[tjwebbnorfolk]

Ok but this is how the market is supposed to work. If the incumbents aren't doing what their customers want, then competitors can rise and fill the gap and compete.

This isn't a shortcoming, it's a competitive market working as intended.

[delecti]

The market doing what it's supposed to do does not negate that the market segment has only been left open because of overly myopic businesses.

[qup]

Why would we think businesses will always make the right move?

They'll blunder. They'll do it even harder in the absence of competition.

[delecti]

Who said I thought businesses would always make the right move?

Businesses blunder. "The market" is just a set of observations, including that competitors will tend to take advantage of those blunders. It is not a failure of the market that businesses have blundered, nor surprising that it will happen occasionally, and neither I nor mrweasel implied otherwise.

[tjwebbnorfolk]

The market is actively trying to solve it right now. Micron is investing $200B in new fabs. Everyone is trying to ramp up production.

Yes, identifying a problem is easy. But solving shortages in all cases requires perfect knowledge of future demand. So, good luck.

[estimator7292]

That's what modern capitalism is and it's bad for everyone

[127]

Only if you don't want or need any geopolitical gradient at all.

[PearlRiver]

Everyone gets mad when Chinese do capitalism...

[joe_mamba]

NO you see, we have to hate Chinese companies because they are unfair competitors since they get state funding from the Chinese government, unlike Intel, Micron, TSMC, ASML, Samsung who don't get state funding from the US, EU, Taiwan, ROK ... oh wait.

Scratch that, we have to hate Chinese companies because they do business with the Chinese military, unlike Intel, Nvidia, Samsung who don't do business with the US and ROK military ... oh wait.

[dev1ycan]

I know you are being sarcastic but the reason why we have to hate Chinese is simply because the standard of living of Americans depends on China not succeeding, simple as that.

[yellowapple]

Does it, though? If anything it seems like the opposite: China's success had directly enabled my standard of living as an American to be as high as it is.

I suppose it'd be true that the standard of living of some Americans depends on China not succeeding — specifically, those Americans who own corporations competing with Chinese firms — but I think they'll survive just fine with only 10 yachts instead of 15.

[fragmede]

There's maybe a tiny bit more to international economics than who gets a yacht. We know how American lives are, given history. The question you have to ask yourself, is what if Apple had invested $275 billion over 5 years into the US instead of China.

[joe_mamba]

Well then hey can just say THAT, instead of coming up with hypocritical BS that doesn't pass the smell test. People internationally have enough IQ to see through the double standards BS, especially since youtube is a thing.

And the standard of living of working class Americans has been on a steady decline since Reagan by the hand of US administrations, not by the hand of CHina.

This isn't defending anyone's standard of living, it's defending profits of domestic monopolies like Micron, who indulge in state subsidies from US taxpayers and then fuck then over on prices.

[tooltalk]

You mean neo-mercantilism?

[bigyabai]

"Why is nobody berating China?" is my favorite oft-repeated refrain on HN.

[ta9000]

They’re too busy berating the US.

[assaddayinh]

Lets not forget there is no competitors. There is one competitor- the chinese state, one huge company willing to subsidize any endeavor that will help it fmgain more marketshare with already captured markets.