Fashion trends are often fleeting. But some styles survive for millennia because stylish folk from ancient times had fashion statements literally engraved into their bones.
According to historical records, polished black teeth were considered a high standard of beauty in parts of Vietnam as early as 400 BCE. Archaeologists have now uncovered physical evidence that this was the case at least 2,000 years ago, reporting their findings in a recent paper published in Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences. For the study, researchers used noninvasive methods to investigate skeletons found in Dong Xa, a region in northern Vietnam.
“This research clarifies both the antiquity and the distinctive techniques of tooth blackening in Vietnam,” the team explained in its paper, adding that the practice “underscores a culturally embedded expression of identity within wider networks of interregional interaction and exchange.”
A history of black teeth
Pitch-black teeth might sound off-putting, given the modern preference for bright white teeth. Indeed, Western influences in Asia have phased out the tradition for younger generations, but tooth blackening has a rich history of cultural significance across South Asia, Oceania, and certain parts of Africa and America, according to the paper.
“The practice is still observed today, not only in Vietnam, but also more widely across parts of Southeast Asia,” Yue Zhang, the study’s lead author and an archaeologist at the Australian National University, told Live Science.
The Vietnamese in particular were known for their intricate method of tooth blackening, a multi-step process involving “sanitization, red dyeing, black dyeing, and polishing,” the paper noted. However, archaeologists studying skeletons from the region didn’t quite have a consensus on what constituted tooth blackening.
For instance, some skulls had reddish-brown teeth that may have been the product of natural staining from eating certain plants, not necessarily tooth blackening. Accordingly, researchers were divided on the exact procedures for tooth blackening in ancient Southeast Asian communities.
The original beauty standard
The new study sought to make a clear distinction between intentional blackening and natural staining. The team selected skeletons unearthed from previous excavations in the Dong Xa site, located in a region of northern Vietnam known to host a rich archaeological record of bronze artifacts from the Iron Age.
The team used X-ray fluorescence to indirectly identify the chemical composition of the skeletons’ enamel. Based on that analysis, they looked at ethnographic evidence to explore possible links between modern tooth-blackening practices and the ancient skeletons.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the researchers found high levels of iron and sulfur in the ancient enamel samples. This points to the involvement of iron salts, Zhang told Live Science.
If true, this is consistent with the modern method of tooth blackening, a weeks-long process that uses a combination of iron salts and tannin-rich plants, such as betel nuts, to dye teeth a deep black. It would also mean the process left people with jet-black teeth for their entire lives.
Something to chew on
The implications of the new findings extend beyond ancient beauty standards, according to the paper. Historical records have noted “significant technological and social transformations during the Iron Age” in modern-day Vietnam. This led to the proliferation of iron use in this particular community, so it makes sense that prevalent beauty standards had something to do with iron use, the researchers explained.
On the other hand, biomolecular evidence for betel nut chewing—presumably a separate practice from tooth blackening—dates as early as 2,000 BCE and was observed beyond Vietnam. The potential connections between the two, therefore, could be another opportunity for investigations, the researchers noted.
But the findings highlight the sheer longevity of tooth blackening in Vietnam, regardless of its diminished influence in the region. It truly seems to be a fashion trend that lasted more than a few lifetimes—remarkably, as the new study shows, with few changes to the methods.
That monopoly has made ASML the most valuable company in Europe, worth over $530 billion. And with the four largest American tech companies — Microsoft, Meta, Amazon and Google — committing more than $600 billion in AI infrastructure spending this year alone, demand for ASML’s machines has surged to the point where the company has openly said the world won’t have enough chips for years.
All that demand has also made ASML a target. Substrate, a San Francisco startup founded by a protégé of Peter Thiel, has raised more than $100 million and been valued at over $1 billion on the claim that it can build a rival lithography machine. Separately, there have been reports that former ASML engineers in China have partly reverse-engineered the technology, a prospect with enormous geopolitical implications.
Christophe Fouquet, who became ASML’s CEO in 2024 after more than a decade at the company, sat down with this editor on the rooftop deck of his Beverly Hills hotel Tuesday morning ahead of his appearance at the Milken Institute Global Conference. Dressed in a blue suit and white shirt, he was relaxed — even when the conversation turned to the rivals.
This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
TC: Did you see the AI explosion coming?
Techcrunch event
San Francisco, CA|October 13-15, 2026
CF: No, not at all. We worked very hard, but not with the idea that this would come. You went from a concept — something people thought would eventually arrive — to ChatGPT, which was really the first good example of what AI could do. And now I think we look at AI as the next revolution, not only industrial but societal. Did I see it coming? No. Sitting in the middle of it every day, sometimes we wake up in the morning and still check that what is happening is really happening.
The big question everyone has is whether the supply chain can keep pace with demand. Can it?
The demand is such that the market overall will be supply-limited for quite a bit. Right now, the biggest bottleneck seems to be in chip manufacturing. We, as an equipment supplier, follow our customers, and so far we’ve followed them pretty well — but we know we have to step up our entire supply chain and capacity. If you talk to the hyperscalers, I think they will tell you that for the next two, three, even five years, they’re not going to get enough chips.
TSMC made news recently saying your latest machines are too expensive. How do you respond?
An EUV system, if you look at the price, is going to be more expensive than a low-NA system, but the cost of making a wafer with this tool on some advanced layers will be cheaper. We can get 20%, 30% cost reduction.
[Editors note: both machines Fouquet is referring to here are EUV machines — the same fundamental technology. NA stands for numerical aperture, a measure of how finely a machine can focus light onto a chip. Low-NA EUV is the current generation; high-NA EUV is ASML’s newest generation, capable of printing even finer patterns but carrying a price tag of $350 million or more apiece. Fouquet is arguing that even though the new machine costs more, it produces chips more cheaply.]
I get a lot of questions about whether it’s going to be this month or next month or the month after. And I usually say it doesn’t really matter, because we designed high-NA for the next 10, 20 years. You can go back to the press from 2016, 2017, and you’ll find the same quotes — low-NA EUV was very pricey. We know what happened after that. The same will happen with high-NA.
There’s a startup called Substrate, backed by Peter Thiel, claiming it can build a rival lithography machine. What do you think of it?
Wanting to have it and having it — that’s still a huge difference. The challenges of lithography are many. Being able to make an image is a starting point, but you need to make that image in very high quantity, at very low cost, at high speed, and with nanometer accuracy. I always say the only reason ASML could build an EUV machine is because 80% of it already existed, based on previous knowledge and products built over time. We had to solve one problem — getting EUV light — and that alone took 20 years. When you start from scratch, the challenge is enormous. I’ve seen a lot of claims. I’ve seen a few pictures. But we had our first EUV picture 30 years ago, and we still needed 20 more years of hard work to turn it into a manufacturing system.
xLight is focusing on one element of our EUV machine — the source that creates the light. The source we have can be extended for many years to come, and we know how to scale it. What xLight is doing is a new source that still has to be built and proven. The only question is whether it provides a performance or cost advantage over what we have. I think the jury is still out. We are working with them so they can demonstrate their technology — we feel that’s a responsibility on our side. But it’s still a very long journey.
There are also reports that former ASML engineers in China have reverse-engineered your machines.
To reverse-engineer anything, you first need to have the machine. And there is no EUV machine in China — we never shipped any tools there. All the tools we have shipped, we know where they are. They’re either in use with customers, and we track those, or they’ve been dismantled and came back to us. The idea that one of our systems is in China is simply wrong. And because our EUV technology has never been exported there, we also have no people in China trained on EUV.
Very early on, when restrictions came in, we created a complete separation within the company between those who can access EUV technology, documents and training, and those who cannot. Our team in China sits on the other side of that line. The facts point to very little, if any, progress at all. It’s hard for people to accept that because access to this technology is so important.
On export controls more broadly — Jensen Huang was here last night arguing that companies should sell globally, that more corporate revenue means more tax dollars for a company’s home country. He also said the important thing is to keep the best and latest closer to home. Do you agree?
I think he’s totally right. What he adds — and I think this is what Nvidia has done — is that you can keep a technological advantage by maintaining a generation gap in what you sell. Nvidia sells a few generations back, and that lets them find the balance between still doing business and not handing a strong competitive advantage to countries where you won’t sell the latest. We believe the same approach should apply to our products. Today we ship tools to China — allowed by export controls — but it’s a tool we first shipped in 2015. If you apply Jensen’s philosophy to our situation, Nvidia is working with roughly an eight-generation gap. We’re looking at two or three. There’s room for rationalization — finding the right balance between not doing business at all, losing a major opportunity, and strongly inviting others to compete with you.
How do you assess where things stand with the current administration on all of this?
There is a good dialogue, which is very important. I think there’s a genuine understanding of what business needs, but there’s still the challenge of finding the right balance between all the different voices and interests. The dialogue is there, and we appreciate that. I’ve been in Washington many times. At least the discussion is happening. But it’s a very complex topic.
You don’t seem concerned about anyone short-cutting your technology.
People like to have the greatest technology, but they tend to forget what it took to build it. It’s been many years of work — not only at ASML but with our suppliers. Many different groups of people solving very difficult problems, and then one company bringing it all together using decades of lithography expertise to turn it into a manufacturing system. This is in no way easy. And I think that’s also our best protection. It’s simply what it took to put it together.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
That monopoly has made ASML the most valuable company in Europe, worth over $530 billion. And with the four largest American tech companies — Microsoft, Meta, Amazon and Google — committing more than $600 billion in AI infrastructure spending this year alone, demand for ASML’s machines has surged to the point where the company has openly said the world won’t have enough chips for years.
All that demand has also made ASML a target. Substrate, a San Francisco startup founded by a protégé of Peter Thiel, has raised more than $100 million and been valued at over $1 billion on the claim that it can build a rival lithography machine. Separately, there have been reports that former ASML engineers in China have partly reverse-engineered the technology, a prospect with enormous geopolitical implications.
Christophe Fouquet, who became ASML’s CEO in 2024 after more than a decade at the company, sat down with this editor on the rooftop deck of his Beverly Hills hotel Tuesday morning ahead of his appearance at the Milken Institute Global Conference. Dressed in a blue suit and white shirt, he was relaxed — even when the conversation turned to the rivals.
This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
TC: Did you see the AI explosion coming?
Techcrunch event
San Francisco, CA|October 13-15, 2026
CF: No, not at all. We worked very hard, but not with the idea that this would come. You went from a concept — something people thought would eventually arrive — to ChatGPT, which was really the first good example of what AI could do. And now I think we look at AI as the next revolution, not only industrial but societal. Did I see it coming? No. Sitting in the middle of it every day, sometimes we wake up in the morning and still check that what is happening is really happening.
The big question everyone has is whether the supply chain can keep pace with demand. Can it?
The demand is such that the market overall will be supply-limited for quite a bit. Right now, the biggest bottleneck seems to be in chip manufacturing. We, as an equipment supplier, follow our customers, and so far we’ve followed them pretty well — but we know we have to step up our entire supply chain and capacity. If you talk to the hyperscalers, I think they will tell you that for the next two, three, even five years, they’re not going to get enough chips.
TSMC made news recently saying your latest machines are too expensive. How do you respond?
An EUV system, if you look at the price, is going to be more expensive than a low-NA system, but the cost of making a wafer with this tool on some advanced layers will be cheaper. We can get 20%, 30% cost reduction.
[Editors note: both machines Fouquet is referring to here are EUV machines — the same fundamental technology. NA stands for numerical aperture, a measure of how finely a machine can focus light onto a chip. Low-NA EUV is the current generation; high-NA EUV is ASML’s newest generation, capable of printing even finer patterns but carrying a price tag of $350 million or more apiece. Fouquet is arguing that even though the new machine costs more, it produces chips more cheaply.]
I get a lot of questions about whether it’s going to be this month or next month or the month after. And I usually say it doesn’t really matter, because we designed high-NA for the next 10, 20 years. You can go back to the press from 2016, 2017, and you’ll find the same quotes — low-NA EUV was very pricey. We know what happened after that. The same will happen with high-NA.
There’s a startup called Substrate, backed by Peter Thiel, claiming it can build a rival lithography machine. What do you think of it?
Wanting to have it and having it — that’s still a huge difference. The challenges of lithography are many. Being able to make an image is a starting point, but you need to make that image in very high quantity, at very low cost, at high speed, and with nanometer accuracy. I always say the only reason ASML could build an EUV machine is because 80% of it already existed, based on previous knowledge and products built over time. We had to solve one problem — getting EUV light — and that alone took 20 years. When you start from scratch, the challenge is enormous. I’ve seen a lot of claims. I’ve seen a few pictures. But we had our first EUV picture 30 years ago, and we still needed 20 more years of hard work to turn it into a manufacturing system.
xLight is focusing on one element of our EUV machine — the source that creates the light. The source we have can be extended for many years to come, and we know how to scale it. What xLight is doing is a new source that still has to be built and proven. The only question is whether it provides a performance or cost advantage over what we have. I think the jury is still out. We are working with them so they can demonstrate their technology — we feel that’s a responsibility on our side. But it’s still a very long journey.
There are also reports that former ASML engineers in China have reverse-engineered your machines.
To reverse-engineer anything, you first need to have the machine. And there is no EUV machine in China — we never shipped any tools there. All the tools we have shipped, we know where they are. They’re either in use with customers, and we track those, or they’ve been dismantled and came back to us. The idea that one of our systems is in China is simply wrong. And because our EUV technology has never been exported there, we also have no people in China trained on EUV.
Very early on, when restrictions came in, we created a complete separation within the company between those who can access EUV technology, documents and training, and those who cannot. Our team in China sits on the other side of that line. The facts point to very little, if any, progress at all. It’s hard for people to accept that because access to this technology is so important.
On export controls more broadly — Jensen Huang was here last night arguing that companies should sell globally, that more corporate revenue means more tax dollars for a company’s home country. He also said the important thing is to keep the best and latest closer to home. Do you agree?
I think he’s totally right. What he adds — and I think this is what Nvidia has done — is that you can keep a technological advantage by maintaining a generation gap in what you sell. Nvidia sells a few generations back, and that lets them find the balance between still doing business and not handing a strong competitive advantage to countries where you won’t sell the latest. We believe the same approach should apply to our products. Today we ship tools to China — allowed by export controls — but it’s a tool we first shipped in 2015. If you apply Jensen’s philosophy to our situation, Nvidia is working with roughly an eight-generation gap. We’re looking at two or three. There’s room for rationalization — finding the right balance between not doing business at all, losing a major opportunity, and strongly inviting others to compete with you.
How do you assess where things stand with the current administration on all of this?
There is a good dialogue, which is very important. I think there’s a genuine understanding of what business needs, but there’s still the challenge of finding the right balance between all the different voices and interests. The dialogue is there, and we appreciate that. I’ve been in Washington many times. At least the discussion is happening. But it’s a very complex topic.
You don’t seem concerned about anyone short-cutting your technology.
People like to have the greatest technology, but they tend to forget what it took to build it. It’s been many years of work — not only at ASML but with our suppliers. Many different groups of people solving very difficult problems, and then one company bringing it all together using decades of lithography expertise to turn it into a manufacturing system. This is in no way easy. And I think that’s also our best protection. It’s simply what it took to put it together.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
#ASML #CEO #Christophe #Fouquet #coming #TechCrunchASML,Christophe Fouquet,Jensen Huang,nvidia,TSMC">ASML CEO Christophe Fouquet: No one is coming for us | TechCrunch
Every time you use AI, you are, in some small way, depending on a 42-year-old, 44,000-person Dutch company that spends €4.5 billion each year to advance its technology.
ASML, headquartered in the Netherlands, makes the machines that make the chips that make AI possible. More specifically, it makes the only machines in the world capable of printing the microscopic patterns on silicon wafers that define the most advanced semiconductors — a process called extreme ultraviolet lithography, or EUV. The machines are roughly the size of a school bus, take months to assemble, involve hundreds of suppliers, and cost anywhere from $200 million to upwards of $400 million apiece depending on the generation (prices that give even ASML’s biggest customers pause occasionally).
That monopoly has made ASML the most valuable company in Europe, worth over $530 billion. And with the four largest American tech companies — Microsoft, Meta, Amazon and Google — committing more than $600 billion in AI infrastructure spending this year alone, demand for ASML’s machines has surged to the point where the company has openly said the world won’t have enough chips for years.
All that demand has also made ASML a target. Substrate, a San Francisco startup founded by a protégé of Peter Thiel, has raised more than $100 million and been valued at over $1 billion on the claim that it can build a rival lithography machine. Separately, there have been reports that former ASML engineers in China have partly reverse-engineered the technology, a prospect with enormous geopolitical implications.
Christophe Fouquet, who became ASML’s CEO in 2024 after more than a decade at the company, sat down with this editor on the rooftop deck of his Beverly Hills hotel Tuesday morning ahead of his appearance at the Milken Institute Global Conference. Dressed in a blue suit and white shirt, he was relaxed — even when the conversation turned to the rivals.
This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
TC: Did you see the AI explosion coming?
Techcrunch event
San Francisco, CA|October 13-15, 2026
CF: No, not at all. We worked very hard, but not with the idea that this would come. You went from a concept — something people thought would eventually arrive — to ChatGPT, which was really the first good example of what AI could do. And now I think we look at AI as the next revolution, not only industrial but societal. Did I see it coming? No. Sitting in the middle of it every day, sometimes we wake up in the morning and still check that what is happening is really happening.
The big question everyone has is whether the supply chain can keep pace with demand. Can it?
The demand is such that the market overall will be supply-limited for quite a bit. Right now, the biggest bottleneck seems to be in chip manufacturing. We, as an equipment supplier, follow our customers, and so far we’ve followed them pretty well — but we know we have to step up our entire supply chain and capacity. If you talk to the hyperscalers, I think they will tell you that for the next two, three, even five years, they’re not going to get enough chips.
TSMC made news recently saying your latest machines are too expensive. How do you respond?
An EUV system, if you look at the price, is going to be more expensive than a low-NA system, but the cost of making a wafer with this tool on some advanced layers will be cheaper. We can get 20%, 30% cost reduction.
[Editors note: both machines Fouquet is referring to here are EUV machines — the same fundamental technology. NA stands for numerical aperture, a measure of how finely a machine can focus light onto a chip. Low-NA EUV is the current generation; high-NA EUV is ASML’s newest generation, capable of printing even finer patterns but carrying a price tag of $350 million or more apiece. Fouquet is arguing that even though the new machine costs more, it produces chips more cheaply.]
I get a lot of questions about whether it’s going to be this month or next month or the month after. And I usually say it doesn’t really matter, because we designed high-NA for the next 10, 20 years. You can go back to the press from 2016, 2017, and you’ll find the same quotes — low-NA EUV was very pricey. We know what happened after that. The same will happen with high-NA.
There’s a startup called Substrate, backed by Peter Thiel, claiming it can build a rival lithography machine. What do you think of it?
Wanting to have it and having it — that’s still a huge difference. The challenges of lithography are many. Being able to make an image is a starting point, but you need to make that image in very high quantity, at very low cost, at high speed, and with nanometer accuracy. I always say the only reason ASML could build an EUV machine is because 80% of it already existed, based on previous knowledge and products built over time. We had to solve one problem — getting EUV light — and that alone took 20 years. When you start from scratch, the challenge is enormous. I’ve seen a lot of claims. I’ve seen a few pictures. But we had our first EUV picture 30 years ago, and we still needed 20 more years of hard work to turn it into a manufacturing system.
xLight is focusing on one element of our EUV machine — the source that creates the light. The source we have can be extended for many years to come, and we know how to scale it. What xLight is doing is a new source that still has to be built and proven. The only question is whether it provides a performance or cost advantage over what we have. I think the jury is still out. We are working with them so they can demonstrate their technology — we feel that’s a responsibility on our side. But it’s still a very long journey.
There are also reports that former ASML engineers in China have reverse-engineered your machines.
To reverse-engineer anything, you first need to have the machine. And there is no EUV machine in China — we never shipped any tools there. All the tools we have shipped, we know where they are. They’re either in use with customers, and we track those, or they’ve been dismantled and came back to us. The idea that one of our systems is in China is simply wrong. And because our EUV technology has never been exported there, we also have no people in China trained on EUV.
Very early on, when restrictions came in, we created a complete separation within the company between those who can access EUV technology, documents and training, and those who cannot. Our team in China sits on the other side of that line. The facts point to very little, if any, progress at all. It’s hard for people to accept that because access to this technology is so important.
On export controls more broadly — Jensen Huang was here last night arguing that companies should sell globally, that more corporate revenue means more tax dollars for a company’s home country. He also said the important thing is to keep the best and latest closer to home. Do you agree?
I think he’s totally right. What he adds — and I think this is what Nvidia has done — is that you can keep a technological advantage by maintaining a generation gap in what you sell. Nvidia sells a few generations back, and that lets them find the balance between still doing business and not handing a strong competitive advantage to countries where you won’t sell the latest. We believe the same approach should apply to our products. Today we ship tools to China — allowed by export controls — but it’s a tool we first shipped in 2015. If you apply Jensen’s philosophy to our situation, Nvidia is working with roughly an eight-generation gap. We’re looking at two or three. There’s room for rationalization — finding the right balance between not doing business at all, losing a major opportunity, and strongly inviting others to compete with you.
How do you assess where things stand with the current administration on all of this?
There is a good dialogue, which is very important. I think there’s a genuine understanding of what business needs, but there’s still the challenge of finding the right balance between all the different voices and interests. The dialogue is there, and we appreciate that. I’ve been in Washington many times. At least the discussion is happening. But it’s a very complex topic.
You don’t seem concerned about anyone short-cutting your technology.
People like to have the greatest technology, but they tend to forget what it took to build it. It’s been many years of work — not only at ASML but with our suppliers. Many different groups of people solving very difficult problems, and then one company bringing it all together using decades of lithography expertise to turn it into a manufacturing system. This is in no way easy. And I think that’s also our best protection. It’s simply what it took to put it together.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
When I first heard the price of the Truke TrueClips, I tempered my expectations, since there’s only so much a brand can do in terms of the design on a tight budget. Well, I’ve been proven wrong, as the TrueClips actually look really good. Don’t get me wrong, the case is made from plastic, but that leather pattern looks super premium. The pattern also protects against oily smudges and scratches, meaning they still look fresh. If you’ve read my previous reviews, you know I’m a sucker for oval earphone cases, and the same can be said here. The oval design keeps portability excellent, so I wasn’t walking around with a huge bulge in my pocket. The opening and closing mechanism is pretty satisfactory, so you can use it as a fidget toy, as well.
Inside the case are the open-back earbuds. Usually, comfort is pretty tricky to answer with earbuds, as everyone has different ear shapes. But with the TrueClips, it’s not a concern. The earbuds have two components: the speaker part and the brains. Both are joined by a wire that clips onto your ears.
The result? I gave these to my parents, who both don’t like the regular earbuds, and their experience was just amazing. They loved how comfortable these were to wear for long periods, and how they could still hear their surroundings. Even I could wear them for hours at a time, and they made for perfect companions on an evening stroll, when I do not want to be cut off from the world. Beyond that, the buds are also IPX5 rated, meaning sweaty gym sessions shouldn’t be a problem. I tried them at my local gym, and they held up well, just don’t drop them in water.
Sound Quality & Battery Life
It’s no secret that you can’t have everything in life, and the same goes for open-back earbuds. The TrueClips bleed sound into the surroundings, but that doesn’t mean they are bad. The 12mm drivers sound pretty decent, with a wide-ish soundstage. There’s limited separation between the different elements, but that’s expected for this price. All that said, the treble is on point, and I also liked the mids, which is where most of the dialogue is. You also get spatial audio support with these buds, which worked just fine in my testing.
I also really like the quad-mic setup of the TrueClips, which kept my voice clear to the other person on calls. That being said, another price you pay for the open-back design, or lack thereof. You’ll hear everything around you, and that can sometimes get overwhelming, especially in a country like India, where honking is basically a national sport. Still, you can turn your volume up a lot without losing detail, so that’s a bonus. The in-flight experience with the TrueClips was similar as well, but I did turn a lot of heads with the unique design.
The battery life is another big plus of the Truke TrueClips, as they lasted me a full week of use before needing a recharge. For context, I used the earbuds for about 3 hours each day, which comes out to roughly 40–45 hours total. Not to mention the USB-C charging port.
Controls
Unlike others, Truke doesn’t have a companion app; everything’s handled through on-device controls. For example, clicking the earbud four times activates dual-connection mode to pair with two devices simultaneously. On the other hand, a triple tap summons the digital assistant, while single taps and double taps are used to play/pause and skip forward the music. It’s a lot to learn, yes. But I’d much rather have this than another app on my phone that hogs storage space.
Verdict
At ₹1,999, the Truke TrueClips are a unique pair of earbuds. They bring something new to people who’ve been starved for choice. And I really appreciate that. For the price, you get a very stylish design that’s sure to turn heads. The form factor is super comfortable, while not compromising much on sound. And the battery life is the best in business. So yeah, I’d recommend the Truke TrueClips.
When I first heard the price of the Truke TrueClips, I tempered my expectations, since there’s only so much a brand can do in terms of the design on a tight budget. Well, I’ve been proven wrong, as the TrueClips actually look really good. Don’t get me wrong, the case is made from plastic, but that leather pattern looks super premium. The pattern also protects against oily smudges and scratches, meaning they still look fresh. If you’ve read my previous reviews, you know I’m a sucker for oval earphone cases, and the same can be said here. The oval design keeps portability excellent, so I wasn’t walking around with a huge bulge in my pocket. The opening and closing mechanism is pretty satisfactory, so you can use it as a fidget toy, as well.
Inside the case are the open-back earbuds. Usually, comfort is pretty tricky to answer with earbuds, as everyone has different ear shapes. But with the TrueClips, it’s not a concern. The earbuds have two components: the speaker part and the brains. Both are joined by a wire that clips onto your ears.
The result? I gave these to my parents, who both don’t like the regular earbuds, and their experience was just amazing. They loved how comfortable these were to wear for long periods, and how they could still hear their surroundings. Even I could wear them for hours at a time, and they made for perfect companions on an evening stroll, when I do not want to be cut off from the world. Beyond that, the buds are also IPX5 rated, meaning sweaty gym sessions shouldn’t be a problem. I tried them at my local gym, and they held up well, just don’t drop them in water.
Sound Quality & Battery Life
It’s no secret that you can’t have everything in life, and the same goes for open-back earbuds. The TrueClips bleed sound into the surroundings, but that doesn’t mean they are bad. The 12mm drivers sound pretty decent, with a wide-ish soundstage. There’s limited separation between the different elements, but that’s expected for this price. All that said, the treble is on point, and I also liked the mids, which is where most of the dialogue is. You also get spatial audio support with these buds, which worked just fine in my testing.
I also really like the quad-mic setup of the TrueClips, which kept my voice clear to the other person on calls. That being said, another price you pay for the open-back design, or lack thereof. You’ll hear everything around you, and that can sometimes get overwhelming, especially in a country like India, where honking is basically a national sport. Still, you can turn your volume up a lot without losing detail, so that’s a bonus. The in-flight experience with the TrueClips was similar as well, but I did turn a lot of heads with the unique design.
The battery life is another big plus of the Truke TrueClips, as they lasted me a full week of use before needing a recharge. For context, I used the earbuds for about 3 hours each day, which comes out to roughly 40–45 hours total. Not to mention the USB-C charging port.
Controls
Unlike others, Truke doesn’t have a companion app; everything’s handled through on-device controls. For example, clicking the earbud four times activates dual-connection mode to pair with two devices simultaneously. On the other hand, a triple tap summons the digital assistant, while single taps and double taps are used to play/pause and skip forward the music. It’s a lot to learn, yes. But I’d much rather have this than another app on my phone that hogs storage space.
Verdict
At ₹1,999, the Truke TrueClips are a unique pair of earbuds. They bring something new to people who’ve been starved for choice. And I really appreciate that. For the price, you get a very stylish design that’s sure to turn heads. The form factor is super comfortable, while not compromising much on sound. And the battery life is the best in business. So yeah, I’d recommend the Truke TrueClips.
Open-back earphones are a genre that’s loved by very few, thanks especially to their form factor, which, instead of sitting inside the ear canal, sits outside it. This allows people to keep an eye on their surroundings while also listening to music. I’ve never really understood why anyone would want a worse listening experience, but a lot of my friends and family hate that suction feeling with earbuds. If that’s you, the Truke TrueClips promise an open-back listening experience that’s stylish and costs less than ₹2,000.
So, when Truke reached out for a review opportunity, I said yes immediately. It’s been over a month since that call, and I’ve been using the Truke TrueClips pretty extensively, taking them on a couple of flights as well. So here’s whether they’re actually worth your money.
Truke TrueClips
Hisan Kidwai
Summary
At ₹1,999, the Truke TrueClips are a unique pair of earbuds. They bring something new to people who’ve been starved for choice. And I really appreciate that. For the price, you get a very stylish design that’s sure to turn heads. The form factor is super comfortable, while not compromising much on sound. And the battery life is the best in business. So yeah, I’d recommend the Truke TrueClips.
Design & Hardware
When I first heard the price of the Truke TrueClips, I tempered my expectations, since there’s only so much a brand can do in terms of the design on a tight budget. Well, I’ve been proven wrong, as the TrueClips actually look really good. Don’t get me wrong, the case is made from plastic, but that leather pattern looks super premium. The pattern also protects against oily smudges and scratches, meaning they still look fresh. If you’ve read my previous reviews, you know I’m a sucker for oval earphone cases, and the same can be said here. The oval design keeps portability excellent, so I wasn’t walking around with a huge bulge in my pocket. The opening and closing mechanism is pretty satisfactory, so you can use it as a fidget toy, as well.
Inside the case are the open-back earbuds. Usually, comfort is pretty tricky to answer with earbuds, as everyone has different ear shapes. But with the TrueClips, it’s not a concern. The earbuds have two components: the speaker part and the brains. Both are joined by a wire that clips onto your ears.
The result? I gave these to my parents, who both don’t like the regular earbuds, and their experience was just amazing. They loved how comfortable these were to wear for long periods, and how they could still hear their surroundings. Even I could wear them for hours at a time, and they made for perfect companions on an evening stroll, when I do not want to be cut off from the world. Beyond that, the buds are also IPX5 rated, meaning sweaty gym sessions shouldn’t be a problem. I tried them at my local gym, and they held up well, just don’t drop them in water.
Sound Quality & Battery Life
It’s no secret that you can’t have everything in life, and the same goes for open-back earbuds. The TrueClips bleed sound into the surroundings, but that doesn’t mean they are bad. The 12mm drivers sound pretty decent, with a wide-ish soundstage. There’s limited separation between the different elements, but that’s expected for this price. All that said, the treble is on point, and I also liked the mids, which is where most of the dialogue is. You also get spatial audio support with these buds, which worked just fine in my testing.
I also really like the quad-mic setup of the TrueClips, which kept my voice clear to the other person on calls. That being said, another price you pay for the open-back design, or lack thereof. You’ll hear everything around you, and that can sometimes get overwhelming, especially in a country like India, where honking is basically a national sport. Still, you can turn your volume up a lot without losing detail, so that’s a bonus. The in-flight experience with the TrueClips was similar as well, but I did turn a lot of heads with the unique design.
The battery life is another big plus of the Truke TrueClips, as they lasted me a full week of use before needing a recharge. For context, I used the earbuds for about 3 hours each day, which comes out to roughly 40–45 hours total. Not to mention the USB-C charging port.
Controls
Unlike others, Truke doesn’t have a companion app; everything’s handled through on-device controls. For example, clicking the earbud four times activates dual-connection mode to pair with two devices simultaneously. On the other hand, a triple tap summons the digital assistant, while single taps and double taps are used to play/pause and skip forward the music. It’s a lot to learn, yes. But I’d much rather have this than another app on my phone that hogs storage space.
Verdict
At ₹1,999, the Truke TrueClips are a unique pair of earbuds. They bring something new to people who’ve been starved for choice. And I really appreciate that. For the price, you get a very stylish design that’s sure to turn heads. The form factor is super comfortable, while not compromising much on sound. And the battery life is the best in business. So yeah, I’d recommend the Truke TrueClips.
A group of protesters from an organization called Everyone Hates Elon have stuck it to Jeff Bezos by planting little fake pee bottles in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York in the days before Monday’s Met Gala. Monday, at the event itself, there were more traditional protesters as well.
According to Fox News, Jeff Bezos avoided the red carpet on Monday and quietly went inside the event via some other entrance.
The explanation for the pee bottles, according to a statement posted on Instagram is that, “Jeff Bezos’s company Amazon is literally being sued for forcing workers to urinate in bottles.” There is indeed a proposed class action suit in Colorado over alleged “work policies that require its delivery drivers in Colorado to urinate in bottles in the back of delivery vans, defecate in bags, and, in many cases, to restrain themselves from using the bathroom at risk of serious health consequences.” When the suit was announced in 2023, Amazon declined to comment on the specifics.
A good way to draw attention to this might be to protest at one of Amazon’s many physical locations, which people sometimes do. Another way would be to stage a funny protest in the lead-up to the Bezos-affiliated Met Gala, which, in addition to being a gala is also a fundraising event for the arts—which gives it a convenient, but real, veneer of kindness.
The fake pee bottles have a message on them that says “Boycott the Bezos Met Gala,” which everyone I know is doing whether they want to or not since they just don’t have the $100,000 it costs to get in. A smaller note at the bottom of the label says “Relax, it’s just water and food coloring.”
The pee bottle stunt is cute, but seems like it was mainly just annoying for people who work at the museum. Still, the protesters got their message out, and they may have successfully put Bezos off of making a red carpet entrance. Plus it would be hard to do a funny stunt protest every time Jeff Bezos has a party on the largest sailing yacht in the world, which he owns, and which is so big it has its own little side-yacht. Though there were fresh rumors going around in the tabloids Monday that he wants to sell that because it attracts too much attention. Maybe someone planted pee bottles in that too.
A group of protesters from an organization called Everyone Hates Elon have stuck it to Jeff Bezos by planting little fake pee bottles in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York in the days before Monday’s Met Gala. Monday, at the event itself, there were more traditional protesters as well.
According to Fox News, Jeff Bezos avoided the red carpet on Monday and quietly went inside the event via some other entrance.
The explanation for the pee bottles, according to a statement posted on Instagram is that, “Jeff Bezos’s company Amazon is literally being sued for forcing workers to urinate in bottles.” There is indeed a proposed class action suit in Colorado over alleged “work policies that require its delivery drivers in Colorado to urinate in bottles in the back of delivery vans, defecate in bags, and, in many cases, to restrain themselves from using the bathroom at risk of serious health consequences.” When the suit was announced in 2023, Amazon declined to comment on the specifics.
A good way to draw attention to this might be to protest at one of Amazon’s many physical locations, which people sometimes do. Another way would be to stage a funny protest in the lead-up to the Bezos-affiliated Met Gala, which, in addition to being a gala is also a fundraising event for the arts—which gives it a convenient, but real, veneer of kindness.
The fake pee bottles have a message on them that says “Boycott the Bezos Met Gala,” which everyone I know is doing whether they want to or not since they just don’t have the $100,000 it costs to get in. A smaller note at the bottom of the label says “Relax, it’s just water and food coloring.”
The pee bottle stunt is cute, but seems like it was mainly just annoying for people who work at the museum. Still, the protesters got their message out, and they may have successfully put Bezos off of making a red carpet entrance. Plus it would be hard to do a funny stunt protest every time Jeff Bezos has a party on the largest sailing yacht in the world, which he owns, and which is so big it has its own little side-yacht. Though there were fresh rumors going around in the tabloids Monday that he wants to sell that because it attracts too much attention. Maybe someone planted pee bottles in that too.
#Fake #Urine #Bottles #Planted #Museum #Met #Gala #Protest #Jeff #BezosJeff Bezos,Met Gala,Urine">Fake Urine Bottles Planted In Museum Before Met Gala to Protest Jeff Bezos
A group of protesters from an organization called Everyone Hates Elon have stuck it to Jeff Bezos by planting little fake pee bottles in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York in the days before Monday’s Met Gala. Monday, at the event itself, there were more traditional protesters as well.
According to Fox News, Jeff Bezos avoided the red carpet on Monday and quietly went inside the event via some other entrance.
The explanation for the pee bottles, according to a statement posted on Instagram is that, “Jeff Bezos’s company Amazon is literally being sued for forcing workers to urinate in bottles.” There is indeed a proposed class action suit in Colorado over alleged “work policies that require its delivery drivers in Colorado to urinate in bottles in the back of delivery vans, defecate in bags, and, in many cases, to restrain themselves from using the bathroom at risk of serious health consequences.” When the suit was announced in 2023, Amazon declined to comment on the specifics.
A good way to draw attention to this might be to protest at one of Amazon’s many physical locations, which people sometimes do. Another way would be to stage a funny protest in the lead-up to the Bezos-affiliated Met Gala, which, in addition to being a gala is also a fundraising event for the arts—which gives it a convenient, but real, veneer of kindness.
The fake pee bottles have a message on them that says “Boycott the Bezos Met Gala,” which everyone I know is doing whether they want to or not since they just don’t have the $100,000 it costs to get in. A smaller note at the bottom of the label says “Relax, it’s just water and food coloring.”
The pee bottle stunt is cute, but seems like it was mainly just annoying for people who work at the museum. Still, the protesters got their message out, and they may have successfully put Bezos off of making a red carpet entrance. Plus it would be hard to do a funny stunt protest every time Jeff Bezos has a party on the largest sailing yacht in the world, which he owns, and which is so big it has its own little side-yacht. Though there were fresh rumors going around in the tabloids Monday that he wants to sell that because it attracts too much attention. Maybe someone planted pee bottles in that too.
![ASML CEO Christophe Fouquet: No one is coming for us | TechCrunch
Every time you use AI, you are, in some small way, depending on a 42-year-old, 44,000-person Dutch company that spends €4.5 billion each year to advance its technology.
ASML, headquartered in the Netherlands, makes the machines that make the chips that make AI possible. More specifically, it makes the only machines in the world capable of printing the microscopic patterns on silicon wafers that define the most advanced semiconductors — a process called extreme ultraviolet lithography, or EUV. The machines are roughly the size of a school bus, take months to assemble, involve hundreds of suppliers, and cost anywhere from 0 million to upwards of 0 million apiece depending on the generation (prices that give even ASML’s biggest customers pause occasionally).
That monopoly has made ASML the most valuable company in Europe, worth over 0 billion. And with the four largest American tech companies — Microsoft, Meta, Amazon and Google — committing more than 0 billion in AI infrastructure spending this year alone, demand for ASML’s machines has surged to the point where the company has openly said the world won’t have enough chips for years.
All that demand has also made ASML a target. Substrate, a San Francisco startup founded by a protégé of Peter Thiel, has raised more than 0 million and been valued at over billion on the claim that it can build a rival lithography machine. Separately, there have been reports that former ASML engineers in China have partly reverse-engineered the technology, a prospect with enormous geopolitical implications.
Christophe Fouquet, who became ASML’s CEO in 2024 after more than a decade at the company, sat down with this editor on the rooftop deck of his Beverly Hills hotel Tuesday morning ahead of his appearance at the Milken Institute Global Conference. Dressed in a blue suit and white shirt, he was relaxed — even when the conversation turned to the rivals.
This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
TC: Did you see the AI explosion coming?
Techcrunch event
San Francisco, CA
|
October 13-15, 2026
CF: No, not at all. We worked very hard, but not with the idea that this would come. You went from a concept — something people thought would eventually arrive — to ChatGPT, which was really the first good example of what AI could do. And now I think we look at AI as the next revolution, not only industrial but societal. Did I see it coming? No. Sitting in the middle of it every day, sometimes we wake up in the morning and still check that what is happening is really happening.
The big question everyone has is whether the supply chain can keep pace with demand. Can it?
The demand is such that the market overall will be supply-limited for quite a bit. Right now, the biggest bottleneck seems to be in chip manufacturing. We, as an equipment supplier, follow our customers, and so far we’ve followed them pretty well — but we know we have to step up our entire supply chain and capacity. If you talk to the hyperscalers, I think they will tell you that for the next two, three, even five years, they’re not going to get enough chips.
TSMC made news recently saying your latest machines are too expensive. How do you respond?
An EUV system, if you look at the price, is going to be more expensive than a low-NA system, but the cost of making a wafer with this tool on some advanced layers will be cheaper. We can get 20%, 30% cost reduction.
[Editors note: both machines Fouquet is referring to here are EUV machines — the same fundamental technology. NA stands for numerical aperture, a measure of how finely a machine can focus light onto a chip. Low-NA EUV is the current generation; high-NA EUV is ASML’s newest generation, capable of printing even finer patterns but carrying a price tag of 0 million or more apiece. Fouquet is arguing that even though the new machine costs more, it produces chips more cheaply.]
I get a lot of questions about whether it’s going to be this month or next month or the month after. And I usually say it doesn’t really matter, because we designed high-NA for the next 10, 20 years. You can go back to the press from 2016, 2017, and you’ll find the same quotes — low-NA EUV was very pricey. We know what happened after that. The same will happen with high-NA.
There’s a startup called Substrate, backed by Peter Thiel, claiming it can build a rival lithography machine. What do you think of it?
Wanting to have it and having it — that’s still a huge difference. The challenges of lithography are many. Being able to make an image is a starting point, but you need to make that image in very high quantity, at very low cost, at high speed, and with nanometer accuracy. I always say the only reason ASML could build an EUV machine is because 80% of it already existed, based on previous knowledge and products built over time. We had to solve one problem — getting EUV light — and that alone took 20 years. When you start from scratch, the challenge is enormous. I’ve seen a lot of claims. I’ve seen a few pictures. But we had our first EUV picture 30 years ago, and we still needed 20 more years of hard work to turn it into a manufacturing system.
What about xLight, a laser startup partly backed by the U.S. government that wants to work with you?
xLight is focusing on one element of our EUV machine — the source that creates the light. The source we have can be extended for many years to come, and we know how to scale it. What xLight is doing is a new source that still has to be built and proven. The only question is whether it provides a performance or cost advantage over what we have. I think the jury is still out. We are working with them so they can demonstrate their technology — we feel that’s a responsibility on our side. But it’s still a very long journey.
There are also reports that former ASML engineers in China have reverse-engineered your machines.
To reverse-engineer anything, you first need to have the machine. And there is no EUV machine in China — we never shipped any tools there. All the tools we have shipped, we know where they are. They’re either in use with customers, and we track those, or they’ve been dismantled and came back to us. The idea that one of our systems is in China is simply wrong. And because our EUV technology has never been exported there, we also have no people in China trained on EUV.
Very early on, when restrictions came in, we created a complete separation within the company between those who can access EUV technology, documents and training, and those who cannot. Our team in China sits on the other side of that line. The facts point to very little, if any, progress at all. It’s hard for people to accept that because access to this technology is so important.
On export controls more broadly — Jensen Huang was here last night arguing that companies should sell globally, that more corporate revenue means more tax dollars for a company’s home country. He also said the important thing is to keep the best and latest closer to home. Do you agree?
I think he’s totally right. What he adds — and I think this is what Nvidia has done — is that you can keep a technological advantage by maintaining a generation gap in what you sell. Nvidia sells a few generations back, and that lets them find the balance between still doing business and not handing a strong competitive advantage to countries where you won’t sell the latest. We believe the same approach should apply to our products. Today we ship tools to China — allowed by export controls — but it’s a tool we first shipped in 2015. If you apply Jensen’s philosophy to our situation, Nvidia is working with roughly an eight-generation gap. We’re looking at two or three. There’s room for rationalization — finding the right balance between not doing business at all, losing a major opportunity, and strongly inviting others to compete with you.
How do you assess where things stand with the current administration on all of this?
There is a good dialogue, which is very important. I think there’s a genuine understanding of what business needs, but there’s still the challenge of finding the right balance between all the different voices and interests. The dialogue is there, and we appreciate that. I’ve been in Washington many times. At least the discussion is happening. But it’s a very complex topic.
You don’t seem concerned about anyone short-cutting your technology.
People like to have the greatest technology, but they tend to forget what it took to build it. It’s been many years of work — not only at ASML but with our suppliers. Many different groups of people solving very difficult problems, and then one company bringing it all together using decades of lithography expertise to turn it into a manufacturing system. This is in no way easy. And I think that’s also our best protection. It’s simply what it took to put it together.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#ASML #CEO #Christophe #Fouquet #coming #TechCrunchASML,Christophe Fouquet,Jensen Huang,nvidia,TSMC](https://i2.wp.com/techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/GettyImages-2250757778.jpg?resize=1200%2C800&ssl=1 "ASML CEO Christophe Fouquet: No one is coming for us | TechCrunch
Every time you use AI, you are, in some small way, depending on a 42-year-old, 44,000-person Dutch company that spends €4.5 billion each year to advance its technology.
ASML, headquartered in the Netherlands, makes the machines that make the chips that make AI possible. More specifically, it makes the only machines in the world capable of printing the microscopic patterns on silicon wafers that define the most advanced semiconductors — a process called extreme ultraviolet lithography, or EUV. The machines are roughly the size of a school bus, take months to assemble, involve hundreds of suppliers, and cost anywhere from 0 million to upwards of 0 million apiece depending on the generation (prices that give even ASML’s biggest customers pause occasionally).
That monopoly has made ASML the most valuable company in Europe, worth over 0 billion. And with the four largest American tech companies — Microsoft, Meta, Amazon and Google — committing more than 0 billion in AI infrastructure spending this year alone, demand for ASML’s machines has surged to the point where the company has openly said the world won’t have enough chips for years.
All that demand has also made ASML a target. Substrate, a San Francisco startup founded by a protégé of Peter Thiel, has raised more than 0 million and been valued at over billion on the claim that it can build a rival lithography machine. Separately, there have been reports that former ASML engineers in China have partly reverse-engineered the technology, a prospect with enormous geopolitical implications.
Christophe Fouquet, who became ASML’s CEO in 2024 after more than a decade at the company, sat down with this editor on the rooftop deck of his Beverly Hills hotel Tuesday morning ahead of his appearance at the Milken Institute Global Conference. Dressed in a blue suit and white shirt, he was relaxed — even when the conversation turned to the rivals.
This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
TC: Did you see the AI explosion coming?
Techcrunch event
San Francisco, CA
|
October 13-15, 2026
CF: No, not at all. We worked very hard, but not with the idea that this would come. You went from a concept — something people thought would eventually arrive — to ChatGPT, which was really the first good example of what AI could do. And now I think we look at AI as the next revolution, not only industrial but societal. Did I see it coming? No. Sitting in the middle of it every day, sometimes we wake up in the morning and still check that what is happening is really happening.
The big question everyone has is whether the supply chain can keep pace with demand. Can it?
The demand is such that the market overall will be supply-limited for quite a bit. Right now, the biggest bottleneck seems to be in chip manufacturing. We, as an equipment supplier, follow our customers, and so far we’ve followed them pretty well — but we know we have to step up our entire supply chain and capacity. If you talk to the hyperscalers, I think they will tell you that for the next two, three, even five years, they’re not going to get enough chips.
TSMC made news recently saying your latest machines are too expensive. How do you respond?
An EUV system, if you look at the price, is going to be more expensive than a low-NA system, but the cost of making a wafer with this tool on some advanced layers will be cheaper. We can get 20%, 30% cost reduction.
[Editors note: both machines Fouquet is referring to here are EUV machines — the same fundamental technology. NA stands for numerical aperture, a measure of how finely a machine can focus light onto a chip. Low-NA EUV is the current generation; high-NA EUV is ASML’s newest generation, capable of printing even finer patterns but carrying a price tag of 0 million or more apiece. Fouquet is arguing that even though the new machine costs more, it produces chips more cheaply.]
I get a lot of questions about whether it’s going to be this month or next month or the month after. And I usually say it doesn’t really matter, because we designed high-NA for the next 10, 20 years. You can go back to the press from 2016, 2017, and you’ll find the same quotes — low-NA EUV was very pricey. We know what happened after that. The same will happen with high-NA.
There’s a startup called Substrate, backed by Peter Thiel, claiming it can build a rival lithography machine. What do you think of it?
Wanting to have it and having it — that’s still a huge difference. The challenges of lithography are many. Being able to make an image is a starting point, but you need to make that image in very high quantity, at very low cost, at high speed, and with nanometer accuracy. I always say the only reason ASML could build an EUV machine is because 80% of it already existed, based on previous knowledge and products built over time. We had to solve one problem — getting EUV light — and that alone took 20 years. When you start from scratch, the challenge is enormous. I’ve seen a lot of claims. I’ve seen a few pictures. But we had our first EUV picture 30 years ago, and we still needed 20 more years of hard work to turn it into a manufacturing system.
What about xLight, a laser startup partly backed by the U.S. government that wants to work with you?
xLight is focusing on one element of our EUV machine — the source that creates the light. The source we have can be extended for many years to come, and we know how to scale it. What xLight is doing is a new source that still has to be built and proven. The only question is whether it provides a performance or cost advantage over what we have. I think the jury is still out. We are working with them so they can demonstrate their technology — we feel that’s a responsibility on our side. But it’s still a very long journey.
There are also reports that former ASML engineers in China have reverse-engineered your machines.
To reverse-engineer anything, you first need to have the machine. And there is no EUV machine in China — we never shipped any tools there. All the tools we have shipped, we know where they are. They’re either in use with customers, and we track those, or they’ve been dismantled and came back to us. The idea that one of our systems is in China is simply wrong. And because our EUV technology has never been exported there, we also have no people in China trained on EUV.
Very early on, when restrictions came in, we created a complete separation within the company between those who can access EUV technology, documents and training, and those who cannot. Our team in China sits on the other side of that line. The facts point to very little, if any, progress at all. It’s hard for people to accept that because access to this technology is so important.
On export controls more broadly — Jensen Huang was here last night arguing that companies should sell globally, that more corporate revenue means more tax dollars for a company’s home country. He also said the important thing is to keep the best and latest closer to home. Do you agree?
I think he’s totally right. What he adds — and I think this is what Nvidia has done — is that you can keep a technological advantage by maintaining a generation gap in what you sell. Nvidia sells a few generations back, and that lets them find the balance between still doing business and not handing a strong competitive advantage to countries where you won’t sell the latest. We believe the same approach should apply to our products. Today we ship tools to China — allowed by export controls — but it’s a tool we first shipped in 2015. If you apply Jensen’s philosophy to our situation, Nvidia is working with roughly an eight-generation gap. We’re looking at two or three. There’s room for rationalization — finding the right balance between not doing business at all, losing a major opportunity, and strongly inviting others to compete with you.
How do you assess where things stand with the current administration on all of this?
There is a good dialogue, which is very important. I think there’s a genuine understanding of what business needs, but there’s still the challenge of finding the right balance between all the different voices and interests. The dialogue is there, and we appreciate that. I’ve been in Washington many times. At least the discussion is happening. But it’s a very complex topic.
You don’t seem concerned about anyone short-cutting your technology.
People like to have the greatest technology, but they tend to forget what it took to build it. It’s been many years of work — not only at ASML but with our suppliers. Many different groups of people solving very difficult problems, and then one company bringing it all together using decades of lithography expertise to turn it into a manufacturing system. This is in no way easy. And I think that’s also our best protection. It’s simply what it took to put it together.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#ASML #CEO #Christophe #Fouquet #coming #TechCrunchASML,Christophe Fouquet,Jensen Huang,nvidia,TSMC")
Post Comment