Reply to tweet: What is the talent ratio of the three giants? When the CEOs of the three major American chip companies are not white, there is actually a whole set of changes in the power structure hidden behind them. On the surface, this is an inspirational story of several Asians and immigrants who have made a comeback; Essentially, it is the result of the United States consolidating its technological hegemony with a global "army of science and engineering". First, explain the phenomenon clearly. In the past, when we mentioned American high-tech companies, the default image was: white elites studying Ivy League, working as consultants, investment banks, venture capitalists, and engaging in politics. Engineers are more of a 'backend role'. But in the generation of AI chips, many key company leaders have become Asian, immigrant, and tech savvy men: studying engineering, conducting research and development, and working in laboratories and computer rooms, rather than mixing in the social circles of prestigious universities. This is not a politically correct CEO, but the result of decades of technological accumulation. Why is that? The first reason is that the structure of talent supply has changed. In the past two to three decades, there have been more and more Asian faces in American science and engineering graduate and doctoral programs, while local white young people have been more inclined towards fields such as finance, law, and consulting that look more glamorous and make quick money. A large proportion of those who are truly willing to study advanced mathematics, chip technology, physics, and materials are international students from China, India, East Asia, and Southeast Asia. After decades of rolling down, it is clear who is writing the underlying code, who is polishing the process, and who is building the chip architecture. The second reason is that the power channels of technology companies are different from those of traditional elites. On Wall Street and in politics, discourse power comes from "circles" - background, school, and connections; In the semiconductor and AI industries, what truly determines life and death is whether you can create the next generation of products. Chips are not a PPT business, they are an industry that will be eliminated if they cannot be made. The board of directors can be very 'white', but if you want to survive, when choosing a CEO, you have to look at a cold question: who understands this technology line the most and who can lead the team to run the product cycle out. So, those engineers who climbed up step by step from garages, laboratories, and design rooms instead approached the power center. The third reason is the globalization of the United States, which is a 'talent driven globalization'. Its logic is simple: attract the smartest and most resilient people in the world, and package them into the United States using the dollar system, technology platforms, and corporate governance. These people may have yellow skin, black hair, and accents, but the patents, chips, architectures, and algorithms they create ultimately settle under the names of American companies, are listed on NASDAQ, and are priced by US dollar capital. From this perspective, 'the CEOs of the Big Three are not white' is not about the decline of the United States, but rather about the country completing a power upgrade - from 'white rule' to a union of 'white capital+global engineers'. Here is an easily overlooked detail: The racial composition is different at the technical, management, and capital levels. In the engineering team, you will see a large number of Asian, Indian, and immigrant backgrounds; Going up to the board of directors, major shareholders, top investment banks, hedge funds, white people are still the absolute protagonists. What does this mean? This means that the power of technological discourse is spreading, but the ultimate allocation power, merger and acquisition power, and pricing power are still in the hands of veteran elites. In other words, laboratories are becoming increasingly diverse, while capital desks are still very traditional. Many people like to interpret this as a 'victory for ethnic minorities'. I don't quite agree. Rather than a certain ethnic group turning over, it is more like the collective rise of the brain in science and engineering. Would you be willing to spend ten or twenty years researching semiconductor processes, EDA tools, and lithography physics? Would you be willing to stay up late in the laboratory or computer room while others are speculating on currency and real estate? In this era, it is still unfair for skin color, but it is becoming increasingly fair for those who are crazy about science. The person who could endure slowly stood on the stage. If we look at it from a historical perspective, this is not new. In the later period of the Roman Empire, the barbarians and mercenaries in the border army were the ones who truly fought; In the late Qing Dynasty, the only ones who could truly defeat foreigners were the randomly recruited Xiang Army, Huai Army, and later the New Army. The nominal rulers and the people who actually support the operation of the empire are often not the same group. The underlying support for today's US technological hegemony is a whole generation of international students, immigrant engineers, and multinational research teams. They may be holding a US passport or just a work visa; Their resumes mention MIT and Stanford, but they grew up in Mumbai, Taipei, Shanghai, and Kuala Lumpur during their childhood. For China, there are two things worth noting about this phenomenon: Firstly, do not simply interpret 'American technology suppression' as' white Americans suppressing you '. The reality is that many talents from our land are contributing to that system. Secondly, if we cannot give enough respect, reward, and stage to the talents in science and engineering, the most outstanding group of people will still be sucked away - it's just a different flight. In the end, it will become: we curse at the American technological hegemony while continuously infusing it with blood. So, when you see the phrase 'CEOs of the three chip giants are not white', don't just take it as a joke. Behind it is: Who would still be willing to be an engineering student who suffers to the point of losing their hair; Who can provide engineers with long-term systems, sense of security, and rewards; Who is using globalization to fit other people's smart minds into their own system. The center of power is slowly shifting from "bloodline advantage" to "ability allocation". AI、 Semiconductors, energy, and computing power are just appearances. The competition at the bottom is about who can sustainably organize a group of smart, hardworking, and willing to research individuals to serve the same national narrative and interest structure. Understanding this point and then discussing 'who controls the future' is meaningful. ——Barbarians talk about AI Manzi Reception Room Xue Manzi talks about AI, Bitcoin, finance, chip, and talent in the chip industry