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

171–180 of 233 posts

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

#171

Post by GlennS »

derefr wrote: post #163
Animats wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people were hoping someone would come up with a better way to make "extreme ultraviolet" (soft x-rays, really) light than the horrible kludge used now.[1] Syncrotrons were tried. (Whatever happened to Lyncean?[2]) What's used now looks like a physics experiment, not a production process. Drops of tin are hit with lasers to emit X-rays, which are then focused with mirrors on the mask and wafer. This takes a s…

What's stopping them from using hard x-rays? Those are really easy to emit. (Genuine question; not trying to suggest that they're all idiots who just never considered using hard x-rays.)

Presumably difficult to make a material that can focus them?

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

#172

Post by Taniwha »

someperson wrote: post #136
Taniwha wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But surely that should be ASML's choice?

ASML machines include a large amount of technology from the US, and so can be controlled under US export control laws. A country is free to develop all those technologies locally and not face US export control, but that's such a difficult task that nobody has achieved it.

ASML is a Dutch company that doesn't export from the US

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

#173

Post by dd36 »

paxys wrote: post #26
Waterluvian wrote: post #15

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

I think a national security argument will highlight the importance and urgency a lot better.

They’re already doing that in the infrastructure package.

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

#174

Post by anonuser123456 »

someperson wrote: post #136
Taniwha wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But surely that should be ASML's choice?

ASML machines include a large amount of technology from the US, and so can be controlled under US export control laws. A country is free to develop all those technologies locally and not face US export control, but that's such a difficult task that nobody has achieved it.

_Every_ country is subject to US technology transfer laws if they want to retain access to the global banking system.

The US can simply put an offending company on a black list and every financial institution will drop them.

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

#175

Post by irrational »

numpad0 wrote: post #137
irrational wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “Continent” refers to single contiguous land encircled by seawater, that aren’t islands, at least as I think of the word. To the best of my knowledge, you are literally the only person who uses that definition. By that definition Asia, Europe, and Africa would be a single continent. North and South America would be a single continent. What school did you go to that they taught you there are 4 continents in the enti…

> 4 continents Isn't that six? Eurasia, Africa, Australia, North America, South America, and Antarctica, with India noted as "sub-continent" and Asia sometimes distinguished within Eurasia by mountain ridges.

By your own definition that can't be true. North and South America are a single continuous land mass. You can walk from the top of North America to the bottom of South America. The same with Eurasian and Africa - they are 100% a connected land mass - you can walk from Europe to Asia to Africa, no problem. So by your own definition there are only 4 continents. To the best of my knowledge, almost everyone else says there are 7-8 continents (depending on whether you count Zealandia or not).

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

#176

Post by Aperocky »

dathinab wrote: post #139
rakah wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They not only have no truble in buying it they likely have one or two systems. But this systems are not easily produced neither fastely so between ordering them and getting them over a year might pass. More importantly just having them doesn't allow you to actually use them properly. They are in a way quite a "raw" tool and the exact details of how you use them make major differences. And even if you know the best wa…

The linux from scratch of hardware world.

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

#177

Post by CamperBob2 »

derefr wrote: post #163
Animats wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people were hoping someone would come up with a better way to make "extreme ultraviolet" (soft x-rays, really) light than the horrible kludge used now.[1] Syncrotrons were tried. (Whatever happened to Lyncean?[2]) What's used now looks like a physics experiment, not a production process. Drops of tin are hit with lasers to emit X-rays, which are then focused with mirrors on the mask and wafer. This takes a s…

What's stopping them from using hard x-rays? Those are really easy to emit. (Genuine question; not trying to suggest that they're all idiots who just never considered using hard x-rays.)

Interaction with the mask material, I imagine. With hard x-rays, most of the photons generated will just sail right through, not interacting at all, or (worse) ionize the material being exposed.

Personally, I'm surprised that there aren't ways to generate this energy by nonlinear mixing of light from two lasers that are separated by the desired frequency.

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

#179

Post by blackrock »

totalZero wrote: post #130
Taniwha wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ASML only makes a few machines every year, you can't just buy them off the shelf IMHO banning sales of ASML's product to China is chest thumping protectionist nonsense - if you're worried about the rise of China's military then you should be tangling their economy up more with that of the West so that they have more reasons not to go to war rather than driving them to be self sufficient.

I don't think they're worried about China's military so much as China's independence from the rest of the semiconductor supply chain. When you give China a machine, it's only a matter of time before they reverse engineer it and make something slightly worse but much cheaper. This kind of theft is backed by the government. So the expectation that they will remain forever dependent upon ASML is wishful thinking.

> When you give China a machine, it's only a matter of time before they reverse engineer it and make something slightly worse but much cheaper

> This kind of theft

You called what they did “reverse engineering.” But then you next called it theft.

Why?

Reverse Engineering is not theft. It’s a follower route, where you build the same thing that someone else had built. You don’t even need their blueprints. You can just work off of their output, and work backwards.

One famous reverse engineering company was Compaq, which reverse engineered the IBM PC, with the nod from Microsoft to make their own PC compatible clone. Was this also theft? And was this also a crime in your worldview?

Another example is the atomic bomb. Once America proved that a nuclear fission bomb was possible, then it was only a matter of time before another country reproduced it.

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

#180

Post by Slikey »

Taniwha wrote: post #172
someperson wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ASML machines include a large amount of technology from the US, and so can be controlled under US export control laws. A country is free to develop all those technologies locally and not face US export control, but that's such a difficult task that nobody has achieved it.

ASML is a Dutch company that doesn't export from the US

That doesn't matter. If they want to export TO the US they are subject to US export laws. The US has a history of their economical and political power forcing companies that have no business with the US to do their bidding to stay in business. Just look at the Iran sanctions.
Post reply on HN