Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO • Hacker News Board

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#81

Post by signatoremo » Thu, Mar 13, 2025, 4:04 AM UTC

gessha wrote: post #70

la64710 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a well written comment. Just because you disagree is no reason to downvote a well written comment.

"Politics aside for a moment" and then following up with politics is at the very least a logically inconsistent statement. Logical inconsistencies aside for a moment, the comment would've carried a little more weight if cited any sources for their claims.

we're seeing the death bellows of many large, entrenched bureaucracies right now with DOGE

What is political about that statement? You may disagree with him, I certainly don’t think all of what happened with DOGE is justified, but that was a neutral statement.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#82

Post by signatoremo » Thu, Mar 13, 2025, 4:12 AM UTC

Veserv wrote: post #68

alterom wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>he was CEO/Chairman of Cadence for 15 years, but other than that Oh, so he's only been leading one of the handful of companies making the full software suite for all stages of silicon design and simulation for 15 years, no biggie. You're aware what kind of company Cadence is, are you?

I know, right? John Sculley ran the, at the time, most successful computer maker, Apple, for 10 years. Brian Krzanich ran the, at the time, largest chip maker, Intel, for 6 years. They were the authorities; their decision-making and abilities running businesses in those industries must have been impeccable to do so for so long.

Did you know that Jensen Huang has been running Nvidia for 30 years? Anyone can pick examples to prove their point.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#83

Post by justahuman74 » Thu, Mar 13, 2025, 4:13 AM UTC

BoredPositron wrote: post #29

htrp wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so he's getting knifed after 6 months and Intel will be in even worse shape?

He is exactly there to be knifed after he cut intel into easy to sell pieces.

Yeah I hope they negotiated a really nice severance package in the employment contract

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#84

Post by heavymetalpoizn » Thu, Mar 13, 2025, 4:17 AM UTC

kelseyfrog wrote: post #54

netsharc wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with grandparent commenter that it's shocking a lot of people (also here) think DOGE is a serious endeavour and not some slapstick bunch of people. The realization is that even in here, plenty of people's emotions cloud their ability to think.

In my experience the highly intelligent are simply more able to find and generate rationalizations and justifications. It's similar to a science-believing schizophrenic, their brain finds physically possible but implausible ways to deceive them. This split demonstrates that intelligence and being grounded in reality are two orthogonal psychological phenomenon. Being grounded in reality is simply the ability to be ope…

[dead]

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#85

Post by brookst » Thu, Mar 13, 2025, 4:17 AM UTC

gpm wrote: post #74

DebtDeflation wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really simple - either Intel is shipping products on 18A (Panther Lake and Clearwater Forest) by Q1 of next year or they are not, and their entire future hinges on this.

I'm not an expert in the silicon business, but I'm pretty sure the lead time is long enough that an incoming CEO has little impact on whether or not they are shipping a new architecture in less than 12 months. Intel's valuation might hinge on it, but evaluating the CEOs success or not... that doesn't strike me as a great idea.

Agree you can’t evaluate entirely on ship date, but you can evaluate on how well the company handles either the last year of development or pivoting and adapting if it’s late. It’s challenging times at Intel, lots of opportunity for a CEO to show great leadership either in success or adversity.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#86

Post by heavymetalpoizn » Thu, Mar 13, 2025, 4:18 AM UTC

bee_rider wrote: post #75

ethbr1 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (there’s no particular reason to believe Intel and the US government are very similar) Large monopolies with limited market pressure to innovate?

Not really, no. Governments aren’t businesses. There isn’t much of a market for governance, people mostly become citizens by birth instead of by shopping around. Governments have natural “monopoly” over their territory (if there is competition for governing inside a territory, you have a civil war going on). Or, there is no monopoly, since you can “shop around” by moving to other countries. It depends on how you want…

[dead]

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#87

Post by brookst » Thu, Mar 13, 2025, 4:21 AM UTC

signatoremo wrote: post #81

gessha wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Politics aside for a moment" and then following up with politics is at the very least a logically inconsistent statement. Logical inconsistencies aside for a moment, the comment would've carried a little more weight if cited any sources for their claims.

we're seeing the death bellows of many large, entrenched bureaucracies right now with DOGE What is political about that statement? You may disagree with him, I certainly don’t think all of what happened with DOGE is justified, but that was a neutral statement.

Disagree. It was both political and speculative.

It presumes that DOGE will be successful in a political fight, which is possible but not certain. The statement is no more neutral (and less accurate IMO) than saying “we’re seeing the culmination of a decades-long war on competence”.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#88

Post by brookst » Thu, Mar 13, 2025, 4:22 AM UTC

ethbr1 wrote: post #66

bee_rider wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comment (despite protests to the contrary) injected politics unnecessarily and a bit randomly (there’s no particular reason to believe Intel and the US government are very similar).

> (there’s no particular reason to believe Intel and the US government are very similar) Large monopolies with limited market pressure to innovate?

Also they both own real estate?

Not all things that share some attributes are similar in general.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#89

Post by brookst » Thu, Mar 13, 2025, 4:24 AM UTC

missedthecue wrote: post #49

beambot wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and I'm sure all those public shareholders are mighty unhappy with the current board's stewardship.

Unfortunately, index funds and mutual funds own about 68% of the Intel, with Vanguard retirement funds being the biggest. These passive custodian investor companies just vote along with the board's recommendation rather than making opinionated or activist decisions.

I’m with you except “unfortunately”. I don’t think we really want Vanguard trying to be an activist investor in all the companies they have major positions in.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#90

Post by alexey-salmin » Thu, Mar 13, 2025, 4:56 AM UTC

gessha wrote: post #76

neelm wrote: post #19

If he wants to succeed, he will need to reconsistute the board. That's a tough one since they appointed him, but otherwise it won't work. The type of transformation Intel needs to go through won't withstand a myopic, short term oriented bureaucracy.

Just because the board made mistakes doesn't mean you have to go full altman on them.

At this point I think you should. They literally took a great company and run it into the ground over profits