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

801–810 of 1001 posts

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

#801

Post by genman »

CDRdude wrote: post #764
preisschild wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine at the end of the American Civil War, a confederate army retreated to an island like Cuba or Hawaii, they took it over and have been calling themselves the real America ever since. In reality while the confederate states were part of the United States, the Republic of China (Taiwan) was never part of the Peoples Republic of China (communist China), its the reverse.

Analogies don’t have to be 100% perfect. The Confederate analogy gets the point across just fine.

It only deceives.

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

#802

Post by thereddaikon »

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…

I use China in this context to mean the Chinese state which given their system is interchangeable with the CCP. So you can subv in CCP in my statement or even Xi if you want since he is unequivocally running things.

In the case of Ukraine, Russia's (read: the russian government which is synonymous with Putin who dictator in all but name) motivation is somewhat similar. But they don't see Ukraine as a rebellious province. They see it as a vassal state as they do all of the other former SSRs and members of the Warsaw pact. Putin and his nationalist group have a very old world view of things and a very specific concept of what their rightful sphere of influence is and what exactly it means to control it. This isn't even unique to them. After securing power, the Bolsheviks quickly attempted to bring former Russian imperial possessions back under their control. That included Ukraine, Poland and Finland. Poland and Finland were able to secure their independence, Ukraine was less fortunate. For all the talk of anti imperialism, they were just as imperial as their predecessors. So this is just russians being russians and an inability for their world view to evolve past the 19th century.

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

#803

Post by bentt »

orthecreedence wrote: post #783
bentt wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I mean on one hand we can do better but on the other, last I checked there's not been a time where citizens were hauled off to prison in the US for disparaging capitalism. Closest we came was the red scare in the 50s and that was tame in comparison to what Stalin and Mao and Pol Pot and Castro and Ho Chi Minh and (do I need to keep going?) put their subjects through.

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

#804

Post by thereddaikon »

wnevets wrote: post #671
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…

> 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 ove…

Its an imperfect analogy but I'm trying to illustrate an idea in a more relatable way. If you pick at the details it will fall apart.

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

#805

Post by dontlikeyoueith »

tazjin wrote: post #755
FuriouslyAdrift wrote: post #737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taiwan is 3x more prosperous per capita. PRC just has a lot more people.

So Norway and maybe Monaco are more successful than the US?

In improving the lives of their people?

Yes, absolutely.

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

#807

Post by runako »

golergka wrote: post #751
runako wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not being snarky here, but what is the benefit of a chip fab in Arizona, thousands of miles from the assembly lines where the chips will be used? I get why it would be important for niche (e.g. defense) applications, but is TSMC scale really needed?

> chip fab in Arizona, thousands of miles from the assembly lines where the chips will be used 1. Chips have a very high $/kg density, so logistics isn't go to change unit economics a lot. 2. These assembly lines are much easier to construct than chip fabs, so if there is any reason to keep the two close, it's not going to be a problem anyway.

> logistics isn't go to change unit economics a lot

Doesn't the shipping time matter, though? And haven't we recently seen that long supply lines are brittle?

> These assembly lines are much easier to construct than chip fabs, so if there is any reason to keep the two close

I was thinking also in terms of the scale of people required to operate them, plus the transport etc. infrastructure to keep them running. All that, and a hypothetical US factory would have labor costs 5x or higher. That would seem to make it an emergency-only scenario?

I just don't see the scenario where such a fab would make economic sense.

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

#808

Post by greedo »

rtkwe wrote: post #790
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #763

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

What port? They already have Crimea (since 2014) and the Black Sea isn't really 'balmy.'

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

#809

Post by iwontberude »

Iolaum wrote: post #589
iwontberude wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To follow up, Taiwan literally blocks their ability to see and defend against attacks coming from behind the Taiwanese island. It’s about observability and reducing easy beachheads.

Given the satellite assets China has I doubt it's true that Taiwan blocks China's abilities to see attacks coming from behind Taiwanese island.

This is specifically for missiles launched by submarines over Taiwan from just off the eastern coast.

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

#810

Post by dragonwriter »

genman wrote: post #798
rtkwe wrote: post #790

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The only reason Russia is against NATO is the article 5 - it makes attacking peaceful nations more expensive and risky for them. That is all there is.

> The only reason Russia is against NATO is the article 5

Nah, they are also against Article 4 (regional security), which while not as concrete of a commitment, applies much more broadly, and which leads to things like the current support for Ukraine, not just Article 5 (mutual defense), which only affects hem when they would want to target a NATO member’s territory in and in a couple areas close to Europe or North America.

Post reply on HN