6 ms·

A funny things is that we keep hearing about US only tech power, but AMSL (NL), is needed by TSMC (TW) to engrave a reference design by ARM (UK). But US is goin

A funny things is that we keep hearing about US only tech power, but AMSL (NL), is needed by TSMC (TW) to engrave a reference design by ARM (UK). But US is going one more time to limit EU tech by getting its hand on both ARM and AMSL as they previously did with many EU tech companies... At one point EU should realize that the US are playing the same game as the Chinese and are really not business friend.

lnsru 6y ago
ARM isn’t UK company since 2016. Maybe current situation isn’t that bad and will lead to international RISC-V explosion.
- mahkeiro 6y ago
  Again this shareholder nationality things? (A Japanese shareholder don’t make ARM a Japanese company). Because by this metric a lot of US companies are not US... (a couple of them can even be Norwegian or Saudi despite having no presence were there shareholders resides).
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - kqvamxurcagg 6y ago
    I've been involved with many international groups where the controlling shareholders have a different domicile to the operating company. The shareholders will always call the shots. They can replace operating teams, restructure the business and transfer technology. The ultimate shareholder has control - have absolutely no doubt about that.
    - simonh 6y ago
      From an economic perspective that's not really the issue, it's the facilities, employment, skills and access to technology that governments mainly care about. Who the owner is only really matters to the extent that it influences those facts on the ground. Any owner could move the company's operations, no matter what their nationality.
bjorn2k 6y ago
Also Cymer is a US company acquired by ASML (https://www.asml.com/en/company/about-asml/cymer https://www.asml.com/en/company/about-asml/cymer). They provide the technology for EUV source.
parsimo2010 6y ago
The EU knows this, but they will continue to comply with US trade sanctions until they can live without the US in all areas. A giant hurdle (but not the only one) is NATO and being able to counter Russia. While NATO and the EU are separate, many countries are members of both. If the EU took a hard stance and said that they value trade with China more than the US's security complaints, the US could very well use that as an excuse to pull troops out of Europe. And if anyone thinks that doesn't matter, just know that a Russian invasion (or more likely erosion of borders) is something that terrifies EU leaders far more than missing out on sales to China.
- akie 6y ago
  All this talk about NATO still being an active entity in the protection of Europe is dangerous and hopelessly naïve. As long as Trump is president, I don't think we need to have any illusions as to which side he would chose in a hypothetical armed conflict between the EU and Russia (he would pick no side). EU politicians should wake up and smell the coffee, and invest in an EU army before it's too late. We really (desperately) need strategic independence from the US and other foreign powers. The US in particular has been an unpredictable, unreliable, and untrustworthy partner in the past two decades or so (e.g. Iran deal, Paris climate accords, Iraq war, EU-US trade wars, ...) EDIT: Stop downvoting me and tell me instead where I'm wrong.
  - DFHippie 6y ago
    > As long as Trump is president So until January 21st.
  - parsimo2010 6y ago
    > EU politicians should wake up and smell the coffee, and invest in an EU army before it’s too late They could, but at least in the short term it appears to be cheaper to let the US spend the money on their military and still get the benefits, even factoring some lost trade to China. It would take many $123mm lithography machines to make up for the billions they would need to create a standing army. That trade off will change, but everything hinges on the “before it’s too late” part of your argument, which you can be assured that virtually no democratically elected politician will get right, since they are looking at <10 years by nature of political campaigns.
mtgx 6y ago
Same with Qualcomm trying to buy NXP (also from NL). It only failed because the Chinese gov refused to accept the merger. But the EU had already agreed to it. The UK should have never agreed to Google buying DeepMind either. These companies have tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars in cash. They can afford to "create" a new competitor in the market, rather than take out OUT of the market, and it we would all be better off. I really think all $100+ million acquisitions of companies should enter automatic anti-trust review. Maybe even lower than that. These acquisitions by large companies hurt consumers in two ways. Either they squander the disruptive technology and nothing comes out of it, slowing down progress for everyone, or they put it to good use and then they get to maintain or extend their dominant positions - and we don't want any of that to happen as consumers. We want these large companies to continue to have healthy competition. It's better for consumers and it's better for the job market, too (fewer companies in the market = fewer job hunting opportunities = downward pressure on salaries).
kabes 6y ago
And IMEC (BE) is pretty important in that chain as well
mschuster91 6y ago
> At one point EU should realize that the US are playing the same game as the Chinese and are really not business friend. While I (as a German) agree that the US imperialism and dominance in high tech is a problem, I would not go as low and say the US is on the same level as China, which is an outright threat to all core values of the Western nations.
- someguydave 6y ago
  yes, for one thing German companies can and do purchase and operate US subsidiaries without much government interference, unlike in China
  - oblio 6y ago
    I find the irony of your comment quite funny. I'm assuming the previous comment about "core Western values" wasn't referring to "unfettered capitalism" but to stuff like "democracy", "respect of human rights", ... :-)
    - hajile 6y ago
      Capitalism is fundamentally as flawed as people are -- but it beats everything else by a huge margin. If you're going to parse hairs, democracy is inherently NOT a "western value". Alexander Hamilton went on at great length in the early federalist papers about the fate of democracies. All failed rather quickly. We formed a republic with democratic elements BECAUSE direct democracy is so tyrannical and doesn't protect minority groups leading to it's downfall. Despite all the complaints, I'd love to see a country throughout history with better treatment of minorities. That country just doesn't exist and countries making things better for minorities over time was even less known at the USA founding. Finally, foreign affairs are much closer to anarcho-capitalism than anything which implies that anarcho-capitalism is the most free one could theoretically be (though the immediate fall into despotism would make the short-lived freedom of little value).
      - someguydave 6y ago
bgorman 6y ago
Intel, a US company provided ASML the funds to develop their latest technology (EUV). (https://newsroom.intel.com/news-releases/intel-and-asml-reach-agreements-to-accelerate-key-next-generation-semiconductor-manufacturing-technologies/ https://newsroom.intel.com/news-releases/intel-and-asml-reac...) In retrospect, Intel should have insisted on much more onerous terms. There are other suppliers who make photolithography equipment, if ASML went bankrupt, the industry would just fund the competitors.
- pieterr 6y ago
  Your link is from 2012. Five years later, Intel reduced their stake in ASML. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-asml-holding-intel-stake/intel-reduces-stake-in-asml-to-below-3-percent-idUSKCN1MM0QD https://www.reuters.com/article/us-asml-holding-intel-stake/...
bitcurious 6y ago
On ARM: > The company was founded in November 1990 as Advanced RISC Machines Ltd and structured as a joint venture between Acorn Computers, Apple Computer (now Apple Inc.) and VLSI Technology. > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arm_Holdings https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arm_Holdings
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
SkyMarshal 6y ago
How is the US getting ASML? I hadn't heard anything about that.

lnsru 6y ago

ARM isn’t UK company since 2016. Maybe current situation isn’t that bad and will lead to international RISC-V explosion.

mahkeiro 6y ago
Again this shareholder nationality things? (A Japanese shareholder don’t make ARM a Japanese company). Because by this metric a lot of US companies are not US... (a couple of them can even be Norwegian or Saudi despite having no presence were there shareholders resides).
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- kqvamxurcagg 6y ago
  I've been involved with many international groups where the controlling shareholders have a different domicile to the operating company. The shareholders will always call the shots. They can replace operating teams, restructure the business and transfer technology. The ultimate shareholder has control - have absolutely no doubt about that.
  - simonh 6y ago
    From an economic perspective that's not really the issue, it's the facilities, employment, skills and access to technology that governments mainly care about. Who the owner is only really matters to the extent that it influences those facts on the ground. Any owner could move the company's operations, no matter what their nationality.

bjorn2k 6y ago

Also Cymer is a US company acquired by ASML (https://www.asml.com/en/company/about-asml/cymer https://www.asml.com/en/company/about-asml/cymer). They provide the technology for EUV source.

parsimo2010 6y ago

The EU knows this, but they will continue to comply with US trade sanctions until they can live without the US in all areas. A giant hurdle (but not the only one) is NATO and being able to counter Russia. While NATO and the EU are separate, many countries are members of both. If the EU took a hard stance and said that they value trade with China more than the US's security complaints, the US could very well use that as an excuse to pull troops out of Europe. And if anyone thinks that doesn't matter, just know that a Russian invasion (or more likely erosion of borders) is something that terrifies EU leaders far more than missing out on sales to China.

akie 6y ago
All this talk about NATO still being an active entity in the protection of Europe is dangerous and hopelessly naïve. As long as Trump is president, I don't think we need to have any illusions as to which side he would chose in a hypothetical armed conflict between the EU and Russia (he would pick no side). EU politicians should wake up and smell the coffee, and invest in an EU army before it's too late. We really (desperately) need strategic independence from the US and other foreign powers. The US in particular has been an unpredictable, unreliable, and untrustworthy partner in the past two decades or so (e.g. Iran deal, Paris climate accords, Iraq war, EU-US trade wars, ...) EDIT: Stop downvoting me and tell me instead where I'm wrong.
- DFHippie 6y ago
  > As long as Trump is president So until January 21st.
- parsimo2010 6y ago
  > EU politicians should wake up and smell the coffee, and invest in an EU army before it’s too late They could, but at least in the short term it appears to be cheaper to let the US spend the money on their military and still get the benefits, even factoring some lost trade to China. It would take many $123mm lithography machines to make up for the billions they would need to create a standing army. That trade off will change, but everything hinges on the “before it’s too late” part of your argument, which you can be assured that virtually no democratically elected politician will get right, since they are looking at <10 years by nature of political campaigns.

mtgx 6y ago

Same with Qualcomm trying to buy NXP (also from NL). It only failed because the Chinese gov refused to accept the merger. But the EU had already agreed to it. The UK should have never agreed to Google buying DeepMind either. These companies have tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars in cash. They can afford to "create" a new competitor in the market, rather than take out OUT of the market, and it we would all be better off. I really think all $100+ million acquisitions of companies should enter automatic anti-trust review. Maybe even lower than that. These acquisitions by large companies hurt consumers in two ways. Either they squander the disruptive technology and nothing comes out of it, slowing down progress for everyone, or they put it to good use and then they get to maintain or extend their dominant positions - and we don't want any of that to happen as consumers. We want these large companies to continue to have healthy competition. It's better for consumers and it's better for the job market, too (fewer companies in the market = fewer job hunting opportunities = downward pressure on salaries).

kabes 6y ago

And IMEC (BE) is pretty important in that chain as well

mschuster91 6y ago

> At one point EU should realize that the US are playing the same game as the Chinese and are really not business friend. While I (as a German) agree that the US imperialism and dominance in high tech is a problem, I would not go as low and say the US is on the same level as China, which is an outright threat to all core values of the Western nations.

someguydave 6y ago
yes, for one thing German companies can and do purchase and operate US subsidiaries without much government interference, unlike in China
- oblio 6y ago
  I find the irony of your comment quite funny. I'm assuming the previous comment about "core Western values" wasn't referring to "unfettered capitalism" but to stuff like "democracy", "respect of human rights", ... :-)
  - hajile 6y ago
    Capitalism is fundamentally as flawed as people are -- but it beats everything else by a huge margin. If you're going to parse hairs, democracy is inherently NOT a "western value". Alexander Hamilton went on at great length in the early federalist papers about the fate of democracies. All failed rather quickly. We formed a republic with democratic elements BECAUSE direct democracy is so tyrannical and doesn't protect minority groups leading to it's downfall. Despite all the complaints, I'd love to see a country throughout history with better treatment of minorities. That country just doesn't exist and countries making things better for minorities over time was even less known at the USA founding. Finally, foreign affairs are much closer to anarcho-capitalism than anything which implies that anarcho-capitalism is the most free one could theoretically be (though the immediate fall into despotism would make the short-lived freedom of little value).
    - someguydave 6y ago

bgorman 6y ago

Intel, a US company provided ASML the funds to develop their latest technology (EUV). (https://newsroom.intel.com/news-releases/intel-and-asml-reach-agreements-to-accelerate-key-next-generation-semiconductor-manufacturing-technologies/ https://newsroom.intel.com/news-releases/intel-and-asml-reac...) In retrospect, Intel should have insisted on much more onerous terms. There are other suppliers who make photolithography equipment, if ASML went bankrupt, the industry would just fund the competitors.

pieterr 6y ago
Your link is from 2012. Five years later, Intel reduced their stake in ASML. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-asml-holding-intel-stake/intel-reduces-stake-in-asml-to-below-3-percent-idUSKCN1MM0QD https://www.reuters.com/article/us-asml-holding-intel-stake/...

bitcurious 6y ago

On ARM: > The company was founded in November 1990 as Advanced RISC Machines Ltd and structured as a joint venture between Acorn Computers, Apple Computer (now Apple Inc.) and VLSI Technology. > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arm_Holdings https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arm_Holdings

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

SkyMarshal 6y ago

How is the US getting ASML? I hadn't heard anything about that.