https://hackaday.com/2020/10/22/stm32-clones-the-good-the-ba...
https://hackaday.com/2020/10/22/stm32-clones-the-good-the-ba...
Having an openly implementable ISA is just one less thing to worry about
L1$ is always starved, thus it is always good to fit more code in it.
In an embedded context, a lot of that doesn't matter either way - your dumb coffee maker doesn't have a lot of opportunity to spy on you anyway. Smart devices are a very different story. However, Chinese embedded chips are often very cheap for the capabilities.
Given all of that, China seems like a great option if they produce RISC-V processors.
The number of Windows-exclusive programs are rapidly dwindling. In a few years, it may not be such a big deal to simply avoid that with Linux (or FreeBSD).
State sponsored extortion is still a thing.
Outside the hobbyist space people do seem to be shunning Chinese SoCs AFAICT. Maybe no name TV boxes have rockchips, but other than that not much.
https://www.arm.com/company/news/2022/04/arm-china-majority-...
The two desires are definitely at odds with each other. Like the RISC-V foundation moved to Switzerland to avoid the possibility in 2019. So the foundation is definitely trying to keep things more open.
At the end of the day it's just ISA and not a micro-architecture design or set of cell libraries and fab processes. So it's not a complete bypass of all possible sanctions. ARM for instance does provide designs and not just an ISA.
The main problem is that a chip made in a sanctioned country with RISC-V can still would have value outside the sanctioned entity unlike some organically developed or a chip made without legally licensing some-other ISA. So sanctioned entity could easily make the chips and then make them look like they are made elsewhere or by someone else and still have something to sell the wider world.