Intel CEO Asks US Government for More Backing, Calls Taiwan Not Stable

[dragontamer5788]

I need AWD so the hybrid is out of the question. With that said Ford will have a 2023 2.2 Ecoboost STX AWD model of the Maverick so I will probably go with that if they have them available. The delay on those pickups is due to the chip shortage from what the salesman told me and from what I've read online.

The semiconductors for the auto-industry are being mostly made by Texas Instruments (in... well... Texas), and Freescale/NXP (Europe).

Yeah, we here care about GPUs and CPUs being made by TSMC, but that's not our country's "strategic chips". Our strategic chips are power-management ICs, MOSFETs, and other such chips required to make cars or other industrial equipment work at all.

You can remove the touchscreen from a car, its not really necessary. You can't remove the power-management or microcontrollers that provide you the logic for antilock brakes. You can't remove SiC MOSFETs that allow an electric car battery to turn on or off.

The on/off switch (aka: SiC MOSFETs) are far, far more important to EVs / Hybrids than anything else.

 

[ixi]

I think the missing chips for mainline industries are mostly things like LCD/OLED drivers and power management ICs.

A lot of these are actually made in the US, Japan, and S. Korea. Most of the shortage is on mature nodes, not the new ones. I have yet to figure out why there is so much focus on TSMC, their capacity constraints + crypto / home demand is definitely affecting GPUs but that's not too relevant vs cars and microwave ovens.

I'll guess because people are not aware of all the other fabs on the planet and talking about a TI fab in Texas doesn't generate clicks.

Not too many people are going to google for "Power Management Integrated Circuit Shortage". Lots will look for "GPU shortage" though.

Yep, most likely you said everything correct .

 

[mechtech]

Doesn’t Intel make more profit than the TSMC??

spend more profits on R&D perhaps??

 

[zlobby]

TSMC plans to spend $100 billion on new fabs. Intel…$20 billion. I guess they need a little help.

And what better place to get the money from, other than the taxpayers? And that's only so that the said taxpayers could then buy 'intel inside' products at hyperinflated prices?
I guess we lived ling enough to see this too.

 

[dragontamer5788]

With TSMC building a fab in Arizona... I feel rather confident in their Arizona fab at least being safe from a Chinese invasion.

The bulk of TSMC's fabs are still in Taiwan though. But spreading out the risk by building fabs in other countries is clearly mutually beneficial.

 

[RedBear]

You could call them scare tactics, but Taiwan has been called "the most dangerous place on Earth" even by The Economists, it's an opinion grounded on quite solid facts, if anything else it's a cautious approach to reduce the dependence on a single island with a peculiar and precarious geopolitical situation, Gelsinger was quite correct on this point. On the point of goverment's support, the very same semiconductor industry of Taiwan exists because it was nurtured and supported by its government, the so called state capitalism has always been strong in the Far East.

Doesn’t Intel make more profit than the TSMC??

spend more profits on R&D perhaps??

Intel's net income isn't actually that much larger, it's $20.9 billion vs 18.53 billion, and Intel is much more than just a foundry, it needs to invest in R&D for its CPUs and other businesses.

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

I'm so tired of huge corporate subsidies and either crumbs or nothing at all for regular people....the only way the government should give Intel money is a loan to be laid back with interest

 

[Why_Me]

Well, it appears both Taiwan and South Korea have decided semiconductors are strategic enough it needs all the support it can get. Meanwhile, USA seems set on ruling a digital world built on others' hardware. The EU "wisely" decided to sit this one out.

EU Official: Semiconductor Independence Is Impossible

Margrethe Vestager sees EU semiconductor self-sufficiency unrealistic.

www.tomshardware.com

 

[RandallFlagg]

EU Official: Semiconductor Independence Is Impossible

Margrethe Vestager sees EU semiconductor self-sufficiency unrealistic.

www.tomshardware.com

I think EU being able to supply all of its own semiconductors, or the US being able to, is not the real objective. Makes me think this person is making up red herrings so that nothing is done. One evidence of that is saying that EU only produces 10% of the worlds semis. Well okay, it's 6% of the worlds population. So maybe they work together with the US and other countries and split it up before they all focus on the same thing and wind up with a million of one part and none of another.

I really don't care if the semis are made in Germany, or Mexico, or Canada, or the US, or Australia, or even India for that matter. No one does I think. You just have to have a complete supply chain in the democratic westernized countries, you have to have the capability to do it and ramp it within a few years if needed.

 

[TechLurker]

I agree with almost all of that post other than the bolded part. The entire world did zilch when Ukraine was invaded and almost a third of it annexed and all I see happening if Taiwan is invaded is a bunch of media lapdogs and politicians yapping away with threats like little dogs.

Let's be fair here though; what in Ukraine was of major value to the rest of the world besides the naval base, which was already long populated with Russian naval forces and had de facto control?

In comparison, TSMC and Taiwan are far more valuable. TSMC producing leading edge chips for various companies and one major reason to avoid letting it fall into Chinese hands, and Taiwan is a smaller but still notable producer of other goods, with "Made in Taiwan" mostly being seen a few steps above "Made in China".

---

As for the main topic, rather than investing into Intel, the US government should invest more into GloFo and TSMC; getting TSMC to open a leading edge fab as well as a research fab in the states to help hedge against some tech loss while also getting their hands on leading edge development (moreso since Apple funds it anyway), and Global Foundries, which has at least 3 stateside Fabs and could use a boost to once again be semi-competitive with Intel, Samsung, and TSMC. Intel has more than enough money to put into matching and countering the rivalry a stateside TSMC and a resurgent GloFo would put up against them, so they don't need the extra investment.

 

[dragontamer5788]

I really don't care if the semis are made in Germany, or Mexico, or Canada, or the US, or Australia, or even India for that matter. No one does I think. You just have to have a complete supply chain in the democratic westernized countries, you have to have the capability to do it and ramp it within a few years if needed.

I think there's a brute-force, physicality element to all of this. Its beyond just simple politics, there's military aspects heavily involved.

I trust Taiwan, but I don't trust Taiwan's defenses (vs China). There's simply no way that Taiwan's 290,000 person-strong military can go up against China's 1-million+ men, not in any reasonable scenario. At best, Taiwan can stall out China maybe long enough for the USA to help but things get hairy after that (I could very well see China beating USA in Taiwan... much like how USA could beat USSR in a Cuban fight. Home-turf advantage is very big).

Similarly, I trust South Korea, but I don't trust South Korea's defenses (vs North Korea). In this case, I think South Korea + US would win a North Korean fight, but North Korea almost certainly would artillery strike the fabs / factories in South Korea, so those factories / fabs cannot be relied upon.

In the first case: China probably won't attack the fabs / factories, they probably want that expensive equipment for themselves. But I can very easily see China winning that fight. In the second case, North Korea would use the threat of blowing-up factories with easy artillery strikes as a bargaining chip.

 

[persondb]

He isn't wrong though his wording might not have been the best.

oh no! a 200B market cap Corporation needs Taxpayers money to keep profits high cause they can't have lower profits for their shareholders and the CEO can't live without their million dollar bonuses...

The US government should help the overall market, not individual companies.

Except that as Gelsinger says, those companies are getting a lot of help from their government and a lot of subsidies.

See: https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Te...ans-to-invest-450bn-to-become-chip-powerhouse

Likewise, they aren't investing in foreign companies but their local ones such as Samsung and SK Hynix for S.Korea and TSMC, UMC and etc for Taiwan. This would likely unbalance the market more towards those nations and companies.

 

[zlobby]

I really don't care if the semis are made in Germany, or Mexico, or Canada, or the US, or Australia, or even India for that matter. No one does I think.

I do, for one. Currently only EU makes some effort to put people's privacy protection higher in its prorities.
I wish to think that EU is less prone to put hardware backdoors in its chips, compared to the US, Rasa or Chaina for example.

I think there's a brute-force, physicality element to all of this. Its beyond just simple politics, there's military aspects heavily involved.

I trust Taiwan, but I don't trust Taiwan's defenses (vs China). There's simply no way that Taiwan's 290,000 person-strong military can go up against China's 1-million+ men, not in any reasonable scenario. At best, Taiwan can stall out China maybe long enough for the USA to help but things get hairy after that (I could very well see China beating USA in Taiwan... much like how USA could beat USSR in a Cuban fight. Home-turf advantage is very big).

Similarly, I trust South Korea, but I don't trust South Korea's defenses (vs North Korea). In this case, I think South Korea + US would win a North Korean fight, but North Korea almost certainly would artillery strike the fabs / factories in South Korea, so those factories / fabs cannot be relied upon.

In the first case: China probably won't attack the fabs / factories, they probably want that expensive equipment for themselves. But I can very easily see China winning that fight. In the second case, North Korea would use the threat of blowing-up factories with easy artillery strikes as a bargaining chip.

Winning wars is no longer a matter of who has the largest number of cannon fodder, i.e. soldiers.
Yes, highly trained teams of spec-ops are still indispensable but sheer numbers mean nothing.

 

[RandallFlagg]

I think there's a brute-force, physicality element to all of this. Its beyond just simple politics, there's military aspects heavily involved.

I trust Taiwan, but I don't trust Taiwan's defenses (vs China). There's simply no way that Taiwan's 290,000 person-strong military can go up against China's 1-million+ men, not in any reasonable scenario. At best, Taiwan can stall out China maybe long enough for the USA to help but things get hairy after that (I could very well see China beating USA in Taiwan... much like how USA could beat USSR in a Cuban fight. Home-turf advantage is very big).

Similarly, I trust South Korea, but I don't trust South Korea's defenses (vs North Korea). In this case, I think South Korea + US would win a North Korean fight, but North Korea almost certainly would artillery strike the fabs / factories in South Korea, so those factories / fabs cannot be relied upon.

In the first case: China probably won't attack the fabs / factories, they probably want that expensive equipment for themselves. But I can very easily see China winning that fight. In the second case, North Korea would use the threat of blowing-up factories with easy artillery strikes as a bargaining chip.

I don't think China would do a direct military attack on Taiwan. I think they would blockade it with their navy. That would put the shoe on the foot of either Taiwan or the western countries to fire the first shot.

Korea, different topic. Any attack there would mean running over 50,000 US soldiers. Korea could be blockaded too though.

 

[Why_Me]

I do, for one. Currently only EU makes some effort to put people's privacy protection higher in its prorities.
I wish to think that EU is less prone to put hardware backdoors in its chips, compared to the US, Rasa or Chaina for example.


Winning wars is no longer a matter of who has the largest number of cannon fodder, i.e. soldiers.
Yes, highly trained teams of spec-ops are still indispensable but sheer numbers mean nothing.

Numbers mean more than you think when backed up by an air force and navy that's within a few hundred miles away. China has the obvious home field advantage. If China decides to invade Taiwan it will be American blood spilled .. not European. In order to fight a war across the other side of the globe you need an actual navy. That leaves everyone out of the picture other than the US, China and the Brits.

I think EU being able to supply all of its own semiconductors, or the US being able to, is not the real objective. Makes me think this person is making up red herrings so that nothing is done. One evidence of that is saying that EU only produces 10% of the worlds semis. Well okay, it's 6% of the worlds population. So maybe they work together with the US and other countries and split it up before they all focus on the same thing and wind up with a million of one part and none of another.

I really don't care if the semis are made in Germany, or Mexico, or Canada, or the US, or Australia, or even India for that matter. No one does I think. You just have to have a complete supply chain in the democratic westernized countries, you have to have the capability to do it and ramp it within a few years if needed.

If this virus has taught me anything it's the fact that the global supply chain isn't what it was made up to be. It has some major deficiencies. I'm for whatever it takes to manufacture microchips in the US for our auto and defense industry. I don't want to see us have to rely on the likes of China, Taiwan, South Korea or the pseudo United States of Europe for microchips.

 

[dragontamer5788]

I don't think China would do a direct military attack on Taiwan. I think they would blockade it with their navy. That would put the shoe on the foot of either Taiwan or the western countries to fire the first shot.

Why did China suddenly decide in the past few years to suddenly build a Navy that rivals the entirety of the US Navy? Why did China suddenly start building 3 aircraft carriers?

This all coincides with the 100-year anniversary of the CCP (2021) and of the PRC (2049). We know they like a big spectacle, we know they like wolf-warrior diplomacy. And... there's in fact a chance that they can beat the USA's Navy in this scenario. Given that chance, and the prestige associated with such a win, why wouldn't China try? (No, they can't rival us on the open seas. But "home turf advantage" means China's Navy will be operating in collaboration with its Air Force and missile-forces. In contrast, US Navy + US Marines will be the only thing reasonable to deploy to help Taiwan).

It all comes down to the confidence behind those "hypersonic ship-killing" missiles China has recently developed. If they think they can kill the US Capital ships, then they've pretty much won the fight. The carriers are the cornerstone of our naval strategy, and the airplanes on board would be necessary for helping Taiwan in almost any scenario. If our carriers are dead (or threatened to leave the area), China probably wins. (US Submarines may be effective... but submarines don't project force into Taiwan, so Taiwan's army would be on their own)

It all comes down to whether or not our AEGIS Cruisers can shoot down those missiles. A completely untested scenario. 3000mph hypersonic is really fast, and will be a challenge to shoot down.

------------

Remember: China's official stance on Taiwan is that Taiwan is in rebellion, and that Taiwan rightfully belongs to China. The US official stance is ambiguous, we haven't officially declared official support of Taiwan. The diplomatic route would be for the USA to give up Taiwan without a fight, much like Hong Kong's democracy disappeared overnight with very little said/done about it. I have my doubts that the USA will give up on Taiwan like we did with Hong Kong though.

Korea, different topic. Any attack there would mean running over 50,000 US soldiers. Korea could be blockaded too though.

North Korean artillery has a range of 40 km (standard round) and 60km (long-distance round). Seoul is 23km from the DMZ. The entire city would be leveled with only artillery strikes, no such "North Korean invasion" needed at all. Furthermore: its a well known fact that North Korean artillery positions are heavily fortified, designed to withstand a nuclear attack from the USA (Korean War was post-nuclear after all). Only a direct assault with land forces would deal with that entrenched artillery. As such, North Korea can easily level Seoul in its entirety.

Those 50,000 US Troops are there to invade if this scenario occurs. They'll be racing against the clock. North Korea on the other hand, just sits back and watches their artillery do all the work.

The only defense is a strong offense. But there's reason to believe our offense simply isn't capable of saving Seoul, or other major cities within 40km of the DMZ. We will probably win the war, but North Korea has many options to really hurt South Korea if it decides to go 100% crazy suicidal on us.

I have very little confidence in the ability to save South Korean cities in this scenario, but I have high confidence in "winning" in the long term, after months or years of combat. (Where "winning" is removing North Korea's ability to conduct such strikes again).

------------

Bonus points: the two scenarios can happen simultaneously. If North Korea decides to attack South Korea, China almost certainly will take advantage of US-weakness and use that as the time to attack Taiwan. Our military forces in the area would be forced to choose between helping South Korea or Taiwan. We will probably try to save both, but... its not like China is stupid about these things. They're savvy and opportunistic. They'll take any advantage they can get.

 

[zlobby]

Numbers mean more than you think when backed up by an air force and navy that's within a few hundred miles away. China has the obvious home field advantage. If China decides to invade Taiwan it will be American blood spilled .. not European. In order to fight a war across the other side of the globe you need an actual navy. That leaves everyone out of the picture other than the US, China and the Brits.


If this virus has taught me anything it's the fact that the global supply chain isn't what it was made up to be. It has some major deficiencies. I'm for whatever it takes to manufacture microchips in the US for our auto and defense industry. I don't want to see us have to rely on the likes of China, Taiwan, South Korea or the pseudo United States of Europe for microchips.

Well, I know one thing for sure. If someone openly attacks another country, it's gonna be all-out war pretty soon. And in all-out war numbers of soldiers will mean nothing at all.

Naturally, by another country I mean one of political or strategic value to some superpower. For example, not many African countrues fit the previous description, so it's pretty much battle royale for the local powers and the local peoples.

I also know this, the world, our wold, may seem very big, but our every action or lack thereof will sooner or later catch up with us, no matter how far away we think we are from danger.

 

[dragontamer5788]

Well, I know one thing for sure. If someone openly attacks another country, it's gonna be all-out war pretty soon. And in all-out war numbers of soldiers will mean nothing at all.

Both China and USA are nuclear powers. All-out-war probably won't happen. But if it does happen, we will all be dead.

It'd be a war of prestige: China would want to finally fix the Taiwan issue, while demonstrating to the world that it can win a fight vs the USA.

There probably wouldn't be any reason for North Korea to attack South Korea, but they're not exactly the most sane of nations. Little Kim isn't an idiot, but there's some kind of Game-of-Thones game being played in that monarchy. If some internal political reason comes out for people to doubt Kim's competence, monarchies (see Henry the VIII, or the Romanovs) are known to start wars to distract their internal populations. As such, the politics of that country can change at the drop of a hat.

 

[bug]

How important are microchips atm .. I enquired a few weeks ago about purchasing a 2022 Ford Maverick and was told by the salesman that I was looking at a 8 - 12 month wait.

Well, it's got 2022 right there in the name, doesn't it?

 

[Why_Me]

Well, it's got 2022 right there in the name, doesn't it?

They were scheduled to be shipped out en masse months ago.

https://www.ford.com/trucks/maverick/?gnav=header-trucks-vhp

 

[zlobby]

Why did China suddenly decide in the past few years to suddenly build a Navy that rivals the entirety of the US Navy? Why did China suddenly start building 3 aircraft carriers?

This all coincides with the 100-year anniversary of the CCP (2021) and of the PRC (2049). We know they like a big spectacle, we know they like wolf-warrior diplomacy. And... there's in fact a chance that they can beat the USA's Navy in this scenario. Given that chance, and the prestige associated with such a win, why wouldn't China try? (No, they can't rival us on the open seas. But "home turf advantage" means China's Navy will be operating in collaboration with its Air Force and missile-forces. In contrast, US Navy + US Marines will be the only thing reasonable to deploy to help Taiwan).

It all comes down to the confidence behind those "hypersonic ship-killing" missiles China has recently developed. If they think they can kill the US Capital ships, then they've pretty much won the fight. The carriers are the cornerstone of our naval strategy, and the airplanes on board would be necessary for helping Taiwan in almost any scenario. If our carriers are dead (or threatened to leave the area), China probably wins. (US Submarines may be effective... but submarines don't project force into Taiwan, so Taiwan's army would be on their own)

It all comes down to whether or not our AEGIS Cruisers can shoot down those missiles. A completely untested scenario. 3000mph hypersonic is really fast, and will be a challenge to shoot down.

------------

Remember: China's official stance on Taiwan is that Taiwan is in rebellion, and that Taiwan rightfully belongs to China. The US official stance is ambiguous, we haven't officially declared official support of Taiwan. The diplomatic route would be for the USA to give up Taiwan without a fight, much like Hong Kong's democracy disappeared overnight with very little said/done about it. I have my doubts that the USA will give up on Taiwan like we did with Hong Kong though.



North Korean artillery has a range of 40 km (standard round) and 60km (long-distance round). Seoul is 23km from the DMZ. The entire city would be leveled with only artillery strikes, no such "North Korean invasion" needed at all. Furthermore: its a well known fact that North Korean artillery positions are heavily fortified, designed to withstand a nuclear attack from the USA (Korean War was post-nuclear after all). Only a direct assault with land forces would deal with that entrenched artillery. As such, North Korea can easily level Seoul in its entirety.

Those 50,000 US Troops are there to invade if this scenario occurs. They'll be racing against the clock. North Korea on the other hand, just sits back and watches their artillery do all the work.

The only defense is a strong offense. But there's reason to believe our offense simply isn't capable of saving Seoul, or other major cities within 40km of the DMZ. We will probably win the war, but North Korea has many options to really hurt South Korea if it decides to go 100% crazy suicidal on us.

I have very little confidence in the ability to save South Korean cities in this scenario, but I have high confidence in "winning" in the long term, after months or years of combat. (Where "winning" is removing North Korea's ability to conduct such strikes again).

------------

Bonus points: the two scenarios can happen simultaneously. If North Korea decides to attack South Korea, China almost certainly will take advantage of US-weakness and use that as the time to attack Taiwan. Our military forces in the area would be forced to choose between helping South Korea or Taiwan. We will probably try to save both, but... its not like China is stupid about these things. They're savvy and opportunistic. They'll take any advantage they can get.

Let's not forget that in North Korea (aka Best Korea) they do have a crazy guy with nukes. He doesn't need much to use them and South Korea is the prime target for that.

Also, don't think that MAD will hold for very long. Simple fact is that all the nuclear alrsenal is in the hands of select few people. While in a nuclear war it's GG for the common folk, the said 'elite' can tuck away in their deep, deep bunkers. There are levels of survival they are prepared to face. It just sucks to be us.

 

[bug]

They were scheduled to be shipped out en masse months ago.

https://www.ford.com/trucks/maverick/?gnav=header-trucks-vhp

My sarcasm font didn't work, did it?

 

[Why_Me]

Well, I know one thing for sure. If someone openly attacks another country, it's gonna be all-out war pretty soon. And in all-out war numbers of soldiers will mean nothing at all.

Naturally, by another country I mean one of political or strategic value to some superpower. For example, not many African countrues fit the previous description, so it's pretty much battle royale for the local powers and the local peoples.

I also know this, the world, our wold, may seem very big, but our every action or lack thereof will sooner or later catch up with us, no matter how far away we think we are from danger.

Again if anyone comes to Taiwan's defense it will be the US meaning it will be American blood spilled ... not European.

 

[mechtech]

I'm so tired of huge corporate subsidies and either crumbs or nothing at all for regular people....the only way the government should give Intel money is a loan to be laid back with interest

If they implement a $300k cap (stocks, bonus, salary etc combined) they would have a lot more extra to invest in the corporation itself.

I remember 2008 the US government bailing out the corps, and all the execs just gave themselves a bonus with the cash.

Now if they want to sell controlling shares to the government they could raise more capital like that

 

[AlwaysHope]

Again if anyone comes to Taiwan's defense it will be the US meaning it will be American blood spilled ... not European.

America & its allies in the Pacific region, meaning Japan & Australia as well. You'll probably get the Philippines joining as well & then there is Indonesia... where do I stop?