7 ms·
The technology is roughly 10 years behind, but in the scenario that the replacement capability becomes important is something like Trump fumbles the great power
by yk 3y ago
The technology is roughly 10 years behind, but in the scenario that the replacement capability becomes important is something like Trump fumbles the great power competition and US and China have a nice nuclear moment. And frankly making do with Haswell era CPUs is lamentable but as far as nuclear exchanges go not that bad.
- demondemidi 3y agoYes, that is intentional. There's more to the CPU market than the next gaming platform.
- cpursley 3y ago[flagged]
- exceptione 3y agoIt is a bit off-topic, but the Biden admin hasn't done anything like that indeed. In fact, nuclear exchange is self-destruction. No one is stupid enough to do that, even Trump wouldn't be. So parent's remark is off. For chips to be blocked going to Germany doesn't thus require a nuclear exchange. You rather should think of smth like military aggression from China towards Taiwan.
- cpursley 3y agoShooting down the Chinese ballon and arming Ukraine with long range weapons aren't potentially acts of provocation against nuclear powers? Reverse the roles. American ballon. Mexico getting armed against the US by a foreign superpower and sworn enemy. Would the US tolerate those acts?
- cpursley 3y agoPeople forget that JFK nearly nuked the USSR over the Cuban missile crisis (which was a response to NATO missiles in Turkey, ironically enough).
- djur 3y agoThe missiles at question in the Cuban missile crisis were nuclear. That's not a reasonable comparison to the non-nuclear confrontation in Ukraine.
- smoldesu 3y ago> Would the US tolerate those acts? Yes? What about their nuclear policy from the past half-century convinces you otherwise?
- justsomehnguy 3y agoIn the last 50 years US never had anything on their border.
- smoldesu 3y agoEven if they did, it wouldn't change much. 1. Nobody would launch nukes domestically, so moot point. 2. Using nukes internationally would be a faux-pas beyond fixing. Every modern, nuclear-equipped nation understands this. 3. The United States doesn't need nuclear weaponry to dispel invaders, or even to retaliate against foreign attacks. Their nuclear weapons exist to deter other nuclear superpowers from using their weapons for petty gain.
- martin8412 3y agoAbsolutely agreed. The US military is so well funded and capable that they could finish the job without needed to resort to nukes.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- SanjayMehta 3y agoNot sure if you’re being sarcastic or serious.
- cpursley 3y agoAmerica totally crushed Grenada!
- deleted 3y ago
- exceptione 3y ago> Reverse the roles. American ballon Ok. American balloon over China will be shot down. You know the rules about air space, water etc? Sincere advice: don't assume you have insights and knowledge that is deeper than those from the experts. This is a pitfall for us HN'ers.
- HeWhoLurksLate 3y agoMan, I wrote several replies to this comment but decided against them all. This is silly- the U.S. and China have been playing with balloons like this for years, that one was just really big
- flohofwoe 3y agoRight, the US would totally make nuclear threats against Mexico for shooting down a ballon. Not even Trump would be deranged enough for that (well on second thought, maybe he would but nobody would take him serious, just like Medvedev's daily nuclear threat).
- cpursley 3y agoThe Mexico example was long range weapons. If Chinese missiles were hitting American cities from Mexico (outside of the localized fighting), do you believe that has the possibility to escalate?
- flohofwoe 3y agoMaybe, but I can give a much more concrete example: Russia has nukes on Europe's doorstep in Kaliningrad which can reach Berlin in a couple of minutes, do you hear anybody in Germany, Europe or NATO whine about "escalation"?
- cpursley 3y agoCan you break this down? I don't follow.
- flohofwoe 3y agoTL;DR: Russia has Iskander missiles stationed in their Kaliningrad exclave (former Koenigsberg if Kaliningrad doesn't ring a bell), Iskander missiles can carry nuclear warheads and have a range of 500 km which is just enough to reach Berlin. Now add two and two together. Why would Russia station nuclear capable missiles in the middle of Europe without the nuclear warheads nearby?
- cpursley 3y agoI'm very aware of Kaliningrad and it's history. I don't understand your point. How does it relate to my analogy of a neighbor of America getting armed and trained by a sworn and bellicose enemy of America who states openly that it's goal is American regime change and geopolitical breakup. Under this scenario, I suspect the US would roll into Mexico and end that sooner than later under the Monroe Doctrine due to the real (or perceived) existential threat. At least, I would hope so - Mexico being in a military alliance with China (and it's 2000 or so mile border) would be not good.
- ToDougie 3y agoMight want to take a peek at a map of Eastern Europe.
- exceptione 3y agoThanks for your suggestion. There are a lot of things I don't know, but this subject is somewhat the exception to that. The US has made no nuclear threats, on the contrary, it has done everything to remind the Kremlin, which was and is threatening all kinds of countries with nuclear blackmail, that doing so is off limits. I will assume you were unknowingly repeating Kremlin propaganda. Please don't.
- tekla 3y agoSuch as?
- somenameforme 3y ago[flagged]
- flohofwoe 3y agoAh the good old whataboutism. Here's some counter-whataboutism: what about the Korean and Vietnam wars (the Soviet Union even sent their own pilots with the jets), and countless other smaller conflicts in Africa? The Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc were pumping weapons into those conflicts or have been invading themselves to support "their side". Same with Russia in Syria btw. At least the free west is upfront and open about the weapon deliveries down to the last helmet: https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/schwerpunkte/krieg-in-der-ukraine/lieferungen-ukraine-2054514 https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/schwerpunkte/krieg-in...
- somenameforme 3y agoThe main reason that propaganda and dehumanization are such a typical part of war, is that it helps prevent people from considering the weight of their own actions, let alone the perspective of the enemy. What I described is not a whataboutism, it's a hypothetical illustrating exactly what's happening today, except flipping the roles of the participants. Yet of course it feels alien enough that you instinctively want to fight against it - I must be tricking you or engaging in some sort of deceptive rhetorical device. I am not.
- yk 3y agoAnd where did I write anything about Biden?
- llm_nerd 3y agoOlder generation fabs are critical. They power most of the machines around us, and often pump out low priced but capable chips. I certainly am not contesting that. I responded to someone who seems to believe this is the great AI equalizer. This fab has no relevance to AI. And FWIW, Europe already has a number of much more advanced fabs! Intel is currently upgrading Ireland to "Intel 4" spec (which in TSMC land would be 7nm), and is building other fabs, for instance. Ultimately this story is "German automakers want more control over supply chain of vanilla automation chips", and not much more. As an aside, it's always interesting that we talk about Taiwan's revered chip prowess (South Korea is up there as well)...when the Dutch company ASML is really the technology key. TSMC executes extraordinarily well, but they wouldn't be doing it without ASML.
- samat 3y agoI am no expert, but my understanding is that to get nice chips, you need both ASML and TSMC. They have very different areas of expertise and posses very different know hows.
- camillomiller 3y agoWell, ASML wouldn’t be doing it without the micro optics they buy from Zeiss in Germany either, it doesn’t stop there
- ironborn123 3y agoLets just say semiconductor manufacturing is the best example of regional competencies and global trade. Globalization has failed on many fronts and resulted in race to the bottom outcomes, but here it works well due to specialization. Having understood that, one can also see a core TSMC strength is that Taiwanese workers are disciplined and work long hours for moderate pay, a culture that European and American labor will never accept. So all these new factories in US/EU should be treated as high cost alternatives, justifiable only for non cost-sensitive customers like defence/aerospace/high end cars.
- FredPret 3y agoAnd/or Taiwanese workers should negotiate higher pay and shorter hours