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

891–900 of 1001 posts

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

#891

Post by coliveira »

legitster wrote: post #773
r00fus wrote: post #728

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's worse than a rebellious province. It's a more successful rebellious province. That statement just made me LOL. In what dimension other than foreign investment do you see Taiwan as more successful than China? In 2025, it's pretty clear that China has self sovereignty, is the world's factory, leads in BRICS, and isn't subject to the US empire.

Per capita income? Percentage of people with education/clean running water/out of poverty? Things that actually matter to the daily lives of people? Yes, China has lifted millions of people out of poverty over the last few decades, but the median person in China is still vastly worse off than the median person in Taiwan.

Chinese people know that Taiwan is only what it is because of money pumped by the US into the little island. It has always been the strategy of Western countries to support little states in the vicinity of enemy countries as a way to contain and divide the nation.

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

#892

Post by spwa4 »

osrec wrote: post #865
rurp wrote: post #850

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear proliferation is the only logical response to this administration. Tripling the number of nuclear armed countries will greatly increase the odds of a hot conflict breaking out which risks the safety of everyone in the world. Of course this fairly straightforward calculus seems beyond what trump/musk are capable of and they are actively working to make Americans safer and less prosperous is countless ways.

Safer? Do you mean the opposite?

The certainty of a war right now vs maybe a nuke tomorrow?

Surely you can see that's an easy choice. And if you can't perhaps read one of the articles on Bucha?

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

#893

Post by crote »

plaguuuuuu wrote: post #874
throwup238 wrote: post #847

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither of which would achieve any strategic goals. TSMC is only important because Western economies crave cutting edge silicon and causing a natural disaster by destroying the dam would not only strengthen the resolve of the Chinese public but alienate the rest of the world.

TSMC chips are used in basically everything military - computers obviously, but also tanks, planes, carriers, signals.... Taiwan would be quite invested in TSMC being a supplier of these.

Are TSMC chips crucial for them, though?

As I understand it, the military generally isn't a big fan of "move fast and break things". They prefer mature, well-designed, and reliable products because it's a matter of life and death - and development takes years.

A 2025 tank isn't going to use chips made using TSMC's cutting-edge 3nm node. Personally I'd expect the fastest chips to be using at best something like the decade-old 14nm node, with the vast majority being on even more mature nodes. Sure, TSMC can produce them, but so can pretty much everyone else. Losing TSMC would be a major blow, but I doubt it'd have a huge long-term impact logistics-wise for the military.

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

#894

Post by xdennis »

seunosewa wrote: post #507
UltraSane wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump's extreme unpredictability might actually be a advantage in this scenario.

He has been predictable in his handling of Ukraine and Israel. He favours the aggressors. He's also predictable in isolationism and wanting manufacturing moved back to America. None of this bodes well for Taiwan.

> He favours the aggressors.

Not quite. He favours isolationism. It's just that Israel is an exception because many Americans (especially religious right wingers) view it akin to a 51st US state.

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

#895

Post by rangestransform »

bitmasher9 wrote: post #888
buzzert wrote: post #856

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what makes the US "The Bad Guys" in the same sentence that mentions North Korea and China?

I think it’s Eurocentric to imply that China is morally inferior to the US. Yes the United States have more personal liberties, but China has less wealth inequality. While the US is more democratic, we have had many questionable elections in our history. Most notably in favor of the victor, Nixon committed treason by sabotaging peace talks in order to influence the ‘68 election [0]. Giving more recent examples of que…

As much progress as china as made, they definitely do not have less wealth inequality than the US. Rural China is still incredibly poor

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

#896

Post by simonh »

cvwright wrote: post #889
kbenson wrote: post #864

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they were equating the US to North Korea (where is China mentioned?), but saying that since the US can no longer be relies on for protection (instead of the sheriff we're at best the anti-hero that will maybe protect you if there's something in it for us). This means countries need to put up a stronger front themselves since there's no larger stabilizing force to rely on. It's interesting, because I'm s…

Agreed that stability is super important. So much so in fact that you’d think more rich countries would help pay to maintain it. But yet here we are…

Bear in mind that after WW2 the US didn’t want European countries arming up too much, and was quite happy to pick up the slack and set the pace. Eisenhower in particular was pretty clear he didn’t want a heavily armed Germany or Italy, for reasons that should be obvious, and was Dubious about France. It was the US that wrote the heavily pacifist Japanese constitution.

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

#897

Post by osrec »

spwa4 wrote: post #892
osrec wrote: post #865

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safer? Do you mean the opposite?

The certainty of a war right now vs maybe a nuke tomorrow? Surely you can see that's an easy choice. And if you can't perhaps read one of the articles on Bucha?

Certainty of war now Vs a potential nuclear war tomorrow? Are those really the only choices as far as you're concerned?

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

#898

Post by makeitdouble »

bitmasher9 wrote: post #888
buzzert wrote: post #856

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what makes the US "The Bad Guys" in the same sentence that mentions North Korea and China?

I think it’s Eurocentric to imply that China is morally inferior to the US. Yes the United States have more personal liberties, but China has less wealth inequality. While the US is more democratic, we have had many questionable elections in our history. Most notably in favor of the victor, Nixon committed treason by sabotaging peace talks in order to influence the ‘68 election [0]. Giving more recent examples of que…

Nitpick: I assume you really meant US centric and not "Eurocentric", as as you point out european countries are more in the middle of it and look at each camps from a distance while being involved with all of them.

In practical terms, we can see how Huawei is not banned in the EU, the EU isn't in a tariff war with China either, while it's also not a clear Chinese ally, also having a independant stance from the US in most geopolitical fights.

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

#899

Post by finghin »

worldsayshi wrote: post #872
rurp wrote: post #850

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear proliferation is the only logical response to this administration. Tripling the number of nuclear armed countries will greatly increase the odds of a hot conflict breaking out which risks the safety of everyone in the world. Of course this fairly straightforward calculus seems beyond what trump/musk are capable of and they are actively working to make Americans safer and less prosperous is countless ways.

They might not care. Musk (et al) seem to be addicted to risk taking.

He and Trump share an enormous amount of plainly evident narcissistic traits, which are effective in business but fatal combined with toxic, quixotic ideology. Impulsivity is among those features.

Narcissists embrace and promote tribalism, which shores their power and volatilises their circles and communities. As conflicts arise, individuals are forced to take side. It is better for the narcissist to lead a battle to disaster than to be the benign civilian in a country at peace.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disor...

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

#900

Post by simonh »

grepexdev wrote: post #873
NicoJuicy wrote: post #861

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Threatening to annex Greenland ( Denmark) Threatening to annex Canada and start a trade war to try to compulse them. Invoking Canadian nationalism instead. Note: he arranged the previous "trade deal" he claims to hate now. Starting a trade war with Mexico, this is actually a source of Fentanyl and I can understand. Camerading with dictators ( Russia), voting the same as them in the UN. Claiming Russia isn't the aggre…

> US is getting more and more hate from literally everywhere in a very short time because of that. A lot is changing very quick and it won't take 4 years until Trump is gone. > The entire world is pretty sure that Trump will take the US in a dictatorship and is going to loosen ties. Do you have a source for this or is it just some vibey rant? That last part seems ridiculous.

He said publicly during the election that if he won “you won’t have to vote anymore” several times, including on a Fox interview.

During protests in his first presidency in 2020 he asked his security advisors “Can’t you just shoot them, just shoot them in the legs or something?”

Combined with his persistent attempts to overturn the result when he lost to Biden, and retribution against Repubican election officials that certified Biden wins, and I’m frankly confused what isn’t clear about what’s going on.

Post reply on HN