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

ASML became the chokepoint for cutting-edge chips

worksinprogress.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 251 posts

Re: ASML became the chokepoint for cutting-edge chips

#141

Post by random3 »

quanto wrote: post #133

I have an interesting discussion with a senior colleague: why ASML? why are they by far the best? Their competitors are a few generations behind. The colleague claimed that there is no special magic. It's not that ASML is using some otherwise unknown laws of physics nor is any single step or component particularly special or novel. It's just that they meticulously optimized each step, and the sum of such steps is the…

Veritasium has a nice video about it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiUHjLxm3V0

Obviously, there are a lot of reasons why. But it boils down to having the vision, the belief and the strength to follow through over many years. It's important to not confound vision with random Kool-Aid. Instead it's grounded in research. That research is itself grounded in a strong vision and belief — it got laughed by the entire physics community at the time:

> 'people seemed unwilling to believe bending x-rays, and they tended to that we had actually made an image by regard the whole thing as a big fish story

Now contrast this with the current academic reality — "publish or perish" and the reality of venture financing and corporate culture that "depends" (arguably in self-inflicted manner, that's not 100% the case) on quarterly repots.

ASML is just a recent story, but if you look back, you'll see that most revolutions have a similar pattern of people crazy enough to deviate from the herd.

The rest— the immense financial risk, the 5000 suppliers, etc. came as a result of having the ability to see through all the noise and the grit to to follow through when everyone calls you an idiot for not doing something "useful"

Re: ASML became the chokepoint for cutting-edge chips

#142

Post by IAmBroom »

ghc wrote: post #113
IAmBroom wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Big gambles have big risks. It's the gambler's folly, after a big win (ASML's EUV) to say, gee, we should have bought more lottery tickets! Next time, it all goes on red! What is no longer mentioned is that ASML made another big gamble at the time they started on EUV. They decided to make an all-in-one chip making machine that took silicon and output chips (instead of matrices of chip circuits laid out on a wafer). O…

Let's not forget the really big gamble (inventing EUV) was made in the 1990s by US national labs: Sandia, Lawrence Livermore, and Lawrence Berkeley.

Inventing EUV lasers.

Re: ASML became the chokepoint for cutting-edge chips

#143

Post by IAmBroom »

smueller1234 wrote: post #61
IAmBroom wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Big gambles have big risks. It's the gambler's folly, after a big win (ASML's EUV) to say, gee, we should have bought more lottery tickets! Next time, it all goes on red! What is no longer mentioned is that ASML made another big gamble at the time they started on EUV. They decided to make an all-in-one chip making machine that took silicon and output chips (instead of matrices of chip circuits laid out on a wafer). O…

The timelines matter as well: They were working on EUV at Zeiss (who make the lensing/mirroring systems) already in 2005. That's about 20 years of development.

Oh, AMSL was designing components of the EUV system by 2005. So, more likely 25 years!

Re: ASML became the chokepoint for cutting-edge chips

#144

Post by bobbruno »

random3 wrote: post #141
quanto wrote: post #133

I have an interesting discussion with a senior colleague: why ASML? why are they by far the best? Their competitors are a few generations behind. The colleague claimed that there is no special magic. It's not that ASML is using some otherwise unknown laws of physics nor is any single step or component particularly special or novel. It's just that they meticulously optimized each step, and the sum of such steps is the…

Veritasium has a nice video about it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiUHjLxm3V0 Obviously, there are a lot of reasons why. But it boils down to having the vision, the belief and the strength to follow through over many years. It's important to not confound vision with random Kool-Aid. Instead it's grounded in research. That research is itself grounded in a strong vision and belief — it got laughed by the entire phys…

One could argue that NVidia's advantage comes from a similar vision epiphany that led to them developing CUDA years before it was viable. The result is similar.

Re: ASML became the chokepoint for cutting-edge chips

#145

Post by runako »

rigonkulous wrote: post #76
runako wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a great way to lower the cost of the current generation of the tech while ensuring there is no next generation of the tech.

I don't think that makes any sense whatsoever. If everyone could make these machines, there'd be more of these machines. There are so many examples of this out there, already, that I find this specious "no next generation" argument to be either simply coming from bias, or ignorance. For sure, we only care about Taiwan because there is one Taiwan. End patents: no more Taiwan problem.

> If everyone could make these machines, there'd be more of these machines.

My post is in violent agreement with this, for this generation of machines.

ASML spends ~$5B annually on R&D with the expectation that they will be able to make ~30% net profit in the future. If you remove patent protection, there will be more competition and obviously profit margins will fall.

I want to rephrase that for emphasis. The point of aa-jv's post was that we would get cheaper chips by invalidating IP. Cheaper chips means lower margins (because you have not lowered input prices). Lower margins was the explicit goal, so to the extent that the changes in IP law work, you will get lower margins for companies like ASML.

At that point, you have a field of companies looking at (say) 10% net returns, still needing to invest billions of new capital into R&D every year. Worse: no patents means that Company A could spend $5B on R&D and Company B could spend $0, and both of them could reap the benefits of that $5B by Company A. So it's not even necessarily clear that the industry would see much net innovation.

Are we even certain there are companies who would enter this capital-intensive business assuming IP was free? Compulsory licensing is a thing, but I am not aware of that even being something that has been requested.

Re: ASML became the chokepoint for cutting-edge chips

#146

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

random3 wrote: post #141
quanto wrote: post #133

I have an interesting discussion with a senior colleague: why ASML? why are they by far the best? Their competitors are a few generations behind. The colleague claimed that there is no special magic. It's not that ASML is using some otherwise unknown laws of physics nor is any single step or component particularly special or novel. It's just that they meticulously optimized each step, and the sum of such steps is the…

Veritasium has a nice video about it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiUHjLxm3V0 Obviously, there are a lot of reasons why. But it boils down to having the vision, the belief and the strength to follow through over many years. It's important to not confound vision with random Kool-Aid. Instead it's grounded in research. That research is itself grounded in a strong vision and belief — it got laughed by the entire phys…

The short answer is they solved something very difficult to accomplish and have a stack of trade secrets as their moat.

Re: ASML became the chokepoint for cutting-edge chips

#147

Post by kryogen1c »

pfortuny wrote: post #106
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard that US nuclear subs actually take the crown, but the design is so secret, that there's no way to verify.

An aircraft carrier would like a word.

>> nuclear sub

>aircraft carrier

Having served on both, this is actually a pretty interesting comparison (at least to me).

Carriers are simply larger, so they likely win by scale, but im not sure on a more per-(sub)system basis.

Carriers have a lot of aircraft handling systems that subs dont, elevators and hangers. Also the carrier has group c&c stuff.

Subs have a lot of stealth systems carriers don't, being that they're visible from space. Lots of dive related stuff, o2/co2 handlers.

They both have weapons systems, hvac, propulsion, distillation, steam generators, reactors, air compressor, many others.

Not obvious to me which one is more complex!

Re: ASML became the chokepoint for cutting-edge chips

#148

Post by quirkot »

random3 wrote: post #141
quanto wrote: post #133

I have an interesting discussion with a senior colleague: why ASML? why are they by far the best? Their competitors are a few generations behind. The colleague claimed that there is no special magic. It's not that ASML is using some otherwise unknown laws of physics nor is any single step or component particularly special or novel. It's just that they meticulously optimized each step, and the sum of such steps is the…

Veritasium has a nice video about it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiUHjLxm3V0 Obviously, there are a lot of reasons why. But it boils down to having the vision, the belief and the strength to follow through over many years. It's important to not confound vision with random Kool-Aid. Instead it's grounded in research. That research is itself grounded in a strong vision and belief — it got laughed by the entire phys…

> But it boils down to having the vision, the belief and the strength to follow through over many years

And importantly, that vision being correct. The graveyard of history is full of the dedicated yet incorrect.

Re: ASML became the chokepoint for cutting-edge chips

#149

Post by SkiFire13 »

warmjets222 wrote: post #117
fl4regun wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do machines have to "make" things? Is a car not a machine?

I've been reading Dashiell Hammett detective stories from the early 1920s and it seems like cars were almost exclusively referred to colloquially as 'machines' back then.

Some languages still colloquially refer to cars with the same word used for machine.

Re: ASML became the chokepoint for cutting-edge chips

#150

Post by GuB-42 »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #96
kens wrote: post #82

Is the ASML machine actually the world's most complex machine under some metric, or is this a claim that someone made up? I.e., did someone actually compare the ASML machine to the Space Shuttle, LHC, Internet, and so forth and show that it is more complex under some definition? (I've done various historical questions, so I'm sensitive to how statements are sourced.) An orthogonal question is what makes sense as a me…

I've heard that US nuclear subs actually take the crown, but the design is so secret, that there's no way to verify.

I doubt that anything in the military is that advanced or complex, including nuclear subs.

A big part of it is the secrecy itself. Things get difficult when you can't communicate. Your pool of candidates for the job is limited: you may not want people with foreign connections, some people don't want to work for the military, don't like the paperwork, don't like the idea that they can't value their skills for another job, etc... In addition, military technology is supposed to work on the battlefield, you don't want delicate stuff there, you want rugged, repairable, proven, reliable.

I think the reason secret military stuff appear so advanced, besides the aura it projects, is that it deals with fields that are underrepresented outside of the military. Like stealth for instance. Stealth is of limited use outside of a conflict. So of course, the stealth package of a nuclear submarine will be much more advanced than the almost nonexistant civilian stealth technology. But for things that are relevant to civilians, like the reactors, engines, etc.., I am sure that what's in subs is relatively simple, and probably dated.

Post reply on HN