this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2025
92 points (96.0% liked)

Technology

73846 readers
5479 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I expect the real issue here is that Cotton doesn't abide by having a non-white CEO at the helm of a good ol' American company. That said, Cadence was caught with their pants down, and should be punished accordingly.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

He is refering to Intel spending large sums of money on stock buybacks instead investing it in their business.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Apple, Amazon, Google, Salesforce, Qualcomm, and Broadcom all did the same. Why is this unique to Intel in this situation?

[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If Apple (or another one of the companies you listed) massively collapsed from their leadership position, it would also be a point of discussion around whether stock buyback was justified.

Mind you, I don't think nationalisation is likely to help Intel or that it is a desirable outcome, I am just sharing the reasoning.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world -1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

What in the world are you talking about? Intel has not "collapsed"?

[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

By all metrics (product performance, market share, capitalization/stock price) they are in free fall and have been for half a decade.

No need to be overly pedantic.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world -1 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Who is being pedantic? I made a single statement of the fact that Intel hasn't collapsed. Where are you getting your info from?

They still make more money than AMD.

They still make more chip income than Huawei.

How have they collapsed?

[–] socialsecurity@piefed.social 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Intel annual net income for 2024 was $-18.756B, a 1210.48% decline from 2023. Intel annual net income for 2023 was $1.689B, a 78.92% decline from 2022. Intel annual net income for 2022 was $8.014B, a 59.66% decline from 2021.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] socialsecurity@piefed.social 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Even if you take one time write off out... Intel has not been profitable since 2023.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

So you're not going to address your fake ass numbers that are total bullshit?

[–] socialsecurity@piefed.social 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

In multiple other comments in this very thread.

[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

I am good man, think whatever you want.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Because Intel was in a hole and has no business distributing so much capital they need, when their entire business is basically intense research and 10 year+ investments.

More specifically, none of those other companies are silicon fabs.

That’s just a small part TBH. They are like a poster child for corporate dysfunction and game of thrones-ish drama in the executive levels, and with Pat gone they are circling the drain.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world -2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Still making BILLIONS in profit. I'm not sure what you mean.

[–] socialsecurity@piefed.social 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Then why is the US taxpyer funding their capex?

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] socialsecurity@piefed.social 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What is the 2.5 billion in this case here then?

The CHIPS act that Trump cancelled for now reason.

[–] socialsecurity@piefed.social 1 points 4 days ago

You are right, us tax payer should be getting equity in all of them!

Intel example is just pathetic that's why everyone always dunks of it.