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

US Intel

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 581 posts

Re: US Intel

#281

Post by lovich »

twoodfin wrote: post #218
throwawaymaths wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starfleet code requires a second backup? In case the first backup fails. What are the chances that both a primary system and its backup would fail at the same time?

This is too glib: If you imagine a world where every critical industry is replicated in every large nation, often inefficiently or inadequately, that’s a world where the average person is much, much poorer. And for what?

It’s a tradeoff between resilience and efficiency.

You can go for full efficiency if you want, but then like the US auto manufacturers learned during Covid, you don’t have any way to handle disruptions to your business

Re: US Intel

#282

Post by Stephen_0xFF »

MangoToupe wrote: post #68

Note that all our issues with china would be solved if we stopped pretending like they're our enemy.

China wants to be number one and they have a good chance of doing it. Every nation’s leaders and people want that. It affords luxury and influence. The US understandably doesn’t want to lose their spot. It also helps making this an issue to give it a sense of urgency so things can get done — be it policy or innovation. There’s some game theory in there — e.g Prisoners Dilemma. Treating them as the enemy won’t lead to the optimal result, but if the US doesn’t and they do, it will lead to the worst result for the US. History is not filled with nations singing Kumbaya. I wish it was.

Re: US Intel

#283

Post by BenFranklin100 »

You know, we can just provide critical industries with direct assistance in the form of subsidies. There’s no need for the US government to take an equity stake.

Nationalizing companies - and that is essentially what we’re starting with Intel - worked out horribly for the Brits last century.

Re: US Intel

#284

Post by logicchains »

georgeburdell wrote: post #23
themgt wrote: post #7

I’ll be honest: there is a very good chance this won’t work .... At the same time, the China concerns are real, Intel Foundry needs a guarantee of existence to even court customers, and there really is no coming back from an exit. There won’t be a startup to fill Intel’s place. The U.S. will be completely dependent on foreign companies for the most important products on earth, and while everything may seem fine for t…

If I may add my view as a formerly high-achieving semiconductor worker that Intel would benefit greatly from having right now, a lot of us pivoted to software and machine learning to earn more money. My first 2 years as a software engineer earned me more RSUs than a decade in semiconductors. Semiconductors is not prestigious work in the U.S., despite the strategic importance. By contrast, it is highly respected and r…

It's only be a short term thing, because fundamentally software is more profitable because it's much less costly to scale. And individual developers have more bargaining power, because they can own the "means of production", while the means of production for hardware is much more expensive.

Re: US Intel

#285

Post by rdw »

"We should do something to preserve leading-edge chip manufacturing in the US. This is Something, therefore we should do it."

Re: US Intel

#286

Post by neural_thing »

RealityVoid wrote: post #130
makestuff wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah seeing the innovations DJI is making in agriculture makes me wonder why VCs do not want to fund other startups like it. I know the margins are worse and it takes way more capital to fund hardware companies, but that has to be better than funding another chat-gpt wrapper. I guess that is why I am not a VC though lol.

They're just hard. What is the US robotics startup that you would use as an example of success? iRobot? It barely broke even.

Skild, Physical Intelligence

Re: US Intel

#287

Post by axus »

mallets wrote: post #96
minkzilla wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Robust and redundant manufacturing spread across the world with more opportunity for innovation?

Trillions of dollars spent just for redundancy? Most wouldn't even succeed in building a working process, forget profitable.

The world collectively (mostly the US) spends trillions on national defense, that spending is unnecessary if we all just got along. I think you're right that everyone spending money on local semiconductor industries is even more wasteful.

Re: US Intel

#288

Post by rangestransform »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #154
belter wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To quote Dave Chappelle: "I want to wear Nike shoes...I don't want to make them!"

'and I'm happy to make money off the jokes about/normalize the little girl that has to work in a sweet shop in a tropical climate doing it for basically nothing'. Current American culture can be pretty ugly.

Unless you believe that rich countries should altruistically give resources to poor countries, this is the best we can do. If there were no cost advantages to manufacturing in poor countries, they would have been entirely left out of the global economic sphere and unable to trade anything for industrial machines and technology.

Re: US Intel

#289

Post by lawlessone »

bix6 wrote: post #87
troad wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have developed an economy oriented around selling one another websites, and we are only belatedly noticing that none of our enemies seem to have followed.

It’s ridiculous. It’s so easy to find VC funding for software but heaven forbid you try and make agricultural innovations. Biotech is slightly better but still a struggle. Hardware only counts right now if it’s defense tech but even then people would rather have another SaaS.

So many of the VC's doing the funding got rich of software and web stuff.

They don't know anything else.

Post reply on HN