Thread

ASML says it sold 'absolutely nothing' in Europe in 2026

402 points · 900 comments · MC995

bsoqk · 1790205152 · focus · HN ↗
> So far, however, the law has done little to spur the construction of new semiconductor factories in Europe. The European Court of Auditors concluded last year that the EU is unlikely to achieve its goal of doubling Europe’s share of the global chip market by 2030.
They should make another law and probably a few more commissions of auditors.
1. philipallstar · 1790426025 · focus · HN ↗
  [dead]
  1. irishcoffee · 1790426597 · focus · HN ↗
    First time I saw that. The phrase “regulate growth” seems like the definition of an oxymoron. That’s a hell of a thing.
    philipallstar · 1790426817 · focus · HN ↗
    Every ridiculous thing Labour does in the UK is a hilarious slap in the face to the Tories who are still not preferable to all this stupidity.
  2. Grimburger · 1790427706 · focus · HN ↗
    I get its sarcasm but TSMC has done so much to try to get the Americans getting some decent yields in their new factories and it's failing so hard, there's real questions about whether they can ever meet their targets. They've sent thousands of existing Taiwanese workers to help at this point and from anecdotal things I hear it's not going well. (I live in Taiwan)
    This stuff is all blood, sweat and tears to get it done, and to be honest a culture.
    You can't just buy it off the shelf. If that was possible everyone would have gone paid for it like an Ikea product years ago.
    0l · 1790428018 · focus · HN ↗
    <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-10-24/tsmc-s-arizona-chip-production-yields-surpass-taiwan-s-a-win-for-us-push" rel="nofollow">https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-10-24/tsmc-s-ar...
    Older article, but seems like things are going pretty ok?
    dgellow · 1790429087 · focus · HN ↗
    Do you have local sources we can look at? I’m not familiar with Taiwan but would be interested reading more about the issues
    skippyboxedhero · 1790430205 · focus · HN ↗
    Investment is risky and uncertain. If you did not do anything because it might fail, you would do nothing at all.
    The inability to cope with failure is a culture that is common in Europe. Failure is so personally devastating, so destructive to social and cultural standing that not only must you not take risks but other people must be actively prevented from taking risk.
    Maybe the US investment doesn't work, but the US will have tried at least. Taiwan is, ironically, the perfect example of where the initial impetus came from the government because there was no culture of risk-taking. Parts of Europe have a savings culture that is very similar to Taiwan and led to very poor growth and very high inequality.
    If the US keeps trying, they will succeed. On here, the view was that China could never build out this capacity, they did. The only way to guarantee failure is to never try.
2. [deleted] · 1790426728 · focus · HN ↗
  [deleted]
3. Epa095 · 1790431691 · focus · HN ↗
  I get the sarcasm, but its not like e.g. TSMC popped up in a environment of pure libertarian free market capitalism. It was, from the beginning, a project of the Taiwanese state, and without significant public influence there is no way it would have become what it is. Are the EU laws what's needed? IDK. But without a proper public industrial policy besides "low taxes and few regulations" there is no way Europe will be able to get significant semiconductor-production up, the rich-get-richer phenomenon is just to strong.
  1. brookst · 1790432613 · focus · HN ↗
    I think the point is that laws alone mean nothing. As you note, Taiwan was more active than just having commissions and signing papers.
    Airbus proves the EU can do this. It remains to be seen if they still have the ability to take constructive action, or if “add more bureaucracy” is the only tool remaining in the toolbox.
    egorfine · 1790433348 · focus · HN ↗
    > Airbus proves the EU can do this
    *could.
    Airbus has been grandfathered into the current legal situation. Today a future Airbus would not be able to even start collecting data for its initial Environmental Impact Study.
    overfeed · 1790443962 · focus · HN ↗
    > Airbus proves the EU can do this
    And Boeing's rampant carelessness proves European laws can be beneficial. "Hurr durr, how about them European laws" is a low-effort comment that adds nothing to the discussions.
    The argument that a slack regulatory environment is sufficient was disproven when the US government subsidized new fabs via the CHIPS Act (a new law!), and then went further and partially nationalized a failing Intel to prop it up.
    lm2s · 1790444138 · focus · HN ↗
    I’ve seen someone explaining why it’s not as easy with semiconductors: Airbus can spread several different factories for different components around the EU. For semiconductors that’s not as feasible. Thus countries would fight which one would have the semiconductors factory. I think it was more or less this argument, which seems to make sense.
  2. thesmtsolver2 · 1790439992 · focus · HN ↗
    > I get the sarcasm, but its not like e.g. TSMC popped up in a environment of pure libertarian free market capitalism.
    Nobody said that. That is a strawman
  3. AdamN · 1790441881 · focus · HN ↗
    Another interesting fact is that Che-Chia Wei (the man who made TSMC what it is) received zero equity. Everything he has he bought himself at the market rate.
    throwaway2037 · 1790488798 · focus · HN ↗
    Don't you mean Morris Chang/張忠謀? He was the founder. Also, this near-meme level phrase "received zero equity" is meaningless when you are paying senior executives millions per year. They just buy shares with their earnings. He was one of the highest (if not highest) paid executive in Taiwan for more than a decade.
  4. microtonal · 1790501018 · focus · HN ↗
    It was, from the beginning, a project of the Taiwanese state, and without significant public influence there is no way it would have become what it is.
    Fun fact in this context: (Dutch) Philips was a major initial investor in TSMC (both in money and IP):
    Only Philips was willing to sign a joint venture contract with Taiwan to put up $58 million, transfer its production technology, and license intellectual property in exchange for a 27.6 percent stake in TSMC.
    <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSMC#History" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSMC#History

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.