Although I do agree with you that it has crossed the line a bit when some of their recent social media presence started to label XRing O1 as far as 'domestically manufactured' while in fact it is not, on this forum what people care most are insights and technological progress rather than what's happening on social media. We should leave non-technical stuff outside our discussions.What Xiaomi did is not "wrong," but their "Jai Hind" tactics are becoming more and more extreme. They and their influencers are misleading the public by claiming the chip is completely "self-developed" and directly comparing Xuanjie to Kirin, while neglecting to mention that their chips are fabbed at TSMC.
This appeal to patriotism is particularly two-faced given than Xiaomi executives were publically celebrating when Huawei got sanctioned for the first time. And this is on top of Xiaomi's other high-profile incidents in the last few months: SU7 crashes, SU7 Ultra false marketing, mobilizing their influencers and internet army to defame their competitors, stealing IP from competitors, etc.
Also, there is a regional rivalry aspect to this as Beijing's tech giants (Baidu, Xiaomi, Lenovo) have failed to become world leaders in the same way their Hangzhou and Shenzhen counterparts have, hence the Beijing governments eagerness to promote Xiaomi's "3 nm breakthrough."
What interests me the most is the 10-core configuration on O1. Mediatek has concluded A520 little cores are useless which I agree but O1 added two of them to an otherwise normal 8-core setup. Even Kirin 9020 with its SMIC 7nm process has abandoned A5XX in favor of its Taishan little cores for better efficiency, so I'm not sure why O1 with TSMC 3nm and plenty of transistor budget for larger cores thinks there is a need for these.