Slashdot Mirror


America's Chipmakers Go To War vs. China (axios.com)

Chinese raids of U.S. intellectual property have helped China build a solid high-tech economy. But the U.S. semiconductor industry is still far ahead -- and China is desperate to catch up. From a report: Semiconductor manufacturers are fighting to protect IP from the Chinese, fearing that, without coherent action from the Trump administration, Beijing could bulldoze their industries. Three weeks ago, Micron and South Korean chipmakers Samsung and SK Hynix all reported that the Chinese government had launched antitrust probes into their firms, and accused them of setting artificially high prices for memory chips. American companies and the U.S. government have long been suspicious about the link between China's anti-monopoly policies and its industrial goals. "They want access to the intellectual property. They need us to teach them how to do it. Once they have the industry, they want to push us out," an industry source familiar with China's investigation into Micron tells Axios. The price hikes, the source says, are largely due to a boom in demand for memory chips in everything from smartphones to autonomous vehicles. China's investigation is "a clear indication that they're not ready to make [semiconductors] work," says the source. The New York Times has a story which also details the lawsuit of how a Fujian govt-backed chipmaker allegedly stole secrets from Micron. Then Micron got sued for patent infringement in Fujian.

Or as the Times reporter describes it, "This is how you lose a major tech company. First, a Beijing-backed buyout offer. Then friendly Chinese partnership proposals. Then the tech gets stolen. Then when you file a complaint in court, you get hit with investigations in China, your biggest market."

110 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. Once they have the industry, they want to push us by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >> Once they have the industry, they want to push us out

    This is news? I remember visiting a couple of mid-to-high tech companies doing business in China ten years ago and every company was structured the same way: the one or two foreigners running the plant and the hundreds or thousands of local Chinese doing everything.

    If chipmakers don't like the way China works...why not try building elsewhere instead of whining about industry protections aimed at a specific country (that screw up things for lots of other people)?

  2. Made in...China. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And just how much of this IP drain was due to outsourcing?

    1. Re: Made in...China. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Only about roughly 100%

    2. Re:Made in...China. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      All hobbyists I know send their board designs to a company who manufactures their PCBs in China, using industry standard chips made in china.

      I've only ever met one person who likes to design their own integrated circuits but they do it for the fun of it and the mental exercise and as far as I know, haven't actually manufactured any of their designs due to the prohibitively expensive equipment required to build a modern IC from scratch these days.

      I certainly don't know of any maker spaces that feature such equipment either, though it might be awesome to have.

  3. Short Term Capitalism by DalM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is capitalism's Achilles Heel. Businesses are run on short term thinking. Sure your trade secrets are going to get stolen and they are going to use your tech to kick you out of there market in two years, but don't you want to do business in China today? Selling in the Chinese market will increase your stock price next quarter.

    Nevertheless, in the long term (multigenerational term), it doesn't matter, they are going to figure it out for themselves one way or the other anyway.

    1. Re:Short Term Capitalism by sinij · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nevertheless, in the long term (multigenerational term), it doesn't matter, they are going to figure it out for themselves one way or the other anyway.

      This is nonsense. It does matter in the long term. In one scenario they are generations behind and keep paying West for innovation that is invented there, and in other scenario they stole all the tech and compete with West, only without having to pay amortization for the cost of innovation.

    2. Re:Short Term Capitalism by sinij · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Look at this way, if Tech X takes 1Bil to develop and 0.5Bil to set up facilities to produce, Western firm has to recoup 1.5Bil and Chinese firm has to recoup 0.5Bil. Consequently, selling the same Tech X Chinese firms can undercut Western firms by a great deal. This is not because of cheaper labor, but because IP is essentially free to Chinese.

    3. Re: Short Term Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Selling into a competitive market is a good thing. Manufacturing in that market is stupid. They have trained their competition and their competition's country does not care if they steal IP. After all, it is the duty of any country to seek what is best for its citizens; without regard for the citizens of other countries. The North America and Europe are about to learn why.

    4. Re: Short Term Capitalism by DalM · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "and in other scenario they stole all the tech and compete with West, only without having to pay amortization for the cost of innovation."

      The third, and most likely, scenario is that -over the next few generations- innovation in chip design becomes a diminishing investment, the patents expire, and microchips become commodities just like every other industry.

      Consider this: today there are not very many significant paper plate patents filed. Paper plates, while once innovative, are a commodity product. If you want, you could start your own paper plate business and try to sell your plates. But basically the only thing you would have to sell on is your brand, your product is going to be basically the same as everyone else's. It's a paper plate. Micro chips are, eventually, going to go the same way. The patents will expire and anyone who wants to make and sell microchips will be able to do so.
      It's inevitable. It's just a matter of time.

    5. Re:Short Term Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The only problem with your idea is that China easily has 1Bil. People and Dollars. If you try to exclude them they will be just as capable as you eventually(/in a short time if they spy a bit), and their market will still be blocked from you, and bigger than yours. So they will also have better scale.

      Or the simplistic version, Made in China 2025, They will spend hundreds of billions on it anyway and beat you, so you may as well make some profit while you can.

    6. Re:Short Term Capitalism by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

      The only problem with your idea is that China easily has 1Bil. People and Dollars. If you try to exclude them they will be just as capable as you eventually(/in a short time if they spy a bit), and their market will still be blocked from you, and bigger than yours. So they will also have better scale.

      Or the simplistic version, Made in China 2025, They will spend hundreds of billions on it anyway and beat you, so you may as well make some profit while you can.

      China has absolutely terrible demographics and that one billion old people will be a mill stone around their necks. Waiting them out is exactly the right move. Moreover you're mischaracterizing this. They aren't excluded, just not able to steal hard won technology.

    7. Re:Short Term Capitalism by sinij · · Score: 1

      West is still leading China in innovation. It is not given that Chinese could catch up to West on their own. China has more people, but they don't produce the same level of innovation on per capita, whatever the reasons are.

      The way I see it, the only way China could compete with West on innovation if we give them all the tech and provide innovation roadmap.

    8. Re:Short Term Capitalism by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and the board will crucify you for "leaving money on the table" if you take the long view and tell the chinese to fuck off.

    9. Re:Short Term Capitalism by soc_cost_priv_gains · · Score: 1

      You mean like Google?

    10. Re:Short Term Capitalism by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      And why is that insightful?

      You still failed to explain: why does it matter?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    11. Re:Short Term Capitalism by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      And why does that matter?

      Why are you so greedy (your example is wrong anyway) that you don't grant them the saving in costs? Why do you demand they have to spent the extra money to "develop" it?

      This is not because of cheaper labor, but because IP is essentially free to Chinese. Actually it is not ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    12. Re:Short Term Capitalism by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      I give you the tea bag phenomena
      Yes, capitalism to these people is a religion

  4. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Reminds me of that old saying about "lying down with dogs, waking up with fleas". Just what exactly did they expect to happen? Also we're not much better with companies buying off other companies employees.

  5. dont want this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    then employ americans and dont outsource and subsidize stem subjects in education

  6. The corporation-syndicates have declared war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Many will die in the intel vs jinhua wars.

  7. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by AHuxley · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The US gov like it that way going back to the 1970's when the USA split China from close deals with the Soviet Union.
    For that to work China got a lot of US tech for free. US brands got invited into China. Low tax, low wages. Production lines that could make a profit with every generation of tech.
    The only trick was the USA would have to transfer the tech production methods so the new factories in China could make the most profit.
    To share everything the US brand had created with a local partner in a Communist nation.
    No tech transfer, no production line. The US brands opted to invest in 1970-80's China rather that much more secure and pro US nations with the same wages.
    Now China understands the US tech it wants to export everything under its own Communist brands at full price to the world.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  8. apple can pull out foxcon has lots of land in WI b by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    apple can pull out foxcon has lots of land in WI build Iphones in the usa!

  9. trump is right the China deal is bad for the USA! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    trump is right the China deal is bad for the USA!

  10. haha - tech rapidly changes by iggymanz · · Score: 2

    the tech for fab is a moving target, and we're right at the point where new tech is needed to go with any finer feature pitch. China will only be able to play catch-up

    1. Re:haha - tech rapidly changes by houghi · · Score: 1

      They are equals in many things and have the knowledge to become better extremely fast. They can push out products much faster and sooner and cheaper. Development is already done for a big part in China for many, many products.

      The reason we think of China as 'cheap and low quality' is because that is what the market wants. That is what people buy. And if they want the quality of other things, remember that that is made in China as well. You ask and they make it AND develop it. Soon you will not need to ask anymore,

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:haha - tech rapidly changes by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      The new hotness is doing a new revision of older processes where manufacturing with fewer masks can be (relatively) cheap, and looser design rules make churning out a design faster.

  11. Abolish patents. by stooo · · Score: 1

    Make it free in the rest of the world also.
    IP is outdated anyway.
    Abolish patents.

    --
    aaaaaaa
    1. Re:Abolish patents. by sinij · · Score: 1

      You can't abolish patents, as that will stop a lot of innovation. That is, you will have competition on efficiencies, but no competition on features and technologies. In a world without patents our PCs would be running 8086 chips made on 4nm fabs sold at 1$ a dozen.

    2. Re:Abolish patents. by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      The primitive form of 'patent' is called a 'secret'.

      Eliminating patents doesn't eliminate innovation, it eliminates innovations falling into public domain on a set schedule.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:Abolish patents. by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      Not universally true. Even when true, can be mitigated.

      How do you make Damascus steel? (Not the folded and welded modern replica, the crucible steal with natural high carbon islands).

      How do you make a Stradivarius?

      Before patents, inventions were kept secret and lost about as often as they became generally known.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    4. Re:Abolish patents. by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      In a world without patents our PCs would be running 8086 chips made on 4nm fabs sold at 1$ a dozen.

      Imagine a Beowulf cluster made out of those!

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    5. Re:Abolish patents. by sinij · · Score: 1

      You fail to recognize that these were methods of production and not actual innovations. How to make a violin is known, how to make Stadivarius is not. If you want a better musical instrument, you need patents. If you want a better violin, you don't. Hence my reference to 8086 chip.

    6. Re:Abolish patents. by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      The "secret" of Damascus steel is a naturally occurring alloy (wootz steel) that came from certain mines in India. That was traded to Damascus and forged there into weapons. Then sold across the Muslim empire. Once the mines with that alloy were exhausted it stopped being manufactured with the same degree of quality. Centuries later people have tried to reproduce its properties. One example would be Bulat steel.

  12. Re:apple can pull out foxcon has lots of land in W by Jfetjunky · · Score: 1

    They are referring to IC's not finished consumer products. There is a huge amount of IP related to the highest-tech integrated circuits. In many cases, such as Intel, they were able to out-accelerate many competitors because they were not only developing new designs for the processors themselves, but they were also developing cutting edge design tools and processes along with them to keep innovation moving.

    That's a huge stumbling block if you're a smaller firm just trying to jump into the ring with a big player.

  13. Re:I don't think it's going to work by stooo · · Score: 2

    You didn't ask for the right quantities.
    Ask for 10k parts, you'll get reasonable prices.

    --
    aaaaaaa
  14. Hooray for Outsourcing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Been in the industry for a long time and this was always an obvious end result. It's cheaper to have China do your stuff, so you give them access to all your IP and then complain when your IP makes the rounds. Tough shit. Should have paid your workers instead of giving your CEO a 10 million dollar annual salary.

    1. Re:Hooray for Outsourcing. by King_TJ · · Score: 1

      Except the problem is, the claim they should have paid their workers better doesn't tend to matter much if that CEO walked away with 10 million a year by letting things go down the tubes with all the IP stolen. He or she got a good run of highly paid years and chance are, will be in a short list considered for hire by the next big corporation.

  15. Fake paid poster. by i286NiNJA · · Score: 2

    There is no way you're this dumb and yet posting on slashdot unless someone paid you. I can make a transistor at home out of toothpaste but I could never dependably build much out of them because they're crude and inconsistent.
    I might be able to litho a primitive IC but I can't make a 10nm wafer and I certainly couldn't design and arrange it's components with the efficiency of intel or AMD

    I have no idea why you made this post or who paid you. Are the Chinese paying you?

    1. Re:Fake paid poster. by Beyond+Opinion · · Score: 1

      I'm intrigued; can you really make a a transistor at home out of toothpaste? Normally I would assume this is hyperbole, but I really, really want it to be true.

    2. Re:Fake paid poster. by hamburger+lady · · Score: 3, Funny

      little-known fact: the red and blue striped parts of aqua fresh are N- and P-doped.

      --

      ---
      Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
    3. Re:Fake paid poster. by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      Sadly I can't find a good source in the amount of time I promised I'd limit myself to looking
      Here
      https://hackaday.com/2011/03/1...
      I think you may have a better time including germanium doping in your search but you have to understand i only allow myself a limited amount of time to respond to posts I make in bad faith. Unfortunately yours happens to be cool.

    4. Re:Fake paid poster. by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      Yes it's difficult on both high and low levels.
      For him to act like it's chill because it's something people do at home.... and for him to pretend to be a regular Slashdot poster
      Please.

    5. Re:Fake paid poster. by i286NiNJA · · Score: 2

      If you feel so strongly why didn't you bother to respond to the other 9600 bad leaf posts that don't accuse anyone of being desperate shills clinging to th3 collapse of their business model?
      Go make me a toothpaste transistor bitch.

    6. Re:Fake paid poster. by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      If the internet hasn't lied to me.
        When I learned how computers work I did a bunch of googling to see how much I could make on my own.
      I can make a cpu out of transistors
      I can make a transistor
      But I would have to carefully choose all of my homemade transistors if I was going to make a cpu and their electrical characteristics could conceivably change at any time.
      Interesting side note. I first learned how transistors actually worked from old classified military videos about transistors and you could hear the excitement in the voice of the narrator. Nobody with a clue would ever act like an IC was not a huge deal.

  16. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    I would feel sorry for a small company who just doesn't have the resources to fully understand what is the cost of doing business in china. And got excited by the low price in partitioning. But for the big companies, with a lot to loose if they don't realize that there isn't a separation between business in government in china, and IP will be acquired if deemed necessary for national self interest.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  17. How to be a cunt in 3 east steps by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 2

    Step 1: Be in charge of a major corporation.
    Step 2: Outsource all the jobs overseas.
    Step 3: Cry when the third world shithole you outsourced the corporation to takes your job.

    1. Re:How to be a cunt in 3 east steps by AHuxley · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Re 'Step 2: Outsource all the jobs overseas."
      South Korea, Thailand, the Philippines kept US secrets during the Vietnam war.
      Nations that helped and supported their friends in the USA.
      They would have welcomed and supported all and any new US high tech investment in the late 1970-90's. Low wages, low tax, secure and ready to support the USA.
      Educated, english speaking. A good working history with the US mil.
      Ireland would have done great tax deals too.
      What did the USA do? Invest in Communist China. Give secrets away for free to China with every new US factory opened.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:How to be a cunt in 3 east steps by drnb · · Score: 1

      Step 1: Be in charge of a major corporation.
      Step 2: Outsource all the jobs overseas.

      When consumers show no preference for where things are made and always reward the company with the lowest price, if you don't do step 2 there won't be a step 1 where you can make decisions. Consumers drive outsourcing, consumers decide who gets the sales, consumers rewarded those first companies that outsourced and other companies followed.

      Naively pretend its the CEOs fault and the problem won't get fixed. Consumers have to change their behavior and show a preference for US made goods. CEOs will follow the sales.

    3. Re:How to be a cunt in 3 east steps by drnb · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Re 'Step 2: Outsource all the jobs overseas." South Korea, Thailand, the Philippines kept US secrets during the Vietnam war. Nations that helped and supported their friends in the USA. They would have welcomed and supported all and any new US high tech investment in the late 1970-90's. Low wages, low tax, secure and ready to support the USA. Educated, english speaking. A good working history with the US mil. Ireland would have done great tax deals too. What did the USA do? Invest in Communist China. Give secrets away for free to China with every new US factory opened.

      That was a political choice made by Nixon/Kissenger in the 1960s. The theory was that engagement with China will liberalize them. Some opportunistic behavior was to be tolerated since it will be offset by the political rewards of a reformed Communist China. Sadly those reforms ended with the Tienaman Square Massacre in 1989 but that 1960s policy of tolerating the opportunistic, now predatory, behavior continued. Trump may be an idiot but he's somehow got it correct that our policy has to change, it has to be reciprocal, free and open and fair in both directions or in neither direction. We can't continue the unidirectional policy, that failed. The modern messenger may be wrong but message is correct.

    4. Re:How to be a cunt in 3 east steps by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      It's really more of a policy issue. Consumers are dumb, CEOs are sociopathic. You can only really blame the non-idiots because the consumers are going to go toward whatever is cheaper. It's the people making the call who have the burden of acting properly. But again, this really is a regulatory issue as opposed to CEO vs consumer, since both of the latter categories fall into the same class: enough people to make the higher-near-term-cost lose (e.g. consumers don't have enough spending power to make a choice even if they wanted to while CEOs will just fall victim to their more sociopathic competitors if they opt for the more expensive route - which is actually how we ended up with a bunch of sociopathic cunts running things to begin with.) Two policies would solve it: minimum tarrifs on imports equal to the US cost to produce the things and execute the CEOs who outsourced (no mercy on that one, they manage resources on behalf of their nation, they don't own them.)

    5. Re:How to be a cunt in 3 east steps by soc_cost_priv_gains · · Score: 1

      It has been shown that consumers will pay more for domestically manufactured products but their limit is 10 to 20%. When the difference is 2 to 3 times more then of course they will pick the lower price.

    6. Re:How to be a cunt in 3 east steps by drnb · · Score: 1

      It has been shown that consumers will pay more for domestically manufactured products but their limit is 10 to 20%. When the difference is 2 to 3 times more then of course they will pick the lower price.

      Chinese products get a 25-30% discount just from the currency manipulation, let alone labor costs, lack of environmental costs, etc. The simple fact remains, consumer choices are destroying the consumer's economic and employment options. Just as predicted in the 1970s when labor tried to warn them.

    7. Re:How to be a cunt in 3 east steps by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      Except that's not consumer choice. We don't have the option to buy CPUs made in America with even moderate capabilities. That hasn't been an option since the only DIY computer kits in the 70's, but unlike your implication even then they were made overseas and the kits were just assembled in the US.

    8. Re:How to be a cunt in 3 east steps by drnb · · Score: 1

      Certainly not every product offers a US made option, however where US options exist a preference can be shown and the situation improved. As a trend is recognized in one area some CEO in a different area will attempt domestic manufacture of a product currently only outsourced. As we rewarded the CEOs of decades past who experimented with outsourcing we can now reward the CEOs of the present/future that experiment with domestic manufacture. We are not locked into the current situation. The trend can flow in either direction. Submarkets are not permanently lost. The consumers are in control, the ship can not be turned instantly, but it can be turned.

    9. Re:How to be a cunt in 3 east steps by drnb · · Score: 1

      In the 1970s, the US was in a shooting war w/ the PRC. By the late 90s, I could catch a (direct) flight to Shanghai and grab a latte. The notion that the China engagement policy "failed" needs a lot more support than has been offered in this thread.

      The shooting was the 1950s, Korea. In the 1970s is was a proxy war in south east asia. The notion of liberalization through engagement was not about ending the shooting per se, it was about ending the hostility of the Communist Chinese and to moderate their domestic policies. That policy objectively failed in 1989, you getting a latte is irrelevant. You could have probably gotten a latte not far from dead students at Tienaman Square. Moving from domestic moderation to external hostility, the "war" simply changed its manner. The Communist Chinese merely exchanged bullets for economic warfare and this has worked out better for them.

  18. From a neutral position by johnsie · · Score: 1, Interesting

    As a non-American I will buy products from whoever gives the the best value for money. Right now, thanks to low wages and the ability to produce quality goods at a low price, China is winning that battle. If I buy an American product then I'm basically paying extra so some fat kid in the US with high wage expectations can have a fancier life, not to get a good product.

  19. US Consumers Outsource Jobs, not CEOs by drnb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    then employ americans and dont outsource and subsidize stem subjects in education

    Consumers decide where things are made, not CEOs. A lower manufacturing cost is only relevant if you are getting the sale in the first place and consumers decide who gets the sale. Consumers rewarded those first CEOs that outsourced with sales, so other CEOs got the message and followed. The message: we consumers don't care where things are made we just want lower prices. Its a tragedy of the commons thing. The individual consumer thinks there one decision will have no impact. But millions are thinking the same thing, let this go on for decades, we now see the result.

    Things will not change until **consumers** change their behavior and show a preference for US made goods.

    1. Re:US Consumers Outsource Jobs, not CEOs by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

      Consumers decide where things are made, not CEOs. A lower manufacturing cost is only relevant if you are getting the sale in the first place and consumers decide who gets the sale. Consumers rewarded those first CEOs that outsourced with sales, so other CEOs got the message and followed. The message: we consumers don't care where things are made we just want lower prices. Its a tragedy of the commons thing. The individual consumer thinks there one decision will have no impact. But millions are thinking the same thing, let this go on for decades, we now see the result. Things will not change until **consumers** change their behavior and show a preference for US made goods.

      You're forgetting that you can simply not allow in super cheap crap. Consumers will pick from what's available, but you don't have to make it easy for it to be available.

    2. Re:US Consumers Outsource Jobs, not CEOs by k6mfw · · Score: 1

      No, consumers only consume. They have no say in where things are made. In fact, most don't know how to make things. Most consumers only see one day ahead, that gadget for $4.95 is just as good as the one for $29.95. CEO has a longer vision, 3 months (or one quarter).

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    3. Re:US Consumers Outsource Jobs, not CEOs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Consumers decide where things are made, not CEOs.

      Amazing. When salaries are talked about CEOs are leaders, decision makers, innovators, responsible for the well-being of not only their company but the nation; worth every penny.

      When negative results come in its the consumers, regulations, lower management, the engineers, the market, never the CEOs. How could anyone expect the poor underpaid, hard-working CEOs to be held accountable.

    4. Re:US Consumers Outsource Jobs, not CEOs by drnb · · Score: 1

      No, consumers only consume. They have no say in where things are made. In fact, most don't know how to make things. Most consumers only see one day ahead, that gadget for $4.95 is just as good as the one for $29.95. CEO has a longer vision, 3 months (or one quarter).

      The CEO is a captive to the consumer's preference. Consumers generally do not reward those who try to manufacture domestically. The CEO does not have the control you think he does, the consumers have far more control than you think they do. Consumer decisions drive things, the longer CEO vision merely tells him to outsource like their competitor who is gaining sales. In other countries the consumers are more aware of where things are made and that contributes to economic and employment health.

    5. Re: US Consumers Outsource Jobs, not CEOs by drnb · · Score: 1

      Or we can try to change the behavior of tens of thousands of CEOs.

      We the consumers have, we changed CEO behavior to outsource manufacturing by rewarding CEOs who outsource with increased sales and punishing CEOs who manufacture domestically with decreased sales.

    6. Re:US Consumers Outsource Jobs, not CEOs by drnb · · Score: 1

      Consumers decide where things are made, not CEOs.

      Amazing. When salaries are talked about CEOs are leaders, decision makers, innovators, responsible for the well-being of not only their company but the nation; worth every penny. When negative results come in its the consumers, regulations, lower management, the engineers, the market, never the CEOs. How could anyone expect the poor underpaid, hard-working CEOs to be held accountable.

      Its not a matter of accountability, its a matter of where the control actually exists. And the control of where things are made is in the consumers hands. CEOs don't give a crap where things are made, if they will get increased sales from domestic they would do that. And consumers were warned of this problem in the 1970s, the 80s, etc ... they ignored the labor leaders, CEOs and politicians who tried to support domestic industry. Walmart **used** to favor US manufacturing, but that strategy failed over time and they adapted to the consumer lead reality of price only matter..

    7. Re:US Consumers Outsource Jobs, not CEOs by del_diablo · · Score: 1

      CEO is capitvated by the laws of the free marked. If he wants to chase tomorrow and perish by not planning, he is free to do so.
      The problem arrives when the rest of the marked is not paying attention: CEO's can ride around companies in a pure stasis draft

      But you are also describing the problem indirectly, by saying
      >The CEO is a captive to the consumer's preference.
      >Consumers generally do not reward those who try to manufacture domestically
      You are basically saying that
      >The CEO can not plan ahead to make a manufacture advantage by purchasing and expanding what is already a part of their supply chain
      What is even more troubling is that you could describe what outsourcing do long term, in a vacuum, but you don't, to make a rather cheap talk point.
      Outsourcing is a long and tedious process, where in the long term the company loses its ability to maintain its IP.
      At first, you get fewer places to start the entry level recruitment for the firm
      Then It turns out nobody knows how to make these things
      And then it turns out that if you don't control the factory, you are basically on the factories good graces to even support your venture.
      And as time goes on, you no longer have anybody who can build patents or IP, because the industrial basis to train these people do not exist.

    8. Re:US Consumers Outsource Jobs, not CEOs by drnb · · Score: 1

      The CEO's existing supply chain does not have the 25-50% discount of Chinese based raw materials, goods and services that currency manipulations provides, nor does the CEO's existing supply chain have the cost reductions from cheap labor, reduced environmental regulations enforcement, etc.

      Yes there are a series of cascading effects of outsourcing, but that does not change the simple fact that consumer choices drive it all. Now look at Germany where consumers consider domestic manufacture far more then US consumers, plus they don't engage in the nonsense that a college degree is the new high school diploma.

  20. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by AHuxley · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The CIA and MI6 assured the US government that freedom would spread quickly and fully all over China in the 1980's.
    That free trade would change China and that democracy would move into China under the cover of free trade.
    The West invested fully and China simply took the tech for free.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  21. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Like Solar. Anybody who built their own plants lost due to Chinese subsidies and building too cheap for anybody else to compete.

    What You Sow, So Shall You Reap.

  22. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by imgod2u · · Score: 1

    IIRC, most semiconductors are not manufactured in China. The two biggest fab locations are either Taiwan (technically not China by Western standards) or the US...

  23. Short Term Consumer Thinking by drnb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is capitalism's Achilles Heel. Businesses are run on short term thinking.

    This is also short term US consumer thinking, a tragedy of the commons thing. Lowering your manufacturing cost is a secondary consideration, the primary consideration is getting the sale in the first place. Consumers drove jobs overseas by rewarding CEOs who outsource with sales. Consumers thought their one little purchase would not make a difference. Multiply by hundreds of millions of consumers, now multiply by many decades.

    There is also short term US/State government thinking. For example the San Francisco bay area buying Chinese steel for a recent bridge project.

    Yes managing companies for the quarterly report is bad and needs to change. But you have to have a company to manage in the first place and consumes will generally reward your competitors if you manufacture in the US and they manufacture overseas. Consumers need to change their purchasing habits and show companies they have a preference for US made goods, that is the only way that things will change.

    1. Re:Short Term Consumer Thinking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How can U.S. consumers buy U.S. made goods? Almost every consumer product is either made in China (or another Asian country) or has parts that were made there! For consumers to buy U.S. made goods, the U.S. made good have to be there first. I have stopped shopping at WalMart because of the drastic changes after Sam Walton died. Sam Walton wanted to sell as many products made in America as possible. After his death, his kids completely reversed that!Almost everything at WalMart is now made in Southeast Asia, even much of the food! Really WalMart? Cheese balls made in China!?

    2. Re:Short Term Consumer Thinking by drnb · · Score: 1

      How can U.S. consumers buy U.S. made goods? Almost every consumer product is either made in China (or another Asian country) or has parts that were made there! For consumers to buy U.S. made goods, the U.S. made good have to be there first.

      Some companies still manufacture domestically. There are websites that help find them. Many websites indicate where products are made. I recall REI having a US Made filter and lots of good gear was listed when I tried it out. There is more out there than you suggest, take an extra moment to find it.

    3. Re:Short Term Consumer Thinking by drnb · · Score: 1

      Consumers need to change their purchasing habits and show companies they have a preference for US made goods...

      Oh so very wrong. Corporations need to change their pricing habits and show consumers they can compete. You can pay extra for something if you want. I'm not going to pay extra so some CEO can get another yacht.

      The CEO is getting the yacht whether he manufactures domestically or in China, you are only denying US workers better jobs, you are effecting the CEO not at all.

  24. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by houghi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1970's? I remember when it was wellknown that all what the Japanese did was copy everything and made bad copies on top of that. Plenty a joke of the Japanese coming to Europe and the US to take pictures of every factory and product but not buy anything.
    After that the copies became better and later they where the ones that where being copied. They became the leader in many products, especially electronics.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  25. Re:Do you remember? by drnb · · Score: 1

    India's problem is one of infrastructure, not knowledge nor ability. You could build a factory but then you would have massive problems transporting the goods to a port.

  26. American raid of Native Indian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Resulted in its formation of the country. USA has like the worst record when it comes to stealing..

  27. Suspicion, suspicion, suspicion... by hackingbear · · Score: 2

    I suspect Iraq still has WMDs too.

    Don't they have any real evidences to present?

    While at it, we should also suspect Huawei put backdoors in their products, just like the Chinese suspect the same about Cisco products... (oh... never mind the second one, just remember Snowden now)

    BTW another American semiconductor company -- Qualcomm -- already paid up $1 billion to settle its Chinese antitrust violation. So pay up Micron.

    1. Re:Suspicion, suspicion, suspicion... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      If Iraq had WMDs, why were they not used in the invasion? Why have none of any note been found?

    2. Re:Suspicion, suspicion, suspicion... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      They most likely still hd gas.

      And as you have seen in the example of the US destroying the Iraq military: you don't need WMDs ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    3. Re:Suspicion, suspicion, suspicion... by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      Apparently, your sense of cynicism has been destroyed by some left over WMDs in Iraq.

  28. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 2

    The US gov like it that way going back to the 1970's when the USA split China from close deals with the Soviet Union. For that to work China got a lot of US tech for free. US brands got invited into China. Low tax, low wages. Production lines that could make a profit with every generation of tech. The only trick was the USA would have to transfer the tech production methods so the new factories in China could make the most profit. To share everything the US brand had created with a local partner in a Communist nation. No tech transfer, no production line. The US brands opted to invest in 1970-80's China rather that much more secure and pro US nations with the same wages. Now China understands the US tech it wants to export everything under its own Communist brands at full price to the world.

    That these forced technology transfers hasn't been fought is a complete failure, and treason, of our government. Firing squads for all involved, including tho WTO.

  29. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by HornWumpus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The average Chinese contract manufacturer makes about a 1% profit selling to the west. They more or less have to cheat and sell additional production in China which gets exported 'informally'.

    Full price for cheap knockoffs is already in the market, the Chinese are way behind in moving up the value curve. By this number of years the Japanese already owned the world camera market and were starting to own the car market.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  30. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Taiwan is not part of the PRC, by anybodies standards.

    Yes the Chinese are butthurt about this. Too bad for them.

    Taiwan has chemical and biological weapons. The situation isn't going to change anytime soon.

    Perhaps after the next revolution on the mainland. When they realize they've been taken for chumps and all the assets they worked 30 years for are worth much much less than they paid for them.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  31. Re:Do you remember? by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

    India hasn't even accepted they have a corruption problem, much less started to do something about it.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  32. You can't do business in China without sharing by kriston · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can't do business in China without sharing your IP with the government. Everything is fair game for them. Their supercomputers are based on MIPS technology with questionable intellectual property licensing. Now they're moving to "license" AMD x86-64 technology.

    --

    Kriston

  33. It has been said a million times. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You are not competing with a Chinese company. You are competing with China.
    Your competitor writes and enforces the laws as they wish.

  34. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by buravirgil · · Score: 1

    My first reference (to date myself) for the obsessive behavior of Japanese photographers is Caddyshack and their heady presence was led by a fully aware Rodney Dangerfield in his audacity to taunt and diminish propertied snobbery.

    --
    Would were! Should is! Could be! And live a hundred times three.
  35. Sounds Like Deflection by StikyPad · · Score: 2

    Both of those things can be true. The Chinese probably want access to corporate secrets, but chipmakers are probably price fixing as well. They have a history of it, and itâ(TM)s the only tech sector where price/performance costs are rising rather than falling. Memory costs more than double what it did five years ago. Itâ(TM)s insane. Sure, thereâ(TM)s rising demand for memory, but thereâ(TM)s higher demand for processors as well, and you donâ(TM)t see processor prices rising. If chipmakers arenâ(TM)t colluding to keep memory prices artificially high and trying to deflect attention with stories like this, Iâ(TM)ll eat my hat. Besides, China has great espionage â" they hardly need fake investigations to get access to corporate secrets.

  36. Re:Do you remember? by drnb · · Score: 1

    India hasn't even accepted they have a corruption problem, much less started to do something about it.

    Corruption did not impede China.

  37. Re:Do you remember? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    On a different scale though.

    India has a whole caste (brahmin) who expect to get government 'work' and live off bribes, for life. They're entitled to those bribes, because of who their grandfather was.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  38. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by Jeremi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The West invested fully and China simply took the tech for free.

    And what did we get in return? Mountains of affordable consumer goods at every big-box store.

    Was it worth the trade? That's an undecidable matter of opinion, but let's not pretend the benefits only went in one direction.

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  39. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    The Chinese own the drone market, and are starting to own the smartphone market.

  40. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    I think South Korea is also in the top 3 with Samsung and Hynix.

  41. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Taiwan has chemical and biological weapons.
    I doubt that. Officially no developed country still has them, we have treaties against that since 30 years.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  42. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    While I suspect that Taiwan does NOT have bio-chem weapons, most nations around the globe do in fact have these. They are very cheap to make, effective, and most of all, untraceable if you know what you are doing. If fact, if you really know what you are doing, you can point the path at another nation.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  43. Re:Do you remember? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    China is fighting hard against corruption, at least on large scale corruption.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  44. Re:Do you remember? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Brahams are priests, not corrupt government workers ... no idea why you are so angry today.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  45. Re:That's cute by Carewolf · · Score: 1

    The DDR memory carter is trying to yet again shift our attention from their price fixing scandals. They have been found out and punished time and time again yet it is still a profitable business practice from them. What are fines in $millions when the benefit of the price fixing is in $billions...

    Yeah, the Chinese might have an ulterior motive, but what they are claiming is 100% true and a matter of simple fact. They are price fixing memory.

  46. Microchip commodity by del_diablo · · Score: 1

    The simple fact that this has already happened, for low end chips. Sure, if you want some fancy x86 thing, a server chip, or a computer chip you are going to need to license a expensive design.
    But for everything else that is used? If your local manufacture plants also make computer chips, you could get anything for small electronics. Anything for anything that doesn't require a real OS: So your idea is basically true for all embedded systems, which is still quoted at "98% of microprocessors".
    Currently any medium size enterprise can basically get any known expired design, and do a test run, and then use it. And it happens.

    But by this revealing statement, the next puzzle arrive: Will the trends thats true for the embedded systems ever be true for things like workstation CPUs?

    1. Re:Microchip commodity by DalM · · Score: 1

      "Will the trends thats true for the embedded systems ever be true for things like workstation CPUs?"

      It certainly will. Eventually. I know this because there is a limit to maximum possible processing power on a chip because we still have to make things out of atoms and molecules. That doesn't mean innovation will stop entirely. Not at all. Think of it like knives. Knives are literally the oldest human invention -actually being invented before modern humans evolved. Even still, despite being hundreds of thousands of years old, clever designer can still design a new better knives. New knives are being designed all the time, mostly for hyper-specialized tasks or knives with special materials or designs. But, ultimately, for 99.99999% of uses, basically any ol' normal high quality knife will do the job fine. Even for specialized skills. Processors will go the same way. Even high end processors. Engineers can rearrange things endlessly, and build specific chips for super-specialized tasks, but eventually, for most every use for most person, CPU processors will become commodity products and become generic tools.

  47. Re:Do you remember? by drnb · · Score: 1

    China is fighting hard against corruption, at least on large scale corruption.

    Perhaps now, now that they are an economic superpower. The fact remains that corruption did not impede their rise from developing nation to economic superpower.

  48. Re:Do you remember? by drnb · · Score: 1

    Sounds like the children of upper echelon Chinese Communist Party members.

  49. Ideologies that go bump in the night by Texmaize · · Score: 1

    It seems to me that some important person in the news was advocating for exactly what you are talking about. Hmmmm, what was that guys name again? Seems to me that guy may not be as much of a moron as the forums seem to claim...

    --
    "Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
  50. Re:Half way to rational by drnb · · Score: 1

    Its not virtue signaling its objective analysis. Trump is an idiot savant at persuasion of the masses perhaps, of marketing himself. However with respect to other areas he lacks the savant and is just an idiot. And idiot can latch on to a good idea however. Our unfair trade with China was recognized as a tool of manipulation for the masses. In reality Trump was perfectly happy to work with China for manufacturing his own products. The actual brains behind the economic policy are people like Navarro.

  51. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    2001, anthrax
    Made in Ft. Detrick, Md.
    So much for "no developed country" has them

  52. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    In a lab.
    Not in a war head or bomb.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  53. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Right, and Israel doesn't have nukes...

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  54. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    In the mail, as a warhead.
    Three times.
    And somehow, the White House was on mandatory Cipro from 1 may, 2001 through 3 June 2003. Hmm. Wonder what THEY knew.

  55. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    A paper envelope is not a warhead.
    It is a paper envelope.

    And that anthrax was nor "manufactured" but stolen.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  56. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    A paper envelope full of Torpex is a warhead when delivered to an intended victim with a detonating device.

  57. Re:Once they have the industry, they want to push by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    A warhead is a thing with an explosive device inside, distributing its payload over a huge area.
    A paper envelope, even with an explosive inside, is not a war head.

    Thanks for nitpicking, idiot.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.