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

Samsung boosts non-memory chip investment to $151B

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 171 posts

Re: Samsung boosts non-memory chip investment to $151B

#131

Post by lumost »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #104
bpodgursky wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US can, and absolutely will, restrict oil exports if prices start to skyrocket. Gas prices are an enormous electoral cudgel. It wasn't even legal to export oil until 2015! https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-21-118#:~:text=With%20U.S.%... .

> The US can, and absolutely will, restrict oil exports if prices start to skyrocket. That would cost US oil producers billions of dollars -- more than the price increase would cost US consumers. Which would only happen if oil producers had dramatically less political influence than they do now, i.e. if we stopped producing so much oil. But then there would be no reason to do it. > It wasn't even legal to export oil…

On a temporary basis this is true as the market is restricted. On a long term time horizon you would simply expect consolidation of global refineries into a new, more powerful monopoly.

Re: Samsung boosts non-memory chip investment to $151B

#132

Post by drivebycomment »

ivalm wrote: post #2

Exciting about the progress but semi has always been boom and bust, I hope all the rush for investment will not create another down cycle.

The down cycle (to be exact, boom-and-bust cycle) is structurally inevitable in the semiconductor market.

For the supply-demand feedback loop to work smoothly, you want the supply to be incremental and quick-to-respond to demand changes. The semiconductor fab is anything but. There are many other reasons for this https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimhandy/2014/05/28/the-3-reaso... but I think the critical reason is that when there's a supply shortage, there's naturally a race among suppliers to build more capacity as soon as they can, so that they can sell more, but the inherent time delay (measured in years) in building up the extra supply combined with the fact that a single new fab gets bigger and more expensive lead to inevitable oversupply, which causes the price drop, which reduces the amount of money to invest for the next cycle, which leads to undersupply a few years later, and rinse/repeat.

The pandemic created one of the biggest demand spikes for semiconductor ever, and combined with the nationalistic stance on building own supply in each country, I suspect this spike will have a ripple effect for the next few years.

Re: Samsung boosts non-memory chip investment to $151B

#133

Post by oblio »

quickthrowman wrote: post #76
throwaway4good wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a very American perspective on things. Hundreds of thousands of US troops are stationed in Germany, Japan, Korea here 75 years after the end of the second world war. Do you think we would like them to stay for another decade? Our politicians may not be in a position to say so, but we would really like our land to be free of foreign troops. As would any other nation.

> Hundreds of thousands of US troops are stationed in Germany, Japan, Korea here 75 years after the end of the second world war. Do you think we would like them to stay for another decade? Yes, I believe those countries would prefer if we stayed. Japan and S. Korea are particularly close to China and prefer we’re around to tamp down Chinese aggression. Germany is hoping we don’t withdraw our troops: https://m.dw.com/…

Europeans who get offended don't need US bases. Those that need them want more US bases. For example Romania.

Re: Samsung boosts non-memory chip investment to $151B

#134

Post by oblio »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #92
tw04 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you think if the US were completely isolationist that China wouldn't assist North Korea in "unifying" the peninsula? I wouldn't want to bet my freedom on that.

And just why would they do that? The only reason China supported North Korea historically is because they don't want US troops at their doorstep.

Puppet states, influence, a thorn in the Japanese side. Why would China need or want Tibet or Xinjiang? Remote regions without Han populations.

Re: Samsung boosts non-memory chip investment to $151B

#135

Post by zamadatix »

raro11 wrote: post #121
ffhhj wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

uBlock Origin for Firefox mobile removes those concents.

It does not for me. I was under the impression it only hides ads. I'm using ublock origin on mobile but still see the cookie notice.

Make sure you have the "annoyances" filter lists enabled in the uBlock settings. Or really - make sure you have every filter list enabled except for the languages you don't use in the languages section.

Re: Samsung boosts non-memory chip investment to $151B

#136

Post by phkahler »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #100
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #21

This is not just some pork-barrel politics of bribing a company to stay in a given country. S Korea will view this similarly to Taiwan - their chip fabs are existential to their country and state. The USA is becoming more isolationist - it is nearly oil-independent, so it's signalling pulling out of the middle east (deals with Iran etc). But it is not silicon-independent. So S Korea and Taiwan are totally dependent o…

> it is nearly oil-independent This has never been how it works. Oil is a global commodity. Even if the US produced as much as it consumes, if something happened in the middle east, the global price would go up. Because when the price went up in Europe or Asia, American oil producers would sell to the highest bidder, which would force American consumers to bid higher. The real path to "independence" is to stop consum…

>> if something happened in the middle east, the global price would go up.

But if WW III starts with say China taking Taiwan and getting into stuff in the pacific, and Russia invading easter european countries, and maybe some other stuff... If the US were to fully engage in some kind of global conflict, they could ban oil exports and not have a supply problem.

This is the kind of thinking the military engages in to ensure their own supply chains won't be distrupted in a war. The ability to operate independently is important even if it's never used.

Re: Samsung boosts non-memory chip investment to $151B

#137

Post by artificial »

oblio wrote: post #134
FooBarWidget wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And just why would they do that? The only reason China supported North Korea historically is because they don't want US troops at their doorstep.

Puppet states, influence, a thorn in the Japanese side. Why would China need or want Tibet or Xinjiang? Remote regions without Han populations.

I’d say Tibet is for water. The Chinese built many dams and several big rivers which flow through several countries originate there.

Re: Samsung boosts non-memory chip investment to $151B

#138

Post by davidf18 »

baybal2 wrote: post #119
will4274 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fracking is immensely damaging to the ecosystem. Not really. Energy is a dirty business, and also one filled with politics and propoganda. Fracking, much like nuclear, was targeted mostly for political, not technical reasons. It's damaging, but less so than coal and not all that much more than vanilla drilling and pipelines in general.

Worth to mention that US reserves are enormous even without fracking. Tons of oil, and gas everywhere.

We drill off the Gulf Coast, but not the East and West Coasts yet, for example.

Re: Samsung boosts non-memory chip investment to $151B

#139

Post by mopsi »

lumost wrote: post #130
mushufasa wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

absolutely true. Since some people are questioning this in the comments: for those that want to do their own research, this is called 'The Law of One Price,' and it applies to other commodities where transportation and storage costs are low. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/law-one-price.asp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_one_price https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/ec... This has bee…

This rule works in any environment where traders trade freely. Historically this has lead to catastrophes such as the Irish potato famine where the price of locally produced food exceeded what locals could pay. Leading to a country that had millions starving while exporting enough food to feed the country. For this and various other temporary phenomenon governments set limits on market economies to prevent outcomes p…

> If a large supply chain issue hits a critical necessity you would absolutely expect countries to start triggering their hoarding policies making the issue worse.

The PPE shortage of 2020 demonstrated very clearly how quickly free-market economics gets thrown overboard in a serious crisis.

Re: Samsung boosts non-memory chip investment to $151B

#140

Post by oblio »

artificial wrote: post #137
oblio wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Puppet states, influence, a thorn in the Japanese side. Why would China need or want Tibet or Xinjiang? Remote regions without Han populations.

I’d say Tibet is for water. The Chinese built many dams and several big rivers which flow through several countries originate there.

Well, not just water. Tibet is a high plateau overlooking the Chinese plains. It's an obvious entry point for a land invasion into the Chinese heartland. Xinjiang is a mountainous and desert region with a similar role.

I know why they're doing it, it's just cynical for the locals.

Similar story for Korea, if you're a great power, wouldn't you move the possible battle like a few hundreds of kilometers away from your capital? You would.

It would still suck for the locals.

Post reply on HN