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

Intel Honesty

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 426 posts

Re: Intel Honesty

#151

Post by cogman10 »

amluto wrote: post #149
cogman10 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it has a lot to do with selfishness. More housing means more people means you have a lower property value for you home in the area. Further, it means your vote becomes less powerful as the poors that live in the high rise have the same voting power as you do in your single family home.

I think it has a lot to do with people believing what you just said. Which is, of course, utter nonsense! If a neighborhood suddenly gets rezoned for 20-story mixed-use development, an existing house will be devalued, but an existing lot will likely gain more then enough value to compensate.

> Which is, of course, utter nonsense!

That doesn't change the loss of voting power. Further, value to who? I agree a 20 story high-rise has more value than a single-family home, but how does that help the single-family homeowner or the homeowners that live around the lot that gets rezoned?

That's the problem. The existing homes and their owners seem mostly downsides to rezoning even though the city as a whole would benefit greatly from them.

Re: Intel Honesty

#152

Post by [deleted] »

amluto wrote: post #149
cogman10 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it has a lot to do with selfishness. More housing means more people means you have a lower property value for you home in the area. Further, it means your vote becomes less powerful as the poors that live in the high rise have the same voting power as you do in your single family home.

I think it has a lot to do with people believing what you just said. Which is, of course, utter nonsense! If a neighborhood suddenly gets rezoned for 20-story mixed-use development, an existing house will be devalued, but an existing lot will likely gain more then enough value to compensate.

[deleted]

Re: Intel Honesty

#153

Post by [deleted] »

prewett wrote: post #143
foobarian wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How could we get a council of a half-dozen visionaries to own a city-sized chunk of land and design a utopia, communist party-style but done right? I really think this is not possible without it being a private parcel where there aren't thousands of individual property owners in the loop for decision making.

> How could we ... design a utopia, communist party-style but done right? We can't. Certainly not until people stop being self-oriented, and stop being willing to sacrifice others for their own benefit. Recorded history says this is not going to happen. Even the one (as far as I understand) religion concerned with transforming human nature to love others sacrificially, Christianity, says this requires divine help. (T…

[deleted]

Re: Intel Honesty

#154

Post by wmf »

cogman10 wrote: post #146
cs702 wrote: post #84

The OP makes a compelling case that Intel's foundry operations have fallen so far behind that they are no longer economically viable on their own, in the face of current market forces, i.e., Intel's foundry business may not be able to earn a positive return on the tens of billions of dollars of capex now required to catch up with TSMC. If the US truly views having a domestic foundry as critical to national security,…

There are a slew of foundries in the US already that aren't intel and are open to manufacturing for non-intel products. For example, Global Foundries. I just don't see what benefit at this point the US government would see investing in intel when they aren't really a whole lot better at the game at this point vs pretty much anyone else.

Intel is a decade ahead of other US foundries.

Re: Intel Honesty

#155

Post by ghaff »

ajross wrote: post #124
ghaff wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are. The problem is that they are for the educational market. Especially with Google's exit from hardware, they're basically mostly cheap devices for kids. And, if you do build a nice one, you could probably get a lower-end MacBook Air for about the same price which would be almost as low-maintenance to use if you wanted it to be.

The cheapest Air is $999 for a fast but pretty limited 8G device. That budget gets you a 16G Meteor Lake Chromebook which runs Debian cleanly in a VM. It's true that Apple is doing a better job than it used to in serving the budget market, but Macs remain pretty exclusive. Similarly a low end Windows laptop with WSL is a better budget choice, though IMHO very inferior to the Chromebook in Linux integration.

I'm not sure we're really disagreeing.

The thing is that I don't really want a budget Chromebook (which certainly exist).

I want something for travel mostly. Ended up getting a new iPad Air recently which isn't all that light but probably fits my needs best as it now has a pretty functional keyboard and can easily be used without the keyboard as an entertainment/consumption device.

Re: Intel Honesty

#156

Post by efitz »

kilotaras wrote: post #106
amluto wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the issues are way downstream of those NIMBYs: Non-housing costs are quite low in Taiwan. Food and childcare, in particular, are so much cheaper than California that it’s hard to believe. But the NIMBYs aren’t totally in the clear. Rental housing with 3+ bedrooms (for families) is severely lacking in much of the US. Maybe fire codes are to blame. Taiwan is full of very nice new high-rise development that cont…

> Non-housing costs are quite low in Taiwan. Food and childcare, in particular, are so much cheaper than California that it’s hard to believe. Those are downstream of housing restrictions to a large extent. From "Housing theory of everything" [0]: Consider a cleaner living in Alabama. In 1960 they could move to NYC and earn wages 84% higher, and still end up with 70% higher income after rent. In 2010, they could move…

Anyone looking to start a new manufacturing business would be insane to consider California for any number of reasons- cost-of-living, (urban) quality of life, regulatory environment, state taxes, etc.

Right now manufacturers should be considering other states. Florida, Tennessee and Texas all are income-tax-free and have business friendly regulatory climates. Several states like Alabama and West Virginia offer extremely low cost-of-living and property costs and likely would negotiate tax abatements.

Re: Intel Honesty

#157

Post by foobarian »

colechristensen wrote: post #137
foobarian wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How could we get a council of a half-dozen visionaries to own a city-sized chunk of land and design a utopia, communist party-style but done right? I really think this is not possible without it being a private parcel where there aren't thousands of individual property owners in the loop for decision making.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_utopian_commu... People try this thing on a fairly regular basis. You're thinking "wouldn't it be great if there was a community led by an absolute authority which agrees with me" and, uh, that kind of thing doesn't scale, last, or continue agreeing with you for a particularly long amount of time. >I really think this is not possible without it being a private parcel whe…

> This is just saying democracy is bad

It's more subtle than that, because it depends on the scope. Democracy is already not applied in many contexts today, such as most private corporations. In fact I think large companies have many analogous features to communist governments what with the central control and absolute authority.

There is certainly no suggestion that a whole state or country should be switched over to an authoritarian regime; of course we all know the classic "we tried this already and it didn't work" line.

There are a lot of cult-ish or vaguely religion-based communities out there. But that's not what I have in mind.

You tend to see a lot of lament in here on HN or other similar forums about things like car-centric suburban hellscapes, poor walkability, bike paths, what have you. Meanwhile in urban settings where these things are better solved there is the problem that property values are sky high, and create an elite environment that turn away support roles and cause a new set of problems.

I would love to see some tech billionaire drive an innovative design over a metro-sized zone. Maybe don't have roads and cars except for deliveries, use roads for cycles and pedestrians? Have a subway built before anything else? High-rise mixed-use buildings with important services like free child-care and urgent care? Have golf-cart-like EVs easily available for short-term rent. Free stupid-fast WiFi/Internet etc.

Kind of like a college campus but scaled up? Maybe the crazy sheiks in Dubai will manage it.

Re: Intel Honesty

#158

Post by amluto »

colechristensen wrote: post #100
amluto wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the issues are way downstream of those NIMBYs: Non-housing costs are quite low in Taiwan. Food and childcare, in particular, are so much cheaper than California that it’s hard to believe. But the NIMBYs aren’t totally in the clear. Rental housing with 3+ bedrooms (for families) is severely lacking in much of the US. Maybe fire codes are to blame. Taiwan is full of very nice new high-rise development that cont…

>Rental housing with 3+ bedrooms (for families) is severely lacking in much of the US. Maybe fire codes are to blame. Taiwan is full of very nice new high-rise development that contains units with lots of bedrooms. Wandering around those developments and the new 3-story developments in California, the ones in Taiwan are much, much, much nicer, even from the outside. The NIMBYs should take note. And it's because of zo…

Not just zoning. Those high rises have units with lots of bedrooms around a central elevator core, and you can’t build those in the US.

Re: Intel Honesty

#159

Post by zelon88 »

amluto wrote: post #65
closeparen wrote: post #50

>Their pay in the Bay Area is double tsmc in taiwan for equivalent roles in raw dollar terms but the ppp differences means your better off working for tsmc in Taiwan than intel in the Bay Area. That’s not a joke. Intel are literally incapable of attracting talent from Taiwan right now. There's some whiplash in hearing constantly how the US is a corporate-dominated oligarchy, and then also seeing trillion-dollar indus…

Some of the issues are way downstream of those NIMBYs: Non-housing costs are quite low in Taiwan. Food and childcare, in particular, are so much cheaper than California that it’s hard to believe. But the NIMBYs aren’t totally in the clear. Rental housing with 3+ bedrooms (for families) is severely lacking in much of the US. Maybe fire codes are to blame. Taiwan is full of very nice new high-rise development that cont…

> Non-housing costs are quite low in Taiwan. Food and childcare, in particular, are so much cheaper than California that it’s hard to believe.

That statement is the problem.

Nobody wants to rent. There are too many rental properties, and not enough affordable housing. The reason you need rental properties is because you're already trying to make a living from families having a home. You're not supposed to do that. That's supposed to be the prize for the family for assimilating with capitalism. By buying it and renting it back to them you're disincentivizing the working class from working.

But by all means, keep privatizing the shit out of 3 bedroom family homes and see what happens. Take every drop of value out of the housing market and bank it. That's what pitchforks are for.

Re: Intel Honesty

#160

Post by dvdkon »

ska wrote: post #67
highfrequency wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice analysis on competitive dynamics of semiconductor industry vs. space industry in the 2000s. > I'm not aware of any other industries which are quite as far "behind" today as space launch systems were in 2010. But if anyone else is, please mention those industries here! Digital payments may be in a similar situation. Visa's 2% fee may seem low but from a scale and competitive standpoint it is fairly absurd - they…

From what i can see as an admitted outsider, payment rails are more complicated than they look, and most of the crypto partisans arguments to "replace" functionality are a mix of 'ignoring that part', or 'we don't want that part anyway' + a few API calls. Problem is, the world consuming these things mostly seems to want those parts, and can't ignore those other parts. Which seems to explain relatively low uptake.

Most Czech banks offer free domestic instant payments, and many small businesses who were previously cash-only now take them as an option. I heard there's also a SEPA equivalent.

If the electronic retail payment industry hadn't already been captured by VISA and MasterCard, I could very well see something like this, a much cheaper and simpler system, being what everybody uses. There's countries (India?) where debit/credit card adoption was slow and now these simpler solutions have significant market share.

Post reply on HN