61–70 of 111 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The founders obviously wanted to exit
everyone wants to exit, the only question is how many zeroes it'll take for you to admit it. If I offered you a billion dollars for 100% of your startup today, would you really actually not exit? what's the old saw? "now we're just haggling over the price"... https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/03/07/haggling/
>Now the bad news: SiBeam was bought by Lattice Semiconductor, and right before I gave this talk, Lattice shut down the entire SiBeam organization and ended support and production of this part. I didn’t find out about this until months later, when I contacted the sales engineers I had been talking to about this part and they told me what happened. This is one thing that really pisses me off. Time and time again you'v…
>Now the bad news: SiBeam was bought by Lattice Semiconductor, and right before I gave this talk, Lattice shut down the entire SiBeam organization and ended support and production of this part. I didn’t find out about this until months later, when I contacted the sales engineers I had been talking to about this part and they told me what happened. This is one thing that really pisses me off. Time and time again you'v…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How can it be that these companies can afford to buy companies at a premium, throw away massive parts of the value of the company It's almost like the lack of robust anti-trust prosecution by world governments have so enriched large, rent-seeking companies that they can literally afford to burn money and still come out ahead...
On the other hand, preventing acquisitions reduces available exits and might discourage future innovation (which in turn might promote more trusts).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agressively tax large organisations. There'd be a cost to that, but as this comment chain is discussing, there's also a cost to leaving them with the money and allowing them to use it to stifle innovation.
Aggressive taxation is a prisoner's dilemma involving every government in the world. Good luck solving that problem. (Honestly, I wish good luck to anyone trying to solve it. Corporate tax is fucked .)
What should be more surprising though is how e.g. Google has ties to USG (through Schmidt) but can still escape harsher taxation. At the same time – maybe that's why they can escape harsher taxation... because USG benefits by other means.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, preventing acquisitions reduces available exits and might discourage future innovation (which in turn might promote more trusts).
I can't believe this is getting downvoted. It's the equivalent of sticking your head in the sand and hoping that if you can't see a bad thing then that bad thing doesn't exist. This is a clear case of incentive design and too strong of an arm in preventing acquisitions can come back to bite you. Don't pretend this isn't the case, acknowledge it and factor it into your beliefs around optimal anti-trust law.
So a bit of a red herring.
Maybe a dumb question, but how is it even possible to do SDR with 60GHz signal on a ~4GHz CPU via a 5Gbps USB3 connection?
EDIT: I guess via down-conversion? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_down_converter
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agressively tax large organisations. There'd be a cost to that, but as this comment chain is discussing, there's also a cost to leaving them with the money and allowing them to use it to stifle innovation.
I would instead move toward "aggressively tax passive investment above some limit." The issue isn't large amounts of money. The issue is large amounts of idle money.
The only way to make your money useless is to hold cash since it's designed to decrease in value over time. Pretty much everything else is promoting some kind of innovation/growth.
I love how industry came up with ever crazier schemes to stream content from phones and laptops to TVs. There must have been three different attempts involving WiFi alone, but this phased array mmWave 60 GHz million bucks basic research abomination surely takes the cake. Meanwhile, some Google engineer realized you could solve 90% of phone-to-TV streaming applications and 100% of the hard technical problems by just t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have any further reading I can do on this?
not really phased array, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lytro
Phased arrays admittedly use the wave theory in a way which is geometrically simple. Maybe "far field" is the way to describe it.