“A lot of people describe that as, oh, it's a workaround of the export controls. It's the loophole of the export controls. It's legal. The U.S. has the ability to make it illegal, and it's legal in the vast majority of cases. For NVIDIA, that's a good thing, because NVIDIA chips are filling all these data centers in Southeast Asia that in many cases wouldn't exist if not for the off-take demand from Chinese companies.”

That's a good question. NVIDIA's primary arguments on export controls are about the market share, the global market share of AI infrastructure that is American. They sort of view Huawei, their primary competitor in China, as this sort of existential threat to U.S. dominance. And their arguments are basically that NVIDIA's interests are U.S. interests. And so, you know, when you talk about the question of remote access, you know, companies completely legally renting the use of NVIDIA hardware that Chinese companies can't purchase themselves to those Chinese companies. You know, that's a policy choice by the U.S. government. You know, a lot of people describe that as like, oh, it's a workaround of the export controls. It's the loophole of the export controls. It's legal. The U.S. has the ability to make it illegal and it's legal in the vast majority of cases. You know, for NVIDIA, that's a good thing because NVIDIA chips are filling all these data centers in Southeast Asia that in many cases wouldn't exist if not for the off-take demand from Chinese companies. It's the same reason that NVIDIA wants to be able to freely sell its chips in China to say we need to be able to compete with Huawei on its own…