411–420 of 438 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
South China Sea
The border conflict ongoing for their entire existence? Technology has advanced some of the methods, but not drastically different.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also worth pointing out that Taiwan is so densely populated and small that it would be hard to invade Taiwan without simultaneously destroying everything of value. It's a fools' errand.
It does not require an invasion unfortunately. It only requires a naval blockade, which would effectively starve the island until they concede to defeat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Was 7nm a requirement? I didn’t gather that from the thread. Small run 22nm is certainly available. These are fabricated in the US, albeit at an Intel site. https://www.mosis.com/pages/intel_sponsored_fab
I mean the article is about them building a 5nm fab in Arizona, so i assume they do need it if they want to build fast AI chips that compete with China should it invade Taiwan.
What process node Google uses for TPU, one possibility for an AI chip, is not in the public domain since v1 but it’s very unlikely this chip is on the bleeding edge. Cost/benefit is likely not there for this use case. But only Google knows for sure since they run the cloud and get to define “benefit”.
https://www.nextplatform.com/2018/05/10/tearing-apart-google...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you and your parent agree with each other.
No, we disagree. I think this fab manufactures almost exclusively to defense even if it manufactures COTS parts. Building small volume fab for 2/3 of the cost of new GIGAFAB makes no sense for commercial purposes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The border conflict ongoing for their entire existence? Technology has advanced some of the methods, but not drastically different.
Building artificial islands in disputed territory and then building non-civilian buildings is drastically different.
edit may have misread your post, unsure if you're comparing or detailing two steps. China has invaded uninhabited islands and built buildings to stake claims for some time. Building the uninhabited island isn't some drastic change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah but isn't it the definition of a slippery slope?
Not really. Taiwan really is an internal Chinese issue and Crimea is essentially 'repairing' the issue of a Russian territory (with majority Russian population) that was split from Russia relatively recently. Everyone knows that and thus no-one is going to start a direct war over these territories. But even if you were contemplating a direct war the issue would be that direct wars against Russia or China are not real…
The question is, do we want to end this idea of "taking back" things that were "ours" in the past? What even is "ours" and when do you get to call the cutoff time? What is it, 1800 AD, 1200 AD, or 2000 BC?
China itself was made up of smaller civilizations many ages ago... so if I'm a present day decendant of one of them, do I get to claim that part of China as my own?
Also, when did the CCP ever control Taiwan? Never. So how can they take it back?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, we disagree. I think this fab manufactures almost exclusively to defense even if it manufactures COTS parts. Building small volume fab for 2/3 of the cost of new GIGAFAB makes no sense for commercial purposes.
The cost of the building is minor compared to the cost of the wafer equipment. It is not uncommon to build a Fab but only fill it with a fraction of the equipment capacity. Fabs can be scaled up when demand increases.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean the article is about them building a 5nm fab in Arizona, so i assume they do need it if they want to build fast AI chips that compete with China should it invade Taiwan.
What’s a fast AI chip? :) What process node Google uses for TPU, one possibility for an AI chip, is not in the public domain since v1 but it’s very unlikely this chip is on the bleeding edge. Cost/benefit is likely not there for this use case. But only Google knows for sure since they run the cloud and get to define “benefit”. https://www.nextplatform.com/2018/05/10/tearing-apart-google...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really. Taiwan really is an internal Chinese issue and Crimea is essentially 'repairing' the issue of a Russian territory (with majority Russian population) that was split from Russia relatively recently. Everyone knows that and thus no-one is going to start a direct war over these territories. But even if you were contemplating a direct war the issue would be that direct wars against Russia or China are not real…
How is Taiwan an internal Chinese issue? There was a civil war that ended in a deadlock. Both societies grew and actually interacted fairly peacefully for 70 years. The people in Taiwan view themselves overwhelmingly as Taiwanese. Using your logic applied to Crimea, should they not obviously be Taiwan then? The question is, do we want to end this idea of "taking back" things that were "ours" in the past? What even is…
Again, this has been played to annoy the PRC, standard divide-and-conquer tactic, but the reality remains that no country is going to go to war against China over this, or in general.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am sure China likes this. If TSCM is scared of a PRC takeover and trying to move investment out of the country, Well China's messaging is working. Maybe before Taiwan was sufficiently richer per capita that taking it over had something to do with its wealth, but now it's a almost exclusively a matter of pride and nationalism. If they get control of a deindustrialized husk, they can say "Look at all the US boot-lick…
The annexation of Taiwan is about access to the pacific ocean, or to be precise, about minimizing the risk of a blockade and about strategic depth on their eastern border. The communist party is literally playing grand strategy and from their perspective, they are surrounded by enemies. This is not nationalist pride, it is nationalist paranoia.