Power feed issues are more solvable than the really fancy chip issues right now, from what it sounds like.
Or we just... continue doing what we were already doing? Because there's very little downside?
Say bye bye to hyper efficient green mandate compliant consumer and industrial equipment, say hi to higher CO2 emissions.
And when the CCP goes for Taiwan and the chip fabs are only half done, and the 'modern' chip supply suddenly no longer is what it once was, what other stopgaps are there to fill the void that will be left?
Or we just... stop the CCP?
No, the primary issues are tax related. And the fact that chip fabs take a good 10 years to build fully anyway.
Did you know that Intel is an american company too?
The problem with that approach is that a microchip package for advanced tech is the size of a rice grain to the size of a baseball in our electronics. From smartphones to warheads. Vacuum tubes would require us to go back to 30lbs brick phones and Sidewinders near the size of a GBU-57A. That's a 30000lbs missile most of the weight would be fuel and the guidance computer and the power supply for that cpu. You'd get 10% to 15% at most for the payload. I love robust systems, but I hated the government issued mobile radios they had us lug in the 90s
...yeah, maybe, if DC's many, many CCP pawns are finally removed before the CCP launch their go.
From what I'd seen DEI issues related to hiring and actually having people who are more than diversity quota positions getting into the pipeline.
My understanding was the highest end chips of any company these days were fab'd in Taiwan, so whatever good stuff Intel has was stuck in the same supply constraints if things went loud.
The problem is t hat this stop gap is more like a dozen step backwards and not even necessarily cheaper while at it.
I'm not talking about putting these in the highest end gear, but as a stop gap where high end chips may be needed in middling importance gear, so the good chips can be husbanded for the most critical piece's of war material.
It's more about logistical/production redundancy in the face of uncertain supply chains, than being bleeding edge in tech or being cheap.
The difference is that the "low" part of the mix is usually older, cheaper, and often already existing and well tested technology.
Not your politicians. They routinely fuck you over costing quadruple the funds keeping old shit running when building new would have saved you two thirds in the long run. Looking at that advanced gun program of yours. It'd have been a wonderful artillery piece with cheap ammo. But your congress said no just make a limited production. Cost went from a billion USD for shells at 4k USD to multiple billions for shells at 15k, we'll 20k now after the pandemic. You'd have had 155mm gun SPGs with half a HIMARS' range now if your senators and congress hadn't snatched at that pork barrel.
No, over in Arizona; the chip plant that was going in there was having DEI issues with getting the hiring done right.
I thought Intel was another one who had most gear in Taiwan; if they are mostly in Israel, that is a little bit of breathing room on the chip supply if things go loud near Taiwan.
And I don't think China is 30 years away from today's state of the art.
Do you mean billions in profit or billions in revenue? After how many billions of investment?
China has its problem with replicating very quality sensitive tech.
Both.
What sort of profit does the company they'd be copying post?
Net income was 8.197 billion dollars for the 12 month period ending on sept 30, 2023. Revenue for the twelve month period ending on march 31, 2024 was 28.329 billion. Gross profit margin was 49.47% in 2022 with an operating profit margin being 30.49%.