In fact, an entire generation of SWEs who forgot the concepts of simplicity and efficiency, coding a never-ending avalanche of rubbish bloated apps is why we continually need new silicon.
Fab engineers in the US are fairly disposable because their existence isn't based on market needs but really as a hedge by the US to be independent. That's going to suck for you because TSMC isn't going to value you that much because you're not really business critical, you're just there to get government subsidies. In Taiwan it's another story and it's almost competitive with good SWE jobs.
Why do you have this idea ? I'm not sure it sounds more "just" than saying, for example, that tasks that are physically more challenging should pay more, or humanly more challenging should pay more, etc..
The truth is we don't need fab engineers because the applications we need to build require already "solved" hardware problems which are mostly supplied en-masse by a the few, large companies.
But, the deeper truth is that we don't need any of it... I have been recently and somewhat pleasantly surprised by how little I truly need. E.g., a 200$ chrome-book satisfies most of my needs. I have much, much beefier computers, hundreds of gigs of ram and multi-core processor, etc...all a waste. (I work as a software engineer and regularly find myself maxing my cores for things I don't really need).
If I could build my own hardware and have it actually do things, man, that would _useful_. Unlike this giant rickety tower of babel we have built...
Recent front page submission comes to mind XD
It's okay just to say that you like the money. You don't always have to use the largest words. It's also okay for someone to say that software engineers are paid lots of money. Perhaps too much.
-> how about starting a semiconductor company where people are paid more?
I'm assuming you're being facetious given the enormous logistical and financial costs of starting a somewhat up-to-date semiconductor company. But, maybe that's the point.
I'm not an SWE.
> You don't always have to use the largest words.
Some words have specific meanings, rather than just being longer synonyms for short words.
> Perhaps too much.
Again, no. This was my point — this is like saying that the solution to homelessness is to take away the homes of everyone with homes, so that everyone is now equally homeless.
Don't pay the people who are already getting a good deal less; pay the people who are currently getting a bad deal more.
> I'm assuming you're being facetious given the enormous logistical and financial costs of starting a somewhat up-to-date semiconductor company.
No. Just fucking do it. Start another company that's less complex but is an obvious money earner; get rich; reinvest your wealth into a semiconductor company. Should only take 10 years. If you care, do it.
If Elon can do it — and Elon is not the smartest man — you can do it too.
(To be clear, you don't have to start a company that competes in the wider semiconductor market; you just have to start a company that competes in a niche. Like, for example, 5G radios. But your goal does have to be to compete; getting acquired means you no longer have control over your own business strategy, incl. profit margins, and therefore can no longer make your company "the one where people get paid well.")
I can agree with this, definitely. I still don't think that it's that easy to start a semiconductor company for the average person considering the requisite expertise and scale of capital necessary. However, outside of the basic accounting, it's not really my area of expertise.