Live data from Hacker News

Intel Honesty

stratechery.com

281–290 of 426 posts

Re: Intel Honesty

#281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Florida and Texas are among the fastest growing states in the country, whereas California is losing population.

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.

Why would you have difficulty becoming pregnant in Florida?

Re: Intel Honesty

#282
post #20
post #10

> in the late 2010’s Intel got stuck trying to move to 10nm, thanks in part to their reluctance to embrace the vastly more expensive EUV lithography process TBH, it's easy to say this with the benefit of hindsight. Throughout most of the 2010s, EUV lithography was like the "year of the Linux desktop" - i.e., this year will be the year where EUV was suitable for high volume manufacturing. I don't really blame Intel fo…

> Throughout most of the 2010s, EUV lithography was like the "year of the Linux desktop" - i.e., this year will be the year where EUV was suitable for high volume manufacturing. We need to learn to recognize the difference between something that's never going to happen for either physical or economic/social/structural reasons, and something that is just really difficult and takes a long time. I always think of this w…

We need to learn to recognize the difference between something that's never going to happen for either physical or economic/social/structural reasons, and something that is just really difficult and takes a long time.

I always think of this when I think about fusion and the irritating "fusion is 20 years away and always will be" meme. In reality fusion has been edging closer, and closer, and closer for decades. Like EUV lithography it's just incredibly hard and requires a ton of capital and time and some of the smartest people on Earth to make it a reality.

Never is a very long time, so I’m not going to say never. But it’s not at all certain that when all those smartest people declare victory we’ll have something that doesn’t make economic sense because the upfront capital costs are too high even if the theoretical (at that point) full lifecycle kWh cost is low.

Re: Intel Honesty

#283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel stock is as high as it was 15 years ago when they had total market domination. Now they are at the brink of collapse. The market is way bigger today but still, I would take a dominant player over a failing one every day. Another way to look at it: Intel market cap is 83B, AMD's market cap is 228B. Do you think Intel is expected to make 1/3 of the money AMD is going to make in coming decades? I see no reason to…

> Another way to look at it: Intel market cap is 83B, AMD's market cap is 228B. Do you think Intel is expected to make 1/3 of the money AMD is going to make in coming decades? I see no reason to be as optimistic. Nit: market cap is not earnings. That's stock price * shares outstanding. This year's earnings looks like this: Intel, 3 months ended: Jun 29, 2024 > Net income (loss) (1,654) https://www.intc.com/news-event…

Yeah but market cap is at least in theory about how much money a company is going to make in the future. Not this year, not the next year but decades is already pretty close (because of the discounting).

Re: Intel Honesty

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Texan, who has considered moving to California many times, this is laughable. I pay maybe $10k-$11k in property taxes ( https://tax-office.traviscountytx.gov/properties/taxes/estim... ). I work for myself at the moment, but if I took my previous salary of $200k and earned that in CA instead, I would owe CA closer to $15k, and I'm not grandfathered into prop 13. Never once in my career has the math made any sense…

> And you if you don't own your property, you don't owe TX anything. If you're renting, it's not like your landlord isn't baking that I to your rent.

But the rent is way lower on the average because cost per sq ft is way lower.

Re: Intel Honesty

#285
post #173
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 extre…

Does anyone truly want to live in Florida, Texas, Alabama, WV? (I left Tennessee off the list because it seems a lot to people _do_ want to live in Nashville anyway). I grew up in Texas. I've lived in 5 states and a Canadian province. My sisters house in Fort Worth is assessed a little lower than my house in WI. But her property tax is more than my property tax plus WI state income tax so.....

Houston and Austin are frickin' awesome if you're into food and hot weather.

Alabama has beautiful beaches...and Huntsville. Birmingham is actually quite nice.

Florida has amazing beaches.

Re: Intel Honesty

#286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Florida and Texas are among the fastest growing states in the country, whereas California is losing population.

Florida will be underwater immanently, in Texas abortion is illegal. I'd call it a "bubble," for lack of a better term.

Texas politics is temporary IMO. Tides will turn eventually.

Re: Intel Honesty

#287
post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is a market where housing supply meets demand, housing is a depreciating asset. Why would you want to buy if renting is cheaper?

> Is a market where housing supply meets demand, housing is a depreciating asset. How so? Supposedly house prices increased by 50% in 5 years there. So obviously it does not meet demand... > Why would you want to buy if renting is cheaper? Because it's usually considerably cheaper long-term? Rent prices go up all the time, so you'd lose a very significant amount of money over 10-20+ years.

If it is cheaper to buy than to rent, then presumably they can buy a house. The difference in prices just has to be bigger than interest rates and it becomes cost-effective to get a loan.

Say rents are >6% of the equivalent cost of ownership, then a mortgage at 6% will be cheaper than renting. So renting can't get that out of control relative to house prices in the long term, they have to go crazy together in a way that favours people who always lived in an area.

Re: Intel Honesty

#288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

> Am I wrong to use when this issue started as the discussion starting point? You're wrong about when it started. It's a lot more recent than that. We didn't build this way in 1904; we couldn't have afforded to live like this because we didn't have cars. A lot of places in the US were actually bulldozed since then to replace them with streets and parking. American zoning specifically was introduced in California for…

None of the people that you called 'greedy' pushed for this zoning to keep Chinese immigrants out. I'm not sure why you are bringing that up. The fact that laws can be created for bad reasons doesn't mean we shouldn't have laws. If someone finds a historically bad use case no more laws should be allowed?

We agree the USA didn't have relevant zoning laws until the population needed zoning laws. I don't think that changes anything (other than maybe we both agree that first passes often turn out to be poor and need revision).

70s environmentalists didn't decide more expensive housing would stop people from having children. I'm a child of these people. I remember the discussion. I remember my parents talking about prop 13. Driving up the cost of housing had zero discussion. The little old lady down the street driven from her home over property taxes did. The rapid changes with no planning did. The loss of the local field where people played. The loss of access to beaches people were used to going to. That's why laws like The California Coastal Act of 1976 were added at this time as well to guaranty public access back to these beaches. It wasn't just 'no building houses and no property tax for boomers' there is a whole body of law created at this time trying to keep California what it had been such as a place where you can go to the beach (up until 1976 that wasn't a given).

While they have been used for racist reasons zoning laws are not defacto racist. Buying a home is the largest purchase most Americans will make. It is also a long term purchase. Guaranteeing that what you buy will stay what you bought for the lifetime of the purchase seems reasonable. Just because outside people don't like the guaranty that the government made doesn't mean that it should be taken away from the people it was made to. I had to fight hard to prevent an temporary (it was not temporary just because it was movable) asphalt plant from being put in across from my neighborhood. I was able to stop it because of zoning laws and all the meetings they had to have to get an exception. I was able to motivate enough people to go to those meetings that they finally gave up. My house was good for 1 thing, raising my children. Allowing an asphalt plant made the largest purchase I will ever make in my life useless for the reason I bought the house. Zoning laws are the government guaranteeing me my purchase will be usable. If the government wants to take away that guaranty they should have to buy me out.

Please remember I was driven out of where I grew up. I understand it sucks. I would have loved to be able to afford to stay and raise a family where I grew up. To have taught my kids to surf. Shown them the cool discoveries I made in Nisene Marks. But I also understand the reasons it ended up this way weren't nefarious, racists, trying to create a hellscape for $$$. It was people making what they thought were the right choices because they didn't like the rapid changes that were happening. Things can turn out bad without having premeditated evil intentions.

Edit: I am so tired of these attacks. My mom was the kindest gentlest person I have ever known. Her and her friends may not have made perfect choices but stop with the 'they were evil'. They were basic, fallible human beings. The results didn't end up great, so fix them. But stop blaming. It helps nothing. They tried. They got access to their beaches back as part of this same movement, something I don't hear all this 'older Californians just suck and are evil' complaining about. Stop attacking people like my dead mother, they don't deserve the attacks. Stop character assassinating these people whose motivations you know nothing about just because you are angry/frustrated.

Re: Intel Honesty

#289

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.

Why would you have difficulty becoming pregnant in Florida?

That’s mostly not the problem: it’s what happens if it goes wrong in ways which are guaranteed to happen for a certain percentage of women every year, and you’re no longer allowed to get medical treatment because some failed Christians couldn’t be bothered to read their own holy book (the Old Testament god is down with abortion, the New Testament one isn’t concerned with it). There are more children who used to have mothers until an attempt at a sibling went wrong than there used to be, and that’s simply shameful.

This has ripple effects: it’s not just women suffering permanent injuries or death but also growing problems in many red states with doctors leaving to avoid the high likelihood of being charged for exercising what is standard medical judgement in the free world.

Even getting pregnant is at risk for couples who need to use IVF. Those attempts can go wrong which are easily resolved if you can get medical care which is increasingly under legal threat. IVF patients tend to be richer and whiter so the GOP is trying to carve out exceptions but that’s far from a given and you’ll still have a nightmare if you get the wrong DA.

Re: Intel Honesty

#290
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think rockets are insanely simple compared to silicon. The amount of research and development it takes to build a light source (hot tin plasma[1]) is extraordinary, and fabs are also probably the most complicated manufacturing facilities in the world. Tesla struggled mightily with integrating disparate auto parts manufacturers some years ago. SpaceX and Tesla benefited from being helmed by a crazy person (in their…

> The computers that came out of Silicon Valley in the late 70s-into the 80s were a disruption to the old stalwarts like IBM. Though for silicon maybe I'm just trapped in that pre-SpaceX thinking. another good example of this is how VLSI in particular disrupted the mini-computer/mainframe market and made CPU's cheap enough to put them into smaller and far cheaper machines. This really shook up the old guys who where…

AFAIK IBM still completely dominates mainframe, so they're not entirely out of the systems space.
Post reply on HN