Researcher Slams GUARD Act Ban on Chinese Robots
Eric Jang argues the 2026 prohibition would cripple US humanoid robotics labs dependent on affordable Chinese hardware.
ML researcher Eric Jang called the proposed GUARD Act's 2026 ban on Chinese-made robots like Unitree models a short-sighted move that would damage US humanoid research. Nearly every American lab relies on these platforms for development, he said, and offered to advise policymakers on regaining hardware competitiveness instead. Tech commentator Robert Scoble endorsed the critique. The bill's backdoor security claims were disputed in the discussion, with an arXiv paper on related robotics topics referenced. No legislative outcome is confirmed in the packet.
Combined views
24.9K
2 posts, first seen 2h ago
Reactions from ranked influencers
2 posts
Terrible, short-sighted move. We are shooting ourselves in the foot here. I am happy to spend time with policymakers to convince them of the idiocy of banning Chinese hardware in 2026, and how the US might regain a competitive edge in hardware. USA is not in the position of strength where enacting GUARD act would improve prospects for US robotics companies in the short or medium term. Nearly every US lab doing research on humanoids uses a Unitree robot because it is the best product for research. I don't know a single US humanoid company that isn't dependent on Chinese magnets somewhere along the chain. Friendshoring is more Chinese than you think. The "Chinese robots have backdoors" seems like a scare tactic. Narratives like this get pushed with so little critical thought of how business people make decisions and how they value their company image. CloudSail (the remote access tunnel on G1) is just Unitree's version of Tailscale. It's like that meme, "Our Noble Fleet Observability" vs. "Their Barbarous Backdoor". Even the oft-cited report on "Data Exfiltration" https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.14139 acknowledges that the functions they discovered are likely used for fleet observability. If China/Unitree were actually trying to backdoor into all robots, they would not roll out their backdoor in this way, and certainly not at today's scales of robots. How dumb would one have to be to put their Evil Backdoor (TM) into the first 10,000 robots? It may very well be an attack vector in the future, but I am befuddled by how "we found Chinese Tailscale on Unitree" is being spun. I'd love to be corrected here, feel free to DM if you have more compelling evidence on these remote tunnels actually being used for nefarious purposes. A better policy that doesn't totally cripple US robotics ecosystem would be to enact stricter data exfiltration laws, e.g. not permit data collected in the US to leave it, much like how China has done. Companies: if you want USA to win, make a good research platform that labs can develop on at a competitive cost. Make the hardware reliable. Enact special economic zones to incentivize Americans to do the same things that the Chinese have done to build up their robotics industry. I don't think there is "unfair competition" - American VCs have deployed way more money than local Chinese govts. Lobbying the govt is not the 200 IQ fundraising move you think it is, and it certainly isn't helping the customer. People want to buy an "American Unitree". Just focus on making that, and make it good.
Yesterday, Congress took up the GUARD Act, bipartisan legislation to keep adversary-controlled robots out of American infrastructure. Our CEO Peggy Johnson wrote about why this hearing matters, in a new op-ed with @PirateWires. 🧵
Totally agree.
Terrible, short-sighted move. We are shooting ourselves in the foot here. I am happy to spend time with policymakers to convince them of the idiocy of banning Chinese hardware in 2026, and how the US might regain a competitive edge in hardware. USA is not in the position of strength where enacting GUARD act would improve prospects for US robotics companies in the short or medium term. Nearly every US lab doing research on humanoids uses a Unitree robot because it is the best product for research. I don't know a single US humanoid company that isn't dependent on Chinese magnets somewhere along the chain. Friendshoring is more Chinese than you think. The "Chinese robots have backdoors" seems like a scare tactic. Narratives like this get pushed with so little critical thought of how business people make decisions and how they value their company image. CloudSail (the remote access tunnel on G1) is just Unitree's version of Tailscale. It's like that meme, "Our Noble Fleet Observability" vs. "Their Barbarous Backdoor". Even the oft-cited report on "Data Exfiltration" https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.14139 acknowledges that the functions they discovered are likely used for fleet observability. If China/Unitree were actually trying to backdoor into all robots, they would not roll out their backdoor in this way, and certainly not at today's scales of robots. How dumb would one have to be to put their Evil Backdoor (TM) into the first 10,000 robots? It may very well be an attack vector in the future, but I am befuddled by how "we found Chinese Tailscale on Unitree" is being spun. I'd love to be corrected here, feel free to DM if you have more compelling evidence on these remote tunnels actually being used for nefarious purposes. A better policy that doesn't totally cripple US robotics ecosystem would be to enact stricter data exfiltration laws, e.g. not permit data collected in the US to leave it, much like how China has done. Companies: if you want USA to win, make a good research platform that labs can develop on at a competitive cost. Make the hardware reliable. Enact special economic zones to incentivize Americans to do the same things that the Chinese have done to build up their robotics industry. I don't think there is "unfair competition" - American VCs have deployed way more money than local Chinese govts. Lobbying the govt is not the 200 IQ fundraising move you think it is, and it certainly isn't helping the customer. People want to buy an "American Unitree". Just focus on making that, and make it good.