to mention other people in their stories or status updates as a consequence of a feature that was only recently enabled on the platform.
Previous to this point, this capability was not available. It wasn’t until quite recently that this capability became available to the public.
According to the information that was provided by the company, users now have the opportunity to tag close friends in their stories, and the person who is mentioned will have the option to go back and re-share an earlier version of that story. This information was provided by the company. The corporation was kind enough to reveal this information to us.
Because of a new feature that has been added to the WhatsApp app, users now have the opportunity to like individual stories and status updates.
This capability was previously unavailable to WhatsApp users.
A significant amount of progress has been made in this context. Alternative readers now have the chance to “like” a work, which is comparable to liking a post on Facebook. This feature was introduced in recent years. When compared to the past, this is a tremendous shift.
At one point in time, viewers were only permitted to observe the total number of views that a particular story had gotten. These restrictions were eliminated in later versions of the software.
Additionally, it is essential that the likes and reactions to a story be kept anonymous during the entire process. One of the factors that contributes to the general mystery that surrounds this characteristic is the fact that this is one of the elements.
The person who brought it to the attention of others is the only person who will be able to judge who enjoyed it and who did not care about it. These individuals will be able to make this determination.
A notification will be issued to the individual who was referenced earlier in the sentence and who was named in the story or status update that was discussed. A notification of this nature will be sent to the individual via WhatsApp.
This message will be sent to the user in question whenever that person makes a reference to another person while they are in the process of elaborating on a narrative or updating their status. You will receive a notification alerting you that you have been tagged in the narrative.
This notification will be delivered to the person who receives this message. In addition, students will be provided with the opportunity to re-share the tale for themselves.
It is important to note that if the names of individuals who have been referenced in a narrative or a status update are included in any of these, then the names of those individuals will not be accessible to any third party through any of these. In light of the fact that the identities of those individuals will be concealed from public disclosure, this is the condition that will be required.
While WhatsApp recently made the announcement that it will be incorporating this functionality, it is highly likely that not all users will have access to it at the same time.
This is despite the fact that WhatsApp recently made this announcement.
Despite the fact that WhatsApp has only recently made a public announcement that it will move forward with the deployment, this is the situation that has presented itself.
As soon as a short period of time has elapsed, access will be made available to each and every person on the entire world.
Additionally, WhatsApp has hinted that new functionalities might be introduced to the status and updates tab in the future months.
The purpose of these capabilities is to provide users with assistance in maintaining healthy connections with the individuals who play a vital role in their living experiences. This is done in order to give users with support in maintaining close relationships with the folks who are the subject of the inquiry.
It is with the purpose of supporting users in successfully keeping close ties with the individuals in question that this step is taken.
SOURCE: DN
SEE ALSO:
Over The Planned “Link Tax” Bill, Google Threatens to Remove NZ News Links.
Accenture and NVIDIA Collaborate to Enhance AI Implementation.
Tech
Over The Planned “Link Tax” Bill, Google Threatens to Remove NZ News Links.

(VOR News) – Google has sent a strong message to the New Zealand government, threatening to stop boosting local news content should the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill become law.
The law, put up by the Labour government and backed by the coalition in power at the moment, mandates that digital companies such as Google pay back news organizations for links to their material.
News publishers, on the other hand, charge the tech giant with “corporate bullying.”
Google says this measure may have unanticipated effects.
Google New Zealand’s country director, Caroline Rainsford, voiced her worries that the law, which is being referred to as a “link tax,” is not doing enough to support the media industry in New Zealand right now.
She underlined that Google would have to make major adjustments if the previously mentioned law were to pass, including cutting off links to news articles from its Search, News, and Discover platforms and cutting off financial ties with regional publications.
According to Rainsford, similar legislation has been proposed and approved in other nations including Australia and Canada, but it has not been proven to be effective there and breaches the principles of the open web.
She drew attention to the fact that smaller media outlets will be most negatively impacted, which will limit their capacity to reach prospective audiences.
Google says its alternative options will protect smaller, local media from negative effects.
Conversely, it conveys apprehension regarding the possible fiscal obligations and vagueness of the legislation, which it feels generates an intolerable level of ambiguity for enterprises functioning within New Zealand.
The New Zealand News Publishers Association (NPA) has reacted to Google’s warnings by alleging that the internet behemoth is using coercive tactics.
They specifically contend that the need for regulation stems from the market distortion that Google and other tech giants have created, which has fueled their expansion into some of the most significant corporations in global history.
The legislation aims to create a more equal framework that media businesses can use to negotiate commercial relationships with technological platforms that profit from their content.
New Zealand Media Editors CEO Michael Boggs stated that he was in favor of the bill, citing the fact that Google now makes a substantial profit from material created by regional publications.
He also emphasized that the use of artificial intelligence by Google—which frequently makes references to news articles without giving credit to the original sources—highlights the significance of enacting legislation.
Paul Goldsmith, the Minister of Media and Communications, has stated that the government is now evaluating various viewpoints and is still in the consultation phase.
He stated that the government and Google have been having continuous talks and will keep up these ongoing discussions.
However, not all political parties accept the validity of the Act.
The ACT Party’s leader, David Seymour, has voiced his displeasure of the proposal, saying that Google is a game the government is “playing chicken” with. He threatened the smaller media companies, saying that they would suffer from worse search engine rankings if the internet giant followed through on its promises.
Seymour contended that it is not the government’s responsibility to shield companies from shifts in the market brought about by consumer preferences.
The things that have happened in other nations are similar to what has happened in New Zealand.
Google has agreements with a number of Australian media firms that are in compliance with its News Media Bargaining Code. These agreements contain provisions that permit an annual cancellation of these agreements.
Due to the government’s decision to exempt Google from the Online News Act, the company has committed to supporting news dissemination by contributing annually to the Canadian journalistic community.
The New Zealand measure is consistent with global approaches aimed at regulating the relationships that exist between technology corporations and media organizations.
It’s hard to say what will happen with the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill as the discussion goes on. Google and the New Zealand media landscape are preparing for what might be a protracted legal battle.
SOURCE: TET
SEE ALSO:
Accenture and NVIDIA Collaborate to Enhance AI Implementation.
-
News4 years ago
Let’s Know About Ultra High Net Worth Individual
-
Entertainment2 years ago
Mabelle Prior: The Voice of Hope, Resilience, and Diversity Inspiring Generations
-
News11 years ago
Enviromental Groups Tell Mekong Leaders Lao Dam Evaluation Process Flawed
-
Health4 years ago
How Much Ivermectin Should You Take?
-
Tech2 years ago
Top Forex Brokers of 2023: Reviews and Analysis for Successful Trading
-
Lifestyles3 years ago
Aries Soulmate Signs
-
Entertainment3 years ago
What Should I Do If Disney Plus Keeps Logging Me Out of TV?
-
Health3 years ago
Can I Buy Ivermectin Without A Prescription in the USA?