10 ms·

Nvidia is obviously a US company, but the chips themselves are manufactured in Taiwan. And of course China sees Taiwan as a rogue province, at at least treats

Nvidia is obviously a US company, but the chips themselves are manufactured in Taiwan. And of course China sees Taiwan as a rogue province, at at least treats invasion there as "on the table". While the US may decide to actively support Taiwan, at the very least a war over that will disrupt production. Should Taiwan fall, and China choose to ban exports from there to the US, then the fun and games would really start. As long as back-channels exist to supply the chips to China, then there's less incentive for China to control Taiwan. The ban exists as good politics (we don't ship to our adversaries) while the back-channels ensure they aren't forced into a position no-one wants them to be in.

Tier3r 2y ago
There exists a third possibility where the US and China sign an under the table deal for China to invade, the US to saber rattle and China to allow the flow of chips to continue. The present direction seems to be the US is "de-risking" from Taiwan by moving chip production to the US, so if China does invade they aren't caught in a bind.
- KK7NIL 2y ago
  > The present direction seems to be the US is "de-risking" from Taiwan by moving chip production to the US, so if China does invade they aren't caught in a bind. This idea that the US is protecting Taiwan for its semiconductor prowess (aka the "silicon shield") is a very confusing idea to me as it ignores the period from the 40's to the 90's when Taiwan had no semiconductor manufacturing that wasn't being done as well or better elsewhere, yet the US was a ardent supporter, to the point of almost entirely shunning the People's Republic of China over it. It's a smart sounding idea (especially if you don't know your 20th century Chinese history) but the facts just don't back it up.
  - gmueckl 2y ago
    China was a commie state like the USSR countries back then. I don't see how the west could have treated one as the idiologocal archenemy and nemesis and not extent the same animosity to the other.
    - twelve40 2y ago
      Back when? China, despite being a "commie state" (still is btw) split up with USSR by 1969 then struck a deal with Nixon to partner up with the US to become a manufacturing hub for the States.
  - voidfunc 2y ago
    The politics of the US are very different from the 40's to 90's. Good luck explaining to the American public why a bunch of their kids need to go die defending the Taiwanese in 2024 unless you can base it in some cold hard economic reality. The reason we supported them back in the 20th century is because the Red Scare was the big boogeyman of the time and we needed military bases and friendlies in that part of the world.
  - InkCanon 2y ago
    I am reasonably familiar with it, you're missing mentioning why the US defended Taiwan initially. The US stopped any formal defense of Taiwan in 1980, not to the 1990s. During the period it did have a defense treaty it was within the context of creating an anti communist bulwark, and such defence treaties (even with highly suspect partners) was the bread and butter of geopolitics in the Cold War. It was not because of some deep love of Taiwan or democracy, in fact Taiwan would only become a democracy after the defense treaty was terminated. And "ardent supporter" is a very tricky term, the US signed a declaration for the One China policy, which is completely against the idea of Taiwan as a separate nation(although at the time the KMT and people largely did not view Taiwan as an separate nation). The silicon shield is undoubtedly a significant part of the calculus around Taiwan, especially wrt direct military intervention. Successive administrations have clearly shown their emphasis on maintaining access to key strategic resources (the Middle East and oil).
    - eloisius 2y ago
      What One China policy did the US sign? China has a One China Principal which some countries uphold, but the US is not one of them. Our _policy_ is to acknowledge China’s position but does not endorse or challenge it. Chinese diplomats are eternally trying to conflate the two, saying even the US admits there is but one China, and thus supports China’s position on the Taiwan question, but that is not true. As for the silicon shield, yes it’s probably a major factor, but not close to the only factor. If PRC realizes its claims over Taiwan and the South China Sea, the entire region, including many US allies, will be under Chinese hegemony. It would spell the end of the current economic order. Japan, Philippines, basically all of East and Southeast Asia would then be trading within China’s new backyard.
      - Tier3r 2y ago
        If one gets into the weeds of the whole messy thing, the Shanghai Communique acknowledges the position of both sides (Taiwan and China) that there is one China, the 1982 Joint Communique acknowledged the Chinese position and said the US had no intention of pursuing a "two Chinas" or "one China and Taiwan" policy. And of course there's a non stop stream of such political speak, which is a red herring for the whole issue. Beyond minor changes to wordings, the main things the US did that screwed over Taiwan: 1) Revoking the mutual defense treaty which legally bound the US to defend Taiwan, replacing it with a more vague law where military intervention was not clear. 2) Recognizing the PRC as the legitimate representative of China. To align your claims slightly, Taiwan also claims the same section of the SCS (actually it claims a slightly larger part), so strictly speaking it is what happens if the "Chinese claims" are realised (Taiwan and China work jointly to support their claims, ironically enough). In real terms the economic effects of China with respect to the SCS are greatly exaggerated for a number of reasons. First being that shipping can be routed through Indonesia. It is not a chokepoint, it just happens to be the shortest route. Second, blockades have little to do with recognising swaths of ocean as territory. These are enforced by navies, and most blockades in history have not happened within the blockaders' own waters (for obvious reasons). It is no easier for China to blockade trade in the region if it claims the SCS. And third, of all the major economic powers, China has historically been the least likely to enact economic warfare like blockades or sanctions. There is also a fourth aspect where in the current political environment, the globalised, trade based economic order is the least popular in the US and assorted European states, not China (who in fact desperately needs trade).
  - jojobas 2y ago
    China didn't have ICBM capability until like 1980. There was much less risk declaring Taiwan support until then, and after that China feigned liberalization just enough to not be seen as a threat.
- tadfisher 2y ago
  Pretty sure TSMC has plans to destroy or disable their fabs in this event. They (or the Taiwanese) would be stupid not to.
  - Maxious 2y ago
    There is believed to be a software remote disable in the ASML provided machinery but it doesn't have to be effective - an invasion would cut off the machines from the maintenance they require https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/21/asml_kill_switch/ https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/21/asml_kill_switch/
  - InkCanon 2y ago
    It's completely speculative for us, but I'd point out only the US has incentive to do that, not Taiwan. The only reason Taiwan would do it is if they adopted a scorched earth policy like Saddam and the burning Kuwaiti oil fields. But even with a psychopathic dictator like Saddam, he never burned his own oil fields.
    - tadfisher 2y ago
      The incentive for Taiwan is to discourage the CCP from invading.
  - csomar 2y ago
    Pretty sure the TSMC elite will prefer to work with the new CCP overlord if they were to give them a good enough deal.
  - K0balt 2y ago
    Not even necessary. The equipment will cease to function if it is cut off from ASML servers in the Netherlands. But yes, a destruction protocol exists for most strategic resources located near adversaries that are considered critical to national security. Weapons systems and strategic production capabilities are the one area where I think that DRM actually makes sense. Not printer cartridges and coffee. FFS.
- Log_out_ 2y ago
  But taiwan has nukes now in all but name? As the us becomes a non-reliable ally everyone with money and a shopping list bordering a totalitarian country heads for Pakistan ?
  - eloisius 2y ago
    Since when has Taiwan had nukes? There was a nuclear program in the 80s and the US pressured them to abandon it. Even civilian nuclear engineering is not very popular in Taiwan. I’d be kind of surprised if Taiwan had any kind of nuclear weapons program and it wasn’t an international crisis, given how thoroughly each side of the straight spy on the other.
chii 2y ago
> there's less incentive for China to control Taiwan. a very minor effect imho. china doesn't want to control taiwan due to any economic reasons. It's ideological. China doesn't want the model of a free, democratic society of chinese people to exist, because it proves that the CCP's authoritarianism isn't the only "good" model. Look at how hong kong was cracked down; china took the opportunity to do it, when the economic bounties from hong kong was being usurped by shenzen (and to a degree, shanghai).
- tightbookkeeper 2y ago
  But Chinese citizens know the US exists? This feels like projection. The US wants to act as if stock markets and political yard signs are the only usable system.
  - chii 2y ago
    > But Chinese citizens know the US exists? of course, but the US is not mostly composed of chinese people. It is common belief in china that the state governance by the CCP is doing good for the country, and the proof is economic progress, material wealth and geopolitical strength.
    - Log_out_ 2y ago
      Geopolitical strength ? Its a comon theme they want to emulate the british empire colonial model worldwide ,seeing it as what started the century of humiliation . Change by trade indeed.
    - shunia_huang 2y ago
      > It is common belief in china that the state governance by the CCP is doing good for the country, and the proof is economic progress, material wealth and geopolitical strength. I don't know, but how to define if a country is going towards a better path, if all the changes listed does not count? If the people there belives, is it unresonable that the people not there argue about that? I'm not saying it is not arguable, it really falls down to the North-Korea situation that almost everyone inside or outside see that place as hell, but I'm not sure if China feels alike here - a country does have significant economic progress, material wealth and 'geopolitical strength', which I don't think NK has all these.
tw04 2y ago
> Should Taiwan fall, and China choose to ban exports from there to the US, then the fun and games would really start. If it looked like Taiwan was actually going to fall, the first thing to be destroyed would be the fabs. There’s almost 0 chance China gets anything usable. If they thought they could, they would’ve invaded during Trump’s term.
- sfmike 2y ago
  Why trumps turn trump was clearly more resilient to china then Biden if anything now before new president is best time to invade
- InkCanon 2y ago
  Destroyed by who - the US or Taiwan? If by Taiwan, IMO it is extremely unlikely. Scorched earth tactics have only been used by the most bitter, determined combatants in a conflict, who are expecting a long protracted war. The cutting edge chips have enormous economic value but virtually no immediate or even medium term military value to China (the time it would take to design and start using them in hardware is years at least).
  - Log_out_ 2y ago
    autoritarians ruin everything they touch,corrupting all things innovative . They cant even run stockpile logistics in the long run.
    - InkCanon 2y ago
      Yes, the huge advantage the US have is the ploddering, bullying, all powerful party. Sometimes I think in a funny way the CCP and the US government both want the same thing - the suppression of the economic development of China.
  - kelnos 2y ago
    TSMC themselves has said they'll disable them, and machine manufacturer ASML has plans for how they could do it. https://9to5mac.com/2024/05/21/chinese-invasion-of-taiwan-tsmc/ https://9to5mac.com/2024/05/21/chinese-invasion-of-taiwan-ts...
imadierich 2y ago
[dead]
PittleyDunkin 2y ago
> The ban exists as good politics (we don't ship to our adversaries) Do normal people really view china as an adversary? I see this constantly being pushed by politicians and pundits but, unlike other countries in my lifetime, I don't really see that much animosity from normal folk. Expats who resent the PRC? Absolutely. Racism? Definitely. But there's not much appetite for the demonization of our largest trade partner, nor do I think people buy that we would ever want actual conflict with them—kinetic or economic (sans them doing something comically evil, of course). Genocide aside (for which there is at best sparse evidence available to westerners) most of the ways that they're supposedly our adversaries just seem like what we were brought up to see as "competition".
- twelve40 2y ago
  They are not our largest trade partner. Both of the last two administrations were driving pretty hard to distance from PRC. Given that, animosity from normal folk or lack thereof seems kind of vague/irrelevant?
  - PittleyDunkin 2y ago
    Sorry I was thrown by calling it good politics. I guess you could call it that ignoring the people and interests the administration allegedly represents but that doesn't make much sense. Unless you consider american enterprise to be the primary clients of the government, which I suppose there's a good argument for. Regardless, china is our third largest trade partner and severing that connection would still absolutely destroy our economy and quality of life.
    - twelve40 2y ago
      > severing that connection would still absolutely destroy our economy and quality of life Probably, who knows. I'm just making an observation. Maybe after being useful to help win the Cold War they are now considered by the powers that be more of an annoyance or a competitive threat? Your guess as to why this is the policy is as good as mine.
- 2y ago
est 2y ago
> Should Taiwan fall, and China choose to ban exports Are there any "exports" to ban after the fall? The TSMC production was interrupted by a metro passing by few kilometers away. How can it sustain in a war?
- starspangled 2y ago
  If the factories weren't bombed before Taiwan fell to the communists, I'd imagine hey would still be cut off from western semiconductor technology, so they would still end up falling behind even if they could get them restarted.
  - est 2y ago
    > get them restarted How can you run a good restaurant business if all the chefs and customers were gone? A nice setup of kitchen appliances surely means a lot but the key is the people.
- dotancohen 2y ago
  Isn't Taiwan in a heavy earthquake zone, the Ring of Fire? Does that not affect the factories more than a subway passing several kilometers away?
  - est 2y ago
    There are no forcasting for earthquakes, but they can be monitored and prevented to a minimum using a warning system, as electromagnetic signals travel faster seismic waves. Some few milleseconds would be enough. https://esg.tsmc.com/en/update/governance/caseStudy/1/index.html https://esg.tsmc.com/en/update/governance/caseStudy/1/index....
twelve40 2y ago
> back-channels ensure they aren't forced into a position That's a great observation. Except in this case this back-channel is kind of glaringly public and possibly illegal?
jojobas 2y ago
So what you're saying is that the lesson of appeasing Hitler was all in vain.
- rightbyte 2y ago
  What about the lesson of not 'appeasing' the Weimar Republic?
  - jojobas 2y ago
    But Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin were appeased, big time.
    - rightbyte 2y ago
      Hopefully it worked?
      - jojobas 2y ago
        Of course it didn't. A dictatorship country with the greatest population on Earth was given everything it needed to become the greatest industrial power and hold everyone else to ransom. The earlier the West divests from China entirely, the better, preferably few decades ago.
aurareturn 2y ago
> As long as back-channels exist to supply the chips to China, then there's less incentive for China to control Taiwan. The ban exists as good politics (we don't ship to our adversaries) while the back-channels ensure they aren't forced into a position no-one wants them to be in. Funny I was just literally thinking about this a few minutes before I opened this thread. I think the TSMC restrictions on China is really bad for Taiwan in the next few years. First, it’s a huge revenue loss for Taiwan. Second, it creates a scenario in which China would take military action on Taiwan if they fall behind too far in AI due to the lack of the most advanced chips. If I’m a Taiwan citizen, I would clamor for the government to negotiate with the US and Chinese government to allow Chinese companies to use TSMC fabs. It’s one sure way to delay military action.
- dylan604 2y ago
  > First, it’s a huge revenue loss for Taiwan. and whose capacity will be sacrificed to fulfill this lost revenue potential?
  - aurareturn 2y ago
    I don’t understand what you mean by capacity.
    - dylan604 2y ago
      Capacity as in the amount of chips they can make. If they are already at max capacity, then which of their customers currently maxing out that capacity will be told no so that they can suddenly start producing chips for other people.
      - aurareturn 2y ago
        More demand will drive up prices. More demand will provide incentives to build even more fabs, which will further increase revenue. Also, TSMC's fabs are not at max capacity. It's only 70-80%.
- 2y ago
clwg 2y ago
In the event of a invasion TMSC in Taiwan will cease to function. "TMSC and its Dutch chip machine supplier ASML have made joint plans to remotely disable the machines in the event of an invasion." https://9to5mac.com/2024/05/21/chinese-invasion-of-taiwan-tsmc/ https://9to5mac.com/2024/05/21/chinese-invasion-of-taiwan-ts...
- akira2501 2y ago
  They'll be disassembled and studied.
  - godelski 2y ago
    They could get fully operating machines and that's not enough to make them the global chip leader overnight, or even in a decade. Analogously, the reason AMD is trailing Nvidia isn't just about hardware... There's many factors at play and this is true for TSMC as well
    - akira2501 2y ago
      There are people who are worried about the economic market. Others are worried about the military impact. Them being a "global chip leader" isn't the problem.
      - godelski 2y ago
        The latter related to what I wrote. But yes chip global chip production would be severely damaged. This includes for china itself. It’s like shooting yourself in the foot to cut off your enemies toe. The military impact is more complicated. It’s worth noting that like most industries the military relies upon computers and its a pretty bad if they are being created by your adversaries instead of allies.
- godelski 2y ago
  People seem to not realize that (just like them) Taiwan knows that China wants TSMC. Even if there wasn't a way to turn the machines off remotely in an invasion, do people not recognize that Taiwan will gladly make China blow up the facility, or do it themselves. The US said they'll do it if Taiwan won't. (Though this may change tomorrow [0]) But it's not just the facility that's important, it's the people. It's not like you can walk in and press a button and start making chips (not to mention the whole supply chain for the materials necessary for manufacturing). It's not a turkey operator... If China somehow captured the facility without severe damage, do you really believe those engineers are just going to do the work? Or rather, do it to their best abilities? Typically people are not very happy when their country has been annexed. It's very easy to slow down production, to introduce error, and it doesn't take very many people resisting to shut down the whole operation, especially if many people are willing to at least "look the other way". All the while the US and others will happily the providing support and be trying to extract those engineers and they're families. (And other countries aren't going to be providing materials so China needs to jump an even bigger gap) Taiwan knows their silicon shield. It exists by design. And it's resistant to more than an invasion. The chance of a China invasion leading to Chinese chip dominance within a decade after the invasion is near 0. It would only weaken the works supply, so it's just China shooting itself in the foot (maybe both and maybe an arm too). It'd be insane to hurt yourself more in an effort to hurt your enemy even a decent amount. Though it's still not out of the question. [0] https://www.reuters.com/technology/tsmc-shares-fall-more-than-2-after-trump-says-taiwan-should-pay-defence-2024-07-17/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/tsmc-shares-fall-more-tha...
dotancohen 2y ago
China is no longer afraid that the US will back Taiwan. Last year Biden threatened Iran with "don't", and Iran "did", and the US did absolutely nothing. Biden has demonstrated that US security promises to allies mean nothing, not do even direct US threats, extremely expensive Navy not withstanding. After Biden's responses to both Russian and Iranian aggression, do you think that China has any concerns anymore?
- dotancohen 2y ago
  To the deleted or missing comment: This is the video of Biden stressing "don't". https://youtube.com/watch?v=aWFefjhPtQk https://youtube.com/watch?v=aWFefjhPtQk By not responding, Biden has undermined decades of US deterrence value.
b112 2y ago
[flagged]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
naveen99 2y ago
Logic cannot be built on lies.
fennecbutt 2y ago
Then ASML stops selling machines to TSMC. Japan is also responsible for a lot of wafer and resist stuff afaik.

Tier3r 2y ago

There exists a third possibility where the US and China sign an under the table deal for China to invade, the US to saber rattle and China to allow the flow of chips to continue. The present direction seems to be the US is "de-risking" from Taiwan by moving chip production to the US, so if China does invade they aren't caught in a bind.

KK7NIL 2y ago
> The present direction seems to be the US is "de-risking" from Taiwan by moving chip production to the US, so if China does invade they aren't caught in a bind. This idea that the US is protecting Taiwan for its semiconductor prowess (aka the "silicon shield") is a very confusing idea to me as it ignores the period from the 40's to the 90's when Taiwan had no semiconductor manufacturing that wasn't being done as well or better elsewhere, yet the US was a ardent supporter, to the point of almost entirely shunning the People's Republic of China over it. It's a smart sounding idea (especially if you don't know your 20th century Chinese history) but the facts just don't back it up.
- gmueckl 2y ago
  China was a commie state like the USSR countries back then. I don't see how the west could have treated one as the idiologocal archenemy and nemesis and not extent the same animosity to the other.
  - twelve40 2y ago
    Back when? China, despite being a "commie state" (still is btw) split up with USSR by 1969 then struck a deal with Nixon to partner up with the US to become a manufacturing hub for the States.
- voidfunc 2y ago
  The politics of the US are very different from the 40's to 90's. Good luck explaining to the American public why a bunch of their kids need to go die defending the Taiwanese in 2024 unless you can base it in some cold hard economic reality. The reason we supported them back in the 20th century is because the Red Scare was the big boogeyman of the time and we needed military bases and friendlies in that part of the world.
- InkCanon 2y ago
  I am reasonably familiar with it, you're missing mentioning why the US defended Taiwan initially. The US stopped any formal defense of Taiwan in 1980, not to the 1990s. During the period it did have a defense treaty it was within the context of creating an anti communist bulwark, and such defence treaties (even with highly suspect partners) was the bread and butter of geopolitics in the Cold War. It was not because of some deep love of Taiwan or democracy, in fact Taiwan would only become a democracy after the defense treaty was terminated. And "ardent supporter" is a very tricky term, the US signed a declaration for the One China policy, which is completely against the idea of Taiwan as a separate nation(although at the time the KMT and people largely did not view Taiwan as an separate nation). The silicon shield is undoubtedly a significant part of the calculus around Taiwan, especially wrt direct military intervention. Successive administrations have clearly shown their emphasis on maintaining access to key strategic resources (the Middle East and oil).
  - eloisius 2y ago
    What One China policy did the US sign? China has a One China Principal which some countries uphold, but the US is not one of them. Our _policy_ is to acknowledge China’s position but does not endorse or challenge it. Chinese diplomats are eternally trying to conflate the two, saying even the US admits there is but one China, and thus supports China’s position on the Taiwan question, but that is not true. As for the silicon shield, yes it’s probably a major factor, but not close to the only factor. If PRC realizes its claims over Taiwan and the South China Sea, the entire region, including many US allies, will be under Chinese hegemony. It would spell the end of the current economic order. Japan, Philippines, basically all of East and Southeast Asia would then be trading within China’s new backyard.
    - Tier3r 2y ago
      If one gets into the weeds of the whole messy thing, the Shanghai Communique acknowledges the position of both sides (Taiwan and China) that there is one China, the 1982 Joint Communique acknowledged the Chinese position and said the US had no intention of pursuing a "two Chinas" or "one China and Taiwan" policy. And of course there's a non stop stream of such political speak, which is a red herring for the whole issue. Beyond minor changes to wordings, the main things the US did that screwed over Taiwan: 1) Revoking the mutual defense treaty which legally bound the US to defend Taiwan, replacing it with a more vague law where military intervention was not clear. 2) Recognizing the PRC as the legitimate representative of China. To align your claims slightly, Taiwan also claims the same section of the SCS (actually it claims a slightly larger part), so strictly speaking it is what happens if the "Chinese claims" are realised (Taiwan and China work jointly to support their claims, ironically enough). In real terms the economic effects of China with respect to the SCS are greatly exaggerated for a number of reasons. First being that shipping can be routed through Indonesia. It is not a chokepoint, it just happens to be the shortest route. Second, blockades have little to do with recognising swaths of ocean as territory. These are enforced by navies, and most blockades in history have not happened within the blockaders' own waters (for obvious reasons). It is no easier for China to blockade trade in the region if it claims the SCS. And third, of all the major economic powers, China has historically been the least likely to enact economic warfare like blockades or sanctions. There is also a fourth aspect where in the current political environment, the globalised, trade based economic order is the least popular in the US and assorted European states, not China (who in fact desperately needs trade).
- jojobas 2y ago
  China didn't have ICBM capability until like 1980. There was much less risk declaring Taiwan support until then, and after that China feigned liberalization just enough to not be seen as a threat.
tadfisher 2y ago
Pretty sure TSMC has plans to destroy or disable their fabs in this event. They (or the Taiwanese) would be stupid not to.
- Maxious 2y ago
  There is believed to be a software remote disable in the ASML provided machinery but it doesn't have to be effective - an invasion would cut off the machines from the maintenance they require https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/21/asml_kill_switch/ https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/21/asml_kill_switch/
- InkCanon 2y ago
  It's completely speculative for us, but I'd point out only the US has incentive to do that, not Taiwan. The only reason Taiwan would do it is if they adopted a scorched earth policy like Saddam and the burning Kuwaiti oil fields. But even with a psychopathic dictator like Saddam, he never burned his own oil fields.
  - tadfisher 2y ago
    The incentive for Taiwan is to discourage the CCP from invading.
- csomar 2y ago
  Pretty sure the TSMC elite will prefer to work with the new CCP overlord if they were to give them a good enough deal.
- K0balt 2y ago
  Not even necessary. The equipment will cease to function if it is cut off from ASML servers in the Netherlands. But yes, a destruction protocol exists for most strategic resources located near adversaries that are considered critical to national security. Weapons systems and strategic production capabilities are the one area where I think that DRM actually makes sense. Not printer cartridges and coffee. FFS.
Log_out_ 2y ago
But taiwan has nukes now in all but name? As the us becomes a non-reliable ally everyone with money and a shopping list bordering a totalitarian country heads for Pakistan ?
- eloisius 2y ago
  Since when has Taiwan had nukes? There was a nuclear program in the 80s and the US pressured them to abandon it. Even civilian nuclear engineering is not very popular in Taiwan. I’d be kind of surprised if Taiwan had any kind of nuclear weapons program and it wasn’t an international crisis, given how thoroughly each side of the straight spy on the other.

chii 2y ago

> there's less incentive for China to control Taiwan. a very minor effect imho. china doesn't want to control taiwan due to any economic reasons. It's ideological. China doesn't want the model of a free, democratic society of chinese people to exist, because it proves that the CCP's authoritarianism isn't the only "good" model. Look at how hong kong was cracked down; china took the opportunity to do it, when the economic bounties from hong kong was being usurped by shenzen (and to a degree, shanghai).

tightbookkeeper 2y ago
But Chinese citizens know the US exists? This feels like projection. The US wants to act as if stock markets and political yard signs are the only usable system.
- chii 2y ago
  > But Chinese citizens know the US exists? of course, but the US is not mostly composed of chinese people. It is common belief in china that the state governance by the CCP is doing good for the country, and the proof is economic progress, material wealth and geopolitical strength.
  - Log_out_ 2y ago
    Geopolitical strength ? Its a comon theme they want to emulate the british empire colonial model worldwide ,seeing it as what started the century of humiliation . Change by trade indeed.
  - shunia_huang 2y ago
    > It is common belief in china that the state governance by the CCP is doing good for the country, and the proof is economic progress, material wealth and geopolitical strength. I don't know, but how to define if a country is going towards a better path, if all the changes listed does not count? If the people there belives, is it unresonable that the people not there argue about that? I'm not saying it is not arguable, it really falls down to the North-Korea situation that almost everyone inside or outside see that place as hell, but I'm not sure if China feels alike here - a country does have significant economic progress, material wealth and 'geopolitical strength', which I don't think NK has all these.

tw04 2y ago

> Should Taiwan fall, and China choose to ban exports from there to the US, then the fun and games would really start. If it looked like Taiwan was actually going to fall, the first thing to be destroyed would be the fabs. There’s almost 0 chance China gets anything usable. If they thought they could, they would’ve invaded during Trump’s term.

sfmike 2y ago
Why trumps turn trump was clearly more resilient to china then Biden if anything now before new president is best time to invade
InkCanon 2y ago
Destroyed by who - the US or Taiwan? If by Taiwan, IMO it is extremely unlikely. Scorched earth tactics have only been used by the most bitter, determined combatants in a conflict, who are expecting a long protracted war. The cutting edge chips have enormous economic value but virtually no immediate or even medium term military value to China (the time it would take to design and start using them in hardware is years at least).
- Log_out_ 2y ago
  autoritarians ruin everything they touch,corrupting all things innovative . They cant even run stockpile logistics in the long run.
  - InkCanon 2y ago
    Yes, the huge advantage the US have is the ploddering, bullying, all powerful party. Sometimes I think in a funny way the CCP and the US government both want the same thing - the suppression of the economic development of China.
- kelnos 2y ago
  TSMC themselves has said they'll disable them, and machine manufacturer ASML has plans for how they could do it. https://9to5mac.com/2024/05/21/chinese-invasion-of-taiwan-tsmc/ https://9to5mac.com/2024/05/21/chinese-invasion-of-taiwan-ts...

imadierich 2y ago

[dead]

PittleyDunkin 2y ago

> The ban exists as good politics (we don't ship to our adversaries) Do normal people really view china as an adversary? I see this constantly being pushed by politicians and pundits but, unlike other countries in my lifetime, I don't really see that much animosity from normal folk. Expats who resent the PRC? Absolutely. Racism? Definitely. But there's not much appetite for the demonization of our largest trade partner, nor do I think people buy that we would ever want actual conflict with them—kinetic or economic (sans them doing something comically evil, of course). Genocide aside (for which there is at best sparse evidence available to westerners) most of the ways that they're supposedly our adversaries just seem like what we were brought up to see as "competition".

twelve40 2y ago
They are not our largest trade partner. Both of the last two administrations were driving pretty hard to distance from PRC. Given that, animosity from normal folk or lack thereof seems kind of vague/irrelevant?
- PittleyDunkin 2y ago
  Sorry I was thrown by calling it good politics. I guess you could call it that ignoring the people and interests the administration allegedly represents but that doesn't make much sense. Unless you consider american enterprise to be the primary clients of the government, which I suppose there's a good argument for. Regardless, china is our third largest trade partner and severing that connection would still absolutely destroy our economy and quality of life.
  - twelve40 2y ago
    > severing that connection would still absolutely destroy our economy and quality of life Probably, who knows. I'm just making an observation. Maybe after being useful to help win the Cold War they are now considered by the powers that be more of an annoyance or a competitive threat? Your guess as to why this is the policy is as good as mine.
2y ago

est 2y ago

> Should Taiwan fall, and China choose to ban exports Are there any "exports" to ban after the fall? The TSMC production was interrupted by a metro passing by few kilometers away. How can it sustain in a war?

starspangled 2y ago
If the factories weren't bombed before Taiwan fell to the communists, I'd imagine hey would still be cut off from western semiconductor technology, so they would still end up falling behind even if they could get them restarted.
- est 2y ago
  > get them restarted How can you run a good restaurant business if all the chefs and customers were gone? A nice setup of kitchen appliances surely means a lot but the key is the people.
dotancohen 2y ago
Isn't Taiwan in a heavy earthquake zone, the Ring of Fire? Does that not affect the factories more than a subway passing several kilometers away?
- est 2y ago
  There are no forcasting for earthquakes, but they can be monitored and prevented to a minimum using a warning system, as electromagnetic signals travel faster seismic waves. Some few milleseconds would be enough. https://esg.tsmc.com/en/update/governance/caseStudy/1/index.html https://esg.tsmc.com/en/update/governance/caseStudy/1/index....

twelve40 2y ago

> back-channels ensure they aren't forced into a position That's a great observation. Except in this case this back-channel is kind of glaringly public and possibly illegal?

jojobas 2y ago

So what you're saying is that the lesson of appeasing Hitler was all in vain.

rightbyte 2y ago
What about the lesson of not 'appeasing' the Weimar Republic?
- jojobas 2y ago
  But Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin were appeased, big time.
  - rightbyte 2y ago
    Hopefully it worked?
    - jojobas 2y ago
      Of course it didn't. A dictatorship country with the greatest population on Earth was given everything it needed to become the greatest industrial power and hold everyone else to ransom. The earlier the West divests from China entirely, the better, preferably few decades ago.

aurareturn 2y ago

> As long as back-channels exist to supply the chips to China, then there's less incentive for China to control Taiwan. The ban exists as good politics (we don't ship to our adversaries) while the back-channels ensure they aren't forced into a position no-one wants them to be in. Funny I was just literally thinking about this a few minutes before I opened this thread. I think the TSMC restrictions on China is really bad for Taiwan in the next few years. First, it’s a huge revenue loss for Taiwan. Second, it creates a scenario in which China would take military action on Taiwan if they fall behind too far in AI due to the lack of the most advanced chips. If I’m a Taiwan citizen, I would clamor for the government to negotiate with the US and Chinese government to allow Chinese companies to use TSMC fabs. It’s one sure way to delay military action.

dylan604 2y ago
> First, it’s a huge revenue loss for Taiwan. and whose capacity will be sacrificed to fulfill this lost revenue potential?
- aurareturn 2y ago
  I don’t understand what you mean by capacity.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    Capacity as in the amount of chips they can make. If they are already at max capacity, then which of their customers currently maxing out that capacity will be told no so that they can suddenly start producing chips for other people.
    - aurareturn 2y ago
      More demand will drive up prices. More demand will provide incentives to build even more fabs, which will further increase revenue. Also, TSMC's fabs are not at max capacity. It's only 70-80%.
2y ago

clwg 2y ago

In the event of a invasion TMSC in Taiwan will cease to function. "TMSC and its Dutch chip machine supplier ASML have made joint plans to remotely disable the machines in the event of an invasion." https://9to5mac.com/2024/05/21/chinese-invasion-of-taiwan-tsmc/ https://9to5mac.com/2024/05/21/chinese-invasion-of-taiwan-ts...

akira2501 2y ago
They'll be disassembled and studied.
- godelski 2y ago
  They could get fully operating machines and that's not enough to make them the global chip leader overnight, or even in a decade. Analogously, the reason AMD is trailing Nvidia isn't just about hardware... There's many factors at play and this is true for TSMC as well
  - akira2501 2y ago
    There are people who are worried about the economic market. Others are worried about the military impact. Them being a "global chip leader" isn't the problem.
    - godelski 2y ago
      The latter related to what I wrote. But yes chip global chip production would be severely damaged. This includes for china itself. It’s like shooting yourself in the foot to cut off your enemies toe. The military impact is more complicated. It’s worth noting that like most industries the military relies upon computers and its a pretty bad if they are being created by your adversaries instead of allies.
godelski 2y ago
People seem to not realize that (just like them) Taiwan knows that China wants TSMC. Even if there wasn't a way to turn the machines off remotely in an invasion, do people not recognize that Taiwan will gladly make China blow up the facility, or do it themselves. The US said they'll do it if Taiwan won't. (Though this may change tomorrow [0]) But it's not just the facility that's important, it's the people. It's not like you can walk in and press a button and start making chips (not to mention the whole supply chain for the materials necessary for manufacturing). It's not a turkey operator... If China somehow captured the facility without severe damage, do you really believe those engineers are just going to do the work? Or rather, do it to their best abilities? Typically people are not very happy when their country has been annexed. It's very easy to slow down production, to introduce error, and it doesn't take very many people resisting to shut down the whole operation, especially if many people are willing to at least "look the other way". All the while the US and others will happily the providing support and be trying to extract those engineers and they're families. (And other countries aren't going to be providing materials so China needs to jump an even bigger gap) Taiwan knows their silicon shield. It exists by design. And it's resistant to more than an invasion. The chance of a China invasion leading to Chinese chip dominance within a decade after the invasion is near 0. It would only weaken the works supply, so it's just China shooting itself in the foot (maybe both and maybe an arm too). It'd be insane to hurt yourself more in an effort to hurt your enemy even a decent amount. Though it's still not out of the question. [0] https://www.reuters.com/technology/tsmc-shares-fall-more-than-2-after-trump-says-taiwan-should-pay-defence-2024-07-17/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/tsmc-shares-fall-more-tha...

dotancohen 2y ago

China is no longer afraid that the US will back Taiwan. Last year Biden threatened Iran with "don't", and Iran "did", and the US did absolutely nothing. Biden has demonstrated that US security promises to allies mean nothing, not do even direct US threats, extremely expensive Navy not withstanding. After Biden's responses to both Russian and Iranian aggression, do you think that China has any concerns anymore?

dotancohen 2y ago
To the deleted or missing comment: This is the video of Biden stressing "don't". https://youtube.com/watch?v=aWFefjhPtQk https://youtube.com/watch?v=aWFefjhPtQk By not responding, Biden has undermined decades of US deterrence value.

b112 2y ago

[flagged]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

naveen99 2y ago

Logic cannot be built on lies.

fennecbutt 2y ago

Then ASML stops selling machines to TSMC. Japan is also responsible for a lot of wafer and resist stuff afaik.