[HN Gopher] China 'must seize TSMC' if the US were to impose san...
___________________________________________________________________
China 'must seize TSMC' if the US were to impose sanctions
Author : LinuxBender
Score : 32 points
Date : 2022-06-07 19:04 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theregister.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theregister.com)
| systemvoltage wrote:
| I'm really interested in how Taiwan would destroy its fabs. Like
| boots-on-the-ground mechanics of how this would work. C4 charges
| implanted in server rooms and the entire fab? Or a special task
| force steps in and wires the whole building with explosives? Air
| strike after evacuating the Fab? Close by Ground-to-ground
| artillery/guided missiles? Digital keys that disable all
| equipment and wipe out all data/IP? I'd love to be a fly on the
| wall in these military rooms if something like this is going on.
| Even better to be part of the team in charge of handling this
| scenario. That kind of sounds like a whole lot of fun.
| everforward wrote:
| I'm not an expert, but my impression was that chip fabs are
| incredibly sterile places. You could probably disable one for a
| long time by just chucking a barrel full of dust into the
| cleanroom.
|
| If it were total destruction, my money would be on artillery.
| Wikipedia says the range for modern artillery is 15-300km,
| which gives a very wide radius in which artillery could be
| hidden (ignoring local geography). If the artillery was
| preemptively dialed into the fab, it could be fired at very
| short notice, and I don't think anyone would be able to stop
| the shells mid-flight.
| shrubble wrote:
| Open barrel of fluorantimonic acid.
|
| Turn on humidifier.
|
| Leave the area!
| fakethenews2022 wrote:
| If they really wanted to destroy the capability, wouldn't they
| have to kill the engineers and technicians or at least evacuate
| them?
|
| Just look at history with operation Paperclip where German
| rocket scientists surrendered to the Allies. Those German
| scientists formed the core of NASA.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip
| squarefoot wrote:
| China would probably have the workforce and technology to
| rebuild it almost quickly, unless the physical destruction is
| also accompanied by all engineers fleeing to western countries
| carrying all IP with them. _That_ would represent quite a
| damage.
| wil421 wrote:
| The military bombs it.
| kryptiskt wrote:
| Just about all the equipment in fabs is tremendously sensitive
| to contamination. You could probably put one out of action for
| months just by opening the doors to outside air.
| plmpsu wrote:
| But what about reverse engineering?
| salawat wrote:
| Ding ding ding.
|
| Just knowing something is possible is often a great
| breakthrough to advancing understanding
| 7speter wrote:
| The chinese would still have tangible examples of ip to
| reverse engineer. The thing is that TSMC is building fabs in
| the US and in Europe (iirc), so even if China starts
| producing products replicating TSMC, the west can't be held
| economic hostage in such a scenario for much longer.
| namlem wrote:
| The idea that TSMC is the main reason why China wants control of
| Taiwan is ridiculous. It factors in of course, but the issue goes
| way deeper than computer chips for China. One, it's a point of
| national shame that factors heavily into CCP propaganda. It's
| seen as a loose end from the Civil War. And two, capturing Taiwan
| would give the Chinese navy unlimited access to the Pacific.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| "However, she then claimed the US was seeking to isolate China,
| citing the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Trans-Atlantic
| Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) agreements as attempts by
| the US to create two large 'anti-China' trade bodies, although
| the US pulled out of the former and the latter was cancelled
| because of disagreements."
|
| This is either a nonsense article or the speaker is saying
| nonsense to appease a domestic constituency. The only thing I can
| think of is Xi's upcoming Hong Kong visit.
| sonotathrowaway wrote:
| What about those claims exactly do you consider nonsense?
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _What about those claims exactly do you consider nonsense?_
|
| Raising hackles over moot agreements, one from which the U.S.
| withdrew, the other which is dead.
| zardo wrote:
| Just because they failed to implement doesn't mean the
| effort is dismissed. They indicate Washington's intent.
| sdfhdhjdw3 wrote:
| But your honor, my client didn't actually _succeed_ in
| robbing the bank.
|
| Bang - case dismissed.
| sdfhdhjdw3 wrote:
| Concur.
| wahern wrote:
| The U.S. pulled out because it doesn't want to "create
| two large 'anti-China' trade bodies". For better or worse
| (worse, IMO) U.S. preference for the past couple of
| decades has been a multitude of bilateral agreements,
| which by their nature would be neither pro- nor anti-
| China.
|
| And the TPP was ratified (as the TPP11) _without_ the
| U.S. Should we now consider all of Australia, Brunei,
| Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, and
| Peru anti-China? I don 't think China gets any warm
| fuzzies from Australia and Japan, but what about all the
| rest?
|
| OTOH, conflating the proposals of some Chinese economist
| (no matter how renowned) with official Chinese policy
| definitely smacks of alarmism and, perhaps, anti-China
| bias.
| srvmshr wrote:
| For a supposed economist of national repute, juxtaposing TSMC
| with Taiwan is facepalm meme worthy. China's interest in Taiwan
| predates TSMC & mobile chips. 'Semiconductor wars' are just the
| pretex of doing something military and stupid. Surely she is not
| serious. In my observation, overzealous nationalism has
| occasionally paved way for intermittent insanity
|
| The good (or the bad, depends) news is that China will be
| shooting itself in the foot. And onto the foot of every
| manufacturing country ready to answer back loudly either as
| sanctions or trade blockades. (Assuming US doesn't do anything
| except looking away). Any invasion will certainly create enough
| chaos to halt the factories at the least - and utter destruction
| in the usual scheme. Besides they don't gain any trade secrets -
| those lie with ASML, sitting comfortably in NL. Net gain is
| negative for China. Factory inoperable? Check. Unnecessary war?
| check. Economic sanctions & international pariah? check. CCP
| politburo members sure see this forecast in their calculus.
|
| Semiconductor production is moving closer to being reality in US,
| for all the obvious geopolitics & supply chain. Invasions or
| plans thereof will have no bearing on their deployment, rather
| pace it faster.
| NicoJuicy wrote:
| ASML in the Netherlands and Imec in Belgium fyi.
|
| For the rest, i fully agree it will be borderline chaos.
|
| They can't even manage COVID with their propaganda.
| dirtyid wrote:
| > not serious
|
| > is moving closer to being reality
|
| This article has less to do with TW soverignty but US/PRC tech
| war. Chen explicitly already presumes rebellious TW to be
| Chinese territory and TSMC to be a Chinese company under
| hostile governance that's giving up crown jewels to the enemies
| (western efforts to get production off island). Proposal is
| stating the obvious: current sanctions has trapped PRC a few
| nodes behind. If US tries to increase the gap via additional
| sanctions before they reshore substantively, PRC can deter by
| threatening to deny US access to TW expertise and IP to cripple
| nascent efforts to reshore (via force). It's short term
| signally that if US goes full out on severe PRC tech sanctions
| (i.e. Russia tier), forget getting any TW experts to help spin
| up Arizona fabs. It's recognizing that both sides need time,
| PRC needs 5-10 years to build indigenous sanction proof supply
| chain and US needs as much time to reshore from TW (CHIPS act
| projects account for like 5% of current TSMC production), but
| if US tries to make things too difficult for PRC, PRC will
| spoil US efforts as well. It's trying to maintain current
| status quo that works / doesn't work in anyone's favour.
|
| Proposal essentially within bounds of strategic thinking in PRC
| circles. TLDR is short/medium term US via origin tech controls
| has leverage during peacetime via sanctions. But PRC has
| leverage during war time simply because they can destroy TW and
| in worst case scenario, East Asian semi supply chain. Yeah PRC
| will suffer, but most of semi production profits goes to
| western companies, and has disproportionate knock on affect in
| advanced western industries, like 10s of trillions in
| productivity for short/medium term. Ultimately she's being
| polite and ignoring the raze TSMC to the ground option - PRC's
| mutually assured destruction card to reset everyone to 2000s
| tech for a few decades. Meanwhile PRC is one of the few
| countries, if not only, trying to create a wholey indigenous
| semi supply chain, even if stuck a few nodes behind. It's
| resetting the gap to same level if not in PRC favour. As for
| whether she's serious, the interview was posted on guancha not
| global times. At least in terms of threat/messaging (directed
| at US), it's somewhat serious. Like her opinion isn't
| controversial, but it is someone with visibility saying quiet
| part out loud.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-06-07 23:02 UTC)