4 ms·

> a single 3nm fab costs ~$20B to build Then counties -- or groups of countries -- that can't or won't fork out $20bn are going to effectively lose their indep

> a single 3nm fab costs ~$20B to build Then counties -- or groups of countries -- that can't or won't fork out $20bn are going to effectively lose their independence.

WJW 9y ago
It could be argued that true independence on a nation-state level has been impossible for most countries ever since a small group of larger countries started building nuclear weapons and ICBMs.
- tempodox 9y ago
  Still, I'd expect the scales to be vastly different. Computer chips are getting ever more pervasive, while not every household / office / factory has nuclear weapons and ICBMs.
- cryptonector 9y ago
  Nukes have nothing to do with the independence of nuke-free countries. It's not like either any of the nuclear club countries can threaten, say, Chile, with nuclear attack if they don't do whatever it is they want. Limited-scale nuclear war would still be a disaster in many ways (political, ecological, economic, cultural, risk of becoming a wider nuclear war, ...), so it can't happen. Small countries lose independence mainly by having to participate in the larger trade and global economy: others, especially bigger countries, have enormous leverage. Pick a small country, any small country outside the nuclear club. It will be a lot easier to force that country to do something it'd rather not using economic threats, or at most the threat of conventional warfare, than threatening nuclear attack.
  - coldtea 9y ago
    >Nukes have nothing to do with the independence of nuke-free countries. It's not like either any of the nuclear club countries can threaten, say, Chile, with nuclear attack if they don't do whatever it is they want. No, but it's the opposite. The countries not having nukes can be easily pushed aside and be invaded (like Iraq, Libya, and so on) in ways countries with nukes cannot.
    - cryptonector 9y ago
      Maybe. You need a big nuclear arsenal and credible delivery vehicles. A few nukes is not enough, as NK is finding out -- a few nukes just makes you a bigger target. A few ICBMs with a few nukes is not enough because we have missile defense. For nukes to buy you independence you need lots of them, lots of ICBMs/SLBMs, and if you don't have quite enough then you need some allies who have many more. NK doesn't really have allies. Russia won't be defending them. China likes to use NK as a bargaining chip, but they won't again go to war over it.
      - mschuster91 9y ago
        > A few nukes is not enough, as NK is finding out They are enough. With showing to the world "we can blow shit up if we want, especially the very near South Korea", they have the leverage to do whatever the f..k they want. If the US (or other Western countries) attempt to repeat Iraq/Libya, they'll blow up Seoul. Basically, they liberated themselves from any kind of pressure from the USA. That, in turn, allowed NK to actually think about meaningful peace talks with South Korea. Of course, the US will still participate in the talks, but with a lot less leverage over NK - so NK will not feel coerced by the US. (Of course, SK will feel coerced a bit more, but at least in terms of nuclear weapons they're still on the upper edge given the US-SK alliance) At least, that's what I hope: that both countries find a way back together (or at the very least, a durable peaceful coexistence), and that the NK civilian population will no longer be suffering for their leadership.
        cryptonector 9y ago
        The US has a ton of leverage, mainly over China. NK can destroy Seoul with conventional bombardment (they have something like 7,000 artillery pieces that will take longer to find and destroy than they will to go through most of their shells). They don't have enough nukes to get past American missile defense. If we don't emplace missile defense around Tokyo, then I suppose they could nuke Tokyo, and that would suck, but then what? then KJU dies. And the thing KJU most wants: to live and rule, but mostly to live.
Tuna-Fish 9y ago
It's only $20B for the next one. It's probably going to be double that for the one after that. High end chip manufacturing has been consolidating since it started, and this is the reason. There will be a time when only one company in the world can afford to have the very best fab, against which the others can then no longer compete.

> a single 3nm fab costs ~$20B to build Then counties -- or groups of countries -- that can't or won't fork out $20bn are going to effectively lose their independence.

WJW 9y ago

It could be argued that true independence on a nation-state level has been impossible for most countries ever since a small group of larger countries started building nuclear weapons and ICBMs.

tempodox 9y ago
Still, I'd expect the scales to be vastly different. Computer chips are getting ever more pervasive, while not every household / office / factory has nuclear weapons and ICBMs.
cryptonector 9y ago
Nukes have nothing to do with the independence of nuke-free countries. It's not like either any of the nuclear club countries can threaten, say, Chile, with nuclear attack if they don't do whatever it is they want. Limited-scale nuclear war would still be a disaster in many ways (political, ecological, economic, cultural, risk of becoming a wider nuclear war, ...), so it can't happen. Small countries lose independence mainly by having to participate in the larger trade and global economy: others, especially bigger countries, have enormous leverage. Pick a small country, any small country outside the nuclear club. It will be a lot easier to force that country to do something it'd rather not using economic threats, or at most the threat of conventional warfare, than threatening nuclear attack.
- coldtea 9y ago
  >Nukes have nothing to do with the independence of nuke-free countries. It's not like either any of the nuclear club countries can threaten, say, Chile, with nuclear attack if they don't do whatever it is they want. No, but it's the opposite. The countries not having nukes can be easily pushed aside and be invaded (like Iraq, Libya, and so on) in ways countries with nukes cannot.
  - cryptonector 9y ago
    Maybe. You need a big nuclear arsenal and credible delivery vehicles. A few nukes is not enough, as NK is finding out -- a few nukes just makes you a bigger target. A few ICBMs with a few nukes is not enough because we have missile defense. For nukes to buy you independence you need lots of them, lots of ICBMs/SLBMs, and if you don't have quite enough then you need some allies who have many more. NK doesn't really have allies. Russia won't be defending them. China likes to use NK as a bargaining chip, but they won't again go to war over it.
    - mschuster91 9y ago
      > A few nukes is not enough, as NK is finding out They are enough. With showing to the world "we can blow shit up if we want, especially the very near South Korea", they have the leverage to do whatever the f..k they want. If the US (or other Western countries) attempt to repeat Iraq/Libya, they'll blow up Seoul. Basically, they liberated themselves from any kind of pressure from the USA. That, in turn, allowed NK to actually think about meaningful peace talks with South Korea. Of course, the US will still participate in the talks, but with a lot less leverage over NK - so NK will not feel coerced by the US. (Of course, SK will feel coerced a bit more, but at least in terms of nuclear weapons they're still on the upper edge given the US-SK alliance) At least, that's what I hope: that both countries find a way back together (or at the very least, a durable peaceful coexistence), and that the NK civilian population will no longer be suffering for their leadership.
      - cryptonector 9y ago
        The US has a ton of leverage, mainly over China. NK can destroy Seoul with conventional bombardment (they have something like 7,000 artillery pieces that will take longer to find and destroy than they will to go through most of their shells). They don't have enough nukes to get past American missile defense. If we don't emplace missile defense around Tokyo, then I suppose they could nuke Tokyo, and that would suck, but then what? then KJU dies. And the thing KJU most wants: to live and rule, but mostly to live.

Tuna-Fish 9y ago

It's only $20B for the next one. It's probably going to be double that for the one after that. High end chip manufacturing has been consolidating since it started, and this is the reason. There will be a time when only one company in the world can afford to have the very best fab, against which the others can then no longer compete.