←back to thread

U.S. government takes 10% stake in Intel

(www.cnbc.com)
607 points givemeethekeys | 2 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 #
fishgoesblub ◴[22 Aug 25 21:38 UTC] No.44990135[source]▶
I don't expect a good reason given the history of this Administration, but a reason in my mind to save Intel is there's only 3 license holders for x86 CPUs. Intel, AMD (American), and VIA (Taiwanese). A dead Intel leaves a single American company that is able to make x86 processors, and a monopoly for actually good x86 CPUs. But somehow I suspect there's no logical reason for this besides lining the pockets of those in the Administration.
replies(6): >>44990222 #>>44990268 #>>44991105 #>>44991191 #>>44991534 #>>44992204 #
1. nebula8804 ◴[23 Aug 25 00:04 UTC] No.44991534[source]▶
A dead Intel could open the door to have more then three license holders. Isn't Intel the reason there are only three license holders?
replies(1): >>44991958 #
2. hajile ◴[23 Aug 25 01:07 UTC] No.44991958[source]▶
The major patents on all the most important parts of x86 expired years ago now. Nobody wants to take on a legacy ISA with tons of footguns everywhere when newer ISAs have learned a lot of lessons from x86 about how to do things better.