There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

PenisDuckCuck9001 ,

After all this time, AMD finally won. They made a hell of a comeback too. GG guys.

FiniteBanjo ,

Somebody should make a Borat Meme with AMD and Intel “Big Success!”

dual_sport_dork ,
@dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world avatar

Done.

https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/0498065e-b80e-49c2-814e-0792bc3fad70.png

Vailliant ,

Thank you kind sir!

OneCardboardBox ,

Stop “non-essential work”…

But I bet they’ll still ship bloatware updates for Windows

geogle ,
@geogle@lemmy.world avatar

Intel is not Microsoft

OneCardboardBox ,

I’m talking about all those Intel programs that come preinstalled.

“Intel device smart updates” “Intel audio control center”

That kind of garbage

AngryMob ,

Those would only be preinstalled if your motherboard has the requisite hardware and you download the drivers and the utilities it wants you to download. They arent preinstalled in any windows ive used, pc or even laptops. Theres a lot of shitty bloatware out there, but intel is hardly worth mentioning in that arena. And theres such better things to make fun of them for too, lol.

Whattrees ,
@Whattrees@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

It does come pre-installed on some computers depending on the provided OS and the changes made by the manufacturer. If you install your own fresh version of windows, it should only be installed if windows believes you need it for the component to function.

My last pre-built came with a bunch of garbage before I wiped it with a fresh copy of windows and almost all went away. I would certainly not say Intel is the worst though, older dell machines and even relatively modern HP machines come with a bunch of “necessarily for the component to function” garbage that can’t really be uninstalled easily (windows will reinstall them).

hardcoreufo ,

I work in the industry and my understanding of the chips act is certain goals must be met in order to receive money. Something like in order to get this 50 million, you must buy 100 million of new equipment and facilities improvement. In order to get this 25 million you must have 50 million worth of new jobs. These requirements were also spread out over years so you couldn’t artificially inflate your work force or sell off equipment.

Not saying Intel doesn’t suck, but I doubt they are getting chips act money now. Or they will have to have a big turn around in the next few years to do so. They certainly aren’t getting a free 8 billion.

kandoh ,

These layoffs will only be for a quarter or two. Just enough for the c-levels to unlock their full bonuses.

interdimensionalmeme ,

And create a glut in their labour market niche, which will take many years before the wages recover to what they were. In the current 20 year permanent labour shortage scenario, this is the way to prevent wages from increasing. Sure these demand shocks will create issues by they’re making the bet the lower overall expenses for wages will make it all worth it. This is them leveraging the imbalance of power been employer and employee

0ddysseus ,

If only there were some tried and tested method for the working class to join together and create a power block equal to the company in order to negotiate better pay and conditions and avoid these outrageous tactics. Pity

Alpha71 ,

Exactly! And then the Government can declare you an essential service and take away all your bargaining power!

Oh wait…

DragonTypeWyvern ,

More like oh no, here I go molotoving again.

HelloHotel ,
@HelloHotel@lemmy.world avatar

I hope it will never hit that point where its the only way forward.

Saledovil ,

Wow, intel must really be struggling if they need to lay off this many people. I don’t think it’s reasonable to invest in Intel at this time.

Or well, I think news of layoffs should always be interpreted in a way that’s pessimistic for shareholders.

curiousaur ,

Have you seen the performance and efficiency of these arm chip? The performance and battery life of Apple’s chips compared to the Intel chips before then? Intel should be absolutely embarrassed.

Saledovil ,

I must admit I don’t keep up with chip developments.

zephr_c ,

At this point I’m starting to think that if you want to subsidize semiconductor manufacturing in the US the Global Foundries might be a better investment. At least they’ve already hit rock bottom.

Allonzee , (edited )

This is an admisson of no future.

They’re throwing crew out of their boat full of holes to assure investors they’re ship shape… for the next quarterly profit report.

Their corpse will be long since picked clean of their patents, assets, and trademarks by 2030.

oxideseven ,

Publicly traded companies are a curse on humanity.

Allonzee , (edited )

All the idiot Americans cheering about scapegoating single mothers as welfare queens since the 80s, never an utterance by anyone with power of all the DO NOTHING private investors that drop their chips from their last trip to the exploitation casino and demand all the profit for no labor whatsoever.

“Fuck you, I’m an owner, pay me.”

Prior to the Jack Welch Ronald Reagan betrayal, the model was correcly “customers first, employees second, investors third.”

Everything falls apart when you give every spare penny to the people who A) dont DO anything to make the money they demand and B) demand the companies they own sabotage their missions and futures to goose net profit for the current quarter so they can profit and walk away having severely damaged those company’s ability to do what they existed for, only to demand it of other companies.

smb ,

maybe the root-cause is less the publicly-traded part but rather the total lack of any consequences?

but yes i totally agree, any company publicly traded will get a payed-for-CEO after a while and latest at that point is where no problems are resolved any more, but instead are IMHO always created on purpose.

Tryptaminev ,

Problem with publicly traded is that there is no personal risk past the price you bought the stocks for. You paid $ 1,000 for some stocks of “evil chemical corp”? Now your financial interest, and thats the only measureable one, would want them to pollute for a damage of $ 10,000 respective to the stock value if that increases your stock price to $ 2,000, as long as the risk of them having to pay for cleaning it up is smaller than 50%. Problem is the same holds true for a damage of $ 100,000 relative to your stock. Or any arbitrarily large amount. Your share in the damage caused could be in the billions, but worst thing the company goes bankrupt and you loose your stocks buying price.

The only alternative would be holding shareholders responsible with their own money, if a company is forced to pay up for damages they caused, going past its bankruptcy.

smb ,

like i said:

maybe the root-cause is […] the total lack of any consequences

but you used much more words ;-)

“publicly traded” does not imply that consequences would be impossible.

i see the opposite is true.

one could make that “public trade” also “very” public as in ownerships could only be changed together with a public note of who that new owner of that share is in person and only like not allow ownership changes more than twice a week per person, making investment more profitable than parasitic high performance trade. also the current lack of consequences could be improved by making the shareholders personally responsible for everything that the company does, including going to jail when the ceo left the country to not go there.

that could include making those responsible who owned that company at the time of its crime, making trust in the company way more important than that they can cause damage to society in macroscope just to profit in microscopical bits.

this way the shareholders would have a at least one trigger to actually want to look into who that bullshittalker is they want to let into such a position of “their property”

society should take care who they let do things with “their property” too.

NutWrench ,
@NutWrench@lemmy.world avatar

I guess Intel needed that QA team, after all.

suction ,

Non essential work, oh dear Product and Project managers, where are you gonna stand in the way of good products next?

SocialMediaRefugee ,

Executives will be “essential”, QA, sys admins, etc will be non essential.

III ,

Eliminating QA is a huge value. We all know it reduces costs relating to employing people, but that’s just the start. It eliminates the number of bugs found and reduces the amount of work that comes with it. All in all it helps projects to release on time. There could be no problem with this, clearly.

isles ,

All my KPIs are saying this is a win.

Aceticon ,

If you don’t check it, it never fails a check!

What’s there not to like?!

Alph4d0g ,

Traditional QA is horse and buggy shit anyway. Shift left and make your tests the requirements (ATDD). Testing is self service, automated and there’s zero delta between behavior intended and behavior tested. Put product owners on the hook to learn Gherkin and Bob’s your uncle.

uis ,

Anyone else still beliving capitalism will do R&D willingly? Even most recent and hyped(not without reason) development - powervia - came from institute from former soviet bloc.

GiddyGap ,

So, buying opportunity?

RoosterBoy ,

“Here is more evidence that our system is fundamentally broken and doesn’t serve the people who make it run anymore”

You: “How can I profit from this?”

You sound like a CEO in the making.

todd_bonzalez ,
@todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee avatar

I mean, stock prices do go up after stuff like this. It’s a reliable way to profit.

The system sucks, but this is literally how rich people turn money into more money, while we complain we don’t have enough.

I may be a socialist, but I live in a capitalist dystopia, so sometimes I just exploit the system that exists instead of constantly taking the idealistic high road and getting kicked in the teeth for it.

UnderpantsWeevil ,
@UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

Even Marx dabbled in the equities markets.

People seem to think having an economic philosophy is the same as having a moral philosophy. Absolutely not. If you look at a system and conclude “This is dysfunctional, it’s leaking money everywhere” that doesn’t preclude you from getting a sponge and mopping some of that money up.

fernlike3923 ,
@fernlike3923@sh.itjust.works avatar

Man I really should’ve bought some Intel instead of Nvidia.

fernlike3923 ,
@fernlike3923@sh.itjust.works avatar

Wait, their stock is 30% down today, what happened?

Maggoty ,

The entire stock market is a casino for rich people and the rest of us are just hoping we can scratch a retirement out of it?

fernlike3923 ,
@fernlike3923@sh.itjust.works avatar

Yeah, I guess.

Maggoty ,

Would be awesome if DARPA bought them…

rottingleaf ,

There’s no corporate death penalty, but there is corporate death from alcoholism, coke overdose and syphilis.

I mean, you do a TRAFU and instead of firing those logically responsible for it you fire your actual troops.

This basically means they failed to find scapegoats inside the company who wouldn’t be management themselves.

Wow.

buddascrayon ,

While Intel has absolutely been losing money on its chipmaking Foundry business as it invests in new factories and extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography, to the tune of $7 billion in operating losses in 2023 and another $2.8 billion this quarter, the company’s products themselves aren’t unprofitable.

So what I’m getting here is that the CEO and or the board decided to invest in something that is losing a ton of money and so now 15% or more of the people who have been working diligently to actually make the company money are going to pay for it by losing their job.

Jestzer ,

https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/b126e7c1-13ce-40b5-b2b7-06e1f87c3607.webp

linearchaos ,
@linearchaos@lemmy.world avatar

That’s definitely a huge issue but they’re going to have a hell of a time on the overcooked processors on the market right now. They’ve sold a hell of a lot of defective product over the past couple of years. Consumers and third parties are going to come after them for refunds. Consumer confidence is way down. They’re going to have a hell of a time trying to sell 15th gen to people. Everyone I know who knows what in the hell is going on is going to AMD.

Llewellyn ,

You have a hell of a love for that phrase!

buddascrayon ,

Consumer confidence is way down. They’re going to have a hell of a time trying to sell 15th gen to people. Everyone I know who knows what in the hell is going on is going to AMD.

I’ve been in the industry since back when AMD actually was making the processors for Intel. And people have been saying this exact thing every time there’s a fluctuation in the processor market. Yet Intel still basically owns the market anyway.

The failure in Intel isn’t their processors, it’s their management.

linearchaos ,
@linearchaos@lemmy.world avatar

I mean you can’t blame the rocks, of course it’s the management :)

ipkpjersi ,

That’s exactly what happened, and that’s how layoffs always work.

The losses of the horrible decisions of the board/owners/management/etc are paid for by the blood of the workers. It’s so wonderful and very fair.

vithigar ,

I think it’s even more absurd than that. The CEO/board decided to make a long-term investment which wasn’t going to pay off for several years. To what should be the surprise of no one, that meant short term losses.

Framing an investment in a massive amount of new infrastructure as a loss because it didn’t immediately start operating in the black is beyond unreasonable, but that’s the demand when all that matters is quarterly gains and year-over-year growth.

UnderpantsWeevil ,
@UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

So what I’m getting here is that the CEO and or the board decided to invest in something that is losing a ton of money

Intel has an enormous technical debt that they’re finally struggling to pay back after they hit a brick wall with their 7nm Titanium chipset.

It isn’t that this is wasteful spending so much as it is big upfront costs for future productive development.

That said, the fact that this work has to be government subsidized in order to be done raises the question of why this business is private at all.

SocialMediaRefugee ,

I’m not sure I want the gov and huge amounts of my tax dollars going to operate federal gov chip fab plants. On the other hand I get your point that it is so heavily subsidized it is practically a de facto situation anyway.

UnderpantsWeevil ,
@UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

I’m not sure I want the gov and huge amounts of my tax dollars going to operate federal gov chip fab plants.

That is ultimately what the subsidies amount to.

On the other hand I get your point that it is so heavily subsidized it is practically a de facto situation anyway.

I think the question isn’t “Do I want my tax dollars going to X?” (because they’re going there whether you want it to or not - semiconductors are an essential industry in a modern post-industrial nation). The question is how you want the business to operate. As a for-profit venture focused on returning the maximum profit to shareholders over the smallest time frame? Or as a public utility, focused on generating a sufficient quota of useful products for a fixed unit cost?

Part of the problem with the Western/Americanized economic system is that the second kind of enterprise is increasingly difficult to find. And where it does exist (the USPS, the state university system, the federal reserve, the SEC/FAA/EPA) there’s been so much privatization and regulatory capture that these institutions appear incapable of fulfilling their mandates.

But constantly diverting responsibility for fixing the problem by saying “I don’t want my tax dollars involved in this failed thing” doesn’t get us any closer to a solution. At some point, the public (and by extension the state bureaucracy) has to engage with our corrupt and failing economic cornerstones. Otherwise, we just become beholden to the nations we import from.

“Let Saudi-ARAMCO handle it” isn’t a solution I find particularly appetizing, either.

paddirn ,

Doesn’t the US have semiconductor chip sanctions in place on China, specifically because it’s a national security concern? If semiconductors are that big of a deal that we need to sanction China over them… maybe they should be nationalized.

UnderpantsWeevil ,
@UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

Doesn’t the US have semiconductor chip sanctions in place on China

Taiwanese Semiconductor is the global industry leader, and half of their output is sold to China. Korea and Japan are also major exporters. The Chinese manufacturers don’t care about losing access to Intel chips, when they’re a generation behind the curve anyway.

maybe they should be nationalized.

Wall Street would flip its lid if the US tried to nationalize Intel.

barsquid ,

The money needs to return to the government. Some wealthy fucks are lining their pockets.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •