Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel's disruption is now complete

jamesallworth.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 638 posts

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#431

Post by hitekker »

jodrellblank wrote: post #352
hitekker wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're unsuccessful. His book on Psychopathy was panned on Reddit, as well as on Goodreads: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/4c27ss/im_pieter_hint... Likewise, the wikipedia article for Social Architecture has been listed "not notable" for the past four years, and hasn't seen any meaningful edits since 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_architecture With respect to the author, I'm not surprised. Nerds…

I'm not seeing his book being panned on your Reddit link, I'm seeing ad-hom attacks on him because of his lack of credentials or some unrelated behaviour they don't like. Is there any actual panning of his book by someone who read his book , in your link? Or anyone who engaged in good faith - e.g. it's a book about his experiences of problem behaviour patterns that hurt others?

The author himself said his book was panned on Reddit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11631424

The larger point is that the audience he chose to market to, rejected his ideas. Whether or not his audience was acting in "good faith" is irrelevant to his failure to communicate.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#432

Post by ip26 »

pavlov wrote: post #389

“The Innovator’s Dilemma” has a rather terrible track record as a handbook for tech corporations. Nokia’s leadership was also big fans of this book in 2000-2010. They saw themselves as the nimble disrupters, eventually eating away all computing markets with their cheap plastic phones and a smartphone OS derived from embedded systems. If Nokia would just keep adding features, the Christensen theory promised that they’…

It's the opposite angle of attack, coming aggressively down from the high end. Same thing Tesla is doing.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#433

Post by haltingproblem »

Except the empirical data does not really back Clay's thesis in The Innovator’s Dilemma. Jill Lepore had an excellent analysis of the track record in a famous new yorker article (1) which caused pmarca to melt down on twitter. In his defense, I think the disruption thesis holds when the industry is fragmented. When a disrupter goes up against a monopoly/duopoly or oligopoly, it fails. Just a conjecture.

Even more generally, in business there are few hard and fast rules and even the ones that work lose their efficacy as the participants learn and adjust to them. Which is a good thing for the system as a whole. I would speculate that entrepreneurs should now look beyond disruption.

(1). http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/06/23/the-disruption-...

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#434

Post by emodendroket »

Spivak wrote: post #405
raziel2701 wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's gonna be another too big to fail thing again.

Less too big to fail, more a national security interest in ensuring the US can make chips during a hypothetical conflict. Great if you’re the company the gov’t blesses for this purpose (like Microsoft) but not so great for their competitors.

I'd probably be nervous about TSMC opening a fab in AZ then

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#435

Post by wussboy »

seph-reed wrote: post #412
dmix wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I've linked to many times on HN: The Iron Law of Bureaucracy > Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people": > First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricu…

This law is the reason term-limits and liquid-democracy are such strong tools. Term limits are best implemented where someone must take on a different job every x years. This doesn't solve the problem of entrenched vampiric bureaucrats entirely, but it at least pushes them towards the chopping block. Liquid democracy is a type of democracy where people give their voting power for particular issues to whoever they tru…

What about the people who project themselves as being experts in a very believable fashion but are actually not experts? Human nature would tend to cause these people to double down on their own self delusion rather than admit they don’t actually know what they are talking about. How do we guard against that?

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#436

Post by calcifer »

aaaxyz wrote: post #286
regimeld wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely agree. The world's supply of semiconductors is dependent, in some ways, on the benevolence of the CCP. TSMC is like Arakkis. We need to diversify the supply chain.

Isn't TSMC building a fab in AZ? Anyway I'd say the "spice" in semiconductor production is rare earth elements, since the CCP controls most of their extraction (and has artificially lowered exports in the past)

> Isn't TSMC building a fab in AZ?

Yes, but the planned chips are an older generation right now and they'll be even older when the fab actually starts production. TSMC would never move cutting edge production outside of Taiwan.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#437

Post by weehoo »

Invictus0 wrote: post #219
whack wrote: post #194

This is a controversial opinion, but I don't agree with the idea that big corporations should make an entry into every single adjacent market. If the company has core expertise and advantages that can deliver a decisive win in a known-lucrative market, then it's a no brainer. But if that's not the case, why run around chasing shadows everywhere, instead of focusing on harvesting the markets where you're already winni…

No company operates this way. Companies are full of people optimizing for their own fortunes, and the company going under is not and will never be a part of those plans.

Many creative productions take on a similar structure to what he proposes. Many entities, some individuals, some partnerships, and some corporations, come together to produce a single work. The associations dissolve when the work is finished.

Films, albums, festivals, etc.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#438

Post by trhway »

galaxyLogic wrote: post #406
dmix wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I've linked to many times on HN: The Iron Law of Bureaucracy > Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people": > First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricu…

That sounds like an ironclad law. But is there empirical evidence for it? And a rational explanation behind it? I mean it's very strict as a rule: "in EVERY case the second group ... ". Strong claims like that require strong evidence and a theory of WHY that would (always) be the outcome. I'm thinking of society as large. That is an organization too. Are we doomed by bureaucracy?

Yes. This is why Moon, Mars, etc colonies are important - it is like small startups wrt. BigCo which is our Earth civilization reaching the state of disfunction.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#439

Post by trepetti »

monocasa wrote: post #411
phire wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

64bit x86 squanders it's variable length advantage by being a 40 year old design that has been extended over and over again. Much of the opcode space is wasted with old single byte instructions that are rarely used these days. There are REX prefix bytes required everywhere to access all 16 registers. Modern instructions that are used all the time are hidden away behind prefix bytes. 64bit ARM is a complete redesign o…

I've heard that there's other benefits, like the fact that memory RMW instructions are essentially a fairly clean way to address physical registers without using any architectural registers. I'd love to see what a CISC-V ISA without the 40 years of baggage looks like (like jeeze, the hlt instruction gets a single byte on x86?)

A code density prioritizing modern ISA is something that I've thought a lot about too. Would be an interesting possibility in the embedded space. I think that there are certain tricks that can be used to speed up the realignment problem, too.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#440

Post by T-A »

dodobirdlord wrote: post #420
T-A wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, so our eggs are not all in one basket, but in two. One claimed as rebel territory by the CCP and one still technically at war with a nuclear-armed hermit kingdom.

Fortunately ASML is in the Netherlands.

I was obviously referring to Samsung.

As for ASML, if it were the key to Intel's woes, the article we are all commenting would not have been written.

Post reply on HN