Absolutely agree with this. There could be many, many reasons out of the named person's control, and that the author is not aware of, as to why this happened. It comes off as petty and arrogant and honestly the same attitude I expect from most people on hackernews. Overall its disappointing. Respect each others privacy.
People calling it trash and then recommending microsoft was an even bigger shock to the point where I am not convinced that those aren't microsoft AI bots astroturfing this post.
It's really (not) cool when I get personalized ads that imply my sexuality or medical conditions when I am sharing a twitch stream with colleagues or friends.
Not worrying about the worth of the company as much, but more to salvage the chip maker expertise that Intel still has (Intel has been in several rounds of layoffs, including 15,000 in 2024).
According to the article, splitting Intel would be good (short term) for the shareholders, bad long term, and bad for the country.
Intel is still a great asset, but it looks like it is losing its appeal as time passes. CEO of Intel is deemed to be a very challenging position. The board does not seem to know how to turn the ship around.
I could see Musk steering that ship. It is technically challenging (Musk seems to thrive in those environments), and it could even benefit the other Musk companies to some extent (XAi, Tesla and even maybe SpaceX).
Intel market cap is 94.713B (AMD is 233B, ARM Holdings is 144B... not mentioning NVIDIA), so about twice what Musk paid for Twitter. But if Musk sets his view on Intel, he would not have a hard time to finance the purchase. Actually, he could wait a bit more as the stock can fall even more (today, Intel stock is at the price of Dec. 1996).
This is armchair talking/joke, and it would be one more crazy thing on the 2024 bingo card, but from all the crazy things we have seen recently, Musk taking over Intel would look quite normal in comparison.
Maybe if he owned the whole thing and could run it as he liked, without having to care about the stock price or paying money to investors, but personally I don't think anyone can do it while also satisfying the stock market.
I'm not sure Musk is especially qualified either, except that he could afford it.
Or a huge warning sign of the wealth disparity between the rich and lower-income group - it's a reality that lower middle-income group today cannot afford to buy homes; they are lucky if they can inherit one.
Its cool that so many people are blaming immigrants and foreign policy and border policy instead of the lack of accessibility to healthcare and affordable treatments or accessibility to preventative care.
We truly are in the fuck you and it’s your fault I don’t have mine era.
The US spends more on public healthcare per capita than any nation on the planet. (We also spend a lot more privately). I think this is a very and incorrect point of blame that has no basis in reality.
> We truly are in the fuck you and it’s your fault I don’t have mine era
Yes, but please don't blame people for feeling that way. People don't feel safe.
When people are insecure, they look to authoritarians for simple solutions. And both major political parties are happy to oblige.
When people are secure, they can care more about other people and issues beyond themselves. But they have to feel safe first. Unfortunately, lack of safety is something people can campaign on and campaigning on "things are good enough already" just never works - even when it's true.
We are in an era where we keep giving up more and more of our civil rights for a promised safety that is never delivered.
Lately, I often think about that drawing where three people are at a table. A blue-collar worker (mine worker or construction worker), a black sad looking black person (immigrant), and a rich guy in suit.
The blue collar worker has a single cookie on his plate, the immigrant no cookies at all, and the rich guy a plate full of cookies. The rich guy with his plate full of cookies, looking at the worker, points to the immigrant. “He wants your cookie”.
No immigrant who turns up at the US border has paid any taxes or contributed anything to US society. It's ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Anyway, that wasn't the point. The point is that if you enter a foreign country it's your responsibility not to bring any diseases with you.
> No immigrant who turns up at the US border has paid any taxes or contributed anything to US society. It's ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Anyway, that wasn't the point. The point is that if you enter a foreign country it's your responsibility not to bring any diseases with you.
This is so laughably silly I don't even know where to begin.
First of all, I was a temporary immigrant to the US and I immediately was on the hook for a bunch of money as part of my visa application process. So immediately I'd argue your first point is incorrect on that technicality anyway, not to mention I was basically moving to the US to start a business so then spent the next two years dumping money into the economy.
What is your expectation of responsibility here? You can be sick and not know you're sick. You can be sick and asymptomatic. You can be sick and think you're sick with something basic like a cold but it's actually the flu or COVID or something else more sinister.
Pretending that anyone is going to adhere to an undefined system of responsibility at the best of times, let alone when it comes to moving overseas into a different country, seems ludicrous to me - I'm supposed to cancel might flight and re-arrange my immigration plans because I have a runny nose?
If you want to have a healthy country you need publicly accessible healthcare for everyone. We literally just had an object lesson in this with the COVID pandemic - indeed, we're still in the middle of the object lesson, where people's sense of "responsibility" towards others when it comes to communicable diseases is visible everywhere you look.
You said "paid any taxes or contributed anything". I'm just pointing out that you're wrong, right out of the gate.
And even if you were right, which you're not, you'd be wrong about 10 minutes after the average immigrant turns up when they first have to buy something and pay sales tax.
The "sense of entitlement" exists in your head. I'm noting that if you want to have a healthy society, a plan to look after sick people is a necessity. Your sort of thinking is exactly why almost one in three hundred Americans died in the first year of the pandemic.
FWIW I left the US for the UK in 2016. Before arriving there I had to pay into their national health insurance scheme. If you object to immigrants coming and not paying their way you could agitate for such a scheme. But I assume that's not the point.
Anyway, looks like you're going to get what you want and nobody is going to come to the US any more. You'll get to see what it's like when it works like that.
Look, I object to the idea that the host country is responsible for the spread of diseases that are brought by immigrants, which is what you're implying when you blame the spread of diseases on the lack of affordable healthcare. I didn't know this was controversial.
It's totally normal for countries to screen for this stuff both at border entry and as part of the immigration process. In Australia we check at the border if you're coming from a country where they have certain diseases (e.g. yellow fever). If you're applying for some immigration status you need medical checks if you're from certain countries to screen you for certain conditions (e.g. tuberculosis).
It is absolutely the host country's responsibility to do this to keep their own citizens safe.
