←back to thread

U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

(www.cnbc.com)
607 points givemeethekeys | 1 comments | 22 Aug 25 21:01 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
cuttothechase ◴[22 Aug 25 21:31 UTC] No.44990065[source]▶
Genuine question-

How does Govt picking winners and losers going to help?

Intel is no Too big to fail Bank. Why save Intel of all chip manufacturers? Wouldnt it be like 25 years too late, with Intel and its heydays !?

Would Govt now ensure parity by investing in "marquee" entities across different industrial domains?

replies(20): >>44990113 #>>44990135 #>>44990144 #>>44990162 #>>44990212 #>>44990285 #>>44990292 #>>44990294 #>>44990525 #>>44990551 #>>44990715 #>>44990722 #>>44991025 #>>44991107 #>>44991139 #>>44991204 #>>44991545 #>>44992843 #>>44993129 #>>45014149 #
jen20 ◴[22 Aug 25 21:35 UTC] No.44990113[source]▶
> How does Govt picking winners and losers going to help?

By ensuring that the US retains at least the ability to manufacture second tier CPUs vs complete reliance on Asia? This doesn't seem unreasonable.

replies(3): >>44990134 #>>44990150 #>>44990320 #
bigyabai ◴[22 Aug 25 21:37 UTC] No.44990134[source]▶
The US can't employ poverty-tier labor to enable competitive margins, though. American businesses and global trade partners already largely reject Intel's foundry services.
replies(3): >>44990148 #>>44990342 #>>44991035 #
1. t-3 ◴[22 Aug 25 23:08 UTC] No.44991035[source]▶
Labor is not the key factor driving chip prices or performance. Fabs are highly automated and filled with extremely precise machinery. The maintenance and upkeep of machinery, the yield per wafer, and consumer demand drive the prices. Labor is basically a rounding error.