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

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

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 1001 posts

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

#421

Post by drodgers »

throw84949499 wrote: post #360
tnt128 wrote: post #314

The idea that the US protects Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion over chips is one of those things that sounds believable but really isn't going to happen. From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves. In the worst-case scenario, they would be 2-3 years behind the cutting edge, which is not mission-critical. Most electronics (civilian or military) do…

Why would China even invide Taiwan? It would destroy "their" infrastructure and kill "their" people! There are much better ways to remove US influence from Taiwan! They can just put sanctions or even blockade Taiwan. And if China puts sanctions on US, and dumps its USD reserves, it can destroy US economy. US is crazy about proxies fighting their "enemies" for them. This type of thinking needs to stop! This is not col…

> even blockade Taiwan.

An act of war, which the US would respond to with a freedom-of-navigation exercise backed up by the full might of US-PACOM. China would lose that standoff, which is why they're unlikely to do it unless they were confident of US non-involvement.

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

#422

Post by drodgers »

WhereIsTheTruth wrote: post #397
UberFly wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would China even invade Taiwan? For the same reasons they invaded and took Hong Kong. Because they have their own manifest destiny to reunify their country into what it once was. They don't care about the collateral damage to achieve this in the end.

You got brainwashed https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12503/1 "1982 U.S.-PRC Joint Communiqué/Six Assurances As they negotiated establishment of diplomatic relations, the U.S. and PRC governments agreed to set aside the contentious issue of U.S. arms sales to Taiwan. They took up that issue in the 1982 August 17 Communiqué, in which the PRC states “a fundamental policy of striving for peaceful reunific…

I don't see how the commenter is 'brainwashed'.

The One China Policy was and remains a convenient status quo for all parties. The risk is that China decides that it's newfound economic and military might have changed that calculus.

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

#423

Post by narrator »

tnt128 wrote: post #314

The idea that the US protects Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion over chips is one of those things that sounds believable but really isn't going to happen. From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves. In the worst-case scenario, they would be 2-3 years behind the cutting edge, which is not mission-critical. Most electronics (civilian or military) do…

They are building hundreds of naval destroyers and multiple aircraft carriers to invade a tiny island? Nope. The CCP is prepping to be the world hegemon and take over the world with drone swarms and bioweapons.

The Taiwan game is like the "Gulf of America" trick that Trump played. It's a test to see if you're with the CCP or against the CCP diplomatically.

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

#424

Post by areyousure »

0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #365
cheema33 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Current administration is fast tracking nuclear prolifiacian. This is correct. Gone are the days when countries could count on the US to provide some protection against illegal invasions. All nations without nukes have to be considering them seriously now. Sure, they signed the NPT. But agreements no longer mean what they used to. Russia violates most of the agreements it signs. US already trashed the Budapest memo…

>US already trashed the Budapest memorandum that it signed in 1996. We were supposed to provide security to Ukraine in exchange for them giving up nukes. This is a common misconception. If you read the memorandum (it's rather short) you'll see it isn't true. We only promised to seek UN Security Council action. We went far beyond that. https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/P...

You are correct that the Memorandum is rather short.

The promise to seek UN Security Council action is only in case Ukraine is attacked with nuclear weapons.

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

#425

Post by xuki »

Stephen_0xFF wrote: post #183
xuki wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US will NOT engage in a hot war against China for Taiwan, that's for certain, regardless of who is president at that time. Why would they risk nuclear war for a bunch of people who are really far away from the US continent?

It’s not so much the people or the land, but rather what they can build. It’s the whole essence of the article. Not sure how far behind the West would fall if TSMC was controlled by the CCP. 5 years? 10?

If the key thing is to avoid China getting access to TSMC plants, I'm sure there are ways to do it without risking US troops. The West would have to live with inferior Intel nodes for a while, but it would be better than anything China could produce.

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

#426

Post by logifail »

tnt128 wrote: post #314

The idea that the US protects Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion over chips is one of those things that sounds believable but really isn't going to happen. From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves. In the worst-case scenario, they would be 2-3 years behind the cutting edge, which is not mission-critical. Most electronics (civilian or military) do…

> The idea that the US protects Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion over chips is one of those things that sounds believable but really isn't going to happen.

I recently got (second-hand) one Taiwanese business perspective on this.

Background: A friend of mine runs an SME in Europe and one of their key suppliers is in Taiwan. Friend visits Taiwan regularly to maintain the relationship. The following conversation happened around a year ago.

My friend gets talking [in private, off the record, after a drink or three] to one of the Taiwanese managers, and the topic turns to China and the invasion scenario. My friend asked if the Taiwanese business had put any thought into what might happen (thinking maybe they've explored the business continuity angles).

The Taiwanese guy basically shrugged, and said that if the Chinese were to launch an invasion, "Taiwan is completely * * * *ed", there's nothing the US or anyone else could or would do to be able to prevent that. He apparently didn't seem up tight about, more resigned. No interest in trying to plan any kind of response, because they feel they'd be hit with overwhelming force and would be completely on their own for long enough that it would all be over.

My friend was and still is concerned about his business continuity, with his key supplier potentially going offline, so is quietly exploring his options.

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

#427

Post by ein0p »

appointment wrote: post #392
DeathArrow wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The Phillipines especially would like a word. BRICS will support China. Most of the unaligned countries will do the same. It will be US, EU, Canada, Australia, Japan, Philippines against the rest of the world. And it's not so much about military might as is about industrial capacity, raw materials and logistics.

The idea that Brazil, South Africa and fucking India would support the PRC against the USA is absurd.

Depending on what they get from China in return, it might not be as absurd as you think. We're not talking direct participation here after all - China has more than enough people. Just some "lethal aid" if e.g. artillery stocks start running low. Another clever and relatively cheap way to extend us would be to stir up trouble where our troops are stationed in the Middle East, for example. This trouble could also use the "lethal aid" from third parties, who would not be directly involved in any fighting.

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

#428

Post by cookiemonsieur »

huijzer wrote: post #406
tnt128 wrote: post #314

The idea that the US protects Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion over chips is one of those things that sounds believable but really isn't going to happen. From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves. In the worst-case scenario, they would be 2-3 years behind the cutting edge, which is not mission-critical. Most electronics (civilian or military) do…

> From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves. For China it’s not about the chips. It’s about getting rid of the humiliation that is having a small island, that was originally part of China, not be a part of China.

[flagged]

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

#429

Post by shellfishgene »

starspangled wrote: post #262
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

TSMC factories on Taiwan are small fry in the scheme of things and won't really move the needle much, in terms of strategy. Samsung and Intel are pretty comparable in manufacturing capability, within a couple of years really. And most chips you find in cars and ships and missiles and satellites and jets aren't leading-edge either. China is terrified of their access to the sea being blockaded. They'd gladly give up TS…

How would you bock China's access to the sea along it's 14000 km coastline? That woulde be a heck of a blockade, with or without Taiwan.

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

#430

Post by stann »

_t9ow wrote: post #398
toyg wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Russia has won the Cold War without direct military confrontation with the US. Let's not rewrite history just to score some cheap propaganda points: the USSR lost the Cold War, and lost it badly. Russia (or rather, putinism) might be winning Cold War II, or The Oligarchic Wars, or whatever you want to call this new conflict, but the actual Cold War ended in the 90s.

I apologise; it was not my intention to rewrite history. It was a rhetorical device, though I can see how I came across as trying to be revisionist. But you're right that it's important to be precise.

Tell me this response was not generated by AI
Post reply on HN