74 pointsby mindraceran hour ago3 comments
  • WarOnPrivacy28 minutes ago

        Intel's finance chief David Zinsner said the firm did not expect to
        bring in more cash than it spent this year, and forecast 
        lower-than-expected revenue for its fourth quarter.
    
    You could have manufactured enough ARC video cards to meet demand. Going forward, you could manufacture solutions to bring local LLM options closer to affordability.

    If you're into manufacturing stuff people really want, that is.

    • lukeschlathera few seconds ago
      If Intel were capable of building more chips they would. I don't think their lagging TSMC in is a diabolical attempt to inflate their profit margins. Although I only really know what I read on the news.
    • darquomiahw8 minutes ago
      ARC GPUs are manufactured using TSMC and not Intel foundry. And they require memory which Intel doesn't manufacture.
    • bigyabai11 minutes ago
      > You could have manufactured enough ARC video cards to meet demand.

      I don't know if anyone told you, but GDDR is included in the current RAM shortage.

    • seemaze19 minutes ago
      According to industry leaders, that would be a terrible allocation of resources[0]. Those wafers belong in a datacenter!

      /s

      [0] https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/data-centers/open...

      • edmundsauto14 minutes ago
        Isn’t this just capitalism in practice?
        • TuxedoBuddy7 minutes ago
          I think in theory yes, but heavy government investment can change how this works in practice.
  • taeric19 minutes ago
    How much of this is the current uncertainty over politics in the US? With the incredibly frustrating aspect that we can't really directly discuss exactly how corrupt a few of the main actors have been, to date.

    And the oddest fear is precisely what will happen if we start trying to ramp up a bit of what used to be normal accountability?

    • nonethewiser9 minutes ago
      >How much of this is the current uncertainty over politics in the US?

      Would you like to posit a theory? The article says nothing about this, and states entirely different causes. This concern seems rather tangential to recent market activity

      • bix64 minutes ago
        Let’s not forget the fed raised rates but kept them unchanged this time even though they clearly need to raise them further.

        In general it’s an earnings story though I agree.

    • cableshaft14 minutes ago
      Yeah this has to be some of it. No coincidence certain industries in the market always shifts up or down significantly just before and after each election, as people try to read the tea leaves of how a shift in political power will affect them.
      • taeric11 minutes ago
        Some of it is also just political fighting making it inconvenient to sign contracts and do work specifically right now. Even places that have favorable build out plans for data centers have strong fears on moving forward with them with how much political ads are using them as a focus.

        Good news on that front is that political fighting typically evaporates with the campaigns. Bad news, of course, is that it typically comes back with them. So contracts have to be executed stupid quick.

        Which flat out makes some things like the CHIPS act non-starters as long as we can't trust the next administration to give a good faith attempt at executing and honoring what came before.

        • petcata minute ago
          > makes some things like the CHIPS act non-starters as long as we can't trust the next administration

          Bidens CHIPS Act is still largely intact though isn't it? The next admin changed some things, renegotiated some implementation details, and even expanded parts of the subsidies. But I believe it is still moving forward at basically the same scale as was originally envisioned.

    • xienze9 minutes ago
      > How much of this is the current uncertainty over politics in the US?

      Uncertainty that just developed overnight?

      > With the incredibly frustrating aspect that we can't really directly discuss exactly how corrupt a few of the main actors have been, to date.

      What does that have to do with Intel, Amazon, and Google's financial results?

      And where did you get the impression that no one can "discuss" any of this? A minute doesn't go by that someone isn't talking about Trump. Including you, regarding a completely unrelated topic.

  • elpakalan hour ago
    Google's AI search is abysmal and is almost always, at least, 30% wrong (outdated, wrong info) ime. I find that I just use the chat interface to save tokens on basic things so I don't want to waste my real AI subscription tokens on basics.

    In theory I understand their change to make search -> AI search instead, but I have a hard time believing that this was benchmarked in any way and not rushed to desperately remain relevant in the AI race.

    • Dennip32 minutes ago
      Disagree. In my experience particularly over the last few weeks, Gemini has gotten very good at understanding what i'm asking for and giving a relevant response that 9 times out of 10 just answers my question without me having to go further into the relevant wiki link etc.
      • method_capital8 minutes ago
        Try asking it about a sporting event or score. It literally just makes shit up. I asked it Tuesday if there was a world series game; it told me with complete confidence there wasn't and that Milwaukee was leading the series 2-1 after losing the night before.
      • taeric21 minutes ago
        Agreed. I have no doubt I could throw curveballs at it, but it has been getting things mostly correct for a while. And the fact that I can follow up with a direct challenge is kind of nice.
    • eigenspacean hour ago
      People say this a lot, and part of me wants it to be true and hates this AI search stuff being shoved in my face, but this really hasn't been my experience.

      Unless I'm searching for something very niche, I'm often quite surprised by how 'directionally right' Google's AI overview is, even if I retain a lot of the skepticism I had towards it.

    • feverzsj31 minutes ago
      It's mostly wrong, if you dig a little bit into the supplied references.
    • foldr41 minutes ago
      Like the sibling, I can't really agree with this. Google is now quite good at answering general queries and doing simple calculations, which is a big step up from its capabilities a few years ago. For example, you can ask

      > What is the equivalent focal length on APS-C of 80mm on full frame?

      and get the correct answer. It's not good compared to frontier AI models, but that's to be expected, given that you don't pay for it.

      • esafak39 minutes ago
        It's also multi-modal, right?
    • georgemcbay22 minutes ago
      > Google's AI search is abysmal and is almost always, at least, 30% wrong

      Different experience for me, IMO AI mode saved Google search. The classic search became pretty much worthless due to decades of SEO winning over good results. But AI mode made Google search far more useful for me and gives me what I'm looking for 99.9% of the time.

      I do understand some people (website operators who used to rely on SEO or google stockholders after the recent earnings report) being upset about AI mode, but as a search user I find it much more effective than where search was just prior to AI mode.

    • cush42 minutes ago
      Other AI search products are so good. I’m not sure why Google is still so far behind. You can feel Gemini struggle in in the new Siri too, it’s awful
      • downrightmike39 minutes ago
        They don't have anyone who fights for the consumer. They just make things and rename it all the time. No one knows what their thing is called today
    • Hikikomori23 minutes ago
      Dont use search but Gemini flash is excellent when I don't use kagi.