Live data from Hacker News

Japan's gamble to turn island of Hokkaido into global chip hub

bbc.com

411–420 of 485 posts

Re: Japan's gamble to turn island of Hokkaido into global chip hub

#411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okinawa was as much a part of China as Botswana and Argentina were. Going back centuries, they've always spoken a japonic language so your government propaganda is a strange approach for seeding justification for invasion in the future.

I never said they speak Chinese or anything like that. in ancient times they were part of China’s tributary system. The Chinese tributary system explicitly allowed different places to keep their own culture and language. It was Japan that annexed them and then systematically destroyed the local culture. The post-WWII agreements (Cairo Declaration, Potsdam Proclamation, San Francisco Peace Treaty framework) all stated…

I'm a bit confused, would love to learn. The Potsdam agreement said that Japan controls is main islands (the ones right by the mainland) and the other minor islands (anything not right next to the main island) would be determine by the Allies later. This was signed by China and obviously has been followed.

Then the Treaty of San Francisco (which didn't involve China signing or agreement or anything) said that the Allies would revert control of Okinawa to Japan, which was the Allies choice at that point given that they were in control as stipulated by the Potsdam agreement.

What's the gap between what was said and what happened? You could argue that the WW2 agreements were unfair and didn't follow historical ownership but I'm not sure which part of the agreements themselves was directly violated.

Re: Japan's gamble to turn island of Hokkaido into global chip hub

#412
post #265

Why are all the comments here so weird? It's like people saw (but didn't read) an article entitled "Man Opens a Taqueria in his Hometown" and the only responses are 1) Why didn't he open it in my hometown? This location isn't convenient for me. 2) Wouldn't it be better for someone else to open a taqueria instead? My cousin is looking for work. Shouldn't we be putting resources into helping him open a restaurant inste…

Because commenters outside Japan may end up buying products containing chips made in Japan. If it was built in let's say France people would be thinking less about potential invasions. Just as "obviously Japan is going to want to develop lucrative manufacturing within Japan," obviously people outside of Japan are going to want manufacturing that is not liable to be shut down or taken over in some way. Not that I thin…

The PRC and Japan is not a remotely comparable situation to the PRC and Taiwan.

The most the PRC could do is potentially sabotage production in Hokkaido, but if they can sabotage production in Hokkaido, they can sabotage it in Arizona.

Re: Japan's gamble to turn island of Hokkaido into global chip hub

#413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That doesn't change that people here want those cutting edge manufacturing and job opportunities the US has. They don't want to be stuck competition with China in commodity widgets like cars or low margin 16nm-65nm microcontrollers You can't build an ecosystem for bleeding edge work without an even larger pipeline of non-bleeding edge and even legacy workflow. For example, it's 14nm that pays the bills for TSMC - n…

>Yet European Biopharma and chemicals engineering remains competitive despite having similar issues as a similar capex heavy industry with a significant IP component. It's really just an institutional issue. Pharma is not a commodity nor resembling anything like "free market" competition. It's a crazy patent minefield, massive regulatory moat, massive state subsidies and government protectionism plus sometimes backro…

> Nothing remotely similar to commodities like software and hardware

First, what I should have done earlier in this conversation because I keep forgetting how broad and complex of an industry this is:

What do you mean by the semiconductor industry? No country other than the US has an end-to-end domestic pipeline from design to fabrication to packaging to developing EDAs.

For this thread, I have limited my conversation to fabrication and package. These industries have largely coalesed around the US and Korea/Japan/Taiwan/China/ASEAN for decades because of industrial policies and educational programs.

For chip design, this industry is largely limited to the US, Israel, India, China, and Taiwan for decades due to a number of key hires at Intel back in the 1990s.

The strategy needed to develop a domestic chip design ecosystem is completely distinct from that for developing a domestic fabrication or packaging ecosystem.

> Pharma is not a commodity nor resembling anything like "free market" competition

It very much is depending on the type of compound, just like it is depending on the type of semiconductor (or downstream components).

> It's all about patents, massive regulatory moats, massive state subsidies and government protectionism plus backroom deals between pharma and politicians

Hate to break your cherry, but that's all industries. I remember our lawyers spending months working with the trade promotion ministry of a certain CEE state along with KPMG in order to get a sweet heart deal to open a dev hub in an IT park that was associated with a politically connected oligarch. The economics of biopharma really aren't that different from semiconductors:

1. You have an entirely separate design phase that is completely independent of synthesis/fabrication

2. You have entire sub-segments of the industry devoted just to synthesis/fabrication along with testing

3. Both are high capex/low margins industries, as Asian players in both China and India have largely disrupted the generics market while higher margin IP tends to be owned by the American subsidiaries of European Biopharma companies

4. It doesn't necessarily make sense to synthesize low margins APIs when you will inevitably be undercut by American, Chinese, or Indian players so the best solution is to specialize in design because that at least allows you to own IP.

------

This is a question for each individual European nation, because this is something that the European Union cannot solve - do EU nations actually care about developing industrial policies intended to develop domestic capacity or not in specific industries.

If so, does each European nation actually have the state-level capacity and the human capital capacity to start making a case for investment.

Additionally, can any European state give the 50%-150% capital subsidy grants or 0-1% interest rate loans that countries like South Korea, Japan, China, Taiwan, the US, and India along with their state-level components?

After chatting with my friends who work on these types of questions in Bruxelles as well as a couple larger European capitals, the answer was no, simply because the fiscal leeway just doesn't exist and the demand really doesn't exist either. If Volkswagen AG or Groupe Renault is pushed into a corner, they will just shift manufacturing out of Europe and towards China or India respectively.

Re: Japan's gamble to turn island of Hokkaido into global chip hub

#414
post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> status quo Yes, we're talking about the current reality and trends about the future. Which is it, are EU manufacturers at large on the decline, or am I too focused on the current reality that they're doing okay, with exceptions? > Making worse cars at higher prices can not work. Who is talking about worse cars or brand loyalty? A Renault 5 or Renault 4 are objectively good cars that sell well based on their perform…

In the end I think outlet disagreement is this: I believe that a Chinese car of the same quality, sold for 70% of the price of a European made car, will outperform the European car in every market, where those cars compete on equal footing. You disagree with that for reasons unfathomable to me. I believe that the European export economy is vital for its prosperity. 45% of Germany's 1 trillion+ exports are to countrie…

> I believe that a Chinese car of the same quality, sold for 70% of the price of a European made car, will outperform the European car in every market, where those cars compete on equal footing. You disagree with that for reasons unfathomable to me

I disagree with that for pretty obvious reasons. The fact that companies like GM and Ford still exist, and not everyone has been buying the cheapest car that fits their needs, unquestionably proves that buying cars is more than just price. Quality is hard to directly compare, but you also have maintenance needs/availability, brand recognition, design.

But anyways, you're talking about manufacturing more widely, and we spent too much time talking about cars. 20% of the EU GDP that are in manufacturing really aren't all about cars.

> I do not think any evidence I could provide to you could convince you otherwise

That's an almost smart way of getting out of having to provide any.

> That you are lying about what I said (e.g. that cost is the only thing that matters for cars

How else would I interpret your incessant attempts to try to convince me that a Chinese car at 70% the cost of an European one would always win? The fact that you're completely ignoring the presence of brand or the importances of marketing and design on car buying choices clearly indicates you only think of cars as their cost to buy. Which is really not what most people's first consideration is, otherwise, again, we wouldn't have Tesla, VW, Audi, Porsche, GM, Ford, Lexus, etc etc existing.

Re: Japan's gamble to turn island of Hokkaido into global chip hub

#415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yet European Biopharma and chemicals engineering remains competitive despite having similar issues as a similar capex heavy industry with a significant IP component. It's really just an institutional issue. Pharma is not a commodity nor resembling anything like "free market" competition. It's a crazy patent minefield, massive regulatory moat, massive state subsidies and government protectionism plus sometimes backro…

> Nothing remotely similar to commodities like software and hardware First, what I should have done earlier in this conversation because I keep forgetting how broad and complex of an industry this is: What do you mean by the semiconductor industry? No country other than the US has an end-to-end domestic pipeline from design to fabrication to packaging to developing EDAs. For this thread, I have limited my conversatio…

>Hate to break your cherry, but that's all industries.

It's not binary where it either it is or it isn't but there's various levels to it and Pharma gets special privilege over industries like cars, phones or semiconductors, since it deals with people's lives.

> as Asian players in both China and India have largely disrupted the generics

Then why did I never took an Indian or Chinese made paracetamol, but all generics in my EU country I ever took from the pharmacy ware locally made? Meanwhile I can't buy a locally made laptop, smartphone, GPU, it's all Asian made goods.

Re: Japan's gamble to turn island of Hokkaido into global chip hub

#416

This, on the surface, makes logistical sense. Chitose (the proposed location) is the international airport for and largest airport in Hokkaido (New Chitose Airport). Setting up a fab and related facilities right next to this location would seem to have obvious benefits.

Japan tends to be a favorite for most enterprise SaaS companies when opening an APJ sales foothold - no other Asian economy is of a similar size and open to Western firms.

Additionally, a Tokyo HQ often manages your South Korea and Taiwan operations as well because of legacy business ties from the colonial era as well as the flying geese era. That said, Sapporo does remain a bit of a niche area like Seattle or Portland before semiconductors because of how dominant Tokyo, Osaka, and Nagoya are.

Knock on wood the Rapidus helps spark a Japanese Beaverton.

Re: Japan's gamble to turn island of Hokkaido into global chip hub

#417
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Once China solves the Taiwan problem they're going to turn their sights on Korea and Japan. China will not annex Japan or South Korea. As a Chinese person, I can assure you that this is not how our mindset works at all. Most of the Western media hype about this is deliberately designed to muddy the waters around the Taiwan issue. Taiwan is different: the vast majority of people there are ethnically Chinese, so reun…

> That cost is simply too high; no one in China wants to pay it China was happy to invade Tibet and assimilate it's population. Hard to believe that a government who claims all of South China sea, large parts of India (Arunachal Pradesh) does not want to expand. Or do you think people of Arunachal Pradesh are also Chinese?

Tibet is not (and was not) defended by a nuclear superpower. South Korea and Japan both have United States military bases and troops stationed there.

I am willing to bet all of the money I will ever make in my lifetime that China will not invade either one as long as they remain under the US nuclear umbrella.

Re: Japan's gamble to turn island of Hokkaido into global chip hub

#418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, it's 100% common knowledge. I distinctly remember my teacher making a point to explain why Chiang Kai-shek and Jiang Jieshi were both valid transliterations in my 10th grade world history class. No one in America with a high school education believes that Taiwan is an unrelated country that China randomly decided to pick on after throwing a dart at a map. Chinese history from antiquity to modern European/Japanes…

> We largely don't even support our own past unprovoked invasions, much less invasions by rivals against stable and prosperous liberal democracies that we have long-standing friendly relationships with. Of course you don't support invasions of your puppet nation that only exists because of your intervention. But let's flip this around. Suppose that there was a second American civil war, one side lost and retreated to…

I'm sure that's subjectively clear to you, maybe not so much to the people actually living in Taiwan or the hypothetical independent California.

Re: Japan's gamble to turn island of Hokkaido into global chip hub

#419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you clarify this for me: the Soviets don't exist, so how can they possibly take the whole of Japan - in some future? If you mean Russia, then no.

Ukraine has a proper army and the support of Europe, albeit with dated weapons. Japan has neither and it's dubious whether the United States would step in. Hokkaido has always been under threat from Russia and the Soviets quickly took the Kuril Islands, which wasn't even originally theirs.

The United States defends Japan. The United States has nuclear weapons.

Knowing those two facts, we can conclude that Russia will not be invading Japan as long as it is protected by the United States. The calculus is very simple when nuclear weapons are involved.

Also, keep in mind that D-Day was the largest amphibious assault in history and all they had to do was cross the English Channel. Russia invading Hokkaido would be suicide, the US nuked Japan rather than try invading the homeland to end WW2 and we controlled every island surrounding Japan at the time.

Re: Japan's gamble to turn island of Hokkaido into global chip hub

#420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We largely don't even support our own past unprovoked invasions, much less invasions by rivals against stable and prosperous liberal democracies that we have long-standing friendly relationships with. Of course you don't support invasions of your puppet nation that only exists because of your intervention. But let's flip this around. Suppose that there was a second American civil war, one side lost and retreated to…

I'm sure that's subjectively clear to you, maybe not so much to the people actually living in Taiwan or the hypothetical independent California.

I agree that, in principle, the people of every territory should have the right to peaceful self-determination regardless of validity of other people's claims to territory. In practice, virtually nobody acknowledges that right, even though it's ostensibly the first article of the UN charter. The Irish had to make life hell for the English to get any concessions, Catalonia had its independence movement dismantled, Kurds are oppressed by every state they live in. The US itself is guilty of this; there was no particular reason the union of two completely opposite cultures had to be enforced, and in another timeline perhaps there was a peaceful national divorce. The hypothetical independent California was actually, in reality, an independent Confederacy of several states, and their independence movement was crushed. To that extent, I could agree China is in the wrong, but only insomuch as any other country is, and it should not be singled out as a particularly aggressive nation when it's playing by the same international norms as the rest of the world. That it wants to reclaim Taiwan is in no way indicative that it has any intention to invade Korea or Japan, as supposed upthread.
Post reply on HN