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

AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 761 posts

Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more

#601

Post by fn-mote »

zuminator wrote: post #548
guywithahat wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically my only opposition to US chips is that we’re less liable to protect Taiwan if China invades

I think realistically the US is unfortunately never going to protect Taiwan. There's no way I see it getting into an unwinnable hot war with China over territory so close to the mainland. If China sent troops to secure the Taiwanese fabs, how could the US possibly dislodge them without destroying the thing they want to protect? The focus on the CHIPS Act by both recent administrations seems an admission that they don…

> how could the US possibly dislodge them without destroying the thing they want to protect?

I would instead assert that it is very likely that the US would destroy the fabs rather than allow China to gain control of them through an act of aggression.

The doctrine of mutually assured destruction has been around a long time. The international players are familiar with it.

Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more

#602

Post by jeroenhd »

epolanski wrote: post #532
piyushpr134 wrote: post #530

US can simply put 20% tariffs on taiwan/chinese chips and this would be absorbed

And how does that make american IT companies with datacenters, etc, more competitive?

In the short term, chips would just be 5-20% more expensive in the US compared to anywhere else. They'd need to raise the tariffs a bit more, though, to make sure there's incentive to increase production to a level that can satisfy demand.

In the long term, it would provide the US with an independent source of chips, and eventually allow them to let go of any plants to protect Taiwan from China.

Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more

#603

Post by seszett »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #599
seszett wrote: post #598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I meant between Ukraine, RUssia and EU. > Yugoslav wars started in 1991 and ended in 2001. Russia invaded Crimea in 2014. Are these wars not "European" enough? Well, Ukraine, Russia and the former Yugoslavian republics that had wars are not part of the EU, or were not at the moment they had their wars. And even though all neighbouring countries trade with the EU, their economies are much less interdependent than th…

>So this supports the idea that the EU does prevent wars rather than invalidating it. Yes, it was all the EU economy. The 40 or so US military bases occupying the EU had nothing to do with ensuring peace on the continent.

I didn't caricature your words, so please don't do it with me.

Of course the US plays a part. But they don't have bases everywhere so it's not that obvious why it would explain why France and Luxembourg get along fine but Serbia and Kosovo don't, is it? Or Turkey and Greece, which both host US bases.

Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more

#606

Post by skeezyboy »

kelnos wrote: post #575
michaelsshaw wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What special quality do "western" countries have that makes it a moral obligation to purchase from them over others? Why is it a moral good to keep value from the others?

For all their flaws (including those plaguing the US right now), I would still much rather live under a Western-style democracy than an autocracy. Purchasing products made under autocratic regimes strengthens those regimes and gives them more power on the world stage. I think "moral obligation" (a phrase the GP did not use, for the record) is a bit over the top, though.

> Purchasing products made under autocratic regimes strengthens those regimes and gives them more power on the world stage. you wouldnt be able to export anything if other people took this stance, so how would anyone make any money?

Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more

#607

Post by criley2 »

fn-mote wrote: post #601
zuminator wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think realistically the US is unfortunately never going to protect Taiwan. There's no way I see it getting into an unwinnable hot war with China over territory so close to the mainland. If China sent troops to secure the Taiwanese fabs, how could the US possibly dislodge them without destroying the thing they want to protect? The focus on the CHIPS Act by both recent administrations seems an admission that they don…

> how could the US possibly dislodge them without destroying the thing they want to protect? I would instead assert that it is very likely that the US would destroy the fabs rather than allow China to gain control of them through an act of aggression. The doctrine of mutually assured destruction has been around a long time. The international players are familiar with it.

I highly doubt it. Taiwan would destroy their own fabs before someone else did. But that's likely unnecessary, China would be unable to operate the fabs anyway and they've already stolen the relevant information and are trying to recreate it. TSMC would get their experts out of the country and their trade partners would simply stop supplying the vital materials.

And mututally assured destruction has nothing to do with the US destroying an industry in Taiwan. MAD specifically refers to the idea that superpowers cannot engage in nuclear war against one another without also being destroyed themselves, because of a Nuclear Triad.

For "Mutually Assured Destruction" to be in anyway applicable, you'd have to say that the second that the US destroyed "Chinese" fabs (Taiwan), China would destroy American fabs. Thus, the US would not attack China without risking itself. The US making targeted strikes on Taiwan is one sided destruction. But to be clear: MAD doctrine is specifically about fullscale thermonuclear war.

Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more

#608

Post by keybored »

kelnos wrote: post #575
michaelsshaw wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What special quality do "western" countries have that makes it a moral obligation to purchase from them over others? Why is it a moral good to keep value from the others?

For all their flaws (including those plaguing the US right now), I would still much rather live under a Western-style democracy than an autocracy. Purchasing products made under autocratic regimes strengthens those regimes and gives them more power on the world stage. I think "moral obligation" (a phrase the GP did not use, for the record) is a bit over the top, though.

The West lives under semi-democracy (partial oligarchy) and exports autocracy.[1] It’s fine for us to prefer to live here (I do; well it’s what I know) but we can’t claim the moral highground (not that anyone in this thread has done that necessarily).

[1]: Why are these countries “autocracies”? To better resist foreign intervention.

Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more

#609

Post by NonHyloMorph »

simgt wrote: post #564
deelowe wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a pretty easy inference for anyone who has mfg experience. The amount you pay per worker versus the quality of work you get back is STARKLY different between US and Taiwanese companies.

As in better or worse? The Taiwanese have been making most of our chips for quite a while. Americans are not naturally more gifted individuals, most manufacturing skills are transmitted from one worker to the next.

I believe they meant that taiwanese manufacturing is superior to american..

Re: AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more

#610

Post by 4gotunameagain »

zuminator wrote: post #548
guywithahat wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically my only opposition to US chips is that we’re less liable to protect Taiwan if China invades

I think realistically the US is unfortunately never going to protect Taiwan. There's no way I see it getting into an unwinnable hot war with China over territory so close to the mainland. If China sent troops to secure the Taiwanese fabs, how could the US possibly dislodge them without destroying the thing they want to protect? The focus on the CHIPS Act by both recent administrations seems an admission that they don…

> If China sent troops to secure the Taiwanese fabs, how could the US possibly dislodge them without destroying the thing they want to protect?

The valuable bits and pieces are already equipped with a self destruct mechanism.

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/tsmcs-euv-machine...

Post reply on HN