How real is America’s chipmaking renaissance?(economist.com)
economist.com
How real is America’s chipmaking renaissance?
https://www.economist.com/business/2023/08/07/how-real-is-americas-chipmaking-renaissance
256 comments
Heh. We must live close to each other. I made the same comment with fewer (read: no) sources.
Definitely a lot of heavy construction.
Definitely a lot of heavy construction.
Yeah when I saw your comment I figured you were from North Texas.
Hello from Richardson.
Hello from Richardson.
I've been thinking about moving out to that area. Building these fabs will do amazing things for the local community & economy. It is also likely the most resilient part of the TX power grid...
There's a lot to like and some to dislike, but I imagine that holds true just about anywhere. I've enjoyed my time living in North Texas, mostly from a cost of living and plenty of opportunity perspective. I don't exactly make a massive income (probably about half of a similar salary to the valley) but with that I'm able to actually afford a decent house with a single income family and still save, have a commute of only a few minutes, and I can take a light rail very close to my home into downtown to access all the things I'd want from a big city.
I definitely don't pretend its all just roses though. It being over 100F every day for the past month or so is definitely a big negative, and a good bit of the politics here is getting ugly. We need to continue to expand the public transit in North Texas and make it more useful to reduce car dependency. More dense housing options need to be available to allow people to choose different ways to live and alleviate rising housing costs. There's a lot of stuff that needs to be addressed, but there's movement in positive directions around here.
A lot of the debate about Texas power grid make things sound way worse than it is. In reality Texas is about average when it comes to reliability in the US. Meanwhile we produce the most renewable energy in the country, we enable people to buy 100% renewable electric plans, and our cost of energy is some of the cheapest in the country. There's definitely challenges ahead for the grid and some of the market strategies we have need to be re-thought, but overall I'm not too worried about the grid long-term. Texas isn't alone with its grid challenges though, most states need to address massively aging infrastructure.
I definitely don't pretend its all just roses though. It being over 100F every day for the past month or so is definitely a big negative, and a good bit of the politics here is getting ugly. We need to continue to expand the public transit in North Texas and make it more useful to reduce car dependency. More dense housing options need to be available to allow people to choose different ways to live and alleviate rising housing costs. There's a lot of stuff that needs to be addressed, but there's movement in positive directions around here.
A lot of the debate about Texas power grid make things sound way worse than it is. In reality Texas is about average when it comes to reliability in the US. Meanwhile we produce the most renewable energy in the country, we enable people to buy 100% renewable electric plans, and our cost of energy is some of the cheapest in the country. There's definitely challenges ahead for the grid and some of the market strategies we have need to be re-thought, but overall I'm not too worried about the grid long-term. Texas isn't alone with its grid challenges though, most states need to address massively aging infrastructure.
> In reality Texas is about average when it comes to reliability
Do you have a source for this? Anecdotally, I felt the need to buy a generator when I lived north of Austin, because outages were frequent enough that it seemed warranted. Since moving to North Carolina (just north of Charlotte), I’ve had exactly one outage in a year, and that was on a mild day, just had some equipment failure.
Never once here have I received notice that I needed to reduce consumption to help the grid.
Do you have a source for this? Anecdotally, I felt the need to buy a generator when I lived north of Austin, because outages were frequent enough that it seemed warranted. Since moving to North Carolina (just north of Charlotte), I’ve had exactly one outage in a year, and that was on a mild day, just had some equipment failure.
Never once here have I received notice that I needed to reduce consumption to help the grid.
https://www.citizensutilityboard.org/wp-content/uploads/2021...
Here they rank it 30/50 in reliability and performance metrics.
If we're sharing anecdotes, I've never lost power for more than a few seconds in the past decade or so, and before that it was pretty much only because of hurricanes or tornadoes in the area.
Here they rank it 30/50 in reliability and performance metrics.
If we're sharing anecdotes, I've never lost power for more than a few seconds in the past decade or so, and before that it was pretty much only because of hurricanes or tornadoes in the area.
FWIW that's a couple of years old. I'll be interested to see the EIA data for 2022 once they finalize it [0].
[0]: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia861/
[0]: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia861/
Careful. The cost of a fab makes it very difficult for competitors to start up. Working in a field with only a few competitors seems attractive, but you risk specializing in skills that only few businesses worldwide can leverage.
I used to work in semiconductors and transitioned to software when I realized how precarious that was.
I used to work in semiconductors and transitioned to software when I realized how precarious that was.
Using mad physics and computer skillz to change the course of empire? Cool! For a $78k salary in HCOL area? Not Cool!
This was years ago and not TX. I'm sure it has gotten slightly better but what I see on glassdoor still makes me very glad I listened to the job hunting postdocs in nanofab class and steered clear of this career path.
This was years ago and not TX. I'm sure it has gotten slightly better but what I see on glassdoor still makes me very glad I listened to the job hunting postdocs in nanofab class and steered clear of this career path.
It really is such a cool field, but yeah, the pay isn't great, especially given the tendency to crunch.
I used to work in semiconductors as well. At the SAS A2/S2 lines right down the street.
I wasn't actually suggesting that I return to my former employer, although the thought has crossed my mind...
My reasoning for a move would be about all of the higher-order consequences of having well-compensated technology enthusiasts imported by the thousands.
I wasn't actually suggesting that I return to my former employer, although the thought has crossed my mind...
My reasoning for a move would be about all of the higher-order consequences of having well-compensated technology enthusiasts imported by the thousands.
> I wasn't actually suggesting that I return to my former employer
No worries, I was picturing a young person setting out to 'make their fortune' by moving across the country to make it. I just wanted to share the perspective I left the field with.
That doesn't mean it isn't possible to make it work!
No worries, I was picturing a young person setting out to 'make their fortune' by moving across the country to make it. I just wanted to share the perspective I left the field with.
That doesn't mean it isn't possible to make it work!
[deleted]
It’s the worst business to work for.
You’ll work 60 hours a week for shitty pay, and be the Yoda of some tool. In 10 years there will be a new magic tool. Then you start learning the Starbucks menu.
You’ll work 60 hours a week for shitty pay, and be the Yoda of some tool. In 10 years there will be a new magic tool. Then you start learning the Starbucks menu.
It's the best possible bootcamp for engineers if you are lucky enough to land a role in systems engineering (or its equivalent). If you actually pay attention and participate, you will learn about ways of troubleshooting that will stick with you forever. The notion of making an assumption is completely exorcised from your body - in this industry, the consequences of bad assumptions cost at least a million bucks always. You might also learn helpful terms like "value-add" that will guide your business sense for the rest of your life.
I can see why a lot of people hate the idea of semiconductor manufacturing. It is the apex of "by the books" while simultaneously exhibiting the most incredible shiny technology on the face of the planet. Being forced to follow all of these rules and procedures to get at the shiny tech rubs a lot of people the wrong way. "What do you mean I can't take my smart phone into the office? Y'all make its memory here." The pay is also arguably pretty bad unless you lock in for life.
I would say you get what you want out of it, just like anything. If you walk in with an entitlement mindset and expect the knowledge to be forced into your brain, you are in for a really shitty ride just as you describe. If you walk in thinking "I'll bust my ass here for 3-5 years and learn what I can", you will have a much better experience.
I didn't even know I wanted to write software full time until I was sitting in a cubicle at Samsung's ATX office for a few years. In my opinion, if you aren't sure what you want to do but you really love all things tech, why the hell not? Try it out. It was a great stepping stone for me.
I can see why a lot of people hate the idea of semiconductor manufacturing. It is the apex of "by the books" while simultaneously exhibiting the most incredible shiny technology on the face of the planet. Being forced to follow all of these rules and procedures to get at the shiny tech rubs a lot of people the wrong way. "What do you mean I can't take my smart phone into the office? Y'all make its memory here." The pay is also arguably pretty bad unless you lock in for life.
I would say you get what you want out of it, just like anything. If you walk in with an entitlement mindset and expect the knowledge to be forced into your brain, you are in for a really shitty ride just as you describe. If you walk in thinking "I'll bust my ass here for 3-5 years and learn what I can", you will have a much better experience.
I didn't even know I wanted to write software full time until I was sitting in a cubicle at Samsung's ATX office for a few years. In my opinion, if you aren't sure what you want to do but you really love all things tech, why the hell not? Try it out. It was a great stepping stone for me.
I also transitioned into tech from Samsung ATX. Working nights in Cleans, doing a weekend Master’s at UT for SWE, and writing shitty CRUD at work to replace even shittier Excel sheets.
I didn’t particularly like the job, but I’m grateful for the opportunities that time and effort has given me.
I didn’t particularly like the job, but I’m grateful for the opportunities that time and effort has given me.
Why can't you learn the next tool?
Everyone in a tech field has to retain the ability to learn new things over time. AI might not take our jobs but it will likely change them. I guess it sucks if you have a fear of learning. Admittedly, at first learning a new thing can be kind of uncomfortable, like getting into a cold swimming pool. But once you get over the initial shock and start moving around, it's not so bad.
Everyone in a tech field has to retain the ability to learn new things over time. AI might not take our jobs but it will likely change them. I guess it sucks if you have a fear of learning. Admittedly, at first learning a new thing can be kind of uncomfortable, like getting into a cold swimming pool. But once you get over the initial shock and start moving around, it's not so bad.
Because the business needs you to keep putting out fires in the old tool while your younger, cheaper replacement trains on the new tool!
"What happens when we need more workers who know the new tool? Shouldn't we invest in training?"
"No, we'll hire them away from our competitors. Let one of them invest in training."
"No, we'll hire them away from our competitors. Let one of them invest in training."
Sounds like a union could help but I guess the odds of that are slim.
Is there anything a union can't help with, in your estimation?
Big companies with standardized jobs are great for unionization. Union bureaucracy is a great answer to corporate or government bureaucracy.
Basically, a big, inflexible place is a good unionization candidate. A smaller, nimble org is a lousy place for a union.
Basically, a big, inflexible place is a good unionization candidate. A smaller, nimble org is a lousy place for a union.
Of course they don't help everything but setting up a seniority system is a common and well tread union policy and solves the stated problem.
Plenty. U**ons solve one problem only: when value created is high but leverage (=pay) is low.
The fact that this problem pops up all over the damn place should tell you something about our relationship to u**ons.
The fact that this problem pops up all over the damn place should tell you something about our relationship to u**ons.
it's not just low pay.
children used to work 10 hours a day and lose hands in machinery. hell, kids are dying in factories now, and the rules just keep getting rolled back further.
miners get black lung or asbestos exposure.
dudes boiled alive in machinery that didn't have fail safes.
company towns that only paid in scrip and then charged you 3x the price of regular goods.
people had to fight and die for an 8 hour workday.
the bourgeoisie programmer types who've never had to work actually dangerous jobs tend to forget just how incredibly brutal working conditions used to be.
children used to work 10 hours a day and lose hands in machinery. hell, kids are dying in factories now, and the rules just keep getting rolled back further.
miners get black lung or asbestos exposure.
dudes boiled alive in machinery that didn't have fail safes.
company towns that only paid in scrip and then charged you 3x the price of regular goods.
people had to fight and die for an 8 hour workday.
the bourgeoisie programmer types who've never had to work actually dangerous jobs tend to forget just how incredibly brutal working conditions used to be.
Seriously! People forget that bosses responded to unionization with actual violent assault, including sending literal bombers against striking miners (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain). Children get to go to school and not work because Unions fought. We have a weekend because Unions fought. We have an eight-hour workday because Unions fought.
We have laws to address those things now. You wouldn't believe the paperwork when someone gets boiled alive at work nowadays.
Sounds like the old tool maintainer isn't leveraging their scarcity power. If their skills are in high demand and short supply, and they can't be replaced, then shouldn't they make things take longer as they learn new tool?
Of course this accelerates the business’s desire to adopt the new tool sooner, so they best hurry!
Of course this accelerates the business’s desire to adopt the new tool sooner, so they best hurry!
Because for this work it's cheaper for the company to hire a new person with a lower starting wage vs. keep employing and paying higher wages to more experienced workers.
It's not the worker's fault they can't learn the new tool (they absolutely can learn it). It's capitalism's fault for valuing workers only for the cost of their labor and nothing else.
It's not the worker's fault they can't learn the new tool (they absolutely can learn it). It's capitalism's fault for valuing workers only for the cost of their labor and nothing else.
> It's capitalism's fault for valuing workers only for the cost of their labor and nothing else.
Sigh. The value you're talking about here is the cost of their labour. This is like a business owner saying that employees should value their jobs differently to their salary.
You're right in the sense that capitalism is fundamentally "people make agreements and decisions within what's available to them" but what's the actual issue you want capitalism to solve, that doesn't create one of the massive downsides that any of capitalism's former rivals has?
E.g. monarchy can reward loyalty, but then so can capitalism. Monarchy can just also tell you to go die on a field if you don't kill the other king's people.
Sigh. The value you're talking about here is the cost of their labour. This is like a business owner saying that employees should value their jobs differently to their salary.
You're right in the sense that capitalism is fundamentally "people make agreements and decisions within what's available to them" but what's the actual issue you want capitalism to solve, that doesn't create one of the massive downsides that any of capitalism's former rivals has?
E.g. monarchy can reward loyalty, but then so can capitalism. Monarchy can just also tell you to go die on a field if you don't kill the other king's people.
> Monarchy can just also tell you to go die on a field if you don't kill the other king's people.
What makes you think that capitalism won't do the same to you? Capitalist[1] societies engage in pointless, bloody wars all the time.
[1] And communist, and other -ist.
What makes you think that capitalism won't do the same to you? Capitalist[1] societies engage in pointless, bloody wars all the time.
[1] And communist, and other -ist.
The society isn't capitalist. The economy is capitalist.
Unlike monarchy/communism/fuedalism etc where power and resource allocation are by necessity mostly centralised, capitalism can (and wants to) be divorced from power, and only do resource allocation. Constant realigning it with power (e.g. regulatory capture) is what corrupts it.
The sort of (limited) power capitalism creates is by creating value in some way: labour, capital, contacts, resources. It's not derived from strength, unlike the other methods.
Of course a government, that is fundamentally derived from strength, and must be, can still fight wars. It can do it much better in fact because its economy was organised by the most efficient manner anyone's ever discovered, and so there's a surplus to tax and an efficient economy to flow requirements through.
Unlike monarchy/communism/fuedalism etc where power and resource allocation are by necessity mostly centralised, capitalism can (and wants to) be divorced from power, and only do resource allocation. Constant realigning it with power (e.g. regulatory capture) is what corrupts it.
The sort of (limited) power capitalism creates is by creating value in some way: labour, capital, contacts, resources. It's not derived from strength, unlike the other methods.
Of course a government, that is fundamentally derived from strength, and must be, can still fight wars. It can do it much better in fact because its economy was organised by the most efficient manner anyone's ever discovered, and so there's a surplus to tax and an efficient economy to flow requirements through.
Capitalism doesn't have desires outside of those of the people who participate in it that hold the most power. The desire of those people is more power. Not resource allocation as an ends, but as a means to more profit.
It has been shown time and time again that the majority of the powerful players in a Capitalist economy inherited their wealth or opportunities.
Capitalism can only function in an economy if a government allows it by setting up the necessary structures and allowing private property ownership.
Society can certainly be Capitalist by extension of the economy being Capitalist due to policies and strucutes set up by goverments.
It has been shown time and time again that the majority of the powerful players in a Capitalist economy inherited their wealth or opportunities.
Capitalism can only function in an economy if a government allows it by setting up the necessary structures and allowing private property ownership.
Society can certainly be Capitalist by extension of the economy being Capitalist due to policies and strucutes set up by goverments.
> what's the actual issue you want capitalism to solve
Seeing as it's more or less the de facto world order it should ideally solve global alignment for the long term wellbeing of Earth-borne life
Seeing as it's more or less the de facto world order it should ideally solve global alignment for the long term wellbeing of Earth-borne life
The difference is capitalism is bottom up. It has no top-downness, and would rather individual people and groups of people made agreements between themselves. That's why it can never usefully be described as a "world order".
That doesn't align well with efficiency or top-down world political agreements. But it has lifted more people out of poverty faster than any other system in history.
That doesn't align well with efficiency or top-down world political agreements. But it has lifted more people out of poverty faster than any other system in history.
The absence of global coherence does not mean it cannot be described as a world order, it just means it's not optimizing for long term success. If we'd like to continue lifting people out of poverty and give future life a fighting chance, we ought to find a coherent system.
Old tool made one wavelength of light for lithography using a specific laser you are an expert in.
New tool makes a different wavelength of light by shooting high energy beams at molten tin and all your PhD research isn't relevant to that.
It's not like moving from Adobe to Figma, it's like moving from physics to chemistry.
New tool makes a different wavelength of light by shooting high energy beams at molten tin and all your PhD research isn't relevant to that.
It's not like moving from Adobe to Figma, it's like moving from physics to chemistry.
Continuous reskilling for bad pay sucks, especially when you can’t reap from your investment of being a specialist for the first tool. Or the old tool is changed for bad reasons.
[deleted]
There are loads of jobs related to the fabs surrounding them though. Lots of companies designing the things these fabs will end up actually producing, lots of testing the things these fabs produce, lots of integrating these things the fabs produce. The technology services supporting those companies making the designs. Etc.
I worked on a campus as a tenant at the facility with a big semiconductor focus and some prototype fabs.
The pecking order was established in the parking lot. The execs drove BMWs and Teslas, the tenants varied. We were in a special lot.
The worker bees in the fabs drove older Hyundais and Nissans. Except for the trades - fabs require a lot of plumbing and electrical contractors, and those guys were all union, all minting overtime, and all driving fancy pickup trucks.
The pecking order was established in the parking lot. The execs drove BMWs and Teslas, the tenants varied. We were in a special lot.
The worker bees in the fabs drove older Hyundais and Nissans. Except for the trades - fabs require a lot of plumbing and electrical contractors, and those guys were all union, all minting overtime, and all driving fancy pickup trucks.
Those jobs don't pay well either.
You'll see salaries of around $70-110k in very expensive metros like the Bay, Portland, Dallas, Austin, etc.
Salaries just haven't kept up in the EE space.
You'll see salaries of around $70-110k in very expensive metros like the Bay, Portland, Dallas, Austin, etc.
Salaries just haven't kept up in the EE space.
I'll tell that to all my friends in the EE space who live very comfortably that they're clearly not paid well.
They'll probably have a laugh while they're out boating.
They'll probably have a laugh while they're out boating.
Idk, KLA has multiple Test Engineer roles open right now in Milpitas that are offering $29/hour and the idiots at Motek have been spamming me with ASIC Design Engineer roles paying around $80-100k/yr within the Bay Area even though I haven't been an engineer for almost a decade.
I think there might be a bimodal distribution within EE salaries where either you work at an Nvidia/Google/Apple/AMD/TI type company which pays competitively and others which pay subpar wages.
Maybe this is heavily dependent on the subset of EE as well (eg. I'd assume the profit margins for a fabless GPU company like Nvidia are much higher than a company building/desigining ASICs for Telcom usecases like KLA).
That said, you seem to be from North Texas/DFW and EE wages and cost of living seem much more managable compared to those offered in the Bay Area and Portland.
I think there might be a bimodal distribution within EE salaries where either you work at an Nvidia/Google/Apple/AMD/TI type company which pays competitively and others which pay subpar wages.
Maybe this is heavily dependent on the subset of EE as well (eg. I'd assume the profit margins for a fabless GPU company like Nvidia are much higher than a company building/desigining ASICs for Telcom usecases like KLA).
That said, you seem to be from North Texas/DFW and EE wages and cost of living seem much more managable compared to those offered in the Bay Area and Portland.
Median home price in Milpitas: $1.3M
Median home price in Richardson: $478K
Median home price in Garland: $301k
Median home price in Sherman: $308k
Median home price in The Colony: $411k
Median home price in Plano: $520k
Which places are you more likely to be able to own your home with ~$100k/yr income?
Median home price in Richardson: $478K
Median home price in Garland: $301k
Median home price in Sherman: $308k
Median home price in The Colony: $411k
Median home price in Plano: $520k
Which places are you more likely to be able to own your home with ~$100k/yr income?
No shit sherlock.
I'm just pointing out that EE salaries within the US are depressed due to the (relatively) low wages within DFW (which by DFW levels are competitive).
At the end of the day, you guys are definetly being underpaid compared to SWEs as well as certain specialities of EE (take a look at Nvidia's mid-level TC in the Bay verus TI's in DFW).
DFW has always been a major EE hub in the US, but SV and Portland are similarly sized EE industry hubs and their wages have been depressed.
Since DFW represents around 30-40% of the EE industry within the US, it's a major portion but plenty of industry share is still stuck in higher CoL areas, which incentivizes talent to either switch to SWE or outsource jobs to SK, Taiwan, PRC, India, and Israel where such salaries are more competitive
I'm just pointing out that EE salaries within the US are depressed due to the (relatively) low wages within DFW (which by DFW levels are competitive).
At the end of the day, you guys are definetly being underpaid compared to SWEs as well as certain specialities of EE (take a look at Nvidia's mid-level TC in the Bay verus TI's in DFW).
DFW has always been a major EE hub in the US, but SV and Portland are similarly sized EE industry hubs and their wages have been depressed.
Since DFW represents around 30-40% of the EE industry within the US, it's a major portion but plenty of industry share is still stuck in higher CoL areas, which incentivizes talent to either switch to SWE or outsource jobs to SK, Taiwan, PRC, India, and Israel where such salaries are more competitive
Sounds like the ideal type of trade to build a union for?
This will be the end of semiconductor industry.
The end of it in the US. It'll carry on fine elsewhere.
That's why TSMC became competitive in the 2000s.
Ah yes, Texas, well known for its labor rights.
When the cops are complaining about union-busting...
When the cops are complaining about union-busting...
If you can't learn a new tool then you're just a tool yourself.
Engineers dancing around the fundamental constraints of reality deserve a bit more respect than folks complaining about learning the latest JS-of-the-month, all of which follow basic comp sci patterns.
You talk as if they're smart enough to learn something new.
They're either smart or they're not. Which one is it?
They're either smart or they're not. Which one is it?
They are “smart enough” to have learned the previous generation of tools while in school or in the early parts of their careers (where expectations are lower), and not “smart enough” to learn the next generation of tools while also doing their full time jobs.
So, ok, but anyone thinking about entering the field can see that they’ll be left in a lurch when they hit mid career.
We’ve already run this experiment for a generation or two; anyone smart enough to finish an engineering degree can just go do a programming career afterwards, where the work and career advancement is easier. Now we have imported chips and a million JavaScript frameworks.
So, ok, but anyone thinking about entering the field can see that they’ll be left in a lurch when they hit mid career.
We’ve already run this experiment for a generation or two; anyone smart enough to finish an engineering degree can just go do a programming career afterwards, where the work and career advancement is easier. Now we have imported chips and a million JavaScript frameworks.
Up above we see "Then you start learning the Starbucks menu". Does that seem like an honest take here? Surely folks "dancing around the fundamental constraints of reality" aren't about to start whipping up frappuccinos because they failed to keep up with industry trends and plan ahead, right?
My good friend from high school has a PhD and was a published expert in a field that stopped being relevant when his company acquired another company and went with their tech.
He was laid off and unemployable in the field. He survived as a Starbucks manager and sold Herbalife for a year while getting some additional education. I was able to help him get a contract as a tech writer to get out of the retail stuff. Now he’s a director level person in a cybersecurity firm.
The one true path is obvious on message boards, but the reality is people find themselves in bad places sometimes.
He was laid off and unemployable in the field. He survived as a Starbucks manager and sold Herbalife for a year while getting some additional education. I was able to help him get a contract as a tech writer to get out of the retail stuff. Now he’s a director level person in a cybersecurity firm.
The one true path is obvious on message boards, but the reality is people find themselves in bad places sometimes.
I'm glad to hear your friend is doing well now. You're a good friend for helping him in his time of need like that.
Here's something new, perhaps: some things are much easier to learn than others.
Obviously, but that doesn't change my mind here.
If you're in the 1% of top performers, you have the cognitive ability to learn new things.
If you're in the 1% of top performers, you have the cognitive ability to learn new things.
> Obviously, but that doesn't change my mind here.
> If you're in the 1% of top performers, you have the cognitive ability to learn new things.
I had to stop and admire the subtle self-deprecating humour on display between those two statements. Well played!
> If you're in the 1% of top performers, you have the cognitive ability to learn new things.
I had to stop and admire the subtle self-deprecating humour on display between those two statements. Well played!
[deleted]
That would be funny if it were true.
"the most resilient part of TX power grid"
A roommate of mine once quipped on something: 'that's like saying my crap smells better than yours'.
Feel free to correct me, I'm not an expert, but Texas runs its own state-only independent grid, it got completely pants in the ice storm a few years ago, and at the time a lot of articles said the Texas grid is fundamentally less resilient that other power companies. Is any of that wrong?
However, Texas is loaded with sun/desert and I believe a ton of wind resources, so it has that going for it for next-generation industry.
A roommate of mine once quipped on something: 'that's like saying my crap smells better than yours'.
Feel free to correct me, I'm not an expert, but Texas runs its own state-only independent grid, it got completely pants in the ice storm a few years ago, and at the time a lot of articles said the Texas grid is fundamentally less resilient that other power companies. Is any of that wrong?
However, Texas is loaded with sun/desert and I believe a ton of wind resources, so it has that going for it for next-generation industry.
> However, Texas is loaded with sun/desert and I believe a ton of wind resources, so it has that going for it for next-generation industry.
Surprisingly, you got to thank George Bush for that
He made renewable wind and solar energy a major part of his energy policy when he was Govenor of TX. [0].
In 1999, he passed a law mandating Texas to get 2,000 megawatts of electricity from renewable energy by 2009. This helped spurt the entire renewable industry in TX
[0] - https://www.technologyreview.com/2016/08/29/70295/george-w-b...
Surprisingly, you got to thank George Bush for that
He made renewable wind and solar energy a major part of his energy policy when he was Govenor of TX. [0].
In 1999, he passed a law mandating Texas to get 2,000 megawatts of electricity from renewable energy by 2009. This helped spurt the entire renewable industry in TX
[0] - https://www.technologyreview.com/2016/08/29/70295/george-w-b...
I mean, you might be able to thank Bush for the investment, but I think we should not start thanking politicians for the sun and the wind, haha.
Why's that surprising?
Because the Bushs are a family of oil types
They actually started off in the New York City publishing industry.
McGraw Hill was founded by the Bush family before they decamped for Dallas in the 1920s.
McGraw Hill was founded by the Bush family before they decamped for Dallas in the 1920s.
"oil types" is a stereotype. Stereotypes don't generate genuine surprises, only surprises compared to the stereotype.
Rhetorical flourish.
The laws of physics suggest an area about the size of Texas is all the bigger you can make a grid. AC is much better than DC for areas of that range, because you can adjust voltages with a cheap transforms. However if you get too large and feed the grid from multiple places, there gets to be a point in the middle where power from one end is driving the grid negative while the other is driving positive.
You can get around this with DC, and grids do interconnect with DC power, but that requires more expensive equipment.
You can get around this with DC, and grids do interconnect with DC power, but that requires more expensive equipment.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. The Eastern Interconnection is far larger than the Texas Interconnection and it's connected via AC. Are you saying that the Eastern Interconnection has inefficiencies due to its size? Or are you saying that the Eastern Interconnection isn't fully synchronized somehow?
I tried reading this IEEE article about the time the Eastern and Western Interconnections were connected into a synchronous system (1967-1975) to learn more about the difficulties with scaling interconnections. It mentioned frequency oscillations causing voltage variations close to the East-West connection (p11), which sounds like the issue you're describing. If that is the issue though, then Texas isn't the size limit for a grid because the Eastern and Western grids exist and are far larger.
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=8594689
I tried reading this IEEE article about the time the Eastern and Western Interconnections were connected into a synchronous system (1967-1975) to learn more about the difficulties with scaling interconnections. It mentioned frequency oscillations causing voltage variations close to the East-West connection (p11), which sounds like the issue you're describing. If that is the issue though, then Texas isn't the size limit for a grid because the Eastern and Western grids exist and are far larger.
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=8594689
About is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Yes you can go bigger than Texas size, but Texas is still big enough.
[deleted]
> it got completely pants in the ice storm a few years ago
Right, in 2021... and in 2011, and in 2003, and in 1989... :p
Right, in 2021... and in 2011, and in 2003, and in 1989... :p
Lots of places face challenges with reliable delivery during massive storms. See NY earlier this year.
I'm definitely interested in how the communities build up to support this long term, assuming best conditions. I'm curious about investment into education that can lead to further economic developments (e.g. rise in engineering education due to factors like proximity to tech jobs that can persist, i.e. working at a fab (in any capacity) is good job/career to learn/work towards).
> I'm definitely interested in how the communities build up to support this long term
From a North Texas perspective, the communities were already built up. The first integrated circuit was made in North Texas. DFW has some of the highest number of fabs per square mile, tons of small producers around along with some of the big behemoths.
North Texas has been a pretty big semiconductor manufacturer since semiconductor manufacturing has been a thing.
For a historical context of the history of the community of semiconductors in North Texas, JFK was shot on his way going to give a speech at what would become UT Dallas, a school whose entire history is focused on semiconductors.
From a North Texas perspective, the communities were already built up. The first integrated circuit was made in North Texas. DFW has some of the highest number of fabs per square mile, tons of small producers around along with some of the big behemoths.
North Texas has been a pretty big semiconductor manufacturer since semiconductor manufacturing has been a thing.
For a historical context of the history of the community of semiconductors in North Texas, JFK was shot on his way going to give a speech at what would become UT Dallas, a school whose entire history is focused on semiconductors.
The Economist seems to really dislike the idea of making anything physical. It’s a pattern I’ve seen generally.
One of the interesting lessons of the past few years is that supply chain lead times are a thing and policy doesn't just happen because central planning says it should.
So, if there is a bubble in the chip supply pipeline, auto manufacture doesn't happen. If there is undersupply of precursor chemicals it takes a while to make vaccines at scale...
What you are talking about makes me think of the very long lead product that is skilled people. A significant proportion of fab employees are genuinely highly skilled workers who need a specialised physics degree and then additional training in order to optimize yields and things like that.
I think they can build the buildings and buy the machines but unless a lot of Taiwanese are willing to get on a plane and move to the US, it is going to take a long time to be able to replace their labour at the required scale.
So, if there is a bubble in the chip supply pipeline, auto manufacture doesn't happen. If there is undersupply of precursor chemicals it takes a while to make vaccines at scale...
What you are talking about makes me think of the very long lead product that is skilled people. A significant proportion of fab employees are genuinely highly skilled workers who need a specialised physics degree and then additional training in order to optimize yields and things like that.
I think they can build the buildings and buy the machines but unless a lot of Taiwanese are willing to get on a plane and move to the US, it is going to take a long time to be able to replace their labour at the required scale.
This is explicitly why Boise State University, an otherwise middle-to-low-tier research university boasts such a high-quality materials engineering department. BSU actually hold some of their intro-to-materials-science courses at the Boise Micron fab so Micron employees can work towards said degrees without missing as much work to commute between the two locations.
Edit to add:
I've met a few people who are aware of US military supply chain rules, and assume it means "oh, chinese $doodad must be crap, that's why we don't give them to our troops", when the reality is just as you said. Supply chain bubbles can be massively disruptive, so its a real strategic blunder to outsource critical components to the country we have designated as our number one rival. I'm not saying we're set up for a trade war, but we are well past due to calculate the cost of increasing short-term profits. Is a quarterly decrease in operating costs from consolidating fabs worth risking a massive disruption when that single fab is knocked out? Given the volumes that even small fabs do, I argue that quarterly increase is not at all worth it.
Edit to add:
I've met a few people who are aware of US military supply chain rules, and assume it means "oh, chinese $doodad must be crap, that's why we don't give them to our troops", when the reality is just as you said. Supply chain bubbles can be massively disruptive, so its a real strategic blunder to outsource critical components to the country we have designated as our number one rival. I'm not saying we're set up for a trade war, but we are well past due to calculate the cost of increasing short-term profits. Is a quarterly decrease in operating costs from consolidating fabs worth risking a massive disruption when that single fab is knocked out? Given the volumes that even small fabs do, I argue that quarterly increase is not at all worth it.
Current analysis projects US semi to face shortage of ~80k talent in next few years, ~300k+ in by decades end. This is reality pretty much in every semi producer countries, SKR and TW both have 50k-100k+ shortage with pretty developed talent pipeline. From everything I've read, current US+co short/medium term talent production won't be enough fill all the new fabs being proposed. Unviable due to operating costs which can always be subsidized, unviable due to lack of talent is much harder to address. Apart from training more, only way to plug gap is to poach talent from CHIP4 partners, which US has the money for. But I surmise it will get geopolitically ugly.
For reference PRC after elevating semi to first-level dicipline in 2018 is pumping out about 30k IC graduates per year. They're still about 200k short, ~520k/720k out of what IC talent 2018 white paper estimated PRC needed for complete semi industry. This is PRC that graduates ~5M STEM with huge population to draw from that bias towards S&T in tertiary. Which leads to the other uncomfortable point that a complete semi industry is more than just fabs, there's a lot of critical semi supply chain stuck in TW / East Asia (SKR/JP) that's going to get disrupted anyway in event of conflict. I don't see any indication US is resolving to reshore the entire semi chain.
For reference PRC after elevating semi to first-level dicipline in 2018 is pumping out about 30k IC graduates per year. They're still about 200k short, ~520k/720k out of what IC talent 2018 white paper estimated PRC needed for complete semi industry. This is PRC that graduates ~5M STEM with huge population to draw from that bias towards S&T in tertiary. Which leads to the other uncomfortable point that a complete semi industry is more than just fabs, there's a lot of critical semi supply chain stuck in TW / East Asia (SKR/JP) that's going to get disrupted anyway in event of conflict. I don't see any indication US is resolving to reshore the entire semi chain.
> Unviable due to operating costs which can always be subsidized, unviable due to lack of talent is much harder to address.
Or, gee, let's throw this out there: perhaps if the pay wasn't shit, people would go into the field.
You know, just like computer science over the past couple of decades.
Or, gee, let's throw this out there: perhaps if the pay wasn't shit, people would go into the field.
You know, just like computer science over the past couple of decades.
This could be an opportunity for low-cost, educational groups to scale or partner up. Is there a list of degree or course requirements fabs are looking for? What programs would be necessary to meet that demand?
There's not much prestige as a BSU alumni (and someone doing a masters part-time there), but I do distinctly remember chatting with materials graduate students and them mentioning that they chose BSU because of the ease of availability for equipment required for research and having Micron right there.
There's a few good things that the university offers which is surprisingly strong. When i went back to prepare for a CS masters (military, self-taught) I was surprised at the quality of the undergraduate degree in preparing students for industry, and how quickly the security program was invested in (INL does a lot of investment here).
All that to say: it's a pretty good school, especially for it's price. I only ever had one bad professor, and it was in the supply chain management department. And it was (is still?) the only raptor biology masters in the country.
There's a few good things that the university offers which is surprisingly strong. When i went back to prepare for a CS masters (military, self-taught) I was surprised at the quality of the undergraduate degree in preparing students for industry, and how quickly the security program was invested in (INL does a lot of investment here).
All that to say: it's a pretty good school, especially for it's price. I only ever had one bad professor, and it was in the supply chain management department. And it was (is still?) the only raptor biology masters in the country.
Good thing there's a university only a couple of miles away from the Richardson fab that specializes in training semiconductor and nano-fabrication which has quite a large international reach which has been massively expanding every year for the last few decades.
>One of the interesting lessons of the past few years is that supply chain lead times are a thing and policy doesn't just happen because central planning says it should.
I would say exactly the opposite, the vaccines were made quite quickly and there weren't major supply issues.
The Defense Production Act (er... central planning as you put it) was used to say what was going to happen when with money to back it up and... things happened quickly.
DPA wasn't invoked to build you new cars or supply you toilet paper so... those things had their supply issues.
The US actually can do logistics very well, especially when there's somebody willing to foot the bill for big asks. The lack of corruption and general merit-based placement here compared to so many other places combined with a large degree of vertical integration means that we can accomplish quite a lot and is one of the underappreciated cornerstones of our ability to make war (and why nobody wants to fight us).
We are decimating (and then some) Russia's military by giving away second tier equipment to Ukraine, and the amount we're giving away is basically an afterthought. A one-time superpower is scraping the bottom of the barrel for equipment fighting against largely NATO supplied spare equipment.
I would say exactly the opposite, the vaccines were made quite quickly and there weren't major supply issues.
The Defense Production Act (er... central planning as you put it) was used to say what was going to happen when with money to back it up and... things happened quickly.
DPA wasn't invoked to build you new cars or supply you toilet paper so... those things had their supply issues.
The US actually can do logistics very well, especially when there's somebody willing to foot the bill for big asks. The lack of corruption and general merit-based placement here compared to so many other places combined with a large degree of vertical integration means that we can accomplish quite a lot and is one of the underappreciated cornerstones of our ability to make war (and why nobody wants to fight us).
We are decimating (and then some) Russia's military by giving away second tier equipment to Ukraine, and the amount we're giving away is basically an afterthought. A one-time superpower is scraping the bottom of the barrel for equipment fighting against largely NATO supplied spare equipment.
This would have been categorically true circa-1970s.
Unfortunately, US industrial vertical integration now includes foundations placed in global low-labor-cost countries.
The crash vaccine manufacturing scaling program was possible because we were rich enough to throw mountains of money (of which we have the most) at any international supply problems.
If the Atlantic or Pacific had been hostile to commercial shipping, or countries hadn't cooperated, it would have had a very different result.
> We are decimating (and then some) Russia's military by giving away second tier equipment to Ukraine, and the amount we're giving away is basically an afterthought. A one-time superpower is scraping the bottom of the barrel for equipment fighting against largely NATO supplied spare equipment.
"We" are not. Ukrainians are dying and holding their own against a much larger country, with the help of NATO surplus equipment.
20,000-50,000 Ukrainians now have at least one limb amputated as a result of the war. [0] [1]
And Russia's military is not being decimated. It's holding its own with an elastic defense, that's making progress difficult and costly for a Ukrainian army that's trained halfway between Soviet mass doctrine and Western maneuver warfare.
At some point the Ukrainians will hopefully manage to exhaust Russia's logistics sufficient to break through their defense, but that's in no way a sure thing.
[0] https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-ukraine-a-surge-in-amputatio...
[1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/05/19/ukraines-amputee...
Unfortunately, US industrial vertical integration now includes foundations placed in global low-labor-cost countries.
The crash vaccine manufacturing scaling program was possible because we were rich enough to throw mountains of money (of which we have the most) at any international supply problems.
If the Atlantic or Pacific had been hostile to commercial shipping, or countries hadn't cooperated, it would have had a very different result.
> We are decimating (and then some) Russia's military by giving away second tier equipment to Ukraine, and the amount we're giving away is basically an afterthought. A one-time superpower is scraping the bottom of the barrel for equipment fighting against largely NATO supplied spare equipment.
"We" are not. Ukrainians are dying and holding their own against a much larger country, with the help of NATO surplus equipment.
20,000-50,000 Ukrainians now have at least one limb amputated as a result of the war. [0] [1]
And Russia's military is not being decimated. It's holding its own with an elastic defense, that's making progress difficult and costly for a Ukrainian army that's trained halfway between Soviet mass doctrine and Western maneuver warfare.
At some point the Ukrainians will hopefully manage to exhaust Russia's logistics sufficient to break through their defense, but that's in no way a sure thing.
[0] https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-ukraine-a-surge-in-amputatio...
[1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/05/19/ukraines-amputee...
Russia's military is being decimated, just not at the line of contact currently. You're watching a protracted battle play out all across the world right now between Russian interests and Western interests. Some of these include:
1. Russian/Wagner (now admitted to be the same) neocolonialism in African states, most recently Niger. Within days Niger stopped trading Uranium to France. Conveniently, France is the least dependent on Russia for energy and will force the French to buy outside of Niger and then refocus on Russia.
2. The latest naval drone hit on a Russian oil tanker in the Black Sea took place well beyond the expected range of Ukrainian capability, which likely means someone else (Turkey?) helped at least get it into launch range. This coupled with the Ukrainian position that all russian ships, and all ships trading with russia are now targets in the Black Sea is also big for the area.
Currently Russians may not be dying in droves defending their positions. However, the knock on effects for russian military capacity, industrial capacity, and naval capacity are incredible. The longer they flounder and the more they commit to Ukraine, the more their traditional enemies are able to take advantage of their weakness.
If russian gas and oil cannot flow out of the black sea safely, their PMC backed interests in Africa and South American become less effective, and the corresponding governments will look elsewhere for influence/protection/trade.
1. Russian/Wagner (now admitted to be the same) neocolonialism in African states, most recently Niger. Within days Niger stopped trading Uranium to France. Conveniently, France is the least dependent on Russia for energy and will force the French to buy outside of Niger and then refocus on Russia.
2. The latest naval drone hit on a Russian oil tanker in the Black Sea took place well beyond the expected range of Ukrainian capability, which likely means someone else (Turkey?) helped at least get it into launch range. This coupled with the Ukrainian position that all russian ships, and all ships trading with russia are now targets in the Black Sea is also big for the area.
Currently Russians may not be dying in droves defending their positions. However, the knock on effects for russian military capacity, industrial capacity, and naval capacity are incredible. The longer they flounder and the more they commit to Ukraine, the more their traditional enemies are able to take advantage of their weakness.
If russian gas and oil cannot flow out of the black sea safely, their PMC backed interests in Africa and South American become less effective, and the corresponding governments will look elsewhere for influence/protection/trade.
It'll be fascinating to learn whatever grey/black ops details come out after the war hopefully ends.
The naval drone question is especially fascinating.
IMHO, they have to be transported closer to impact site by some other vessel.
Ukraine doesn't have submarines, and Russia has 6(?) Kilo's in the Black Sea, so traditional submarines would be insane in that environment anyway.
And whatever transport method would need to be stealthy with respect to Russia's sensing methods: acoustic, radar, to a lesser degree visual.
Given Ukraine's technical capabilities and traditional shipbuilding expertise, I'd hazard there's a somewhat-stealthy drone carrier boat (probably also unmanned).
They could also be hiding/launching the drones directly from commercial shipping, but that's an awfully big risk for the flag country/ship owner with respect to Russia boarding and searching, or even back tracing launch points.
The naval drone question is especially fascinating.
IMHO, they have to be transported closer to impact site by some other vessel.
Ukraine doesn't have submarines, and Russia has 6(?) Kilo's in the Black Sea, so traditional submarines would be insane in that environment anyway.
And whatever transport method would need to be stealthy with respect to Russia's sensing methods: acoustic, radar, to a lesser degree visual.
Given Ukraine's technical capabilities and traditional shipbuilding expertise, I'd hazard there's a somewhat-stealthy drone carrier boat (probably also unmanned).
They could also be hiding/launching the drones directly from commercial shipping, but that's an awfully big risk for the flag country/ship owner with respect to Russia boarding and searching, or even back tracing launch points.
> The naval drone question is especially fascinating.
> IMHO, they have to be transported closer to impact site by some other vessel.
The specifications I have seen is that they have somewhere between a 400km - 800km (I know it's a big spectrum) range.
If they were about mid that, they wouldn't need launching from outside the Ukrainian mainland to hit pretty much anything of military interest.
> IMHO, they have to be transported closer to impact site by some other vessel.
The specifications I have seen is that they have somewhere between a 400km - 800km (I know it's a big spectrum) range.
If they were about mid that, they wouldn't need launching from outside the Ukrainian mainland to hit pretty much anything of military interest.
> The lack of corruption and general merit-based placement here compared to so many other places combined with a large degree of vertical integration means that we can accomplish quite a lot and is one of the underappreciated cornerstones of our ability to make war (and why nobody wants to fight us).
First of all, other countries managed to develop and produce large amounts of vaccine in very short timeframe during the pandemic. Second of all, the reason nobody wants to fight the US is that the US spends as much on its military as the next ten or so countries. The US makes up 40% of all global military spending.
> We are decimating (and then some) Russia's military by giving away second tier equipment to Ukraine
The total value of NATO aid to Ukraine is on a similar scale as Russia's entire military budget. NATO is not just giving away second-tier equipment. It's giving Ukraine what it thinks Ukraine can use most effectively right away (such as upgraded T-72 tanks, man-portable air-defense and anti-tank systems early on), and some of that is cutting-edge gear (such as the Storm Shadow missile).
First of all, other countries managed to develop and produce large amounts of vaccine in very short timeframe during the pandemic. Second of all, the reason nobody wants to fight the US is that the US spends as much on its military as the next ten or so countries. The US makes up 40% of all global military spending.
> We are decimating (and then some) Russia's military by giving away second tier equipment to Ukraine
The total value of NATO aid to Ukraine is on a similar scale as Russia's entire military budget. NATO is not just giving away second-tier equipment. It's giving Ukraine what it thinks Ukraine can use most effectively right away (such as upgraded T-72 tanks, man-portable air-defense and anti-tank systems early on), and some of that is cutting-edge gear (such as the Storm Shadow missile).
Whilst I agree with some of your post I think the following is incorrect.
> and some of that is cutting-edge gear (such as the Storm Shadow missile).
Storm shadow is 20 years old from first deployment and 29 years since development started. Its replacement is being actively developed since 2017, it’s hardly “cutting edge”.
It’s just new enough that the Russians have trouble countering it.
> and some of that is cutting-edge gear (such as the Storm Shadow missile).
Storm shadow is 20 years old from first deployment and 29 years since development started. Its replacement is being actively developed since 2017, it’s hardly “cutting edge”.
It’s just new enough that the Russians have trouble countering it.
>One of the interesting lessons of the past few years is that supply chain lead times are a thing and policy doesn't just happen because central planning says it should.
The dominant ideology in the US, at least until recently, is that there should be no central planning. The invisible hand of the market was all-knowing and would allocate resources far more efficiently than any human planner.
I wouldn't blame central planning, I'd blame the lack of it.
The dominant ideology in the US, at least until recently, is that there should be no central planning. The invisible hand of the market was all-knowing and would allocate resources far more efficiently than any human planner.
I wouldn't blame central planning, I'd blame the lack of it.
That was just a lot of talk. The federal government has been shaping the US economy and its industries since the start. Things like agriculture and energy has always been subsidized. E.g. the offshoring of manufacturing and the newer cultivation of green energy tech are entirely the result of tax and subsidy policies designed to result in these things.
The problem with laissez faire economic allocation has been timescales.
It's an extremely efficient allocator... on a certain timescale, itself determined by the market.
It's an incompetent allocation on different timescales, typically when you get into the 5+ year range.
The ideal blend is when capability is centrally planned, but implementation and tactical scale is market-demanded.
It's an extremely efficient allocator... on a certain timescale, itself determined by the market.
It's an incompetent allocation on different timescales, typically when you get into the 5+ year range.
The ideal blend is when capability is centrally planned, but implementation and tactical scale is market-demanded.
The political valence of this could be significant next year. This is a lot of high paying, high-demand jobs in multiple sectors of the economy from just one of 3 major pillars of the administration's agenda.
What kind of salary ranges do you expect for these roles and in what metro areas?
North Texas, North Mexico, and chunks of the broader west coast, esp. Boise and Portland.
all sorts of roles but middling pay and long hours. not quite the Chinese 996 but taking hints from it; the Taiwanese version, essentially
all sorts of roles but middling pay and long hours. not quite the Chinese 996 but taking hints from it; the Taiwanese version, essentially
A commitment that apparently does not include:
- treating anyone who isn't "white enough" with dignity and without extreme suspicion of being in the country illegally. Driving in texas and not white enough? You might end up in jail if you don't have sufficient proof on you that you're not "an illegal"
- a reliable power grid, because they petulantly do not want to have to follow federal regulations in how they run said grid (also, electrical pricing that doesn't swing by 4 orders of magnitude or more)
- a well-funded public school system with science-based curriculum to develop their children into a skilled workforce capable of critical thinking, being retrained, etc.
- human rights, healthcare, mental health services, etc which highly skilled technical workers tend to strongly prefer/value (and in case nobody told Texas: there is a long, long history of highly skilled electronics engineers, programmers, etc being LGBTQ, autistic, having mental health needs, etc.)
Anyone who is highly skilled in semiconductors could write their own ticket. Why would they go to Texas?
- treating anyone who isn't "white enough" with dignity and without extreme suspicion of being in the country illegally. Driving in texas and not white enough? You might end up in jail if you don't have sufficient proof on you that you're not "an illegal"
- a reliable power grid, because they petulantly do not want to have to follow federal regulations in how they run said grid (also, electrical pricing that doesn't swing by 4 orders of magnitude or more)
- a well-funded public school system with science-based curriculum to develop their children into a skilled workforce capable of critical thinking, being retrained, etc.
- human rights, healthcare, mental health services, etc which highly skilled technical workers tend to strongly prefer/value (and in case nobody told Texas: there is a long, long history of highly skilled electronics engineers, programmers, etc being LGBTQ, autistic, having mental health needs, etc.)
Anyone who is highly skilled in semiconductors could write their own ticket. Why would they go to Texas?
> a reliable power grid
Texas ranks about middle of the pack by most statistics in electrical grid reliability while also being one of the cheapest places in the US. Its also expanding renewable energy faster than any other state in the US, by a massive margin.
> electrical pricing that doesn't swing by 4 orders of magnitude or more
Clearly shows you don't actually know what you're talking about. The vast majority of households and businesses in Texas are on fixed rate contracts. The price of my electricity swings every three years or so. The headlines you're reading are spot prices; the vast majority of people don't directly pay those.
> a well-funded public school system with science-based curriculum to develop their children into a skilled workforce capable of critical thinking, being retrained, etc
Eh, PreK-12 35th overall according to US News, not great. 25th for higher education, so exactly middle of the pack. There's a lot worse of places to be education-wise. It really varies from school district to school district though. US News ranks the high school my kids will eventually attend in the top 16% of schools nationally. The smaller college I attended was ranked in the top third of all national universities. Not too bad.
> Why would they go to Texas?
As mentioned, loads of opportunity and comparatively low costs of living compared to a lot of other places.
Texas ranks about middle of the pack by most statistics in electrical grid reliability while also being one of the cheapest places in the US. Its also expanding renewable energy faster than any other state in the US, by a massive margin.
> electrical pricing that doesn't swing by 4 orders of magnitude or more
Clearly shows you don't actually know what you're talking about. The vast majority of households and businesses in Texas are on fixed rate contracts. The price of my electricity swings every three years or so. The headlines you're reading are spot prices; the vast majority of people don't directly pay those.
> a well-funded public school system with science-based curriculum to develop their children into a skilled workforce capable of critical thinking, being retrained, etc
Eh, PreK-12 35th overall according to US News, not great. 25th for higher education, so exactly middle of the pack. There's a lot worse of places to be education-wise. It really varies from school district to school district though. US News ranks the high school my kids will eventually attend in the top 16% of schools nationally. The smaller college I attended was ranked in the top third of all national universities. Not too bad.
> Why would they go to Texas?
As mentioned, loads of opportunity and comparatively low costs of living compared to a lot of other places.
For all these issues, states like Texas are going to be vastly more practical than doing any real projects in places like California. Look at California's record on railway, housing, etc. SF spends $1B/mile on railway (see Central subway), or $1M on a public toilet. If anything, moving more industries to states like Texas or Georgia is a great way to improve the overall dynamics of the state. This already happened to a great degree with film/tv studios moving to Atlanta.
It’s a law in many countries that you have to carry your ID with you, eg Germany. The police may do random check in high risk areas. Do you think Germany treats its citizens without dignity?
You have to own an ID document (Pass or Personalausweis) in Germany, but you don't have to carry it with you.
Maybe I misinterpret it, but the law says “[Germans] must present their identity card at the request of an authority entitled to check identification.” I guess they won’t mind if it’s at your home a casual drive away, but if you live in another city?
The point is that this isn't Germany and there is no such law here.
If there is no such law in Texas, then surely detaining random people who are not white enough and putting them in jail would be a significant topic of discussion rather than an offhand comment on HN. 40% of Texas are Hispanic — a demographic that would be under the most suspicion. That is a lot of people in jail for no reason and without any legal reasons. The whole state would probably get bankrupt after a few lawsuits by those unfairly arrested citizens.
I was tempted to reply, "you're not from around here, are you?" but that's probably a bit too snarky.
There are only four states that require you have an ID during a police stop and Texas is not one of them. Obviously if you're driving, a driver's license is required. But for a random stop walking down the road? Nope, Texas does not require that you have ID.
To the rest of your post: I honestly don't know where to start. You're making a lot of assumptions that don't hold. Suffice to say that it's a lot harder to prevail in a case against the police than you realize.
People get arrested/thrown into jail for no reason far more often than you apparently think. I know someone (a software developer actually) who was attacked by an undercover officer in a case of mistaken identity. He fought back not knowing the guy was a cop. To prevent him from being able to sue, they charged him with assaulting a police officer. After months of trying to fight it in court, he finally gave up. City dropped the charges as long as he agreed not to sue them.
This is why people are so pissed and why there have been so many protests in the last few years. Everyone is tired of this shit.
There are only four states that require you have an ID during a police stop and Texas is not one of them. Obviously if you're driving, a driver's license is required. But for a random stop walking down the road? Nope, Texas does not require that you have ID.
To the rest of your post: I honestly don't know where to start. You're making a lot of assumptions that don't hold. Suffice to say that it's a lot harder to prevail in a case against the police than you realize.
People get arrested/thrown into jail for no reason far more often than you apparently think. I know someone (a software developer actually) who was attacked by an undercover officer in a case of mistaken identity. He fought back not knowing the guy was a cop. To prevent him from being able to sue, they charged him with assaulting a police officer. After months of trying to fight it in court, he finally gave up. City dropped the charges as long as he agreed not to sue them.
This is why people are so pissed and why there have been so many protests in the last few years. Everyone is tired of this shit.
Let’s assume all of that is true. How come that your media feeds me stuff about “it’s a MAGA country” cases that turn out to be hoaxes or “it’s okay to be white” signs at college campuses instead of citizens being unlawfully detained so often it is a legitimate threat to half of the state’s population?
That sounds like a massive conspiracy that all media (left, liberal, conservative) are part of.
That sounds like a massive conspiracy that all media (left, liberal, conservative) are part of.
Because none of what I said is newsworthy.
The assumption here is that the politics of the state will continue to shift against extremism.
What do you mean 'continue'?
Bush won Texas by 20 points, Trump won it by 9 and 5.5 points respectively. Expect the margin to go down again in 2024.
Surprisingly few people engage with the main points of the article. It is pointed out how much money are spent, but the article is about how profitable those fabs will be. The author is conservative in judgments, but they ask a few questions worth considering, mainly: are the fabs big and efficient enough to offset the slower build, which is also more expensive, for lower volumes of production.
Profitability on the fab level is the wrong metric. Producing semiconductors, like producing vaccines, has large positive externalities. It enables basically the entire rest of the economy to function. These fabs could lose billions, kept alive by government subsidies, and still be a great deal for the country as a whole.
It’s hard to believe anything at the scale and complexity of a modern semiconductor fab industry could remain competitive without actually facing competitive market pressures.
I think this applies to manufacturing in general (it is good for a society to build things).
The trouble is that capturing government subsidies can become a business by itself.
As long as the subsidies are there to restart involvement I think you get the benefits without profitability. If real profitability isn't a medium-to-long-term goal, things could get messed up.
The trouble is that capturing government subsidies can become a business by itself.
As long as the subsidies are there to restart involvement I think you get the benefits without profitability. If real profitability isn't a medium-to-long-term goal, things could get messed up.
Macro economic arguments are pretty big here.
The real question is how unprofitable will it be to remain dependent on Taiwan in the face of the inevitable conflict coming with China. US and Europe based fabs could literally lose money and require subsidies and still net out as less expensive.
Competition is inevitable, conflict, no at least I hope not. Of course, we (the US) can’t make them decide not to attack Taiwan, but our countries have managed the tricky situation so far.
I wouldn't talk of a conflict with China as inevitable. Competition is fine but no one in their right mind should wish for military conflict with China, it would be a tragedy for humanity.
wish for and expect are two different things. I wish the war in Ukraine would end tomorrow, I don't expect it will though.
while China invading Taiwan is not a guarantee, it is certainly highly probable. this risk should be taken into account by the us government
while China invading Taiwan is not a guarantee, it is certainly highly probable. this risk should be taken into account by the us government
I think most of us only can reply to the first paragraph or so, and the first plot, because of the paywall. So most of the conversation is about the headline.
Below extension will be useful
https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-chrome
https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-chrome
I’d have to check and see how it works. I’m happy to block ads (I’ll render whatever I’m sent however I want), but I wouldn’t want to access content that the publisher didn’t intend to send.
It works for sites that set a cookie to limit how many free articles you can see without logging in, or sites that let search engine scrapers bypass the paywall to read the full content.
I would say it's a little more ethically questionable than ad blocking. Ad blocking is like buying a paper from a newsstand and duct taping over the ads - totally fine, it's my paper and I'll do whatever I want with it. This extension is like hanging around the newsstand reading all the front pages until the owner shoos you away, and then coming back with a fake mustache to keep reading.
I would say it's a little more ethically questionable than ad blocking. Ad blocking is like buying a paper from a newsstand and duct taping over the ads - totally fine, it's my paper and I'll do whatever I want with it. This extension is like hanging around the newsstand reading all the front pages until the owner shoos you away, and then coming back with a fake mustache to keep reading.
Yeah, it feels vaguely more grey-area than ad blocking. Although that’s just a gut read, not very reliable.
I’m very much ideological about being in the camp: you can send me whatever you want, and I’ll render it however I want, and anyone who has a problem that is the problem.
I’m not sure how I feel about impersonating a scraper or switching around my cookies so that the site sends me something else.
Actually, this is legitimately the first question in this area that has gotten me confused in a while; if the tool was impersonating somebody, a specific person with account, that’s just be straightforwardly unauthorized access. Impersonating a category of user that has no actual specific identity, but that they default to allowing access? That seems… I mean, doesn’t really seem like lying exactly, but it also doesn’t seem totally honest. Tricky!
I’m very much ideological about being in the camp: you can send me whatever you want, and I’ll render it however I want, and anyone who has a problem that is the problem.
I’m not sure how I feel about impersonating a scraper or switching around my cookies so that the site sends me something else.
Actually, this is legitimately the first question in this area that has gotten me confused in a while; if the tool was impersonating somebody, a specific person with account, that’s just be straightforwardly unauthorized access. Impersonating a category of user that has no actual specific identity, but that they default to allowing access? That seems… I mean, doesn’t really seem like lying exactly, but it also doesn’t seem totally honest. Tricky!
I think it's clearly dishonest, but fairly limited potential to harm the business. It's on the same moral level as going to a chain restaurant every week and telling them it's your birthday every time so they give you a free dessert. It's definitely lying but you're not going to put them out of business. If everyone started doing this, they'd just get rid of the free dessert/free article policy and probably be fine.
One thing that gives me a little pause is, these sites, they treat search engine scrapers preferably to humans, right? And the scraper’s job is to categorize sites and recommend them to people.
So, IMO, it is more like: if most restaurants gave reviewers preferential treatment and tended to comp their meals, and this was very well known, and you went around telling everybody you were a reviewer. Which also seems dishonest, but it isn’t like you are exploiting some nice little cute good-faith thing like free dessert on your birthday, you are exploiting the restaurant’s attempt to get a better review. Seems, like, dishonest but fair play.
And, I’d love if search engines would stop giving me paywalled sites, haha. So maybe it would be nice if everyone would exploit this loophole, they could close it, and the whole system would get a little more honest. (I’m not doing it unilaterally though).
So, IMO, it is more like: if most restaurants gave reviewers preferential treatment and tended to comp their meals, and this was very well known, and you went around telling everybody you were a reviewer. Which also seems dishonest, but it isn’t like you are exploiting some nice little cute good-faith thing like free dessert on your birthday, you are exploiting the restaurant’s attempt to get a better review. Seems, like, dishonest but fair play.
And, I’d love if search engines would stop giving me paywalled sites, haha. So maybe it would be nice if everyone would exploit this loophole, they could close it, and the whole system would get a little more honest. (I’m not doing it unilaterally though).
there is an archive.is link posted in the comments and at least firefox has extensions for circumventing paywalls.
I think many people are just clicking on the main shared link, rather than using those tools.
For me personally—in general, I read the story that the author/publisher intentionally posted for public discussion. While it is possible to circumvent paywalls, I wouldn’t want to go against the will of the author and their publisher.
I think it is weird that we allow discussion of unauthorized copying of text here, but we don’t seem to allow (at least as far as I’ve seen) links for unauthorized copying of, say, movies or music.
For me personally—in general, I read the story that the author/publisher intentionally posted for public discussion. While it is possible to circumvent paywalls, I wouldn’t want to go against the will of the author and their publisher.
I think it is weird that we allow discussion of unauthorized copying of text here, but we don’t seem to allow (at least as far as I’ve seen) links for unauthorized copying of, say, movies or music.
While not specific to chipmaking, Lyn Alden's latest public newsletter on reshoring is, as always, excellent: https://www.lynalden.com/reshoring/
The relevant point is that while the manufacturing portion is real, successful reshoring also requires skilled labor. Skilled labor for fab production is not something US has now and it takes many years to grow; and it is not clear if the US has the desire and the will to foster this growth.
The relevant point is that while the manufacturing portion is real, successful reshoring also requires skilled labor. Skilled labor for fab production is not something US has now and it takes many years to grow; and it is not clear if the US has the desire and the will to foster this growth.
Those are good points, and there's one more. If we want supply chain security, we need to scale up the rest of the ecosystem to go from chips to a packaged products on a shelf. That goes back to your point about fostering the growth... we need to foster the rest of the vertical too.
An easy solution to that is open up skilled worker programs. Importing talent is something the US is generally excellent at, offering a much more dynamic culture, better quality of life, better compensation than most manufacturing hubs and having a sizable ethnic community for most cultures wherever skilled labor is needed. While not universally true by any measure enough people want permanent residency in the US that you could staff almost any nascent industry. Further funding to public universities could establish programs and import professors. Once you’ve seeded the industry mentorship, education, and opportunity fosters a domestic talent pool. Sadly these days nativism is the popular politic.
My question: As an American, why should I work in IC fabrication? I'm competing with low-cost Asians who set a cap on my salary. Work conditions, income, and everything else is worse than SWE.
I switched away from electronics early in my career, and it seems like a strict win.
As much as I believe in on-shoring, I'm not sure those issues can, will, or should be fixed.
I switched away from electronics early in my career, and it seems like a strict win.
As much as I believe in on-shoring, I'm not sure those issues can, will, or should be fixed.
For the "can" part, looking at the numbers, it looks possible.
If I take TSMC, they have:
* $73b revenue
* $32b income
* 73000 employees
(2022 numbers from wikipedia)
That's a really high margin, and a really high revenue per employee. This means there is probably room to accommodate for higher wages.
The concern I have revolves more around the US work culture. Employees tend to switch company frequently. Given how critical institutional knowledge is for running these fabs, this is a handicap.
I also cannot shake the feeling that the lack of regulations regarding working conditions might also be detrimental. Better regulations and compensation rules regarding night shifts or on-call for example could improve things greatly and attract far more workers in this field.
If I take TSMC, they have:
* $73b revenue
* $32b income
* 73000 employees
(2022 numbers from wikipedia)
That's a really high margin, and a really high revenue per employee. This means there is probably room to accommodate for higher wages.
The concern I have revolves more around the US work culture. Employees tend to switch company frequently. Given how critical institutional knowledge is for running these fabs, this is a handicap.
I also cannot shake the feeling that the lack of regulations regarding working conditions might also be detrimental. Better regulations and compensation rules regarding night shifts or on-call for example could improve things greatly and attract far more workers in this field.
> The concern I have revolves more around the US work culture. Employees tend to switch company frequently.
It’s not just cultural and it’s hinted at in the second part of your comment. Lack of regulation in employment means you’re penalised financially for staying in one job. Most employees have little say in their pay and conditions.
Employees wages are rarely commensurate with the value they provide to a firm.
It’s not just cultural and it’s hinted at in the second part of your comment. Lack of regulation in employment means you’re penalised financially for staying in one job. Most employees have little say in their pay and conditions.
Employees wages are rarely commensurate with the value they provide to a firm.
> Employees tend to switch company frequently. Given how critical institutional knowledge is for running these fabs, this is a handicap.
When I've seen people switch firms, the institutional knowledge they brought over was gold.
When I've seen people switch firms, the institutional knowledge they brought over was gold.
I don’t think the target job market here is six figure salaries for SWEs, I think it’s mid-high 5 figure salaries for skilled manufacturing employees.
More than Asia, but same order of magnitude, maybe even the same ballpark for some areas.
I expect most chip design will still be done in Asia and those are the high paying jobs.
More than Asia, but same order of magnitude, maybe even the same ballpark for some areas.
I expect most chip design will still be done in Asia and those are the high paying jobs.
Honest question but won't these "low-cost Asians" not be as much of a factor on wages if the fabrications are in the US?
Depends if there are tariffs that incentivize purchase of more expensive American chips.
They may be forced upon us, regardless of the negatives you highlight, if globalization and free-trade brakes down and/or the international trade-value of the $ goes down making the cost-benefit for domestic sourcing more favorable.
You're right. Why should any American ever work in any job that doesn't favorably compare to SWE salary and working conditions? Everyone should quit their jobs and become a SWE. It's just that simple, right?
/s
/s
The issue is that there is a high level of overlap between the skill sets/aptitudes necessary to work in the chip industry and on the software side, and in some subsets, its substantially easier on the SWE side. Why work harder for less if the general aptitude for jobs is about equal?
Because a janitor does not know how to SWE? And a CEO makes more? And a teacher has meaningful work?
On the other hand, EEs either can SWE or can learn quickly, and switching seems like a win in all respects, unless you have a bunny suit kink or something.
On the other hand, EEs either can SWE or can learn quickly, and switching seems like a win in all respects, unless you have a bunny suit kink or something.
My wife was a process engineer in microelectronics. She is now doing data engineering and ML, and doubled her salary. She will never return to that industry.
When these types of things are funded one always gets the sinking feeling that the money is just getting stolen and/or wasted by savvy insiders who know how to write grants or who know the right people. In fact, I think that's a reasonable assumption and some proof is required to show that it is not the case.
> When these types of things are funded one always gets the sinking feeling that the money is just getting stolen and/or wasted by savvy insiders who know how to write grants or who know the right people.
That's definitely the feeling I get when I see the grants that get given out for Broadband to underserved areas. So much money gets spent on infrastructure for not much actual benefit.
Hopefully these fabs don't follow down that road. If nothing else, it'll be a lot easier to check and see if the objective were achieved, compared to broadband which is inherently much more decentralized.
That's definitely the feeling I get when I see the grants that get given out for Broadband to underserved areas. So much money gets spent on infrastructure for not much actual benefit.
Hopefully these fabs don't follow down that road. If nothing else, it'll be a lot easier to check and see if the objective were achieved, compared to broadband which is inherently much more decentralized.
It would be cool if there was a neighborhood watch but for projects and/or money. Like, a couple dozen people in the community who watch that specific money like a hawk, to make sure it benefits the community and moves along at a good pace and the actors don't take advantage.
One good thing with broadband is that the FCC is making companies publish service maps.
I've heard from multiple people that they've looked at the map and forced companies to make amendments when they claim to offer service in an area but don't actually.
I've heard from multiple people that they've looked at the map and forced companies to make amendments when they claim to offer service in an area but don't actually.
This is exactly how I feel which is conflicting because my company gains from such funds. My multinational employer, based outside of the US, has been expanding into the US for years due to shrinking growth opportunity in Asia and Europe. In recent All Hands, the NA head has mentioned we’re applying for millions in grants through the IRA which is essentially subsidizing what we were planning to do all along.
I hope this at least means there’s no excuse to cut bonuses in upcoming years though.
I hope this at least means there’s no excuse to cut bonuses in upcoming years though.
Good thing there are $200B worth of proof already. At what point would you be satisfied, if 100% of semi manufacturing took place in the US and 0 chips were manufactured elsewhere the instant the grants were handed out?
It's odd but comments like yours would normally elicit something like anger, now elicit sadness. Why do you take this tone? Why do you willfully misunderstand my point? Why not take a charitable view?
I'd be happy if even half of that money actually went into a fab, and only half was wasted on lawyers, fees, studies, and wherever else free money manages to go rather than to actually building things. The timeline doesn't matter, nor does the fraction of on-shore chips made. You created those measurements out of thin air.
I'd be happy if even half of that money actually went into a fab, and only half was wasted on lawyers, fees, studies, and wherever else free money manages to go rather than to actually building things. The timeline doesn't matter, nor does the fraction of on-shore chips made. You created those measurements out of thin air.
I took a very charitable take of your comment, that at best can be interpreted as “this policy was completely useless” when the evidence is staring you in the face. TSMC was clearly motivated by CHIPS to build fabs in the US for dozens of billions and pocketed a fraction of that as a handout. The fact that I’m writing this obvious information down is charitable.
The big question is what exactly is being built.
The CHIPS Act was marketed as an "AI cold war", and needing to bring high-tech research and production back to the US. Is is actually doing that by incentivizing companies to build leading-edge fabs in the US, or are companies just using it as free money to expand the production capacity of their trailing-edge processes?
Sure, having locally-sourced trailing-edge chips is still better than getting them from overseas, but it doesn't exactly do anything to reach the intended goals.
The CHIPS Act was marketed as an "AI cold war", and needing to bring high-tech research and production back to the US. Is is actually doing that by incentivizing companies to build leading-edge fabs in the US, or are companies just using it as free money to expand the production capacity of their trailing-edge processes?
Sure, having locally-sourced trailing-edge chips is still better than getting them from overseas, but it doesn't exactly do anything to reach the intended goals.
While skepticism is good, the skepticism should go both ways. What other types of funding like this are you thinking about?
It's been a long time since the US did industrial policy.
It's been a long time since the US did industrial policy.
They profited offshoring now they will charge you to bring it back so they can profit some more. The wheel will continue to spin and nothing will come from it. Just enjoy the ride.
It's hard to fake a building going up.
The building is the easy part, almost trivial part.
Getting the enough ASML machines to supply a fab for an advanced process (and they have a backlog that is almost a decade long), starting up the whole complex logistical process to feed the fab (with lots of single source suppliers that are already committed to the existing fab capacity), getting all the necessary personal and skillsets started and getting the fab working, creating all the little feeder companies that are necessary around the fab, all that is hard work. It is is something that the US has largely lost most knowledge of how to do with all the outsourcing of industrial capacity.
And all this has to be done agains the upwind pressures of our service economy. Our politicians are largely lawyers, our financial sector focuses on short term returns, and our companies are rife with lawyers and MBA layers taking their cut out of the necessary investments in manufacturing and engineering. None of this is encouraging for the necessary long term slog to bring back industrial capacity, particularly something with as complex and deep logistical tail as semiconductor manufacturing.
Getting the enough ASML machines to supply a fab for an advanced process (and they have a backlog that is almost a decade long), starting up the whole complex logistical process to feed the fab (with lots of single source suppliers that are already committed to the existing fab capacity), getting all the necessary personal and skillsets started and getting the fab working, creating all the little feeder companies that are necessary around the fab, all that is hard work. It is is something that the US has largely lost most knowledge of how to do with all the outsourcing of industrial capacity.
And all this has to be done agains the upwind pressures of our service economy. Our politicians are largely lawyers, our financial sector focuses on short term returns, and our companies are rife with lawyers and MBA layers taking their cut out of the necessary investments in manufacturing and engineering. None of this is encouraging for the necessary long term slog to bring back industrial capacity, particularly something with as complex and deep logistical tail as semiconductor manufacturing.
The solution to what you mention is to turn the big levers that have an outsized impact.
Such as slashing the corporate tax rate (and the offset is to raise the individual tax rate on higher incomes). Which is the Ireland model, and it works extraordinarily well (even more so if you already have a desirable foundation). Cut it far enough and it'll lure more companies and jobs than you can absorb. And meanwhile the corporate income tax is an increasingly trivial component of the US Government's funding, it's no longer very important. If anything we should cut it further (~15%) and very aggressively pull companies, investment, R&D, manufacturing out of foreign nations and into the US. The corporate tax rate is a magnet, the lower you go the stronger it is (and there is no doubt a significant diminishing of returns as you go below a certain % figure).
Increase the standing incentives (not only one-off programs like the CHIPS Act).
Such as slashing the corporate tax rate (and the offset is to raise the individual tax rate on higher incomes). Which is the Ireland model, and it works extraordinarily well (even more so if you already have a desirable foundation). Cut it far enough and it'll lure more companies and jobs than you can absorb. And meanwhile the corporate income tax is an increasingly trivial component of the US Government's funding, it's no longer very important. If anything we should cut it further (~15%) and very aggressively pull companies, investment, R&D, manufacturing out of foreign nations and into the US. The corporate tax rate is a magnet, the lower you go the stronger it is (and there is no doubt a significant diminishing of returns as you go below a certain % figure).
Increase the standing incentives (not only one-off programs like the CHIPS Act).
While that's true, what _can_ happen with these sorts of subsidised projects is that the building goes up, but... that's about it, and nothing much ever happens in the building (this was essentially the case with that Foxconn Wisconsin thing, say). That said, that does _not_ seem to be the case in this instance, but, in general, a building going up isn't great evidence for anything.
CNBC's take on the matter [How Texas Became The American Chipmaking Hub](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDamhO7my9A). Although the 17 minute clip is Texas-centric, it still talks about other states.
This was an excellent watch. Thank you.
The world’s largest deposit of ultra pure quartz, which is needed for the very high end processors, is in North Carolina.
The renaissance is real, or is about to be.
The renaissance is real, or is about to be.
Is it difficult to refine less-pure quartz?
I just assumed they had processes for eliminating any and all contaminants.
I just assumed they had processes for eliminating any and all contaminants.
It is only done in China, Japan, the United States, Germany, and Italy. Since some of the newer semiconductors are shaped at 99.9999999999% (literally, 10 9s) pure, only a few places in the world can do the purification. China, and only China, can do 99.9999999 (Seven 9s) at scale, which is good enough for solar panels.
Sorry, let me clarify: I'm assuming that the requirements are so stringent that all quartz ore needs to be purified.
So I'm wondering how much the initial ore purity really matters.
So I'm wondering how much the initial ore purity really matters.
The process is more complex and the energy more intense the more 9’s you need, because the contaminates in quartz are different depending on where it was mined. This complexity is why there’s only one place in the world that can do it at solar panel demand scale — and that’s because China dumped a ton of money into the process and doesn’t have strict pollution laws. If you can start with purer quartz, you’re way ahead of reaching scalable refinement.
Here's a great video on it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIRfWyyOFPg
Here's a great video on it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIRfWyyOFPg
Yep, near Spruce Pine, NC. My Grandad lived his whole life in that area and would tell stories about mining mica and riding the trains they used to transport it. There's still a bit of the train system left, at a local amusement park, Tweetsie Railroad.
What is quartz used for beyond oscillators?
Reduce pure quartz, get pure silicon.
Quartz = SiO2 --> Silicon and Oxygen QED
i read the "The resonance is real"
America's basic socioeconomic structual model is highly flawed and any company wanting to do manufacturing here will see obvious disadvantages compared to Europe or Asia.
1) Employers are responsible for employee health coverage, inflating employee costs by a significant degree. The rationale for this model among the investor class is that it makes employees dependent on their employer and limits the power of unions, but for example in Germany, there's free state-supplied health care (paid for by higher taxes on individual and corporate profits).
2) Four decades of neoliberal trade policy and corporate profit maximization have created a situation of fragile global supply chain dependence and a lack of skilled experienced labor in many manufacturing sectors. High-skill manufacturing jobs have been replaced with low-skill service jobs and the brain drain into the financial sector has left the industrial sector in second place.
3) Construction and operation of new manufacturing facilities relies on a robust domestic infrastructure system, but American infrastructure (railroads, electricity grids, ports, etc.) is woefully decrepit in many areas and lags behind China and Europe. Again the reason is nobody wants to pay for it, and the issue is not 'overregulation' it's that it would require higher taxes and corrupt government contractors divert government funds into their own pockets instead of into the projects, resulting in constant cost overruns and low-quality outputs (reminscent with what went on with Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction contracts).
It turns out worshipping at the feet of Milton Friedman & Co. wasn't such a good idea after all.
1) Employers are responsible for employee health coverage, inflating employee costs by a significant degree. The rationale for this model among the investor class is that it makes employees dependent on their employer and limits the power of unions, but for example in Germany, there's free state-supplied health care (paid for by higher taxes on individual and corporate profits).
2) Four decades of neoliberal trade policy and corporate profit maximization have created a situation of fragile global supply chain dependence and a lack of skilled experienced labor in many manufacturing sectors. High-skill manufacturing jobs have been replaced with low-skill service jobs and the brain drain into the financial sector has left the industrial sector in second place.
3) Construction and operation of new manufacturing facilities relies on a robust domestic infrastructure system, but American infrastructure (railroads, electricity grids, ports, etc.) is woefully decrepit in many areas and lags behind China and Europe. Again the reason is nobody wants to pay for it, and the issue is not 'overregulation' it's that it would require higher taxes and corrupt government contractors divert government funds into their own pockets instead of into the projects, resulting in constant cost overruns and low-quality outputs (reminscent with what went on with Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction contracts).
It turns out worshipping at the feet of Milton Friedman & Co. wasn't such a good idea after all.
>Construction and operation of new manufacturing facilities relies on a robust domestic infrastructure system, but American infrastructure (railroads, electricity grids, ports, etc.) is woefully decrepit in many areas and lags behind China and Europe. Again the reason is nobody wants to pay for it,
A whole lot of people want to pay for it. The problem is that a minority doesn't, and they've been able to ruin things for the rest of us.
A whole lot of people want to pay for it. The problem is that a minority doesn't, and they've been able to ruin things for the rest of us.
I don't think much associated with fabs ships by rail, even in Europe.
BMW would seem to be in a good position to judge the manufacturing capabilities of both Europe and the US, with their large presence in both.
$1.7 billion expansion in the US towards the end of 2022:
https://www.bmwgroup-werke.com/spartanburg/en/news/2022/BMW-...
Expanding on their already expansive presence in Spartanburg. The X3-X7 and their newest high end vehicle the XM are all built in the US:
https://www.bmwgroup-werke.com/spartanburg/en.html
Mercedes, another company that knows about manufacturing in Europe and the US, is producing some of their newest vehicles in the US, including new electronic vehicles that debuted in 2022, the EQE and EQS. The 2024 Maybach EQS680, with an estimated price of $200k, is also built in the US.
Toyota is spending $2.5 billion to expand their US facilities:
https://pressroom.toyota.com/toyota-announces-2-5-billion-ex...
$1.7 billion expansion in the US towards the end of 2022:
https://www.bmwgroup-werke.com/spartanburg/en/news/2022/BMW-...
Expanding on their already expansive presence in Spartanburg. The X3-X7 and their newest high end vehicle the XM are all built in the US:
https://www.bmwgroup-werke.com/spartanburg/en.html
Mercedes, another company that knows about manufacturing in Europe and the US, is producing some of their newest vehicles in the US, including new electronic vehicles that debuted in 2022, the EQE and EQS. The 2024 Maybach EQS680, with an estimated price of $200k, is also built in the US.
Toyota is spending $2.5 billion to expand their US facilities:
https://pressroom.toyota.com/toyota-announces-2-5-billion-ex...
KIA and Hyundai have built and are building more in Georgia as well.
On point 1, it would be interesting to see the per employee costs both in taxes and payrolls/benefits between mostly identical companies in the US and somewhere like Sweden. I imagine it might be higher in Sweden.
> obvious disadvantages compared to Europe or Asia
> Employers are responsible for employee health coverage, inflating employee costs by a significant degree
> for example in Germany, there's free state-supplied health care (paid for by higher taxes on individual and corporate profits).
TANSTAAFL, just choose your favorite accounting structure. A company with a younger contract workforce (and likely lower spending/risk profile) might find the funding model advantageous.
> Employers are responsible for employee health coverage, inflating employee costs by a significant degree
> for example in Germany, there's free state-supplied health care (paid for by higher taxes on individual and corporate profits).
TANSTAAFL, just choose your favorite accounting structure. A company with a younger contract workforce (and likely lower spending/risk profile) might find the funding model advantageous.
Thanks, but can't get past captcha. 12ft.io blocked it and archive.ph doesn't work on my browser due ri ssl error. Anyone know other sites?
> can't get past captcha
For days now Firefox gets stuck in an infinite loop of captchas for all of the archive links posted to HN. Nothing changed at my end.
For days now Firefox gets stuck in an infinite loop of captchas for all of the archive links posted to HN. Nothing changed at my end.
I've been having problems with them since yesterday.
I had a little luck with archive.org/web, but it's not quite as stream-lined.
I had a little luck with archive.org/web, but it's not quite as stream-lined.
Below extension seems to work
https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-chrome
https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-chrome
There’s a lot of discussion on this thread about how US workers (even outside extreme CoL hubs) are just too expensive to do cutting-edge semiconductor fabrication.
Why? Ease up a bit on immigration for skilled workers, subsidize however many CHIPs Acts it takes to get the motor running, export a higher standard of living for skilled workers thereby, and margins on the most elite manufacturing sector on earth stay…really friggin high?
How productive does the global economy have to get before paying people well stops being a non-starter?
We didn’t used to fuck around on this: Bell Labs, Western, DARPA, the Apollo Program. Shareholders got a solid, low-beta return, workers got benefits and an education for their kids, and technology improved at an explosive rate.
Why? Ease up a bit on immigration for skilled workers, subsidize however many CHIPs Acts it takes to get the motor running, export a higher standard of living for skilled workers thereby, and margins on the most elite manufacturing sector on earth stay…really friggin high?
How productive does the global economy have to get before paying people well stops being a non-starter?
We didn’t used to fuck around on this: Bell Labs, Western, DARPA, the Apollo Program. Shareholders got a solid, low-beta return, workers got benefits and an education for their kids, and technology improved at an explosive rate.
My take is it not the skill or even the cost of labor. The biggest issues is it is easier to find skilled people in Asia willing to work late and long hours to keep the machines running 24/7. The only way to make money is to keep these machines running as close to 100% efficiency 24/7. It isn't just one company, it is the whole chain of suppliers/manufactures with fast turn around time that gives Asia a upper hand.
I live in a relatively small city that has a 30B phased wafer fab project under way, and an another separate 5B wafer fab project underway, and plans for at least one more in the next couple years.
Anecdotal, of course, but there's some real things being built for sure.
Anecdotal, of course, but there's some real things being built for sure.
Is that a city that TSMC is already throwing under the bus and saying the American workers there are lazy and not cut out for their harder Taiwanese business/work ethic? https://9to5mac.com/2023/06/29/tsmc-arizona-chip-plant-delay...
I don't think any of this onshoring, if it ever actually happens, is going to be a net positive for the areas that host the fabs. TSMC is already sending hundreds of their own workers over to America to work on stuff because they aren't happy with the local workforce, I don't see any reason why this will change any time soon. The US is just going to be a place they send their workers to fab chips in plants that got sweet cost/tax breaks, and that they don't care at all about polluting the local environment.
I don't think any of this onshoring, if it ever actually happens, is going to be a net positive for the areas that host the fabs. TSMC is already sending hundreds of their own workers over to America to work on stuff because they aren't happy with the local workforce, I don't see any reason why this will change any time soon. The US is just going to be a place they send their workers to fab chips in plants that got sweet cost/tax breaks, and that they don't care at all about polluting the local environment.
Is this perhaps just sour grapes from TSMC because they actually need to train the new workforce?
The hilarious thing is that when TSMC was founded they had to train EVERYONE. Taiwan had zero chip fabrication talent. All of the specialists at the time, even the founder of TSMC, were in the US. For them to complain that it's impossible to train a workforce is laughable and is most likely just racism/nationalism.
To be fair the expertise needed to produce chips in 1987 and 2023 is radically different.
The continuity of knowledge transitioning from one generation of production to the next shouldn’t be underrated. If you started in 1987 with state-of-the-art knowledge and kept up with the advances, your knowledge would have transformed over the years.
Of course, if you’re just getting started now, the knowledge from 1987 is of little use (not entirely useless though) and indeed drastically different from 2023 SotA.
Of course, if you’re just getting started now, the knowledge from 1987 is of little use (not entirely useless though) and indeed drastically different from 2023 SotA.
Nope, I'm in Texas and not Arizona. We've already got two wafer plants here. The largest projects are expansions on those, so these companies are pretty familiar with the available workforce at this point.
What's the end goal here? To onshore only chip production to the US? Or are we talking about onshoring entire electronics supply chains?
How about all the other stuff that's required besides the dies themselves... chip substrates? packaging? Passive components? Onshore PCB manufacturers (that are actually affordable)?
We build 10 to 12 layer boards with BGA x86 CPUs. There's a MASSIVE premium on trying to have complex PCBs made in the US. The last time I looked I found a lot of PCB mfgs in Mexico, but they're seemingly owned by the Chinese.
How about all the other stuff that's required besides the dies themselves... chip substrates? packaging? Passive components? Onshore PCB manufacturers (that are actually affordable)?
We build 10 to 12 layer boards with BGA x86 CPUs. There's a MASSIVE premium on trying to have complex PCBs made in the US. The last time I looked I found a lot of PCB mfgs in Mexico, but they're seemingly owned by the Chinese.
I have similar concerns. If you can't source all the discrete components, PCBs, solder, masks, connectors, general hardware (nuts bolts, screws, etc), you're still dependent on a world wide supply chain.
For both Digikey and Mouser, there's no way to even see or filter for Country of origin.
For both Digikey and Mouser, there's no way to even see or filter for Country of origin.
At the very least it’s several hundred billion dollars worth of real. We’ll have to see if the policy sustains itself or not.
Does that include the several hundred billion dollars from CHIPS act?
That was a sad moment last year, I am extremely concerned we Zombified our tech sector.
That was a sad moment last year, I am extremely concerned we Zombified our tech sector.
Can you please elaborate what the issues are, and what do you mean by Zombified?
I've seen this argument elsewhere so I think I know what he means. Basically the idea is you throw money around too easily and companies that would otherwise die (due to poor management/inability to compete) stay around. Too much subsidy yields poor incentive to compete yields fewer breakthroughs and slower technological progress.
[deleted]
How much of this chipmaking renaissance can be compared to the American Factory Netflix documentary having some of the same challenges? I understand that shows the difference in culture more than anything but underneath it also speaks of efficiency which is of high importance.
I think a few key differences compared American Factory is the Chinese glass factory effectively replaced the automotive factory, China doesn't have strong relations to the US, and the factory was framed as the project of one Chinese businessman.
Well the CHIPS Act was $50 billion.
We've got another $50 billion. And another after that. And another after that. As necessary.
See: Ukraine v Russia.
$50 billion ain't what it used to be (and Russia is an economic joke in scale compared to the US, we can shovel billions of dollars into that war endlessly). Its just that the US and China have gotten so massive compared to their former peers, that we can fund at a relative gigantic level quite easily. The US economy is now 50% larger than the EU economy, and six times larger than Japan. US GDP per capita is a shocking $80,000 - well over double that of both the EU and Japan (soon to be double that of France and Britain; or closing in on France and Britain combined to put it another way). $80,000 is equal to the combined GDP per capita of France + Japan.
Things that are difficult for the EU to fund, like $50 billion for chips, are now comparatively easy for the US (or China) to fund. We're only funding the CHIPS Act because that sum is no longer a huge deal to the US. That's a little toy program that Biden was allowed to play with precisely because it's not that big of a deal financially. A medium deal would be $200-$300 billion (eg helping Ukraine defeat Russia across several years); a big deal is $500b-$1 trillion (infrastructure level).
Germany's economy hasn't grown on an inflation adjusted basis in decades. The same is largely true of all of Europe's biggest economies.
US GDP in 2008: $14.7 trillion. Now: $26.8 trillion.
Germany GDP in 2008: $3.7 trillion. Now: $4.3 trillion. And that is a mirror of what has been going on in Europe broadly (with a few exceptions eg the Baltics and Ireland). Since 2008 the US has added economy equal to Germany + France + Britain + Italy.
$50 billion would have been a big deal for the US, two decades ago.
We've got another $50 billion. And another after that. And another after that. As necessary.
See: Ukraine v Russia.
$50 billion ain't what it used to be (and Russia is an economic joke in scale compared to the US, we can shovel billions of dollars into that war endlessly). Its just that the US and China have gotten so massive compared to their former peers, that we can fund at a relative gigantic level quite easily. The US economy is now 50% larger than the EU economy, and six times larger than Japan. US GDP per capita is a shocking $80,000 - well over double that of both the EU and Japan (soon to be double that of France and Britain; or closing in on France and Britain combined to put it another way). $80,000 is equal to the combined GDP per capita of France + Japan.
Things that are difficult for the EU to fund, like $50 billion for chips, are now comparatively easy for the US (or China) to fund. We're only funding the CHIPS Act because that sum is no longer a huge deal to the US. That's a little toy program that Biden was allowed to play with precisely because it's not that big of a deal financially. A medium deal would be $200-$300 billion (eg helping Ukraine defeat Russia across several years); a big deal is $500b-$1 trillion (infrastructure level).
Germany's economy hasn't grown on an inflation adjusted basis in decades. The same is largely true of all of Europe's biggest economies.
US GDP in 2008: $14.7 trillion. Now: $26.8 trillion.
Germany GDP in 2008: $3.7 trillion. Now: $4.3 trillion. And that is a mirror of what has been going on in Europe broadly (with a few exceptions eg the Baltics and Ireland). Since 2008 the US has added economy equal to Germany + France + Britain + Italy.
$50 billion would have been a big deal for the US, two decades ago.
I'm excited to see what happens with Micron in Clay and seeing how far they're committing (and putting their money where their mouth is already) gives me a lot of hope to see it through.
Won’t we have to wait to find out?
It's interesting to see that, in the end, the domestic manufacturing guys were right but in a different way. The biggest blockers to America presently are ossified construction and manufacturing. Chip fabs delayed due to local red tape. Ammo factories cannot expand manufacturing because they are now historic buildings. Fascinating.
These 'problems' are all solved with more funds, which the US Government has a very, very large supply of (courtesy of the global reserve currency).
Producing more ammo isn't a serious problem, it's a trivial problem that the Pentagon & Co. are in the process of resolving.
Producing more ammo isn't a serious problem, it's a trivial problem that the Pentagon & Co. are in the process of resolving.
I think we have to wait until the buildings are out outputing merchandise and making some $$$.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't fabs need plentiful water?
Why Arizona and Texas...?
Why Arizona and Texas...?
Fabs need ultra pure water and it's cheaper to recycle the water they use than rely on city water supplies. So they need a ton of water initially but once they're up and running they don't need much water after that. Because of this, even a desert environment like Arizona is fine.
What about the vast energy required by fabs? Do you have a special tax to reinvest and maintain the grid or do they pay the same rates as a normal Arizona grocery store? Texas is hardly a paragon of a stable grid given the blackouts the past few years.
Despite the headlines, Texas has a fairly stable grid. They have work to do, but all grids do. In the end it doesn't matter too much as you cannot make a grid stable enough to rely on without backup power onsite and once you have that you can ride out most unstable events.
> Despite the headlines, Texas has a fairly stable grid.
Have the power generators applied any of the recommendations in the report commissioned by ERCOT after the 2021 blackouts? When the 2021 blackouts happened, they had not implemented any of the winterization updates recommended by the another report a decade earlier (2011). The outcome of the 2021 blackouts was the legislature allowing utility companies to claw back their "losses" from customers' bills over 10+ years - with no obligation to make changes or investing in equipment to ensure there same cascading failures won't happen again.
Have the power generators applied any of the recommendations in the report commissioned by ERCOT after the 2021 blackouts? When the 2021 blackouts happened, they had not implemented any of the winterization updates recommended by the another report a decade earlier (2011). The outcome of the 2021 blackouts was the legislature allowing utility companies to claw back their "losses" from customers' bills over 10+ years - with no obligation to make changes or investing in equipment to ensure there same cascading failures won't happen again.
> State leaders had helped persuade the companies to open the facilities by offering big tax breaks and water and other infrastructure grants.
> Intel soon announced a $20 billion expansion in Chandler, with two additional factories that would bring 3,000 new jobs to the state. Chandler also approved $30 million in water and road improvements for the new plants.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/22/technology/arizona-chips-...
Basically just told them "Don't worry about it, we'll foot the bill for any infrastructure needed to get you your water"
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/22/technology/arizona-chips-...
Basically just told them "Don't worry about it, we'll foot the bill for any infrastructure needed to get you your water"
Texas is quite large and only a small part of it, relatively, is desert.
Don't mean to alarm you but Texas is a coastal state
But Texas is also the size of the four states to its east. Georgia is a coastal state. If you pull from Brunswick, GA and send it to just outside St. Louis, that distance is covered within the single state of Texas.
That said, we don't pull sea water to supply water for industry - desalination is too costly.
That said, we don't pull sea water to supply water for industry - desalination is too costly.
Coastal states also get a lot of rain.
We aren't talking about building fabs way out in Abilene are we?
We aren't talking about building fabs way out in Abilene are we?
Georgia’s rain comes in from the west. Sometimes its southwest. The only time it comes from its coast is when a hurricane lands nearby.
Some other commenter was talking about building fabs in the desert. I think we’re certainly in hypothetical territory.
My point was that the “coastal state” comment doesn’t explain how that magically make clean water plentiful.
Some other commenter was talking about building fabs in the desert. I think we’re certainly in hypothetical territory.
My point was that the “coastal state” comment doesn’t explain how that magically make clean water plentiful.
The populated areas of Texas have plenty of water.
There's enough water in Arizona that pecans and cotton are grown there, undoubtedly less $/H2O industries than semiconductors
Most likely, the fabs got competitive tax incentives from those states.
Given the issues tsmc had already had with Arizona, I personally doubt much will come of this. But who knows?
This all feels like a prelude to a World War.
Eh. It's more a correction caused by over globalization.
Too many theorists decided to claim that "no one would ever risk their economy!" and since it made lines go up globally everyone bought in. Then Russia invaded Ukraine and suddenly the hawks who'd been screaming about supply lines and logistics for years were taken more seriously.
You can't simultaneously threaten military/economic action and also rely on them for major resources. Not to mention how countries like China have essentially warped the market for goods around their artificially cheap labor, and the threat of losing that plus one of the largest markets in the world is severe.
Now granted, we could all still wind up in world war, but to me it looks like the standard stuff.
Too many theorists decided to claim that "no one would ever risk their economy!" and since it made lines go up globally everyone bought in. Then Russia invaded Ukraine and suddenly the hawks who'd been screaming about supply lines and logistics for years were taken more seriously.
You can't simultaneously threaten military/economic action and also rely on them for major resources. Not to mention how countries like China have essentially warped the market for goods around their artificially cheap labor, and the threat of losing that plus one of the largest markets in the world is severe.
Now granted, we could all still wind up in world war, but to me it looks like the standard stuff.
For the USA, war (at some level) has pretty much always been constant. Autarky also isn't new to the USA. The current on-shoring movement seems to me to be more about the USA's empire collapsing, and the military contractors getting worried about their supply lines. So, prelude to WWIII? Maybe, but it can be explained in other ways.
To the extent that the US has an empire, it's not collapsing right now. The US continues to maintain plenty of foreign military bases, US military alliances and partnerships are strong (arguably NATO is now stronger than it was in the recent past), and overseas territories like Guam are still firmly under US control.
What's changed is that China continues to rise in power and exert its influence, combined with Russia's invasion of Ukraine making the West antsy about dependencies on China as well as Taiwan (if China invades or blockades Taiwan).
What's changed is that China continues to rise in power and exert its influence, combined with Russia's invasion of Ukraine making the West antsy about dependencies on China as well as Taiwan (if China invades or blockades Taiwan).
Why do you say that?
Removing the dependence of chip manufacturing from non-Nato countries and bringing them to the United States.
Was that a common factor to the previous world wars?
National security: very real.
kadu123(1)
Any Political backed endavour life's the memory duration of the system. Aka if politicians change every year and the average drop out rate is 1/5 your political crisis memory dilutes down to 0.5 of the politicianpopulation in 3 years. Opposition is viable to have a consensus. Of course if internal mismanagement makes abandoning a "learned beehive our" earlier a rallying battleflag, the laws making the endavour viable might evaporate sooner.
While I have some sympathy for the policy makers attempting to do this they do appear to be oblivious that to the outside world, especially their allies, the meta-lesson is any critical industry will eventually be onshored by the printing of hundreds of billions to price you out if necessary. This isn't a recipe for long term peaceful co-operation.
It's ridiculous to criticise China on one hand, and then emulate every move they've made ten/twenty years later.
It's ridiculous to criticise China on one hand, and then emulate every move they've made ten/twenty years later.
How is it ridiculous to build redundancy when the entire global economy has a single point of failure on an island just off the shore of a sworn foe, which they also would love to invade? If it hurts someone's feelings, they need to grow up - the situation is untenable and onshoring is the correct strategy.
Geopolitics are not after school specials about friendship being only thing that matters in life.
Critical industries are, well, critical. Securing redundancy for critical things is risk management 101, even on much smaller scale than geopolitics.
Critical industries are, well, critical. Securing redundancy for critical things is risk management 101, even on much smaller scale than geopolitics.
Don't underestimate how powerful American (soft) influence is; many Taiwanese happily support these policies.
But yes; Taiwan will end up losing on two ends: Massive tech transfer to the US. And a loss of access to its biggest market - mainland China.
But yes; Taiwan will end up losing on two ends: Massive tech transfer to the US. And a loss of access to its biggest market - mainland China.
I mean do you not have to hedge again china just landing troops on taiwan? I think the pandemic chip shortages threw into sharp relief that we are totally dependent on imports (and for higher end chips on taiwanese imports almost exclusively). If china decides to blockage or invade Taiwan it would be cataclysmic.
PRC/ROC conflict has been dormant for 70 years - maybe don’t stir it up?
uh, hate to tell you dude...
Regardless outsourcing all manufacture of one of the most critical resources we depend on to a tiny island nation halfway around the world is bad news.
Regardless outsourcing all manufacture of one of the most critical resources we depend on to a tiny island nation halfway around the world is bad news.
[deleted]
So if we criticize China we should do nothing? It’s not clear how you can be sympathetic that something should be done and against the obvious thing that should be done.
Will you explain what “emulate every move they’ve made ten/twenty years later” means? I don’t understand this comment.
Breach of WTO rules, free trade principles, market distorting industrial policies.
https://www.ti.com/about-ti/company/ti-at-a-glance/manufactu...
https://news.ti.com/blog/2022/09/29/tis-new-300-millimeter-w...
https://dallasinnovates.com/finisar-considers-3-billion-semi...
https://www.dallasnews.com/business/jobs/2022/12/07/sherman-...
https://www.samsung.com/us/sas/Taylor
> Texas has led the country in semiconductor exports for 11 straight years, and has shown a commitment to expanding the industry.
https://www.texastribune.org/2022/07/26/texas-chips-act-semi...