• Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Again, a strangely confrontational near total agreement with my conclusions that China will be able to easily produce consumer-centered microchips and have difficulty closing the gap to cutting edge microchips.

    Two differences of opinion but I can see:

    1. You argue that progressively more advanced microchips don’t matter, I cannot see how having more advanced thinking machines is going to be a less important to automation, AI, national security going forward than they already are.

    2. you believe it’s only a matter of “throwing manpower at the situation” for the Chinese to catch up to TSMC, which does not bear out.

    If restaurant A has one cook that has created the most popular omelet through a set of interdependent recipes and complex creative cooking methods, and restaurant B next door hires a new cook every week, instructs them how to create an adequate omelette, and asks them to create a better omelet than the cook at A, restaurant B could easily be stuck with 100 cooks who have learned how to create an adequate omelette and are continuing that set of processes without ever finding a better recipe.

    It does not automatically follow that having more cooks is going to result in a better omelette.

    Culturally, Taiwan thrives on innovation and creativity. China survives by hierarchy, tradition and established processes.

    Again, it isn’t impossible that those one hundred cooks will come up with the perfect omelette, although it’s illogical to think all it takes is hiring more cooks and teaching them the recipe for an adequate omelette to create a better omelette then the cook at restaurant A.