4 ms·

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.
      - lotsofpulp 4y ago
        > Thats another problem we can throw money at until it is resolved. My argument is it is possible the US cannot throw money at it until it is resolved, perhaps due to the R&D not resulting in success, due something external that causes US to lose ability to throw money at it, due to something internal that causes US to not politically support it, enough people not sufficiently interested in the sciences, etc.
ClumsyPilot 4y ago
California hired best expertise in the world, the French national rail builder. They were so appauled at the political disfunction, they quit the project. They started one in morocoo instead - its already operating while the californian one is nor even 50% complete. Your political disfunction is part of the package. Incompetent management is too. You cant just hire 1 expert software engineer into dysfunctional conoany and expect great results
- arrosenberg 4y ago
  Ok, but to my point, California was able to purchase the best expertise available. That they mismanaged it is a separate issue.
  - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
    My point is it does not matter how much money you spend, if you cant organise you aren't gonna replace TSMC
Slartie 4y ago
Okay, I'd like to buy some expertise in building anti-gravity devices.
- Nomentatus 4y ago
  I can put you in touch with the Montgolfier brothers for a reasonable price. :)
Nomentatus 4y ago
Trade secrets aren't always for sale; or easy to discover. TSMC appears to have some, re EUV tech; maybe Intel will easily catch up once they too adopt the EUV tech (they didn't earlier 'cause they thought it wasn't ready for prime time.) I don't know.

> 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.
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      > Thats another problem we can throw money at until it is resolved. My argument is it is possible the US cannot throw money at it until it is resolved, perhaps due to the R&D not resulting in success, due something external that causes US to lose ability to throw money at it, due to something internal that causes US to not politically support it, enough people not sufficiently interested in the sciences, etc.

ClumsyPilot 4y ago

California hired best expertise in the world, the French national rail builder. They were so appauled at the political disfunction, they quit the project. They started one in morocoo instead - its already operating while the californian one is nor even 50% complete. Your political disfunction is part of the package. Incompetent management is too. You cant just hire 1 expert software engineer into dysfunctional conoany and expect great results

arrosenberg 4y ago
Ok, but to my point, California was able to purchase the best expertise available. That they mismanaged it is a separate issue.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  My point is it does not matter how much money you spend, if you cant organise you aren't gonna replace TSMC

Slartie 4y ago

Okay, I'd like to buy some expertise in building anti-gravity devices.

Nomentatus 4y ago
I can put you in touch with the Montgolfier brothers for a reasonable price. :)

Nomentatus 4y ago

Trade secrets aren't always for sale; or easy to discover. TSMC appears to have some, re EUV tech; maybe Intel will easily catch up once they too adopt the EUV tech (they didn't earlier 'cause they thought it wasn't ready for prime time.) I don't know.