331–340 of 638 posts
Nvidia's stake in Intel could have terrible consequences. First, it is in Nvidia's interest to kill Intel's Arc graphics, and that would be very bad because it is the only thing brighing GPU prices down for consumers. Second, the death of Intel graphics / Arc would be extremely bad for Linux, because Intel's approach to GPU drivers is the best for compatibility, wheras Nvidia is actively hostile to drivers on Linux.…
Nvidia's stake in Intel could have terrible consequences. First, it is in Nvidia's interest to kill Intel's Arc graphics, and that would be very bad because it is the only thing brighing GPU prices down for consumers. Second, the death of Intel graphics / Arc would be extremely bad for Linux, because Intel's approach to GPU drivers is the best for compatibility, wheras Nvidia is actively hostile to drivers on Linux.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What happens now if one of these companies implodes? does it pull everything with it?
Well, the AI bubble will eventually pop since none of the major AI chatbots are remotely profitable, even on OpenAI's eyewatering $200/month pay plan which very few have been willing to pay, and even on that OpenAI is still loosing money on it. And when it pops, so will Nvidia's stock, it's only a matter of time. The AI hype train was built on the premise that AI will progress linearly and eventually end up replacing…
This is comically premature.
Probably government-mandated.
Nvidia's stake in Intel could have terrible consequences. First, it is in Nvidia's interest to kill Intel's Arc graphics, and that would be very bad because it is the only thing brighing GPU prices down for consumers. Second, the death of Intel graphics / Arc would be extremely bad for Linux, because Intel's approach to GPU drivers is the best for compatibility, wheras Nvidia is actively hostile to drivers on Linux.…
Not necessarily true. This might be a Microsoft funding a bankrupt Apple kind of moment. American competition isn't a zero sum, and it's in Nvidias' best interest to keep the market healthy.
Looking at Google's recent antitrust settlement, I'm not sure this is true at present.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, the AI bubble will eventually pop since none of the major AI chatbots are remotely profitable, even on OpenAI's eyewatering $200/month pay plan which very few have been willing to pay, and even on that OpenAI is still loosing money on it. And when it pops, so will Nvidia's stock, it's only a matter of time. The AI hype train was built on the premise that AI will progress linearly and eventually end up replacing…
> AI will replace a lot of well paid white collar work, but it failed to deliver on that promise This is comically premature.
When you follow the progress in the last 12 months, it really isn't. Big AI companies spent "hella' stacks" of cash, but delivered next to no progress.
Progress has flatlined. The "rocket to the moon" phase has already passed us by now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intel isn’t that far behind. But it is dumb to depend on fabs in a country that is just one Chinese missile away from getting destroyed.
That's most of the world, including the USA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_weapons_of_mass_dest...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US government is itself a major shareholder in Intel, and has every incentive to push Intel stock over its competitors. It's almost a certainty that Nvidia was forced into this deal by the government as well. We are way beyond regulation here.
The US government isn’t (or at least shouldn’t be) profit-motivated anyway, so it isn’t obvious what their incentives are WRT Intel’s stock.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
He didn’t say anything violent. Have you watched the monologue? Even if he did (which he didn’t), I don’t see Fox shutting down anything when one of their presenters recently stated, on air, that we should euthanize our homeless population.
ABC is a broadcast network. It relies on a network of affiliates (largely owned by a few big companies) who selectively broadcast its programming both over the airwaves and to cable providers. Those affiliates have individual licenses for their radio broadcasting bandwidth which the FCC does have leverage over (and whose content the FCC has a long history of regulating, but not usually directly over politics, e.g. public interest requirements, profanity, and obscenity laws).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intel isn’t that far behind. But it is dumb to depend on fabs in a country that is just one Chinese missile away from getting destroyed.
And why would they when TSMC is in both China and the US in some fashion?
https://www.asiafinancial.com/taiwan-says-tsmc-not-allowed-t...
That may have changed since then. But do you really want to depend on a foreign government for chip manufacturing?