[HN Gopher] The World's current and next Innovations depend on a...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The World's current and next Innovations depend on a single
       country, Taiwan
        
       Author : burgerquizz
       Score  : 127 points
       Date   : 2021-01-01 14:08 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (erickhun.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (erickhun.com)
        
       | ipnon wrote:
       | TSMC is in a league of its own. Only Samsung currently has the
       | capacity to compete on a similarly international level. There are
       | a variety of startup competitors from mostly China and the US,
       | but TSMC is so technologically advanced, and the demand for ever
       | faster chips is so great, that they will easily retain the
       | dominant global position for at least the duration of the 2020's.
        
         | bob1029 wrote:
         | It might seem like Samsung is caught off balance by TSMC's
         | recent progress, but they are still very much in this race.
         | 
         | I haven't worked for Samsung in ~7 years, but last I recall
         | they were aggressively pursing all manner of value optimization
         | angles. They also have an existing presence in the US, whereas
         | TSMC is going to be about 5 years out on their US factory.
         | Keeping American workers around to inject ideas into your
         | manufacturing process can be invaluable if you have typically
         | been operating the business like a Borg cube (i.e. relentless
         | standardization throughout, potentially at the cost of more
         | complex value-add proposals).
        
         | lumost wrote:
         | Fabs seem like a classic example where the market will trend to
         | a monopoly. Each generation makes fabs themselves more
         | expensive along with the incremental R&D . As each generation
         | largely obsoletes the previous, the price of being second goes
         | up.
        
           | 8fhdkjw039hd wrote:
           | Drexlarian nanotechnology?
        
           | MichaelZuo wrote:
           | It seems that any activity where R&D is a significant chunk
           | trends towards a monopoly.
        
           | magicsmoke wrote:
           | Also a perfect case study of where the free market worldview
           | and the nation-state worldview bump heads. The free market
           | tends towards a single global monopoly for these highly
           | capital intensive industries in the name of economic
           | efficiency, but this inevitably erodes the sovereignty and
           | independent action of countries that have to depend of the
           | good graces of wherever this monopoly has its HQ.
        
           | nickpp wrote:
           | Until a startup with an innovation in fabrication itself
           | comes along disrupting the industry and rendering all those
           | incumbent investments suddenly obsolete.
           | 
           | Happened again and again. In free markets, of course. Even if
           | they may trend to, only controlled markets reach monopoly.
        
             | lumost wrote:
             | There are plenty of counter examples, and I'd dare say the
             | majority of notable historical "true" monopolies were
             | disrupted due to government intervention rather than
             | disruption. While intel has had a process lead for decades,
             | they've never had a monopoly on fabrication.
        
               | nickpp wrote:
               | Do you have some examples? Any monopoly I know of was
               | government granted, usually through regulations. I
               | actually know of much more examples of disruption...
               | 
               | Now the market can arrive to a state of monopoly due to
               | some powerful player, but as long as the startup
               | mechanism is functioning, competition will arrive and
               | disrupt.
        
               | lumost wrote:
               | Standard Oil, US Steel, AT&T are the best known examples
               | in the US. None of these (including AT&T) were government
               | granted. They also share a few key traits
               | 
               | 1) They dominated their "primary" markets
               | 
               | 2) Their primary market was deep, and competing with them
               | was cost prohibitive for any economic entity as in lose
               | the GDP of a small country expensive.
        
               | nickpp wrote:
               | Ok, I can't talk about the first two because, frankly,
               | it's been a while.
               | 
               | But AT&T - you kidding me?! It was illegal to even bring
               | your own phone device to their network! It was a
               | classical example of government protected monopoly.
               | 
               | A free market will break its own monopolies. A market
               | corrupted by government regulation will need government
               | intervention.
        
             | sudosysgen wrote:
             | Maybe after twenty to fourty years this will happen. So
             | far, this hasn't happened in this field.
        
       | imjustsaying wrote:
       | >The world's current and next innovations depend on a single
       | country: Taiwan. It's probably one country you might never hear
       | about, or perhaps confuse with its neighbor, Thailand, or even
       | think it's a part of China.
       | 
       | >I've been living in Taiwan for 3+ years, and am baffled that I
       | never pay attention to semiconductors.
       | 
       | I can't imagine how baffled he's going to be when he discovers
       | Taiwan considers itself part of China.
        
         | teacpde wrote:
         | The blog post seems to have good logic reasoning regards
         | semiconductors, but it is wired to open with statements that
         | involves political views.
        
         | ipnon wrote:
         | This is misleading. The two dominant parties are the KMT, the
         | descendants of the post civil war military dictatorship that
         | wants political union with the People's Republic of China, and
         | the DPP, which wants to preserve Taiwan's independence as its
         | own liberal democratic nation.
         | 
         | The DPP has won the last 2 elections, so it is fair to say that
         | more Taiwanese believe Taiwan is an independent nation than
         | not.
        
         | chillacy wrote:
         | Afaik Taiwan considers (or considered) itself to _be_ China:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan,_China#Background_and_a...
        
           | ipnon wrote:
           | Taiwan is split politically on the issue of whether or not it
           | is a part of China or a unique independent nation.
        
             | bobthepanda wrote:
             | It is also a status quo not really worth rattling at the
             | moment, since all indications are that when Taiwan changes
             | its mind the PRC will start treating it like a breakaway
             | province and start the invasion.
        
             | throwawaysea wrote:
             | That's not what GP means. He means they consider themselves
             | to be the "true" China and the "true" ruling faction of
             | China.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | > Taiwan considers itself part of China.
         | 
         | China, not the CCP. They view themselves as the rightful
         | leadership party.
         | 
         | This is very historical though. When polled on whether Taiwan
         | would want to become part of China, remain independent, or
         | become part of the US (!), the majority wants US Statehood.
         | 
         | I'll go look up sources and cite them in just a bit.
         | 
         | Edit: Wikipedia cites
         | https://web.archive.org/web/20090326142909/http://www.tvbs.c...
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/51st_state
        
           | magicsmoke wrote:
           | Wouldn't be surprised. Taiwan only exists as an independent
           | entity because of American actions in Asia.
        
             | publicola1990 wrote:
             | Yet it was American actions that handed over Taiwan's seat
             | in UN and Security Council to PRC.
        
               | magicsmoke wrote:
               | Yep, at the end of the day the whole fiasco between
               | Taiwan and the PRC isn't really about Taiwan. It's about
               | US-PRC relations and who gets the final word in Asia.
               | Taiwan is just a game piece.
        
           | lumost wrote:
           | Assuming the respondents were not answering in jest, the odds
           | of this ever happening round to 0.
        
         | inetsee wrote:
         | I think you have it backwards; China considers Taiwan to be
         | part of China. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/china-taiwan-
         | relations
        
           | ipnon wrote:
           | The Cross-Strait issue is explicitly mentioned in the
           | preamble of the PRC'S constitution.
           | 
           | >Taiwan is part of the sacred territory of the People's
           | Republic of China. It is the lofty duty of the entire Chinese
           | people, including our compatriots in Taiwan, to accomplish
           | the great task of reunifying the motherland.
           | 
           | http://en.people.cn/constitution/constitution.html
        
           | publicola1990 wrote:
           | Taiwan also claims the entire mainland as their territory,
           | and KMT especially continuing to claim Taiwan as the "true"
           | China.
        
           | lumost wrote:
           | The current govt of Taiwan held the China seat on the UN
           | Security Council until 1979. The history on this issue is
           | complex.
        
       | dirtyid wrote:
       | >The world needs (and want) better semiconductors
       | 
       | Does it really? What kind of exclusive capabilities would
       | humanity meaningfully lose if we regressed back to 14nm? Ray
       | tracing?
       | 
       | More realistic title is lack of foresight allowed Taiwan to
       | monopolize leading fab production for next 5-10 years. A mistake
       | every major party is rapidly correcting. TSMC is one US sanction
       | or one Chinese glitterbomb away from being irrelevant. Long term
       | money is on Samsung.
        
       | tristanj wrote:
       | TSMC is the 11th most valuable company in the world, with a
       | market cap of 489B US dollars.
        
         | person_of_color wrote:
         | What's the "next TSMC" (as an investor?)
        
           | hydroreadsstuff wrote:
           | I would look at the smaller Chinese (not SMIC) ones. Without
           | looking I'd guess they are already highly valued. I have no
           | idea though how long it could take to overtake
           | TSMC/Intel/Samsung.
        
           | ipnon wrote:
           | TSMC is just beginning to reap the rewards of its market
           | dominance. Samsung is a similarly promising investment, but
           | they are listed in South Korea, which is normally
           | inaccessible to Western investors. If you're convinced of
           | TSMC I'd also look into shorting Intel. That bird has flown.
        
           | trixie_ wrote:
           | XSD is a good ETF for semis
        
       | hourislate wrote:
       | >Today's TSMC's monopoly is probably the result of a 40 years
       | relationships with partners, with tight relationship and trust
       | between each others.
       | 
       | From the following link:
       | 
       | https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Technology/TSMC-and-Google-...
       | 
       |  _Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. is working with Google
       | and other U.S. tech giants to develop a new way of making
       | semiconductors more powerful._
       | 
       | It seems they're getting some help (how much?) from companies
       | like Google, AMD, NVIDIA, Apple, etc when it comes to chip
       | packaging.
        
       | samfisher83 wrote:
       | Intel had the manufacturing edge for a long time. Things change.
       | Just because one company is up now doesn't mean it will be up
       | forever.
       | 
       | I think one thing TSMC does better than intel is they have a more
       | long term view. They aren't as concerned about hitting next
       | quarters earnings. Their single biggest shareholder is the
       | government of Taiwan. One of their board members a is Taiwanese
       | minister, So I think the government wants to make sure TSMC is
       | around for the long term. They also provide a lot of jobs in
       | Taiwan. If have ever been to Hsinchu you could see how many jobs
       | the semi industry provides. Everything from engineers to more
       | blue color workers.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-01-01 23:02 UTC)