All large militaries will want to ensure that they have an independent supply chain for key technologies. None really care how that is achieved - through independent IP development or leveraging existing IP.
The South Africans did this during the apartheid era, as did the Russians and Chinese.
If these become good enough to commercialise that is a secondary matter.
It will be interesting to see if these eventually find their way into the embedded supply chain.
The later is how I took it PJ - that the knockoff of the Chinese Alpha was originally for their military use. I don't think Dec was ever actively contracted or otherwise serving the needs of the red army
(I'll ask my friend someday who was an Alpha yield engineer though ;-)
But is it really internal ORIGINATED IP, or is it just a impressive bootleg from an abandoned Alpha chip architecture plans?
Not to belittle their accomplishments, but can this effort be qualified as home-brew IC development?
The age of the original design upon which this processor is based is rather irrelevant as to its degree of internal architectural advancement. E.g. Intel Sandy Bridge and AMD Bulldozer are "based on" x86 ISA introduced in 1978. Attaining 1 petaflops performance with only 65nm process 1MW power is quite significant. The supercomputer race got a lot more interesting with this announcement!
I agree this is an impressive achievement, but let's not get carried away. A processor core based on or similar to the DEC Alpha 21164 -- which was introduced in 1995 -- hardly qualifies as "the latest in technology." Neither does 65 nm CMOS.
What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.