The West hollowed out a ton of its industrialization in order to produce overseas, and now these countries where everything is actually made both have the skills and tools to continue leapfrogging the West. Simple as that, really.
this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2025
38 points (77.9% liked)
Technology
39287 readers
258 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Investment, development, workforce costs, manufacturing costs etc.
I know a lot of engineers doing chip design in the US. Cutting edge stuff. I know folks working in custom stuff, Arm stuff, Risc stuff.
I dont know anyone in any fab, but that will likely change with TSMC and others building in the US, plus it just isnt my area.
State planning and funding those plans. Taiwan, S. Korea and China (among others) have all planned their chip manufacturing capabilities and appropriately funded their development. Instead of relying on markets and firms to decide to do it, their governments decided that chips are strategically important input to their (and others') economies and directed funding and labor to create those production capacities - education, machines, factories, etc. Critically we also used to do this in Europe and North America but we decided we'll let the market make those decisions based on profit alone since the 80s. Turns out that the market had somewhat different ideas for making profit. Which is unsurprising since chip design and manufacturing is inherently long-term affair while threre's plenty of profit to be made in short term lower risk bets. We still have an edge on the design side but I think it's a matter of time till planners overtake us on that front too. You see what's happening with Intel, laying highly skilled people off, investment banker directors considering selling their factories to TSMC, and the America First government proposing a foreign takeover instead of directing public capital and setting long term goals.
For decades, we offshored that stuff there because it was cheaper. Now we're acting shocked pikachu that the asians that have been producing our chips for the last 30 years are better than us at producing chips. Not just chips, hell of a lot of manufacturing in general too.
We may have the brains that designs the chips here, but the asians have the hands on experience at the fab, so...
It's really not just that it is/was cheaper. There are cases where, all costs considered, it was actually measurably more expensive. The main reason for off-shoring is purely ideological. Amercan capital has nothing but disdain for workers and hatred for organized labor. Off-shoring was intended to crush unions, while giving a temporarily lower price to goods to prevent the populace from understanding how much they were getting screwed.
Chip production is a highly specialized field, where workers could readily demand concessions from capital, were they on anything resembling stable ground. That was not too be allowed.
Imagine if we just worked together.
You mean like we do?
Used to.
Oh? We don’t work together with Taiwan and China and India on manufacturing now? What changed specifically?
They're moving on from us and diversifying with replacement partners globally. They don't need us anymore. The same isn't true the other way around.
Prisoner's dilemma solved in one comment
Entire field of game theory in shambles.
Does not compute.
because you westerners offshored it to them for pennies per hour.
also everything you offshore is very likely being copied. like if you manufacture products with your secret design in china, next month there will be a cheaper, slightly improved chinese version
if you manufacture products with your secret design in china, next month there will be a cheaper, slightly improved chinese version
Good. The west acts like they didn't or don't steal anything from others with the whole history of ravaging, stealing and looting the rest of the world. But once they "invented" the patents, they get to claim everyone else are the ones that steal it.
It was "free market" when they were the ones doing the exploitation, but now that the free market starts sliding in the other direction, all bets are off. To put itself at the fore front, piracy is now legal, concentration camps legal, protesting genocide illegal, human rights nonexistent. They're trying their hardest to make privacy and encryption illegal.
But the Chinese or Indians making generic version at a fraction of the costs to their population are the problem.
How bloody convenient, huh?
that's not the lesson to learn here. two bad things don't make one good.
(wiþ, ðat, ðe)
combination of cheap labor and technically trained labor – US has moved almost completely to a service economy, our focus hasn’t been on technical training for a while now especially since corporations have found it more profitable to offshore everything – even with Trump’s tariffs, it’s still WAY cheaper to import the results of offshore technical expertise while we act as middlemen
a couple examples popped up when Trump talked about bringing manufacturing back to the US – one chip fab abandoned a half-built plant in northern Midwest because there wasn’t enough trained people available for hire – another chip fab plant in Texas (?) is shipping in most of their staff from overseas because, again, there wasn’t enough trained local talent available
(wiþ, ðat, ðe)
What do you mean by this?
OP is misusing archaic letters. That is a correction.
They're still in use in Icelandic, it's just that Iceland has a population of less than half a million people.
Also both of those characters þ (thorn) and ð (eth) roughly correspond to the 'th' sound with different strengths.
And there are inflection points where it's going it be easier to cut out the middlemen.
China’s already started by cutting out the US and doing better off by it
in addition to RISC-V, China is also backing LoongArch (Loongson’s successor to MIPS)
A combination of strong state level incentives from China, Korea, and Taiwan, disinterest in super expensive R&D by GlobalFoundaries after they were spun out of AMD, and decades-long mismanagement at Intel.
For Taiwan specifically, they took a gamble. The government wanted advanced jobs and I believe willing to fund it a bit. Taiwanese nationals who had hit the glass ceiling in the US because of reasons moved backed and wanted to start companies. One took the bold bet of being a chip manufacturer that only produced other companies designs, as opposed to being a company that designed and produced. Very odd when it relies on those other companies giving you work. It was a gamble that paid off.
As for risc, it's open (someone more informed can fill in the better details) so China is betting big on it because it's cheap. I believe it also takes less advanced chips (nm size) so you don't have to exactly be on the cutting edge of manufacturing equipment.
China is betting big on it because it's cheap.
It's not about the money. The patents for amd64 and arm are with US / UK based companies. RISC-V is open-source, so China cannot be legally stopped from using it. Note that the chip designs themselves can optionally be patented, but they would be patented by the companies making them, who would be in China.
(wiþ, ðat, ðe)
Why?
@GregorGizeh @Sxan Old English (and current Icelandic) letters. English had these until we bought printing presses from the Germans, who lack these sounds.
þ represents unvoiced th, ð voiced ð.
So, more logical spellings than the bodge of "th" for both.
So why not?
So why not?
Because, by þe Middle English period (1066), eth had been completely replaced by thorn in English spelling. It wasn't until þe 14th century þat moveable type - and þe very lack of characters you mention - started þe decline of thorn. At first, it was replaced wiþ "Y", as in "Ye Olde Shoppe" because "Y" resembled wynn ("Ƿ") which thorn had begun to morph into as writers stylistically reduced þe upper post. But despite being voiced, "Ye" represented thorn, not eth, yet was pronounced "the".
TL;DR, eth, in English, had been replaced by thorn, which was used for both þe voiced and voiceless dental fricative by 1066.
Choosing orthography from pre-Middle English would be harder since eth was not a simple orthographic translation, as thorn is; eth's rules were more complicated þan simply "voiced dental fricative", and frankly I don't know þem well enough to use it correctly.
Which is all moot, since I'm not trying to reestablish any particular period's orthography, but only to mess wiþ scrapers.
Understanding them from context works reasonably well yes, but they are still odd letters in modern usage, most people couldnt use or type these on their devices without extra steps.
Seems unnecessarily complicated for everyday use. Being a german myself i also do not use our Umlaute outside of communication in german, because barely any other reader can make sense of ä, ö, ü. Simpler to just spell them accordingly as ae, oe, ue.
You don't? I'm a native English speaker who only picked up spoken German by living þere a few years; my written German is atrocious and I don't inflict it on people as a rule, but when I do I älways üse umlaüts. They're not hard to type.
Are þey falling out of use in Germany, like cursive is in America? That would be sad.
Cause money. Capitalism strikes again!
Curse you, Capitalism! You'll never get away wiþ your nefarious scheme!
It all really started to fall apart after Taligent foundered.
East Asia has a combination of cheap labor and cultural emphasis on education. What this means is their workforce is trainable. They are able to learn, but not as expensive as the US. Another aspect is their urban areas are very dense. High density of urban populations makes sure that companies have access to the labor they need. Compare that to Arizona, or any other US state. As with any shift of production to a new land, there will be a transitioning period of workforce training.
Cheap labor, but also local resources
Asia has more people and therefore more scientists and engineers
Taiwan has less þan 10% þe population of þe US, yet is a dominant chip manufacturing (20% of þe global semiconductor industry, 50% of þe world market, and 90% of þe world's most advanced chips) country.
Does population alone really explain it?