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

781–790 of 1001 posts

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

#781

Post by legitster »

tdeck wrote: post #674
legitster wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worse than a rebellious province. It's a more successful rebellious province. For China, they hold up all of these technical accomplishments and quality of life improvements they have made under their one party system. But now over here is Taiwan that never bought in and is doing even better! It undercuts all of their messaging. If the communist party could wave a magic wand, they would take Taiwan and not just…

> they hold up all of these technical accomplishments and quality of life improvements they have made under their one party system. But now over here is Taiwan that never bought in Never bought in to one party rule huh? It seems like people forgot about the 38 years of martial law: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law_in_Taiwan

Even so, this doesn't change the fact that anything that Maoists could take credit for was done better by the non-ideologue dictator next door.

But the fact that the martial law came to an end largely democratically is good evidence that both democratic reform was easier outside of the CCCP, and that the Taiwanese single party rule was probably not as totalitarian as some people claim.

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

#782

Post by rhubarbtree »

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…

Not really sure how to read this, but to state it how most international commentators would put it:

China wants Taiwan because they think it is part of China, and because China is building an empire.

America would defend Taiwan because it wants to contain China, TSMC is an extra incentive.

In the Trump administration, this calculus may change. Trump may well let China take Taiwan in the spirit of carving up the world between major powers. I believe this will now happen.

In terms of invasion, it is far more likely China blurs the lines and blockades Taiwan, extracting concessions and using Russian-style tactics to take control without a real “war”. This is one reason why Trump’s policy in Ukraine is a disaster for the Taiwanese, as it confirms the efficacy and acceptability of such tactics.

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

#783

Post by orthecreedence »

bentt wrote: post #729
smaug7 wrote: post #628

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This to me is the correct answer. A lot of times in war it's not about logic or reason, it's about emotion and feeling. Throughout Chinese history, a leader is only "legitimate" or dare I say, have the Mandate from Heaven, when they have unified the country under one banner. It is a stain on their authority that there is "rouge" state outside the CCP's control. They will do anything to unify their country for nationa…

Yes, communist nations especially need to protect the narrative that their way is the best way. Having the Taiwanese sitting off shore thriving outside of party control is embarrassing.

I'm so happy to live in the US, a country without ceaseless propaganda about how our way of life is the best and our democracy is the best and our freedom is the only way and there is no alternative to unfettered capitalism.

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

#784

Post by michpoch »

golergka wrote: post #749
michpoch wrote: post #747

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russian army has plenty of combat experience. Russian weapons were export product and are battle tested. China has none of that. Russia brought soldiers from the far east to fight. How eager do you think Chinese will be to kill their fellow people in Taiwan? The communist government is not branding them as a enemy.

> Russian army has plenty of combat experience. Russian weapons were export product and are battle tested. Both Russian personell with real combat experience and russian weapons that have been sold to outside customers have run out in the first half a year of the war. Since late 2022, Russia is fighting with freshly mobilized troops that go from being civilians to dying in a meat attack in less than a week with no bo…

> Since late 2022, Russia is fighting with freshly mobilized troops that go from being civilians to dying in a meat attack

The frontline troops - sure, but officers and up?

Now think if the Chinese will be willing to take part in a meat-grinder war?

> 1960s tanks from Soviet stockpiles.

You mean in a battle-tested equipment. China got some-quality modernised soviet equipment with operators that never took part in any operations.

China has certainly a weaker military than Russia before the war. And a society that might not be willing to die in millions to occupy a small island where their fellow people live, for no good reason other than political.

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

#785

Post by ithkuil »

lupusreal wrote: post #697
knowitnone wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the US made China it's manufacturing arm and now the US wants to take that back? Kind of late. If China invades Taiwan, the US is to blame. Talk about putting all your eggs in one basket.

> If China invades Taiwan, the US is to blame That's completely deranged. The CCP has intended to take Taiwan from day one. Before they even managed to drive the ROC out of mainland China they intended to take all of China, including Taiwan, and their failure to take Taiwan has never been something they were satisfied with. Manufacturing has nothing to do with it. America only has anything to do with it insofar as th…

Yeah that weird logic is all too common recently. I'll paraphrase:

The ravenous wild beast is pounding at your door. The only thing standing before you and certain death is your front door that needs urgent repairs. You call your landlord begging for help but they say it's not their problem.

The beast smashes through the door and eats you up.

Some would agree that the landlord is to blame because of inaction. Some would argue instead that the landlord is not responsible for your problem. You should have not provoked the beast. Or fixed the door yourself. Or paid more rent etc.

This framing only works of the wild beast has no agency at all. It's by definition wild and we all know what it will do and it can't help itself but being a man eating wild beast. It has no moral obligation to not be a man eating beast.

But by applying this framing to Russia and CCP you're dehumanizing them. You're assuming that they are so evil they cannot possibly have any moral obligations and so the burden falls on third parties (or worse, you, their victim!) if they attack you!

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

#786

Post by grotorea »

saberience wrote: post #775
skyyler wrote: post #640

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"rouge" means red "rogue" means rascal

Jesus, you realize people just mistype things sometimes? It really annoys me when people feel like they have to come in and correct others this way, it's so condescending.

This specific one is so common, are people actually mistyping or getting autocompleted? flashbacks to Rouge One

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

#787

Post by zuminator »

saberience wrote: post #775
skyyler wrote: post #640

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"rouge" means red "rogue" means rascal

Jesus, you realize people just mistype things sometimes? It really annoys me when people feel like they have to come in and correct others this way, it's so condescending.

Personally, I'm grateful to be corrected on a casual and anonymous forum if it saves me from making the same mistake on a formal document, condescension notwithstanding. My response to grammar cops is either, "Thank you!" if it was due to my ignorance, or "Oops, damned autocorrect/typo/ brain fart," if a lack of attention was at fault.

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

#789

Post by KoftaBob »

deagle50 wrote: post #288
justahuman74 wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A vast nuclear weapons program is cheaper than $100b

It would not go unnoticed and would pretty much guarantee invasion.

They can ask for Israel's assistance, they managed to (relatively) covertly develop nuclear weapons without a major power getting in their way.

Granted, the US president who was pushing the most for inspections of Israel's Dimona nuclear facility was JFK, who ended up no longer being a problem for them (how very convenient).

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

#790

Post by rtkwe »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #763
thereddaikon wrote: post #611

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China doesn't want Taiwan for TSMC. They want Taiwan because they see them as a rebellious province. In their mind, the Chinese civil war never ended and that island is the last bastion of the Kuomintang. One way I've heard it described in a way that is easier for Americans to understand is; Imagine at the end of the American Civil War, a confederate army retreated to an island like Cuba or Hawaii, they took it over…

> They want Taiwan because they see them as a rebellious province. We can argue about what the exact desire is - there's 100M people in the CCP - we'll probably never know an exact answer. The important thing is - China is willing to spend a LOT more money to take Taiwan than it is economically worth. So this idea that 1) China wants Taiwan for chips, 2) War would cost more than chips, 3) Therefore, Taiwan is logical…

There's one big strategic thing the Ukraine war offers Russia and that's a nice balmy port and (if they'd managed the original 3 days to Kiev) removing a potential invasion front on it's juicy underbelly.
Post reply on HN