Stockton Rush got a bargain on the carbon fiber he bought from Boeing because It was approaching the end of its shelf life and it was no longer acceptable for use in aircraft, let alone submarines.
Rush also made a number of claims about the involvement of Boeing and other companies, claiming they were "involved in both the design and construction" of his submarine. Those claims were not true. Boeing made it clear that they had NO involvement in any part of the sub's design or construction and they had simply sold Rush the carbon fiber.
That Intel paid rebates to manufacturers on the condition that they would buy all (Dell) or nearly all of their CPUs from Intel.
That it paid retail stores rebates to only stock x86 parts.
That it paid computer manufacturers to halt or delay the launch of AMD hardware, including Dell, Acer, Lenovo, and NEC
That it restricted sales of AMD CPUs based on business segment and market. OEMs were given permission to sell higher percentages of AMD desktop chips, but were required to buy up to 95% of business processors from Intel. At least one manufacturer was forbidden to sell AMD notebook chips at all.
this is what i was thinking. the article opens by saying it was ubiquitous in the 2000s, but thats only because of aggressive marketing and unfair monopolistic practices.
athlons were faster at lower clockspeeds for a big chunk of the 2000s and no one batted an eye.
Not just that - intel did dual core CPUs as a response to AMD doing just that, by gluing two cores together. Which is pretty funny when you look at intels 2017 campaign of discrediting ryzen by calling it a glued together CPU.
AMDs Opteron was wiping the floor with intel stuff for years - but not every vendor offered systems as they got paid off by intel. I remember helping a friend with building a kernel for one of the first available Opteron setups - that thing was impressive.
And then there's the whole 64bit thing which intel eventually had to license from AMD.
Most of the big CPU innovations (at least in x86 space) of the last decade were by AMD - and the chiplet design of ryzen is just another one.
2009 era was also when Intel leveraged their position in the compiler market to cripple all non-Intel processors. Nearly every benchmarking tool used that complier and put an enormous handicap on AMD processors by locking them to either no SSE or, later, back to SSE2.
My friends all thought I was crazy for buying AMD, but accusations had started circulating about the complier heavily favoring Intel at least as early as 2005, and they were finally ordered to stop in 2010 by the FTC... Though of course they have been caught cheating in several other ways since.
Everyone has this picture in their heads of AMD being the scrappy underdog and Intel being the professional choice, but Intel hasn't really worn the crown since the release of Athlon. Except during Bulldozer/Piledriver, but who can blame AMD for trying something crazy after 10 years of frustration?
Historically AMD has only been able to take the performance crown from Intel when Intel has made serious blunders. In the early 2000s, it was Intel commiting to Netburst in the belief that processors could scale past 5Ghz on their fab processes, if pipelined deeply enough. Instead they got caught out by unexpected quantum effects leading to excessive heat and power leakage, at the same time that AMD produces a very good follow-on to their Athlon XP line of CPUs, in the form of the Athlon 64.
At the time, Intel did resort to dirty tricks to lock AMD out of the prebuilt and server space, for which they ultimately faced antitrust action. But the net effect was that AMD wasn't able to capitalize on their technological edge, Ave ended up having to sell off their fabs for cash, while Intel bought enough time to revise their mobile CPU design into the Core series of desktop processors, and reclaim the technological advantage. Simultaneously AMD was betting the farm on Bulldozer, believing that the time had come to prioritize multithreading over single-core performance (it wasn't time yet).
This is where we enter the doldrums, with AMD repeatedly trying and failing to make the Bulldozer architecture work, while Intel coasted along on marginal updates to the Core 2 architecture for almost a decade. Intel was gonna have to blunder again to change the status quo -- which they did, by betting against EUV for their 10nm fab process. Intel's process leadership stalled and performance hit a wall, while AMD was finally producing a competent architecture in the form of Zen, and then moved ahead of Intel on process when they started manufacturing Zen2 at TSMC.
Right now, with Intel finally getting up to speed with EUV and working on architectural improvements to catch up with AMD (and both needing to bridge the gap to Apple Silicon now) at the same time that AMD is going from strength to strength with Zen revisions, we're in a very interesting time for CPU development. I fear a bit for AMD, as I think the fundamentals are stronger for Intel (stronger data center AI value proposition, graphics group seemingly on the upswing now that they're finally taking it seriously, and still in control of their destiny in terms of fab processes and manufacturing) while AMD is struggling with GPU and AI development and dependent on TSMC, perpetually under threat from mainland China, for process leadership. But there's a lot of strong competition in the space, which hasn't been the case since the days of the Northridge P4 and Athlon XP, and that's exciting.
Intel was ahead of AMD ever since core 2 duo, in 2006. Amd was behind for almost 10 years and it wasnt until ryzen and especially zen 2 that AMD pulled ahead. And then with zen 3 and zen 4, AMD wiped the floor with intel.
7800x3d is the best cpu ever made for gaming and it succeeded the 5800x3d which was already a legendary cpu. Intel has been getting wrecked so hard that they are literally using tsmc to manufacture their cpus, an obvious admission that their manufacturing is behind the competition(amd is fabless and is also using tsmc).
Intel has the ability to come back on top, at least as far as x86 cpus are concerned. The question is whether x86 is even relevant anymore, considering the insane efficiency gains shown by apple's m series and even qualcomm's upcoming snapdragon x series.
Ran by Israelis? I’m looking at the current Board of Directors for Intel and none jump out as Israeli. Some have names that might sound Jewish, but make that leap to calling them Israeli is some Nazi-level shit.
I did a cursory Google and found an article from 2014 about David Perlmutter, who at that time had been the highest Israeli in the Intel corporate structure. He was Intel’s Executive Vice-President, General Manager of Intel Architecture Group and Chief Product Officer. I’m certainly not about to waste my time searching the biographies of every current C-Suite and Board member, but I highly doubt it’s an “Israeli run” company. The more I see this shit the more I’m starting to think inbred Nazis are leveraging the current anger at Israel to spread their anti-semitic rhetoric.
Yeah, I think the conflict has been an excuse to bring back the hate that lead to the holocaust. Disliking a leader or a countries actions is one thing. Singling out a group of people because of there religion or origin is not. It doesn't matter if it is Jewish, African, Asian or anything else. Don't hate an entire race or group.
Yes it's all just extremely coincidental that Intel does their main investments in an Apartheids state in the middle east 7000 miles away instead of in America. And good job accusing people of anti-semitism to defend israel. Sure haven't heard that one before. When Intel has direct lines to Netanyahu and Smotrich one might start asking questions.
Tell me how much research was done into calling TikTok a Chinese owned company? Even Bytedance is behind a few shell companies that dissolve their ownership from being traced to China. So by that logic I can now say that TikTok is not Chinese either.
For one, what do you think makes a company from X country?
Technically where it is headquartered, but Israel has 3, just 3, fabrication plants for manufacturing, not development or research.
All manufacturing of Intels high tech chips (20A which is 2nm, and the 5nm chips) will be manufactured in the US, while slightly less advanced, but still advanced chips like the 10nm, are 4/5 made in US, the middle of the road chips, are about half and half, but Intel 4 is made in Ireland, but anything above 22 nm is US made, and 22 nm manufacturing varies.
If you base it on manufacturing, then no, it is not Israeli. It is still American.
All developmental facilities are in the US, mostly in Oregon.
If you base it on development, then no, it is not Israeli. It is still American.
All research facilities are in the US, such as the RP1.
If you base it on research, then no, it is not Israeli. It is still American.
Intel is headquartered in California.
Thus, it is still a US company.
Those are just Intel owned locations, I’m not sure about the individual work forces, so I could not answer that.
But about 43% of their workforce is in the US. The US workforce for Intel is 62k, divided by the total number of Intel employees, 131,900, equals about 0.43, so 43%. There are 12,000 Israeli employees, so, using that same math, about 9%. Their largest workforce is in the US.
In conclusion, while Intel has a large presence in Israel, it is a US tech company, and using your own logic, it remains that way.
Also I’m not defending Israel at all. I have not mentioned my views on Israel or the current conflict at all. I am not really defending Intel either, just offering evidence that they are an American company, not an Israeli company.
I am not using calls of antisemitism to defend Israel, I’m saying that equating some with a potentially Jewish last name as not only Jewish but Israeli to boot is racist as hell and definitely 100% antisemitic.
Fwiw, Israel paid Intel at least $3.2 billion dollars to build of fabs there. That isn’t Intel supporting Israel, that’s Intel being a corporation in a capitalist system and doing the thing that makes the most sense financially. Ethically grey? Yes, at best, but it is not “supporting Israel”. Look at the makeup of the current battlespace in Ukraine. It’s dominated by missiles, drones, wireless jammers, starlink terminals, etc. All that shit needs computer chips. Russia was scavenging circuit boards off of home appliances because of their limited access due to sanctions. WW2 era warfare required an army to maintain steady control over oil refined oil, which had never really been a humongous issue previously. Warfare in 2024 requires access to silicon fabrication. If you can’t maintain that supply line you can’t continue building drones, missiles, whatever. Israel is surrounded by countries that would blockade them in the event of total war in the region. Having fab facilities in country makes complete sense from their perspective. Once again, Intel getting paid to build a fab somewhere isn’t tacit approval of the actions of the government in that place, it’s Intel doing what any publicly traded company would do, maximize profit.
Like I’m absolutely not shilling for Intel here, I do not own any discrete Intel products. I have shit with Thunderbolt, but there’s not much I can do about that. I’m not defending Israel in their current invasion of Gaza.
All I’m saying is that Intel is an American company, and that it makes sense for Israel to want to have fab facilities in country due to their geopolitical situation. An American company doing business in the country of a US ally is not surprising. If you don’t like it, pressure your elected officials to embargo Israel and to put them on the ITAR list. At that point Intel will have to shut down its operations in Israel.
And I can use all this same logic for TikTok not being owned by China. Am I supposed to call anyone suggesting otherwise Sinophobic now?
When israel gives Intel massive subsidies to buid fabs there do you believe there is no ownership nor influence involved? There is absolutely no way that Intel can have such deep direct ties with israel without israel having a massive stake and influence in the company.
Deciding to build a $25 Billion factory in israel at this current moment in time is absolutely bonkers and impossible to explain in any other way than some serious Zionist shenanigans going on.
The only link I am aware of is that Intel operates an R&D center in Haifa (which, it happens, is responsible for the Pentium M architecture that became the Core series of CPUs that saved Intel's bacon after they bet the farm on Netburst and lost to Athlon 64). Linkerbaan's apparent reinvention of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion to the contrary, the only real link seems to be that Haifa office, which exists to tap into the pool of talented Israeli electronics and semiconductor engineers.
There's absolutely no connection to a company doing their largest investment ever in a country actively committing Genocide which has a high likelihood to be the center of ww3 and idealogical support of that coutnry. None whatsoever.
It's telling how saying TikTok is owned by China is something that while also technically untrue never gets so many liberals off their chairs to debate technicalities.
Uber was originally marketed as ride-sharing, too. Just an app to find people going the same way. Of course, I'm fairly sure that their current iterations was the plan all along as anyone with enough business sense to start those companies must have predicted that there would be people who take on Uber/AirBnB as a primary source of income. But sharing your house or planning a shared trip is much more palatable than "Landlords but Worse".
Any somewhat touristic city that didn't implement some drastic restrictions has been fucked. In those places you can make from 2 to 10 time as much with airbnb as you can with a normal tenant so it becomes the obvious choice for a property owners. the only way to fix supply is regulation.
Nice article, but that headline is so misleading, I'm not inclined to upvote it.
tl;dr: Microorganisms used to live without oxygen. Some organisms started sprewing oxygen. Oxygen killed off most of these oxygen-free microorganisms. Life evolved and adapted. There's this lake in which the bottom layer is oxygen-less and oxygen-free microorganisms exist there. Scientists are doing a bunch of studies of this ecosystem.
I wouldn't call those organisms "alien." They were first in this planet!
Because often it is a nightmare to evict a tenant that do not pay the rent.
I can speak for where I live where a lot of people gone to the short-rental way exactly because that way they have the certainty that when they want the house back, for every reason, they have it.
To me AirBnB is not the problem, it is the wrong solution to a real problem.
What I do not agree about is the implicit assumption that if AIRBNB is banned then every house that was used for short-term rental would become available on the long-term rental market.
The main advantage of the short-term rental (obvious higher profits aside) is the fact that the owner is sure to be able to get back the house if/when he need it. So many owners saw the possibility to use an house with AirBnB (or other similar ways) a lot more attractive than keeping it empty (paying the taxes on it) and much less risky than having a long-term rental where the tenants could be turn out to be a bad one.
There are whole 30 story apartment buildings which are managed and run like a hotel but with units purchased by owners for STRs. Crowd-sourced hotels. So might be that company managing a whole building.
Admired AMD since the first Athlon, but never made the jump for various reasons--mostly availability. Just bought my first laptop(or any computer) with an AMD chip in it last year, a ryzen7 680m. There is no discrete graphics card and the onboard GPU has comparable performance to a discrete Nvidia 1050gpu. In a 13" laptop. The AMD chip far surpassed Intel's onboard GPU performance, and Intel laptop was ~30% more from any company. Fuck right off.
Why doesn't this matter to Intel? Part of why they always held mind space and a near monopoly is their OEM computer maker deals. HP, DELL, etc. it was almost impossible to find an AMD premade desktop, laptops were out of the question.
I believe my first amd was a desktop athlon around 2000. I needed a fast machine to crunch my undergraduate thesis and that was the most cost effective.
In recent years I can't buy amd for a strong desktop, went with xps and there's no options. Linux is a requirement for me, so it narrowed down my choices a lot. As you'd expect, it's a horrible battery life compounded by being forced to pay and not choose an NVIDIA card that also has poor drivers and power management.
x86 and it's successor amd86 instruction set is a Pandora box and a polished turd, hiding things such as micro instructions, a full blown small OS running in parallel and independent of BIOS, and other nefarious bad practices of over engineering that is at the roots of spectre and meltdown.
What I mean is I prefer AMD over Intel, but I prefer riscv over both.
Luxury isn't about price point. And last I checked, you couldn't get a new tesla for 40k.
Saying that tesla is luxury is like saying that McDonald's is fine dining.
Do yourself a favor and look up the comparable pricing for the ioniqs versus tesla. Tesla has always been overpriced (from factory) for what it offered.
Yeah, they're known for performance and AI features. You don't get a Model S for comfy seats or the suspension, you get it because it's fast and can drive by itself. Look at the marketing, it's all about the 0-60 time and the self-driving.
The Model 3 and Model Y are about branding (dude, you're driving a Tesla!), and the Model X is about form factor and almost everything the S is known for. They're not competing with Lexus and Cadillac, they're competing with Porsche and BMW.
Hotels were a nightmare, cabs were a nightmare. These companies indisputably changed the game in the favour of the consumer all around the world.
Where we are now having an issue is large swaths of housing taken over by companies and investors wanting a return. As long as housing and renting are attractive for investment over and about housing and transitory renting, it will attract lots of money.
Supply must be improved to improve the housing market. This should be a continuous government function at least at the low and middle income level not just a private endeavour.
Density and public transport is the answer - not killing something that absolutely changed the game and took the hotel and cab market back to their customers begging for a chance.
Sure, but AirBnB and Uber didn't improve the hotel and taxi markets, they just joined them. They each took advantage of a tech debt and then lowered the barriers for entry to the market. In doing so, they made a shit ton of money by carving out market share from the fucked up systems you described.
Also by doing and end run around regulations by pretending to be people just renting their house when they are away or giving rides to people going in the same directions. That is why they have names like 'ride share' instead of 'contracted cabbies who drive their own cars'.
Seriously? Not sure about airbnb since I use booking, but Uber was so much better than cabs it wasn't even close. They didn't even make that much money. They lost money last quarter
What wasn’t a nightmare was bed and breakfasts. They also weren’t an excuse to keep property off the housing rental market at scale.
These companies aren’t saviours, they’re businesses who rode public tech optimism and common frustration at established industries in the same fields to stay ahead of regulation and have the public demand it. Surprise, they’re the same businesses.
The ones I've been to are comparable to a hotel and include a good breakfast. So yeah, a bit more than an Airbnb, but not that far off from Airbnb + good breakfast restaurant.
Yeah, I think the main issue is supply. Airbnb works because of a mix of supply and costs. There just aren't many nice places to stay in resort areas, and the few that exist are extremely expensive (e.g. fancy hotels). Likewise, hotels are often more expensive and less convenient if you have a large group (e.g. my family likes to vacation together, and there's like 20 of us).
The problem seems to be long term residents feeling the pain of increased housing costs. If you legislate against that, those tourists will still need to go somewhere, which means more hotels or more strain on transportation from the outlying areas to the tourist area. If mass transit is effective, that's not a big issue, but far too often that's not the case, so you'll just end up with tons of traffic.
My proposal is to not ban it, but instead limit it to residents, so in order to do short-term rentals, you need to be physically present a majority of the year. Otherwise, you need to apply as a regular rental, which can be limited to certain areas near transit hubs to keep traffic under control. Then improve transit into the area so tourists who don't fit in the city can easily get there.
Was the issues not multiple, like the carbon fibre hul not made using vacuum technologies but just like roll on the sheet and some epoxy in a warehouse, that carbon fibre being strong tensile wise but not compression wise, the titanium carbon fibre interface and their different stress deformations due to pressure, having the Titanic OST playing the whole time, like multiple safety shortcuts and maybe using a game controller as your only form of any interaction, like what happens if some kid bites the cable or something
Let's also not forget that there was no way to exit the submersible from the inside. The door was bolted on by the surface team. So if they had just lost power (instead of being crushed), they would've been floating on the surface with no way out. That's the another obvious horrendous design choice.
I work on submarines. Everything that company was doing gave me a panic attack. The SUBSAFE program exists for a reason. Like, there's a time and place for innovation, and when people's lives are on the line is NOT it.
Usually these program's rules seem very tedious and restrictive and I can easily see one person looking at this and think they are in place to stifle innovation and keep the little guy out.
I remember how he said to not have regulatory approval because of of this or that, but why not get a regulatory expert to have a look, might not approve your vessel but might show clearly missed safety critical blindspots.
But these rules exist for a reason, they where usually written in blood, it's how I know this incident added rules to your SUBSAFE program.
SUBSAFE was implemented in 1963 following the loss of USS Thresher (SSN-593). It's a remarkably strict QA program for systems and components exposed to seawater/operating pressure. To our credit, we've only lost one submarine since 1963 (USS Scorpion, SSN-589, and she was never SUBSAFE-certified), so the program works.
Similarly stringent controls for the Titan would have either caught all the manufacturing defects in the carbon fiber, or prevented anyone from thinking it's a good idea to begin with. A big part of innovation is learning what rules you can reasonably bend/break, and which should never be touched. I tend to think pressure hull construction falls in the "never touch" category, at least not without a mountain of testing, data collection, fatigue life calculation, etc. along with communication with regulatory bodies to ensure you meet the principles of the regulation, if not the exact words (again, innovation has it's place).
So cool you work on submarines that is extremely cool, I am in a way different industry, mining. Jeez I wished we had your safety record of only one lost submarine. Our industry has gone through a couple of mines in the same period.
But wow, how does the safety of submarines compare to other industries, granted outside of war times, like compared to trains or even other seafaring vessels
We benefit from the bottomless DoD budget for sure. We have the ability to spend as much as it takes on material and training to ensure reliability and safety for the crew. And it shows. We've had several undersea collisions (SSN-711 in 2005 and SSN-22 in 2021), and while both incidents were extremely serious, both boats made it safely back to port for repair.
It bugs me that everyone harps on the controller. It's far and away the least suspect part of this.
Multiple generations of hardware iterations by many competing companies, well defined and understood software interface options, literally billions of hours of testing, easily replaceable, several axes of control, and a huge portion of the population has at least some experience with one.
There's a reason the military uses them when they can.
I have no issues with the controller either think it was a great addition, were I had a gripe is that it was the only way to operate the vessel, so not an addition but the sum total of controls.
Like if you were bolted into a vehicle, with no way to interact with the outside except a tiny window and only a game controller, it is a lovely piece of efficient engineering and does everything you need, but if this controller maybe gets damaged for example it's cable was unfortunately pinched off by someone's shoe. When you realise at a 1000m the closest thing to a god is that controller working and taking you safely back to surface in time or being stuck and hoping the guy who got you into the mess, that his, only other plan the dissolvable ropes on the weights actually work and you get to surface and get found and unsealed before air runs out.
I think this was the original sin, the root cause. One man's vanity and arrogance, which made him blind to his own shortcomings. He build something great, let us not lie, but we can clearly see in hindsight the obvious truth. Well if what people that know way more than I do are right, the vessel imploded quicker than the neurons in your brain, so it must've been an quick painless death
I mean, using a controller in and of itself is not suspect, but the model they used is the cheapest one you can get with a recognizable name and is known for being unreliable, which is absolutely a suspect decision to make when it's the only method of control
Ok it probably was prepreg now that I think back, but I saw the application video where the just rolled it on no vaccume bags to remove any voids or cavities
arktrek.shop
Top