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

231–240 of 426 posts

Re: Intel Honesty

#231

Post by kmeisthax »

foobarian wrote: post #123
colechristensen wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

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.

The first step is don't do this, central planning is a canonical bad idea. Case in point: NIMBYism works because cities are already masterplanned, "communist-party-style". American suburbia is commie blocks. So all you have to do when someone wants to change the plan is to have two or three people shout "no" at the city council and for nobody else to show up.

If you actually want higher-density, what you actually want is national or state laws that restrict what zoning can restrict. Japan is a good model for this: they have a nationalized zoning plan. Individual city councils can only pick specific zones from a list of varying densities of mixed commercial/residential zones and industrial zones.

A lot of the harms of suburban life are specific to the segregation of commercial and residential: moving people away from the places they want to go to means they need a car, and the infrastructure to use it with, which takes up space, which pushes everything else away, which creates more demand for cars and car infrastructure, and so on. Conversely, we could imagine, say, taking a few lots in an otherwise single-family development and turning them into convenience stores or something, which would be something people could just walk to.

Once you have the legal capacity to build you can then start talking about having government money go into buying and developing upzoned property. Private ownership and developers will follow. The goal is not to bring about some specific master plan but to just generally increase access to land and housing. You can run it as a co-op if you want but do not, for the love of god, micromanage people into wishing they had their $500k mortgaged single-family homes that they """owned""" back.

Re: Intel Honesty

#232

Post by scarface_74 »

decafninja wrote: post #210
scarface_74 wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how many of the traditional demographics of tech workers do you think want to move to Florida? It is currently my home state and I work remotely. But I’m older. I would never want to live here if my wife were younger or I thought there was any chance we wanted to become pregnant.

I don’t know, Miami is pretty nice. The only reason I wouldn’t consider living in Miami is that if I ever got laid off, the tech job ecosystem is poor at best. It’s not perfect but neither is SFBA, NYC, or Seattle.

Until you have to pay the skyrocketing insurance costs.

I am not blaming the government for that. It’s just life when you live in an area with frequent hurricanes

Re: Intel Honesty

#233

Post by rstuart4133 »

crowcroft wrote: post #59
linuxftw wrote: post #29

Intel has $29B cash on hand. Their new fabs are being subsidized. Sure, American labor is more expensive than APAC, but I don't see that being a huge differentiator in such an automated manufacturing segment. My personal rabbit-hole conspiracy is that AI is driving a fire under the national security apparatus, and we're going to see a restriction on AI-chip technology being exported or manufactured overseas. Intel wi…

$29b cash and about $50b in debt. They have a valid business still, but I think you're under appreciating how much of a hole they need to dig themselves out of. Their current foundries can't just make other chips, and they certainly can't make GPUs for AI (TSMC make Intel GPUs). They are making a new foundry in Ohio, but in Intel's current state and comments they've made to the market it's not guaranteed the foundry…

> $29b cash and about $50b in debt.

I know nothing about finance, but I have trouble figuring out how they got themselves into this situation given this https://www.intc.com/stock-info/dividends-and-buybacks :

    As of June 29th, 2024, we were authorized to repurchase up to $110.0 billion, of which $7.24 billion remain available. We have repurchased 5.77 billion shares at a cost of $152.05 billion since the program began in 1990.
Had they not bought there own shares they would be sitting on $70B cash and no debt.

Re: Intel Honesty

#234

Post by astrange »

dvdkon wrote: post #160
ska wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/cr…

It takes (at least) two people to want to adopt a payment system. The reason American customers use credit cards is that they like them; they're very safe for customers and they have reward points.

You could pay with cash or debit if you wanted to, but then you can't chargeback the business.

Re: Intel Honesty

#235

Post by _chris_ »

ohcmon wrote: post #47
nightski wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying you are wrong but personally I'd view the stock as an attractive perk right now since it is so low. Whereas if I were joining a company such as Nvidia I'd honestly be kind of worried. Historical performance isn't really a great indicator here.

You would be surprised, but nvidia’s employee stock plans allow to select the purchase price within the last 2 years https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/benefits/money/espp/

> allow to select the purchase price within the last 2 years

I don't think that's true. My reading of that is "you lock in the price on your start date and can keep that for the next 2 years going forward". That doesn't help anybody joining at >$1k / share. :D (and that's only ESPP, not standard stock compensation).

Re: Intel Honesty

#236

Post by _DeadFred_ »

astrange wrote: post #227
_DeadFred_ wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it selfish to have national parks when there are people that are homeless and the government could give them literally free land? Long ago the people that lived in the area realized that they liked where they lived and how it was, and voted to put in place rules to keep it that way. It sucks now, I and all my friends the grew up there were forced to move somewhere affordable, but it's not pure selfishness. They di…

> Long ago the people that lived in the area realized that they liked where they lived and how it was Ignoring that there were probably Indians there - that wasn't "long ago", residential zoning was mostly introduced in the 30s-60s. America hasn't had zoning for most of its life! Most other countries have never had it and still don't. (Except every other Anglo country has an even /worse/ planning system than American…

Am I wrong to use when this issue started as the discussion starting point? Or are you agreeing that it is unfair to force a living situation change on a native population because other people want to move in or force their say about things?

Zoning was introduced in the USA in 1904. The USA was 'urbanized' in 1920 the first time more Americans lived in cities than the rural countryside. Our zoning laws fit with the time period when we would develop things like... zoning laws.

When my family moved to the Bay Area huge parts of it was fruit trees (with another large part being future superfund toxic waste dumps).

If you were to drive (because they aren't designed for walking) along the 'Walmart strip' of any town in the USA I can't see how you can argue 'the USA has too strong of city planning'. Our growth is the stuff of ugly, out of control, unwalkable, car requiring nightmares.

Re: Intel Honesty

#237

Post by ak217 »

ghshephard wrote: post #214
ak217 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think your analysis is valid in California. Public high schools in California receive most of their funding on a per-pupil, attendance-weighted basis from the state on a redistributive basis (all property taxes from across the state are pooled and redistributed).

Parcel Taxes allow wealthy areas like Palo Alto to have much higher qualities of education. School District quality is probably one of the number one factors for families looking for a home.

Most school districts in California don't have any parcel taxes. There are definitely some like Palo Alto and other Bay Area and LA school districts that do, but they serve as a relatively small boost (0 to 20% of the district's budget). But yes, to the extent they constitute a significant portion of the revenue, the dynamics described by the parent post play a role.

Parcel taxes are known to be a poor funding mechanism for this reason, but they were the only viable way for districts to raise extra money while working around the toxic side effects of Proposition 13 (https://ed100.org/lessons/parceltax), which illustrates its long shadow in California state law. Prop 13 is of course responsible for multiple other self-reinforcing anti-growth incentive loops.

Re: Intel Honesty

#238

Post by mnau »

dvdkon wrote: post #160
ska wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/cr…

Sweeden has a Swish and I am pretty sure many countries have very similar free option.

We just need a non-profit integrator to do it worldwide... Use credit card as a fallback if everything else fails.

Re: Intel Honesty

#239

Post by wmf »

jjtheblunt wrote: post #193
wmf wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pork bellies also go bad but you can make money trading them. You don't even take delivery.

are you suggesting the parent comment should be considering derivatives like agricultural product futures?

Yeah. The government could pre-pay for chips to guarantee demand then auction the futures right before the chips are manufactured.

Re: Intel Honesty

#240

Post by bryanlarsen »

twobitshifter wrote: post #122
FredPret wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's grim at INTC but don't forget the CHIPS act and whatever else will follow that. The US government spends 0.5T per month - more than the market cap of all but the top 15 American companies [0] [1] Not saying it's a good or bad idea, or that it will or won't happen - but if the US government decides to reinvent Intel, they can easily write a cheque that (if spent wisely) might do the trick. [0] https://companiesma…

Intel is underserving of this investment and the chips act has no teeth to ensure that they follow through and build these facilities and create jobs. They will not follow through and spend the money wisely and that was clear from the moment that bill was drafted.

> has no teeth

CHIPS act money is milestone based, and no money has yet been paid out, according to the article.

That sounds like teeth to me.

Post reply on HN