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

541–550 of 682 posts

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

#541

Post by hackyhacky »

WalterBright wrote: post #532
hackyhacky wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The school had one. When I wasn't at school, I wrote code in spiral notebooks. Today you can buy a computer for $25. https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=raspberry+pi You can pick up a keyboard at the thrift store for about $5, and a monitor for maybe $15.

Okay so you admit that you did in fact have capital and you were lying before?

Did you ever compensate the school for their involuntary loan of that computer or are you now admitting that you are a thief?

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

#542

Post by hcurtiss »

hackyhacky wrote: post #495
hcurtiss wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 fo…

It's not, but if the existence of billionaires correlates strongly with an increase in the median standard of living, I'm all for it. My politics are not driven by envy -- only what consistently produces the best outcome for the most.

Regarding the idea that we can design a system where "no one should be left wanting," that sounds nice. So does big rock candy mountain. There is no such system.

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

#543

Post by vladms »

hackyhacky wrote: post #495
hcurtiss wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 fo…

But not all "capitalist" societies have the same percentage in "abject poverty". So that makes me think that capitalism by itself is not the only major determinant of some of the bad things that we see, but rather the lack of interest and of focus to fix actual issues. Many societies can learn from others and improve their situation. Note: and many, if not most actually do, check : https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/the-share-and-number-of-p...

If the goal is to reduce poverty, the number of billionaire is actually irelevant. How you fund reducing poverty might influence the number of billionaires, but, for me it is more important what each society does for the poor, rather than counting how many are billionaires today.

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

#544

Post by hackyhacky »

ivewonyoung wrote: post #496
hackyhacky wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

All well and good but you still haven't addressed my point which is that China's reduction of poverty is due to its central control of wages, construction, and capital.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48236489

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

#545

Post by hackyhacky »

ivewonyoung wrote: post #511
hackyhacky wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Once people are given all the resources they want they are not motivated to work You are again straw manning an argument. I said nothing about giving people all resources with no work. In fact, I explicitly said the opposite: I want a society where people compete to provide labor in order to gain material advantage. My argument against capitalism is that that competition should be fair: people should compete for re…

That makes no sense because labor needs capital to take risks so they get salaries. For example new drug discoveries cost a lot of money and a huge percentage fail with big losses that go to paying labor but not eventually benefiting from it. Banning that model where capital is risked by passive investors would've meant far fewer life saving drugs being invented, literally making mankind worse off. If someone wants t…

> That makes no sense because labor needs capital to take risks so they get salaries.

Total non sequitur. Labor (and salaries) predate the existence of money, as well as capital investment.

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

#546

Post by wing-_-nuts »

inglor_cz wrote: post #526
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean one can go look at the health outcomes of the average american vs other developed nations, and see that we do not get much for the amount of money we spend. I won't bother to argue this with you. If you're genuinely operating in good faith, you're just as capable of finding the studies as I am, and if not, there's really no point

When comparing average Americans and their health to average, say, Spaniards, we should not ignore the 400 lb gorilla in the room named "obesity". Even Europeans are getting bigger, but America is way, way worse. Seeing those extreme landwhale-type people who cannot even walk around the mall and navigate it using a motorized cart, throwing bulk packages of horrible shitty ultraprocessed food and drinks into said cart…

Uhuh, That's why we're #1 in the world in conditions uncorrelated with obesity like infant mortality right?

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

#547

Post by WalterBright »

hackyhacky wrote: post #508
WalterBright wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

> It was created by the company you invested in. That's right: the value was created by other people, but yet you are benefiting. That makes you a parasite. > I took the risk of providing capital for the company to use to create wealth. So what? I can take a risk by jumping into a shallow pool. That's not the same as labor and does not entitle me, ethically, to profit. The profit should go to the people who do the wo…

> That's right: the value was created by other people, but yet you are benefiting. That makes you a parasite.

This is classic Marxism.

The employees were compensated commensurate with the value they produced. The value the investors create is the result of taking the risk by providing the capital and organization needed for the company to operate.

If you don't believe that, you're free to organize with like-minded fellow travelers, set up a commune, and split the rewards equally. I would caution you, however, that 20,000 other communes have been set up in the US, and they all disappeared. In my estimation, the typical commune member leaves after about 2 years, because they were doing all the work and the others were lazing around getting their equal share.

Put another way, SpaceX would not exist without Musk.

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

#548

Post by hcurtiss »

wmf wrote: post #119
hcurtiss wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There absolutely are monopolies. There are, in fact, many state run enterprises. Where do you get these ideas?

My understanding is that the Chinese government prefers to have multiple successful companies in each field and they don't like it when one company becomes too powerful.

So also does the US. Trump had prominent cases against Google and Meta. Biden against Apple and Amazon. Prominent efforts on airlines and grocery stores. Honestly, I'm pretty sure the US and Chinese antitrust laws are pretty similar (theirs largely crafted after ours).

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

#549

Post by hackyhacky »

hcurtiss wrote: post #542
hackyhacky wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 fo…

It's not, but if the existence of billionaires correlates strongly with an increase in the median standard of living, I'm all for it. My politics are not driven by envy -- only what consistently produces the best outcome for the most. Regarding the idea that we can design a system where "no one should be left wanting," that sounds nice. So does big rock candy mountain. There is no such system.

> It's not, but if the existence of billionaires correlates strongly with an increase in the median standard of living, I'm all for it.

Great, but it doesn't. The gap between the poor and the wealthy has only grown in the US, especially since Reagan's "trickle down" economics.

https://www.statista.com/chart/35953/inequality-wealth-gap-u...

The accusations against the working poor of "envy" are a barbaric slur. People just want to get valued fairly.

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

#550

Post by ijidak »

adrian_b wrote: post #466
FuriouslyAdrift wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are running fabs at 100% capacity. New fabs take many years to build, cost billions, and are out of date within a few process moves. One cannot simply "flood the market" or the Chinese would have done it ages ago.

The Chinese memory makers have been sabotaged by USA, otherwise they would have already "flooded the market" and reduced the prices. Even so, the production of cheaper Chinese DDR5 memory is increasing despite not being able to import all the tools and materials that are needed, so eventually they will benefit from this memory shortage that allows them to gain market share that they would not have gained otherwise.

I'd like to learn more about how they've been sabotaged. What happened?
Post reply on HN