News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Intel might be too big to fail by gjsman-1000 on Sunday November 03, 2024 @12:57PM (#42034709)
Honestly, I don’t think our government has the competence.
Re:Intel might be too big to fail by BadHumans on Sunday November 03, 2024 @12:58PM (#42034723)
Intel clearly doesn't have the competence.
Re:Intel might be too big to fail by gjsman-1000 on Sunday November 03, 2024 @01:00PM (#42034734)
Intel is already doing what only a few nations in the world can do, and at a more advanced level than our rival superpower. The view of incompetence is because they are a few years behind cutting edge, and as such, are losing orders.

There is absolutely no reason to believe our government is competent enough to solve that particular issue. Heck, China hasn’t succeeded in solving it; and only recently began mass production of 14nm. If TSMC, and only TSMC, was not around, Intel would be viewed as ultra-competent right now.

Re:Intel might be too big to fail by JohnBooty on Sunday November 03, 2024 @04:09PM (#42036108)

    The view of incompetence is because they are a few years 
    behind cutting edge, and as such, are losing orders.
Thank you. I thought I was going crazy.

Everybody's talking about Intel like they are turning out absolute garbage. It's true they're lagging the cutting edge, but from reading this discussion you'd think they were trying to sell 2003 P4 Netburst chips in 2024.

Re:Intel might be too big to fail by lupusreal on Monday November 04, 2024 @06:56AM (#42040713)
Intel may have incompetent leadership but they nonetheless have valuable capabilities which, presently, need to be preserved for strategic reasons. Letting those capabilities go isn't an option. If that means protecting Intel from their own incompetent leadership, so be it.

This is little different than the time Boeing got caught doing illegal corporate espionage against Lockheed, but possessed a launch capability that the American government needed. Boeing wasn't allowed to fail as some here probably think they should have; instead their launch business was merged into Lockheed's, forming ULA, to ensure that both could continue.