BEIJING :China, the world's top processor of rare earths, banned the export of technology to extract and separate the critical materials on Thursday, the country's latest step to protect its dominance over several strategic metals.Rare earths are a group of 17 metals used to make magnets that turn power into
You obviously fall into the trap of believing that hard science cares about politics, and that money thrown at problems as part of national strategic planning magically solves them. But for anyone else legitimately interested in understanding the topic better and having a glimpse at its complexity, those are great resources:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmgkV83OhHA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ge2RcvDlgw
If the above is too advanced, this can serve as a good primer and answers “how the heck did we get there”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt9NEnWmyMo
Also, I never wrote that China will never get to EUV (or eventually something beyond that), just that it will take a very long time, because the complexity is spread across several very distinct scientific disciplines, integrating them is a challenge of its own (again, watch the videos), and packaging this into a system that meets the scale and reliability requirements to make it commercially viable hasn’t been reproduced to date.
EUV is complex, unlike nuclear weapons and energy, 5G, space stations, probes to the dark side of the moon and hypersonic missiles. Those things are simple.
EUV is complex. And more so than the accomplishments you mentioned: nuclear weapons were cracked in the 1940’s, probe moon landings in the 50’s and space stations in the 70’s. All have since been reproduced by several nations in isolation. That is not the case of state of the art lithography. No single nation “owns” it because it truly is a multinational endeavor.
(And actual hypersonic missiles haven’t made it to the battlefield, and 5G is about commoditization and standardization, by the ITU, an organ of the united nations, so I’m not sure exactly how that adds to your rhetoric)
Way to put your ignorance on display.
Lecturing me about ignorance while deliberately misrepresenting bleeding edge next generation nuclear reactors and probes to the dark side of the moon as old tech.
American hypersonics can’t even make it out of testing and Chinese ones are being deployed on warships already.
Weak shit for someone pretending to argue from a position of knowledge
Fair, how about you enlighten me about the present topic, then, instead of digressing? It does look like deflection and insults doesn’t make it prettier.
I’m not digressing at all. Your argument is that EUV tech is somehow exceptionally complex, therefore China cannot create it’s own version in a reasonable time frame. The direct response to that claim is to point to examples of complex technologies that China has mastered and advanced.
China leads the world in new patents and has mastered several technologies which even America has not. Given that the current leading purveyors of EUV are the frickin Dutch, not the Americans, there’s no basis to claim that EUV is exceptionally complex such that the world’s leading scientific and econmic power cannot reproduce it.
Same response as https://programming.dev/comment/5908167 ; I never wrote that China cannot create it’s own version, but that it will likely take some time. Reasons for this complexity are also mentioned in that post.
I get where your impression comes from, but I highly recommend watching the video about EUV’s history (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmgkV83OhHA) to better weight the contribution of every (international) party.
Russia has used dozens of hypersonic missiles in Ukraine and destroyed American Patriot Missile Defense systems with them
Your overall point about EUV being difficult isn’t wrong, but this line is really where the typical liberal forecasting of China’s capabilities fall apart: they don’t give a shit about it being commercially viable, they give a shit about having the industrial capacity.
The reason why EUV is more or less a cartel monopoly in the West is that it’s a cobbled together collection of scientific principles that work well enough that the first few companies that figured it out could make insane profits off of it, and then proceeded to patent the shit out of it to prevent anyone else from doing so. The engineering behind EUV is… not great from a reliability standpoint, most notably the fact that EUV has an average downtime of something like 10% (meaning your fabs are offline 10% of the year for maintenance), in large part because you’re shooting little droplets of liquid metals with a high intensity laser which tends to splatter and require cleanup. There are potential alternatives to this process for creating the kind of UV light you need for lithography, such as particle accelerators, that are theoretically superior but the R&D into those alternatives costs tens of billions of dollars with no guarantees that any of it will ever become profitable, so Western capital doesn’t bother trying.
China doesn’t have that profit restriction. It needs the ability to produce bleeding edge chips to remove its reliance on an increasingly hostile West, and it has not only the engineering and scientific power to brute force that kind of R&D but the ability to devote a sizeable portion of its national resources to doing so. It doesn’t matter if its profitable, it matters if they’re able to decouple a critical industry from the West and ignore sanctions accordingly, and that has infinitely more value than a shareholder dividend, so they will put the resources into doing so and, inevitably, they will figure it out. And from what we’ve seen over the past 2 years since the trade wars have started, they’re not only succeeding but doing so ahead of expectations, in large part because increasing tensions have made life a living hell for Chinese scientists and engineers abroad working in these industries due to racism and suspicions of spying which push them to emigrate back to China and lend their expertise there instead.
In 20 years, chips made in mainland China will be competitive or even superior to their Western counterparts unless the West undoes 50 years of neoliberal rot overnight and replicates what the CPC is doing for silicon manufacturing or the CPC collapses and China experiences the same shock doctrine that the former Soviet states did in the 90s, and neither of those outcomes look likely right now.
Making the light is a relativity easy step, it’s mirrors that are hard af.
But China will develop euv tech and beyond, and I hope they will do it in a new way and advance human knowledge.
And I hope this nationalistic freakshow will just melt away, as it’s a ball and chain on humanity.
Hey, thanks for the constructive comment :)
True, but I don’t think the end-goal is to “just” achieve technical sovereignty. Answering local demand requires production at a large scale
I really wouldn’t put it that way, if you check my 3rd link out, you’d see that there were a few competing technologies on the table, and the topic was researched by national labs and a lot of public funding as well. Japan was also a leader and significant contributor but ultimately failed. It’s not nearly as clearly cut as “bad imperialistic USA locks it down for rest of us”: there is real international competition, and real international cooperation.
I can’t predict where we will be at in 20 years. No matter what, we will be many generations beyond EUV. Other approaches that were deemed unfeasible before (=today) might turn practical in the future as fundamental research advances, and I suspect China will be strong in those areas, and, as you said, perhaps a leader.
Dutch managed it, why wouldn’t the chinese, with a centrally planned economy that can directly integrate the different disciplines, be able to?
Communists in shambles - how could anyone fund science for the sake of progress instead of making money?
Dutch didn’t, not alone, far from that. Have a stab at the first link I posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmgkV83OhHA
This will also show a long list of “honorable mentions” who failed, including the Japanese attempts (which, as you should know, aren’t exactly new to the game, way ahead of China and largely self-reliant in the matter, unlike China whose semiconductors industry has been centered around import of foreign tech)
I didn’t write that they “wouldn’t be able to”, I merely pointed the actual reasons why this is extremely hard (perhaps the hardest current Engineering feat, or why I find this whole thing fascinating), with speculations that this will take a while
no need to stretch it: if China wants to meet the ever growing domestic demand (either military or civil), China need fabs churning chips reliably. Simple as that.
As opposed to the chinese, who are completely alone, all 1.whatever billion of them.
You just fucking said it required cooperation you dumb cum juggler, now you’re saying they failed despite not cooperating?
I cannot sufficiently describe how much I hate your stupid reddit tier “um, akshumally I didn’t use those exact words therefore you’re completely misrepresenting what I said!” You won’t shut up about how hard and difficult and borderline impossible it is and you want me to believe you’re not trying to say they won’t be able to? You’re certainly not arguing that they will.
That’s not what commercially viable mean, buddy.
no need to speculate, China is not at the same level today (or we wouldn’t even be having this discussion in the first place), no matter how populous. Would it help catch-up? Probably! You are the one bringing this up, not me, so…
Was this a difficult sentence to read? Should I break it down for you? Those two things can be true at the same time (which is essentially what I wrote):
ASML (NL) EUV machines being the culmination of international cooperation (with US/TW/DE/…)
Japanese having an expansive indigenous lithography industry and history
Today’s China has neither.
Well, I’m sorry that a well-sourced post with actual engineering and historical facts, meant for the legitimately curious and interested people here makes you so angry. What can I say other than “you probably didn’t check-out the links and are arguing in bad faith/for the sake of it” and “you are letting your emotions blur your comprehension, i.e. putting words in my mouth”.
Unless the CCP starts distributing indigenous chips asking nothing in exchange, which I find unlikely to say the least, those will be traded (against hard money, work, resources, …) on some form of market. I’m not really into arguing about semantics, so you do you.
You definitely know you’re winning when you’re constantly complaining about your opponent. You hate communists yet allow them to live in your brain rent-free. Interesting.
Removed by mod
Love turning mental health discourse into a snide bitchy weapon to imply that someone pursuing a disagreement is simply mEnTaLlY iLl
Who hurt you? Help is available.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
🌽
Removed by mod
No one is attacking your “factual and informative” comment.
No one is disputing the difficulties you’ve highlighted. What is being disputed is your assertion that those difficulties are relevant to your assertion that China won’t be able to achieve this.
And the subject of the conversation is a technology that humans have already developed and is in use. So what is it about China/the PRC that would cause you to assert they are incapable of building/employing this technology?
Your argument is that “Hard science doesn’t care about politics,” so I assume you don’t want to imply that you’re critiquing the capabilities of China’s political system. So what’s left? Is it racism? The removed can’t achieve what other humans have already proven is possible because the removed is subhuman?
You are making a political statement whether you intend to or not, you don’t just get to whine about how you were only talking about the science and why is everyone being so mean when you only started a discussion about the science to reinforce (or deflect from) your original assertion.
Well, except I did not only NOT write that, I even wrote the exact opposite, see: https://programming.dev/comment/5899890
Also, interpreting my messages with your ideologically colored lenses doesn’t imply that this thread invites political discourse. I’m sure you’ll find many people here willing to vent their frustrations with you in easily ignorable threads of their own.
“Anyone who questions America’s might is insane! I am a normal person!”
Because every single thing must revolve around America, only one thing can be bad at a time, and if I’m not with you I must be against you.
Neutrality is support of the status quo, there are no parties that neither support nor oppose it.
Oh, were we talking about something being bad? I thought we were just having a non-politically tinted discussion about science and technology
I mean, it’s the most powerful empire ever to exist, one built on ongoing slavery and genocide. It’s difficult to find global problems that don’t lead back to the amerikkkan ruling class.
Removed by mod
I forgot, it’s only mature intelligent high-IQ adults who lick the boot of slavery and genocide.
I mean, from here I see only one person feeling obliged to bring up:
America
Imperialism
Slavery
Genocide
IQ
boot licking
in a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with this, and this person isn’t me. So do yourself a favour and go babble with people who care.
Look in the fucking mirror champ
You’re trying to tell me a rapidly developing, well-resourced country will hit some arbitrary technology threshold because communism. You know, the political system that put the first man in space a generation after most of the USSR wasn’t even literate.
Don’t you think that you are over-reading a little? I never brought up communism nor any socio-economical ideology for that matter. Quick tip for you: try to read some about economics and China if you nurture any expectation that it is a communist state other than in name.
If you don’t think China is communist, why do you think it will hit whatever arbitrary threshold you’re imagining?
I think we know why
What does that mean? What does this have to do with the above?
Seems like you missed something if that’s your interpretation
If that’s the point you want to make, do back it up if you want others (i.e. anyone who cares, i.e. not me) to comment on that?
You’re the one who made an assertion without backing it up in the first place. Its clear you don’t know what you’re talking about
China doesn’t need to produce the fast chips because their comparative advantage is in quantity manufacturing.
Sure thing, until you realize that China isn’t that big at all as the 5th largest producer of semiconductors behind Taiwan, Korea, Japan and the USA:
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/semiconductor-manufacturing-by-country
China is listed as the largest and 5th largest in your source