[HN Gopher] Sony to join TSMC on new $7B chip plant in Japan ___________________________________________________________________ Sony to join TSMC on new $7B chip plant in Japan Author : thedday Score : 371 points Date : 2021-10-11 17:47 UTC (5 hours ago) (HTM) web link (asia.nikkei.com) (TXT) w3m dump (asia.nikkei.com) | ChuckMcM wrote: | Let me know when they actually break ground and start building | one :-). | | I fully support TSMC's efforts to diversify the jurisdictions | that have semi-conductor fabs though. That is a huge win for them | and makes the Chinese mainland threat to assimilate Taiwan less? | More fab capacity is a win. | jonplackett wrote: | So what actually happens to fabs outside of Taiwan if China do | take Taiwan and presumably also TSMC the company. | deaddodo wrote: | Theoretically; something similar to what happened to the | Cuban cigar producers after the revolution. They spin off | into their own company/companies no longer recognizing the | "invalidated" company charter. | | But, realistically, China will press their global influence | to keep them under Sino-TSMC's control under a new Chinese | corporate charter. | i21QMgplhRJs2OL wrote: | Something like what happened with Arm China. | | https://www.extremetech.com/computing/326447-arm-china- | seize... | mianos wrote: | p.sm this was retracted. The new company is specifically | specialising in extensions and add-ons. Or that was what | they were told to re-write. | ksec wrote: | >Or that was what they were told to re-write. | | Especially when they are in the middle of going thought | M&A. Along with trying not to anger China which could | retaliate. | stale2002 wrote: | Well one possibility is that those fabs will simply be | nationalized by the country that they are in. | | That would be an effective economic retaliation against a | country that invades someone else like that. | protomyth wrote: | I think the going in position is that the fabs in Taiwan are | not going to exist if China takes the island, so the only fab | business will be outside fabs. I assume they have a | continuity plan for one of the other offices to become the | new HQ | https://www.tsmc.com/english/aboutTSMC/business_contacts | ChuckMcM wrote: | Really good question. I don't know. | | What I would do if I were leading TSMC is create a wholly | owned subsidiary which held all of the non-Chinese assets and | headquarter it in a tax neutral country like the Netherlands. | Let's call it TSMC International. Then in the event of an | assimilation by China, sell all of the assets that TSMC the | parent company owns, to TSMC-i for $1 or something. And in | fact have the paper work at the TSMC-i headquarters all | filled out just waiting for being dated and executed by | TSMC-i executives. | | It is a variation on a poison pill defense. | taf2 wrote: | I'm a little bit confused why it has to be so expensive and so | hard to produce chips... Is it because of the scale required to | sell them at a low enough price to be competitive? If so, is | there maybe a market for smaller fabs that only produce small | scale batches of specialized chips? | MangoCoffee wrote: | foundry is a capital intensives business. | | the processing steps that is involved is like 300+. that's why | you hear the term "yield" in the semis foundry business. each | step that went wrong is going to affect your yield. | | here is a short video that show the semis fab process. | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9arR8T0Qts | hinkley wrote: | The more times you have to fiddle with something, the more | opportunities you have to break it. It's compound interest | essentially, and that can add up real fast. If you have 300 | steps and by some freak coincidence, each step had exactly | the same error rate, so that you lose N% at each step, then | here are the overall yields: | | 1% loss: 4.9% yield | | 0.5% loss: 22.2% yield | | 0.1% loss: 74% yield | | 0.01% loss: 97% yield | | You have to have an error rate in the range of X failures per | thousand per step to get above 50% yield, and X/10000 for a | really good yield. And all of these things are so small that | a spec of dust causes failures. | ksec wrote: | >I'm a little bit confused why it has to be so expensive and so | hard to produce chips. | | You are talking about something that is forever edging towards | atomic size manufacturing. $7B is hardly expensive in today's | terms. Not to mention the scale. Annual Smartphone sales is | 1.2B unit. You have multiple silicons within a single | smartphone. | | >If so, is there maybe a market for smaller fabs that only | produce small scale batches of specialized chips? | | Smaller Fabs will just be as expensive. You built larger fabs ( | as you have noted ) to try and amortised over larger volume. ( | Lower Unit Cost ) Which is the problem why NAND and DRAM | capacity planning are hard, their Fab size have grown to a | scale that it is hard to build additional one without some | careful consideration. ( High Cost, High Risk ) | akvadrako wrote: | The machines that can make modern chips are extremely | expensive. On one hand they are sensitive enough that shipping | them costs millions of dollars since they need to stay in a | vacuum. On another hand they need a room-sized laser installed | nearby. | thedday wrote: | And water. They need lots and lots of water. And everything | has to be ultra clean and to start that way in creation, | shipping and in use. | sbierwagen wrote: | A new fab would be competing with old fabs that are already | amortized/depreciated, and thus have lower capital costs. | Cyph0n wrote: | A few reasons: | | 1. Extremely expensive equipment, both directly related to IC | fabrication (e.g., lithography) and indirectly related (e.g., | air filtration, water processing, stabilization). | | 2. A large amount of skilled labor onsite to operate and | maintain the complex equipment. | | 3. Constant supply of resources, including power, water, and | sand. | zinekeller wrote: | So, on reading this I imagine that this is purely for "mature" | process nodes, and not definitely for cutting-edge nodes, plus | the fact that some of the semiconductor infrastructure is already | there, so 7 billion US dollars might be in the correct ballpark. | | Well, at least Japanese manufacturers (probably more of | automobile suppliers like Denso rather than Sony's mobile | division) will have a domestic source. | deaddodo wrote: | By mature, they _probably_ mean 7nm or even 5nm. Semiconductor | manufacturers are always keeping old nodes spun up for | technology that doesn't require (or wouldn't even function | properly) on smaller nodes. Spinning up a 7nm /5nm fab allows | them to free up their flagship fab for 3nm. | Zigurd wrote: | There are levels of "mature." Many chip plants, some of which | were built to nurture home grown tech, have fallen far short of | what is old hat to TSMC. | hinkley wrote: | With the rise of Tata, India, the US and Japan all have | substantial automotive concerns that might be very interested | in their suppliers having shorter supply chains. Especially | after the black eye they've already gotten. Expect automotive | lobbyists to be smoothing the way for these agreements to get | approval from the respective State Departments. | hinkley wrote: | It's very likely at this point that the next 'mature' process | from TSMC will still be interesting from a competitive | landscape sense. If the timeline works out so that the current | node gets built in a few years in Japan or India, that won't be | 'cutting edge' but it'll still be pretty sharp, if some other | fabs don't get their shit together and soon. | simonh wrote: | Wikipedia lists about a hundred fabs in Japan already. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_semiconductor_fabricat... | | This might not achieve the very latest cutting edge nodes, but | there are diminishing returns for going very far down-node. | troymc wrote: | The article says, "Japanese chipmakers had dropped out of the | race for large-scale chip development by the 2010s and | instead contracted out the production of cutting-edge | semiconductors to companies like TSMC." and the new plant | "would be TSMC's first chip production operation in Japan". | simonh wrote: | Sure, but the basic infrastructure needed to support fabs | is still there. | zinekeller wrote: | Yes, I knew that, but the chip crunch also affected mature | nodes, so the capacity for mature nodes is also clearly not | enough. | wavefunction wrote: | Somebody needs to build cutting-edge node fabs given the | rhetoric from China in the past few days regarding forced | "reunification" with China. | theteapot wrote: | Past few days? Where have you been for the last 70 odd years? | Difference lately is it's become more credible for bunch of | reasons around politics and capability. | dragonelite wrote: | Taking over Taiwan will not give China cutting edge node | fabs. TSMC is working on a western equipment plus chemical | stack. So it will give China absolutely nothing, China is | rich enough to make Taiwanese talent offers they can't | resist. So much so that Taiwan had to shut down Chinese | recruitment bureaus and certain Taiwanese talent are not | allowed travel or exit the country. | | China can just bide its time they will be the biggest economy | at the end of the decade that will psychologically change the | world so much regarding the West and Asia. You can already | see a disconnect between western and Asian elites/diplomats | view on China and the Region. Why Western ASEAN anti-china | recruitment the last few years failed really hard. | cronix wrote: | > So it will give China absolutely nothing | | It essentially gives them tremendous power over the world. | All they have to do is threaten to shut it down, or ban | exports to the west, or put very high tariffs on them. In | addition to gaining all IP from customers. What do you | think that will do to all companies that rely on cutting | edge TSMC nodes such as Apple? Tesla? Nvidia? These new | plants won't likely be putting out M1 chips, etc., the | cutting edge fabrication is held physically in Taiwan. It | would be a great way to collapse the economies of the world | as you are rising, if one were aiming at doing such a | thing. | [deleted] | wavefunction wrote: | China must obviously gain cutting edge node fabs or | associated knowledge and processes from seizing Taiwan | given the claims you've made about Taiwanese being | prevented from being hired by the Chinese Government. | throw0101a wrote: | > _China can just bide its time they will be the biggest | economy at the end of the decade that will psychologically | change the world so much regarding the West and Asia._ | | Does this take into account China's demographics? Will be | to able to 'grow rich before it grows old'? | dragonelite wrote: | I'm not a demographer, so only time will tell how big of | a problem it will become. The Chinese government is | worried about it, already was couple of years ago. But I | don't see it becoming a roadblock that will prevent China | from becoming the biggest economy in the world, hell I | wouldn't be surprised that the Chinese market will be | twice that of the combined western market. | | China can always play the Asian immigration card. To | soften the blow of a graying demographic. | DOsinga wrote: | The headline and the first line of the article are not all that | much in sync. Joining or considering to join: | | Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., the world's largest | contract chipmaker, and Sony Group are _considering_ joint | construction of a semiconductor factory in western Japan amid a | global chip shortage, Nikkei has learned. | HenryKissinger wrote: | I thought semiconductor factories couldn't work in places with | lots of seismic activity. | systemvoltage wrote: | Intel has multiple fabs in Oregon. They have seismic | requirements for buildings and tools. | alliao wrote: | Taiwan have loads of earthquakes too, people just work harder. | renerthr wrote: | Article in the original language: | | [0]: https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXZQOUC10E680Q1A910C2000000/ | encoderer wrote: | So when Xi invades Taiwan and forces unification, who owns these | fabs? Will there be a new tsmc-jp and tsmc-us? | Shadonototra wrote: | > So when Xi invades Taiwan | | 'invades' is the wrong word, it's used by the propaganda | machine from the UK/US | | please don't be politically brainwashed and use the right word; | China will reclaim Taiwan on the date everyone signed | neltnerb wrote: | Your complaint is whether the word "reclaim" or "invade" is | used? Why do you think your word choice is right when the | leader of Taiwan seems to disagree? | | Reclaiming something against the wishes of the local | population is still invading, it just denies agency to the | human beings that live there as if they agreed to that | outcome. It's like the US saying they are going to liberate | Iraqis when, no, it still involved an invasion... | | Are you arguing that the population of Taiwan actually is | super into being part of the PRC and that the media makes it | seem otherwise? I don't think that polling agrees with you, | their actions don't seem to agree with you, my friends in | Taiwan definitely don't agree with you, but obviously the | media is adept at influencing public opinion. | | I believe it's theoretically possible, but knowing people in | Taiwan and knowing their opinion makes me skeptical. I know | there's sampling bias in that they are fluent in English and | highly educated people who I know personally, of course. | Shadonototra wrote: | for debates to be healthy, one must use the right words to | describe a situation | | once proper description of the situation is done, one can | argument whether something is good/bad fair/unfair | legal/illegal an atrocity or something wonderful | | burning steps is the best way to not think properly | | and i'm not arguing anything, i state facts and i use the | right words for it | | i don't care about what's gonna happen in the pacific, | whether china gonna nuke the west coast first or it's gonna | escalate with one of the US's paws aka australia, who | cares? | | i also find it funny that you extrapolate what i may think, | based on what? what did i say about the Taiwanese? i'm not | qualified to have an opinion about it, but i'm qualified to | state historical facts | encoderer wrote: | > whether china gonna nuke the west coast first or it's | gonna escalate with one of the US's paws aka australia, | who cares? | | Oh good lord. Go away shill. At least you make yourself | obvious. | Shadonototra wrote: | exactly, not thinking properly makes people forget what | WAR is, and its effect on the people | | are you ready for war? | | i am not, therefore i stay honest and i use the right | words to describe situations | bumbada wrote: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party | | All people in China mainland is taught that Taiwan is part | of China and it is so ingrained on them that it is | impossible to discuss this with them. | | And now that things are getting sour in China the CCP | always uses the external enemy card to redirect the anger | against others and not become beheaded themselves. | encoderer wrote: | You are likely replying to a paid communist shill, or | somebody who has been educated by one. Still, you are | right. | Shadonototra wrote: | i got paid by the Chinese communist party yes, and so | what? that's what the western society is all about? | making profit, no matter how, it's called an | advertisement campaign :) | | /s | | also your comment is against hackernews rules, let's see | if they are enforced, or only when it goes against their | political beliefs | neltnerb wrote: | I agree, but do try to keep an open mind. | | This "reclaim" stuff seems like it really doesn't | recognize the reality of the civil war at all, it just | comes off as a way to make invading peaceful neighbors | whose stuff you want seem like it's the status quo rather | than an extreme step opposed in force by the local | population. | | It makes no sense. I'm sure the media is biased towards | prioritizing reporting about the India/China border | conflict, the China/Taiwan conflict, the China/Vietnam | conflict, the China/Indonesia conflict... but still, | those are all significant conflicts. I buy that they're | being more heavily reported on, but not that the facts | are literally incorrect. It's not like I'm getting news | from NPR, and the publisher definitely has no great | attachement to US hegemony. | Factorium wrote: | Hypersonic missiles should be raining down onto the Three | Gorges Dam before that's allowed to happen. | DeathArrow wrote: | What if Xi has faster hypersonic missiles? | neltnerb wrote: | Depends on whether the launch sites get hit before | launching, this part of MAD is well understood. You just | need survivability enough for a second strike (or early | warning enough to render it moot). | xster wrote: | "I don't hate the Chinese people, I just hate the Chinese | government" | jrockway wrote: | Possession is nine tenths of the law. | | (I almost worry about Taiwan; if they are the sole source of | iPhone and PC chips, then they will receive a lot of protection | from other countries in the event that China invades. If we | have TSMC factories in Japan and the US, then people won't | care. Good for buying GPUs, bad for democracy.) | yyyk wrote: | The decision whether the West will fight for Taiwan will not | be affected by TSMC. | | HN crowd absurdly overestimates the need for the smallest | node. At worst, the West will have a mildly smaller amount of | slower chips for a few years until sufficient investment | allows catching up. | speedybird wrote: | I also worry for Taiwan. If China chose to invade and the | first invasion wave were not successfully repelled by the | military assets already in the immediate area, other nations | might try to intervene but few would be in a position to act | immediately. "Defending Taiwan" is a tricky prospect if the | PRC already invaded it yesterday; and as you say, possession | is nine tenths of the law. | stefan_ wrote: | I'm not sure what would be left in Taiwan after an invasion | but I'm sure it doesn't include the hyper-sensitive latest- | node semiconductor factory. | namelessoracle wrote: | I thought the way the island is set up is that is that it | was very difficult to make an initial amphibious push on | the island with a few chokepoints that made defending it | much easier for Taiwan that one might expect. And if China | DID manage to break through one of those points the Island | was effectively lost. | tomthe wrote: | TSMC is a better defense than owning nuclear weapons. But | also way more expensive to develop (so not really a good | option for North Korea or Iran...). But for Taiwan it is | vital to keep the smallest proccess on their land. | ThrowawayR2 wrote: | From the legal perspective, the shareholders still own TSMC (by | definition) and therefore still own the fabs, same as before, | and the shareholders are spread out across the entire globe. | neltnerb wrote: | Under which legal system? I thought that China was generally | able to influence who owns domestic companies pretty much at | a whim by nationalizing them, and that chip manufacturing | seems like something that many countries might consider | nationalizing based on how expensive they are and how | critical they are. | | Although it seems convoluted enough that if it's not truly | critical things get left alone. But chip fabs are probably | critical enough that they won't get left alone. | encoderer wrote: | But non-Chinese can't own a Chinese company. All the Chinese | companies on American stock markets are basically just shell | companies with a "profit sharing agreement" with the | underlying Chinese controlled asset. | | That's why this is an interesting question to me. | | It doesn't feel like we can trust the CCP to maintain the | status quo any longer. | unixhero wrote: | Sony?? This is very promising. | the-dude wrote: | Not an insider : isn't $7bn relatively cheap? Could it be this | plant is for image sensors? | | I couldn't read the article. | forty wrote: | No idea for your question, but you should be able to read the | archived article here https://archive.is/TM8fk | kube-system wrote: | The article mentions: | | > Sony will also help prepare the factory site. Its aim is the | stable procurement of semiconductors for its image sensors. | | > The company controls half of the world's market share for | sensors used in smartphones and cameras, with manufacturing | bases in Kumamoto and Nagasaki prefectures. The sensors are | manufactured in-house, but the semiconductors that process | images are procured from third parties, including TSMC. | | > Sony CEO Kenichiro Yoshida previously said that the ability | to steadily procure semiconductors is important for maintaining | Japan's international competitiveness. | gimmeThaBeet wrote: | I was interested to see it was in Western Japan, and after | looking it up in context, it isn't surprising when almost all | of Sony's foundries are all over Kyushu. | | Always interested to understand why things are where they are | (e.g. proximity to Korea/China, sheer expense of Tokyo or | somewhere like Osaka for a large industrial operation). | [deleted] | zinekeller wrote: | So, on reading this I imagine that this is purely for "mature" | process nodes, and not definitely for cutting-edge nodes, plus | the fact that some of the semiconductor infrastructure is | already there (for use in image sensors), so 7 billion US | dollars might be in the correct ballpark. | crate_barre wrote: | Sounds cheap but they made a couple of billion on the ps4 | alone. Sounds like a reasonable investment. | MangoCoffee wrote: | "Bloomberg noted that India is currently studying possible | locations with adequate land, water, and manpower resources. | India reportedly said it would provide financial support by | fronting half of the capital expenditure needed from 2023, along | with tax breaks and other incentives." | | India is going to put up half of the capex up front w/tax breaks | and incentives. India govt. also going to scout out land for | Taiwan. | | TSMC will be in Taiwan, China, Japan, US, and India. | | https://techhq.com/2021/10/heres-why-a-mega-chip-deal-betwee... | maldeh wrote: | India's first forays into semiconductor fabrication in the 80s | and 90s were likewise enthusiastically supported by the | government (land, incentives, tax breaks and so on), but were | ultimately hamstrung by more fundamental infrastructure issues | that couldn't just be magicked away - water shortages and | unstable power grids - each of which could grind manufacturing | to a halt for months on end and delayed production cycles. (I | think there was also a major fire in a leading SC plant that | caused delays by years.) If anything these shortcomings could | be exacerbated in 2021-22. The government would need a much | more comprehensive infrastructural solution this time around. | beloch wrote: | Even so, it's not hard to see why India remains alluring for | tech companies. Wages are low and there's a massive number of | young workers with more on the way. In these respects, India | is, now, what China was a few decades ago. Plus, it's right | next door to existing supply chains and less encumbered by | international politics. | | If the problems can be solved, the returns will be great. | MangoCoffee wrote: | i was thinking how come India didn't take China's approach to | prop up their own foundry like SMIC. since India seem to have | a need for semis. from the article: | | "India's semiconductor demand is said to be valued at around | US$24 billion and is expected to reach US$100 billion by | 2025. The country's semiconductor demand currently is | entirely met through imports." | baybal2 wrote: | >India's first forays into semiconductor fabrication in the | 80s and 90s were likewise enthusiastically supported by the | government | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isBYV6QWDIo | downrightmike wrote: | Agreed. They were absolutely hamstrung because their | facilities burned down and were only restored to s shadow of | their former selves. They are still generations behind | everyone else, and not able to use their anywhere near their | full capacity. Plus their competitors took the opportunity to | hire the best people that India away from the state fabs. | Shame really, if they could increase their output, this | shortage would be the time to regain some footing. | gautamcgoel wrote: | Wait, China uses TSMC? I'm surprised PRC govt allows that. | dan-robertson wrote: | So obviously some chips fabricated by TSMC go to China for | further manufacturing into consumer devices or whatever. But | I was also surprised by the grandparent comment to this one. | Does TAMC have fabs in mainland China. I would have thought | that would make the US (and Taiwanese) government nervous as | Chinese manufacturing being so reliant on external fabs | discourages them from doing anything silly with Taiwan. | baybal2 wrote: | > Wait, China uses TSMC? I'm surprised PRC govt allows that. | | They have any other alternative? China imports more | microchips than OIL in trade value. | | TSMC going black is an instant lights out for their industry. | yitianjian wrote: | China and Taiwan are very very closely economically and | culturally linked. The PRC and ROC governments do work | together, it's no longer the 1970's. | [deleted] | pvarangot wrote: | The PRC is not a monad like most hit piece journalism and | armchair geopoliticians would like to make you believe to | sell you their easy to implant ideas. The ROC does behave | more like a monad if that's a thing, but on the PRC side | the military and the banks don't even share the same plan | for dealing with Taiwan. | | I agree on the cultural and economical aspects both | governments work together but I am not sure that on other | aspects tensions are not as high as in the 1970s or worse. | I wish they were not, I just don't know. | dan-robertson wrote: | I thought I knew what a monad was and the only problem | was all the tutorials and other people clearly struggling | to understand it. But now I'm not so sure. | skissane wrote: | That made me chuckle. But I think the GP is using the | term "monad" more in the sense of Leibniz's philosophy | than that of functional programming or category theory - | "monad" as meaning ultimately simple and indivisible, as | "atoms" were in the original ancient Greek atomic theory | (as opposed to modern atomic theory in which the so- | called "atoms" turned out to not actually be atomic after | all). Of course, even in that sense the GP is using the | term figuratively - nobody literally believes that China | is a single indivisible entity, a hive-mind or Borg, but | the GP is claiming that Chinese society (and even the | Chinese government) contains more divisions of opinion | and interest and attitude than many outside observers | assume. And I'm sure there is some truth in that - but, I | think the GP is wrong in suggesting Taiwanese society is | different - that is just as true of Taiwanese society, | and Taiwan being a democracy puts these differences more | out in the open (DPP vs KMT etc), China's more closed | system means many of these differences exist behind | closed doors; and even if sometimes people within China | get away with speaking of some of them openly, they have | to be careful what they say and how they say it, to much | greater extent than people in Taiwan have to | PedroBatista wrote: | It's no longer the 70's as it appears we are heading to the | 50's or worse. | nodata wrote: | > it's no longer the 1970's. | | Oh? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-58854081 | deaddodo wrote: | To be fair, the RoC agrees completely with Xi Jinping. | | They just disagree on who should run the reunified | nation. | tyrfing wrote: | That's not accurate. My understanding is the KMT agrees, | and DDP doesn't (specifically: 1992 consensus), and the | fact that the population opinion has been shifting | towards independence is the primary tension currently. | | At any rate, summing it up as "the RoC agrees" would seem | to simplify a cultural argument along the lines of "the | US agrees completely that guns are good". | | For example: https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article | /3151551/tsai-in... | WastingMyTime89 wrote: | That's only their official position and they can't change | it because that's one of the PRC red lines. They consider | Taiwan dropping their claim on the mainland as a change | in the status quo and a casus belli. Everyone know the | RoC doesn't aspire to a reunited China anymore. | deaddodo wrote: | So, officially, they agree with Xi Jinping. | stale2002 wrote: | No, its not. If I point a gun to your head, and tell you | that I am going to shoot you, if you do not "agree" that | the moon is made of cheese, you are not actually | "agreeing". | | We both know, that you do not agree that the moon is made | of cheese, in this situation. I have just made words come | out of your mouth, to something that you do not agree | with. | | To say that they "agree" is just a silly word game, that | does not reflect the truth of the matter, and instead is | playing into propaganda that denies the reality that | Taiwan is already a country, and is already independent | of china, and that Taiwan is not interesting in being | taken over, or taking over china. | WastingMyTime89 wrote: | They say what the PRC forces them to say but de facto | don't believe in it. It's a complete misrepresentation to | argue that Taiwan agree with China regarding | reunification but with reversed roles. | | Taiwan is a democracy and a majority of Taiwanese want | independence but argue for keeping the status quo in | order to avoid a war (both the KMT and the DDP - their | disagreement is more technical than that). Some wanted | Taiwan to declare it in the 90s to force the hand of the | USA and win a decisive war but this position seems more | precarious nowadays. | monocasa wrote: | From their viewpoint, TSMC is theirs anyway. | connicpu wrote: | China's official position is that Taiwan is a province in | rebellion, but economics mean they can't treat it exactly | like an ongoing civil war so... It's complicated | TooSmugToFail wrote: | TSMC is good at this subtle diplomatic tightrope dance. | 29athrowaway wrote: | China tried to subsidize a national semiconductor | manufacturer to rival TSMC but after billions wasted they | gave up. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-10-11 23:00 UTC)