0 points
*

Oh, so if China helps out their companies, it’s meddling but if the US government fucking bails out a company that should go bankrupt because of dreadful and shit management, it’s a necessary step to secure national interests. So much for “the free market will regulate itself”.

Hypocrites.

Anti Commercial-AI license

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Q: how do you remain competitive against your competitors if those have the backing of an entire nation behind them?

A: you don’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

You do have to consider that Intel has a head start of multiple decades, should’ve had a war-chest the size of a nation (like Nintendo), and has a nigh monopoly position in the CPU market. Intel also has preferential treatment in the US (similar to Microsoft), so it’s not it isn’t already being funded by the US government.

You don’t catch up on decades of research just by pumping in money. That’s like trying to have a baby faster by having more women.

Trying to pretend Intel is the underdog in this scenario is not credible. Despite - or maybe exactly due to, their head start, pseudo-leaders who thought they could survive any boneheaded decision are giving that lead away. And yet again, tax payer money may have to be used to correct the decisions of a private company (yes publicly traded but the government doesn’t own Intel). Privatise profits, nationalise debt. Works every time!

Anti Commercial-AI license

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

AMD should be the next monopoly. Let Intel die in peace.

permalink
report
parent
reply
99 points

🌈 N A T I O N A L I S A T I O N 🌈

permalink
report
reply
28 points

💪letting it fail anyway 👍

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Is it really a good idea to let Taiwan and Samsung control all semiconductor manufacturing?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

I love that paranoia and xenophobia. As if a corrupt domestic company is somehow magically better than a corrupt international company.

It’s been quite obvious over the past few years that yes there’s potentially some risk of foreign countries trying to install spy code, but actually that doesn’t seem to happen very often, and what’s much more damaging to our society are large corporations that use their power to screw over the general public, and most of these large corporations are domestic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
*

Yes. Not Samsung but Taiwan. It would force the us to not tiptoe around China.

Also Intel is one of many, maybe the biggest name but for a Long time not the biggest player at all.

Ever read the name AMD? The ones actually behind x86 64bit and many other things?

Nvidia (even though they invest to much into a double that will pop)

ARM?

Texas instruments?

Bosh?

There is more than enough without intel.

*Apple

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

What does that mean exactly? Is the company expected to compete or just support existing products or be sold to other owners?

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Let’s start with what we’re not doing. We’re not handing out money to private investors in the old “socializing losses privatizing profits” bullshit we’ve been doing since the nineties.

So, if there’s a compelling national security reason to keep the company alive, we, the state buy it. Then we, the state, run it. We run it in a way that benefits our interests as owners and customers.

Maybe a few years down the line we can find a way to sell it (or our share in it) in a way that satisfies our national security requirements and makes us a load of money. This is not unheard of, see the acquisition and subsequent sale of ABN AMRO by the kingdom of the Netherlands.

Maybe split it up, write off some parts, sell some others, keep others.

Or we strip maybe it’s IP, and license it out to contractors to get the shit we need.

We can do whatever. We own it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

A tech company is not like a bank though, its value is not just in assets but in expertise. Is the plan to layoff all the engineers or pay them less? Is the plan the company generates profit? What if it can’t compete anymore and is just a money sink? And if you’re just going to sell it for assets then how’s that different from letting the company go bankrupt?

And licensing it out to contractors? That just sounds like a huge money sink.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Cram them under AMD and make it not-a-monopoly by ending all x86 patents.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Even if they did, starting a chip company is fucking difficult AF. You don’t want one mega company. You end up in a situation like Canada where they have one airline company and barely any cell carriers.

Competition is healthy. Fingers crossed that Nvidia starts making x86 CPUs as well as Qualcomm. AMD needs more competition too.

The GPU industry also needs some real competition.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Other chip companies abound, they just cannot make x86. That’s been a duopoly for nearly thirty years. VIA was an asterisk on that until they got bought by some Chinese company. Cyrix tried faking their way around it via what we’d now call microcode, and it went poorly.

x86 would become like ARM… which admittedly could be devastating toward RISC-V.

permalink
report
parent
reply
62 points

If Intel can’t pay their own bills from Intel’s money, they can be sold to a private company, file for chapter 11, or go out of business.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

as much as I think Intel is dumb, it’s definitely not in the consumers best interest for Intel to go out of business or absorbed into another company

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

I will take Intel being sold or going under over cronyism and corporate welfare.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Why is it in anyone’s best interest to keep it as a monopoly if it can’t pay its bills? Its products are going to stagnate either way, injecting money is useless.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

And let all those backdoors just walk away?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I assume that you’re at least halfway joking about backdoors in Intel.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Intel silicon has historically had a lot of “bugs”…

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Feeding people that can’t afford to eat because of low salaries and high prices: That’s socialism!

Giving billions to a company that deserves to be replaced: That’s capitalism!

permalink
report
reply

PC Gaming

!pcgaming@lemmy.ca

Create post

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

Community stats

  • 4.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.5K

    Posts

  • 9.7K

    Comments