4 ms·

The US is capable of many things, in theory. In practise, not a lot of new capabilities have materialised so far. Not even a single new Foxconn plant or a domes

The US is capable of many things, in theory. In practise, not a lot of new capabilities have materialised so far. Not even a single new Foxconn plant or a domestic contender (if any). That's not to say that is impossible, but without good examples we can all say a bunch of stuff and it won't mean anything.

colechristensen 5y ago
There's a difference between what happens for economic reasons and what would happen for an actual security / supply chain threat.
- oneplane 5y ago
  > That's not to say that is impossible, but without good examples we can all say a bunch of stuff and it won't mean anything.
  - colechristensen 5y ago
    Ok, in WWII a big part of Allied victory was the US mobilizing a vertically integrated industrial base to build war materiel. You can look at the history of the Defense Production Act (1950) to see it in action several times building up local industries with lots of cheap money.
    - ianai 5y ago
      Right, if the US wanted it done it could be done.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - lotsofpulp 5y ago
        Is there a reason to assume the ability to ramp up in WW2 has any bearing on the ability to ramp up an operation like ASML today? You cannot just throw any bodies at a problem like creating ASML. You have to throw very specific bodies with each one having at least a decade or more of very specific expertise (it seems like, based on the comments and articles I have read). That is just ASML, not even getting into the deep expertise TSMC must need to execute, or even Apple in designing. Knowledge itself has expanded tremendously since WW2 such that to be top of the field in WW2 required much less time than to be top of the field today.
        AnimalMuppet 5y ago
        Manhattan Project? That wasn't a "just throw bodies at it" either...
        PKop 5y ago
        Do we have the same quality of human resources we had then?
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        I do not know for sure, but I suspect blowing things up might be less difficult than creating and maintaining all the stable reactions needed to create a long lasting microchip. Nevertheless, even the Manhattan project took 5 or 6 years.
        dgfitz 5y ago
        Are you sure? They employed well over 100k people I thought, and maybe a handful of those people actually knew the full scope of the project.
        Jensson 5y ago
        Soviet also managed that, large state sanctioned projects can accomplish some feats but not others. Soviet did nuclear, soviet went to space, so those are examples of what states can do. However soviet tried to make good computers, but they failed to do so, so for all we know large state sanctioned efforts cannot solve this problem, so it looks like you need the agility of a free private sector to get through it.
      - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
        Do you have any evidence of required expertiese existing in US, youbare only offering tautologies so far

colechristensen 5y ago

There's a difference between what happens for economic reasons and what would happen for an actual security / supply chain threat.

oneplane 5y ago
> That's not to say that is impossible, but without good examples we can all say a bunch of stuff and it won't mean anything.
- colechristensen 5y ago
  Ok, in WWII a big part of Allied victory was the US mobilizing a vertically integrated industrial base to build war materiel. You can look at the history of the Defense Production Act (1950) to see it in action several times building up local industries with lots of cheap money.
  - ianai 5y ago
    Right, if the US wanted it done it could be done.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      Is there a reason to assume the ability to ramp up in WW2 has any bearing on the ability to ramp up an operation like ASML today? You cannot just throw any bodies at a problem like creating ASML. You have to throw very specific bodies with each one having at least a decade or more of very specific expertise (it seems like, based on the comments and articles I have read). That is just ASML, not even getting into the deep expertise TSMC must need to execute, or even Apple in designing. Knowledge itself has expanded tremendously since WW2 such that to be top of the field in WW2 required much less time than to be top of the field today.
      - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
        Manhattan Project? That wasn't a "just throw bodies at it" either...
        PKop 5y ago
        Do we have the same quality of human resources we had then?
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        I do not know for sure, but I suspect blowing things up might be less difficult than creating and maintaining all the stable reactions needed to create a long lasting microchip. Nevertheless, even the Manhattan project took 5 or 6 years.
        dgfitz 5y ago
        Are you sure? They employed well over 100k people I thought, and maybe a handful of those people actually knew the full scope of the project.
        Jensson 5y ago
        Soviet also managed that, large state sanctioned projects can accomplish some feats but not others. Soviet did nuclear, soviet went to space, so those are examples of what states can do. However soviet tried to make good computers, but they failed to do so, so for all we know large state sanctioned efforts cannot solve this problem, so it looks like you need the agility of a free private sector to get through it.
    - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
      Do you have any evidence of required expertiese existing in US, youbare only offering tautologies so far