I remember when their cars were a joke, and when their cellphones were cheap trash. Now I don't think I'd buy a non-Chinese new car or cellphone, lol.
This doesn't mean they will always be behind though.
If I was ASML I would have an AI generated honeypot of techniques that are plausible but incorrect for China to go after on this and make sure you get hacked by them.
This isn't to say that automated translation is bad, I use it extensively, but not all interaction worth having is online.
Many cultures will probably much rather interact with a foreigner speaking proficient AI translation, than a language-learner speaking with a poor accent and constant grammatical imperfections. Go to the Netherlands now as a Dutch learner who hasn't reached B2 level, for example, and local people won't like it, it just wastes their time compared to using English.
Washington, via the recent MATCH Act, has requested ASML to not supply or maintain any of the older equipment.
ASML has travelled to Washington to tell US Congress to take a long walk off a short pier.
No, not in this case.
> I remember when their cars were a joke, and when their cellphones were cheap trash.
Any country can make cars and phones now if they REALLY want to, they just don't because they wouldn't be competitive on the global market at performance and at scale. But not anyone can just make an EUV machine if they want to.
Becoming a leader in commodity white goods like a phones and cars is a different beast than EUV machines. The challenges are not even remotely comparable.
China doesn't have a Zeiss, it doesn't have an ASM, it doesn't have a Cymer, it doesn't have a Trumpf, and it doesn't have a dozen other domestic competitors to western suppliers of critical parts that make an EUV machine.
And each of those suppliers, like Zeiss for example, is a leader because it has decades of expertise that can't be speed-run, even with IP theft. So before China can have an ASML it first needs a Zeiss. So ask yourself where is their Zeiss and are they beating the west's Zeiss?
The "moat" we're talking about with private companies is that it's very hard for competitors to get enough funding to compete, and private investors are unwilling to invest in a company that will compete with a big established player. That's completely different when a state has a strategy and decides to invest to achieve a goal.
They were promised upwards mobility, but their leaders need factory workers, more than ever.
Chinese factories are more automated than ever. More and more skilled chinese do skilled white collar work not repetitive factory assembly work.
It might take them a decade, but they'll get there. Working on the basis that you can somehow stop China rather than merely delaying them is a comforting illusion.
Where's the proof in that? China can't even create jet engines that outperform dated soviet designs even when they bought their IP. Some things are just almost impossible to do without the right people at the right time, and you can spend virtually unlimited money and still never get there.
Russia does not have a 5th generation engine core in even the validation phase.
China has a 5th generation engine core the WS-15, it has not only passed validation but is currently in mass production.
A true 5th generation engine core allows true supercruise
You can see the gap between the F-22, J-20 and Su-57
The F-22 supercruises from mach 1.5 -> mach 1.8 (This is because they have 5th gen engines, and is it burns its fuel stores)
The J-20 supercruises at mach 1.4 -> mach 1.8 (This is because the J-20 has a much larger internal fuel load, vs the F-22 as it burns this fuel it speeds up)
The Su-57 super cruises at mach 1.3 -> mach 1.5 (This is because it has a 4th gen engine, the actual 5th gen engine intended to power the SU-57 is stuck in development hell the Izdeliye 30 (or AL-51F1) so Russia put a souped up 4th gen engine inside the SU-57 the AL-41F1 which is the same core as the AL-31F. If they do complete their 5th gen engine the SU-57 is expected to supercruise at mach 1.8-> mach 2.0 as it burns up its fuel. Su-57 accepts more stealth penalties in exchange for superior aerodynamics.
It has the Changchun Institute of Optics, Fine Mechanics and Physics (CIOMP)
Founded 1952. One of its things:
>4-Metre Silicon Carbide (SiC) Mirror: CIOMP successfully manufactured the world's largest single-piece Silicon Carbide mirror blank. It provides the optical backbone for high-resolution space telescope imaging systems
Apparently carbide mirrors are used for EUV lithography.
Nature article + pic of mirror https://www.nature.com/articles/s41377-022-01050-w
Producing 10x of 10-years old GPUs is not exactly useful for modern AI codebases for instance.
This matters for AI datacenters in particular, if they want to be autonomous in building them they need to be able to build advanced microprocessors locally.
So are modern Western cars - and arguably also phones.
If I'm forced to drive in a bug-riddled impossible-to-repair privacy-invading spaceship either way, why would I go for the overpriced outdated Western one rather than the affordable innovative Chinese one?
I would prefer a boring 2000s car with an electric drivetrain, but it's not like anyone is making them...
Vendor-lock is quite high, possibly higher in the US.
Look at iPhone, hardware is behind, restricted, unauditable privacy and questionable software in terms of performance (especially starting iOS 26, where you lost the choice for Liquid Glass).
Impossible to reasonably sync AirPods or watches, Macbook or choose the firmware version.
In comparison, the irony is that China offers the freedom (like with Qwen).
On these supposedly evil Chinese devices (phones, headphones, watches, etc), you have an open platform with great hardware, that you can modify as much as you want, and the only people who restrict you is... Google (making sure you cannot root without losing to important apps, so technically you can root, but practically you can't).
All the claims about "China = bad hardware and bad software" were true 20 years ago, but this is not the case anymore.
That being said, should certainly be quite cautious about default setup... you have US surveillance, PLUS, Chinese surveillance.
btw after one pixel with swollen battery I'm never buying one again, but I have to admit they have great cameras, reasonable dimensions and easily unlockable bootloader, sadly it's wrote pointless with faulty unreliable hardware and shit bare bone software
My in law has a BYD Seagull, fail to see how it lags compared to similarly priced cars.
Chinese cars are incredibly popular in Europe, because they are better cars at the same price tag, even the more expensive ones.
I think it's asinine to think their high end manufacturing is crap, keeps us non competitive, let alone ignoring most of our stuff or large parts of it already comes from China.
And it has nothing to do with wages, modern high end manufacturing is highly automated and skilled engineers are as expensive as in southern or central Europe.
It's like those people thinking Aliexpress/Temu products are subsidized by Chinese gov, not realizing that Ali/Temu is extremely expensive and you can buy products there for like 1/2 - 1/10th of their price in Chinese online shops (especially Pinduoduo), people claiming China is subsidizing this and that don't realize how cheap is to produce products. Been in China last summer, bought 4 big suitcases full of things mostly from Pinduoduo.
What have you tried so far on a daily basis to say this?
Have you tried latest Huawei models?
By the way, Foxconn makes iPhones, does it count as Chinese quality or not?
as for the cars, I'd agree maybe compared to most western brands, but the question is whether is worth paying 30-100% extra for only slightly better western car
But I agree that, given enough time, China should be able to. But Volvo en Tesla handing over IP themselves, and phone makers letting China produce and assemble phones (maybe not as extensive these days anymore) is something different.
EDIT: I mentioned Saab when I meant Volvo. Not sure if people downvoted based on that, I have no info on Saab so consider that as a mistake.
China has Money and Smart people. (and very effective corporate / nationstate espionage) so they can most certainly reproduce advanced machines.
They might not have incentive yet to do it because it will not make them popular, and potentially output products would be banned on US/EU. They play a long game and want US and EU consumers to ask tehir governments to please allow the chinese products.. so their market share is safe and stable.
I think once there is enough incentive for them they would do it. They simply do not want to do it currently.
> people overstate complexity of ASmL machines. They are not impossible to make or use, specialist work sure but its possible. The only reason why no one does it is: 1) IP laws, 2) Costs
The real reasons are: enormous complexity, lots of original research involved, deeply specialized supply chains. Recreating that takes lots of time and money. Even if you cut corners and steal IP. So that leaves China with 'time' as the real impediment. And who knows, AI will be a boost to get to that goal?
And they only allocated a small number of employees and resources to bring their first EUV machine to market?
ASML had 7,685 employees prior to their EUV success (Including contracts), of these 7,685 employees only 2500 were engineers. ASML put half of these engineers to develop the NXE:3100 and they only spent 10 billion dollars.
So total resources = 1250 engineers, 10 billion to make EUV a reality and 13 years.
So yes the complexity and difficulty of EUV machines is vastly overstated. The amount of resources spent on it is coins found in couch cushions to huge mega corps.