• 2 Posts
  • 864 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 18th, 2023

help-circle



  • This is absolutely about cars MADE in China.

    hugely high-end and out of the price range for most people.

    There are lots of cheaper options in Europe now, and more coming all the time.
    The new thing is that they are getting better range, because batteries are getting cheaper.
    There are lots of excellent option around 30K EUR/USD.

    And cars like the Renault 5 expected January are coming at just below 20,000.- EUR making it basically also 20k USD here in Denmark.
    Currently there are a couple of options just below 22k EUR. But as stated more are coming.

    USA has chosen politically to have less competition by adding 100%¤ import tax to cars from China. So of course prices are higher in USA.



  • How much taxpayer money went to tesla?

    Oh boy, Tesla is receiving taxpayer money through so many channels.
    First they got cheap federal loans to build the company, they got massive direct funding for building the charging grid.
    EVERY single car sold receives a TAX credit. And finally other brands have to pay Tesla regulatory credits, because those are designed to favor and promote electric cars too.

    So Tesla is indeed a massively subsidized company.




  • what’s perhaps most striking about GenCast is that it requires significantly less computing power than traditional physics-based ensemble forecasts like ENS. According to Google, a single one of its TPU v5 tensor processing units can produce a 15-day GenCast forecast in eight minutes. By contrast, it can take a supercomputer with tens of thousands of processors hours to produce a physics-based forecast.

    If true this is extremely impressive, but this is their own evaluation, so it may be biased.


  • Yes Chrysler is part of Stellantis, and once upon a time, way way back in what has since been called the 80’s, Chrysler was near bankrupt, but a savior came to Chrysler with the name Lee Iacocca. The mastermind behind Ford Mustang. And he came to Chrysler and saw all that was bad and fixed it. He undertook to finish a bold new type of car in the Dodge Caravan, which became hugely successful and saved Chrysler. Chrysler went on to become so successful they were even able to buy up other brands like AMC that also owned Jeep.

    Ah well, as a European I know little about Chrysler today, but I have fond memories of once admiring mostly everything American, and Lee Iacocca and Jack Tramiel are probably the two business leaders I respect the most of all time.

    Sorry to hear Chrysler is now considered safe to bet against. But sadly Stellantis has been shit for some years now.
    Stellantis has many traditionally popular European brands, like Citroen, Peugeot, FIAT, Opel (Vauxhall in UK), Alpha Romeo and Lancia. And AFAIK all the brands are doing poorly.




  • Funny the Radeon RX 480 came out in 2016 at a similar price. Is that a coincidence?
    Incidentally the last great generation offering a midrange GPU at a midrange price. The Nvidia 1060 was great too, and the 1080 is claimed to maybe be one of the best offers of all time. Since then everything has been overpriced.

    The RX 480 was later replaced by the 580 which was a slight upgrade at great value too. But then the crypto wave hit, and soon a measly 580 cost nearly $1000!!! Things have never returned quite back to normal since. Too little competition with only Nvidia and AMD.


  • I think it’s looking pretty grim

    Absolutely, but for some reason Intel has a history of failing in new areas. Their attempt with Itanium for high end was really bad, their attempt at RISC which mostly ended up in SCSI controllers was a failure too. Their failure with Atom not being competitive against Arm. Their attempts at compute for data-center has failed for decades against Nvidia, it’s not something that just happened recently. And they tried in the 90’s with a GPU that was embarrassingly bad and failed too.

    They actually failed against AMD Athlon too, but back then, they controlled the market, and managed to keep AMD mostly out of the market.
    When the Intel 80386 came out it was actually slower than the 80286!, When Pentium came out, it was slower than i486. When Pentium 4 came out, it was not nearly as efficient as Pentium 3. Intel has a long history of sub par products. Typically every second design by Intel had much worse IPC, so much so that it was barely compensated by the higher clocks of better production process. So in principle every second Intel generation was a bit like the AMD Bulldozer, but where for AMD 1 mistake almost crashed the company, Intel managed to keep profiting even from sub par products.

    So it’s not really a recent problem, Intel has a long history of intermittently not being a very strong competitor or very good at designing new products and innovating. And now they’ve lost the throne even on X86! Because AMD beat the crap out of them, with chiplets, despite the per core speed of the original Ryzen was a bit lower than what Intel had.

    What kept Intel afloat and hugely profitable when their designs were inferior, was that they were always ahead on the production process, that was until around 2016. Where Intel lost the lead, because their 10nm process never really worked and had multiple years of delays.

    Still Intel back then always managed to come back like they did with Core2, and the brand and the X86 monopoly was enough to keep Intel very profitable, even through major strategic failures like Itanium.




  • why should not US Treasury take an equity position for their “risk”

    I understand why that may seem like a fair solution on the surface, but it’s because that would make Intel a part federally owned company, and in general it is avoided to have publicly owned companies competing against private companies. Which in this case would be Nvidia, AMD, Comcast, Qualcomm etc. It’s a huge conflict of interest, and would easily be seen as unfair competition, possibly also by trade partners.

    There might also be legal issues, internally in USA, and with WTO and other trade agreements.

    So it’s kind of opening a can of worms that is better left closed. It’s not that I don’t understand where you are coming from, but trust me, regulation is way better than a government taking control.
    Intel may collapse, but then maybe one of the previously mentioned companies may pick up the remains, and built it better. This is why we need to have free competition.



  • Are you really still going to justify share buybacks

    No I don’t generally like share buybacks.

    FACTS is 🤡 capitalism here

    Those are the rules we are working under. If you don’t like the rules, that’s another debate.

    that’s because intel refused to take the terms US government atached to the money.

    But that would void the entire agreement, making your entire claim nothing but fluff and hot air.

    You can’t trust these parasite to run industry

    OK, so who can be trusted more? A 100% government controlled system, like the one that crashed the Soviet Union?


  • This is not about an arbitrary thesis, but about FACTS!
    As I’ve already shown, Intel was ONLY buying back when they actually had profits.
    And buying back stock is NOT a gift to stockholders.
    The CHIPS thing is a strategic political decision, you originally claimed was many times more than it actually is.
    Obviously you are so stuck in your prejudiced opinions based on speculation and false information, that you don’t care even when you find you had the facts wrong.
    The CHIPS agreement is not a gift, but a 2 way agreement that requires Intel to make heavy investments inside USA, and the money haven’t been paid out yet, except for an initial amount that is only a fraction of the total agreement.
    It’s not like the Biden administration just throws free money at companies as you seem to think.
    Now Trump may decide to do just that, because he is corrupt as hell. But that will be another debate.