Live data from Hacker News

Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

datacenterdynamics.com

401–410 of 453 posts

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#401
post #400
post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's not a whole hour of labor in each iPhone. Not even close. Humans just put together robot-assembled boards, screens, and so on. If this is re-shored, it wouldn't be that difficult for Apple to reduce manual labor even further than that, possibly to near zero. I've tried to repair an iPhone PCB once where an SMD resistor fell off. I couldn't do it, even though I have a hot air workstation and a bench microscope…

> an M1 Pro die, which is manufactured _solely_ by robots, and can't even use human labor I was not aware that there were no employees in modern chip fabs. They must require some sort of maintenance cycle, how often do humans come to modern chip fabs?

"Maintenance" won't add $100 per die like GP is suggesting. There are hundreds of dies per wafer, and thousands of wafers within maintenance interval. We're talking a very small incremental cost. And it too could be reduced to account for more expensive labor.

I'd like to pose a better question: why do you voluntarily carry water for Apple? If you are in the US (or in one of its allied countries), on-shoring advanced semiconductors, and other types of advanced manufacturing is 100% beneficial to you no matter from which perspective you consider it.

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#402
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China has no reason to invade Taiwan, and plenty of reasons to avoid doing it. The whole thing is just another American wet dream.

Did you feel the same way about Hong Kong?

Seeing that Hong Kong was literally an NED-sponsored [1] color revolution, and that every country in the world had a national security law except for Hong Kong until last year, I'd say that the Hong Kong situation is not at all a case study for whether China would invade Taiwan. Since 2019 I've watched for a year how the western public and the protesters yelled that "it's going to be a Tiananmen 2.0" and "the tanks will soon roll in", only for the tanks to never have rolled in. In the mean time, the protesters who were called "pro-democracy" by western mainstream media were doing some very undemocratic things, such as assaulting fellow Hong Kongers for merely disagreeing with them[2].

Two Hong Kong youths have a Youtube channel on which they present views that don't align with mainstream western media. This interview is very telling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYK-cC9mw6c The guest on the show interviewed 100 protesters. What's interesting is that none of the protesters were able to explain what concrete change they want. The protesters merely blindly reigurated media talking points without being able to explain what's behind those talking points. None of them have actually read the NSL text.

Sound familiar? Yes: the "anti-voting fraud" Capitol rioters, who were hiding unnoble intentions behind a noble label. Many Hong Kong "protesters" were merely anti-China, not pro-democratic. They literally attacked people merely for speaking Mandarin. Ironically, one guy that was attacked was Taiwanese, not mainland Chinese.

Seeing how they literally burned innocent people[3], vandalized public infrastructure, vandalized mainland Chinese busineses merely for being mainland Chinese, made petrol bombs[4], etc. is it really reasonable to expect China to do absolutely nothing? Bringing back safety to the streets is what any government would do. After it was clear that they'd never send in tanks, people moved the goalpost and started demonizing the NSL but few people know what's actually in the NSL.

Demise of Hong Kong's rule of law are exaggerated. Even after the NSL, Hong Kong's judiciary remains fiercely independent — with evidence.[5]

[1] The NED is the regime change arm of the CIA. Despite the name, they are anti-democratic, having overthrown democratic regimes that refuse to align with the US. They publicly admit having sponsored the Hong Kong protests: https://www.ned.org/region/asia/hong-kong-china-2020/

[2] Videos: https://twitter.com/DanielDumbrill/status/116629626167206297...

[3] https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/30...

[4] https://twitter.com/SCMPHongKong/status/1195968903748317184

[5] https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/hong-kong/article/31480...

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know a few people who went to university near a large Intel campus that was always hiring. These people told me that if you got hired into Intel, it was almost always as a design verification & validation engineer, and that getting an actual design (architecture) job was near impossible (especially as a recent graduate, even with an MS). Is it the same for Samsung?

how could a new grad be qualified to design a new intel chip? seems like those are necessary stepping stones to learn all the real world issues that would be involved in actually designing a chip.

If they're talented and knowledgeable enough to contribute. Top tier students can do it. They don't need to start in validation.

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't Samsung big enough to simply ask permissions to build their own nuclear reactor at that point ? Or wind turbine farms or whatever ?

A new nuclear plant cost billions and takes years to get permission and construction to complete. I assume they rather want to make chips, soon.

Well, for the sake of entertainment let's see: I suppose Samsung still want to be able to manufacture products in its Texan factories for more than 5 years (which according to my small European contry is roughly the time it took to build a nuclear power plant in the 70's) and they have billions (oh and Apple too) and according to Google's first results:

     Companies that are planning new nuclear units are currently indicating that the total costs (including escalation and financing costs) will be in the range of $5,500/kW to $8,100/kW or between $6 billion and $9 billion for each 1,100 MW plant.
So why not ? They'd control one more link in the supply chain.

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#405
post #399
post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a full scale conflict, carrier group would be sunk by subs in the first 15 minutes. Those carrier groups are a relic of the past that only works against unsophisticated adversaries who do not have the largest submarine fleet in the world [1] or nukes. US military planners know this so any such things will be withdrawn shortly before shit is about to go down, or (more likely) never brought in in the first place. An…

To those downvoting, if your attention span is long enough for a long read, here's an explanation of why the United States will 100% guaranteed lose if it chooses to engage: https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2021/11/03/america-agains...

I read that. Doesn't at all explain why the US would be guaranteed to lose in a naval conflict in the Taiwan strait.

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#406
post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://youtu.be/83b_u5V51U8 Here's a good example

I appreciate your response, but that is just one teacher though not any kind of policy. I am trying to find out what specific part of California's "Critical Race Theory" curriculum you object to. I hear a lot of people who are mad about the teaching of CRT in schools, but thus far no one has provided me concrete examples of any specific teachings that are objectionable. It seems to me to be more of bogey man rather t…

https://dc.medill.northwestern.edu/blog/2020/07/21/the-1619-...

Here's a better example. I think youre delusional if you think this isnt real

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#407
post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To those downvoting, if your attention span is long enough for a long read, here's an explanation of why the United States will 100% guaranteed lose if it chooses to engage: https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2021/11/03/america-agains...

I read that. Doesn't at all explain why the US would be guaranteed to lose in a naval conflict in the Taiwan strait.

Because the US has been ruled by incompetent and corrupt imbeciles since the 70s. And there's now a second generation of incompetent imbeciles in the government who were students back then. If you think they can avert, let alone win this, you're out of your mind. Our best play here is to not intervene on another country's behalf seeing how we couldn't win against a bunch of semi-literate cave dwellers with Kalashnikovs after 20 years and 2 trillion dollars. War against today's China would be unwinnable in _any_ shape or form whatsoever under any circumstances even if we had competent leadership, which is something we do not have, and haven't seen in 50 years.

Watch the YT video linked in the article. China is in the position of strength now. They're on an upward trajectory. We're on a steep downward one. And that won't change until we at least acknowledge the realities of our present predicament, and begin the serious, careful work to rectify it. I see no signs of that even being possible the way things are right now, let alone likely.

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A new nuclear plant cost billions and takes years to get permission and construction to complete. I assume they rather want to make chips, soon.

Well, for the sake of entertainment let's see: I suppose Samsung still want to be able to manufacture products in its Texan factories for more than 5 years (which according to my small European contry is roughly the time it took to build a nuclear power plant in the 70's) and they have billions (oh and Apple too) and according to Google's first results: Companies that are planning new nuclear units are currently indi…

"So why not ? They'd control one more link in the supply chain."

Because operating a nuclear reactor is a whole different thing, than operating a chip plant and you usually want to focus your energy, not spread it out. And when the goal is, to just have blackout save energy for your chip plant, then there are way cheaper, riskfree and faster solutions, like batteries, or gas generators.

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#409
post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>he said unification in a "peaceful manner" was "most in line with the overall interest of the Chinese nation, including Taiwan compatriots". Are you sure that’s the article you wanted to link to?

As far as American access to semiconductors goes, it doesn't matter if the takeover is peaceful or not. Chinese control over Taiwan could easily disrupt the supply chain through tariffs, export bans, backdoored hardware, etc etc.

Yes, China could do what the US is doing right now. So what?

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#410
post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is now much more open then they were for a long time and as it happens their growth really started when they did that. The are 1.4 billion people who have embraced mostly 'typical capitalism' that is comparable to most countries in the world do. Its not like they are the first to have the idea of tarrifs or helping strategic industries. China has continental scale and 100s of millions of people living on the co…

The pushback from many whenever it’s suggested that the US should undergo a general trend to bring back manufacturing jobs to America always fascinates me. I always wonder what’s going through their heads when they prefer that things continue to be made on the other side of the world in a sweatshop paying their workers cents on the dollar to make cheap, soulless, throwaway goods in countries with terrible environment…

It is bordering on racist to suggest that because things are US produced they will be Quality over Quantity. What you actually need to win is Quality and Quantity. The same arrogance the US manufactures had about Japan and got their as kicked.

At seems like you have some delusional fantasy that the world could run on locally made artisanal goods and that those goods then magically have more 'soul' (whatever that is) and would be better for the environment. And even if that was the case, these products would still depend on international supply chain.

Its equally false to suggest that everything outside of the US is made in sweatshops. China doesn't dominate because of sweatshops, but because going down stream, mining, refining. These are complex operations, requiring lots of educated engineering, capital and vision. Look at a company like CATL that is powering much of the worlds EVs. This is a company that exploded in growth in a highly complex industry.

> Paying more for something better?

So like car from Japan, Europe and soon China?

Where are you getting those high quality electronics, batteries, refined rare earths and so on? Please tell me the US companies who produce all these amazing things that are so much better then those from the international competition

> It wasn’t long ago at all that we were making most of the stuff we bought.

Who is 'we'? The US? Your family? Are you advocating to go back to per modernism where every woman was doing 40h of weaving for the family to have cloth?

The US never produced everything it needed. In modern history international supply chains are a thing.

And this was most true after the US literally bombed the shit out of Europe and Japan. And China was destroyed by Japan. Soviets and China turned communist. Maybe do that again and you can again do that? Even then it was the US and the British empire.

> Call out every company you see that doesn’t make their products in the USA and ask when they’re going to stop selling out their own neighbors just for a buck.

You can't fix problem by calling people out. If you force companies to make 'everything local' then they will simply no longer be internationally competitive.

If you seriously think to just cut of the US from the rest of the world would lead to a higher standard of living you are sorely mistaken.

Your level of understanding of the connection between international trade and living standards seems to be totally lacking. Your suggestion to just 'guilt' (or assuming with fines or whatever) every company into buying all local is a surefire way to completely destroy the economy and the competitiveness of the US.

And its simply anti-democratic. People might be willing to pay 1% more if something is marketed as locally produced. But most of the time people don't actually care. And they never cared. People care about themselves and their families and their standard of live. If Japan makes better cars, they will not simply buy American because its made in Detroit. The same goes for everything else.

If you want to improve standards of living, just cutting yourself of from international trade is literally the worst thing to do.

Post reply on HN