[gofetch.git] / test / expected / SLASHDOT / 0102636958.html

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
  <meta http-equiv='content-type' content='text/html; charset=utf-8'>
  <meta name='viewport' content='width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0'>
  <style type='text/css'>
    body { margin: 1em 15%; }
  </style>
</head>
<body>
<div class='story'>
	<h2>Computer Chips Are Still 'Made in USA' (axios.com)</h2>
	<div class='details'>(Thursday September 06, 2018 @11:30PM (msmash) 
from the how-about-that dept.)</div>
	<br/>
    <ul>
    <li>Reference: <a href=''>0102636958</a></li>
        <li>News link: <a href='https://news.slashdot.org/story/18/09/06/1558206/computer-chips-are-still-made-in-usa'>https://news.slashdot.org/story/18/09/06/1558206/computer-chips-are-still-made-in-usa</a></li>
        <li>Source link: <a href='https://www.axios.com/computer-chips-manufacturing-america--10dcfe13-64f3-4ea9-ad4a-cb189a00429a.html'>https://www.axios.com/computer-chips-manufacturing-america--10dcfe13-64f3-4ea9-ad4a-cb189a00429a.html</a></li>
    </ul>
	<br/>
	<div class='content' style='text-align: justify'>
		For all the wishful thinking about manufacturing more laptops and iPhones in the U.S., there is [1]one sector of tech manufacturing where America remains a leader: computer chips . From a report:<br/><br/>&gt; Some $44 billion worth of semiconductors are exported from the U.S. each year, making them America&#x27;s fourth leading manufacturing export after cars, airplanes and refined oil. There are roughly 80 wafer fabrication plants (aka fabs) in the U.S., spread across 19 states. [...] An even greater share of the world&#x27;s computer chips are designed domestically and made overseas by companies including Qualcomm, Apple, Broadcom and Nvidia. A bunch of the high-tech gear needed to produce chips is also designed and/or made in the U.S.<br/><br/><br/><br/>[1] https://www.axios.com/computer-chips-manufacturing-america--10dcfe13-64f3-4ea9-ad4a-cb189a00429a.html
	</div>
<hr/>
  <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
    <h3></h3>
    <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'></div>
    <div class='comment_content'></div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by bobbied ( 2522392 )</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>Why?</p><p>Politics of course..</p></div>
      <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
        <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
        <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by Alwin Barni ( 5107629 )</div>
        <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>> Why?</p><p>> Politics of course..</p><p>Could you please expand?</p></div>
        <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
          <h3>Re:Why is it "wishful thinking"? (Score:5, Funny)</h3>
          <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 )</div>
          <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>>> Why?</p><p>>> Politics of course..</p><p>> Could you please expand?</p><p>P o l i t i c s o f c o u r s e.</p></div>
          <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
            <h3>Re: (Score:2, Funny)</h3>
            <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by Anonymous Coward</div>
            <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>>>> Why?</p><p>>>> Politics of course..</p><p>>> Could you please expand?</p><p>></p><p>> P o l i t i c s o f c o u r s e.</p><p>></p><p>I'm not sure if I should laugh, or hunt you down and smack you upside your head with a 2x4.</p></div>
            <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
              <h3>Re: (Score:3)</h3>
              <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by Highdude702 ( 4456913 )</div>
              <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>I mean, I thought it was hilarious, and it wasn't the name calling garbage you see here too often.</p></div>
            </div>
          </div>
          <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
            <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
            <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by Alwin Barni ( 5107629 )</div>
            <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>:-)</p><p>However:</p><p>expand ikspand/</p><p>verb</p><p>verb: expand; 3rd person present: expands; past tense: expanded; past participle: expanded; gerund or present participle: expanding</p><p>* become or make larger or more extensive</p><p>* give a fuller version or account of.</p></div>
            <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
              <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
              <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 )</div>
              <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>>  :-)</p><p>> However: expand - verb  ...</p><p>> (1) become or make larger or more extensive</p><p>> (2) give a fuller version or account of.</p><p>Yup, I know; I was married to an English teacher for 20 years, but using the first definition was funnier.  :-)</p><p>[1]Remember Sue... [tumblr.com]</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>[1] http://remembersue.tumblr.com/</p></div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Re: Why is it "wishful thinking"? (Score:1)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by Anonymous Coward</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>The only reason is automation. Jobs were never going to come back from chip manufacturing.</p><p>They have a factory crew for setting up the parts and feeding the machines. Pretty cheap, doesn't actually make much money for anyone but the corporation running it. It's all "unskilled" and low pay...setting up all those machines, getting material dimensions in spec and running the machine is just considered general labor.</p></div>
    </div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Re: (Score:3)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by YuppieScum ( 1096 )</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>> If the US leads in chip manufacture, why can't it be competitive in putting the pieces together?</p><p>Because most of the CPU silicon used in the commonest devices - phones and laptops - is fabbed in Asia.</p><p></p><p>Because most of the parts - like screens, RAM and flash storage - are also made in Asia, so it's cheaper to bolt it all together in a location closest to the source of the most parts.</p><p></p><p>Because final assembly of something like an iPhone is a manual process that requires the dexterity of nimble fingers. It's not quite the same as bolting doors onto a Chevvy.</p></div>
    </div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by GameboyRMH ( 1153867 )</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>Because it hardly has any of the pieces right now - it would be a massive effort to put all the supply chains in place for the various electronics components needed for a whole computer when the US currently makes little more than chips. Currently those supply chains are in Asia (which also has the advantages of cheap labor and lax environmental laws). I'd compare it to going from just making engine blocks to making a whole car, but that underplays the difficulty too much.</p></div>
    </div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by AHuxley ( 892839 )</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>Re "why can't it be competitive in putting the pieces together?"</p><p>Think back to the 1970 and 1980's when the CPU thing needed new production lines and was no longer low yield skilled lab work.</p><p>Non first world nations part pay their workers in food, dormitories. Their introduction to work is free as its part of the nations free "education".</p><p>Tax reductions and industrial export support then further supports the electronics brand in the poor nation.</p><p>No unions. Lots of pollution.</p><p></p><p>The big brands moved to ver</p></div>
    </div>
  </div>
  <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
    <h3>But for how long? (Score:2)</h3>
    <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by DMJC ( 682799 )</div>
    <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>Sure they still do, but China is beginning to manufacture X86 CPUs directly. It's only a matter of time until they catch up and crush Intel and AMD through undercutting, and throwing money at the problem. [1]https://www.tomshardware.com/n... [tomshardware.com]</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>[1] https://www.tomshardware.com/news/china-zen-x86-processor-dryhana,37417.html</p></div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by Dallas May ( 4891515 )</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>In the long run, yes. Probably not really soon. There are plenty of significant advances happening that space right now. They might market to the far low end PCs, but they aren't the market AMD and Intel really want anyway.</p></div>
    </div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by jon3k ( 691256 )</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>By then (10-20 years, if they're lucky) the desktop will be commoditized and mobile (ie laptops) mostly replaced with ARM. All the growth is in the server market and China is a long, long way from producing an X86 CPU that can compete with Intel Xeons. Who knows what the landscape will look like by then.</p></div>
      <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
        <h3>Re: But for how long? (Score:2)</h3>
        <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by adolf ( 21054 )</div>
        <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>This will also be the year of Linux on the desktop!</p></div>
        <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
          <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
          <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by tsa ( 15680 )</div>
          <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>Yeah, paradise is near!</p></div>
          <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
            <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
            <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by adolf ( 21054 )</div>
            <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>We're on the home stretch, boys!</p></div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by AHuxley ( 892839 )</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>As long as the NRO needs hand crafted space CPU products.</p></div>
    </div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by CaffeinatedBacon ( 5363221 )</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>But who will people trust to make their CPU's. Intel with their "management engine" and AMD etc all with the same is already freaking enough people out.</p><p>Who is going to want a Chinese CPU with who knows what running on it that you will never be able to see, has access to everything, and can do anything it wants to "your computer" and "your data".</p><p>Most countries would probably just ban them like they are [1]doing for 5G telecom equipment already.  [nytimes.com]</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/23/technology/huawei-banned-australia-5g.html</p></div>
    </div>
  </div>
  <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
    <h3>Yeah, but . . . (Score:5, Interesting)</h3>
    <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by dtmos ( 447842 ) *</div>
    <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>. . . computer chips with state-of-the-art lithography soon all will be manufactured overseas. Specifically, they will be made by exactly two companies, [1]Samsung [samsungfoundry.com] and [2]TSMC [tsmc.com], with GlobalFoundries' recent announcement that it is [3]stopping development of its 7nm process [anandtech.com]. GF operated the old IBM facility in Fishkill, NY, and AFAIK was the last company offering state-of-the-art foundry services with a fab in the US.</p><p>Intel is still in business, of course, and even has a [4]foundry business [intel.com], but it cannot seem to successfully operate it -- substantially all of its wafer starts are chips of its own design. With the capital cost of each new-generation fab reaching $20 billion, it's only a matter of time until Intel -- which has only its internal product base of chip designs to fill its fabs, while Samsung and TSMC make chips for the entire industry -- can no longer afford the move to the next generation.</p><p>If the rest of the semiconductor industry (or the US DoD) wants high-performance computer chips, there's now nowhere to go except Samsung and TSMC. It will be interesting to see what politicians do when they realize that the best digital chips can no longer be manufactured in the US. The choice seems to be either (1) have our economy -- everything from cell phones to missiles -- dependent on chips manufactured overseas, or (2) subsidize Intel's foundry business and the semiconductor equipment manufacturers to the tune of tens of $billions, just to keep a US source of high-performance semiconductors.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>[1] https://www.samsungfoundry.com/foundry/homepage.do</p><p>[2] http://www.tsmc.com/english/default.htm</p><p>[3] https://www.anandtech.com/show/13277/globalfoundries-stops-all-7nm-development</p><p>[4] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/foundry/overview.html</p></div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3></h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'></div>
      <div class='comment_content'></div>
      <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
        <h3>Re: (Score:3)</h3>
        <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by Dallas May ( 4891515 )</div>
        <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>The same reason they haven't produced a car yet. They could, but they don't want to. They have good deals with their current suppliers, so why make that investment?</p></div>
        <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
          <h3>The normal Transition of economies (Score:2)</h3>
          <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by aberglas ( 991072 )</div>
          <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>1. Primary production</p><p>2. Manufacturing</p><p>3. Services</p><p>Services will keep things going fine. Lawyers, tax accountants, retail and beauty consultants. That is where the growth will come from.</p></div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3></h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'></div>
      <div class='comment_content'></div>
      <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
        <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
        <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by nateman1352 ( 971364 )</div>
        <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>TI doesn't have state-of-the-art lithography for digital. They gave up on the Moore's Law race 10 years ago after they reached 45nm. TI realized during the development of WinRT that building CPUs requires very expensive fabs and if you are not an x86 supplier then your only option is to make ARM chips, which is a race to the bottom with very thin margins. TI realized they can make more money building mixed signal designs on older process.</p></div>
      </div>
    </div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Re:Yeah, but . . . (Score:4, Insightful)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by Graymalkin ( 13732 ) *</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>State of the art lithography is not a synonym for high-performance computer chips. In fact for a lot of uses, DoD included, state of the art lithography is nowhere in the requirements. Hardened chips on robust/insulated substrates is more important in many uses than smaller die traces.</p></div>
    </div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by KalvinB ( 205500 )</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>They'll be subsidized under issues of national security if they're really needed by the government. The government generally doesn't run bleeding edge technology so the chips that can be produced in the US will be plenty sufficient for government needs. If the government ever needs a $20 billion plant, they'll cut a check under the national defense budget.</p><p>We've been comfortable with foreign made chips for decades in the consumer market. Unless there is a severe national security issue that won't change.</p></div>
    </div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Re: (Score:2)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by nateman1352 ( 971364 )</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>Intel has the same fundamental problem with foundry that AMD had 10 years ago. Every 3rd party company does not trust Intel to prioritize their products over Intel's own products. Intel will always build their own products on the latest process node first. If you fab with Intel then your wafers will always get 2nd priority over Intel's own wafers. The only way that is not the case is if you are such a huge customer that your contract requires Intel to construct an entire new factory just for you. Then you h</p></div>
    </div>
  </div>
  <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
    <h3>Poor writing in TFA (Score:5, Informative)</h3>
    <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by whoever57 ( 658626 )</div>
    <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>"An even greater share of the world's computer chips are designed domestically and made overseas by companies including Qualcomm, Apple, Broadcom and Nvidia."</p><p>This reads as though Qualcomm, Apple, Broadcom and Nvidia are making chips. What would be clear and accurate is:</p><p>"An even greater share of the world's computer chips are designed domestically by companies including Qualcomm, Apple, Broadcom and Nvidia and made overseas."</p></div>
    <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
      <h3>Still somewhat misleading... (Score:4, Informative)</h3>
      <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by YuppieScum ( 1096 )</div>
      <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>Don't forget, a hefty chunk of Qualcomm's - and pretty much all of Apple's - designs are not original, but instead are based on IP from ARM, a British company (although recently bought out by SoftBank).</p><p></p><p>In fact, Broadcom and Nvidia are also licencees of ARM IP as well, but less of their overall product range derives from it.</p></div>
    </div>
  </div>
  <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
    <h3>Are you sure? (Score:3, Interesting)</h3>
    <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by Gabest ( 852807 )</div>
    <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>TSMC and Samsung are the leaders in chip making. And second class Intel and AMD both have shady Middle-East ties from Israel and Dubai.</p></div>
  </div>
  <div class='comment' style='display: block; margin-left: 80px'>
    <h3>13% market share is not good (Score:4, Interesting)</h3>
    <div class='by' style='font-style: italic;'>by Goldsmith ( 561202 )</div>
    <div class='comment_content'><p></p><p>This is a crazy article. At the end, it meekly points out that the US has a 13% market share in chip production. Given that the US started this industry, leads in design in this space, leads in capital available for high tech industry, and that the US accounts for 15% to 18% of global GDP, a 13% market share in chip production is very poor performance. This is below what you might expect for a simple commodity that depends only on domestic market size and way below what you'd expect for this industry.</p></div>
  </div>
</div>
</body>