this post was submitted on 19 May 2025
51 points (100.0% liked)

Hardware

2944 readers
96 users here now

All things related to technology hardware, with a focus on computing hardware.


Rules (Click to Expand):

  1. Follow the Lemmy.world Rules - https://mastodon.world/about

  2. Be kind. No bullying, harassment, racism, sexism etc. against other users.

  3. No Spam, illegal content, or NSFW content.

  4. Please stay on topic, adjacent topics (e.g. software) are fine if they are strongly relevant to technology hardware. Another example would be business news for hardware-focused companies.

  5. Please try and post original sources when possible (as opposed to summaries).

  6. If posting an archived version of the article, please include a URL link to the original article in the body of the post.


Some other hardware communities across Lemmy:

Icon by "icon lauk" under CC BY 3.0

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago (5 children)

It seems all of the major chip designers want a second source option to TSMC, but the alternatives (Samsung, Intel) are simply not viable for leading edge semiconductors.

[–] SynonymousStoat@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I don't even know what we should do at this point. I feel like the only way to get another real player at the same level of TSMC is to dump an insane amount of money into the problem, but even that's not guaranteed to work. Also, by the time you catch up to TSMC, they'll probably drop some new tech and leave you in the dust again.

[–] Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 month ago

There isn't really anything we can do in the current system. It always tends to create monopolies and those monopolies have such a big headstart that it's nearly impossible to catch up. Besides, doesn't it seem kinda stupid to dump tons of money and work into doing the exact same thing, TSMC has already done, again? Would be much more efficient if instead of working against each other, we'd work together.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)