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

361–370 of 581 posts

Re: US Intel

#361

Post by twoodfin »

mpyne wrote: post #322
twoodfin wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Why? The efficiency gains are a matter of size of the average company, not a matter of the total number of companies. If what you said were true, it would be cheaper for there to be only one flavor of soda (as Bernie Sanders might have put it) rather than dozens. Competition is better for consumers than monopoly, and that applies even when the consumers are nations.

The premise of this thread is that efficient markets and comparative advantage won’t leave even a large nation with enough of the right competitive local industries for national security or whatever objective.

Thus to sustain those industries (semiconductor fabrication in this case) industrial policy (subsidies, tariffs, government investment, “Buy American” rules, … ) is essential.

Re: US Intel

#362

Post by yibg »

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…

Same for me except I never started. Graduated EE and went straight into software. Not just higher pay, but also a hell of a lot more jobs available, especially to new grads.

Re: US Intel

#363

Post by _carbyau_ »

supportengineer wrote: post #347
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.

These ads ain't gonna show themselves.

So the greatest military force in the world now needs to fight the war on

...

adblockers?

Re: US Intel

#364

Post by Fade_Dance »

BeetleB wrote: post #350
deepsquirrelnet wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because there’s many ways to raise capital, but very few ways to get talent. You’re arguing about logistics under the current economic rules while simultaneously defending a change of rules. When you put that on the table, then there’s a lot more ways to overcome the obstacles of today that aren’t being discussed. If a company’s management becomes a risk to national interests, then giving them more money with no adde…

Oh I agree that this may not be a solution. Where I disagree is that if Intel fails, something better (US based) will replace them. It won't.

If we're already into the realm of the US government taking huge equity stakes and forming state corporations, maybe they could help form a new JV after a theoretical Intel failure. That's no less major a step to take.

In the scenario where Intel fails (which would primarily be centered around defaulting on the 50 billion of debt that they built up and can barely service), the US gov could offer strong tax incentives to players who want to form up a new national fab company. Give it favored status essentially (again, if the US is already crossing fairly extreme lines of having US state owned corporations, this doesn't seem so extreme in comparison).

You already have Private Equity interests that are starting to consume Intel. Ex: some of the new fabs are funded by Brookstone, and they have sold off a portion of the profit from the venture, and then collateralized the transaction with the hard assets and put Private Equity at the top of the bankruptcy cap stack.

I think that if the US gave some incentives, the pieces would fall into place extremely quickly. PE would do the actual capital funding in a heartbeat if they had sweetheart tax incentives, and Japan/SK/TSMC would also get involved. Presumably - given the style of the current admin - the "deal" would be "you get favored status by taking part in this project. We will give strong tax benefits to also drive profit. If you turn it down, expect to see tariffs and calls go unanswered while your competition has a direct line."

Re: US Intel

#365

Post by Fade_Dance »

Aurornis wrote: post #241
jollyllama wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Billions for fast food delivery apps, not a dime for defense or sustainable agriculture.

> Billions for fast food delivery apps, not a dime for defense or sustainable agriculture Defense venture capital funding is literally in the billions and has resilient even in a broader VC pullback: https://www.spglobal.com/market-intelligence/en/news-insight...

Beyond Meat also hit 15 billion market cap at peak.

Re: US Intel

#366

Post by sgerenser »

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…

I think this is more of an Intel problem than a general semi industry problem. I work for Arm and I’m compensated better than when I worked at Microsoft (although it’s partly due to stock appreciation after the IPO). But I’ve also heard that Broadcom has top-teir RSU grants as well, and even AMD is more competitive than Intel.

Re: US Intel

#367

Post by sevensor »

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…

Same boat. The pay was mediocre, the hours were bad and far too many, and the company used cyclical demand to keep us in perpetual fear of layoffs. Mandatory pager carry 24/7/365 unless I was on vacation out of town. Rotating weekend coverage. Rotating holiday coverage. First couple of years were 12 hour shifts on my feet, then I went to process integration and did endless meetings instead.

I loved, still love, the actual technology of semiconductor fabrication, but you’d have to pay me 8x what I was making for me to go back to the business of semiconductor fabrication.

Re: US Intel

#368

Post by _carbyau_ »

packetlost wrote: post #62
georgeburdell wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

If Intel were well managed they would purge like 2/3rs of the managers and anyone in the bottom 50th percentile and then pay whatever it takes to get people skilled in their core industry back, training the remaining people as necessary to fill in gaps for the future. They literally cannot have a culture that encourages the now-traditional job hopping that is so pervasive in American business culture. They can't affo…

In every workplace I've been, I end up thinking 50% of people here could be gone tomorrow and nothing would change.

But the real trick is filtering precisely the 50% you want.

Re: US Intel

#369

Post by roody15 »

nonethewiser wrote: post #85
Diog wrote: post #51

To be honest, for most Chinese people, the reason we haven't taken action regarding Taiwan is not because of TSMC, but rather our patience with the current will of the Taiwan people. However, this patience has its limits. Even if TSMC has better chips now, China mainland will surpass them next 10 years. You can compare the gap in chip technology between Chinese companies in 2015 and that projected for 2025 to see thi…

Do you think an invasion of Taiwan brings risk of a new, worse status quo? I think that's primarily why China doesn't invade. If it were possible to just achieve an easy, total victory then there is no reason to wait for Taiwanese people to change their mind about joining China. Im also confused why you say China's inaction on Taiwan isnt about TSMC its about patience, but patience is running out because China wont n…

China has no reason nor any incentive to invade Taiwan. They are moving ahead with a strategy of overwhelming force and patience. In short China will simply continue to greatly expand its Navy and overall military size. It will do so until its so overwhelming that Taiwan will simply end up voting to join back with China as it will be in its own interest. China has no need to speed this process up and can simply do exactly what it is doing now.. and just watch how things will change in the next 5-10-15 years.

Re: US Intel

#370

Post by roody15 »

webdevver wrote: post #60

for all this talk about intel struggling, they seem to be quite capable to continue producing very competitive CPUs and other IP. my understanding is that they are still doing well in the datacentre world, unless that has changed? its worth keeping in mind Intel is quite a big company... and naturally, the parts that are chugging along just fine are not going to be making headlines (or much noise at all really.)

In my experience over the last 5 years the vast majority of companies I have worked with have moved to AMD for server purchases. Intel is not competing well on the home PC or server market in recent times at least that is what I am seeing.
Post reply on HN