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

TSMC looks to double down on U.S. chip factories as talks in Europe falter

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 511 posts

Re: TSMC looks to double down on U.S. chip factories as talks in Europe falter

#271

Post by mook »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #157

Geopolitically this makes a lot of sense. Will be interesting to see how China reacts as it moves forward. If Intel is serious this time about letting third parties into their fabs then it could be quite the reversal of fortune. However, as I've said in the past Intel is most likely to do this with "alternate" process streams, in order to not expose their full capabilities to competitors. High hopes but low expectati…

As a first pass, wouldn't this be good for China? TSMC was strategic for Taiwan, as a military takeover of Taiwan (where the plants will likely be damaged or scuttled) would be economically damaging for the US. That might be a bit different if the US has enough high-the fabs internally.

I'd love to hear better analysis; I'm not confident of my understanding here.

Re: TSMC looks to double down on U.S. chip factories as talks in Europe falter

#272

Post by giardini »

kragen wrote: post #240
giardini wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

kragen says "People won't suddenly forget how to use their shortwave radios, smelt iron, and make gunpowder just because it's radioactive outside. " shortwave radios? With no electrical power, no batteries? "smelt iron" with coal, maybe! Now you've got wrought iron, which is good for what, horseshoes? Hedge your bets and buy a couple of horses tomorrow. [Bad news: I can imagine your neighbors' queries: "Hey, Bing, wh…

> shortwave radios? With no electrical power, no batteries? Nuclear retaliation might take 20 minutes. The diesel UPS will last that long. What would the aftermath look like months or years later, though? Big coal power plants might be targeted, but most solar panels will continue to work; those can run shortwave radios for decades, giving you transcontinental and intercontinental logistical coordination capabilities…

Your thinking has many curious gaps! e.g.,

I fail to see how "shortwave radios" would be particularly useful for the 20 minutes of "nuclear retaliation",

Bitcoin transactions require networked computers which, again, won't be around w/o power/batteries, a working network, etc.

Implementing the Haber-Bosch process requires very sophisticated engineering, machining and careful operation. Lots of trial and error is involved.

simply making "cordite" is only one step in producing an artillery shell. There's the gun, it's transport, the shell casing, the primer, the aiming mechanism, etc. You must train the gunner, etc.

That "organization that defeated Japan" you speak of would most likely not be present (would be destroyed),

No need to kill everyone in China. Just the "A Ship" and they're all in Beijing. Pollution is bad there already and would be even worse after a nuclear war!8-))

One person can "snuff out" a group.

Why do I get the feeling I'm talking to a child who is fairly well-educated but has a patchy understanding of the real world, someone better at history than at science? Maybe someone who games a bit? I think I'll stop this dialogue here.

Re: TSMC looks to double down on U.S. chip factories as talks in Europe falter

#273

Post by jeremiahhs »

croes wrote: post #263
_the_inflator wrote: post #228

"European chip and auto companies, for their part, are mostly lined up against the idea. They would prefer subsidies for the older-generation chips that are heavily used by car manufacturers and are in short supply. Many of TSMC's most lucrative customers, such as Apple, are U.S.-based, while its European customer base is made up of mostly of automakers buying less-advanced chips." Oh boy... This is exactly why EU wi…

Tesla owns VW? Telsa is overvalued and still doesn't make profit from car manufacturing. And it's USPs get fewer and fewer and especially full driving autonomous won't happen in the near future despite Musk's claims

You've bought the CNBC fud. Tesla made 4x the profit from cars than bitcoin or credits. Valuation is based on the future, not on the past. Exponential growth matters - just look at the last ten years, then extrapolate a few years more. If you did not predict 500k Tesla cars delivered in 2020, back in 2015, then you can not credibily comment on current valuation ( which is based on the future).

Re: TSMC looks to double down on U.S. chip factories as talks in Europe falter

#274

Post by bigfudge »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #261
nl wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The situation with Taiwan (an independent - if unrecognised - country) is very different to HK which was a separately governed province of China.

This statement conflicts with my understanding of the British rule of Hong Kong and the accords under which is was placed under the sovereignty of China.

HK was always going g to be returned to the Chinese. It took 20 years for the charade to end, but the situation is different to Taiwan.

Re: TSMC looks to double down on U.S. chip factories as talks in Europe falter

#275

Post by realityking »

mrtksn wrote: post #131
lousken wrote: post #65

Is automotive industry all that EU cares about? What about IoT/robotics? The fact that TSMC want to build only their older fab here is really disappointing to me.

EU is loosely coupled peace union with a lot of sovereignty left to the individual states. If I remember correctly, ones Rupert Murdoch famously said that it’s impossible to find a phone number to call. So, It’s probably not up to the EU to care about automotive, that must be Germany. France and Spain likely cares about other things and no one cares about cutting edge chips. EU can push from the top by easing state a…

> If I remember correctly, ones Rupert Murdoch famously said that it’s impossible to find a phone number to call.

Irbid question is attributed to former US foreign secretary Henry Kissinger who supposedly asked:

> Who do I call if I want to call Europe?

Like many famous quotes, it seems to be false: https://www.ft.com/content/c4c1e0cd-f34a-3b49-985f-e708b247e...

Even if he had said it, the EUs political framework has changed and there‘s now a “foreign minister”-like Post that is the EUs phone number for other foreign ministers.

Re: TSMC looks to double down on U.S. chip factories as talks in Europe falter

#276

Post by jeeeb »

shakna wrote: post #97
jeeeb wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Australia is a relatively small market located far from global supply chains with relatively high energy, capital and labour costs. I think we need to be selective about which industries we promote, especially if the industry will only be viable with large government subsidies.

> Australia is a relatively small market located far from global supply chains Australia is also the world's second largest exporter of rare earth metals. It does, in fact, have a considerable part of the raw materials required for fabrication already being extracted in-nation. It would not take much for Australia to insert itself into that global supply chain, as a more reliable and stable political environment than…

Define “not much”. The idea sounds nice but how do you execute on it?

Should Australia tax or ban rare earth exports to try to force value add industries here?

That would go against our position as a stable supplier and would seem more likely just to make customers source their rare earth supplies elsewhere (they’re not that rare).

Re: TSMC looks to double down on U.S. chip factories as talks in Europe falter

#277

Post by Apocryphon »

magicsmoke wrote: post #210
jollybean wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is more able and likely to 'take over Taiwan' since probably any point in history. It's a stated strategic objective and there's no reason to think it won't happen.

The chilling implication behind some Taiwanese downplaying the threat is that they think it'll be relatively bloodless. That is, they plan to surrender once China feels comfortable enough about its naval balance against the US to pull the trigger. Taiwan under new management doesn't affect their retirement. The king is dead, long live the king. After all, its their lives they'll be needlessly throwing away if America…

Most of Europe doesn't have the will to defend themselves even in invasion, either:

https://brilliantmaps.com/europe-fight-war/

But that's how it is since the end of WWII. Major nations, or at least wealthy ones, don't go to open war with each other anymore. American hegemony and the NATO alliance structure, as well as the nuclear umbrella, has sapped the will to fight from most of the developed world, outside of brushfire conflicts. Taiwan is not a major nation, but it was an economic power, and at least has very comfortable first world living conditions. In such a situation, why would the population want to throw it all away?

Though on the other hand, why would the PRC, with its burgeoning middle classes and its coastal opulence, want to do something as destabilizing as to declare war, unprovoked? At the very least they'd face sanctions and diplomatic disapproval. The military build-up is concerning and should be taken seriously. But those who would assume that China would just cavalierly declare war in the near future should consider how much China would lose in the bargain.

Re: TSMC looks to double down on U.S. chip factories as talks in Europe falter

#278

Post by iagovar »

croes wrote: post #266
schmorptron wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. This is sooo frustrating. Why does Europe, and Germany especially, just NOT grasp digitalization at all? I'm growing ever more angry that almost our politicians are 80 year old mega-boomers who are voted in by other boomers and couldn't care less about any interests other than their own. Young people and their climate & computors be damned.

It's a little bit more complicated. TSMC wants subvention for building the fabs, but the chips that will be produced will be sold elsewhere. So the EU gains nothing from it but costs. The EU needs a european chip manufacturer and developer not a subsidiary of Intel or TSMC

We already have em, but they lag behind TSMC by decades

Re: TSMC looks to double down on U.S. chip factories as talks in Europe falter

#279

Post by pmlnr »

jeremiahhs wrote: post #273
croes wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla owns VW? Telsa is overvalued and still doesn't make profit from car manufacturing. And it's USPs get fewer and fewer and especially full driving autonomous won't happen in the near future despite Musk's claims

You've bought the CNBC fud. Tesla made 4x the profit from cars than bitcoin or credits. Valuation is based on the future, not on the past. Exponential growth matters - just look at the last ten years, then extrapolate a few years more. If you did not predict 500k Tesla cars delivered in 2020, back in 2015, then you can not credibily comment on current valuation ( which is based on the future).

Valuation is based on who farted at wall street.

Re: TSMC looks to double down on U.S. chip factories as talks in Europe falter

#280

Post by raverbashing »

TMWNN wrote: post #227
Griffinsauce wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I remember correctly, ones Rupert Murdoch famously said that it’s impossible to find a phone number to call. Do the HN rules of assuming good faith apply to him as well? /s https://europa.eu/european-union/contact/call-us_en Please don't signal boost easily falsifiable claims like this. The function of it is to sow division and prevent proper nuanced discussion.

>Please don't signal boost easily falsifiable claims like this. The function of it is to sow division and prevent proper nuanced discussion. The phone numbers on that page is a hotline for general questions. It is absolutely not the same thing as the point mrtksn's Murdoch quote mentioned. A media magnate like Murdoch has the phone number to the White House central switchboard and can get the President on the phone.…

Murdoch meant "who should I call to have the deals I want to make facilitated?" (to put it in PC terms)
Post reply on HN