News broke that the US, Netherlands, and Japan agreed to restrictions on DUV lithography equipment, but there are still many gaping holes in the new restrictions regarding equipment, chemicals, and component supply chains.
There is no long term vision for the sanctions. Do we really think with all the scientists and engineers that China has and will have, they won't be producing all these tools? 2 years ago we didn't imagine they would be producing chips at 7nm. I suspect they've been working on them for several years already.
If they start building these tools, western supply chain will be devastated.
There absolutely is vision, but poor execution. China already are trying to and will spend on building it's own equipment.
It has happened 100s of different supply chains through decades of state-sponsored corporate espionage, hacking, dumping, and draconian restrictions including forced tech transfers for market access.
This was without any relatilitory actions.
Sanctions would only slow the Chinese efforts, not accelerate them.
Yes you absolutely right, 30 years steel copy, even today thousands off Chinese students are are in top Uni all over the world!! Leaning because Chinese uni are still not good, and looking for jobs to steel and copying
the problem with engineering experts is that they miss the big picture for the trees. semiconductor manufacturing is not the petroleum industry, it does not take millions of years of geological processes to mint wafers. by definition it can be copied relentlessly, the only question is how long and how much money is required to get the desired outcome.
i've heard all the same bullshit applied to turbofan engines in the last decade-- the PRC was too inexperienced to build high bypass turbofans, they have no originality and can't copy etc. meanwhile the WS-20 already powers the Y-20 transporter.
The market is not a place for dominance by any single entity; everyone exists as a part of the market. Indeed, Chinese researchers could attempt to replicate the same equipment, but by the time they have managed to do so, market leaders have already moved on to researching the next advanced technology. Where will the leaders be when the followers have found the answers they seek? By that same time, it's likely that the leaders have already discovered even more advanced technology and begun to enjoy the greater productivity it might brought. So, if the productivity of the new technology greatly surpasses that of the old, how can the costs invested in replicating the old technology be recuperated? Moreover, for the researchers who have devoted a great deal of effort on a technology that will soon be obsolete or abandoned by the market /by the world, how would they feel as an aspiring scientist? if it's not good, then why would a talented successor chose to follow their path? The blockades practiced by the USA are not intended to destroy the opponents outright, because the think tanks know they should not and can not do that. Therefore, the role they are trying to play is to pretend themselves as a cat toying with its prey, or a snake entangling its catch, aiming to hold back the enemy and hoping to exhaust them to death. In Economic perspective, this is a strategy to maximize the attack capabilities by leveraging their comparative advantage. Nobody knows if this is an effective tactic overtime, but at least it will make the enemy know we're not to be messed with.
They not, they have steel and copying it , we talking about the Chinese, not all Asian people,
And you really think in the West we all sleep from now on?? You not wonder why we so far ahead if they so clever how come thousands off Chinese come to Uni's all over the world, they come because we know it
The Chinese have thousands of years of experience inventing things and all you talk about is they "steeling" and copying. I think your arrogance and persistent negative narrative on others would be your downfall.
“Decades of state-sponsored corporate espionage, hacking, dumping, and draconian restrictions including forced tech transfers for market access from China have led to retaliatory sanctions on China’s access to the 21st century’s most important industry, semiconductors“
The official reason for the sanctions is national security not what you wrote. I don’t think what you wrote is correct regardless, this is part of a wider goal to contain China economically so it doesn’t threaten US hegemony. There have been very few proven cases of corporate espionage and the joint venture model which I believe is the source of the “forced tech transfer” complaints is optional. These companies are not being forced to do anything. Also recently Tesla entered into the China market with no joint venture. I believe there are many other companies too (apple, Microsoft?)
Thanks, this is really useful. I'm a bit confused by this bit:
> The complete lack of restrictions around photoresists represents a significant hole that governmental regulations have not contemplated. [...] Shipment of photoresists must also be stopped as Western governments do not know what process node existing DUV tools are being used.
Good note. Thank you.
There is no long term vision for the sanctions. Do we really think with all the scientists and engineers that China has and will have, they won't be producing all these tools? 2 years ago we didn't imagine they would be producing chips at 7nm. I suspect they've been working on them for several years already.
If they start building these tools, western supply chain will be devastated.
There absolutely is vision, but poor execution. China already are trying to and will spend on building it's own equipment.
It has happened 100s of different supply chains through decades of state-sponsored corporate espionage, hacking, dumping, and draconian restrictions including forced tech transfers for market access.
This was without any relatilitory actions.
Sanctions would only slow the Chinese efforts, not accelerate them.
Yes you absolutely right, 30 years steel copy, even today thousands off Chinese students are are in top Uni all over the world!! Leaning because Chinese uni are still not good, and looking for jobs to steel and copying
US sanctions greatly increased Chinese investment in semiconductor industry.
Wrong. Made in china 2020.
Not necessarily true. Without the sanctions, they were happily buying our products. Now they are spending hundreds of billions to make themselves.
That's factually incorrect. See made on china 2020. Smic andymtc are simple examples. Naura acmr amec are others.
the problem with engineering experts is that they miss the big picture for the trees. semiconductor manufacturing is not the petroleum industry, it does not take millions of years of geological processes to mint wafers. by definition it can be copied relentlessly, the only question is how long and how much money is required to get the desired outcome.
i've heard all the same bullshit applied to turbofan engines in the last decade-- the PRC was too inexperienced to build high bypass turbofans, they have no originality and can't copy etc. meanwhile the WS-20 already powers the Y-20 transporter.
The market is not a place for dominance by any single entity; everyone exists as a part of the market. Indeed, Chinese researchers could attempt to replicate the same equipment, but by the time they have managed to do so, market leaders have already moved on to researching the next advanced technology. Where will the leaders be when the followers have found the answers they seek? By that same time, it's likely that the leaders have already discovered even more advanced technology and begun to enjoy the greater productivity it might brought. So, if the productivity of the new technology greatly surpasses that of the old, how can the costs invested in replicating the old technology be recuperated? Moreover, for the researchers who have devoted a great deal of effort on a technology that will soon be obsolete or abandoned by the market /by the world, how would they feel as an aspiring scientist? if it's not good, then why would a talented successor chose to follow their path? The blockades practiced by the USA are not intended to destroy the opponents outright, because the think tanks know they should not and can not do that. Therefore, the role they are trying to play is to pretend themselves as a cat toying with its prey, or a snake entangling its catch, aiming to hold back the enemy and hoping to exhaust them to death. In Economic perspective, this is a strategy to maximize the attack capabilities by leveraging their comparative advantage. Nobody knows if this is an effective tactic overtime, but at least it will make the enemy know we're not to be messed with.
They not, they have steel and copying it , we talking about the Chinese, not all Asian people,
And you really think in the West we all sleep from now on?? You not wonder why we so far ahead if they so clever how come thousands off Chinese come to Uni's all over the world, they come because we know it
The Chinese have thousands of years of experience inventing things and all you talk about is they "steeling" and copying. I think your arrogance and persistent negative narrative on others would be your downfall.
“Decades of state-sponsored corporate espionage, hacking, dumping, and draconian restrictions including forced tech transfers for market access from China have led to retaliatory sanctions on China’s access to the 21st century’s most important industry, semiconductors“
The official reason for the sanctions is national security not what you wrote. I don’t think what you wrote is correct regardless, this is part of a wider goal to contain China economically so it doesn’t threaten US hegemony. There have been very few proven cases of corporate espionage and the joint venture model which I believe is the source of the “forced tech transfer” complaints is optional. These companies are not being forced to do anything. Also recently Tesla entered into the China market with no joint venture. I believe there are many other companies too (apple, Microsoft?)
Hi Dylan, do you have an update on the impact on den semi supply chain names given latest regulatory events? Many thanks
Thanks, this is really useful. I'm a bit confused by this bit:
> The complete lack of restrictions around photoresists represents a significant hole that governmental regulations have not contemplated. [...] Shipment of photoresists must also be stopped as Western governments do not know what process node existing DUV tools are being used.
Doesn't ECCN 3C002 place restrictions on all the relevant photoresists? Or am I misunderstanding something? https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-B/chapter-VII/subchapter-C/part-774#Supplement-No.-1-to-Part-774
I'm not familiar with legal code. I do know that resist isn't restricted though.
Placeat quis in eiu
?
When will be i phone sold under 100usd?