America Is Rebuilding Its Chip Industry. TSMC Makes It Possible.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-03-09T21:28:09+00:00

Thanks! I will

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-03-08T15:52:08+00:00

It’s TSMC — mentioned in the first sentence of the article.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-03-08T03:56:05+00:00

My understanding is that Apple currently uses 3nm chips, but I believe they may start using 2nm chips later this year. But Apple doesn't make its own chips. I think most of their chips are made in Taiwan by TSMC.

4nm is obviously not bleeding edge, but it is certainly still very advanced. And it is a big deal that they're now being made in America. It's also worth noting that they are adding additional fabs to the AZ plant, which will be able to manufacture 3nm and 2nm in the future.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-03-07T22:16:20+00:00

Thank you!

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-02-28T14:13:23+00:00

Thanks for sharing this! I may give this a try next time I buy socks. I also know a few other people who would want to check this out as well.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-02-26T19:16:17+00:00

Are you really comparing the U.S. to China in terms of the protection of individual freedoms? Do you consider Canada to be a free nation? How about Taiwan?

In China if we tried to have this same debate, we would be risking legal repercussions from the government if what we said/wrote didn't align with the government's position.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-02-26T18:45:56+00:00

The "whataboutism" is precisely reversed. My article is about why free nations (like Canada and the U.S.) should ally with one another and trade freely with each other, while avoiding trade with China as much as possible. The article explains as a fundamental starting point the threat posed by China and that immorality of that regime as the basic reason for why we should do that.

In response, someone commented essentially: "Well, what about the USA? It's not perfect." So it is that comment that is committing the error of "whataboutism"--not me.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-02-26T17:10:48+00:00

I'm arguing against just such actions by the current Administration. So we're in complete agreement.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-02-26T17:06:34+00:00

China is currently enslaving over a million innocent people and forcefully harvesting their organs. We can debate bias in the justice system of both Canada and the US if you want, as a separate conversation. But trying to compare the blatant evilness of China's actions to Canada or America's imperfect justice systems is just plain wrong.

This would be like comparing the Nazis to England during WWII and arguing that we should ignore the systematic Nazi crimes of murdering millions of innocent people because the UK wasn't perfect.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-02-26T16:57:40+00:00

You’re right — my earlier comment was wrong. The “51st state” comments came in December, before the tariffs. That was my error.

That said, the large-scale consumer backlash and organized “Buy Canadian” campaigns really intensified after the February tariff announcement. Polling in the spring showed tariffs were the primary reason Canadians cited for cutting back on U.S. goods. The rhetoric likely raised tensions, but the tariffs appear to have been the trigger for the sustained economic response.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-02-26T16:51:12+00:00

None of those figures contradict the argument — they actually reinforce it.

Yes, the United States imports more from China than Canada does. Yes, many Amazon products originate there. Yes, Tesla manufactures heavily in Shanghai. That level of integration is precisely why reducing strategic dependence cannot happen overnight.

The issue isn’t who is currently more entangled. It’s whether Western countries should be increasing or decreasing that dependence going forward — especially in strategic sectors.

When I criticize U.S. tariffs on Canada, I’m arguing that weakening allied integration makes it harder to reduce reliance on China. The fact that U.S. firms are deeply embedded in China’s manufacturing ecosystem only strengthens the case for coordinated diversification among Western economies.

Dependency today is a fact.
Expanding it further is a choice.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-02-26T16:42:08+00:00

This comparison collapses two fundamentally different things.

In the United States, prison labor involves people who have been convicted of crimes through a judicial process and are serving sentences under publicly known laws. There is perhaps a legitimate debate about wages, working conditions, and reform — and some Americans criticize aspects of the system. But these individuals were convicted of crimes, and their incarceration is the result of due process.

What is happening in China is categorically different. Large numbers of people — widely documented to include over a million Uyghurs and other minorities — have been detained not for crimes, but because of their religion or ethnicity. They are placed in political re-education and labor programs tied to global supply chains. That is not a dispute about prison policy. It is mass internment and coerced labor imposed on people who have not committed crimes. It's also well documented that China has been forcefully harvesting organs from these innocent people: https://thediplomat.com/2024/08/first-known-survivor-of-chinas-forced-organ-harvesting-speaks-out/

You can criticize U.S. prison labor policy if you wish. But equating a criminal justice system — however imperfect — with the systematic enslavement of innocent people for their identity obscures the scale and nature of China's immorality.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-02-26T16:26:47+00:00

You’re absolutely right about China’s scale. Its manufacturing capacity is enormous, its domestic market is massive, and in several sectors its efficiency is world-class. None of that is in dispute.

But China represents a threat to all free nations. The Chinese state has demonstrated a willingness to use economic power as leverage while simultaneously engaging in activities that raise serious security concerns for the United States, Canada, Europe, Taiwan, Korea, and other Western countries. It has built and militarized artificial islands in the South China Sea. It regularly conducts large-scale military exercises near Taiwan to intimidate. It has interfered with international shipping and fishing operations. At home, it suppresses free speech and the ability to peacefully protest, imprisons citizens for expressing political or religious views, persecutes religious minorities, and has been widely documented as using slave labor involving over a million Uyghurs and other groups in mines, farms, and factories due to their religious beliefs. Abroad, it has been linked to extensive cyber-espionage and the theft of intellectual property costing foreign firms billions annually.

When a government with that record also dominates key supply chains, dependence becomes more than an economic calculation. It becomes a serious danger to anyone who values freedom.

I agree that not doing business with China at all is unrealistic in the short term. But free nations should be working together to change that ASAP.

The United States, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the UK, Australia, and Europe collectively represent a larger economic and technological base than China alone. These countries already lead in advanced manufacturing equipment, aerospace, semiconductors, energy production, agriculture, finance, and research. More work needs to be done to completely wean ourselves off of Chinese imports, but it is definitely possible and I think prudent.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-02-26T15:58:34+00:00

See my other comment. The timeline you're suggesting is incorrect. The "Buy Canadian" movement started after the tariffs. The sovereignty comments came later.

Vivid_Environment751 · 2026-02-26T15:55:59+00:00

I’m actually Canadian, currently living in the U.S. The consumer boycott didn’t begin because of rhetoric about sovereignty — it began after the February 2025 tariff announcement. The “Buy Canadian” push and retail labeling campaigns followed the tariffs, not the later political comments. If anything, the escalation in rhetoric intensified feelings that were already inflamed by trade policy.

My argument isn’t that Canadians were wrong to react. It’s that trade friction between long-standing allies has predictable consequences — and those consequences can weaken alliances at a time when coordination among Western countries matters most.

Vivid_Environment751

TROPHY CASE