A new chip design from IBM has been compared to a ‘block of flats’ by the UK’s innovation agency, which has hailed it as a national security boost. Sources confirm that the architecture, which stacks components vertically rather than spreading them horizontally, is being fast-tracked for defence applications.
The design, known as 3D chip stacking, allows multiple layers of transistors to be packed into a single chip. One source described it as ‘a high-rise in a city of bungalows’. The Innovation Agency, a government body, has classified the development as ‘critical’ for maintaining British technological sovereignty.
Documents uncovered by this journalist reveal that the agency has already brokered a deal with IBM to provide early access to the design for UK-based manufacturers. The agreement includes provisions for ‘secure supply chains’ to prevent foreign interference.
But the move raises questions about accountability. Who approved this deal? And at what cost? The agency claims the partnership will create thousands of jobs, but critics argue it hands over control of key infrastructure to a US corporation.
A spokesperson for the agency said: ‘This is about ensuring our national security is not compromised by reliance on foreign chipmakers. IBM’s technology is a leap forward.’ However, they refused to disclose the financial terms of the agreement.
The chip design, which IBM unveiled earlier this year, promises to revolutionise computing by increasing speed and reducing energy consumption. But in the hands of the military, it could also be used for surveillance or cyber warfare.
The agency’s decision to prioritise this partnership over domestic alternatives has sparked debate. One former defence official told me: ‘We are trading one dependency for another. Are we so afraid of Chinese chips that we are willing to hand our secrets to America?’
The full implications of this deal are yet to be seen. But one thing is clear: the line between innovation and national security is blurring, and the public is being kept in the dark.
