G
@futurebird So, anyway; China has internal chip-making initiatives, the US public stake in Intel is part of the US internal chip-making initiative, the actual economic capability to do it is mostly Europe and Taiwan (and the rest of insular and peninsular Asia) being held up by the entire global economy, and it's painfully obvious (since about 1990) that chips are up there with oil as a necessary input to an effective military.
Note that tariffs tend to break the necessary global integration.
@futurebird Taiwan (where TSMC's core bits are located) is in the path of a Chinese invasion. Having material control of the one global chip foundry is either a crushing PRC economic advantage or a global economic disaster (nobody has current/modern/cutting edge processor chips, for anything); for the US to get out of this position involves making Intel much more capable from a supply chain inside the US. (This isn't possible, the US economy is too small, but the empire can't admit that.)
@futurebird This has a bunch of consequences; the major one (anything not a phone is a niche device) is that Apple put billions upon billions into full vertical integration which funded TSMC for the half what wasn't "not in our strategic interests to deal with those monopolists at Intel" (any value of strategic you want, there); the result is that the one global chip foundry when the music stops for Moore's Law is NOT Intel.
(It is that hard to do; the entire global economy can afford _one_.)
@futurebird It was obvious very early (1970s) that there would only be a single chip manufacturer standing. (Everybody talks about Moore's Law, but the cost to create the fab doubles, too, not just the chip performance.)
Intel figured they were the Lord's anointed and made repeated strategic errors: x86/Itanium (could be three), ignoring power efficiency, not making phone chips for Apple, relying on monopoly power/Wintel leverage for market share, and missing graphics processing.
@futurebird Someone late in their eighth decade who was in the ICU with COVID about five years ago who is today showing signs of cognitive decline is nigh-guaranteed to be experiencing very fast cognitive decline.
This hasn't soaked into the public consciousness yet, but the literature is not ambiguous. And since this value of "cognitive decline" is not too far off literal brain rot, well. Thereabouts of more merciful than rabies.
@futurebird "crime problem" = "insufficient white supremacy", particularly "they're not white, and they don't look or act like they're afraid of me".
I think it's a mistake to go get crime statistics; it has nothing to do with crime statistics (not in any plausible way) and an awful lot to do with externalised fears.