Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel chief Pat Gelsinger: Too many chips made in Asia

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 233 posts

Re: Intel chief Pat Gelsinger: Too many chips made in Asia

#101

Post by riversflow »

sigstoat wrote: post #68
TeeMassive wrote: post #44

This have been bothering me for a while. What would happen if for any reasons the biggest fabs are destroyed? It would take years to get more than half of a century of accumulated knowledge just from patents, and that's not even counting industrial secrets and all the economical machine needed to support such an industry. There have been projects focused on securing Humanity's technological knowledge in case of a wor…

> What would happen if for any reasons the biggest fabs are destroyed? it "just" takes some years and heaping piles of money to replace them. though probably more if you're trying to replace them all at once, as there aren't a lot of folks who make the equipment to rebuild the fabs. > It would take years to get more than half of a century of accumulated knowledge just from patents, and that's not even counting indust…

World peace will only go so far if a huge solar storm hits us and we are not adequately prepared.

Re: Intel chief Pat Gelsinger: Too many chips made in Asia

#102

Post by kmonsen »

yongjik wrote: post #88

> "Having 80% of all supply in Asia simply isn't a palatable manner for the world to have its view of the most critical technology," Mr Gelsinger said. Eh, the whole set of FAANG plus Intel itself is based on American West Coast, and this guy's take is that so many chips being made in East Asia is not "palatable" for the world? There's nothing wrong with saying "That's a large pie they're eating and we want a bigger…

That's not really a counterpoint though. It is kind of bad for the world that FAANG++ and for example most of the movie industry is centered in US (west coast)?

Also with tensions rising there it is not good if 80% of the chips are being made in a war zone. And bad for everyone but China if China takes control of Taiwan.

I don't think any of these are value statements?

Re: Intel chief Pat Gelsinger: Too many chips made in Asia

#103

Post by lumost »

InitialLastName wrote: post #65
tibbydudeza wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes the govt needs to intervene and provide resources when you want to get things done properly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_Press_Program

Yes, but some of the ROI of that intervention should be able to be captured by the US (as a representative of the people) in the form of equity or secured loans. Insisting on stimulus of private industry without equity or interest is a great way to socialize losses and privatize gains, as they say.

a great way to do this is to create a joint venture which the government owns but the private company operates/develops.

The government can later sell the stake to a private party to balance out the books.

Re: Intel chief Pat Gelsinger: Too many chips made in Asia

#104

Post by jonhohle »

vkou wrote: post #28
Waterluvian wrote: post #15

America should use the "we need to spend spend spend to revitalize the economy" to domesticate more industry.

As a taxpayer, I'm not particularly keen in seeing my money subsidize privately owned firms. Spend-spend-spend should either be done through secured loans, or by the government receiving equity.

Or… products.

Occasionally I think about the tradeoff between municipal purchases that support the community (with expanding degrees of community) or which are the best for the task. Prior to EVs, for example, should parking enforcement be performed in a Prius to maximize long term TCO or should it use a GM/Ford/Dodge and keep money in the US.

At least in the US we've found that major global competitors control relatively critical roles in production of goods in the medical space. Who is responsible for quantifying the risk of being cut off from components?

Re: Intel chief Pat Gelsinger: Too many chips made in Asia

#105

Post by tootie »

Waterluvian wrote: post #15

America should use the "we need to spend spend spend to revitalize the economy" to domesticate more industry.

Import substitution is usually a loser policy for developing nations. Also subsidies can frequently run afoul of trade agreements because they're basically the same as a tariff in terms of disadvantaging exporters.

National security is not really a valid concern but could maybe be used to justify divestment from China. But that just means diversification of import partners. We could be building fabs in Mexico like we do with the auto industry. Or, as he's actually suggesting, europe.

Re: Intel chief Pat Gelsinger: Too many chips made in Asia

#106

Post by baybal2 »

rowanG077 wrote: post #86
baybal2 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, not to forget the 157i debacle. Intel first started cheaping out as far back as 2003-2005. 157i could've been almost as good as EUV, at much lower cost, but Intel fully consciously decided to forego it because "nobody can beat us on 193i yet," and of conern that 157i consortium will give superior litho to potential competitors.

What is 157i? Googling with various helper terms doesn't turn anything up.

157nm lithography process using fluorine excimer laser light source.

Re: Intel chief Pat Gelsinger: Too many chips made in Asia

#107

Post by astrange »

tibbydudeza wrote: post #63
NobodyNada wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that? As the article explains, they have just announced their plans to directly compete against TSMC/Samsung as a manufacturer of chips for other companies (rather than just manufacturing their own designs). To me, this suggests Gelsinger is confident in the company’s ability to get their 7nm-and-beyond processes back on track and become competitive once again.

Rocket Lake is still on 14nm because of issues with their 10nm process and the new guy a week in is talking smack about them shipping 7nm product and compete against the likes of TMSC/Samsung ???.

They don't have to do 10 and 7 on the way to 5, right? I assume they can just skip some of the work, especially if the newer process is totally different anyway.

Re: Intel chief Pat Gelsinger: Too many chips made in Asia

#108

Post by rakah »

Nokinside wrote: post #54

As he says here, the decision not to take risk and jump to EUV with TSMC and Samsung was the mistake that started this downfall and it snowballed. The decision happened somewhere in the pathfinding stage into 10nm. When Gerald Marcyk was running Intel components research back in the 2001 Intel was already considering using EUV lithography for the 45nm technology node that would come out 2007. It turned out that the s…

EUV is hard, but isn't part of the reason why only ASML can make those machines because of the CRADA they have with DOE as a member of the EUV LLC? I believe this agreement was why ASML wasn't allowed to sell their solution to China recently. I bet Intel will have no trouble buying EUV to bring in-house - especially if that serves US strategic interests.

Re: Intel chief Pat Gelsinger: Too many chips made in Asia

#110

Post by m463 »

ngngngng wrote: post #10

I'm stoked. I've been a bit of an Intel hater lately but more competition is good for everyone. Though I'm guessing other people are excited about these directions as well because their stock is pretty high at the moment.

There have traditionally been cycles and we all win.

I remember years back when AMD became competitive with intel and then intel turned around and came out with fast cpus, and we had all kinds of choices.

I think the PC is a really good thing we don't want to lose it. When we have competition it is better for customers with more choices, and employees who actually have to compete, and there are standard interfaces new companies can develop for.

Honestly, what I worry about is Apple and their spiral into themselves and their closed ecosystem.

I think Apple was at their best when the adopted the PC architecture and interoperability made everything better.

Post reply on HN