US Lawmaker Proposes: Built-in Tracking in NVIDIA GPUs Can Be Remotely Disabled

U.S. lawmakers have proposed a new bill that would require NVIDIA GPUs to be equipped with geolocation tracking technology and the ability to be remotely disabled. This measure aims to limit the export of these products to China. The proposal has sparked significant public debate, especially regarding its potential for infringing on users’ privacy and imposing strict legal penalties if violated. In regions with stringent data protection laws, like the European Union (EU) and its General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), such tracking technologies could directly violate local laws. This could lead to products being unable to sell in those markets or result in substantial fines for companies involved. Many internet users on social media platforms have expressed strong dissatisfaction, viewing this proposal as not just government interference software but also a threat to global consumers' privacy. The chip manufacturing industry has generally met the proposal with skepticism and even resistance. For instance, NVIDIA has firmly rejected the legislation, citing concerns about user privacy. Other major chip designers and manufacturers, such as AMD and Intel, have not publicly supported it either. The industry fears that adding these features will not only increase the design and manufacturing costs of chips but also extend development cycles. Moreover, there are concerns about potential security vulnerabilities and legal entanglements, which could undermine product competitiveness and market positioning. Similar technology control measures have had mixed results in the past. For example, NVIDIA introduced a Lite Hash Rate (LHR) technology to its GeForce cards to limit their performance in mining cryptocurrencies. However, this technology was quickly bypassed by miners and modders, rendering the intended effects minimal and raising questions about whether the current proposal’s tracking technology can truly achieve its goals. Some analysts argue that such unilateral measures might inadvertently boost other countries' efforts to develop their domestic semiconductor industries. By seeking technological autonomy, these nations could reduce their dependency on U.S.-led global supply chains, thereby diminishing America's influence in the global market. Additionally, the strict controls and potential hidden "backdoors" could drive international customers to buy non-U.S. designed and manufactured chips, even if their performance is slightly inferior, to avoid the risks associated with potential supply chain vulnerabilities and privacy breaches. As of now, the "Chip Security Act" remains in the proposal stage, yet to receive approval from the U.S. Congress. It has a long legislative process ahead before it can become a formal law. The appearance of this proposal underscores the growing tension in international relations under the current complex geopolitical landscape, where technology leadership is increasingly becoming a focal point of political rivalry. Regardless of its eventual fate, the bill highlights the deep-seated issues in the global tech industry and the challenges that U.S. companies and the tech ecosystem face. The ultimate impact of this bill on the global tech industry and consumers remains to be seen. Companies like NVIDIA, AMD, and others will likely continue to navigate the uncertain and evolving regulatory climate, balancing their interests in innovation, cost management, and market access with the increasing demands for transparency and accountability.