3 ms·

Given that this exists as a sort of defence mechanism against Taiwan being invaded, this isn't so bad, is it? Being within striking distance of cutting edge is

Given that this exists as a sort of defence mechanism against Taiwan being invaded, this isn't so bad, is it? Being within striking distance of cutting edge is far better than being miles behind, at least to my mind.

Workaccount2 2y ago
It's not bad at all. The reason it is noteworthy is because it is not a competitor fab to intel's cutting edge domestic fabs. That is if intel can get their act together.
riku_iki 2y ago
that fab needs to be active and profitable to keel afloat for many years forward. Not being cutting edge can put it into scrutiny eventually.
akfHanv 2y ago
There are bigger U.S. interests like not giving the control over the South China Sea to China. TSMC is a minor issue and would probably be destroyed by either the U.S. or Taiwan itself in case of a successful invasion.
- rayiner 2y ago
  > control over the South China Sea to China Why shouldn't China should control the South China Sea? And why do we care about a body of water on the other side of the planet?
  - SllX 2y ago
    South China Sea is just a name, not a cause for maritime irredentism, and that Sea also borders most countries in Southeast Asia, countries which consider themselves independent sovereign nations. So it’s international waters which an enormous amount of global trade flows through. Allowing the PRC to call it their sovereign territory is conceding that they have license to fuck with that trade at-will, since those ships which are currently going through international waters would instead be going through PRC jurisdiction.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - mytailorisrich 2y ago
      The claim is not just the PRC's actually, as it predates it. It's "China's claim" and so the ROC/Taiwan has the same one. Obviously only the PRC is starting to reach the power to actually trying to enforce it. The historical context, really, is that China has been weak in the last two centuries, a period during which Western powers divided the world among themselves and decided modern borders while China was majorly screwed. In the South China Sea for instance all countries apart from Thailand have been colonies of Western countries.
      - SllX 2y ago
        I am aware of the historical context, but right now the ROC isn’t the major problematic entity proactively asserting claims in the South China Sea and building up its Navy with an eye towards enforcing them against independent and sovereign Southeast Asian nations and threatening the flow of international trade. If they become the problem, we can bring them into the conversation at that time.
        mytailorisrich 2y ago
        They are disrupting the Western-established order. That is the issue, the rest is just rhetoric to sugar-coat that deeper truth. The most strategically impacted countries are actually the East Asian ones, Taiwan, Korea, Japan. That's an important point because they are almost de facto US protectorates on mainland China's doorsteps. There is no right or wrong. There are competing interests as always. The US are trying to protect their control of the region, while China is trying to disrupt that and increase control of its own backyard and gain leverage in East Asia.
        SllX 2y ago
        > They are disrupting the Western-established order. Yes, this is the problem. That Western-established order sees a full third of global maritime shipping transiting the South China Sea. > The most strategically impacted countries are actually the East Asian ones, Taiwan, Korea, Japan. That's an important point because they are almost de facto US protectorates on mainland China's doorsteps. Speaking of rhetoric. > There is no right or wrong. No, there is very much a right and a hypothetical wrong here. Right is for both the sovereign territory of nations and international waters to be respected as such. Wrong would be for the PRC to be able to assert its most extremist position on what parts of the South China Sea it considers to be its territory as this line cuts through both the sovereign waters of other nations nearby and their land in some cases, allowing the PRC to put its thumb on the scale in one of the largest shipping channels in the world. Don’t forget, the State called the “People’s Republic of China” is by its own laws only an entity subordinate to the Communist Party of China. No country should have that much power over international shipping, but a totalitarian one even less so.
  - RandomCitizen12 2y ago
    I hereby declare the South China Sea is now named the RandomCitizen12 Sea. I now have the moral imperative to control it. Pay your tolls or be judged.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - exe34 2y ago
    I declare wherever rayiner lives to be exe34 territory. please send rent payments.
  - pcwalton 2y ago
    > Why shouldn't China should [sic] control the South China Sea? For the same reason India shouldn't control the Indian Ocean.
  - dctoedt 2y ago
    > why do we care about a body of water on the other side of the planet? Just how close geographically must a body of water be for us to care about it? Or might there be other criteria?
  - tptacek 2y ago
    You've written about this yourself in the past. If you want to provoke the thread, you should at least be forthright that you've changed your mind, rather than feigning bafflement that anyone would agree with what you yourself used to advocate.
- fragmede 2y ago
  > TSMC is a minor issue No it's not. Disruption of the world's chip supply would be grave, and is a strategic asset very much worth being protected. If it weren't for TSMC, Taiwan's situation would be much different.
  - hollerith 2y ago
    The US started assisting Taiwan long before the rise of TSMC though. For example, a treaty was signed in 1955: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_Defense_Treaty_between_the_United_States_and_the_Republic_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_Defense_Treaty_between_...

Workaccount2 2y ago

It's not bad at all. The reason it is noteworthy is because it is not a competitor fab to intel's cutting edge domestic fabs. That is if intel can get their act together.

riku_iki 2y ago

that fab needs to be active and profitable to keel afloat for many years forward. Not being cutting edge can put it into scrutiny eventually.

akfHanv 2y ago

There are bigger U.S. interests like not giving the control over the South China Sea to China. TSMC is a minor issue and would probably be destroyed by either the U.S. or Taiwan itself in case of a successful invasion.

rayiner 2y ago
> control over the South China Sea to China Why shouldn't China should control the South China Sea? And why do we care about a body of water on the other side of the planet?
- SllX 2y ago
  South China Sea is just a name, not a cause for maritime irredentism, and that Sea also borders most countries in Southeast Asia, countries which consider themselves independent sovereign nations. So it’s international waters which an enormous amount of global trade flows through. Allowing the PRC to call it their sovereign territory is conceding that they have license to fuck with that trade at-will, since those ships which are currently going through international waters would instead be going through PRC jurisdiction.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - mytailorisrich 2y ago
    The claim is not just the PRC's actually, as it predates it. It's "China's claim" and so the ROC/Taiwan has the same one. Obviously only the PRC is starting to reach the power to actually trying to enforce it. The historical context, really, is that China has been weak in the last two centuries, a period during which Western powers divided the world among themselves and decided modern borders while China was majorly screwed. In the South China Sea for instance all countries apart from Thailand have been colonies of Western countries.
    - SllX 2y ago
      I am aware of the historical context, but right now the ROC isn’t the major problematic entity proactively asserting claims in the South China Sea and building up its Navy with an eye towards enforcing them against independent and sovereign Southeast Asian nations and threatening the flow of international trade. If they become the problem, we can bring them into the conversation at that time.
      - mytailorisrich 2y ago
        They are disrupting the Western-established order. That is the issue, the rest is just rhetoric to sugar-coat that deeper truth. The most strategically impacted countries are actually the East Asian ones, Taiwan, Korea, Japan. That's an important point because they are almost de facto US protectorates on mainland China's doorsteps. There is no right or wrong. There are competing interests as always. The US are trying to protect their control of the region, while China is trying to disrupt that and increase control of its own backyard and gain leverage in East Asia.
        SllX 2y ago
        > They are disrupting the Western-established order. Yes, this is the problem. That Western-established order sees a full third of global maritime shipping transiting the South China Sea. > The most strategically impacted countries are actually the East Asian ones, Taiwan, Korea, Japan. That's an important point because they are almost de facto US protectorates on mainland China's doorsteps. Speaking of rhetoric. > There is no right or wrong. No, there is very much a right and a hypothetical wrong here. Right is for both the sovereign territory of nations and international waters to be respected as such. Wrong would be for the PRC to be able to assert its most extremist position on what parts of the South China Sea it considers to be its territory as this line cuts through both the sovereign waters of other nations nearby and their land in some cases, allowing the PRC to put its thumb on the scale in one of the largest shipping channels in the world. Don’t forget, the State called the “People’s Republic of China” is by its own laws only an entity subordinate to the Communist Party of China. No country should have that much power over international shipping, but a totalitarian one even less so.
- RandomCitizen12 2y ago
  I hereby declare the South China Sea is now named the RandomCitizen12 Sea. I now have the moral imperative to control it. Pay your tolls or be judged.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- exe34 2y ago
  I declare wherever rayiner lives to be exe34 territory. please send rent payments.
- pcwalton 2y ago
  > Why shouldn't China should [sic] control the South China Sea? For the same reason India shouldn't control the Indian Ocean.
- dctoedt 2y ago
  > why do we care about a body of water on the other side of the planet? Just how close geographically must a body of water be for us to care about it? Or might there be other criteria?
- tptacek 2y ago
  You've written about this yourself in the past. If you want to provoke the thread, you should at least be forthright that you've changed your mind, rather than feigning bafflement that anyone would agree with what you yourself used to advocate.
fragmede 2y ago
> TSMC is a minor issue No it's not. Disruption of the world's chip supply would be grave, and is a strategic asset very much worth being protected. If it weren't for TSMC, Taiwan's situation would be much different.
- hollerith 2y ago
  The US started assisting Taiwan long before the rise of TSMC though. For example, a treaty was signed in 1955: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_Defense_Treaty_between_the_United_States_and_the_Republic_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_Defense_Treaty_between_...