From atoms to agents: Physical + Cognitive Compute Stacks in Era / Material Science Tech & Insights → Highlights For business: DM, [email protected]
Joined April 2016
- Tweets17.3K
- Following458
- Followers4K
- Likes62.3K
슈포 (Superposition) retweeted
I respect Jukan, but I feel a little frustrated whenever I see this kind of argument.
You can build any scenario around plausible assumptions, and yes, of course, the outcome will follow from those assumptions. If you assume demand collapses, customers accumulate inventory, and contract terms get renegotiated, then naturally, memory companies’ revenue and profits will decline.
But honestly, this feels like the perspective of analysts who treat memory as just a commodity you manufacture and sell, without properly understanding the technological changes taking place in custom memory.
Who exactly are these customers we are talking about when we say they could cancel LTAs or defer deliveries? They are the very customers working with memory companies to design the next generation of HBM and 3D stacked DRAM.
After jointly designing and validating these products, can customers really cancel those volumes so easily or push deliveries out by one or two years? How would they manufacture their own products, which were designed around that memory? What happens to the launch and system deployment schedules they have already coordinated? Switching suppliers also raises questions of design compatibility and requalification. If you are going to argue that contracts can be adjusted, you also need to explain what that decision would mean for the very customers canceling them.
This is one of the biggest reasons I keep saying that memory is no longer the same cyclical industry it used to be. The parties to these LTAs are already tied together from the design stage. But if you still view memory simply as a commodity where rising prices lead to more production, and inventory buildups lead to price cuts or canceled orders, you will inevitably miss this shift in the technical and business relationships.
One more thing. These arguments about a collapse in memory demand seem to assume that planned AI data center investments will be canceled on a massive scale, or that AI infrastructure expansion will slow so substantially that memory demand falls sharply. What interests me more than whether contracts can be adjusted is why you expect demand to weaken that dramatically in the first place.
I think it would be more realistic to discuss directly whether the AI era we expect will actually fail to materialize, and whether much of the AI infrastructure investment currently planned will disappear. If that is your outlook, I can at least understand why you would expect memory demand to collapse and customers to cut volumes even for products they have jointly developed.
I'd like to believe LTAs are durable too. But take one example.
Analog chipmaker onsemi said this in 2023.
On January 5, 2023, at JPMorgan's CES forum, CEO Hassane El-Khoury was asked how much LTSAs would still hold once the shortage eased. His answer: “They are a legally binding agreement ’cause they’re a liability for the customer because they’re take or pay.” He also said he would not accept a customer reopening price talks just because it could get the same parts 10% cheaper elsewhere.
On October 30, 2023, on the Q3 earnings call, onsemi cut its SiC shipment forecast for the year from $1 billion to more than $800 million after one automotive OEM reduced demand. An analyst asked how this could happen when the company had been saying its LTSAs were legally binding. The same CEO reaffirmed that they were binding, but said he did not want to enforce the contracts just to push inventory onto a customer whose demand had dropped. If it worked for both sides, terms could be adjusted customer by customer, whether by a quarter, a year, or longer.
In its 10-K filings, onsemi also states that it amended LTSAs with some strategic customers by mutual agreement in 2024, and changed delivery schedules and committed volumes on some LTSAs in 2025 as demand shifted.
Microchip is another case. Customers in its Preferred Supply Program (PSP) originally had to place 12 months of orders and could not cancel or reschedule them unless Microchip raised prices. On its November 2025 earnings call, however, the CEO said the company had accepted some cancellations and pushouts so customers could adjust their backlog. On the same call, the CFO separately addressed the multiyear LTSAs the company had signed. Some of those contracts were still in effect, he said, but customers had been allowed to defer taking delivery of committed volumes by one to two years if they needed to.
Every time I see cases like these, I doubt how much memory makers' LTAs will protect earnings in a downcycle. Right now the most reliable thing is the prepayments and deposits themselves. That cash can go into capacity expansion today.
I can picture hyperscalers with no DRAM inventory continuing to buy at current prices. But once inventory has piled up, will they keep taking every committed unit at the same price? I have a hard time picturing memory makers holding customers to the high contract price all the way through.
The LTA itself may never be broken and may stay in place. But if both sides agree to push this year's volumes into next year or two years out, this year's earnings estimates come down. If price gets renegotiated too, margin estimates have to come down as well.
Again, I agree LTAs are sturdier than they used to be. What I question is whether, after demand turns, memory makers can still earn 80% margins on contracts signed during the upturn and keep collecting hundreds of billions of dollars in profit because of those LTAs.
슈포 (Superposition) retweeted
TSMC has denied reports that it is exploring 3D DRAM production at Nvidia’s request. It says it remains focused on logic chip manufacturing.
$TSM
$NVDA
Tom’s Hardware reports the response. A TSMC spokesperson said the company focuses on its core business at all times, which is dedicated integrated circuit foundry work. Its mission is to be the trusted technology and capacity provider of the global logic integrated circuit industry for years to come. The statement effectively rejects the earlier report from The Information. That report, citing two people familiar with the matter, said TSMC had begun drafting plans for 3D DRAM manufacturing after a request from Nvidia, its largest customer. The effort was said to be led by Hsu Kuo-chin, TSMC’s vice president of advanced packaging and a former head of Micron’s Taiwan operations.
TSMC works with DRAM producers to package memory into system-in-packages for customers. It lacks the expertise and production capacity to make DRAM, let alone 3D DRAM. Even major memory makers are years away from 3D DRAM. Pursuing it would not address current shortages for at least five years. Micron, Samsung, and SK Hynix are all working on 3D DRAM. Micron’s strategy includes at least four more planar DRAM process technologies before 3D DRAM becomes a reality. Making DRAM would require TSMC to develop manufacturing processes distinct from its logic production. 3D DRAM also needs different techniques to build vertically stacked memory cell layers while controlling defects and maintaining acceptable yields.
A denial is not a finished supply plan.
If TSMC has already stated that it stays focused on logic foundry work and that 3D DRAM remains years from market viability even at the major memory makers, does the next constraint stay on how the existing DRAM and high-bandwidth memory suppliers scale output through 2027 and 2028, or on whether Nvidia and other AI chip designers still need additional long-term memory sources beyond the current three?
슈포 (Superposition) retweeted
얹혀가는 김에 저도 하나 올립니다 ㅋㅋ
김크립토님 말씀처럼 오케스트레이션의 핵심은 전이와 검증입니다. 그런데 이 두 가지는 멀티에이전트 없이 세션 하나에서도 똑같이 무너집니다.
작업 분배를 잘 했느냐? (전이)
부패: 문서와 메모리가 실제 코드와 어긋남 → /doc-drift
오염: 외부 스킬, 플러그인, MCP를 검토 없이 들여옴 → /integration-intake
분산: 같은 사실이 파일 여러 곳에 흩어지고 서로 모순됨 → /ssot-audit
혼란: 어디까지가 이번 작업인지 모름 → /scope
충동: 하다 보니 범위 밖 파일까지 고침 → /freeze
분배된 작업을 진짜 잘 한 게 맞냐? (검증)
목표를 잠그고 PLAN→DO→VERIFY 루프를 강제함 → /goal-lock
검증이 스스로를 확인하는 순환 구조인지 31개 패턴으로 점검함 → /eval-leakage-audit
푸시 전에 시크릿 스캔과 리뷰를 함 → /pre-push
세션 사이 전이도 있습니다.
세션이 끝날 때 /session-checkpoint로 남기고, 다음 세션은 /session-start로 받습니다. 사람이 매번 "어디까지 했더라"를 설명하지 않아도 됩니다.
스킬 22개는 각각 따로 써도 되고, 순서대로 쓰면 프로젝트 셋업부터 리뷰, 거버넌스까지 덮습니다. Claude Code, Codex, Cursor에서 씁니다.
github.com/AlexZio00/soverei…
자자 오케스트레이션에서 중요한건 컨텍스트 전이 그리고 검증입니다.
결국 오케스트레이터도 에이전트거든요.
1. 작업 분배을 잘 했느냐? (전이)
- 부패, 오염, 분산, 혼란, 충동
2. 분배된 작업을 진짜 잘 한게 맞냐? (검증)
- 재현 가능성
이 두가지를 잘 해야합니다. 그리고 이 두가지를 잘 하는 방법은 무엇이냐? 제 오픈소스를 보는것입니다. (갑분 광고 ㅈㅅ..)
대부분의 작업에 멀티에이전트를 쓰지마십시오. 모델들의 성능이 좋아지면서 멀티에이전트의 가치는 점점 떨어져가고 있습니다. 하지만 밀도있고 규모있는 소수의 작업을 위해서라면 멀티에이전트는 고려해봄직합니다.
밀도있는 workflow를 만들어주고 전이, 검증을 도와주는 오픈소스!!! github.com/AgwaB/pi-workflow
pi 생태계 한정이지만 어떤 provider든 다 쓸 수 있게 개선 중입니다. (github.com/AgwaB/agent-workf…)
율무님한테 얹혀갑니다 ㅋㅋㅋ
슈포 (Superposition) retweeted
No matter how revolutionary AI turns out to be, there’s no reason every dollar poured into it should survive. If it really transforms productivity, some companies will make a fortune while others lose billions, drown in debt, or get bought out for a fraction of what they were once worth. That’s how markets work.
Except now we’re told AI is the new normal, that markets have learned from past crashes, and that investors and policymakers know enough to prevent another collapse. Maybe they do. But it’s quite a leap from being better prepared for a crisis to believing the market no longer needs to go through a serious correction. And then there’s China, which seems to come up whenever someone questions how much money is being poured into AI. America can’t afford to fall behind, we’re told, as though that settles the question of whether the investments themselves make financial sense.
I’m optimistic about what AI can accomplish, but a company that can’t even earn its cost of capital and needs fresh debt just to stay alive doesn’t get a pass on its financial losses simply because the technology might change the world.
And if markets have learned so much from past crashes, why is restructuring still treated as something we should avoid? We’ve spent generations operating under a system where companies fail, assets change hands, and investors take losses, even when the technology really does change everything.
If the new normal means we can skip all that, maybe we’re talking about a different economic system altogether.
슈포 (Superposition) retweeted
GOOGLE $GOOGL WILL SPEND $17B ON A NEW DATA CENTER IN WYOMING
The site in Laramie County will be Google's first in the state, per Bloomberg. Google says it will pay for all the power the data center uses.
The data center will be air-cooled to limit water use.
슈포 (Superposition) retweeted
中 국유기업도 부채 위기…4130억위안 빚에 채권시장 출렁 [차이나 워치]
중국의 부동산 침체가 지방 국유기업의 신용위기로 번지면서 채권시장이 크게 흔들리고 있다. 광둥성 주하이시 최대 국유기업인 주하이화파그룹의 대규모 부채와 유동성 문제가 불거지자 투자자들이 채권 매도에 나서면서다.
헝다그룹 등 민간 부동산 개발업체의 채무불이행에 이어 지방정부가 소유한 대형 국유기업까지 자금난에 직면했다는 점에서 시장의 경계심이 커지고 있다. 중국 부동산 시장이 내년부터 회복할 수 있다는 전망이 나오고 있지만 장기간 누적된 부채 부담이 금융시장 불안 요인으로 부각됐다는 분석이다.
슈포 (Superposition) retweeted
Korean media report that JNTC, a Korean glass substrate maker, has been registered as a TGV glass substrate supplier to NVIDIA.
thelec.kr/news/articleView.h…
슈포 (Superposition) retweeted
TrendForce: Memory
> Overall DRAM bit supply growth will slow to 24% in 2027, and the tight supply situation will continue.
> TrendForce indicates that looking ahead to 2027, as cloud service providers (CSPs) accelerate the deployment of AI servers and actively develop agentic AI applications, demand for server CPUs, RDIMMs, and SOCAMMs will grow simultaneously.
> Server CPU shipments are projected to increase by over 30% year-on-year in 2027, exceeding the approximately 25% bit supply growth of server DRAM, leading to a continued widening of the supply-demand gap.
$NVDA $AMD $MU $SKHY $DRAM $EWY $INTC
슈포 (Superposition) retweeted
[긴급 브리프] QQQ · $647.05 · 2026-11-05 종가
■ 결론
신규 롱 진입은 보류하고 관망합니다. 종가 647.05가 112일선 707.01보다 8.48% 아래에 있어 추세 필터가 방어 상태입니다. 순 GEX는 -72.0억 달러이고, 가격은 ZGL 712.39보다 10.1% 아래에 있습니다. 종가는 200일선 679.61 아래로 내려갔고, 60일 최저 종가를 기록했습니다.
■ 추세 위치
가격은 200일선 아래로 내려갔지만, 50일선 722.03은 아직 200일선 위에 있습니다. 그래서 하락 추세 확정이 아니라 추세가 흔들리는 단계로 봅니다.
하락 추세 확정은 50일선이 200일선 아래로 내려갈 때입니다. 200일선 이격 -4.79%는 지난 2,513거래일 가운데 하위 0.8% 수준입니다. 상대강도 사분면(RRG)은 약세(Lagging)입니다.
■ 핵심 레벨
위쪽 첫 관문은 679.61(200일선)입니다. 다음은 707~713 구간입니다. 이 구간에는 112일선 707.01, Max Pain 708, ZGL 712.39, 20일선 712.40이 모여 있습니다. 그 위에 50일선 722.03과 콜 월 800(OI 23.4만)이 있습니다. 아래쪽에는 손절선 614.70(-5%)과 풋 월 600(OI 26.6만)이 있습니다.
전 만기 풋 OI가 가장 많은 행사가는 650(36.3만)입니다. 이 가격은 현재가 바로 위에 있습니다. 가격이 가장 큰 풋 매물대 아래로 내려왔다는 뜻입니다. 이번 주 만기 풋 OI가 몰린 675, 680, 713도 모두 현재가 위의 내가격 풋입니다. 이 가격들은 지지로 읽지 않습니다.
■ 수급
옵션 만기 다섯 구간의 GEX가 모두 음수입니다. 0~3일 -13.7억, 3~7일 -5.9억, 7~21일 -18.2억, 21~45일 -15.3억, 45일 이상 -19.0억 달러입니다. 딜러 포지션은 데이터에 없습니다. 그래서 하락 가속은 가능성으로만 봅니다.
풋/콜 비율은 OI 기준 1.21, 거래량 기준 1.19입니다. ATM 내재변동성은 31.96%이고, IV 위치는 8.75입니다.
RSI 26.90은 과매도입니다. 그러나 추세가 흔들릴 때는 과매도가 오래 이어질 수 있습니다. 거래량은 20일 평균의 2.68배입니다. 하루 평균 변동폭 2.54%는 과거 상위 2.4% 수준입니다.
■ 기댓값
손절은 진입가의 -5%로 고정해서 계산했습니다.
200일선 회복 매수: 680에 사서 707.01을 노립니다. 이익은 +3.97%입니다. 필요한 승률은 55.7%입니다. 승률을 40%로 놓으면 기댓값은 -1.41%입니다.
풋 월 눌림 매수: 602에 사서 647.05를 노립니다. 이익은 +7.48%입니다. 필요한 승률은 40.1%입니다. 승률을 45%로 놓으면 기댓값은 +0.62%입니다. 양수이지만 실행 기준(+2%)보다 낮습니다. 추세 필터와 감마 조건도 막혀 있어서 진입하지 않습니다.
■ 행동
기본값은 관망입니다. 다시 검토할 조건은 종가의 200일선 679.61 회복입니다. 추세가 흔들리는 단계이므로 진입하더라도 평소 비중의 절반 이하로 들어갑니다. 손절과 익절 규칙은 SPY와 같습니다.
■ 뷰 폐기 조건
VIX 백워데이션이 나오면 롱 검토를 멈춥니다.
50일선이 200일선 아래로 내려가면 하락 추세 확정으로 봅니다. 이 경우 반등을 추격하지 않습니다.
종가가 600 아래로 내려가면 눌림 매수 시나리오를 버립니다.
반대로 종가가 200일선 위로 돌아오면 이 판정은 무효입니다. 그때는 상승 추세 안의 눌림으로 다시 봅니다. 이 브리프에서 가장 중요한 변수는 하나입니다. 종가와 200일선 679.61의 위치입니다.
■ 유효기간 고지
2026-11-12까지 유효합니다. 그 전에 200일선 회복, VIX 백워데이션, CPI 발표 가운데 하나가 오면 그때 끝납니다. SPY와 QQQ는 같은 시장의 근거이므로 두 브리프를 독립된 신호 두 개로 세지 않습니다. 투자 권유가 아닙니다.
슈포 (Superposition) retweeted
At the peak of the market before the 1929 crash, and again at the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000, there wasn’t some single piece of news that suddenly changed everything. Imbalances had been building for a long time, and once investors started selling, there simply weren’t enough buyers willing to support those prices.
Credit markets had already been flashing warning signs, and with dealers now estimated to be sitting on deeply negative gamma, the selling can feed on itself as every move lower forces them to sell more to hedge their positions.
VIX has surged more than 30%, yet it’s still only in the mid-20s. If volatility keeps climbing, vol-control funds could add another wave of selling. After a while, who started selling or why hardly matters..
슈포 (Superposition) retweeted
CNBC reports that Chinese AI model developer Kimi is looking to rent Nvidia Blackwell GPUs from a European cloud provider. Kimi is interested in using the chips for both inference and training.
Kimi reportedly offered to pay 30% to 50% more upfront than buyers outside China.