7 ms·

isn't it risky to build this in a seismically active region? wouldn't somewhere that has almost no history of earthquakes like korea be better?

loeg 11mo ago
Japan doesn't have the option of building in Korea? Not if it wants to retain sovereign control.
rich_sasha 11mo ago
It would be darkly amusing if all chips come from either politically unstable Taiwan or seismically unstable Hokkaido. But then Japan seems amazing at producing all sorts of other delicate things, despite all of its soil being basically built out of earthquakes, so I guess they have this bit figured out.
- noduerme 11mo ago
  That's not even a tough call if you had to lay odds on which would go offline first. Is "politically unstable" once again an acceptable euphemism for a small democracy being threatened with destruction by a totalitarian superpower? I thought we decided that was gauche. After, say, the German invasion of Czechoslovakia.
  - Braxton1980 11mo ago
    I don't think China wants to destroy Taiwan. They want it to be a part of China.
    - SllX 11mo ago
      Right now there is no non-violent path to achieving that because Taiwan intends to violently and militarily resist if it comes to that. Probably with the aid of America, although I’m a lot less certain of that than 5 year ago, and it’s looking like it’s a lot more likely to be with the aid of Japan as well. Also a success by the PRC would still result in the political destruction of the Republic of China and the subjugation of its people.
      - noduerme 11mo ago
        It should be noted that even if Taiwan's military resistance were negligible (or on the order of Tibet's), which it's not, that would not validate invading them and taking away their autonomy. For all intents and purposes, Taiwan is a self-governing nation, distinct from China precisely because it does not wish to be part of China.
        MangoToupe 11mo ago
        Taiwan is not distinct from China. Both the ROC and the PRC view Taiwan as part of China (ironically, at the cost of the mass slaughter of taiwanese to in service of the chinese).
        decimalenough 11mo ago
        "One China" is a political fig leaf that allows both sides to pretend the other country doesn't exist. Back in reality, the Republic of China (Taiwan) is fully independent from the People's Republic of China and fulfills every criteria of nationhood.
        MangoToupe 11mo ago
        Ok, nothing you said contradicts anything I said
        noduerme 11mo ago
        From that perspective, the ROC is the legitimate government of Beijing. Facts on the ground appear otherwise, but facts on the ground also imply that Taiwan is not part of the PRC's version of China.
        MangoToupe 11mo ago
        > From that perspective, the ROC is the legitimate government of Beijing. No. I don't understand how you came to this conclusion. Both governments claim legitimacy and only one has actual sovereignty.
    - rockskon 11mo ago
      By force. Because Taiwan doesn't want to be a part of Beijing's China.
      - atwrk 11mo ago
        Both points are not really true. For the China part: Yes, the "by force" part certainly exists as a position, in competition to the peaceful unification approach. It's important to keep in mind, though, that the confrontative position of the first Trump administration and afterwards the Biden administration significantly helped the "by force" faction. There was an interesting piece in Foreign Policy about that, a social scientist from the US was questioning Chinese students at an elite university on this very topic and thus had the chance to do a time series observing the attitude change following US actions. Secondly, in Taiwanese politics, Unification is actually a big topic and even has its own party, the New Party, advocating for it (plus the fringe CUPP). Not popular right now, but certainly existing - and evidently falsifying the notion that the all of "Taiwan doesn't want to be part of Beijing's China".
        rockskon 11mo ago
        So according to your logic, it only counts if it's unanimous inside Taiwan to not be taken over by Beijing but it doesn't need to be unanimous for those who want reunification with China?
        atwrk 11mo ago
        No. I pointed out that both the "by force" statement for China and the "Taiwan doesn't want" statement are so oversimplified that they became factually incorrect. The "logic" is your inference and neither stated nor implied by me.
        rockskon 11mo ago
        How is it not factually correct? The existance of a faction within Taiwan that wants Taiwan to reunify with Beijing's China isn't materially relevant if they don't have any path forward to accomplish their goal.
    - fankt 11mo ago
      Become a part of a country with no freedom of speech? Yep, that's destruction.
    - noduerme 11mo ago
      Come here, chicken. I don't want to hurt you, I just want to eat you!
    - n4r9 11mo ago
      China wants to destory Taiwan's democracy, as OP said quite correctly.
  - elefanten 11mo ago
    Spot on. And the mistake of considering appeasement of said totalitarian superpower by “letting them have it” would be just as enormous.
    - jabron 11mo ago
      Comparing Nazi Germany and the PRC in any way is certainly an interesting choice, considering they're the one major power in the world that actually doesn't have a recent history of invading sovereign nations.
      - noduerme 11mo ago
        Come again? Tibet was absolutely a sovereign nation. I guess it depends what you mean by "recent", but the colonization is still underway, daily. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Tibet_by_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Tibet_by_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War
        ta20240528 11mo ago
        'Tibet was absolutely a sovereign nation. I guess it depends what you mean by "recent"' The rest of the world notes from afar that Hawaii became a US state in 1959, whilst Tibet entered the PRC way back in 1951. In 1993, the US congress apologised for this - they didn't give it back :)
      - Lio 11mo ago
        Yeah they do. Even right now they're trying to take territory from the Philippines. China just has a history of denying what they're doing as they're doing it. There are so many examples online. My favourite is of a Chinese warship ramming into its own coast guard vessel as they fail to intimidate the Philippines Coast Guard. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev22n0lm1xo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev22n0lm1xo
      - matkoniecz 11mo ago
  - inglor_cz 11mo ago
    As a Czech who absolutely hates the Protectorate era, I can still see a good case to use somewhat neutral expressions like "politically unstable" if you want to discuss technical topics like supply chains without delving into the underlying politics. Declaring "I am a friend of democracies threatened by totalitarian countries" before every economic utterance looks as performative and ultimately counterproductive to me as all the "land acknowledgments" that infected the US academia. (Not coincidentally, those don't help actual Amerindians at all.) Yeah, Central Europe in the 1930s was politically unstable, no way around it. And it wasn't just question of Czechoslovakia vs. Germany either. Most countries had irredentist movements and/or land demands on their neighbours.
    - noduerme 11mo ago
      So, let's say the TSMC is the modern equivalent in "supply chain" terms as Czech guns made in Plzeň, like the Škoda 75mm cannon - wait, let's rewind. I'm not saying Czechoslovakia was politically stable in 1939. I'm saying that when your neighbor claims they need to rescue you from instability - like when America says they need to rescue a Latin American or Middle Eastern country from "political instability" when that country elects someone who doesn't want the country's resources owned and run by companies with imperialist backing - that is code for a green light to conquer them and take their resources. The same as it was for the Germans. The same as it is for China re: Taiwan and Russia re: all the former Soviet republics. Declaring your neighbor "politically unstable" and presenting yourself as its savior was the clearest way in the 20th Century to declare war without any casus belli. I'm sure you wouldn't like your country to be invaded again if the powers around it decide you can't manage your own affairs. [edit] I also spent about a year living in Prague and I love your country, Czechs are the best, and their sense of freedom is an immense relief from let's say other countries in the EU, so, I think it's amazing that you have maintained your independence from the enormous forces surrounding you and pulling in all directions. I think part of this is something I observed, that Czechs act like they are part of one small family.
      - inglor_cz 11mo ago
        Again, context matters and we are likely not talking in a "let us decide whom to invade" context. BTW "Declaring your neighbor "politically unstable" and presenting yourself as its savior was the clearest way in the 20th Century to declare war without any casus belli" is not really true, sometimes this happened, but wars have been declared for all sorts of putative reasons, like "our particular minority is being oppressed" or "the neighbouring government plotted against the life of our sovereign" or "they are infidels, go get them". Anyway I don't really see what you propose. Binning expressions because someone someday used them in bad faith, in the belief that this will stop future invasions from happening? This seems to be somewhat futile to me. Invasions aren't fundamentally caused by words. Words only work as a cloak and one cloak can be easily substituted by another, and it will, depending on the current state of politics in the invader and invadee country. Note that the Russians explained their invasion into Ukraine by calling them "fascists". Should the Western civilization drop the word forever because of that?
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]
  - RobotToaster 11mo ago
    It's been in vogue since the American invasion of Vietnam
    - noduerme 11mo ago
      right, another reason China shouldn't invoke it to invade a free country.
  - brabel 11mo ago
    China doesn’t want to destroy Taiwan , it wants to reunite with it like it did with other territories that had been taken by foreign powers, like happened to Hong Kong and Macau. Taiwan was occupied by Japan and then never went back to being China after the Japanese were defeated because the Chinese Party that was defeated in the Revolution fled to the Island and never accepted the PRC as legit government in China. Some of the more nationalist Taiwanese even consider themselves to be the legit government in exile of all China. You seem to not understand any of that when you compare China with Nazi Germany, really embarrassing.
    - phantasmish 11mo ago
      There’s definitely something embarrassing going on, and it starts but does not end with confusing destruction of a state with destruction of… I’m not even sure what you had in mind. The land? The infrastructure? Taiwan’s democracy is absolutely threatened with destruction by a totalitarian superpower, that wasn’t in any way incorrect or misleading, and that’s how the GP post phrased it. Its state is threatened with destruction. That’s entirely accurate.
      - brabel 11mo ago
        Where are you from? Did you know Taiwan is not recognized as a state independent of China by Europe, the USA, Japan and nearly every other country with the exception of 12 small countries? https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-that-recognize-taiwan https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries... You want it to be a state but your own country says it’s not one most likely. Stop embarrassing yourself.
        phantasmish 11mo ago
        The concept of “political fiction” exists and is important, yes, but we need not confuse it for reality. [edit] I think I’ve used the wrong term here but I think I get the idea across. There are diplomatic lies maintained in many situations where everyone largely operates like it’s not true, and the situation with Taiwan is so quintessentially one of these that’s it’s a common first example to illustrate the point. In my defense it’s been a loooong time since my last international relations class.
- KeplerBoy 11mo ago
  Isn't Taiwan also seismically active? They are reports of earthquakes affecting TSMC fabs in january 2025 and april 2024. Apparently these were not huge blows to their fabs, otherwise we would be talking about that day-in-day-out, but there's always a risk of that happening.
  - zamadatix 11mo ago
    Seems even more active, at least according to number of magnitude 6+ earthquakes since 1900 in the region https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/?extent=12.72608,101.84326&extent=49.56798,179.18701&range=search&search=%7B%22name%22:%22Search%20Results%22,%22params%22:%7B%22starttime%22:%221900-01-01%2000:00:00%22,%22endtime%22:%222025-11-24%2023:59:59%22,%22maxlatitude%22:45.951,%22minlatitude%22:20.303,%22maxlongitude%22:147.305,%22minlongitude%22:118.477,%22minmagnitude%22:6,%22orderby%22:%22time%22%7D%7D https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/?extent=12.72608...
  - ehnto 11mo ago
    Seems silly to be talking about this as if this is some kind of global consortium effort. Japan is building Japan at semi conductor industry, for the benefit of itself, of course it is located in Japan.
    - KeplerBoy 11mo ago
      Sure, Japan and Taiwan have no choice. They have to build on their seismically active islands or give up, which is not an option.
- HarHarVeryFunny 11mo ago
  I guess it depends on what sort of monetary damage the typical Hokkaido earthquake would have on a fab - just result in a bad batch of chips perhaps, or also damage equipment? Obviously it's known that the region is very seismically active (159 earthquakes in Hokkaido so far this year!), but Japan are used to having to build to minimize earthquake damage. https://earthquaketrack.com/p/japan/hokkaido/recent https://earthquaketrack.com/p/japan/hokkaido/recent
SllX 11mo ago
Given Korea hasn’t been a Japanese colony since the War, and they want to build in their territory, options are limited.
rkachowski 11mo ago
you have silicon valley right by the San Andreas fault line..
Panoramix 11mo ago
TSMC is in a seismically active region
SapporoChris 11mo ago
Japan is quite adept at building structures resistant to earthquakes and tsunami. I'd be very surprised if the designers and architects of this endeavor are unaware of the issues.
anonymous908213 11mo ago
I believe Koreans would find being colonized again to be at least a little bit objectionable. Hokkaido is significantly safer compared to Honshu. It does still experience quakes, but it is at least not directly on major fault lines.
basisword 11mo ago
Why would the Japanese government back a company to build chips...in Korea?

loeg 11mo ago

Japan doesn't have the option of building in Korea? Not if it wants to retain sovereign control.

rich_sasha 11mo ago

It would be darkly amusing if all chips come from either politically unstable Taiwan or seismically unstable Hokkaido. But then Japan seems amazing at producing all sorts of other delicate things, despite all of its soil being basically built out of earthquakes, so I guess they have this bit figured out.

noduerme 11mo ago
That's not even a tough call if you had to lay odds on which would go offline first. Is "politically unstable" once again an acceptable euphemism for a small democracy being threatened with destruction by a totalitarian superpower? I thought we decided that was gauche. After, say, the German invasion of Czechoslovakia.
- Braxton1980 11mo ago
  I don't think China wants to destroy Taiwan. They want it to be a part of China.
  - SllX 11mo ago
    Right now there is no non-violent path to achieving that because Taiwan intends to violently and militarily resist if it comes to that. Probably with the aid of America, although I’m a lot less certain of that than 5 year ago, and it’s looking like it’s a lot more likely to be with the aid of Japan as well. Also a success by the PRC would still result in the political destruction of the Republic of China and the subjugation of its people.
    - noduerme 11mo ago
      It should be noted that even if Taiwan's military resistance were negligible (or on the order of Tibet's), which it's not, that would not validate invading them and taking away their autonomy. For all intents and purposes, Taiwan is a self-governing nation, distinct from China precisely because it does not wish to be part of China.
      - MangoToupe 11mo ago
        Taiwan is not distinct from China. Both the ROC and the PRC view Taiwan as part of China (ironically, at the cost of the mass slaughter of taiwanese to in service of the chinese).
        decimalenough 11mo ago
        "One China" is a political fig leaf that allows both sides to pretend the other country doesn't exist. Back in reality, the Republic of China (Taiwan) is fully independent from the People's Republic of China and fulfills every criteria of nationhood.
        MangoToupe 11mo ago
        Ok, nothing you said contradicts anything I said
        noduerme 11mo ago
        From that perspective, the ROC is the legitimate government of Beijing. Facts on the ground appear otherwise, but facts on the ground also imply that Taiwan is not part of the PRC's version of China.
        MangoToupe 11mo ago
        > From that perspective, the ROC is the legitimate government of Beijing. No. I don't understand how you came to this conclusion. Both governments claim legitimacy and only one has actual sovereignty.
  - rockskon 11mo ago
    By force. Because Taiwan doesn't want to be a part of Beijing's China.
    - atwrk 11mo ago
      Both points are not really true. For the China part: Yes, the "by force" part certainly exists as a position, in competition to the peaceful unification approach. It's important to keep in mind, though, that the confrontative position of the first Trump administration and afterwards the Biden administration significantly helped the "by force" faction. There was an interesting piece in Foreign Policy about that, a social scientist from the US was questioning Chinese students at an elite university on this very topic and thus had the chance to do a time series observing the attitude change following US actions. Secondly, in Taiwanese politics, Unification is actually a big topic and even has its own party, the New Party, advocating for it (plus the fringe CUPP). Not popular right now, but certainly existing - and evidently falsifying the notion that the all of "Taiwan doesn't want to be part of Beijing's China".
      - rockskon 11mo ago
        So according to your logic, it only counts if it's unanimous inside Taiwan to not be taken over by Beijing but it doesn't need to be unanimous for those who want reunification with China?
        atwrk 11mo ago
        No. I pointed out that both the "by force" statement for China and the "Taiwan doesn't want" statement are so oversimplified that they became factually incorrect. The "logic" is your inference and neither stated nor implied by me.
        rockskon 11mo ago
        How is it not factually correct? The existance of a faction within Taiwan that wants Taiwan to reunify with Beijing's China isn't materially relevant if they don't have any path forward to accomplish their goal.
  - fankt 11mo ago
    Become a part of a country with no freedom of speech? Yep, that's destruction.
  - noduerme 11mo ago
    Come here, chicken. I don't want to hurt you, I just want to eat you!
  - n4r9 11mo ago
    China wants to destory Taiwan's democracy, as OP said quite correctly.
- elefanten 11mo ago
  Spot on. And the mistake of considering appeasement of said totalitarian superpower by “letting them have it” would be just as enormous.
  - jabron 11mo ago
    Comparing Nazi Germany and the PRC in any way is certainly an interesting choice, considering they're the one major power in the world that actually doesn't have a recent history of invading sovereign nations.
    - noduerme 11mo ago
      Come again? Tibet was absolutely a sovereign nation. I guess it depends what you mean by "recent", but the colonization is still underway, daily. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Tibet_by_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Tibet_by_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War
      - ta20240528 11mo ago
        'Tibet was absolutely a sovereign nation. I guess it depends what you mean by "recent"' The rest of the world notes from afar that Hawaii became a US state in 1959, whilst Tibet entered the PRC way back in 1951. In 1993, the US congress apologised for this - they didn't give it back :)
    - Lio 11mo ago
      Yeah they do. Even right now they're trying to take territory from the Philippines. China just has a history of denying what they're doing as they're doing it. There are so many examples online. My favourite is of a Chinese warship ramming into its own coast guard vessel as they fail to intimidate the Philippines Coast Guard. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev22n0lm1xo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev22n0lm1xo
    - matkoniecz 11mo ago
- inglor_cz 11mo ago
  As a Czech who absolutely hates the Protectorate era, I can still see a good case to use somewhat neutral expressions like "politically unstable" if you want to discuss technical topics like supply chains without delving into the underlying politics. Declaring "I am a friend of democracies threatened by totalitarian countries" before every economic utterance looks as performative and ultimately counterproductive to me as all the "land acknowledgments" that infected the US academia. (Not coincidentally, those don't help actual Amerindians at all.) Yeah, Central Europe in the 1930s was politically unstable, no way around it. And it wasn't just question of Czechoslovakia vs. Germany either. Most countries had irredentist movements and/or land demands on their neighbours.
  - noduerme 11mo ago
    So, let's say the TSMC is the modern equivalent in "supply chain" terms as Czech guns made in Plzeň, like the Škoda 75mm cannon - wait, let's rewind. I'm not saying Czechoslovakia was politically stable in 1939. I'm saying that when your neighbor claims they need to rescue you from instability - like when America says they need to rescue a Latin American or Middle Eastern country from "political instability" when that country elects someone who doesn't want the country's resources owned and run by companies with imperialist backing - that is code for a green light to conquer them and take their resources. The same as it was for the Germans. The same as it is for China re: Taiwan and Russia re: all the former Soviet republics. Declaring your neighbor "politically unstable" and presenting yourself as its savior was the clearest way in the 20th Century to declare war without any casus belli. I'm sure you wouldn't like your country to be invaded again if the powers around it decide you can't manage your own affairs. [edit] I also spent about a year living in Prague and I love your country, Czechs are the best, and their sense of freedom is an immense relief from let's say other countries in the EU, so, I think it's amazing that you have maintained your independence from the enormous forces surrounding you and pulling in all directions. I think part of this is something I observed, that Czechs act like they are part of one small family.
    - inglor_cz 11mo ago
      Again, context matters and we are likely not talking in a "let us decide whom to invade" context. BTW "Declaring your neighbor "politically unstable" and presenting yourself as its savior was the clearest way in the 20th Century to declare war without any casus belli" is not really true, sometimes this happened, but wars have been declared for all sorts of putative reasons, like "our particular minority is being oppressed" or "the neighbouring government plotted against the life of our sovereign" or "they are infidels, go get them". Anyway I don't really see what you propose. Binning expressions because someone someday used them in bad faith, in the belief that this will stop future invasions from happening? This seems to be somewhat futile to me. Invasions aren't fundamentally caused by words. Words only work as a cloak and one cloak can be easily substituted by another, and it will, depending on the current state of politics in the invader and invadee country. Note that the Russians explained their invasion into Ukraine by calling them "fascists". Should the Western civilization drop the word forever because of that?
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- RobotToaster 11mo ago
  It's been in vogue since the American invasion of Vietnam
  - noduerme 11mo ago
    right, another reason China shouldn't invoke it to invade a free country.
- brabel 11mo ago
  China doesn’t want to destroy Taiwan , it wants to reunite with it like it did with other territories that had been taken by foreign powers, like happened to Hong Kong and Macau. Taiwan was occupied by Japan and then never went back to being China after the Japanese were defeated because the Chinese Party that was defeated in the Revolution fled to the Island and never accepted the PRC as legit government in China. Some of the more nationalist Taiwanese even consider themselves to be the legit government in exile of all China. You seem to not understand any of that when you compare China with Nazi Germany, really embarrassing.
  - phantasmish 11mo ago
    There’s definitely something embarrassing going on, and it starts but does not end with confusing destruction of a state with destruction of… I’m not even sure what you had in mind. The land? The infrastructure? Taiwan’s democracy is absolutely threatened with destruction by a totalitarian superpower, that wasn’t in any way incorrect or misleading, and that’s how the GP post phrased it. Its state is threatened with destruction. That’s entirely accurate.
    - brabel 11mo ago
      Where are you from? Did you know Taiwan is not recognized as a state independent of China by Europe, the USA, Japan and nearly every other country with the exception of 12 small countries? https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-that-recognize-taiwan https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries... You want it to be a state but your own country says it’s not one most likely. Stop embarrassing yourself.
      - phantasmish 11mo ago
        The concept of “political fiction” exists and is important, yes, but we need not confuse it for reality. [edit] I think I’ve used the wrong term here but I think I get the idea across. There are diplomatic lies maintained in many situations where everyone largely operates like it’s not true, and the situation with Taiwan is so quintessentially one of these that’s it’s a common first example to illustrate the point. In my defense it’s been a loooong time since my last international relations class.
KeplerBoy 11mo ago
Isn't Taiwan also seismically active? They are reports of earthquakes affecting TSMC fabs in january 2025 and april 2024. Apparently these were not huge blows to their fabs, otherwise we would be talking about that day-in-day-out, but there's always a risk of that happening.
- zamadatix 11mo ago
  Seems even more active, at least according to number of magnitude 6+ earthquakes since 1900 in the region https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/?extent=12.72608,101.84326&extent=49.56798,179.18701&range=search&search=%7B%22name%22:%22Search%20Results%22,%22params%22:%7B%22starttime%22:%221900-01-01%2000:00:00%22,%22endtime%22:%222025-11-24%2023:59:59%22,%22maxlatitude%22:45.951,%22minlatitude%22:20.303,%22maxlongitude%22:147.305,%22minlongitude%22:118.477,%22minmagnitude%22:6,%22orderby%22:%22time%22%7D%7D https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/?extent=12.72608...
- ehnto 11mo ago
  Seems silly to be talking about this as if this is some kind of global consortium effort. Japan is building Japan at semi conductor industry, for the benefit of itself, of course it is located in Japan.
  - KeplerBoy 11mo ago
    Sure, Japan and Taiwan have no choice. They have to build on their seismically active islands or give up, which is not an option.
HarHarVeryFunny 11mo ago
I guess it depends on what sort of monetary damage the typical Hokkaido earthquake would have on a fab - just result in a bad batch of chips perhaps, or also damage equipment? Obviously it's known that the region is very seismically active (159 earthquakes in Hokkaido so far this year!), but Japan are used to having to build to minimize earthquake damage. https://earthquaketrack.com/p/japan/hokkaido/recent https://earthquaketrack.com/p/japan/hokkaido/recent

SllX 11mo ago

Given Korea hasn’t been a Japanese colony since the War, and they want to build in their territory, options are limited.

rkachowski 11mo ago

you have silicon valley right by the San Andreas fault line..

Panoramix 11mo ago

TSMC is in a seismically active region

SapporoChris 11mo ago

Japan is quite adept at building structures resistant to earthquakes and tsunami. I'd be very surprised if the designers and architects of this endeavor are unaware of the issues.

anonymous908213 11mo ago

I believe Koreans would find being colonized again to be at least a little bit objectionable. Hokkaido is significantly safer compared to Honshu. It does still experience quakes, but it is at least not directly on major fault lines.

basisword 11mo ago

Why would the Japanese government back a company to build chips...in Korea?