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

Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 734 posts

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#111

Post by chaorace »

Isinlor wrote: post #22

China already declared that it will use force in Taiwan if "possibilities for a peaceful reunification should be completely exhausted". From Chinese Anti-Secession Law: Article 8: In the event that the "Taiwan independence" secessionist forces should act under any name or by any means to cause the fact of Taiwan's secession from China, or that major incidents entailing Taiwan's secession from China should occur, or t…

This kind of bluster is a mainstay of Chinese geopolitics. The law was intentionally written in an open-ended way so that the party always gets the final say on what "completely exhausted" should mean. It serves as a propaganda tool internally and a point of leverage externally -- the party never needs to actually act on the threat for it to serve a valuable purpose.

With that being said, it's not that simple. Bluster isn't just a political tactic -- it also enables the military to slowly chip away at norms and edge closer towards a strategic advantage (e.g.: progressively violating more and more of Taiwan's sovereign airspace). If the party could have things their way, the military would merely continue pushing the envelope until one day a D-Day assault force seemingly randomly washes up on Taiwan's doorstep.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#112

Post by computerfriend »

gdy wrote: post #93
Isinlor wrote: post #22

China already declared that it will use force in Taiwan if "possibilities for a peaceful reunification should be completely exhausted". From Chinese Anti-Secession Law: Article 8: In the event that the "Taiwan independence" secessionist forces should act under any name or by any means to cause the fact of Taiwan's secession from China, or that major incidents entailing Taiwan's secession from China should occur, or t…

"EU was caught off guard by Russia" You've got to be kidding me. Putin had been warning West since the Munich speech in 2007. [0] [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Munich_speech_of_Vladim...

And yet, they were caught off guard.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#113

Post by buscoquadnary »

computerfriend wrote: post #106
mensetmanusman wrote: post #26

Highly recommend the economist’s podcast on Xi called ‘The Prince’ Xi became a Leninist and is trying to be the next Mao. He is a true believer that his glory and the glory of China can only happen by taking back Taiwan. TSMC is a huge reason for this conflict. The current US policy is trying to slow China’s technological might for that next war.

I also highly recommend The Prince . But I don't buy this argument. TSMC is a factor, sure. In that it likely increases the cost of war. The PRC shouldn't expect that by invading, they'll win TSMC (the company, the tech, the talent, the market share).

No post body was provided.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#114

Post by Dah00n »

windexh8er wrote: post #82
kingkawn wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chinese tech and power has come along way since your formative image of them took shape in the early 2000s

How? China doesn't possess the capability to build their own competitive chips. The chips they do manufacture do not require high precision. Everything I've read about China over the last few years has indicated it is, generally, unsustainable. From their disastrous fiscal policies of internal hyper-finance [0], their weakening navy [1], their aging population that's well on its way through decline [2] and the [3] co…

>China doesn't possess the capability to build their own competitive chips

The US doesn't either. ASML is the only supplier of cutting-edge lithography systems and they are Dutch, not from Taiwan or the US. Without them Intel and TSMC couldn't do what they do and US sanctions is why China can't currently build competitive chips. It is not because of some kind of US tech brilliance.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#115

Post by greedo »

windexh8er wrote: post #51
mensetmanusman wrote: post #26

Highly recommend the economist’s podcast on Xi called ‘The Prince’ Xi became a Leninist and is trying to be the next Mao. He is a true believer that his glory and the glory of China can only happen by taking back Taiwan. TSMC is a huge reason for this conflict. The current US policy is trying to slow China’s technological might for that next war.

But China doesn't actually have a lot of technological prowess on their own. The USG might be trying to slow them down but they're not concerned about China militarily. I worked for a defense contractor back in the early 2000s when the USG was selling a lot of arms and systems to Taiwan. I got to see the bullying in person via the ASOC (part of the C4ISR platform) system we were installing. China would routinely fly…

The US has no naval presence in Taiwan. USN ships might do port visits, but they have no basing rights. They will periodically transit the Straits on Freedom of Navigation (FON) exercises. The closest USN base is in Yokohama Japan.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#116

Post by computerfriend »

ethbr0 wrote: post #43
ambicapter wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like normal foreign relations/diplomacy. It's all grey areas where politicians politick and diplomats maneuver to get what they want without anyone losing face.

But when politicians and diplomats make a miscalculation, soldiers die.

Not just soldiers.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#117

Post by throwawaylinux »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #75
Isinlor wrote: post #22

China already declared that it will use force in Taiwan if "possibilities for a peaceful reunification should be completely exhausted". From Chinese Anti-Secession Law: Article 8: In the event that the "Taiwan independence" secessionist forces should act under any name or by any means to cause the fact of Taiwan's secession from China, or that major incidents entailing Taiwan's secession from China should occur, or t…

China will invade Taiwan when the cost to do so is low enough and/or they are desperate. In other words, the probability of success is considerably higher today than it will be in the future (even if the probability of success today isn't great). Russia is a declining state relative to Ukraine & Europe, so Putin's odds of success in 2022 were considerably higher than they would be 10 years later. So if invading Ukrai…

> And a war indefinitely delayed is a war avoided.

You spend the rest of the comment before this talking about how war will happen when they are stronger and probably can't be avoided, so I don't know how this last sentence follows.

If you know for sure that someone will wage war on you in future, and that they will get stronger faster than you will, then it could be in your interest to go to war against them sooner rather than later.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#118

Post by randomopining »

tarsinge wrote: post #97
oneoff786 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s also in the US’ strategic interests to simply make it clear that China can’t have Taiwan regardless of the TSMC however

Of course it is in the US strategic interests, the problem is having strategic interests doesn't automatically give the US rights to intervene. Contrary to Ukraine (plain violation of the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation) the situation in Taiwan is complicated (for those who doubt it please at least make the effort to read the Wikipedia entry). Now given recent history I don't doubt the US will not let it…

Taiwan as a piece of land has much more strategic importance than Ukraine. Ukraine's grain and terrain are the two things that are important about it from a utilitarian sense.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#119

Post by jcranmer »

rr888 wrote: post #49
oneoff786 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s also in the US’ strategic interests to simply make it clear that China can’t have Taiwan regardless of the TSMC however

Quoted post unavailable.

> After seeing Ukraine turning into a WW1 quagmire

Ukraine is nowhere near a WW1 quagmire. The lines are far from static, and we've seen one dramatic rout a month ago resulting from a competently-executed war of maneuver operation that was completely impossible in the WW1 situation.

It looks less like WW1 (a war that ultimately came down to bleeding men until one side ran out, at which point the war effort came flying off the rails extremely rapidly) and more like WW2 (a war of maneuver where applying sufficient overwhelming force in a narrow front could and did produce overwhelming breakthough--even if it took a very large stack of operational successes to ultimately prove victorious in the war).

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#120

Post by bryanlarsen »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #117
bryanlarsen wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China will invade Taiwan when the cost to do so is low enough and/or they are desperate. In other words, the probability of success is considerably higher today than it will be in the future (even if the probability of success today isn't great). Russia is a declining state relative to Ukraine & Europe, so Putin's odds of success in 2022 were considerably higher than they would be 10 years later. So if invading Ukrai…

> And a war indefinitely delayed is a war avoided. You spend the rest of the comment before this talking about how war will happen when they are stronger and probably can't be avoided, so I don't know how this last sentence follows. If you know for sure that someone will wage war on you in future, and that they will get stronger faster than you will, then it could be in your interest to go to war against them sooner…

Xi's China will wage war. It won't always be Xi's China.
Post reply on HN