Senate Votes 64-34 to Advance Chips Bill | Hacker News Reader

Senate Votes 64-34 to Advance Chips Bill

wsj.com

10 pointsstereoradonc7 comments

I hate this. I truly believe that Intel swindled the government by playing up the fear of TSMC taking over and China invading Taiwan to "acquire" TSMC. Also, chip shortages are ending fast. We might soon have a surplus of chips because of capacity expansion in response to Covid but demand is declining or returning to normal.

Now tax payers have to hand over $54 billion mostly to Intel and other rich semiconductor companies.

"Also, chip shortages are ending fast" Working in robotics, everyone is desperate to buy chips. Chip lead times are still extremely long and there is no indication when the semiconductor industry will be returning to normal. Not sure where you are getting this perspective? China absolutely subsidizes their tech industry, so a healthy free market economy is not reality. If the U.S. is going to spend money on anything, home-grown semiconductors is a great option. Maybe there is valid criticism for some of the semiconductor companies for off-shoring and transferring knowledge and manufacturing to 3rd parties. But creating high skilled jobs for U.S. engineers and domestic manufacturing would be very beneficial to the U.S.

You can have a shortages in one area of chip manufacturing but still have a surplus in others.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/analyst-predicts-end-of-ch...

I can find articles saying there will be a surplus, and the shortage will continue, so not sure. I would agree that there will probably be a lot of unbalances in the supply before the situation settles.

I love this.

There is no alternative but to having American competency at making chips. Relying on the rest of the world (*one small island nation) to do this is unsafe. Shocks must be guarded against. This is an existential risk to any society, as a number of sanctioned countries have seen time & time again.

Having foundry capabilities here will insure ongoing American talent in the realm, and insure chip making opportunities are open to new & existinf companies.

The cost is tiny for enormous security.

>The cost is tiny for enormous security.

Security and x86? I would maybe not hate this if there were a stipulation that these companies must move beyond x86 with a completely new architecture, something more reasonable for the modern era. Theres too much legacy crud that just muddies the waters when trying to learn how to program these contraptions. Maybe some way to completely disable speculative / out-of-order execution. What are WE getting out of this? By WE I mean non-giant-chip-conglomerate shareholders/welfare queens.

http://archive.today/elJm5

Reply on news.ycombinator.com