Earlier quoted context omitted.
To have a conversation about the US government buying a stake in Intel, and the threats of China in that space, requires one to have a conversation about both politics and ideology. It’s disingenuous to claim anything else. And to point out the irony of the passing fad on straws but deep love of fast fashion highlights the hypocrisy of US society in general and why we are incapable of having nice things or getting an…
The purpose of HN is to discuss things in the spirit of intellectual curiosity. To respond to an article about chip manufacturing with such a generic ideological flamebait line as "You can’t build a foundry on DEI, but you can feel good about yourself as you virtue signal about straws as you buy fast fashion" is the opposite of intellectual curious discussion. If the topics of DEI, straws and fast fashion are mention…
Re: US Intel
#581You can’t in good faith say the root article was an “article about chip making” unless you didn’t read the article. I will only agree my tone was off but it was very much on topic and anyone who actually read the article would realize it’s political. I’ve learned often what HN is going for, which is often shallow group think, and I agree HN is better when it posts articles that are “about chip making” but this wasn’t one of them. The silver lining is at least we can still comment on this without the “system” making a “decision” that just ends the discussion immediately.