• lorez@lemm.ee
        715·
        11 months ago

        Yeah stop using them to manufacture goods sold in the West, see how well they fare…

        • arin@lemmy.worldEnglish
          142·
          11 months ago

          Uhh then they have more resources? And we have less affordable goods.

          • AlijahTheMediocre@lemmy.world
            127·
            11 months ago

            The modern Chinese economy is very dependent on trade with the West and other East Asian nations that are generally more favorable of the west.

            Those resources aren’t shit if they can’t make them into shit others will buy.

            • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.mlEnglish
              32·
              11 months ago

              That’s not really true. Much of China’s economic growth in recent years has been driven by internal demand and not foreign investment.

          • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
            42·
            11 months ago

            Yes congrats on proving that economics really is a zero-sum game and every econ professor has been wrong this whole time.

  • lntl@lemmy.ml
    302·
    11 months ago

    I wonder when these poor resources will be liberated. The regions in China which have these resources must be freedomized.

    • ElHexo [comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
      132·
      11 months ago

      Australia has huge reserves of rare earths.

      Australia also has huge reserves of cobalt too, but it’s cheaper to fuck up the DRC with violence and pollution, force kids to mine it and then write articles hand wringing about the ~ moral implications of modernity ~ without mentioning there are viable alternatives.

  • Jajcus@kbin.social
    193·
    11 months ago

    Isn’t that their long national tradition? Like with paper technology, silk technology or porcelain technology?

  • u_tamtam@programming.dev
    152·
    11 months ago

    No better way to boost diversion, and probably a net win for the planet considering how dirty and environmentally harmful the rare earth supply chain is today.

      • u_tamtam@programming.dev
        24·
        11 months ago

        Yup, though you are comparing 19th century tech to cutting edge tech: the PRC isn’t going to crack EUV lithography on its own any time soon

        • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
          404·
          11 months ago

          • China can’t make modern electronics

          • Okay they can make modern electronics but they’ll never design their own domestic brands

          • Okay they made their domestic brands but they’ll never achieve market dominance

          • Okay their domestic brands dominate their own market but they’ll never see export success

          • Okay they’re seeing export success in the EU, India, SEA, and the Middle East, but they’ll never make their own RAM or set teleco standards

          • Okay they made their own RAM and helped define the standard for 5G, but they’ll never make their own processors.

          • Okay they made their own processors but they’ll never make anything smaller than 10nm

          • Okay they made a 10mn chip but they’ll never make a 7nm chip

          • Okay they made a 7nm chip but they’ll never make a 5nm chip

          • Okay they made a 5nm chip but they’ll never crack DUV

          • Okay they cracked DUV but they’ll never crack EUV <------ YOU ARE COPING HERE

          • Okay they cracked EUV but they’ll never make a 4nm chip

          • Okay they made a 4nm chip but they’ll never build a chip factory around a large scale particle accelerator

          • Okay they built a large scale chip factory around a particle accelerator but…

          • u_tamtam@programming.dev
            21·
            11 months ago

            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:

            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.

            • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
              242·
              11 months ago

              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.

              smuglord

              • u_tamtam@programming.dev
                21·
                11 months ago

                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)

                smuglord

                Way to put your ignorance on display.

                • Krause [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
                  156·
                  11 months ago

                  actual hypersonic missiles haven’t made it to the battlefield

                  Really? Then how come Russia has had them in service since 2017 and China deployed theirs in 2019? This is just cope from western “military experts” online that can’t deal with the fact that Russia and China have better missiles than America.

                • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
                  101·
                  11 months ago

                  Way to put your ignorance on display.

                  smuglord

                  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

            • DefinitelyNotAPhone [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
              191·
              11 months ago

              and packaging this into a system that meets the scale and reliability requirements to make it commercially viable hasn’t been reproduced to date

              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.

              • mranachi@aussie.zone
                13·
                11 months ago

                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.

              • u_tamtam@programming.dev
                4·
                11 months ago

                Hey, thanks for the constructive comment :)

                [China] don’t give a shit about it being commercially viable, they give a shit about having the industrial capacity.

                True, but I don’t think the end-goal is to “just” achieve technical sovereignty. Answering local demand requires production at a large scale

                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

                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.

            • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.netEnglish
              15·
              11 months ago

              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),

              Dutch managed it, why wouldn’t the chinese, with a centrally planned economy that can directly integrate the different disciplines, be able to?

              packaging this into a system that meets the scale and reliability requirements to make it commercially viable hasn’t been reproduced to date.

              Communists in shambles - how could anyone fund science for the sake of progress instead of making money?

              • u_tamtam@programming.dev
                2·
                11 months ago

                Dutch managed it, why wouldn’t the chinese, with a centrally planned economy that can directly integrate the different disciplines, be able to?

                • 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

                for the sake of progress instead of making money?

                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.

                • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.netEnglish
                  9·
                  11 months ago

                  Dutch didn’t, not alone, far from that.

                  As opposed to the chinese, who are completely alone, all 1.whatever billion of them.

                  which are[…]largely self-reliant in the matter

                  You just fucking said it required cooperation you dumb cum juggler, now you’re saying they failed despite not cooperating?

                  I didn’t write that they “wouldn’t be able to”

                  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.

                  if China wants to meet the ever growing domestic demand (either military or civil), China need fabs churning chips reliably.

                  That’s not what commercially viable mean, buddy.

            • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
              131·
              11 months ago

              You obviously fall into the trap of believing that hard science cares about politics

              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.

              • u_tamtam@programming.dev
                21·
                11 months ago

                You’re trying to tell me a rapidly developing, well-resourced country will hit some arbitrary technology threshold because communism

                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.

                • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
                  61·
                  11 months ago

                  try to read some about economics and China if you nurture any expectation that it is a communist state other than in name.

                  Seems like you missed something if that’s your interpretation

            • duderium [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
              142·
              11 months ago

              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.

                • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
                  121·
                  11 months ago

                  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.

                • ferristriangle [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
                  102·
                  11 months ago

                  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.

              • u_tamtam@programming.dev
                2·
                11 months ago

                And what does that have to do with advanced lithography? I’m not some military expert and I doubt you are either so why waste your time spreading your unsubstantiated beliefs?

                • JuryNullification [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
                  92·
                  11 months ago

                  Those beliefs are very well substantiated. Fuck, you could even find this shit on Wikipedia. Look for “DF-21” and then look at the news articles about the American tests blowing up.

        • duderium [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
          291·
          11 months ago

          “Okay, China built a jump gate to Alpha Centauri, and I’m currently working as a Bloodbag for Immortan Joe, but seriously, when are these tankies going to admit that communism and fascism are the same?”

    • Longpork_afficianado@lemmy.nz
      2·
      11 months ago

      If it were a ban on the rare earth minerals themselves, yes, but a ban on the extraction technologies just secures dependence on Chinese sources.

      The reason China is a major exporter of these minerals has less to do with their availability in China and more to do with their lax environmental regulations, which allow extraction via means that are prohibited in many other countries.

      So preventing their extraction in countries where stricter environmental standards are in place just means more environmental damage.

  • XTornado@lemmy.ml
    126·
    11 months ago

    The pot is boiling, the countdown is starting… We will see how long more until they hit Taiwan.

  • nekandro@lemmy.ml
    32·
    11 months ago

    Anyone who knows anything about China’s REE processing industry should be terrified. They’re so far ahead it’s not even funny.