4 ms·

Backed by the might of its own economy, surely the US can rebuild dominance in any technological area it happens to choose given its strategic position and aims

Backed by the might of its own economy, surely the US can rebuild dominance in any technological area it happens to choose given its strategic position and aims? TSMC’s assertion “We’re the best, don’t even try competing” strikes me as “fear masked by false bravado” - a bit pointless, really.

arrosenberg 4y ago
Pretty much. The US can subsidize the industry to any extent we want, not much TMSC could do to stop us.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  What would delay or stop the US is not having sufficient people with sufficient knowledge and having to re R&D it which is never guaranteed. Saudi Arabia’s king can give their people all the money they want, but they will not be able to buy the technical and management expertise and culture that takes decades to develop without waiting decades for it to develop, with the risk that it does not.
  - arrosenberg 4y ago
    Thats another problem we can throw money at until it is resolved.
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      I will have to disagree. There are some aspects of life that are not purchase-able, at least not on a timescale that can be attributed to a single leadership group (and therefore unlikely to garner sufficient political support).
      - arrosenberg 4y ago
        Thats not a particularly compelling argument. Expertise is always for sale.
        lotsofpulp 4y ago
        > sufficient people with sufficient knowledge Sufficient is an important word, and sufficient expertise is not abundant in the business this thread is referring to. That is why Apple can lock up the most advanced chip supplies, that is why only one business in Taiwan makes it, why only one business in Netherlands can help the one in Taiwan make it, and why only one business in Germany can help the one in Netherlands make it.
        arrosenberg 4y ago
        So you are saying the Apple, the company with the most money, is able to use that money to acquire a monopoly on the expertise needed for their chips. How does that refute my point? The USG can do the same thing if they want to spend the money.
        lotsofpulp 4y ago
        I am saying Apple and the USG will not be able to acquire the chips that TSMC/ASML/Zeiss/whoever else is crucial are making in the event TSMC/ASML/Zeiss/etc stop existing, in a timely manner. Not that Apple and USG are not more or less indispensable than TSMC/ASML/Zeiss, that is neither here nor there. The point is some things simply have no fungibility, and hence you cannot buy your way out of it. If 2 billionaires got trapped on an island with all their wealth in cash, and neither knew how to build a boat or sail, all that cash is not going to help them avoid having to figure out how to build a boat and navigate the seas in sufficient time to survive.
        arrosenberg 4y ago
        I guess I’m unclear on your argument then. The entire point of this thread is that the US is building that fungibility (and they can do so by spending whatever is required to acquire people and machines to do it), and TMSC doesn’t like it. Obviously if those companies stopped existing today it would cause disruptions.
    - thrown_22 4y ago
      If money could solve every problem Mali would have conquered Europe. Culture matters more than money and Western culture is on a downward spiral.
      - arrosenberg 4y ago
        Weird take! Mali was a French colony for a long time, so comparing it to the US (of all places) doesn’t make much sense. Culture does matter, but its pretty clear the west is the entrepreneurial engine of the global economy and that doesn’t seem likely to change.
        thrown_22 4y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mansa_Musa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mansa_Musa At the same time Portugal was a bunch of poor fishermen trying to get past a sandbank on the African coast.
        arrosenberg 4y ago
        And you think 14th century Africa is comparable to the modern world?
        thrown_22 4y ago
        If 14th century Mali couldn't conquer 14th century Portugal money doesn't solve problems.
        arrosenberg 4y ago
        I have no idea if Mansa Musa spent huge amounts trying to conquer Portugal, or what his amphibious invasion capabilities were. To be honest, its a really silly comparison since the world was vastly different and neither of us can fully appreciate how it worked. I do know that the US has generally been successful when throwing resources at problems until they are solved in its recent history (at least to the Civil War), so its entirely reasonable to believe we can continue doing so successfully.
    - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
      As germany is find out now, you can print money a but you cannot print energy. If US has destroyed its human capital in chipmaking, it will take decades to rebuild. And while doing so, it must navigate the same political system that makes it impossible for California to build a train
      - jleyank 4y ago
        What if it is viewed as a software problem - figure out how to program two boring chips rather than a single, faster one? People used to program way closer to the bare metal so there’s all sorts of inefficiency that choice be squeezed out of how programs run if need be. Money and fear, as we have seen, is a powerful motivator.
    - mathverse 4y ago
      Chinese government has an unlimited supply of money that they can throw at any problem and yet they failed to do so when it comes to advanced chips. They are always trying to poach engineers from TSMC,Samsung and others by offering N-times the salaries and it resulted in no significant gains.
      - arrosenberg 4y ago
        So what? China is an authoritarian state that will kidnap your family. That has nothing to do with attracting talent to the US.
        midoridensha 4y ago
        It has everything to do with it. You seem to be assuming the US is some kind of paradise that everyone would live to live in, despite the horrible culture, broken healthcare system, and mass shootings every other day. You can't just throw money at people and get them to come work for you wherever you are. Only some people will take the opportunity, others will decide other things are more important than money.
    - Slartie 4y ago
      > Thats another problem we can throw money at until it is resolved. The Russians also assumed that "throwing money" at problems, like maintaining a huge army, would somehow resolve them without having to actually do the nasty job of, you know, solving problems at their roots. When push came to shove, it turned out that all the money went to some place nobody knows, but the problem stayed and got even bigger.
  - usrbinbash 4y ago
    Considering that the US, and the EU, both have top universities in the tech field, and are both attractive places for skilled people to work in, I cannot fathom how availability of expertise would be a problem.
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      Wherever I have worked, there are myriad undocumented processes that result in the final product. I am sure there is quite a bit of undocumented magic in the development of the most advanced technologies in the world, including the communication skills between various experts speaking a language that is probably alien to most with years of rigorous study. I cannot even get my mom’s baking/frying recipes to produce the same taste and textures that she can, yet I was the one watching and documenting them multiple times.
skeeter2020 4y ago
A big part of this story is infered from recent comments from their CEO Morris Chang, a western educated & trained 91-old man who essentially built a nation's economy. At his age and success I'm not surprised he has some strongly defined views that align past success with future outcomes.
zarzavat 4y ago
The US has been trying to build a rocket to go back to the moon. The current attempt is a rewarming of the Space Shuttle. Is that a sensible way to build a rocket to go to the moon? No. But it was the only way to get Congressional approval, as lawmakers wanted to maintain economic activity in their own states/districts. The US is not capable of having a national policy on anything, because power is too fractured and fragile. Which is not a bad thing overall necessarily, but it is a bad thing in this case. Taiwan is a small unitary state, as is South Korea. The governments of both know that the national interest and their chipbuilders’ interests are aligned. In Taiwan’s case especially so.
- jleyank 4y ago
  This is a gamble. In the past, the presence of a sufficiently strong external enemy has done wonders towards uniting the us. Same with bits of the eu. Both groups have shown willingness to do a whole lot of damage when they choose to do so.
LatteLazy 4y ago
That depends. What if political deadlock prevents it from actually acting? What if competing in this space requires long term thinking that US labour and capital markets are not set up for, will the US restructure it's economy to meet this goal? despite its size? There is always a huge gulf between what modern nations COULD do and what they actually WILL do. In the west, we're allergic to making any sort of painful decision or any sort of delayed gratification. That's why the war on terror has blown back so hard. Could the Nato liberate Afghanistan? Of course! Did it? No, we spent 20 years mismanaging it then gave up. Personally, I'd put this in the same category as Universal healthcare or green energy or fixing education. Of course we can do it. But we won't.
Normille 4y ago
>Backed by the might of its own economy, surely the US can rebuild dominance in any technological area it happens to choose given its strategic position and aims? And if you can't build dominance by fair means, just sanction the Chinese companies that are beating you. And, needless to say, all your little lickspittle acolytes in Europe and Australia will follow suit.

arrosenberg 4y ago

Pretty much. The US can subsidize the industry to any extent we want, not much TMSC could do to stop us.

lotsofpulp 4y ago
What would delay or stop the US is not having sufficient people with sufficient knowledge and having to re R&D it which is never guaranteed. Saudi Arabia’s king can give their people all the money they want, but they will not be able to buy the technical and management expertise and culture that takes decades to develop without waiting decades for it to develop, with the risk that it does not.
- arrosenberg 4y ago
  Thats another problem we can throw money at until it is resolved.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    I will have to disagree. There are some aspects of life that are not purchase-able, at least not on a timescale that can be attributed to a single leadership group (and therefore unlikely to garner sufficient political support).
    - arrosenberg 4y ago
      Thats not a particularly compelling argument. Expertise is always for sale.
      - lotsofpulp 4y ago
        > sufficient people with sufficient knowledge Sufficient is an important word, and sufficient expertise is not abundant in the business this thread is referring to. That is why Apple can lock up the most advanced chip supplies, that is why only one business in Taiwan makes it, why only one business in Netherlands can help the one in Taiwan make it, and why only one business in Germany can help the one in Netherlands make it.
        arrosenberg 4y ago
        So you are saying the Apple, the company with the most money, is able to use that money to acquire a monopoly on the expertise needed for their chips. How does that refute my point? The USG can do the same thing if they want to spend the money.
        lotsofpulp 4y ago
        I am saying Apple and the USG will not be able to acquire the chips that TSMC/ASML/Zeiss/whoever else is crucial are making in the event TSMC/ASML/Zeiss/etc stop existing, in a timely manner. Not that Apple and USG are not more or less indispensable than TSMC/ASML/Zeiss, that is neither here nor there. The point is some things simply have no fungibility, and hence you cannot buy your way out of it. If 2 billionaires got trapped on an island with all their wealth in cash, and neither knew how to build a boat or sail, all that cash is not going to help them avoid having to figure out how to build a boat and navigate the seas in sufficient time to survive.
        arrosenberg 4y ago
        I guess I’m unclear on your argument then. The entire point of this thread is that the US is building that fungibility (and they can do so by spending whatever is required to acquire people and machines to do it), and TMSC doesn’t like it. Obviously if those companies stopped existing today it would cause disruptions.
  - thrown_22 4y ago
    If money could solve every problem Mali would have conquered Europe. Culture matters more than money and Western culture is on a downward spiral.
    - arrosenberg 4y ago
      Weird take! Mali was a French colony for a long time, so comparing it to the US (of all places) doesn’t make much sense. Culture does matter, but its pretty clear the west is the entrepreneurial engine of the global economy and that doesn’t seem likely to change.
      - thrown_22 4y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mansa_Musa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mansa_Musa At the same time Portugal was a bunch of poor fishermen trying to get past a sandbank on the African coast.
        arrosenberg 4y ago
        And you think 14th century Africa is comparable to the modern world?
        thrown_22 4y ago
        If 14th century Mali couldn't conquer 14th century Portugal money doesn't solve problems.
        arrosenberg 4y ago
        I have no idea if Mansa Musa spent huge amounts trying to conquer Portugal, or what his amphibious invasion capabilities were. To be honest, its a really silly comparison since the world was vastly different and neither of us can fully appreciate how it worked. I do know that the US has generally been successful when throwing resources at problems until they are solved in its recent history (at least to the Civil War), so its entirely reasonable to believe we can continue doing so successfully.
  - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
    As germany is find out now, you can print money a but you cannot print energy. If US has destroyed its human capital in chipmaking, it will take decades to rebuild. And while doing so, it must navigate the same political system that makes it impossible for California to build a train
    - jleyank 4y ago
      What if it is viewed as a software problem - figure out how to program two boring chips rather than a single, faster one? People used to program way closer to the bare metal so there’s all sorts of inefficiency that choice be squeezed out of how programs run if need be. Money and fear, as we have seen, is a powerful motivator.
  - mathverse 4y ago
    Chinese government has an unlimited supply of money that they can throw at any problem and yet they failed to do so when it comes to advanced chips. They are always trying to poach engineers from TSMC,Samsung and others by offering N-times the salaries and it resulted in no significant gains.
    - arrosenberg 4y ago
      So what? China is an authoritarian state that will kidnap your family. That has nothing to do with attracting talent to the US.
      - midoridensha 4y ago
        It has everything to do with it. You seem to be assuming the US is some kind of paradise that everyone would live to live in, despite the horrible culture, broken healthcare system, and mass shootings every other day. You can't just throw money at people and get them to come work for you wherever you are. Only some people will take the opportunity, others will decide other things are more important than money.
  - Slartie 4y ago
    > Thats another problem we can throw money at until it is resolved. The Russians also assumed that "throwing money" at problems, like maintaining a huge army, would somehow resolve them without having to actually do the nasty job of, you know, solving problems at their roots. When push came to shove, it turned out that all the money went to some place nobody knows, but the problem stayed and got even bigger.
- usrbinbash 4y ago
  Considering that the US, and the EU, both have top universities in the tech field, and are both attractive places for skilled people to work in, I cannot fathom how availability of expertise would be a problem.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    Wherever I have worked, there are myriad undocumented processes that result in the final product. I am sure there is quite a bit of undocumented magic in the development of the most advanced technologies in the world, including the communication skills between various experts speaking a language that is probably alien to most with years of rigorous study. I cannot even get my mom’s baking/frying recipes to produce the same taste and textures that she can, yet I was the one watching and documenting them multiple times.

skeeter2020 4y ago

A big part of this story is infered from recent comments from their CEO Morris Chang, a western educated & trained 91-old man who essentially built a nation's economy. At his age and success I'm not surprised he has some strongly defined views that align past success with future outcomes.

zarzavat 4y ago

The US has been trying to build a rocket to go back to the moon. The current attempt is a rewarming of the Space Shuttle. Is that a sensible way to build a rocket to go to the moon? No. But it was the only way to get Congressional approval, as lawmakers wanted to maintain economic activity in their own states/districts. The US is not capable of having a national policy on anything, because power is too fractured and fragile. Which is not a bad thing overall necessarily, but it is a bad thing in this case. Taiwan is a small unitary state, as is South Korea. The governments of both know that the national interest and their chipbuilders’ interests are aligned. In Taiwan’s case especially so.

jleyank 4y ago
This is a gamble. In the past, the presence of a sufficiently strong external enemy has done wonders towards uniting the us. Same with bits of the eu. Both groups have shown willingness to do a whole lot of damage when they choose to do so.

LatteLazy 4y ago

That depends. What if political deadlock prevents it from actually acting? What if competing in this space requires long term thinking that US labour and capital markets are not set up for, will the US restructure it's economy to meet this goal? despite its size? There is always a huge gulf between what modern nations COULD do and what they actually WILL do. In the west, we're allergic to making any sort of painful decision or any sort of delayed gratification. That's why the war on terror has blown back so hard. Could the Nato liberate Afghanistan? Of course! Did it? No, we spent 20 years mismanaging it then gave up. Personally, I'd put this in the same category as Universal healthcare or green energy or fixing education. Of course we can do it. But we won't.

Normille 4y ago

>Backed by the might of its own economy, surely the US can rebuild dominance in any technological area it happens to choose given its strategic position and aims? And if you can't build dominance by fair means, just sanction the Chinese companies that are beating you. And, needless to say, all your little lickspittle acolytes in Europe and Australia will follow suit.