"Shit, the products we are making now are still crap - hire them back!"
One product cycle later.
"This product sucks, you're fired."
What Intel fails to realize is, it's their abusive business practices that make all this happen. Until they wake up to the reality that they can't simply buy away the competition, they're going to keep going through these boom and bust cycles.
Intel's problem has been and always will be not engineering but rather a failure of business strategy. They have 'engineered' the company to fail, as it were. Until they wake up to this reality and divert their focus from beating AMD at all costs to making the best products at any cost - they will never find sustained success.
This is true for all companies, by the way - even AMD. Intel is just a particularly egregious example that has invested about 10x what they do in engineering in market manipulation.
They could be the most valuable tech firm in the world. Instead they have spent ~$40B on share buybacks since 2019.
Incompetent, profit-driven leadership is what kills equity value. Not overinvestment in R&D.
They definitely didn't fire these people, they left because of the poor leadership at intel. If anything intel has been awful at trimming the fat. Wasn't until last year that they started getting rid of dead weight.
Short term this is probably going to help intel a lot, but I have to agree that intel needs to go back to promoting from within and giving attention to internal talent, otherwise they're just going to leave like these veterans did.
I could swear they did. I thought maybe Gelsinger was the one who was involved with the P4, so I checked his wikipedia page and didn't find that, but noticed this tidbit:
"In 2013, Gelsinger co-founded Transforming the Bay with Christ (TBC), a coalition of business leaders, venture capitalists, non-profit leaders and pastors aiming to convert one million people over the next decade."
Sounds like good times for Christians at Intel! I see the diversity page on their website doesn't say anything about religious diversity.
just what we need: - Right Wing corporate zealots - Right Wing religious zealots
rolled up together. the Founding Fathers were explicitly anti-religion with respect to governance. structured lying and inculcation to the hoi polloi. "Stop the Steal".
Christian here but tending more towards a sort of agnosticism. I'd say that religion should be left out of companies and the state. Politics should be left out of companies too.
"Announcing the super-pipelined 56-stage Death Valley microarchitecture. Target frequency: 66 GHz by the end of the decade. Will scale beyond 166 GHz. Intel 0.5 nm technology."
You’re missing the Synergy component. What if the internal intel employees wanted or are super excited for these veterans to come back? The fact that they’ve even agreed to go back is very telling. No need to spin this into a negative light. There’s a reason why Intel was producing rather high performance cores, and the people component got turned upside down with prior CEOs, and now Gelsinger is organizing his chess pieces for the war that is coming: Apple 3nm and below, Qualcomm Nuvia, AMD Zen5, and Nvidia entering the ring as well. If Intel had a winning formula with these veterans in place, Gelsinger is smart to lure them back.
The main short to mid term goal of Gelsinger is to stop the erosion of market share. Apple and AMD pose a serious risk to Intel’s market share. If they can stem the bleeding, then they have time to develop the next generation of leaders. If they don’t stem the bleeding, then they risk a runaway snowball effect of potential new leaders abandoning ship or avoiding intel altogether. The key is to make Intel an attractive place for the new leaders to even want to work… stop being so negative.
> If they can stem the bleeding, then they have time to develop the next generation of leaders.
No, they still have very healthy revenues and margins. There might never going to be a better time for them to make the organizational changes they need than now. And the best way to keep good people is to show that the organization is serious about doing what it takes to compete.
They have healthy revenues now, but with a resurgent AMD, Apple, Qualcomm and NVidia pushing ARM solutions, it is urgent to develop the war chest NOW. Sometimes the best offense is a good defense, and that’s the strategy they’re going with. Blunt the impact of the competition, with trusted leadership, and when the competition is licking their wounds, then you bring in the next generation of leaders. Let’s see how the strategy plays out in the next 3-5 years.
> There’s a reason why Intel was producing rather high performance cores
So, the old dogs knew how to build good CPUs at yesterday's scale and with yesterday's tech. It's not obvious they're the right ones to lead Intel's foray into new generations. I'm not being age-ist, here. Maybe they are, but it's not a given.
It just feels too much like replaying the greatest hits. Although there's a lot to be said for Pat having a team under him that he trusts. Maybe that's a lot of what this is about.
This is the lady that led the Skylake team, Intel’s most profitable architecture. Smart to bring her back, especially now that they have EUV working, as well as access to TSMC. Perhaps she’ll go on to lead the development of the next generation of Intel’s most profitable architecture.
old dogs built an architecture that's nearly as performant as zen 2 per core, on a worse process with fewer transistors. how much time do you think has passed exactly? It's been less than a year since zen 3.
Not to mention that zen's designs were finalized by "the old dogs" like Mike Clark and Jim Keller. Turns out old dogs can learn new tricks.
> an architecture that's nearly as performant as zen 2 per core, > on a worse process with fewer transistors.
And that's leakier than a sieve.
And if we're comparing across process nodes, then you should also acknowledge that it's a lot less efficient than Zen2. They kept it in the game by massively juicing the TDPs and cranking the GHz.
> zen's designs were finalized by "the old dogs" like Mike Clark and Jim Keller.
Jim said he's not the father of Zen. But rather than get into exactly what he did do, let's try to get back on track.
I gather you're triggered by my "old dogs" comment, but my real point was about trying to recapture the success of the past by replaying the greatest hits. Except, that's not how it works. In the age of AI chip design and changing HW/SW boundaries, all I'm saying is that I wouldn't presume the old guard is necessarily the best to lead that change. Not to say that some aren't, but it's not obvious that he's really focused on how Intel needs to adapt for the future, rather than just trying to Make Intel Great Again.
It's leaky because their process is leaky. They've been forcing incremental gains by widening and pushing boost for years, has hardly anything to do with the fundamental architecture, as you can see with rocketlake fattening up and still eating absurd amounts of power.
And it's ironic that you talk about the "new age" of chip design when all of the market leaders right now have teams that are being overseen by the old guard. Hell article is about Weiss, who went from flipping Mellanox to integrating with Nvidia, and now nvidia basically owns the AI market. Jensen's still leading nvidia with no signs of handing it off. You've got Keller working with Ljubisa Bajic, another old hat from the ATi days. Just because these old people lead the company doesn't mean they are stamping out the ideas of their younger, fresh employees.
Hell Renée James, another person from the 80s era intel, founded ampere computing, which is probably the most successful enterprise ARM cpu developer right now. Man, someone should've let her know what she should've just given up because of her association with intel.
> ampere computing, which is probably the most successful enterprise ARM cpu developer
They just took IP out of ARM's parts bin and slapped it together to make Altra. There's nothing original in there, as far as we know. Even the power management is basic.
We can't really know if Ampere is any good until they release their in house core and we see how it stacks up against CPUs with the N2 cores.
And they weren't even first to market with a Neoverse CPU. Amazon beat them to market by like 10 months and probably shouldered most of the burden of debugging ARM's IP.
No, I mean it leaks information almost faster than Zen can compute it! It's leaky because Intel employed a bunch of optimizations and cut corners where they shouldn't have.
> it's ironic that you talk about the "new age" of chip design when all of the > market leaders right now have teams that are being overseen by the old guard.
I'm talking about tomorrow and you're still talking about yesterday. My question was whether Pat is putting together the right team to build future generations of chips, which will have to go beyond the existing playbook to stay relevant. I think we won't know for another 2-4 years.
I get that you're triggered by the "old dogs" comment, but try to see past that.
Weiss was involved with both sandy bridge AND skylake. Pat with nahalem. Do we really need to go into what Lisa su has done for AMD?
"I'm not being age-ist, here"
yes you are. The "old dogs" are not single handedly building these new CPUs, get your head out of the sand. They oversaw or were involved with major projects within intel and are engineers at heart, the kind of people you need at the head of a hardware company.
> yes you are. The "old dogs" are not single handedly building these new CPUs
To understand my point, you have to look at the trend. If what Pat's doing simply amounts to bringing back all previous top performers, then the strategy amounts to trying to "replay the greatest hits".
Instead, what he should be doing is looking ahead 5 years and beyond, then crafting the organization to be successful on that timeframe. And it seems unlikely that the people you'd want in charge are the same in both cases.
> They oversaw or were involved with major projects within intel and are engineers at heart, > the kind of people you need at the head of a hardware company.
Okay, so you're saying that Intel doesn't have enough engineers who have done anything substantial that can be promoted into some of those roles? And there's nobody from anywhere else they can attract who's up to the task?
So, to put it another way, it's like looking to recreate the glorious past, rather than trying to build a bold new future. That's what this feels like.
And just to clarify, I don't mean there'd be 0 overlap between the managers you'd want for one strategy vs. the other. I'm just saying they probably wouldn't be identical, because it's hard to manage new initiatives without some depth in that area.
So, to the extent the future depends on things like AI chip design, it would seem sensible to have someone leading that effort with a foot in both worlds, rather than someone familiar only with doing it the old way.
But he's not writing Anandtech articles for public consumption is he (commenters don't count...LOL)? Are you reporting the news or MAKING it here? WE are allowed to be biased, but we don't expect the hardware press to be an AMD portal site. ;) They've been doing the same on NV articles for ages too. See me destroying them with their own data on their 660 Ti article ages ago (Ryan, J Walton IIRC - he attacked name-called etc...ROFL couldn't handle their own benchmarks from older articles being used on THEIR articles later to prove them BS bias)..ROFL "1200p is the new enthusiast standard"...Uh, at 660ti launch (2560x1600 for those who don't remember)? It still isn't the standard TODAY (never really became one, 1440p took over), YEARS later...LOL. Wake me when 1200p is the market leading res. Last I checked it is STILL 1080p. TODAY by far, right (my res is a decimal today, yep running 1200p dell 2407 WFP-HC from 2007ish)? Comic. It's taken 9yrs to get 1440p to 8%...ROFLMAO. 4k still at 2.14% on steamhardwaresurvey and back then it was ~2% for 1200p and 4k was near 0 IIRC or was ZERO? LOL). https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/ I guess at 8% you could call 1440p enthusiast now. But at 2.14%, you'd have to call 4K PIPE DREAM for most still right people? That is ULTRA enthusiast IMHO at this point still, and 8k is a % of 1.84%(other category)...LOL 3440x1440 is 1.09% of the market (just FYI).
That's like changing bathroom laws for 2-4% of the public that is LGBT ruining everyone's idea of SAFE bathrooms. Also, what percent of those 2-4% are AFFECTED? A very small % of an already small number.
I already have to deal with a GAY guy potentially looking at my D|CK in a bathroom (uncomfortable but not TOO dangerous, still...little nerds might be afraid). I can't punch that guy because that would be breaking the law. That is assuming he's not trying to do ANYTHING else to me in said bathroom (I'll leave that there, you can figure out what I mean adults). But the other side of that coin, is sending MEN (with GEAR intact so to speak) into a bathroom where our daughters/wives/sisters/moms are (you get it, I can't cover all these gender idiots here), and asking THEM to feel safe...ROFL. NO WAY, that will make me want to beat you out of fear for my loved one. You are asking for it at that point. Just like Ryan asking me to down him in ~2012 for saying 1440p was enthusiast at minuscule market share. I STILL don't think it is worth benchmarking 4K today for 2% of the market and having it in nearly every gpu/cpu review. Do it once or twice a year in a roundup or something.
That was kind of a clumsy segue from computer discussion into culture wars.
The whole bathroom controversy is AstroTurf. And they key point its exponents don't want you to know is that it's a non-issue. Their entire argument is based on fear-mongering, as there's *no data* that supports their case.
The whole part about gays using our restrooms is a perfect example of what a non-issue this is. There have been gays using public restrooms for as long as there have been public restrooms, and yet there's never been a real problem with assaults by them.
Finally, did it ever occur to you that if a man wanted to attack women in a public restroom (something that's already against the law), maybe he wouldn't feel compelled to obey gendered bathroom laws? Choose logic & data over political ideology, please.
> Skylake has been Intel’s most exploit-prone microarchitecture ever.
Fixed that for you.
> Weiss left Intel in September 2017 to join Mellanox/NVIDIA, > where she held the role of Senior VP Silicon Engineering > and ran the company’s networking chip design group.
Uh oh. I hope nobody is using *those* chips in critical infrastructure!
> In her new role at Intel, Tom’s is reporting that Weiss will lead > all of Intel’s consumer chip development and design
Good call. Consumers don't care about security.
> If you’ve been following the news of Intel’s personnel of late, > you might start to learn a pattern
"Make Intel Great Again!"
> In a company of 110000 employees, it seems odd that Intel feels > it has to rehire to fill those key roles.
It's because Intel routinely purges people who don't advance up the ladder. So, you lose some critical people who just keep their heads down and focus on their job, and you're left with people more interested in playing politics.
No confusion on my end. The assumption that "veterans" means "military veterans" instead of literally any other of the hundreds of kinds of "veterancy" is your problem, not Anandtech's.
It's not really my problem either because, at least in the US, when you talk about "veterans" you always mean military veterans. "Do you have a veterans discount?" I was asked by a checkout clerk, on the same day I posted that comment. Obviously, they didn't mean Intel veteran. Or you have the gov body, the DVA (Department of Veteran Affairs -- for the military, not Intel). Maybe you'd classify it as a societal problem in the US?
Just more indications that the top/mid Intel management really doesn't know what to do in a competitive market. I knew the company management had degraded over the past decade--just didn't know by how much. Turning to retirees who were fortunate to work in Intel's halcyon monopoly days in the hopes of repeating past successes just reinforces the fact that Intel cannot function in an ultra-competitive market. In the past, Intel bought out other companies or literally paid vendors not to sell competitor's products (like Dell, infamously) and stayed ahead that way--but those strategies won't work today, and the company seems to be foundering.
It doesn't matter that they don't know what to do, they still have boatloads of money and smart people, enough to out-compete the other players.
Even if ARM ends up overpowering and crushing x86, which imo is unlikely, they will keep playing the game, either licensing the ARM architecture and making their own cores, or making RISC-V cores and crushing ARM.
AMD literally survived by buying other companies in the 90s, and look at them now.
You seem to forget that in those halcyon days intel was churning out some amazing products and pushed the envelope for performance. Starting with core 2 to skylake intel was at the forefront of high performance computing.
> Starting with core 2 to skylake intel was at the forefront of high performance computing.
You should distinguish what proportion of that performance margin was due to good microarchitecture vs. superior manufacturing tech. Intel had the best manufacturing tech until about 2017, which covered over the small inter-generational IPC gains they've had since Sandybridge.
When they lost their edge in manufacturing tech, they were no longer safe from anyone who had a competitive microarchitecture.
It's funny how this article highlights the profitability of Skylake, when most of that is due to the subsequent failures instead of Skylake's strengths. And the article didn't even mention its multitude of security flaws. Probably the most exploit-prone CPU, ever.
hard to tell. more likely, these people are familiar/worked with Pat. Intel buying TSMC 3nm supply for mobile/server product easily secures Intel and hurts AMD
Every body makes CPUs these days, just get arm license and make few changes here and there. Its not that advanced anymore where you need highly talented people. Intel has lost the charm it once had, CPU making doesn't sound that exciting any more. One area Intel screwed up big time is process development. They should hire some good guys there.
Unfortunately for a company as big as Intel more drastic changes will be required to help change the culture. They should take their medicine now and trim 10-20% of the rank and file and 20-40% of the management. They can’t just add a bunch of new, expensive management and become even more top heavy. They are looking more and more like a big company at the end of its lifecycle. With this much management overhead and the expense of running fabs, the house could quickly fall in on them.
They've been running pretty hot for awhile so I don't think they've had significant layoffs outside of acquisitions they've run into the ground. Besides my massive profits from the stock buyback there are some good reasons for trimming the workforce:
1) Bad management teams tend to accumulate a significant number of under qualified and under performing workers. 2) Bad management teams lack focus and start many dead-end pet projects. 3) The numbers are showing a significant loss of market share and ASP for Intel. And they need significant funding for underperforming fabs. They really need a good product end of this year or next, or their hand could be forced.
The idea here is not to make a quick buck, but to improve the health and performance of the business. Now will they do this? Will they do it in a competent manner? Probably not. Will it be screwed up by political infighting and political correctness. More likely. Hard to see them stopping the tail spin against better performing management teams and companies they are competing against.
> Will it be screwed up by political infighting and political correctness.
Well, the most charitable view I can see of what Pat is doing is to get people under him that he trusts, precisely as a way to cut through the political BS.
Well, perhaps they had engaged in too much diversity hiring, woke human resource or any of the brown racist nonsense. Perhaps it's a good thing that they are going back to merit and experience.
Instead of your ‘perhaps’ you should have some substance. That also goes for the ‘political correctness’ post above.
When people use that intellectually barren/craven phrase they are clumsily demanding their own ‘political correctness’. All politics is about correctness. That should be obvious but obvious truths are in short supply.
There is a lot to be said for requiring tech folk to get a liberal arts education. ‘Perhaps’ they wouldn’t foist such stunted attempts at political philosophy.
Full disclosure: From my experience there is no shortage of intellectually-stunted Ph.Ds in the humanities. Quality varies tremendously. I had a conversion with one tenured buffoon who, among other joyous beauties, demanded that I not speak to him about social justice. A career of naval gazing left him woefully underprepared for the challenge of expressing his demand in a non-stunted non-fraudulent manner.
‘Social justice’ is a redundancy just like ‘political correctness’. Complaints about either are deception wherein the complainer merely wants their politics to win, typically irrespective of their factuality.
OK, you can call it whatever you learned in liberal arts school. It’s not philosophy, it is just how things work. The point is at any large company like Intel (especially if they are involved in government contracting), HR is not going to let a manager just hire or layoff anyone they want. They are gonna roll up the numbers and ensure they do not violate any metrics they have in place, regardless of any one individuals performance. Note this is not just race and sex, they are also looking at things like age. They are trying to minimize any issues with government contracts and lawsuits, as well as any negative press or social media.
> any large company like Intel (especially if they are involved in government contracting), > HR is not going to let a manager just hire or layoff anyone they want.
HR has certain "protected classes" of employees, who are eligible to sue for things like discrimination.
That doesn't mean other classes of employees have no standing, however. At my employer, a group of employees opened a HR case because their manager (a Chinese national) seemed to be considering only Chinese candidates for job openings in their group. I don't know how the case ended up, but that group was taken out from under that manager (but possibly due to another allegation against him).
These are all costs to the business they don't have to deal with, in most other countries.
There are enough qualified minorities to staff any position, a fact that people who idiotically employ the internally-redundant phrase ‘political correctness’ is either do not comprehend or pretend not to.
The situation is unfair to some minorities and unfair to some members of the majority (such as pale-skinned people from the working class trying to rise economically). But... that does not justify the denigration of minorities whose job status is aided by affirmative action. Again... there are plenty of qualified minorities to occupy any position. The world is vastly overpopulated and degree inflation has been a fact for quite some time and is only increasing.
And there's the problem, the criteria for social programs should be based on family wealth instead of skin color. The narrative that race-based affirmative action is not racist in itself is simply laughable.
If someone is qualified why does it matter what skin color they are? Why does it matter if someone is a minority if the person in question is qualified?
You're missing my point. My point was, once again, that the minorities who are hired via affirmative action policies should not be denigrated. One or two of the posts I responded to specifically blamed them for Intel's decline and cited them as a threat to corporate competitiveness in general. It is racist tripe.
*No how dare you go against the agenda!!!!* the comment.
"There is a lot to be said for requiring tech folk to get a liberal arts education. ‘Perhaps’ they wouldn’t foist such stunted attempts at political philosophy."
The only people who claim this are liberal arts majors with no job skills who think everything is racist. AKA really annoying/depressing people who drag down whatever company they manage to latch themselves onto. Also the type of people that need purged from the workplace before they totally ruin it.
Not sure what your point is, but they've had lots of employees in Israel, for decades. In fact, I think some Muslim countries even had boycotts against Intel for a long time, due to the amount of employment they provide in Israel.
I could care less about hypotheticals or activist investors, beliefs, etc. Strike back so consumers get the benefits from more competition.
I was hoping for an i7 with extreme cache, and an on die GPU. Tiger Lake desktop actually. I kept waiting to upgrade my 1U’s but AMD 5700G’s appear to have beaten Intel even on that processor level.
Bright side, competition brought me the perfect CPU for my needs.
The honest answer is "diversity". Forced, quantified, sticking people in silos by the color of their skin "diversity" is what happened.
Which is a shame because Intel from the start has been welcoming to anyone. Intel has never cared if you're man, woman, black, white, Andromedian, whatever. If you got the chops to get the work done, then you're in.
Now it's all about pushing URM's (under represented minorities) into the company as fast as possible to claim the company is "woke" and "diverse". But no one actually stopped to ask these diverse new hires if they understand how a computer works - which most of them don't. So now the fab facilities are just chock full of people that don't have a clue about any sort of advanced technology, and are just there to draw a paycheck.
Thanks for your perspective. Just so we're clear, I'm curious to know roughly what proportion of Intel's failings you consider caused by that, and roughly when did you notice these changes?
And not to directly address the diversity thing, but I think I should probably mention I've been hired into roles for which I was under-qualified. That's not the end of the world. As long as the employee has the potential to do the job and half-decent coaching, they can grow into it.
The key thing is probably for them to see the path from where they are to where they're expected to be. I'd say don't sell anyone short, before they've had opportunities and support to step up prove they're willing and able to do the work. While not everyone is going to make it, once some do, it will hopefully inspire their peers by showing both what's possible and what it takes.
So, as a manger, my first request would be for HR to do the best job it can of recruiting the highest caliber candidates in whatever category they're prioritizing. Then, if they're pushing candidates who need additional training and support, they really need to make those resources available.
If diversity is a top-level business priority, then the organization needs to recognize the costs and provide the appropriate backing. And once money enters the conversation, it has a way of making people serious.
Again, sidestepping the debate over diversity itself, there are surely better and worse ways to do it. As with nearly all things in business and life.
Here's a thought (it'll never come true). What if there were a way to abstract/obfuscate a person's colour during the hiring process? Then it would be based purely on merit.
This is why liberal arts is essential. When someone is required to take a course in social psychology one learns that hiring decisions are dominated by psychological deficiencies in interviewers — not objective prospective employee quality.
A memorable bit of research showed, for instance, that simply putting a briefcase down by a wall prior to shaking hands is enough to be disqualified by the vaunted expert HR staffer. Why? Because unconscious emotional responses (first impressions based mainly on superficialities in the first 30 seconds) dominate interviewers. Those kinds of biases make it very difficult for some minorities to get a fair shake. Simply turning up looking or moving the ‘wrong’ way is enough.
Liberal arts undergrad programs clue people in to the fact that the world isn’t as ‘common sense’ as their loud mouths would have it. That is, if they’re intelligent enough to grasp that.
Hollywood actors are forced to take voice lessons to learn how to sound artificially heterosexual.
Hollywood is stereotyped as being socially progressive but it is typically quite conservative, to the point of abusing its workers and the public with such narrowmindedness. In its earliest history that wasn’t as true but religious lobbyists quickly transformed the industry.
If ‘San Francisco values’ means stuffing your true voice into a shoe box in order to have a job that is telling in terms of what minorities typically face.
Whatever the reason is, there's very little good that comes out of Hollywood nowadays.
Concerning the Code/pre-Code eras that you pointed out, I'd say it's appalling and art should never be restricted. Having said that, one can't deny that some of our best films come from the Code era. I think restriction and restraint force one to operate in a subtle way, and the result is usually more effective than "showing everything." It's analogous to show, don't tell. Older horror directors knew it too. Compare Alien 1979 with today's stuff plastered with CGI monsters. Even in romance films of the '40s, much restraint but love running from heart to heart.
> there's very little good that comes out of Hollywood nowadays.
I think the main thing that changed is there are now a lot more people producing content in a lot more places. This leaves Hollywood reaching for blockbusters and other surefire hits, as a reliable revenue source.
> some of our best films come from the Code era.
Yeah, sometimes constraints make for better art. However, it's good that more people can participate and they can broach more subjects. I usually rely on IMDB to avoid wasting my time on sub-par productions.
Hollywood is in Los Angeles, not San Francisco. Silicon Valley is adjacent to San Francisco.
California has 70.2% of the population of England, 3.1 times the land area, and about 1.25 times its GDP. It might be tempting to lump it all together, but it makes about as much sense as me confusing London and Liverpool.
> Perhaps if there were a way to abstract social awkwardness/proficiency/customs during interviewing?
I approach each interview with a sheet of questions suited to the type of position. That's not to say my interviews are totally formulaic, but there's a high degree of uniformity between them, and I can pretty well quantify my ratings and justify my decision. There's always some touchy feely stuff, but I make sure that doesn't comprise the core of the interview, after seeing some candidates do well in those areas, while being weak in core skills and knowledge. Mostly, I try to give interviews where I think the candidate should leave with a pretty good sense of how well they did.
As an interviewer, I feel a duty to be prepared and demonstrate competency to the candidate. This is one thing that appealed to me about a former employer. I immediately follow each interview by putting my review in writing. If we got the candidate through a recruiter, I follow up to let them know the strengths and weaknesses of any candidate we don't accept, so they can hopefully find us more suitable candidates.
These days, a lot of employers are using online tests as an initial step, in order to filter & grade applicants. I think it mostly covers core skills & knowledge, though I've heard it sometimes includes ethics and other areas.
Liberal arts programs are the source fo the very peopel who claim not hring an arbitrary number of minorities is "racist" because of Buzzwords and Feelings.
Also tend to be some of the most racist people youll ever meet.
I agree that generalisations aren't ideal. At the end of the day, it's always the individual case that counts. I feel the climate of these days is creating more division and going contrary to the spirit of unity.
> I feel the climate of these days is creating more division
That's why I don't like labels. They're simplistic and do more to divide than inform. They're merely a cognitive shortcut that tends to get overused and plays into tribal instincts in dangerous ways.
> and going contrary to the spirit of unity.
A spirit of unity would be nice, but it occurred to me some time ago that as the world gets increasingly dirty, hot, and crowded, humanity will get too bogged down in the various squabbles spun off like eddies, rather than focusing on the underlying currents pushing us adrift. I hope that we can at least try to avoid unnecessary divisions and at least focus on matters of substance.
Oh yes. Labels tend to suggest I'm different, you're different, when only a short while ago, nobody cared about any difference. Nobody saw any difference. I think finding common ground is important, finding the thing that unites people. Also, getting to know a person, then the superficialities fade away and the differences become a beautiful enrichment.
Well said, the promotion of diversity hiring is just disgusting. This is why as a guy from EU, I'm supporting China in the trade war with US and avoid buying US products whenever possible.
You're right, and I realised that weakness after I posted my comment. I suppose what I meant was, do we want Triumph of the Will style propaganda twice a week, or Hollywood-style propaganda?
Comparing China with Nazi Germany? Look at you, trying to act witty. Can you show me some of these Chinese propaganda films? Or are you just assuming this based on what Western mainstream media narrative says?
Regardless, China has proven throughout history that it doesn't try to conquer or control the entire world so it's unlikely any supposed propaganda of theirs will spread worldwide.
I'll admit, I haven't seen any of these Chinese propaganda films, and was basing my view of it on the media, which says they're playing two a week. It was wrong of me to compare that with Triumph without watching them. But totalitarianism has a similar root, even if the fruits are different, and I'm understandably suspicious of a country that has treated the Uyghurs the way they've done.
I don't consider China government as totalitarianism, there are 3 separate interest groups that are part of the Politburo which would be similar to classic parties. The fact that these groups can work together and compromise to pick only a single leader goes to show that it's not as centralized as people outside China think.
I consider China to be experimenting on a hybrid system between communism and democracy which should not be outright disregarded. As for the Uighur situation, there's also no real proof at the moment and in fact some of those Uighur testimonials were proven to have ties to NSA agents who have infiltrated China.
I don't know much about China's government. But some reading this afternoon shows that they're not at the extreme end of the scale. Still, I suspect those "democratic" offerings are little more than words. Bottom line, the state is the boss, whether it's split into groups or not, and runs the show. That's how I see it. Also, I'm going to guess here that it's all tied down to the Party and not the leaders. The leaders can come and go---they don't matter---but the Party will always persist.
> there are 3 separate interest groups that are part of the Politburo
Except Xi purged key members, in his anti-corruption campaign. His new anti-corruption agency isn't even accountable to China's Supreme Court. He also "centralised his power and created working groups with himself at the head to subvert government bureaucracy." That's how he was able to change the change the Constitution to eliminate term limits.
> it's not as centralized as people outside China think.
If the citizens have no vote, then it's already too centralized. There's no check on power.
> I consider China to be experimenting on a hybrid system between communism and democracy
How is it even remotely a hybrid? Even before Xi seized absolute control and made himself leader for life, it was not a democracy in any way.
And their empty promises and subsequent backsliding on promises for Hong Kong to have their own democratic form of self-governance just shows they have no interest in *any* sort of democracy.
> As for the Uighur situation, there's also no real proof at the moment
Okay, I think we're done here. Basically everyone except China & their closest allies is saying that China is committing genocide in Xinjiang. It's not just many testimonials, but also satellite photos, leaked government documents, and other evidence. If you're buying China's propaganda on this, then I think we have nothing left to discuss.
> Can you show me some of these Chinese propaganda films?
China has explicit censorship of film, TV, and news media. They also *do* create pro-government propaganda, though I'm far from an expert on this subject.
Which brings us into the era of social media: the modern form of propaganda. China has something called the 50 Cent Army, because they pay millions of people about $0.50 per day to troll social media platforms in various ways. Most of this is domestic, but there's no shortage of China's meddling in foreign social media.
> All film is state propaganda. Some of it is just better-disguised. > Television is even more obvious.
I don't even know where you get this. The US government has no say in what goes into movies or TV, nor do they have any hand in funding the vast majority of it (there are some grants for mostly noncommercial art, but that's very tiny, by comparison with the overall entertainment industry).
You can argue against this or that cultural value, or the corrosive effect of commercialism on the arts, but it's definitely not propaganda in the sense that some government body is telling writers/directors/producers what to put in their films and shows.
> you resort too much to authority instead of thinking for yourself.
Huh? OG made a bold & specific claim without evidence. I have a right to request evidence.
Please tell me what I should "think for myself" about this. We can't just go around believing things because they somehow feel true. That's how you get demagogues. There needs to be a level of rigor. Any true journalist would understand what I'm talking about.
I'll add that one definite factor in censoring content of late is China. Both Chinese funding of some US studios & productions, as well as the lure of the Chinese market is leading to a lot of self-censorship by big studios and individuals early in their career who fear getting blacklisted.
> I'm supporting China in the trade war with US and avoid buying US products whenever possible.
You should understand what a world looks like, when China runs everything. It's a very authoritarian society, with ubiquitous surveillance, restricted speech, restricted press, few legal rights, and you absolutely cannot criticize The Party. They have a flavor of mercantilism where they eventually dominate all major sectors of the economy.
The US looks worse than it is, mostly because all of its dirty laundry is hanging out for the world to see. Our freedom of speech and freedom of the press are actively and passively working against us. It's not a perfect place, but there is still a commitment to free markets, open competition, human rights, and rule of law.
I'd suggest you take some time to consider what you truly value, in the world of tomorrow.
BTW, I have nothing against Chinese people. And I'd have no problem with China itself, if their government more closely resembled those of Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, or maybe Singapore.
I value honesty and when it's all said and done China is less hypocritical than US as a whole. Hypocrisy is the biggest issue with the world nowadays and American society is the no. 1 there.
> Hypocrisy is the biggest issue with the world nowadays
Is it? Would you like to be killed by an earnest and honest serial killer? If someone says they're going to drive a bus full of children off a cliff and then actually does it, we don't give them credit for doing what they said they were going to do! It would be far better if they realized what a bad idea it was and changed course.
There are some things worse than hypocrisy. Things like ethnic cleansing, seizing the South China Sea, driving foreign competitors out of business with unfair trade practices, and indebting developing countries into servitude through infrastructure loans they can't even afford to service.
And if you care about hypocrisy, ask people in Xinjiang about their "retraining" camps, or people born in Hong Kong about China's promise of "one country two systems". And if we leave Hong Kong aside, I guess you might have a point that at least China doesn't pretend to be a democracy. That would make them less hypocritical than say Russia or Iran.
A parting thought about hypocrisy. Sometimes, what might look like hypocrisy is the product of something else. If there's a meaningful inconsistency, it pays to look at what's behind it. Most of all, it pays to be pragmatic and consider which likely consequences actually matter.
"There are some things worse than hypocrisy. Things like ethnic cleansing, seizing the South China Sea, driving foreign competitors out of business with unfair trade practices, and indebting developing countries into servitude through infrastructure loans they can't even afford to service."
Like I said, I consider hypocrisy far more dangerous than all of that.
110 Billion by Federal Government to fund Semi Conductor research recently. Hopefully save on R & D for chip makers, but most likely will go to Universities which can share downstream.
Reading Intel’s recent roadmap is still discouraging compared to AMDs drive ahead on successful designs.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
121 Comments
Back to Article
ET - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
Intel can continue this practice indefinitely. All they need is to occasionally let some veterans go in order to rehire them a while later.Sahrin - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
"This product sucks, you're fired."One product cycle later.
"Shit, the products we are making now are still crap - hire them back!"
One product cycle later.
"This product sucks, you're fired."
What Intel fails to realize is, it's their abusive business practices that make all this happen. Until they wake up to the reality that they can't simply buy away the competition, they're going to keep going through these boom and bust cycles.
Intel's problem has been and always will be not engineering but rather a failure of business strategy. They have 'engineered' the company to fail, as it were. Until they wake up to this reality and divert their focus from beating AMD at all costs to making the best products at any cost - they will never find sustained success.
This is true for all companies, by the way - even AMD. Intel is just a particularly egregious example that has invested about 10x what they do in engineering in market manipulation.
They could be the most valuable tech firm in the world. Instead they have spent ~$40B on share buybacks since 2019.
Incompetent, profit-driven leadership is what kills equity value. Not overinvestment in R&D.
whatthe123 - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
They definitely didn't fire these people, they left because of the poor leadership at intel. If anything intel has been awful at trimming the fat. Wasn't until last year that they started getting rid of dead weight.Short term this is probably going to help intel a lot, but I have to agree that intel needs to go back to promoting from within and giving attention to internal talent, otherwise they're just going to leave like these veterans did.
Oxford Guy - Thursday, July 8, 2021 - link
The corporation is a plutocratic/regressive wealth redistribution mechanism. It is not altruism.There are enough shiny toys that fall out to placate the masses, while the true costs are borne by the ‘public domain’ not the profiteers.
TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
That's a whole lotta buzzwords to say "they're rich and I dont like that"mode_13h - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
: )shabby - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
Will they be rehiring the Prescott team also?mode_13h - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
I could swear they did. I thought maybe Gelsinger was the one who was involved with the P4, so I checked his wikipedia page and didn't find that, but noticed this tidbit:"In 2013, Gelsinger co-founded Transforming the Bay with Christ (TBC), a coalition of business leaders, venture capitalists, non-profit leaders and pastors aiming to convert one million people over the next decade."
Sounds like good times for Christians at Intel! I see the diversity page on their website doesn't say anything about religious diversity.
29a - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
Ugh.FunBunny2 - Thursday, July 8, 2021 - link
just what we need:- Right Wing corporate zealots
- Right Wing religious zealots
rolled up together. the Founding Fathers were explicitly anti-religion with respect to governance. structured lying and inculcation to the hoi polloi. "Stop the Steal".
vladx - Saturday, July 10, 2021 - link
Which is still 1000 times better than having incompetent neoliberals and LGBT diversity hires leading the company as is the case with Google nowadays.GeoffreyA - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
Christian here but tending more towards a sort of agnosticism. I'd say that religion should be left out of companies and the state. Politics should be left out of companies too.mode_13h - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
> Politics should be left out of companies too.You can keep politics out of companies a lot easier than you can keep companies out of politics.
WaltC - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
Hah--hah...;) They are probably running things.GeoffreyA - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
"Announcing the super-pipelined 56-stage Death Valley microarchitecture. Target frequency: 66 GHz by the end of the decade. Will scale beyond 166 GHz. Intel 0.5 nm technology."mode_13h - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
: )Exotica - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
You’re missing the Synergy component. What if the internal intel employees wanted or are super excited for these veterans to come back? The fact that they’ve even agreed to go back is very telling. No need to spin this into a negative light. There’s a reason why Intel was producing rather high performance cores, and the people component got turned upside down with prior CEOs, and now Gelsinger is organizing his chess pieces for the war that is coming: Apple 3nm and below, Qualcomm Nuvia, AMD Zen5, and Nvidia entering the ring as well. If Intel had a winning formula with these veterans in place, Gelsinger is smart to lure them back.HyperText - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
Agreed. I understand the logic explained in this article, but sometimes it feels a bit too far stretched.Exotica - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
The main short to mid term goal of Gelsinger is to stop the erosion of market share. Apple and AMD pose a serious risk to Intel’s market share. If they can stem the bleeding, then they have time to develop the next generation of leaders. If they don’t stem the bleeding, then they risk a runaway snowball effect of potential new leaders abandoning ship or avoiding intel altogether. The key is to make Intel an attractive place for the new leaders to even want to work… stop being so negative.mode_13h - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
> If they can stem the bleeding, then they have time to develop the next generation of leaders.No, they still have very healthy revenues and margins. There might never going to be a better time for them to make the organizational changes they need than now. And the best way to keep good people is to show that the organization is serious about doing what it takes to compete.
Dehjomz - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
They have healthy revenues now, but with a resurgent AMD, Apple, Qualcomm and NVidia pushing ARM solutions, it is urgent to develop the war chest NOW. Sometimes the best offense is a good defense, and that’s the strategy they’re going with. Blunt the impact of the competition, with trusted leadership, and when the competition is licking their wounds, then you bring in the next generation of leaders. Let’s see how the strategy plays out in the next 3-5 years.mode_13h - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
> There’s a reason why Intel was producing rather high performance coresSo, the old dogs knew how to build good CPUs at yesterday's scale and with yesterday's tech. It's not obvious they're the right ones to lead Intel's foray into new generations. I'm not being age-ist, here. Maybe they are, but it's not a given.
It just feels too much like replaying the greatest hits. Although there's a lot to be said for Pat having a team under him that he trusts. Maybe that's a lot of what this is about.
Dehjomz - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
This is the lady that led the Skylake team, Intel’s most profitable architecture. Smart to bring her back, especially now that they have EUV working, as well as access to TSMC. Perhaps she’ll go on to lead the development of the next generation of Intel’s most profitable architecture.whatthe123 - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
old dogs built an architecture that's nearly as performant as zen 2 per core, on a worse process with fewer transistors. how much time do you think has passed exactly? It's been less than a year since zen 3.Not to mention that zen's designs were finalized by "the old dogs" like Mike Clark and Jim Keller. Turns out old dogs can learn new tricks.
mode_13h - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
> an architecture that's nearly as performant as zen 2 per core,> on a worse process with fewer transistors.
And that's leakier than a sieve.
And if we're comparing across process nodes, then you should also acknowledge that it's a lot less efficient than Zen2. They kept it in the game by massively juicing the TDPs and cranking the GHz.
> zen's designs were finalized by "the old dogs" like Mike Clark and Jim Keller.
Jim said he's not the father of Zen. But rather than get into exactly what he did do, let's try to get back on track.
I gather you're triggered by my "old dogs" comment, but my real point was about trying to recapture the success of the past by replaying the greatest hits. Except, that's not how it works. In the age of AI chip design and changing HW/SW boundaries, all I'm saying is that I wouldn't presume the old guard is necessarily the best to lead that change. Not to say that some aren't, but it's not obvious that he's really focused on how Intel needs to adapt for the future, rather than just trying to Make Intel Great Again.
whatthe123 - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
It's leaky because their process is leaky. They've been forcing incremental gains by widening and pushing boost for years, has hardly anything to do with the fundamental architecture, as you can see with rocketlake fattening up and still eating absurd amounts of power.And it's ironic that you talk about the "new age" of chip design when all of the market leaders right now have teams that are being overseen by the old guard. Hell article is about Weiss, who went from flipping Mellanox to integrating with Nvidia, and now nvidia basically owns the AI market. Jensen's still leading nvidia with no signs of handing it off. You've got Keller working with Ljubisa Bajic, another old hat from the ATi days. Just because these old people lead the company doesn't mean they are stamping out the ideas of their younger, fresh employees.
whatthe123 - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
Hell Renée James, another person from the 80s era intel, founded ampere computing, which is probably the most successful enterprise ARM cpu developer right now. Man, someone should've let her know what she should've just given up because of her association with intel.mode_13h - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
> ampere computing, which is probably the most successful enterprise ARM cpu developerThey just took IP out of ARM's parts bin and slapped it together to make Altra. There's nothing original in there, as far as we know. Even the power management is basic.
We can't really know if Ampere is any good until they release their in house core and we see how it stacks up against CPUs with the N2 cores.
mode_13h - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
And they weren't even first to market with a Neoverse CPU. Amazon beat them to market by like 10 months and probably shouldered most of the burden of debugging ARM's IP.mode_13h - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
> It's leaky because their process is leaky.No, I mean it leaks information almost faster than Zen can compute it! It's leaky because Intel employed a bunch of optimizations and cut corners where they shouldn't have.
> it's ironic that you talk about the "new age" of chip design when all of the
> market leaders right now have teams that are being overseen by the old guard.
I'm talking about tomorrow and you're still talking about yesterday. My question was whether Pat is putting together the right team to build future generations of chips, which will have to go beyond the existing playbook to stay relevant. I think we won't know for another 2-4 years.
I get that you're triggered by the "old dogs" comment, but try to see past that.
TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
Weiss was involved with both sandy bridge AND skylake. Pat with nahalem. Do we really need to go into what Lisa su has done for AMD?"I'm not being age-ist, here"
yes you are. The "old dogs" are not single handedly building these new CPUs, get your head out of the sand. They oversaw or were involved with major projects within intel and are engineers at heart, the kind of people you need at the head of a hardware company.
mode_13h - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
> yes you are. The "old dogs" are not single handedly building these new CPUsTo understand my point, you have to look at the trend. If what Pat's doing simply amounts to bringing back all previous top performers, then the strategy amounts to trying to "replay the greatest hits".
Instead, what he should be doing is looking ahead 5 years and beyond, then crafting the organization to be successful on that timeframe. And it seems unlikely that the people you'd want in charge are the same in both cases.
> They oversaw or were involved with major projects within intel and are engineers at heart,
> the kind of people you need at the head of a hardware company.
Okay, so you're saying that Intel doesn't have enough engineers who have done anything substantial that can be promoted into some of those roles? And there's nobody from anywhere else they can attract who's up to the task?
So, to put it another way, it's like looking to recreate the glorious past, rather than trying to build a bold new future. That's what this feels like.
mode_13h - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
And just to clarify, I don't mean there'd be 0 overlap between the managers you'd want for one strategy vs. the other. I'm just saying they probably wouldn't be identical, because it's hard to manage new initiatives without some depth in that area.So, to the extent the future depends on things like AI chip design, it would seem sensible to have someone leading that effort with a foot in both worlds, rather than someone familiar only with doing it the old way.
vladx - Saturday, July 10, 2021 - link
Just the usual for AnandTech writers who have a clear AMD bias nowadays to try to spin everything Intel does as negatively as possible.Qasar - Thursday, July 15, 2021 - link
just like you tend to spin everything as positive as you can for intel ? come one vlad, you are known to have a clear bias towards intel.TheJian - Sunday, July 25, 2021 - link
But he's not writing Anandtech articles for public consumption is he (commenters don't count...LOL)? Are you reporting the news or MAKING it here? WE are allowed to be biased, but we don't expect the hardware press to be an AMD portal site. ;) They've been doing the same on NV articles for ages too. See me destroying them with their own data on their 660 Ti article ages ago (Ryan, J Walton IIRC - he attacked name-called etc...ROFL couldn't handle their own benchmarks from older articles being used on THEIR articles later to prove them BS bias)..ROFL "1200p is the new enthusiast standard"...Uh, at 660ti launch (2560x1600 for those who don't remember)? It still isn't the standard TODAY (never really became one, 1440p took over), YEARS later...LOL. Wake me when 1200p is the market leading res. Last I checked it is STILL 1080p. TODAY by far, right (my res is a decimal today, yep running 1200p dell 2407 WFP-HC from 2007ish)? Comic. It's taken 9yrs to get 1440p to 8%...ROFLMAO. 4k still at 2.14% on steamhardwaresurvey and back then it was ~2% for 1200p and 4k was near 0 IIRC or was ZERO? LOL).https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
I guess at 8% you could call 1440p enthusiast now. But at 2.14%, you'd have to call 4K PIPE DREAM for most still right people? That is ULTRA enthusiast IMHO at this point still, and 8k is a % of 1.84%(other category)...LOL 3440x1440 is 1.09% of the market (just FYI).
That's like changing bathroom laws for 2-4% of the public that is LGBT ruining everyone's idea of SAFE bathrooms. Also, what percent of those 2-4% are AFFECTED? A very small % of an already small number.
I already have to deal with a GAY guy potentially looking at my D|CK in a bathroom (uncomfortable but not TOO dangerous, still...little nerds might be afraid). I can't punch that guy because that would be breaking the law. That is assuming he's not trying to do ANYTHING else to me in said bathroom (I'll leave that there, you can figure out what I mean adults). But the other side of that coin, is sending MEN (with GEAR intact so to speak) into a bathroom where our daughters/wives/sisters/moms are (you get it, I can't cover all these gender idiots here), and asking THEM to feel safe...ROFL. NO WAY, that will make me want to beat you out of fear for my loved one. You are asking for it at that point. Just like Ryan asking me to down him in ~2012 for saying 1440p was enthusiast at minuscule market share. I STILL don't think it is worth benchmarking 4K today for 2% of the market and having it in nearly every gpu/cpu review. Do it once or twice a year in a roundup or something.
mode_13h - Sunday, July 25, 2021 - link
That was kind of a clumsy segue from computer discussion into culture wars.The whole bathroom controversy is AstroTurf. And they key point its exponents don't want you to know is that it's a non-issue. Their entire argument is based on fear-mongering, as there's *no data* that supports their case.
The whole part about gays using our restrooms is a perfect example of what a non-issue this is. There have been gays using public restrooms for as long as there have been public restrooms, and yet there's never been a real problem with assaults by them.
Finally, did it ever occur to you that if a man wanted to attack women in a public restroom (something that's already against the law), maybe he wouldn't feel compelled to obey gendered bathroom laws? Choose logic & data over political ideology, please.
mode_13h - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
> Skylake has been Intel’s most exploit-prone microarchitecture ever.Fixed that for you.
> Weiss left Intel in September 2017 to join Mellanox/NVIDIA,
> where she held the role of Senior VP Silicon Engineering
> and ran the company’s networking chip design group.
Uh oh. I hope nobody is using *those* chips in critical infrastructure!
> In her new role at Intel, Tom’s is reporting that Weiss will lead
> all of Intel’s consumer chip development and design
Good call. Consumers don't care about security.
> If you’ve been following the news of Intel’s personnel of late,
> you might start to learn a pattern
"Make Intel Great Again!"
> In a company of 110000 employees, it seems odd that Intel feels
> it has to rehire to fill those key roles.
It's because Intel routinely purges people who don't advance up the ladder. So, you lose some critical people who just keep their heads down and focus on their job, and you're left with people more interested in playing politics.
ballsystemlord - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
@Ian , that title makes it sound like Intel is hiring former US military people. Maybe change it to "Intel continues to Rehire Intel Veterans..."Wereweeb - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
No confusion on my end. The assumption that "veterans" means "military veterans" instead of literally any other of the hundreds of kinds of "veterancy" is your problem, not Anandtech's.ballsystemlord - Thursday, July 8, 2021 - link
It's not really my problem either because, at least in the US, when you talk about "veterans" you always mean military veterans. "Do you have a veterans discount?" I was asked by a checkout clerk, on the same day I posted that comment. Obviously, they didn't mean Intel veteran. Or you have the gov body, the DVA (Department of Veteran Affairs -- for the military, not Intel).Maybe you'd classify it as a societal problem in the US?
FullmetalTitan - Thursday, July 8, 2021 - link
-Maybe you'd classify it as a societal problem in the US?Nailed it
mode_13h - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
I'm in the US and I had no misinterpretation of that title. I get your point, but the title is reasonable.WaltC - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
Just more indications that the top/mid Intel management really doesn't know what to do in a competitive market. I knew the company management had degraded over the past decade--just didn't know by how much. Turning to retirees who were fortunate to work in Intel's halcyon monopoly days in the hopes of repeating past successes just reinforces the fact that Intel cannot function in an ultra-competitive market. In the past, Intel bought out other companies or literally paid vendors not to sell competitor's products (like Dell, infamously) and stayed ahead that way--but those strategies won't work today, and the company seems to be foundering.Wereweeb - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
It doesn't matter that they don't know what to do, they still have boatloads of money and smart people, enough to out-compete the other players.Even if ARM ends up overpowering and crushing x86, which imo is unlikely, they will keep playing the game, either licensing the ARM architecture and making their own cores, or making RISC-V cores and crushing ARM.
TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
AMD literally survived by buying other companies in the 90s, and look at them now.You seem to forget that in those halcyon days intel was churning out some amazing products and pushed the envelope for performance. Starting with core 2 to skylake intel was at the forefront of high performance computing.
mode_13h - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
> Starting with core 2 to skylake intel was at the forefront of high performance computing.You should distinguish what proportion of that performance margin was due to good microarchitecture vs. superior manufacturing tech. Intel had the best manufacturing tech until about 2017, which covered over the small inter-generational IPC gains they've had since Sandybridge.
When they lost their edge in manufacturing tech, they were no longer safe from anyone who had a competitive microarchitecture.
It's funny how this article highlights the profitability of Skylake, when most of that is due to the subsequent failures instead of Skylake's strengths. And the article didn't even mention its multitude of security flaws. Probably the most exploit-prone CPU, ever.
zodiacfml - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
hard to tell. more likely, these people are familiar/worked with Pat. Intel buying TSMC 3nm supply for mobile/server product easily secures Intel and hurts AMDsseemaku - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
Every body makes CPUs these days, just get arm license and make few changes here and there. Its not that advanced anymore where you need highly talented people. Intel has lost the charm it once had, CPU making doesn't sound that exciting any more. One area Intel screwed up big time is process development. They should hire some good guys there.edzieba - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
The trend reaches even further back: a bunch of the Larrabee team have been re-hired (e.g. Tom Forsyth back in 2019)flgt - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
Unfortunately for a company as big as Intel more drastic changes will be required to help change the culture. They should take their medicine now and trim 10-20% of the rank and file and 20-40% of the management. They can’t just add a bunch of new, expensive management and become even more top heavy. They are looking more and more like a big company at the end of its lifecycle. With this much management overhead and the expense of running fabs, the house could quickly fall in on them.mode_13h - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
Layoffs are a way of life, at Intel.I take it you're just annoyed that they're not planning any more stock buybacks?
flgt - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
They've been running pretty hot for awhile so I don't think they've had significant layoffs outside of acquisitions they've run into the ground. Besides my massive profits from the stock buyback there are some good reasons for trimming the workforce:1) Bad management teams tend to accumulate a significant number of under qualified and under performing workers.
2) Bad management teams lack focus and start many dead-end pet projects.
3) The numbers are showing a significant loss of market share and ASP for Intel. And they need significant funding for underperforming fabs. They really need a good product end of this year or next, or their hand could be forced.
The idea here is not to make a quick buck, but to improve the health and performance of the business. Now will they do this? Will they do it in a competent manner? Probably not. Will it be screwed up by political infighting and political correctness. More likely. Hard to see them stopping the tail spin against better performing management teams and companies they are competing against.
mode_13h - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
> Will it be screwed up by political infighting and political correctness.Well, the most charitable view I can see of what Pat is doing is to get people under him that he trusts, precisely as a way to cut through the political BS.
dwightlooi - Wednesday, July 7, 2021 - link
Well, perhaps they had engaged in too much diversity hiring, woke human resource or any of the brown racist nonsense. Perhaps it's a good thing that they are going back to merit and experience.Oxford Guy - Thursday, July 8, 2021 - link
Two racist posts in a row in this topic.Instead of your ‘perhaps’ you should have some substance. That also goes for the ‘political correctness’ post above.
When people use that intellectually barren/craven phrase they are clumsily demanding their own ‘political correctness’. All politics is about correctness. That should be obvious but obvious truths are in short supply.
There is a lot to be said for requiring tech folk to get a liberal arts education. ‘Perhaps’ they wouldn’t foist such stunted attempts at political philosophy.
Oxford Guy - Thursday, July 8, 2021 - link
Full disclosure: From my experience there is no shortage of intellectually-stunted Ph.Ds in the humanities. Quality varies tremendously. I had a conversion with one tenured buffoon who, among other joyous beauties, demanded that I not speak to him about social justice. A career of naval gazing left him woefully underprepared for the challenge of expressing his demand in a non-stunted non-fraudulent manner.‘Social justice’ is a redundancy just like ‘political correctness’. Complaints about either are deception wherein the complainer merely wants their politics to win, typically irrespective of their factuality.
flgt - Thursday, July 8, 2021 - link
OK, you can call it whatever you learned in liberal arts school. It’s not philosophy, it is just how things work. The point is at any large company like Intel (especially if they are involved in government contracting), HR is not going to let a manager just hire or layoff anyone they want. They are gonna roll up the numbers and ensure they do not violate any metrics they have in place, regardless of any one individuals performance. Note this is not just race and sex, they are also looking at things like age. They are trying to minimize any issues with government contracts and lawsuits, as well as any negative press or social media.mode_13h - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
> any large company like Intel (especially if they are involved in government contracting),> HR is not going to let a manager just hire or layoff anyone they want.
HR has certain "protected classes" of employees, who are eligible to sue for things like discrimination.
That doesn't mean other classes of employees have no standing, however. At my employer, a group of employees opened a HR case because their manager (a Chinese national) seemed to be considering only Chinese candidates for job openings in their group. I don't know how the case ended up, but that group was taken out from under that manager (but possibly due to another allegation against him).
These are all costs to the business they don't have to deal with, in most other countries.
vladx - Saturday, July 10, 2021 - link
If promoting meritocracy over PC is racist nowadays, that just goes to show how crazy American society has gotten.Oxford Guy - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
There are enough qualified minorities to staff any position, a fact that people who idiotically employ the internally-redundant phrase ‘political correctness’ is either do not comprehend or pretend not to.The situation is unfair to some minorities and unfair to some members of the majority (such as pale-skinned people from the working class trying to rise economically). But... that does not justify the denigration of minorities whose job status is aided by affirmative action. Again... there are plenty of qualified minorities to occupy any position. The world is vastly overpopulated and degree inflation has been a fact for quite some time and is only increasing.
vladx - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
And there's the problem, the criteria for social programs should be based on family wealth instead of skin color. The narrative that race-based affirmative action is not racist in itself is simply laughable.TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
If someone is qualified why does it matter what skin color they are? Why does it matter if someone is a minority if the person in question is qualified?GeoffreyA - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
++Oxford Guy - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
You're missing my point. My point was, once again, that the minorities who are hired via affirmative action policies should not be denigrated. One or two of the posts I responded to specifically blamed them for Intel's decline and cited them as a threat to corporate competitiveness in general. It is racist tripe.TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
*No how dare you go against the agenda!!!!* the comment."There is a lot to be said for requiring tech folk to get a liberal arts education. ‘Perhaps’ they wouldn’t foist such stunted attempts at political philosophy."
The only people who claim this are liberal arts majors with no job skills who think everything is racist. AKA really annoying/depressing people who drag down whatever company they manage to latch themselves onto. Also the type of people that need purged from the workplace before they totally ruin it.
Oxford Guy - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
Your alias is apropos.Vitor - Thursday, July 8, 2021 - link
Well, you have a very jewish looking woman with a very jewish name. So it is just silly to say Intel has regreted being "woke".mode_13h - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
Not sure what your point is, but they've had lots of employees in Israel, for decades. In fact, I think some Muslim countries even had boycotts against Intel for a long time, due to the amount of employment they provide in Israel.GeoffreyA - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
I think that Pentium MMX, M, Sandy Bridge, Skylake, and Sunny Cove were designed there. In Haifa?Oxford Guy - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
I am not seeing a point in your post.This is the Israel facility, correct? Is it supposed to be surprising to have staff from Israel there?
dsplover - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
I could care less about hypotheticals or activist investors, beliefs, etc. Strike back so consumers get the benefits from more competition.I was hoping for an i7 with extreme cache, and an on die GPU. Tiger Lake desktop actually.
I kept waiting to upgrade my 1U’s but AMD 5700G’s appear to have beaten Intel even on that processor level.
Bright side, competition brought me the perfect CPU for my needs.
Can’t wait to see Intel strike back in 2025.
mode_13h - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
Yeah, it's too bad they didn't bring Tiger Lake H to the desktop. The closest thing to it is their NUC Extreme.JKflipflop98 - Saturday, July 10, 2021 - link
The honest answer is "diversity". Forced, quantified, sticking people in silos by the color of their skin "diversity" is what happened.Which is a shame because Intel from the start has been welcoming to anyone. Intel has never cared if you're man, woman, black, white, Andromedian, whatever. If you got the chops to get the work done, then you're in.
Now it's all about pushing URM's (under represented minorities) into the company as fast as possible to claim the company is "woke" and "diverse". But no one actually stopped to ask these diverse new hires if they understand how a computer works - which most of them don't. So now the fab facilities are just chock full of people that don't have a clue about any sort of advanced technology, and are just there to draw a paycheck.
mode_13h - Saturday, July 10, 2021 - link
Thanks for your perspective. Just so we're clear, I'm curious to know roughly what proportion of Intel's failings you consider caused by that, and roughly when did you notice these changes?mode_13h - Saturday, July 10, 2021 - link
And not to directly address the diversity thing, but I think I should probably mention I've been hired into roles for which I was under-qualified. That's not the end of the world. As long as the employee has the potential to do the job and half-decent coaching, they can grow into it.The key thing is probably for them to see the path from where they are to where they're expected to be. I'd say don't sell anyone short, before they've had opportunities and support to step up prove they're willing and able to do the work. While not everyone is going to make it, once some do, it will hopefully inspire their peers by showing both what's possible and what it takes.
mode_13h - Saturday, July 10, 2021 - link
So, as a manger, my first request would be for HR to do the best job it can of recruiting the highest caliber candidates in whatever category they're prioritizing. Then, if they're pushing candidates who need additional training and support, they really need to make those resources available.If diversity is a top-level business priority, then the organization needs to recognize the costs and provide the appropriate backing. And once money enters the conversation, it has a way of making people serious.
Again, sidestepping the debate over diversity itself, there are surely better and worse ways to do it. As with nearly all things in business and life.
GeoffreyA - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
Here's a thought (it'll never come true). What if there were a way to abstract/obfuscate a person's colour during the hiring process? Then it would be based purely on merit.Oxford Guy - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
This is why liberal arts is essential. When someone is required to take a course in social psychology one learns that hiring decisions are dominated by psychological deficiencies in interviewers — not objective prospective employee quality.A memorable bit of research showed, for instance, that simply putting a briefcase down by a wall prior to shaking hands is enough to be disqualified by the vaunted expert HR staffer. Why? Because unconscious emotional responses (first impressions based mainly on superficialities in the first 30 seconds) dominate interviewers. Those kinds of biases make it very difficult for some minorities to get a fair shake. Simply turning up looking or moving the ‘wrong’ way is enough.
Liberal arts undergrad programs clue people in to the fact that the world isn’t as ‘common sense’ as their loud mouths would have it. That is, if they’re intelligent enough to grasp that.
Oxford Guy - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
Hollywood actors are forced to take voice lessons to learn how to sound artificially heterosexual.Hollywood is stereotyped as being socially progressive but it is typically quite conservative, to the point of abusing its workers and the public with such narrowmindedness. In its earliest history that wasn’t as true but religious lobbyists quickly transformed the industry.
If ‘San Francisco values’ means stuffing your true voice into a shoe box in order to have a job that is telling in terms of what minorities typically face.
GeoffreyA - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
Whatever the reason is, there's very little good that comes out of Hollywood nowadays.Concerning the Code/pre-Code eras that you pointed out, I'd say it's appalling and art should never be restricted. Having said that, one can't deny that some of our best films come from the Code era. I think restriction and restraint force one to operate in a subtle way, and the result is usually more effective than "showing everything." It's analogous to show, don't tell. Older horror directors knew it too. Compare Alien 1979 with today's stuff plastered with CGI monsters. Even in romance films of the '40s, much restraint but love running from heart to heart.
mode_13h - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
> there's very little good that comes out of Hollywood nowadays.I think the main thing that changed is there are now a lot more people producing content in a lot more places. This leaves Hollywood reaching for blockbusters and other surefire hits, as a reliable revenue source.
> some of our best films come from the Code era.
Yeah, sometimes constraints make for better art. However, it's good that more people can participate and they can broach more subjects. I usually rely on IMDB to avoid wasting my time on sub-par productions.
GeoffreyA - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
I do believe the last decade produced excellent, even outstanding, content. Perhaps the best since the '80s. Got a feeling it's going down again.mode_13h - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
> If ‘San Francisco values’Hollywood is in Los Angeles, not San Francisco. Silicon Valley is adjacent to San Francisco.
California has 70.2% of the population of England, 3.1 times the land area, and about 1.25 times its GDP. It might be tempting to lump it all together, but it makes about as much sense as me confusing London and Liverpool.
Oxford Guy - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
'Hollywood is in Los Angeles, not San Francisco. Silicon Valley is adjacent to San Francisco.'I was obviously using that sarcastically to enhance my point.
GeoffreyA - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
"first impressions based mainly on superficialities in the first 30 seconds"That's a problem, yes. Perhaps if there were a way to abstract social awkwardness/proficiency/customs during interviewing?
mode_13h - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
> Perhaps if there were a way to abstract social awkwardness/proficiency/customs during interviewing?I approach each interview with a sheet of questions suited to the type of position. That's not to say my interviews are totally formulaic, but there's a high degree of uniformity between them, and I can pretty well quantify my ratings and justify my decision. There's always some touchy feely stuff, but I make sure that doesn't comprise the core of the interview, after seeing some candidates do well in those areas, while being weak in core skills and knowledge. Mostly, I try to give interviews where I think the candidate should leave with a pretty good sense of how well they did.
As an interviewer, I feel a duty to be prepared and demonstrate competency to the candidate. This is one thing that appealed to me about a former employer. I immediately follow each interview by putting my review in writing. If we got the candidate through a recruiter, I follow up to let them know the strengths and weaknesses of any candidate we don't accept, so they can hopefully find us more suitable candidates.
These days, a lot of employers are using online tests as an initial step, in order to filter & grade applicants. I think it mostly covers core skills & knowledge, though I've heard it sometimes includes ethics and other areas.
GeoffreyA - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
Sounds like a solid approach. Insightful to see it from the interviewer's side. Thank you.TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
Liberal arts programs are the source fo the very peopel who claim not hring an arbitrary number of minorities is "racist" because of Buzzwords and Feelings.Also tend to be some of the most racist people youll ever meet.
Oxford Guy - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
Hypocrisy is prevalent everywhere. It is one of the central defining qualities of humanity. Truth = convenience.GeoffreyA - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
"Hypocrisy is prevalent everywhere"Sure, but there's a scale, and I've got to admit, some people who "fight" the most for "justice" are curiously prejudiced in another angle.
mode_13h - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
> some peopleI'm skeptical of generalizations. I'd rather take things on a case-by-case basis. Labels are a tool for the lazy. We can do better.
Now, if you want to debate the merits or wisdom of specific policies, that's another matter.
GeoffreyA - Friday, July 16, 2021 - link
I agree that generalisations aren't ideal. At the end of the day, it's always the individual case that counts. I feel the climate of these days is creating more division and going contrary to the spirit of unity.mode_13h - Saturday, July 17, 2021 - link
> I feel the climate of these days is creating more divisionThat's why I don't like labels. They're simplistic and do more to divide than inform. They're merely a cognitive shortcut that tends to get overused and plays into tribal instincts in dangerous ways.
> and going contrary to the spirit of unity.
A spirit of unity would be nice, but it occurred to me some time ago that as the world gets increasingly dirty, hot, and crowded, humanity will get too bogged down in the various squabbles spun off like eddies, rather than focusing on the underlying currents pushing us adrift. I hope that we can at least try to avoid unnecessary divisions and at least focus on matters of substance.
GeoffreyA - Monday, July 19, 2021 - link
Oh yes. Labels tend to suggest I'm different, you're different, when only a short while ago, nobody cared about any difference. Nobody saw any difference. I think finding common ground is important, finding the thing that unites people. Also, getting to know a person, then the superficialities fade away and the differences become a beautiful enrichment.vladx - Saturday, July 10, 2021 - link
Well said, the promotion of diversity hiring is just disgusting. This is why as a guy from EU, I'm supporting China in the trade war with US and avoid buying US products whenever possible.GeoffreyA - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
Sure, US is full of problems, we know, but that doesn't make China the saviour to follow. Unless we'd like to see two propaganda films a week.Oxford Guy - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
All film is state propaganda. Some of it is just better-disguised. Television is even more obvious.vladx - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
Well said. @Oxford Guy. Everything that comes out of Hollywood nowadays is choke full of propaganda.GeoffreyA - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
You're right, and I realised that weakness after I posted my comment. I suppose what I meant was, do we want Triumph of the Will style propaganda twice a week, or Hollywood-style propaganda?vladx - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
Comparing China with Nazi Germany? Look at you, trying to act witty. Can you show me some of these Chinese propaganda films? Or are you just assuming this based on what Western mainstream media narrative says?Regardless, China has proven throughout history that it doesn't try to conquer or control the entire world so it's unlikely any supposed propaganda of theirs will spread worldwide.
GeoffreyA - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
I'll admit, I haven't seen any of these Chinese propaganda films, and was basing my view of it on the media, which says they're playing two a week. It was wrong of me to compare that with Triumph without watching them. But totalitarianism has a similar root, even if the fruits are different, and I'm understandably suspicious of a country that has treated the Uyghurs the way they've done.vladx - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
I don't consider China government as totalitarianism, there are 3 separate interest groups that are part of the Politburo which would be similar to classic parties. The fact that these groups can work together and compromise to pick only a single leader goes to show that it's not as centralized as people outside China think.I consider China to be experimenting on a hybrid system between communism and democracy which should not be outright disregarded. As for the Uighur situation, there's also no real proof at the moment and in fact some of those Uighur testimonials were proven to have ties to NSA agents who have infiltrated China.
GeoffreyA - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
I don't know much about China's government. But some reading this afternoon shows that they're not at the extreme end of the scale. Still, I suspect those "democratic" offerings are little more than words. Bottom line, the state is the boss, whether it's split into groups or not, and runs the show. That's how I see it. Also, I'm going to guess here that it's all tied down to the Party and not the leaders. The leaders can come and go---they don't matter---but the Party will always persist.mode_13h - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
> there are 3 separate interest groups that are part of the PolitburoExcept Xi purged key members, in his anti-corruption campaign. His new anti-corruption agency isn't even accountable to China's Supreme Court. He also "centralised his power and created working groups with himself at the head to subvert government bureaucracy." That's how he was able to change the change the Constitution to eliminate term limits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xi_Jinping
> it's not as centralized as people outside China think.
If the citizens have no vote, then it's already too centralized. There's no check on power.
> I consider China to be experimenting on a hybrid system between communism and democracy
How is it even remotely a hybrid? Even before Xi seized absolute control and made himself leader for life, it was not a democracy in any way.
And their empty promises and subsequent backsliding on promises for Hong Kong to have their own democratic form of self-governance just shows they have no interest in *any* sort of democracy.
> As for the Uighur situation, there's also no real proof at the moment
Okay, I think we're done here. Basically everyone except China & their closest allies is saying that China is committing genocide in Xinjiang. It's not just many testimonials, but also satellite photos, leaked government documents, and other evidence. If you're buying China's propaganda on this, then I think we have nothing left to discuss.
mode_13h - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
> Can you show me some of these Chinese propaganda films?China has explicit censorship of film, TV, and news media. They also *do* create pro-government propaganda, though I'm far from an expert on this subject.
https://www.propublica.org/article/how-china-uses-...
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/20/915060788/motherlan...
I'm sure this hole goes deeper than we probably want to dig. Just check out this Soviet-style anthem for China's Internet Censorship Agency:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbBKPqOh6DU
Which brings us into the era of social media: the modern form of propaganda. China has something called the 50 Cent Army, because they pay millions of people about $0.50 per day to troll social media platforms in various ways. Most of this is domestic, but there's no shortage of China's meddling in foreign social media.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party
mode_13h - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
> All film is state propaganda. Some of it is just better-disguised.> Television is even more obvious.
I don't even know where you get this. The US government has no say in what goes into movies or TV, nor do they have any hand in funding the vast majority of it (there are some grants for mostly noncommercial art, but that's very tiny, by comparison with the overall entertainment industry).
You can argue against this or that cultural value, or the corrosive effect of commercialism on the arts, but it's definitely not propaganda in the sense that some government body is telling writers/directors/producers what to put in their films and shows.
Oxford Guy - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
'The US government has no say in what goes into movies or TV'I don't know where you get that! It's patently, obviously, false.
GeoffreyA - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
You mean the rating system?mode_13h - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
> I don't know where you get that! It's patently, obviously, false.Citation needed.
vladx - Thursday, July 15, 2021 - link
"Citation needed."And here's the problem with you @mode_13h, you resort too much to authority instead of thinking for yourself.
mode_13h - Friday, July 16, 2021 - link
> you resort too much to authority instead of thinking for yourself.Huh? OG made a bold & specific claim without evidence. I have a right to request evidence.
Please tell me what I should "think for myself" about this. We can't just go around believing things because they somehow feel true. That's how you get demagogues. There needs to be a level of rigor. Any true journalist would understand what I'm talking about.
mode_13h - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
I'll add that one definite factor in censoring content of late is China. Both Chinese funding of some US studios & productions, as well as the lure of the Chinese market is leading to a lot of self-censorship by big studios and individuals early in their career who fear getting blacklisted.mode_13h - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
> I'm supporting China in the trade war with US and avoid buying US products whenever possible.You should understand what a world looks like, when China runs everything. It's a very authoritarian society, with ubiquitous surveillance, restricted speech, restricted press, few legal rights, and you absolutely cannot criticize The Party. They have a flavor of mercantilism where they eventually dominate all major sectors of the economy.
The US looks worse than it is, mostly because all of its dirty laundry is hanging out for the world to see. Our freedom of speech and freedom of the press are actively and passively working against us. It's not a perfect place, but there is still a commitment to free markets, open competition, human rights, and rule of law.
I'd suggest you take some time to consider what you truly value, in the world of tomorrow.
mode_13h - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
BTW, I have nothing against Chinese people. And I'd have no problem with China itself, if their government more closely resembled those of Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, or maybe Singapore.GeoffreyA - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
Spot on!GeoffreyA - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
"Welcome to City-17. It's safer here..."vladx - Thursday, July 15, 2021 - link
I value honesty and when it's all said and done China is less hypocritical than US as a whole. Hypocrisy is the biggest issue with the world nowadays and American society is the no. 1 there.mode_13h - Friday, July 16, 2021 - link
> Hypocrisy is the biggest issue with the world nowadaysIs it? Would you like to be killed by an earnest and honest serial killer? If someone says they're going to drive a bus full of children off a cliff and then actually does it, we don't give them credit for doing what they said they were going to do! It would be far better if they realized what a bad idea it was and changed course.
There are some things worse than hypocrisy. Things like ethnic cleansing, seizing the South China Sea, driving foreign competitors out of business with unfair trade practices, and indebting developing countries into servitude through infrastructure loans they can't even afford to service.
And if you care about hypocrisy, ask people in Xinjiang about their "retraining" camps, or people born in Hong Kong about China's promise of "one country two systems". And if we leave Hong Kong aside, I guess you might have a point that at least China doesn't pretend to be a democracy. That would make them less hypocritical than say Russia or Iran.
A parting thought about hypocrisy. Sometimes, what might look like hypocrisy is the product of something else. If there's a meaningful inconsistency, it pays to look at what's behind it. Most of all, it pays to be pragmatic and consider which likely consequences actually matter.
vladx - Saturday, July 17, 2021 - link
"There are some things worse than hypocrisy. Things like ethnic cleansing, seizing the South China Sea, driving foreign competitors out of business with unfair trade practices, and indebting developing countries into servitude through infrastructure loans they can't even afford to service."Like I said, I consider hypocrisy far more dangerous than all of that.
dsplover - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
110 Billion by Federal Government to fund Semi Conductor research recently.Hopefully save on R & D for chip makers, but most likely will go to Universities which can share downstream.
Reading Intel’s recent roadmap is still discouraging compared to AMDs drive ahead on successful designs.