43 Comments

All of this will be moot if the US does not figure out a way to keep the international EE and CS PhD students educated in elite US universities. The H1B visa is way overdue to make way to some kind of ranking/points-based system instead of the anachronistic lottery system from the 90s.

It will kill 2 birds in 1 stone; it will largely get rid of the fraud, abuse and low-wage job replacement issue raised by the system's critics and will also help retain the best and brightest in the country.

Expand full comment

Noah - Just want to add some context.

ASML (my employer) is basically the only company that can make commercial EUV machines. There's an outside chance that China may be able to leapfrog ASML by making advances based on some startup's tech somewhere, but it's not likely - it's like betting on the Russians to make a better stealth jet just because they bought the startup that owns that "invisibility cloak" fabric.

The core problem with EUV [ed: which I've personally worked on!] is that, in the most professional jargon I can summon, IT'S REALLY FUCKING HARD. Even ASML with all of our internal access to EUV IP can just barely keep the machines working. It's not because we're doing anything wrong (at least, not wronger than anyone else in any other industry), it's because the tech is so damned sensitive, it's a (professional jargon warning) FUCKING MIRACLE that it works at all.

Even if some spy magically handed China all of our IP tomorrow, it'd still take their best engineers and scientists at least a decade, if not two, to reverse-engineer an EUV machine. It's not that it's technically unfeasible for anyone else to develop EUV. It'd just cost ~$100-200B over a decade-plus, and no one has that kind of scratch sitting around.

[Ed: This isn't like the Russians reverse-engineering nuclear weapons, where you just need to throw enough money and minds at it to invent a bomb you can manufacture on the cheap at relatively low precision. Rather, it's the highest-precision industrial tooling effort _in the history of mankind_. Reverse-engineering EUV from scratch is about 300 separate Manhattan Project-level efforts, and any one of them can take down the entire enterprise.]

So yeah, as things stand today, the "soft blockade" should give the West plenty of time to build up semiconductor capacity, even under the most wildly pessimistic scenario.

Expand full comment
Aug 2, 2022·edited Aug 2, 2022Liked by Noah Smith

It wasn't all that long ago that Wall St, the City of London et al insisted that manufacturing be offshored to China & call centres to India. Not just because of lower production costs & bigger shareholder returns, but also the now-discredited belief that when China opened up economically, it would open up politically.

That ship has long sailed, first with Tiananmen Square, and now with Xi's dollarshop Maoism displacing Hu's Dengism. The COVID pandemic also exposed the limitations of the "offshore everything" approach. And when the gains from fiscal globalisation end up hogged by the few & don't trickle down to the many...

Expand full comment
Aug 2, 2022Liked by Noah Smith

Thanks, Noah, for such a thoughtful, well-researched, interesting piece. I've recently become a paid subscriber of yours, and it's this kind of writing that makes me so glad I did so. Looking forward to more of the same!

Expand full comment
Aug 2, 2022·edited Aug 2, 2022Liked by Noah Smith

Since the Ukraine tensions the idea of independence has come to the fore in key areas. In Europe it is energy. In USA key military components. Globalisation is coming to an end. And probably just in time sourcing. How widespread and what sectors other than energy and the military isnt known. It won't be easy to do as there is much to unwind.

Expand full comment
Aug 2, 2022Liked by Noah Smith

Hey Noah - can you do a deep dive into Immigration reform in a follow up post?

This relates to CHIPS, sure. But also in general.

Highly skilled, STEM based immigration reform needs, current status and next steps.

Feels like the next relevant topic here - to properly staff the Fabs (among other things).

Expand full comment

Always enjoy your articles

Expand full comment
Aug 2, 2022Liked by Noah Smith

Typo: "there’s a general shift away from thinking that economists’ nostrums about free trade and government non-intervention contain are worth listening to" Suspect you started to write "contain anything worth", and then tried to pare back to just "are worth"?

Expand full comment

I need to get the disclosure out of the way first; I've owned Intel stock for about 20 yeas now. I would add to Noah's post that in addition to Semtech, there is the Semiconductor Research Corporation (SRC) that has been around since 1982 and supports basic research and is funded by industry members of the consortium (I visited them way back in 1983 when they were just getting started).

The US funds a huge amount of basic research in STEM and there is no reason that it should not be involved in applied research funding and manufacturing as well. Policy makers cannot close their eyes to what other nations have and are doing. However, a lot of what is done by nation states has had mixed results. I well remember back in the 1980s when Japanese industrial policy was greatly feared but those fears ended up misplaced. China may be spending huge amounts of money but one only need look at their failure in the Covid vaccine area to understand that just spending money is not enough.

I am hopeful that the US can move forward with an industrial policy that both makes sense and achieves concrete results. I agree with Noah that this is just the beginning.

Expand full comment

Pretty sure we know who the ultimate winners will be: semiconductor executives.

Expand full comment

Industrial policy = special interests entrenched in government. https://www.google.com/search?q=mohair+subsidy

Expand full comment

Computer chip production is important, but we should not lose focus: with typical chips quantity is far more important than quality. Even 'weapon systems of the future' can do nicely with off-the-shelf components, e.g. this recent demonstration of a smart drone swarm which has nothing special as far as chips go:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/watch-a-swarm-of-drones-navigate-a-forest-without-crashing/ar-AAWVmxH

Had things been the other way around and it were China with the new node tech and larger manufacturing capability, the West would have still been fine so long as it kept some decent capability.

What does matter? First, keeping capability onshore. Second, new tech like Quantum Computing which promises to revolutionize encryption. Third, being careful of hardware backdoors.

This act is useful, but there are better arguments for industrial policy - and way better reasons to defend Taiwan than TSMC, like say the fate of its 24 million people.

Expand full comment

I'd still call myself a neoliberal and a free trade advocate, but there's no question that national security is a blind spot for the more simplistic and Pollyannaish form of that ideology. It's simply not a good idea to be utterly dependent on trade partners for crucial resources unless they're both friendly and right on your border.

I also think that the failure of opening up trade with China to produce political liberalization in that country is an argument for restricting future free trade deals to other democratic countries, or at least making entry into them for authoritarian regimes contingent on political liberalization.

Expand full comment

For a history of EUVL, contact me.

Expand full comment

What are the other industries that Congress should focus on in the same way, with strategic value? Energy is the obvious one, we're pretty close to autarkic on fossil fuels but the supply chain for lithium batteries and solar panels is very much not domestic. Rare earths, as a predecessor step to several of these industries.

Education would be a more fraught one, but it's also a sustainable competitive advantage, so probably worth considering. What's on the list of a would-be industrial policymaker?

Expand full comment

Its striking that only 17 Republicans supported this -- meaning that 33 Republicans opposed something that is critical to national interest.

Expand full comment