News on China's scientific and technological development.

manqiangrexue said:

I said show your evidence, NOT tell me a story. Where are the linked articles? I want to see just how strong China was and whether they blew it or it was just not feasible to continue to invest in a badly backwards industry against global competitors given the economic status back then.

Going in circles; a one vs. one comparison against a modern EUV machine that is 180 million and the size of a house is not the only way to go about things. Your repeated attempts to move the goalpost fail to cover the fact that you said focused lasers cannot do mass work but they can.

Click to expand...

not feasible to continue to invest in a badly backwards industry against global competitors given the economic status back then?

Ask you yourself this question, why are they doing it now? And trying to reinvent the wheel. Because they got no choices because US sanctioned them?

Do you really need your butt kicked in order to gert moltivated?

EUV is the way to go and Chinese researchers should stop giving out easy gimmicks trying fool people and give chinese people false sense of hope

nastya1 said:

As you continue to read it says for large scale processing it use direct write method which means directly write on wafer without the resist.
So it doesnt matter they use dual beam with resist or single beam how can compete with millions rays of light litho.

Click to expand...

You are contradicting yourself, how do they use resist and not resist at the same time? Laser is light lol

nastya1 said:

not feasible to continue to invest in a badly backwards industry against global competitors given the economic status back then?

Ask you yourself this question, why are they doing it now? And trying to reinvent the wheel. Because they got no choices because US sanctioned them?

Click to expand...

Obviously, China was much poorer back then and could not afford to subsidize tons of backwards money-losing industries. And yes, the difference is that now China is much richer, with a much stronger scientific background, and must do this.

And I still don't see lick of evidence from you to justify your claim that China, in the 1950's was ahead of the West in lithography and that's probably because you made it up like all your other stories.

nastya1 said:

Do you really need your butt kicked in order to gert moltivated?

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, imperfect people do and quoting myself from #6319:

"... if China and its companies were perfect, they would have had the strategic foresight to have a full lithography chain ready the instant Trump attempted any ban. But for many reasons already mentioned, mostly that Chinese companies wanted the easy way to earn money, that did not happen. Nobody is perfect, but if you cannot be perfect, the next best thing is to have Chinese speed of development. "

nastya1 said:

Lol. Come on. No companies can afford have employees doing monitoring equipments daily basis.
Without their employees monitoring the machines wont work?
Wow come on. Be real.
Companies paid for the machine full yet need a ASML guy to give permission onsite on daily basis.

Its pretty wild

Click to expand...

You just have no understanding how high tech equipment and dual use machine make money. If you think that buying some high tech machines and you can run them forever, then you have no idea that selling you a high tech machine is not that profitable for ASML but servicing that machine is the money maker. That's why it is impossible to run these machines without these equipment providers service them for you. ASML has made sure of that.


(1) Installed Base Management sales equals our net service and field option sales.

nastya1 said:

Well, huawei is using their limited stockpiles of chips.

Click to expand...

That is why those fighting against Huawei have no chance whatsoever.

They already made a stand alone 5G network, and this is the best they can do, hope to win in the future via sabotage of the supply line.

The race to 5G is close to being over. The projection was China was going to have stand alone 5G networks in two years. Two years!

But it is happening now.

We know is surely gonna lose.

Gatekeeper said:

Thank you.

So 5G it's like making a car, any industrialised country can do it. But who is the most efficient at it. For example, in the 60s and 70s Japanese develope lots of components that just required snapping it together, as opposed involving a person spending time screwing it together.

But of course, the downside is others can and does copy it for their own use. I know patents are meant to protect this. But how much can it protect, it's debatable.

This leads to my next question, if other firms are unable to produce without infringing upon Huawei's patent. And this leads to paying royalties to Huawei. Will this usage of Huawei's tech constitute breaking of Trump's sanctions?

Anyeay I'm now more informed than I was before. I'll get back to the wifey and impressed her with my new found knowledge! Lol

Click to expand...

Patent does not prevent other players to use it, it only protect the inventor to profit from it. Companies are oblidged by 3GPP standard to use these patented solution in their product, they are oblidged to pay royalties to the owners.

For example, if US buy Ericsson base station which will involve lots of devices and softwares that have Huawei's patent in it. Ericsson will pay Huawei from their profit from US. Trump can not stop Ericsson to pay Huawei because Ericsson is a Swedish/EU company who also has operation in China. Ericsson not paying Huawei will make it break laws in rest of the world outside of US. Ericsson won't do that, nobody would.

So the question is not "if someone breaks Trump's sanction" since that sanction is pulled out his backend with absolute no logical ground. The true question is what can Trump do about the breaking, and how far he is willing to go to isolate US from the rest of the planet.

manqiangrexue said:

Obviously, China was much poorer back then and could not afford to subsidize tons of backwards money-losing industries. And yes, the difference is that now China is much richer, with a much stronger scientific background, and must do this.

And I still don't see lick of evidence from you to justify your claim that China, in the 1950's was ahead of the West in lithography and that's probably because you made it up like all your other stories.


Unfortunately, imperfect people do and quoting myself from #6319:

"... if China and its companies were perfect, they would have had the strategic foresight to have a full lithography chain ready the instant Trump attempted any ban. But for many reasons already mentioned, mostly that Chinese companies wanted the easy way to earn money, that did not happen. Nobody is perfect, but if you cannot be perfect, the next best thing is to have Chinese speed of development. "

Click to expand...

Read about how China squander its opportunity

KYli said:

You just have no understanding how high tech equipment and dual use machine make money. If you think that buying some high tech machines and you can run them forever, then you have no idea that selling you a high tech machine is not that profitable for ASML but servicing that machine is the money maker. That's why it is impossible to run these machines without these equipment providers service them for you. ASML has made sure of that.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(1) Installed Base Management sales equals our net service and field option sales.

(Figures in millions of euros unless otherwise indicated)	Q3 2019	Q4 2019	FY 2018	FY 2019
Net sales	2,987	4,036	10,944	11,820
...of which Installed Base Management sales 1	661	906	2,685	2,824
New lithography systems sold (units)	52	67	207	203
Used lithography systems sold (units)	5	9	17	26

Click to expand...

Earlier, You were saying equipments needs daily permission from ASML employee.

And now you saying on site support services on needed basis.

I dont get it

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskComputerScience/comments/dus2y1
X-ray litho is even better than euv

nastya1 said:

Read about how China squander its opportunity

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

That's all? First of all, what does a mistake in the 1960's have to do with China being high on maglev, 5G, AI?

Secondly, article claims that China was close to the US in the 1960's at semiconductor technology. It is entirely unclear how the author qualifies that statement as well as what semiconductor technology means. It does not seem to mean lithography. Also, the US is far from being self-sufficient and I don't know if it ever was. It does not make its own lithographs and Intel, America's leading foundry, Intel, cannot yet go below 10nm. So right now, I don't know if China trails the US at all in "semiconductor technology" but rather that no country has, now or possibly ever before, commanded the entire manufacturing line from raw material to lithograph to design, to chip manufacturing. So China can very well be better or comparable to the US now but the challenge for China is to become the first country that commands the entire line of technology. This is not a sanction that the US would fare well under, so being close to the US, as the article suggested, would do very little good.

And this is you moving the goalpost again, but to a smaller degree than before. You said that China was self-sufficient and world-leading. The article supports neither; it only hints that China briefly had the chance to rival the US in semiconductor tech, which in many ways, it does today as well.