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

U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 765 posts

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#461

Post by fach »

bongodongobob wrote: post #434
UncleOxidant wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple has more money than some nation states. And Apple needs their chips fabbed, so why not have Apple invest $50B into Intel? Nvidia could afford to chip in too. These companies that face a huge amount of geopolitical risk because they've put all of their eggs in the TSMC basket should have to pay for this not US taxpayers.

I'd rather the citizens control the companies than the other way around.

Branding nationalizing companies as “citizens control” is quite the spin. Chinese citizens surely own the means of production, right?

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#462

Post by kragen »

johnecheck wrote: post #450
tbrownaw wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> doesn't make semiconductors, they mostly make flash and whatnot Um. All that stuff is still semiconductors, just with different patterns printed on them.

You're right but also wrong. Flash is just semiconductors etched in a different pattern than logic, but you don't print on semiconductors. Semiconductors are 'printed' on wafers via photolithography.

Intel's wafers are made of silicon, which is a semiconductor. Silicon on sapphire hasn't been widely used for a long time, if that's what you're thinking of. Photolithography prints resists on semiconductor wafers which are then used to pattern the next process step, such as wet etching, plasma etching, oxide growth, epitaxial polysilicon growth, ion implantation, etc. These mostly remove semiconductor from the wafer or alter its properties.

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#463

Post by UncleOxidant »

lugu wrote: post #457
UncleOxidant wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple has more money than some nation states. And Apple needs their chips fabbed, so why not have Apple invest $50B into Intel? Nvidia could afford to chip in too. These companies that face a huge amount of geopolitical risk because they've put all of their eggs in the TSMC basket should have to pay for this not US taxpayers.

If TSMC diseaper tomorrow, people will still buy computers, with chips made from Korea, or China, who cares. What are apple or Nvidia risking? They have worked hard to lock their customer. The problem is for the US military.

Apple & Nvidia switching to, say, Samsung as their foundry would likely take at least a year before they'd start to see production. Meanwhile, little to no revenue. It is a risk for them. And if China went for Taiwan, why not also cause some trouble for S Korea while they're at it? (Wouldn't have to invade, just block shipping, etc. - if China decided to do maximal damage. It's also quite possible that N Korea would take advantage of the situation)

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#465

Post by freeopinion »

JustExAWS wrote: post #287
ch4s3 wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d really rather we didn’t bail out these companies at all. It clearly creates moral hazard and makes it hard for better run companies to enter markets.

Chip manufacturing is too important for the US. We can’t be completely dependent on Taiwan. Nothing against Taiwan, it’s one attack away from being obliterated by China. No company is going to come out of someone’s garage and build a chip fab.

Nobody is going to swoop in and buy a distressed company that owns a bunch of fabs then turn it around if that company keeps getting bailed out.

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#466

Post by viraptor »

gizajob wrote: post #420
viraptor wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Taiwan becomes practically inaccessible, is there any way another country can setup a competing fab (for the latest generation of chip sizes) without years of R&D? As far as I understand, the practical knowledge of how to do it doesn't exist right now. (Neither does the prerequisite tooling)

Given there’s fabs doing essentially the same thing elsewhere then yes. Getting down to 3nm and the technology and secrets that involves would take a while though. TSMC can’t do it either without xUV lithography machines made by ASML in the Netherlands. Furthermore there isn’t anything magical about about the current generation of chips that couldn’t be replicated at at a scale of 12 or 15 or 20 nanometers - it’s jus…

I meant specifically for a given small size. Sure larger ones can be and are produced elsewhere. But how many years behind is everyone else if they can't get any help at all from the current companies.

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#467

Post by yieldcrv »

MyOutfitIsVague wrote: post #180
yieldcrv wrote: post #154

[flagged]

That's needlessly rude. I just found the sequence of events confusing. If I promise you a cash gift, then some months later demand you to give me something in return for the promised gift, it would be silly to say that I paid absolutely nothing. I don't consider that pedantic.

Okay, you’re right, I’m sorry

I ran into someone recently that derailed every conversation for a needless correction and would opt for arguing about that instead of going back to what the initial conversation was about. This reminded me of that and my tolerance is low for it, for now

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#468

Post by sgnelson »

Everyone is talking about "bailouts" and "owning a company that the government funds."

This isn't about that at all. This is about the breakdown of the rule of law, a unitary executive bypassing all other branches of government and demanding a private enterprise give itself over to the government.

If you don't think there was an "or else" as part of this deal, you're largely mistaken. If you don't think that there will be other questionalbe demands placed on Intel in the future from this government, you are largely mistaken.

But y'all go ahead and can keep arguing over whether we should "get something back" from this deal. Because that's really going to maker ameraica graet agian.

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#469

Post by lugu »

gizajob wrote: post #405
JustExAWS wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chip manufacturing is too important for the US. We can’t be completely dependent on Taiwan. Nothing against Taiwan, it’s one attack away from being obliterated by China. No company is going to come out of someone’s garage and build a chip fab.

Nvidia has a market cap of 4.5 trillion dollars and everyone is committing hundreds of billions to AI CapEx in their direction - they can afford to organise chip fabs if it really came to it. Ok TSMC and ASML would need to be on board but it could be done. Should be done in fact because even a simple SWOT analysis would show the risk to their business.

What is the risk for Nvidia if TSMC diseaper? Wouldn't they simply switch supplier and pick the second best option?

Re: U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

#470

Post by adapteva »

colechristensen wrote: post #458
adapteva wrote: post #444

Any strings attached? If not, ironically a big chunk of those US tax payer dollars will likely end up in Taiwan/TSMC.

There's an option for the US to buy an additional 5% if Intel sells so it doesn't have majority ownership of its fabs. But I think the real strings are a soft, private insistence that Intel won't be allowed to sell itself overseas. The Defense Production Act and the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States would be used to prevent the sale. The carrot is the whatever $18B in grants and investment, the sti…

No strings common share purchase means cash in hand, which implies Intel can spend it on any operational cost, including buying billions in TSMC wafers (which they already do).
Post reply on HN