In relation to your comments about Intel, a shift in management strategy led to a significant decline in its competitive edge. This downturn can largely be attributed to former CEO Brian Krzanich, who prioritized short-term financial metrics over long-term growth. Krzanich's remuneration package, which focused on earnings performance, drove him to make decisions that favored immediate financial gains. To boost earnings per share (EPS), he cut operating expenses, most notably in research and development (R&D), a move that starkly contrasted with Intel's legacy of innovation. Despite the importance of Moore’s Law, which emphasized the rapid doubling of transistors in integrated circuits, Krzanich redirected resources away from R&D and toward stock buybacks, inflating EPS at the expense of the company’s future.
In addition to slashing R&D, Krzanich delayed transitioning to more advanced manufacturing processes in an effort to reduce capital expenditures. This allowed competitors like TSMC and Samsung to surpass Intel in manufacturing technology, eroding its market leadership. The lack of innovation led to a talent drain, as key engineers left for more forward-looking rivals. Further compounding these errors, Intel adopted a progressive dividend policy during Krzanich's tenure, consistently increasing dividends even as the company’s fortunes declined. This meant that capital which ought to have been reinvested was being handed out to shareholders - it was tantamount to a partial liquidation of the asset sheet which impaired Intel's ability to compete.
Under Gelsinger, Intel has begun scaling back dividends and refocusing on long-term strategy, but whether the company can fully recover remains uncertain. The damage has been done.
Well said. Financializing the company made them miss out on the next wave of competition in x86 and prevent any potential investment in the ML chip space. I fear their potential for a comeback is very bleak. They may have a chance if the chip market shifts more towards precision-based processors as models will undoubtedly need more accuracy and specificity in the future.
Blackberry (and even Nokia) were able to find profitable niches after their fall from grace. Maybe Intel can find their way once more...
"It’s something I’ve been struggling with when I write — the push and pull of wanting to get straight to the point and avoid anything unnecessary AND all the good that can come from spending more time on an idea, exploring it from more angles, going for depth and style and playfulness…"
As a reader, I'd prefer errors go to the maximalist side. There's nothing wrong with minimalist if your just cutting fluff. However, if you write too much, it is reasonably easy for me to skip over it. On the other hand, if you leave out something interesting, we are missing out on some good insights.
Good feedback, though to be clear, maximalist versus minimalist isn’t just about the length. It’s also also about style, and that can be harder to figure out.
"Abandoning bad books is good training for dropping bad ideas more generally and avoiding the sunk cost fallacy. The net value of this practice is higher than just recovering the opportunity cost.
Start more books AND stop more books! The result is that you’ll read more AND be happier with what you do read."
But what about books that you can tell are good, yet just don’t seem to click? For example, I’m currently reading Guns, Germs, and Steel, and while I can tell it’s incredibly well-researched and thoughtful, I’m struggling to make my way through it.
Biographies, business books, and psychology are much easier for me to read because there’s either a defined character you’re learning from, or the concepts are directly applicable to today.
Historical books, where the 'characters' are societies from 30,000 years ago and the subject matter is crops they grew, are much tougher reads for me, and I don’t feel as pulled in.
Do you ever experience this? When a quality book doesn’t feel like your cup of tea? Should you still drop it, or is it better to expand your horizons and push through?
There's no absolute rule that I follow in every case. It's always a judgement call.
Usually I read multiple books in parallel, so I tend to bounce back between a more difficult book that I know is good and others to keep me going.. Or sometimes I'll just drop it and come back to it later, when I feel more motivated for it.
But there are also "good books" that many others like that just aren't for me, and that's fine too. Nobody's tastes are exactly alike.
Hiya - what made you choose the Nexteer? Am very tempted, but curious as to why that one - I'm sure you did your research properly! In the UK, there are a couple of different models - the more trad skateboard shaped one you have, and a more plain oval shaped one. Many thanks!
It was reasonable priced, had lots of good reviews, the stoppers on the bottom at magnetically attached and could be moved around, it came with both the cylinder roller and a ball.. It felt like the one that I could keep using for a long time and grow into, rather than some of the ones with fixed stoppers or just the roller.
I don't think the shape ultimately matters that much except for storage space and that if you have a longer one, you can roll around farther, which feels nice.
When I was listening to the podcast a while back I thought that tech consortium idea was brilliant. It would be pretty amazing if they actually pulled it off. Other than the direct benefits it could be a give the public a boost of moral to see a group working together to solve a major problem supply chain problem.
I've been wondering if AI could actually end up pushing modular nuclear over the starting line. There aren't many places in the US where with access cheap and stable gigawatt power. We could end up seeing a lot of them in the midwest, TN, WV, KY, IN, MI, OH, IL, etc. With manufacturing having made its exist stage left there should be at least some of that existing power infrastructure left, right of ways if nothing else, and lots of motivated communities ready with tax incentives.
AI appears to be in a similar place that the web/mobile was in back in the late 00s, early teens with bottlenecks in networking and storage. It took almost 10 years for SSDs and super fast/cheap networking to become totally ubiquitous to the point that worrying about IO stopped being a daily concern.
I think when I read about Spruce Pine for the first time was when the reality of the semiconductor supply really hit me. It feels like the modern world is balanced on a few pins stacked end to end. That brought me to the realization that we'll likely never have sensible politics or radical change in the US, at least not while these extremely critical but fragile global supply chains exist. The people in power will feel that too much is at stake to leave it up to chance.
And the balancing on a few things is what I was trying to show with my inverted pyramid drawing... Can you imagine how many trillions of market cap (private and public, direct and indirect) rest on the shoulders of TSMC?
That feels too precarious for me. Would love an alternative to emerge.
It's hard to fathom and It doesn't take much imagination to see it all come crashing down. The drawing was excellent, a really great way to visualize it.
Interesting to see Intel potentially be the next BlackBerry — a former industry giant losing relevance. Do you think there's still hope for a turnaround? What kind of radical move do you think could save them?
Enjoy your balance board. You might be interested to know that during the 1960s, NASA discovered that after exercising on the balance board, reading comprehension improved. I used one at my standing desk for a while, which is cool, but it also inspired an app, yet to be realized. Use the phone in your pocket to sense your movements on the board and create an app that synchronizes visual displays on the computer screen in front of you. The possibilities are endless. Among other things, I think we could train ourselves to read better and faster. Reading harnesses our proprioception which synchronizers our physical movements with our vision. This is a whole world still waiting to be explored.
Agree 100% with your streaming music comments. I continue to cling to my iTunes library and smart playlists. I have painstakingly rated every song in my library over almost 20 years and they’ll have to pry it from my cold, dead hands.
In a traumatic event for me, I lost all my iTunes meta-data a few years ago because of some technical SNAFU... after that I went more all in with the streaming side of things, but I still wish I could go back to more personalization like that.
Almost happened to me once! The library file got corrupted and I had to restore from a backup. The process was not seamless and I'm still dealing with some oddities in the database but it's mostly intact.
Re: Music Streamers - reminder that most Algos are rubbish. I just keep coming back to 'The Inmates are Running the Asylum' which I'm guessing you've read - look it up if not.
RE: music streamers - they are so incredibly frustrating. No, Spotify, I don't want you to inject the pop music (Chappel Roan) I was checking out one time on a whim to my post-grunge rock mix. The recency factor is tuned far too high for their algorithm. I have a feeling they are tuning their models to the "average" user who probably listens to the same artists frequently or even obsessively (e.g Taylor Swift fans) because they have gamified listening statistics as a form of status that you can flex at the end of the year. As a long time user of Spotify (I was a closed-beta tester), it's sadly gotten worse over time and more expensive to boot. For as extensive of a library and as much R&D as Apple and Spotify have, they still can't compete with Pandora's algorithm from back in the day.
In relation to your comments about Intel, a shift in management strategy led to a significant decline in its competitive edge. This downturn can largely be attributed to former CEO Brian Krzanich, who prioritized short-term financial metrics over long-term growth. Krzanich's remuneration package, which focused on earnings performance, drove him to make decisions that favored immediate financial gains. To boost earnings per share (EPS), he cut operating expenses, most notably in research and development (R&D), a move that starkly contrasted with Intel's legacy of innovation. Despite the importance of Moore’s Law, which emphasized the rapid doubling of transistors in integrated circuits, Krzanich redirected resources away from R&D and toward stock buybacks, inflating EPS at the expense of the company’s future.
In addition to slashing R&D, Krzanich delayed transitioning to more advanced manufacturing processes in an effort to reduce capital expenditures. This allowed competitors like TSMC and Samsung to surpass Intel in manufacturing technology, eroding its market leadership. The lack of innovation led to a talent drain, as key engineers left for more forward-looking rivals. Further compounding these errors, Intel adopted a progressive dividend policy during Krzanich's tenure, consistently increasing dividends even as the company’s fortunes declined. This meant that capital which ought to have been reinvested was being handed out to shareholders - it was tantamount to a partial liquidation of the asset sheet which impaired Intel's ability to compete.
Under Gelsinger, Intel has begun scaling back dividends and refocusing on long-term strategy, but whether the company can fully recover remains uncertain. The damage has been done.
In relation to your comment about building a business in the US to compete with TSMC, please see "Can Intel achieve the impossible dream": https://rockandturner.substack.com/p/can-intel-achieve-the-impossible
Well said. Financializing the company made them miss out on the next wave of competition in x86 and prevent any potential investment in the ML chip space. I fear their potential for a comeback is very bleak. They may have a chance if the chip market shifts more towards precision-based processors as models will undoubtedly need more accuracy and specificity in the future.
Blackberry (and even Nokia) were able to find profitable niches after their fall from grace. Maybe Intel can find their way once more...
I don't think Intel is likely to full go out of business, but if they lose relevance, they could become even smaller..
RIM/BlackBerry market cap peaked above $80bn and it's now barely above $1bn.
Great comment. As you point out, the problem with these bad decisions is that they compounded..
"It’s something I’ve been struggling with when I write — the push and pull of wanting to get straight to the point and avoid anything unnecessary AND all the good that can come from spending more time on an idea, exploring it from more angles, going for depth and style and playfulness…"
I FEEL SEEN
🫡
As a reader, I'd prefer errors go to the maximalist side. There's nothing wrong with minimalist if your just cutting fluff. However, if you write too much, it is reasonably easy for me to skip over it. On the other hand, if you leave out something interesting, we are missing out on some good insights.
Good feedback, though to be clear, maximalist versus minimalist isn’t just about the length. It’s also also about style, and that can be harder to figure out.
"Abandoning bad books is good training for dropping bad ideas more generally and avoiding the sunk cost fallacy. The net value of this practice is higher than just recovering the opportunity cost.
Start more books AND stop more books! The result is that you’ll read more AND be happier with what you do read."
But what about books that you can tell are good, yet just don’t seem to click? For example, I’m currently reading Guns, Germs, and Steel, and while I can tell it’s incredibly well-researched and thoughtful, I’m struggling to make my way through it.
Biographies, business books, and psychology are much easier for me to read because there’s either a defined character you’re learning from, or the concepts are directly applicable to today.
Historical books, where the 'characters' are societies from 30,000 years ago and the subject matter is crops they grew, are much tougher reads for me, and I don’t feel as pulled in.
Do you ever experience this? When a quality book doesn’t feel like your cup of tea? Should you still drop it, or is it better to expand your horizons and push through?
There's no absolute rule that I follow in every case. It's always a judgement call.
Usually I read multiple books in parallel, so I tend to bounce back between a more difficult book that I know is good and others to keep me going.. Or sometimes I'll just drop it and come back to it later, when I feel more motivated for it.
But there are also "good books" that many others like that just aren't for me, and that's fine too. Nobody's tastes are exactly alike.
Hiya - what made you choose the Nexteer? Am very tempted, but curious as to why that one - I'm sure you did your research properly! In the UK, there are a couple of different models - the more trad skateboard shaped one you have, and a more plain oval shaped one. Many thanks!
It was reasonable priced, had lots of good reviews, the stoppers on the bottom at magnetically attached and could be moved around, it came with both the cylinder roller and a ball.. It felt like the one that I could keep using for a long time and grow into, rather than some of the ones with fixed stoppers or just the roller.
I don't think the shape ultimately matters that much except for storage space and that if you have a longer one, you can roll around farther, which feels nice.
When I was listening to the podcast a while back I thought that tech consortium idea was brilliant. It would be pretty amazing if they actually pulled it off. Other than the direct benefits it could be a give the public a boost of moral to see a group working together to solve a major problem supply chain problem.
I've been wondering if AI could actually end up pushing modular nuclear over the starting line. There aren't many places in the US where with access cheap and stable gigawatt power. We could end up seeing a lot of them in the midwest, TN, WV, KY, IN, MI, OH, IL, etc. With manufacturing having made its exist stage left there should be at least some of that existing power infrastructure left, right of ways if nothing else, and lots of motivated communities ready with tax incentives.
AI appears to be in a similar place that the web/mobile was in back in the late 00s, early teens with bottlenecks in networking and storage. It took almost 10 years for SSDs and super fast/cheap networking to become totally ubiquitous to the point that worrying about IO stopped being a daily concern.
I think when I read about Spruce Pine for the first time was when the reality of the semiconductor supply really hit me. It feels like the modern world is balanced on a few pins stacked end to end. That brought me to the realization that we'll likely never have sensible politics or radical change in the US, at least not while these extremely critical but fragile global supply chains exist. The people in power will feel that too much is at stake to leave it up to chance.
Great comment! Well said.
And the balancing on a few things is what I was trying to show with my inverted pyramid drawing... Can you imagine how many trillions of market cap (private and public, direct and indirect) rest on the shoulders of TSMC?
That feels too precarious for me. Would love an alternative to emerge.
It's hard to fathom and It doesn't take much imagination to see it all come crashing down. The drawing was excellent, a really great way to visualize it.
Haha, thanks, I don't know about excellent, but I'm a visual thinker so I was trying to get the idea across
I am as well.
I once volunteered as was an MFA studio assistant for half a semester so I know art when I see it 😉 😁
Interesting to see Intel potentially be the next BlackBerry — a former industry giant losing relevance. Do you think there's still hope for a turnaround? What kind of radical move do you think could save them?
There's hope, but it'll be very hard and very expensive. Ideally, the Big Tech Consortium idea would be part of that.
Enjoy your balance board. You might be interested to know that during the 1960s, NASA discovered that after exercising on the balance board, reading comprehension improved. I used one at my standing desk for a while, which is cool, but it also inspired an app, yet to be realized. Use the phone in your pocket to sense your movements on the board and create an app that synchronizes visual displays on the computer screen in front of you. The possibilities are endless. Among other things, I think we could train ourselves to read better and faster. Reading harnesses our proprioception which synchronizers our physical movements with our vision. This is a whole world still waiting to be explored.
That's fascinating, I had no idea!
Agree 100% with your streaming music comments. I continue to cling to my iTunes library and smart playlists. I have painstakingly rated every song in my library over almost 20 years and they’ll have to pry it from my cold, dead hands.
In a traumatic event for me, I lost all my iTunes meta-data a few years ago because of some technical SNAFU... after that I went more all in with the streaming side of things, but I still wish I could go back to more personalization like that.
Almost happened to me once! The library file got corrupted and I had to restore from a backup. The process was not seamless and I'm still dealing with some oddities in the database but it's mostly intact.
Re: Music Streamers - reminder that most Algos are rubbish. I just keep coming back to 'The Inmates are Running the Asylum' which I'm guessing you've read - look it up if not.
Great edition!
RE: music streamers - they are so incredibly frustrating. No, Spotify, I don't want you to inject the pop music (Chappel Roan) I was checking out one time on a whim to my post-grunge rock mix. The recency factor is tuned far too high for their algorithm. I have a feeling they are tuning their models to the "average" user who probably listens to the same artists frequently or even obsessively (e.g Taylor Swift fans) because they have gamified listening statistics as a form of status that you can flex at the end of the year. As a long time user of Spotify (I was a closed-beta tester), it's sadly gotten worse over time and more expensive to boot. For as extensive of a library and as much R&D as Apple and Spotify have, they still can't compete with Pandora's algorithm from back in the day.