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

TSMC head says drive to onshore chip supply chain is 'unrealistic'

asia.nikkei.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 221 posts

Re: TSMC head says drive to onshore chip supply chain is 'unrealistic'

#151

Post by metalliqaz »

rednerrus wrote: post #88
joenathanone wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lithography machines and factories are prohibitively expensive, it can take years of production to break even, if you over build you may just end up in the red. Additionally the fabs have a limited lifespan when they are cutting edge and able to produce premium chips.

Then shouldn't the government be involved in ensuring we have what's necessary? Seems like strategic reserves are in order here.

don't know why you were downvoted for that. it is clear in 2022 that it's a national security issue

Re: TSMC head says drive to onshore chip supply chain is 'unrealistic'

#152

Post by pphysch »

AdamH12113 wrote: post #150
pphysch wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is absurd. No, we definitely wouldn't. Most people wouldn't notice if TSMC disappeared. In a couple years they might go, hey, why isn't my iPhone 42 any faster than my iPhone 35. But most devices and datacenters would keep running for literally years. Occasionally there would be a disaster that is hard to recover from due to missing supplier inventory. The average warranty on such devices is like 3 years, and ma…

TSMC makes a lot more than iPhone CPUs. A lot more. And they do a lot more than cutting-edge process nodes -- they have active 180nm fabs. Microcontrollers, ADCs, DACs, ASICs... almost anything you can buy that contains electronics can have ICs manufactured by TSMC. Now think about all the non-consumer equipment with embedded electronics -- trucks, trains, container ships, industrial equipment, medical equipment. Sud…

Yes, TSMC is a very important corporation.

No, their (improbable) destruction would not cause an "unimaginable" global economic catastrophe as the previous commentator implied.

Re: TSMC head says drive to onshore chip supply chain is 'unrealistic'

#153

Post by dirtyid »

tomatowurst wrote: post #145
iooi wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming that the US would go to war with China over Taiwan. That's not a given -- by a long shot. > and start a Russian style sanction Unlike the Russian sanctions, a broad sanction on the Chinese economy would deeply impact the US economy. It's not a viable strategy.

> US would go to war with China over Taiwan They've repeatedly signaled and backed this up with a real aircraft carrier that sails between the straits. They aren't doing this just for show. The ball is in CCP's court, if they venture too far past their coastline they are going to face USN + JSDF. Again, Taiwan is NOT ukraine. It's semiconductor supply is critical to national security and the economy. US also signaled…

> real aircraft carrier

USN hasn't had the balls to sail carriers through the strait in 20+ years even under Mike Pompeo at the nadir of US/PRC relations since Nixon. Clinton sent 2 during last TW strait crisis for shits and giggles. Strait transits are down to DDGs and coast guard vessels now.

PRC doesn't even need Navy to venture outside the first island chain to destroy East Asia semi, or conduct massive crippling cyber warefare on CONUS. Reality is US has very limited options protecting East Asia interests and US is now existentially vulnerable in multiple domains that can't be solved with biggest military budget and 20 aircraft carriers.

PRC is moving to sanction proof economy and decoupling anyway, eating sanctions for taking back TW is built into the equation.

Re: TSMC head says drive to onshore chip supply chain is 'unrealistic'

#154

Post by SkyMarshal »

alooPotato wrote: post #21
SkyMarshal wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily, if you find a way to restrict supply chains to allied nations only that you don’t have risk of war with.

so cut out china? now bring onshore everything to allied countries.... still seems like a large portion of the graph..

It's a huge proportion of the graph, it would be like an economic Manhattan project, but 10x bigger. But if things continue on the current trajectory with China's rapid military build-up, base-building around the SCS, threatening Taiwan and the other Asian nations, it may become necessary.

Re: TSMC head says drive to onshore chip supply chain is 'unrealistic'

#155

Post by ketzo »

potta_coffee wrote: post #98
UnpossibleJim wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this type of thinking, while relevant, ignores other hidden costs associated with off-shoring the majority of our manufacturing. 1. The environmental costs are not insignificant with both the lack of environmental regulation and added ocean shipping (yes, I know people are tired of hearing about environmental impact) 2. The humanitarian cost of offshoring our manufacturing is not insignificant. We may not hav…

Environmental impact is a really important concern. But aren't we just deciding _where_ that impact will occur? I don't think environmental damage in China is inherently superior to environmental damage in America; not for any reason other than, "I live in America, so of course I want America to be have a clean environment." I think the environmental impact of these industries could be reduced but profit overrules al…

Well, there’s environmental damage incurred by going back and forth between China and the U.S., which could be reduced/eliminated.

Re: TSMC head says drive to onshore chip supply chain is 'unrealistic'

#156

Post by stubish »

unethical_ban wrote: post #57
55873445216111 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Historically, excess wafer fab capacity is what bankrupts semiconductor companies. An underloaded fab very rapidly eats up profit. Over the last 10 years, the industry has become very cautious not to overbuild capacity. We have now arrived at the opposite end of the long term (~10 year) cycle and we have accumulated a serious underinvestment in capacity.

I feel like there was a lesson about just-in-time inventory for critical supply chains recently. Perhaps a product as complex, sophisticated and absolutely necessary for a modern society should have government guarantees.

What will the lesson be though? Once the dust settles, it may well be that the savings over the last few decades outweighs the losses due to the supply shortages. I guess it comes down to how good the risk analysis was and if they acknowledge that once-in-a-lifetime events happen many times in a lifetime.

Re: TSMC head says drive to onshore chip supply chain is 'unrealistic'

#157

Post by cultofmetatron »

gnulinux wrote: post #6

Well, of course, TSMC doesn't want chip supplies to be onshored. It's everyone other than TSMC and Taiwan willing to do so. West wants to have reliable access to chips without potential war with China. In addition to geopolitics, wouldn't overproduction of chips be beneficial to consumers in the form of cheaper chips and greater variety?

plus, tsmc having the majority of their fabs in Taiwan is the biggest incentive for the united states to step in if China tries to invade.

Re: TSMC head says drive to onshore chip supply chain is 'unrealistic'

#158

Post by thorRay8383 »

55873445216111 wrote: post #103
rednerrus wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then shouldn't the government be involved in ensuring we have what's necessary? Seems like strategic reserves are in order here.

In practical terms, the government is just too slow to actually help. They always shoot behind the target. The semiconductor market is cyclical. By the time the CHIPS Act, etc, actually get passed and implemented, the market will already be in oversupply and voters/politicians will complain about government handouts for these companies.

In practical terms the government is intentionally hamstrung to appear incompetent:

https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/annual-reports/...

With a vote Congress destroys budgets and the narrative is the PO sucks.

Government incompetence is private interest driven propaganda

Re: TSMC head says drive to onshore chip supply chain is 'unrealistic'

#160

Post by LAC-Tech »

dirtyid wrote: post #153
tomatowurst wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> US would go to war with China over Taiwan They've repeatedly signaled and backed this up with a real aircraft carrier that sails between the straits. They aren't doing this just for show. The ball is in CCP's court, if they venture too far past their coastline they are going to face USN + JSDF. Again, Taiwan is NOT ukraine. It's semiconductor supply is critical to national security and the economy. US also signaled…

> real aircraft carrier USN hasn't had the balls to sail carriers through the strait in 20+ years even under Mike Pompeo at the nadir of US/PRC relations since Nixon. Clinton sent 2 during last TW strait crisis for shits and giggles. Strait transits are down to DDGs and coast guard vessels now. PRC doesn't even need Navy to venture outside the first island chain to destroy East Asia semi, or conduct massive crippling…

Is it really "balls" to not sail an aircraft carrier?

Last time it happened was during the Taiwan straight crisis where the PRC fired missiles - which a defector in the PRC told Taiwan had no warheads - deliberately near Taiwanese cities.

Why respond with a crisis level military show of force when - thankfully - there's no crisis?

Post reply on HN