Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | re-thc's commentslogin

> The Astro claim is that astro developers will all continue full-time on it. So why acquire it instead of supporting it?

In defense? Someone else can acquire it.


Get testers to collect feedback without paying for hosting costs. To kill off competition with closed off models that are behind services.

Some countries have rather specific reasons e.g. China. Most high end AI tooling e.g. Nvidia GPUs are "banned" or capped. They're low on capacity. So they train their models with Nvidia GPUs outside of their country (i.e. avoid import ban), publish the model and then fine tune it back home for their market.


> I would think that if they were serious they would commit to cofinancing new foundries or signing long term minimum purchasing agreements.

That would ruin TSMC and others' independence.

Nvidia already did buy Intel shares so it is a thing.

Nvidia did discuss with TSMC for more capacity many times. It's not about financing or minimum purchasing agreements. TSMC played along during COVID and got hit.


How do you figure? Demand for electronics skyrocketed when everyone working from home bought new laptops webcams, tablets. There was a fire on a TSMC manufacturing line that caused a shortage early on but capacity recovered, demand stayed strong throughout and there was a massive spike at the end when car manufacturers needed to ramp back up to handle all the paused orders.

As far as I know there was never a demand dip at any point in there.


> there was a massive spike at the end when car manufacturers

Which barely impacts TSMC. Most of their revenue and focus is on the advanced nodes - not the mature 1s.

> As far as I know there was never a demand dip at any point in there.

When did I imply there was a demand dip? I said they built out too much capacity.


What happened during COVID? Could you please explain shortly what they agreed to, and how it bit them?

Time for AMD to shine?

AMD's approach to pricing was "comparable NVidia card minus $50". If price of remaining NVidia cards goes up then AMD will follow.

They already had worse margins so probably not unless they've been hoarding RAM. AMD also wants DC money.

you'd fool me looking at how PITA is to make stuff work compared to NVIDIA

Wanting something, and executing on it properly are two different things.

Knowing AMD, shine by doing the same.

My impression for the past decade or so is that Radeon for PC is AMD's way of keeping their GPU division's engine running between contracts for consoles or compute products. At the very least it's a welcome byproduct that provides a competent iGPU and a test bed for future 'main' products. It's been a long while since AMD has shown future vision for PC GPUs or they've led with a feature instead of following what others do.

> My impression for the past decade or so is that Radeon for PC is AMD's way of keeping their GPU division's engine running

During this time AMD was focused on CPUs. They've already said that they'll focus more on GPUs now (since CPUs are way ahead and AI is a thing) so this should change things.


AMD avoids a price war with Nvidia for the simple reason that Nvidia has much, much more cash and will win this war, easily.

> I mean the amount of money invested across just a handful of AI companies is currently staggering and their respective revenues are no where near where they need to be. That’s a valid reason to be skeptical.

Yes and no. Some of it just claims to be "AI". Like the hyperscalers are building datacenters and ramping up but not all of it is "AI". The crypto bros have rebadged their data centers into "AI".


> The crypto bros have rebadged their data centers into "AI"

That the previous unsustainable bubble is rebranding into the new one, is maybe not the indicator of stability we should be hoping for


> Yes, but those aren't contracted commitments, and we know some of them are equity swaps.

It's worse than not contracted. Nvidia said in their earnings call that their OpenAI commitment was "maybe".


> I am of the opinion that Nvidia's hit the wall with their current architecture

Not likely since TSMC has a new process with big gains.

> The story with Intel

Was that their fab couldn’t keep up not designs.


If Intel's original 10nm process and Cannon Lake had launched within Intel's original timeframe of 2016/17, it would have been class leading.

Instead, they couldn't get 10nm to work and launched one low-power SKU in 2018 that had almost half the die disabled, and stuck to 14nm from 2014-2021.


As an early Tailwind Plus / Tailwind UI customer I don’t think it has anything to do with AI. The product and technicals are there but from a business and user perspective Tailwind the paid product was trash and still is. It tried to do everything and lacked direction.

There were originally snippets but it’s not reusable in a proper sense based on components like a design system. Each snippet may have overlaps but you can’t get it together properly.

Next there was catalyst, a react component library but it was barebones and doesn’t tie into the snippets.

And then there were templates, which again is another direction.

It would have been better if it was thought out. Design system. Component library. Snippets built on a solid base.


MUI sells paid components paid monthly. Definitely doable for the paid product.

I'm not super familiar with tailwind plus, but I am familiar with MUI.

MUIs paid offerings are open-core, you pay for support and a couple of extra features.

Tailwind plus looks like paying for basic components (checkboxes, sidebars, buttons) and it doesn't even offer anything like DataGrid (free with mui).


> and it doesn't even offer anything like

Shows Tailwind was just too little too late.


Why not? Tiktok certainly needed engineers?

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: