TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S. • Hacker News Board

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#241

Post by agumonkey » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 5:13 AM UTC

Shank wrote: post #215

dataflow wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean, let alone the current one? The US population does not seem ecstatic to enter something that could turn into WWIII, which makes me feel that even a president in favor of this would quickly fail to do anything.

> What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean The whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this from happening. All high-performance computing is dependent on TSMC right now.

Is this all because US are afraid China will own the world through HPC/AI ?

How many of us really depend on the latest cpu to survive ?

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#242

Post by nomilk » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 5:16 AM UTC

jopsen wrote: post #232

nomilk wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it a given that the US would come to Tawian's defence now (let alone in a few years, when the US is presumably less dependent on Taiwanese chips)? I guess it comes down to how dependent on Taiwan's chips the US actually is (I don't know the answer to that). The US isn't dependent on Ukraine and it's pressuring them to hand over land. If it turns out the US isn't dependent on Taiwan it could show similar indifferen…

> Is it a given that the US would come to Tawian's defence now In practice, probably yes, officially probably maybe. Giving a security guarantee would allow Taiwan to do provocative things, so hence, why there isn't a formal one. If it actually came to be today, I guess the US would at-least offer token support. To (a) embargo China, (b) ensure chip facilities Taiwan aren't surrendered intact. Both of which doesn't r…

This is both very accurate and very depressing.

'Security guarantee' conjures thoughts of defending a population and its cities from destruction, whereas what it actually means is the opposite: to ensure all items of value are fully destroyed before they're taken.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#243

Post by protocolture » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 5:17 AM UTC

safety1st wrote: post #147

yo_yo_yo-yo wrote: post #121

I cannot even begin to imagine what madness has infected the Taiwanese government to allow this. I feel so sorry for a great, entrepreneurial people. US tariffs will not matter when you are blockaded and Chester Nimitz is very much dead. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43123628

Right now is a very interesting moment in that the future is crystal clear and yet so many people of all persuasions don't want to accept it for so many different reasons * The USA is going to claw back whatever economic largesse it has granted to the rest of the world, and ultimately renege on many of its security guarantees, with the underlying reason being that it can no longer afford to be world police and pay fo…

Allies are good for America. Trade is good for America. Isolation has never been good for anyone.

>The USA is going to claw back whatever economic largesse it has granted to the rest of the world

The USA is going to stop bribing people to like them, an arrangement that suited the USA very well, but is difficult to articulate to seppos in general.

>This is a net relative win for the US economically because once it claws back what it needs, it has a better ability to "go it alone" than any other country in the world. US stocks will continue to be the best buys out there

This is a huge loss, but seems like a win for people who don't understand trade, supply and investment ie, seppos.

>Ergo we are looking at another American century

A Century of trying to keep a safe distance from the most armed nation doing its best north korea impersonation.

Let me make a prediction here.

1. The US is going to get more isolationist 2. Every time they face consequences of isolationism, they will simply declare that the problems were caused by not being isolationist enough, tearing up more trade agreements and generally just shifting away from the world. "If they wont sell us good at price we like, we will just abandon international patent agreements" seems like its not far off after the tariffs. 3. This is a spiral that will end the modern USA as anyone knows it.

I am quite happy with this, as long as the seppos keep the nukes to themselves while they remove themselves from the planet economically.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#244

Post by roenxi » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 5:17 AM UTC

Shank wrote: post #215

dataflow wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Taiwan is hugely reliant on US defense guarantees. What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean, let alone the current one? The US population does not seem ecstatic to enter something that could turn into WWIII, which makes me feel that even a president in favor of this would quickly fail to do anything.

> What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean The whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this from happening. All high-performance computing is dependent on TSMC right now.

We could be plunged back into the horrible era that was ... the 2010s! There wouldn't be a global collapse if TSMC was lost. It'd be an inconvenience that sets the semiconductor industry back a decade or so. Most advanced technology hasn't had time to have an impact on the global economy yet and 98% of people won't notice much in practice if all the TSMC foundries exploded tomorrow. There'd maybe be some shortages while other companies build new foundries - although even then it isn't a given people would care. China seems to be about to flood the market with manufacturing capacity.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#245

Post by tayo42 » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 5:18 AM UTC

aiauthoritydev wrote: post #175

yo_yo_yo-yo wrote: post #121

I cannot even begin to imagine what madness has infected the Taiwanese government to allow this. I feel so sorry for a great, entrepreneurial people. US tariffs will not matter when you are blockaded and Chester Nimitz is very much dead. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43123628

This is an announcement to make Trump happy. They are giving him all the good PR he wants.

I might have believed that a couple weeks ago. Mexico and Canada put a show on for the him about the tarrifs and they're still set to be in place tommrow. Why would anyone else play along now?

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#246

Post by jopsen » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 5:20 AM UTC

raincole wrote: post #146

yo_yo_yo-yo wrote: post #121

I cannot even begin to imagine what madness has infected the Taiwanese government to allow this. I feel so sorry for a great, entrepreneurial people. US tariffs will not matter when you are blockaded and Chester Nimitz is very much dead. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43123628

If we give them the doubt of benefit: TSMC is just appeasing Trump and will delay the actual investment as much as possible. If we face the reality: Taiwan is a vassal state. The decision makers are simply owned by the US.

> If we face the reality: Taiwan is a vassal state. The decision makers are simply owned by the US.

The thing about US "vassel" states is they don't have to do what the US says. And sometimes won't!

It's a classic Russian talking point that Ukraine has no agency. You're making the same argument for Taiwan.

Taiwan doesn't have to accept a US deal they don't like. They could build nukes. They could opt to do nothing and run the risk of invasion.

It's a democracy, Taiwan has agency. Even if, they have good reasons to make friends with the US.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#247

Post by mardifoufs » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 5:21 AM UTC

tensor wrote: post #76

braincat31415 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. I do. The US buys a lot of it, and it is cheap . As for Europe, you are right, partially it's a matter of a mindset, however there are objective reasons for expensive energy. France's access to cheap uranium is almost gone. Europe refuses to sign long-term russian gas delivery contracts and are buying spot which costs arm and leg (whatever is left of it). German power plants are shuttered. LNG imported from th…

However hard it is, the decline of the US is going to force Europe and the rest of the western countries to build out replacements for US labour and goods. The US is simply not a reliable trading partner nor ally under the new administration. Energy will be built.

Its weird to claim that the US is in decline when discussing the EU. The fate of the EU is incredibly intertwined with that of the US. If one is in decline, the other is as well.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#248

Post by jopsen » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 5:23 AM UTC

tayo42 wrote: post #245

aiauthoritydev wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an announcement to make Trump happy. They are giving him all the good PR he wants.

I might have believed that a couple weeks ago. Mexico and Canada put a show on for the him about the tarrifs and they're still set to be in place tommrow. Why would anyone else play along now?

No to mention that NAFTA was renegotiated under Trumps first term.

Still it might be cheaper to just give him worthless wins with no follow thru.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#249

Post by pj_mukh » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 5:24 AM UTC

ein0p wrote: post #236

pj_mukh wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Moreover, a lot of other countries will totally provide "lethal aid" and intelligence to China, if it needs it, in hopes of taking the hegemon down a few pegs." This seems...not true. The Phillipines especially would like a word. Most of China's neighbors are begging for more American Hegemony (America is just not good at it anymore). China's industrial prowess is clear, but it's also true that. China (esp the CCP)…

See the comment above about the intellectual faculties of people who think like you do. We had to hightail out of Afghanistan. What on earth makes you believe that we could win against a peer adversary, let alone do so without a draft or millions of body bags?

America would have to do nothing like invade Mainland China to topple the CCP. War is the authoritarian achilles heel since time immemorial and China knows it (Russia doesn't), otherwise they would've taken Taiwan 10 years ago. China's best case scenario is if it could find a way to take Taiwan like they took Hong Kong, on a technicality and relatively quietly.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_the_Russian_invasion...

P.S: I especially question the mental faculties of someone who can't see other angles to a problem. China's hegemony is the mainstream opinion, it's obvious. Maybe try to question what you're not seeing now.

Re: TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

#250

Post by shigawire » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 5:26 AM UTC

ein0p wrote: post #236

pj_mukh wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Moreover, a lot of other countries will totally provide "lethal aid" and intelligence to China, if it needs it, in hopes of taking the hegemon down a few pegs." This seems...not true. The Phillipines especially would like a word. Most of China's neighbors are begging for more American Hegemony (America is just not good at it anymore). China's industrial prowess is clear, but it's also true that. China (esp the CCP)…

See the comment above about the intellectual faculties of people who think like you do. We had to hightail out of Afghanistan. What on earth makes you believe that we could win against a peer adversary, let alone do so without a draft or millions of body bags?

>had to hightail out of Afghanistan.

Not really a good comparison. Trying to build a coalition of people who didn't really care vs supporting countries in the region who are highly motivated by their own self interest.