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

The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

davidoks.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 682 posts

Re: The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

#491

Post by WalterBright »

hackyhacky wrote: post #356
sokoloff wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It shifts the gains away from the marginal investor in Microsoft who was only willing to pay a penny less for those shares (probably an eighth of a dollar when this anecdote happened). Instead of them getting the 100 cars, the buyer who was willing to hit the ask earlier gets them. That profit comes from owning a piece of a productive company, productive companies often spring from early-stage losses that require inv…

Your comment does not address the (imho reasonable) criticism that the described system incentivizes gambling as the key to wealth, rather than labor. There are many problems with a gambling based economy, not least among them that over a long enough time line, all the money ends in very few hands.

> a long enough time line, all the money ends in very few hands.

You're assuming the economy is zero sum, which it obviously is not.

Re: The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

#492

Post by WalterBright »

hackyhacky wrote: post #446
sokoloff wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Studying that chart might reveal a way to long-term invest in a way that isn't anything like gambling. Or, I might be completely wrong and just been on an incredible white-hot-streak gambling for the last 30 years.

"I can win" is not a refutation of the claim that investment is gambling in any way that matters. The more relevant question is: does investment reward productivity (i.e. skill, strength, labor) or does it reward ownership (i.e. those who have capital will continue to accumulate capital)? By your own statement, it seems the latter. All of that money that you've "earned" with investment, where do you think it came fro…

> All of that money that you've "earned" with investment, where do you think it came from?

It was created by the company you invested in.

> What do you think you've done to deserve it?

I took the risk of providing capital for the company to use to create wealth.

Risk is an elemental characteristic of free markets.

Re: The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

#493

Post by mrandish »

state_less wrote: post #432
Analemma_ wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, there are a bunch of bizarre comments in here. "Why aren't they rushing to make more fabs? Don't they know China is using this moment to the enter the market in a big way?" Yes, they do! And building more fabs would make that worse. The last thing you want to do before a state-backed player enters the market in a boom cycle is load up on debt to produce more capacity just before the bust.

It's a bit surprising many here are referencing the memory supply cycles without mentioning this revolutionary new application for memory people call AI. It'd be like talking about weather cycles and climate without mentioning global warming. Just like the planet is not going to get colder on average than it was for the foreseeable future, we're not going to need less memory for the foreseeable future. China is tryin…

> this revolutionary new application for memory people call AI.

Most analysts think LLMs will elevate the long-term base RAM demand level. I mentioned 15-25% above prior projections without AI, which I think everyone agrees is highly likely. That's actually a lot because it's an overall market number and RAM goes lots of places other than PCs, servers and high-end mobile (depending on how you segment, 25% overall could be in the neighborhood of doubling PC, server, high-end mobile demand).

Above that range analyst estimates diverge. Some are more bullish, and a few are much more bullish. But everyone's error bars get much wider when the numbers go over 30% overall. It's hard to tease out exactly how much of the current demand bubble will persist in the long-run. Clearly, the current market is distorted by short-term dynamics but which part is base demand and which distortion?

How much consumer AI compute will be on-device vs aggregated in load-balanced clouds? How much RAM will that kind of compute require? Will the market find it's more efficient to consolidate around two or three mega-datacenters or will each frontier lab (and geopolitical block) continue drag racing each other to tie-up future RAM (as much to keep it away from competitors as for their own needs). I don't know. I've been watching this game as an interested bystander for several decades and I wouldn't bet too much of my own money on the most bullish estimates.

Re: The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

#494

Post by GeekyBear »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #15

What was most surprising about all this to me was this line: > So modern DRAM manufacturing is an extraordinarily complex and expensive process. Building a single state-of-the-art DRAM fabrication facility, a “fab,” will cost you about $15 to $20 billion; acquiring all the necessary equipment, like lithography tools and etching machines, will cost you another few billion; and then it’ll take you a few years of produc…

For a commodity part, Apple has a history of buying a manufacturing partner a dedicated manufacturing line in exchange for locking down a guaranteed supply at a lower overall price.

It's one of the early moves Tim Cook made after joining Apple to lock down enough flash memory supply to move iPods from hard drives to flash.

Re: The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

#495

Post by hackyhacky »

hcurtiss wrote: post #473
hackyhacky wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't understand the point of capitalism. It's not about making rich people richer. Making the rich richer isn't necessarily the point, but it is an unavoidable consequence. > Capitalism is about producing stuff. Humans have been producing stuff well before the concept of ownership was invented, and certainly well before the massive wealth accumulation that is the hallmark of capitalism.

And almost for the entirety of that period, humans lived in abject poverty. The rise of capitalism perfectly correlates with the most spectacular increase in human flourishing and prosperity in the history of our species. Even in the last fifty years, liberalizing economies, private ownership, and contract law have lifted tens of millions out of poverty, mostly in SE Asia.

And yet many in capitalist society lived and still live in abject poverty, despite the fact that there are enough resources so that no one should be left wanting. Nevertheless, you've somehow convinced yourself that those people either (a) don't matter, (b) deserve it, or (c) can't be helped.

If the goal is to reduce poverty, I fail to see how the existence of billionaires is a positive outcome, either now, in the form of Musk and his ilk; in the form of the robber barons of the late 18th century; or in the form of the noble lords of the feudal period to owned a lot but contributed nothing.

Re: The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

#496

Post by ivewonyoung »

hackyhacky wrote: post #431
CamperBob2 wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As others have pointed out, that's a naïve and frankly incorrect reading of Chinese history, but it's also not something that can be addressed here.

It evidently can be addressed here, as you yourself mentioned. No one has yet pointed out to me why my reading is "naive and frankly incorrect," so feel free to be the first.

I listed the reforms upthread that you ignored.

All the reforms fit a capitalistic model, not just a free commerce model.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48231586

And of course, Mao's communism was very anti-capitalistic.

Re: The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

#497

Post by hackyhacky »

WalterBright wrote: post #487
tardedmeme wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capitalism incentivizes risk taking because the payoff is enormous - the most successful risk takers get to own the world 50 years later. The problem: there's a second phase 50 years later, where the risk takers from 50 years ago own the world and do their best to prevent further rewards flowing to new risktakers. We are in that phase now. The other problem: when the reward is so great, you do everything to get ahead…

> the most successful risk takers get to own the world 50 years later. Musk creating wealth has taken nothing from me. How about you? > there's a second phase 50 years later, where the risk takers from 50 years ago own the world and do their best to prevent further rewards flowing to new risktakers. We are in that phase now. Did you know that Hackernews is run by wealthy people who fund startups? What illegal things…

> Musk creating wealth has taken nothing from me. How about you?

That's exactly what he'd like you to believe. Where did that money come from? Did he just print it himself?

> Musk creating wealth has taken nothing from me. How about you?

Considering that billionaires are actively involved in writing the laws that ostensibly apply to them (see also: regulatory capture), I hardly think that legality should be highest bar that we hold them to. After all, the lords of medieval France acted "legally" when they executed their tenant farmers for failing to pay rent after a bad harvest.

Re: The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

#498

Post by hackyhacky »

WalterBright wrote: post #488
tardedmeme wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like what? Will they be profitable?

I started my own software business with no capital.

That's very impressive. How did you write software without a computer?

Re: The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

#499

Post by WalterBright »

hackyhacky wrote: post #467
sokoloff wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Never lost money over any 20 year period” is a good enough refutation of investing in the S&P being gambling in any way that matters to allow me to act. Others might be more conservative and I hope they find and choose investments which match their style and risk-tolerance.

> in any way that matters to allow me to act. I don't care how you act. That capitalism benefits the rich is not the subject of debate. This isn't /r/wallstreetbets What is at stake us that all value is created by labor; and that the capitalist class (of which you are a member) is allowed to profit despite not producing anything at all. That makes you a parasite. Isn't that what the rich say about the poor?

> What is at stake us that all value is created by labor

That's the communist "Labor Theory of Value" which is nonsense.

For example, spend the day digging a hole in your backyard. Did you create any value? Nope.

Re: The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

#500

Post by hackyhacky »

WalterBright wrote: post #485
WalterBright wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Capitalism is in no way a prerequisite for technological development. Communist countries copied technology, their inventions are very few. Capitalist countries routinely exhibit rapid technological development.

I was just watching "Shock and Awe", a documentary on Amazon, about the development of electrical theory and products. It was driven largely by people who wanted to make money off of their inventions. None of the progress came from communist countries. Did you know that Gutenberg invented the printing press in order to make money? Did you know the Wright Bros invented the airplane in order to make money? And so on an…

> It was driven largely by people who wanted to make money off of their inventions.

I am getting a little tired of repeating myself, but you're evidently confused so I'll indulge you.

The opposition to capitalist as a monetary system does not imply the opposition to the profit motive. As I've said several times, and which you continue to ignore, the exchange of goods and services in the form of commerce requires the profit motive. Conflating my position with communism is a straw man.

Post reply on HN