4 ms·

Is there any evidence that the standards are actually higher and not just more expensive, time consuming,.and bureaucratic?

KerrAvon 3y ago
Both things can be true. I’m sure there are ways to streamline the bureaucracy. But if you ignore Chesterton’s fence you get Superfund sites dotting the landscape. The rules exist for reasons.
- fallingknife 3y ago
  Rules always exist for a reason but as often as not the reason is to justify the existence of bureaucratic gatekeepers and not the actual stated reason for the rule. Unless there is a lower incidence of workplace accidents and environmental contamination at US facilities as compared to equivalent Japanese facilities then the additional rules are pure dead weight loss. And I have not seen any evidence that our factories are any safer or cleaner than Japan's.
  - pylua 3y ago
    Some rules are put in place to prevent situations that are extremely unlikely to occur in the first place, but are more catastrophic when they happen. Trying to compare incident rates would not account for how well rounded a system of rules really is. I would suggest that the best course of action would be to follow the advice of our fellow countrymen who drafted these rules, then ask other countries to follow it if they want to sale products in our country.
    - fallingknife 3y ago
      Why would I trust the rules made by my own government if I can see that other more productive countries are building things better and faster than us?
  - paulmd 3y ago
    > Rules always exist for a reason but as often as not the reason is to justify the existence of bureaucratic gatekeepers and not the actual stated reason for the rule. No, that’s merely a reflection of your anarchistic and misanthropic worldview. Most people would not agree at all that “most rules” serve only to justify gatekeepers. You are free to jump the fence and fall into the gorilla exhibit if you want but there is still a very good reason the rule exists. And the fact that you apparently see such rules as a “minority” speaks more to you than anything.
pylua 3y ago
Here is one the articles I was referencing. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/28/phoenix-microchip-plant-biden-union-tsmc https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/28/phoenix-mic... When I read through it again it I realized many problems seem similar to common issues in software projects.
- maxglute 3y ago
  I think if TW standards is good enough to build 3nm chips on an earth quake zone, it's good enough for US. We're talking about building leading edge semi conductor not housing, which granted TW is hilariously bad at.
  - pylua 3y ago
    Apparently that is not what the regulations say? I don't think us employees / employers are able to go against the regulations without legal consequences.
    - maxglute 3y ago
      I'm more addressing the point that US building regulations (when it comes to fabs) has "higher standards" vs just being more onerous. Which your second sentence in original point addressed but I missed.

KerrAvon 3y ago

Both things can be true. I’m sure there are ways to streamline the bureaucracy. But if you ignore Chesterton’s fence you get Superfund sites dotting the landscape. The rules exist for reasons.

fallingknife 3y ago
Rules always exist for a reason but as often as not the reason is to justify the existence of bureaucratic gatekeepers and not the actual stated reason for the rule. Unless there is a lower incidence of workplace accidents and environmental contamination at US facilities as compared to equivalent Japanese facilities then the additional rules are pure dead weight loss. And I have not seen any evidence that our factories are any safer or cleaner than Japan's.
- pylua 3y ago
  Some rules are put in place to prevent situations that are extremely unlikely to occur in the first place, but are more catastrophic when they happen. Trying to compare incident rates would not account for how well rounded a system of rules really is. I would suggest that the best course of action would be to follow the advice of our fellow countrymen who drafted these rules, then ask other countries to follow it if they want to sale products in our country.
  - fallingknife 3y ago
    Why would I trust the rules made by my own government if I can see that other more productive countries are building things better and faster than us?
- paulmd 3y ago
  > Rules always exist for a reason but as often as not the reason is to justify the existence of bureaucratic gatekeepers and not the actual stated reason for the rule. No, that’s merely a reflection of your anarchistic and misanthropic worldview. Most people would not agree at all that “most rules” serve only to justify gatekeepers. You are free to jump the fence and fall into the gorilla exhibit if you want but there is still a very good reason the rule exists. And the fact that you apparently see such rules as a “minority” speaks more to you than anything.

pylua 3y ago

Here is one the articles I was referencing. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/28/phoenix-microchip-plant-biden-union-tsmc https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/28/phoenix-mic... When I read through it again it I realized many problems seem similar to common issues in software projects.

maxglute 3y ago
I think if TW standards is good enough to build 3nm chips on an earth quake zone, it's good enough for US. We're talking about building leading edge semi conductor not housing, which granted TW is hilariously bad at.
- pylua 3y ago
  Apparently that is not what the regulations say? I don't think us employees / employers are able to go against the regulations without legal consequences.
  - maxglute 3y ago
    I'm more addressing the point that US building regulations (when it comes to fabs) has "higher standards" vs just being more onerous. Which your second sentence in original point addressed but I missed.