Following the widely celebrated visit of Nvidia Corp CEO Jensen Huang (黃仁勳) and the company’s surge in market capitalization, Taiwan has plunged into a fervent wave of adulation. Government officials, industry leaders, and academics have lined up to pay tribute, and media outlets cannot seem to lavish sufficient praise in their breathless coverage. There is an uneasy question beneath this frenzy: Are we mistaking the shovel vendor for the one who knows where the gold is?
Taiwan has earned its reputation as an efficient node in the global tech supply chain. Firms such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) that have supported global growth with their foundry capacity and processing innovation are revered as “national protectors” and part of the “silicon shield.” With the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) as a new frontier in technological progress, Taiwanese seem eager to repeat their past industrial success with a new technological emblem.
On the surface, Nvidia seems to fit the bill: It is led by a charismatic, forward-looking, Mandarin-speaking executive, and it relies on TSMC to support its efforts to meet global demand for AI infrastructure. However, a closer look shows that Nvidia is not in a position to define the future of AI, it is only one step in the computation acceleration process.
The true architects of artificial general intelligence (AGI) are OpenAI, DeepMind, Anthropic and similar entities. They are the ones designing the learning architectures, curating the training data, calibrating inference mechanisms and creating ethical boundaries. While indispensable, the GPU remains a means to an end, not the conceptually innovative source.
This raises important questions. In our motivation to sustain Taiwan’s dominant role in the hardware supply chain, are we abandoning all claims of ownership for core intelligence technologies?
Are we devoting so much effort to hardware production that we are forfeiting the opportunity to shape AGI architectures, narratives and ethical frameworks?
To be clear, Huang deserves enormous respect for his strategic timing efforts and supply chain mastery, but to accept his vision as a guiding roadmap for Taiwan’s trajectory risks conflating production capacity with knowledge agency. Our continuing global influence would not be determined solely by meeting the computational requirements of technological superpowers, but by articulating a vision of what intelligence should become, and how it should serve society.
Taiwan needs to make a strong commitment to foundational research, including indigenous model design and culturally grounded computational architectures.
If we fail to make the necessary investment, we might find ourselves idolizing the shovel vendors instead of building the future that our tools are meant to create.
Huang Chung-yuan is a professor in the Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering, Department of Artificial Intelligence and the Artificial Intelligence Research Center at Chang Gung University.
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming
RSS