7 ms·
> transferring knowledge from TSMC to a US workforce. No, no it's not. When semiconductor manufacture moved to Asia, this was generally done under a "technolo
by KK7NIL 2y ago
> transferring knowledge from TSMC to a US workforce.
No, no it's not.
When semiconductor manufacture moved to Asia, this was generally done under a "technology transfer agreement", which was an explicit agreement for US companies to transfer their (usually older) tech to an independent local company who would then be allowed to manufacture it and develop it.
This is how TSMC started, by doing a deal with Philips to manufacture for them but also to trained on the tech and to be allowed to use it themselves.
This TSMC US fab (and Samsung's new fab) are not under such an agreement, it is directly run by TSMC with no explicit goal to transfer technology.
I think it was a mistake for the US CHIPS act funding to go to such a venture without a clause for technology transfer back to a US company.
- klooney 2y agoThe workers can walk away with whatever is in their heads
- pests 2y agoLong walk back to Taiwan.
- moooo99 2y agoI’ve seen this attitude in other fields and while it is conceptually true, the more complex the field, the more workers have to „walk away“ with their knowledge to have enough knowledge to be of any use
- Joeri 2y agoArizona has enforceable non-compete contracts, so they may walk away with the knowledge but they might not be allowed to use it.
- cududa 2y agoYes, and if China invades Taiwan, those noncompetes are going out the window and/ or the plant is getting nationalized
- proudeu 2y agoTSMC really screwed thesmelves with that deal honestly.
- Washuu 2y agoI would say as a company having an extra foundry in a less earthquake prone part of the world is a good idea to keep the company alive in the case of a major disaster.
- tonyhart7 2y agowell TSMC actually winning on this one because TSMC have another fabs if china invade taiwan and for taiwan, US has pledged to its security in case of invasion would defend no matter what
- yodsanklai 2y ago> US has pledged to its security in case of invasion would defend no matter what Maybe with TSMC building chips in the US, that'll be one less reason for the US to defend Taiwan.
- WinstonSmith84 2y agoThis. And it's certainly an argument that has not escaped China (nor Taiwan). If there is a "loser", that's Taiwan.
- tonyhart7 2y agonope, US would not give an inch of taiwan in case of invasion we talking about geo politic here. if china attack taiwan so would be north korea (this is their best chance) for south korea and japan this is their existensial crisis, having china and north korea close to their home even for a kilometer is basically death sentence You cant forget also US literally spends billions of dollar to keep balance of power in Europe,Middle-East and Africa do you think US would ignore Asia where 30+-% world trade and resources happen??? you dnt need expert to figure it out
- EasyMark 2y agoThey can’t move to another state?
- HumblyTossed 2y agoWalk away to where? And what transferable knowledge?
- lossolo 2y agoThese workers didn't create the fab equipment and don't know how to design or create the machinery used there. They also don't have access to the software source code. Most US workers hold maintenance or managerial positions, while those with the deep technical expertise come from Taiwan. There will be no knowledge transfer, aside from how to operate the fab, which is something Intel US employees already know.
- mixmastamyk 2y agoFab equipment is made by other companies. Such as ASML: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASML_Holding https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASML_Holding
- KennyBlanken 2y agoThe US workers are almost certainly limited to people who are low to mid level techs who don't know anything useful. Everyone with actual cutting edge knowledge is from Taiwan and almost certainly under the tightest of NDAs and NCAs. Even high level people in the plant still aren't that useful. What's useful are the insanely expensive, insanely complicated extreme-ultraviolet lithography equipment from ASML. Nobody in the world makes the stuff they do. At least, that we know of. It wouldn't surprise me if the NSA has funded designing and building an EUV lithography system, or just stole the designs from ASML. We know they do a lot of their own ultra-miniature silicon, so they have a strong interest in this sort of tech.
- llamaimperative 2y agoAren’t Philips and ASML both effectively under American control anyway? Is the TSMC part of the stack that special in terms of actual IP (versus more squishy organizational know-how)?
- KK7NIL 2y ago> Aren’t Philips and ASML both effectively under American control anyway? IDK about Philips but ASML follows US export restrictions due to a deal it agreed to when it bought a US company a few decades ago, yes. > Is the TSMC part of the stack that special in terms of actual IP (versus more squishy organizational know-how)? I don't want to go into too many details as I work in the Intel Foundry but it's certainly both. We'd be very happy to know how TSMC does some specific things, let me put it that way. At the same time, our execution has been dubious since 10 nm.
- _DeadFred_ 2y agoIsn't it that ASML has to for continued access to the USA IP that they acquired?
- throwup238 2y agoIIRC it wasn’t because of an acquisition but part of a joint venture with ASML, Intel, and some other companies to develop EUV with a bunch of Department of Energy funding that started in the late 1990s.
- KK7NIL 2y agoIndeed, I was wrong, thanks for the correction. From Wikipedia: > In 1997, ASML began studying a shift to using extreme ultraviolet and in 1999 joined a consortium, including Intel and two other U.S. chipmakers, in order to exploit fundamental research conducted by the US Department of Energy. Because the CRADA it operates under is funded by the US taxpayer, licensing must be approved by Congress.
- mnau 2y agoASML follows US restrictions because of US power. That purchase is just convinient excuse. If they never bought it, US would force them other way (e. g. access to banking).
- School-Cotton 2y agoAmerican companies already know how to manufacture older chips. It’s not like TSMC is light years ahead of Intel. They’re ahead, but not by so much that their older generation tech would be transformative.
- KK7NIL 2y agoSemiconductor R&D is very multi-dimensional (despite the media only talking about the one dimensional made up measurement of node size), there are many things Intel could learn from TSMC, and the other way around too.
- throwaway48476 2y agoTSMC and intel are more directly comparable than, say Sony CMOS image sensors.
- insane_dreamer 2y agoTSMC is ahead because it adopted ASML's EUV tech earlier than Intel (huge blunder by Intel). The real tech breakthroughs came from ASML, and Intel now has that technology too (and is trying to leapfrog TSMC by being the first to get the new High-NA EUV from ASML, though it won't actually producing sub-3nm chips with it until 2025 or maybe 2026).
- KK7NIL 2y ago> TSMC is ahead because it adopted ASML's EUV Depends what you mean by "adopted". Pretty sure Intel had EUV prototypes before TSMC (or at least very close), but it was slower to transition its high volume production to it due to execution issues. > The real tech breakthroughs came from ASML I know this how the media portrays it now a days but there's so much more to semiconductor manufacturing than lithography, especially since the serious slowdown of lithography scaling with around 193 and 193i litho. Great example is GlobalFoundry which sent its EUV machine back because it realized it could not compete on the R&D needed to keep up with the other foundries.
- whimsicalism 2y agoWhy would TSMC ever agree to such a deal?
- aksss 2y agoWhen the island of Taiwan gets the Alderaan treatment, I'm not sure that will be an issue.