[A_D_E_P_T]

The answer is, of course, yes. What is there to stop them? Sure, it's difficult -- but where there's a will, and where the resources of China are involved, there is most assuredly a way.

I remember when their cars were a joke, and when their cellphones were cheap trash. Now I don't think I'd buy a non-Chinese new car or cellphone, lol.

[andy_ppp]

The usual game plan of getting the technology they want to copy by offering cheap and highly skilled Chinese labour and access to the Chinese market by building the machines there is not available to them, so the likelihood is this will take longer and be more difficult than other implementations. There's hundreds of other technologies needed other than the lasers and the mirrors and the software and the experience running these machines at scale. I think to make more than a handful of GPUs they will be behind for at least 5 years.

This doesn't mean they will always be behind though.

If I was ASML I would have an AI generated honeypot of techniques that are plausible but incorrect for China to go after on this and make sure you get hacked by them.

[ilovecake1984]

Their cars and phones are still second rate. They are, however, cheap enough to be good value.

[crote]

> Their cars and phones are still second rate

So are modern Western cars - and arguably also phones.

If I'm forced to drive in a bug-riddled impossible-to-repair privacy-invading spaceship either way, why would I go for the overpriced outdated Western one rather than the affordable innovative Chinese one?

I would prefer a boring 2000s car with an electric drivetrain, but it's not like anyone is making them...

[rvnx]

About privacy invasion, it works for all countries in the world.

Vendor-lock is quite high, possibly higher in the US.

Look at iPhone, hardware is behind, restricted, unauditable privacy and questionable software in terms of performance (especially starting iOS 26, where you lost the choice for Liquid Glass).

Impossible to reasonably sync AirPods or watches, Macbook or choose the firmware version.

In comparison, the irony is that China offers the freedom (like with Qwen).

On these supposedly evil Chinese devices (phones, headphones, watches, etc), you have an open platform with great hardware, that you can modify as much as you want, and the only people who restrict you is... Google (making sure you cannot root without losing to important apps, so technically you can root, but practically you can't).

All the claims about "China = bad hardware and bad software" were true 20 years ago, but this is not the case anymore.

That being said, should certainly be quite cautious about default setup... you have US surveillance, PLUS, Chinese surveillance.

[throwaw12]

> Their cars and phones are still second rate

What have you tried so far on a daily basis to say this?

Have you tried latest Huawei models?

By the way, Foxconn makes iPhones, does it count as Chinese quality or not?

[epolanski]

Have had two Xiaomi phones in a row, I don't see the second rate.

My in law has a BYD Seagull, fail to see how it lags compared to similarly priced cars.

Chinese cars are incredibly popular in Europe, because they are better cars at the same price tag, even the more expensive ones.

I think it's asinine to think their high end manufacturing is crap, keeps us non competitive, let alone ignoring most of our stuff or large parts of it already comes from China.

And it has nothing to do with wages, modern high end manufacturing is highly automated and skilled engineers are as expensive as in southern or central Europe.

[chvid]

"What is there to stop them?" Washington for sure is trying their very best and has so far been quite successful.

[fauigerzigerk]

The US has successfully stopped them from acquiring the machines. That's not the same as stopping them from acquiring the capability to make them. On the contrary.

[defrost]

ASML of the Netherlands agreed to go along with past US requests to not supply China with bleeding edge machines, so China is making do with the older models while working hard to break the non-US hardware monopoly.

Washington, via the recent MATCH Act, has requested ASML to not supply or maintain any of the older equipment.

ASML has travelled to Washington to tell US Congress to take a long walk off a short pier.

[chvid]

If history is a guide, the Dutch will do what the US asks of them.

[toxicunderGroov]

Sadly yes, wish we'd just told them to fuck off and make a deal with China, they are the future - but we seem to be very scared of daddy.

[amelius]

We'll soon be reading science textbooks in Chinese.

[TFNA]

It has recently been reporting that China is cutting back foreign-language programmes in universities because AI translation is seen as the way of the future. So, in their view everyone will soon be reading science textbooks, whether of Chinese provenance or not, in any language.

[realusername]

I think they are onto something, language learning is quickly shifting into a hobby category (I don't mean it negatively)

[lambdaone]

The problem with not learning languages is that it restricts you to computer-mediated communication. If you learn other languages than your own, even at a fairly basic level, there is a whole world of social interaction and culture out there that just can't be accessed with a machine in the way.

This isn't to say that automated translation is bad, I use it extensively, but not all interaction worth having is online.

[TFNA]

The expectation is that AI translation will also become quasi-realtime, so for in-person interactions, too.

Many cultures will probably much rather interact with a foreigner speaking proficient AI translation, than a language-learner speaking with a poor accent and constant grammatical imperfections. Go to the Netherlands now as a Dutch learner who hasn't reached B2 level, for example, and people won't like it, it just wastes their time compared to using English.

[ThrowawayTestr]

Is cutting edge even necessary? If you could build the last two nodes 10x as cheaply that would be way more valuable.

[eloisant]

They're already capable to build microprocessors completely in-house. This is precisely the cutting edge we're talking about.

This matters for AI datacenters in particular, if they want to be autonomous in building them they need to be able to build advanced microprocessors locally.

[trvz]

Cheaper isn’t even required; just better scalability.

[SXX]

If you have stolen IP designed for cutting edge processes you need about the same tech to produce said IP.

Producing 10x of 10-years old GPUs is not exactly useful for modern AI codebases for instance.

[jon-wood]

Despite rumours to the contrary the world does need things that aren't useful for modern AI codebases still, I'd really appreciate it right now if China could get some fabs going that just manufactured RAM, storage, and maybe a selection of chips that the big ones have given up on because its more profitable to endlessly churn out GPUs and NPUs.

[kasabali]

I wouldn't mind getting 1080ti s , kaby lake cores or gigabytes of DDR4 for cheap.

[holoduke]

Constant blaming and framing others of stealing. State support, unfair practices etc is not gonna help you become successful. China is now part of the game. You better work with them.

[joe_mamba]

>The answer is, of course, yes.

No, not in this case.

> I remember when their cars were a joke, and when their cellphones were cheap trash.

Any country can make cars and phones now if they REALLY want to, they just don't because they wouldn't be competitive on the global market at performance and at scale. But not anyone can just make an EUV machine if they want to.

Becoming a leader in commodity white goods like a phones and cars is a different beast than EUV machines. The challenges are not even remotely comparable.

China doesn't have a Zeiss, it doesn't have an ASM, it doesn't have a Cymer, it doesn't have a Trumpf, and it doesn't have a dozen other domestic competitors to western suppliers of critical parts that make an EUV machine.

And each of those suppliers, like Zeiss for example, is a leader because it has decades of expertise that can't be speed-run, even with IP theft. So before China can have an ASML it first needs a Zeiss. So ask yourself where is their Zeiss and are they beating the west's Zeiss?

[lambdaone]

This is a Manhattan Project-level endeavour, and most countries would not be capable of it. China, however, is. Even though it lacks the expertise to do all these specific things to the Western cutting edge level right now, it has the resources, the overall technology and engineering base, and the determination to achieve the goal with the full power of the Chinese economy behind it. Not to mention industrial espionage.

It might take them a decade, but they'll get there. Working on the basis that you can somehow stop China rather than merely delaying them is a comforting illusion.

[eloisant]

They have more than 1 billion people that are getting more and more educated, they have the capital and will to invest in it, they will get there eventually.

The "moat" we're talking about with private companies is that it's very hard for competitors to get enough funding to compete, and private investors are unwilling to invest in a company that will compete with a big established player. That's completely different when a state has a strategy and decides to invest to achieve a goal.

[exceptione]

The comparison with cars and cellphones falls short for ASML machines. The former categories involved western companies transferring IP to Chinese counterparts. So far, the Chinese have succeeded in stealing IP from ASML, but this is complexity in its own category. Also, the whole supply chain is part of the solution. That is a lot to copy.

But I agree that, given enough time, China should be able to. But Volvo en Tesla handing over IP themselves, and phone makers letting China produce and assemble phones (maybe not as extensive these days anymore) is something different.

EDIT: I mentioned Saab when I meant Volvo. Not sure if people downvoted based on that, I have no info on Saab so consider that as a mistake.

[saidnooneever]

people overstate complexity of ASmL machines. They are not impossible to make or use, specialist work sure but its possible. The only reason why no one does it is: 1) IP laws, 2) Costs

China has Money and Smart people. (and very effective corporate / nationstate espionage) so they can most certainly reproduce advanced machines.

They might not have incentive yet to do it because it will not make them popular, and potentially output products would be banned on US/EU. They play a long game and want US and EU consumers to ask tehir governments to please allow the chinese products.. so their market share is safe and stable.

I think once there is enough incentive for them they would do it. They simply do not want to do it currently.

[exceptione]

Why do you think they don't want to do it? I find that a weird statement, and your given reasons don't make sense to me. This is one of their core programs, and as part of that have taken over some IP via espionage programs. China is actively trying to build one for quite some time now.

  > people overstate complexity of ASmL machines. They are not impossible to make or use, specialist work sure but its possible. The only reason why no one does it is: 1) IP laws, 2) Costs

Citation needed, if these were the real roadblocks China would have had the machines by now already. Even with all the parts at hands (don't forget: from a total of 5100 suppliers) the Chinese couldn't assemble one. It is complex with a lot of know-how involved.

The real reasons are: enormous complexity, lots of original research involved, deeply specialized supply chains. Recreating that takes lots of time and money. Even if you cut corners and steal IP. So that leaves China with 'time' as the real impediment. And who knows, AI will be a boost to get to that goal?