The semiconductor maker has struggled to keep up in the artificial intelligence boom with rivals such as Nvidia and AMD.

Trump tweet:

It is my Great Honor to report that the United States of America now fully owns and controls 10% of INTEL, a Great American Company that has an even more incredible future. I negotiated this Deal with Lip-Bu Tan, the Highly Respected Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The United States paid nothing for these Shares, and the Shares are now valued at approximately $11 Billion Dollars. This is a great Deal for America and, also, a great Deal for INTEL. Building leading edge Semiconductors and Chips, which is what INTEL does, is fundamental to the future of our Nation. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Thank you for your attention to this matter.

  • thejml@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    67·
    17 days ago

    I negotiated this Deal with Lip-Bu Tan, the Highly Respected Chief Executive Officer of the Company.

    That i tried to get fired less than two weeks ago.

  • jballs@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    59·
    17 days ago

    Could you imagine how many times the word “socialism” would be blasted on Fox News if Biden did this?

      • Hylactor@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        17·
        17 days ago

        You’re more right than you may know.

        An actual city wall existed on the street from 1653 to 1699. During the 18th century, the location served as a slave market and securities trading site, and from 1703 onward

      • Zorque@lemmy.worldEnglish
        6·
        17 days ago

        Functionally, there’s no such thing. In a system that gives the most power to the company that makes the most money, that company will seek to maximize its profits. Part of maximizing profits is eliminating competition. So in a “free” market, the most successful will subvert the freedom of their competition thus eliminating the freedom in the market.

        Self-correction in a market is an illusion crafted people either desperate to salvage a broken system, or those who seek to exploit them.

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.mlEnglish
    35·
    17 days ago

    Lol at all the conservatives screeching about “socialism” and “communism” and how they will be the downfall of our country, then slurping up Trump nationalizing part of Intel 🤣

    They don’t believe in anything, just brain dead simpleton cultists who would happily stick their tongue into a rat trap if Trump told them to do it.

  • kibiz0r@midwest.socialEnglish
    21·
    17 days ago

    The way This Guy capitalizes Random Words drives me INSANE.

    If you wanna be president of the United States, you should at least learn the language.

    • absentbird@lemmy.worldEnglish
      12·
      16 days ago

      Yes, but also because they’re just better chips and you probably should have only been getting them to begin with. Way more power efficient, smaller process, less heat, easier to upgrade, better multi core performance, lower price; you just get a better CPU.

      • iopq@lemmy.worldEnglish
        32·
        16 days ago

        Note that better multicore perf is not true through the entire stack, because Intel chips have p core making them have better multicore perf in a lot of price-competitive offerings.

        But the current platform is quite dead, you won’t get upgrades for it

    • festus@lemmy.caEnglish
      29·
      16 days ago

      When Biden was president the Democrats passed the Chips Act, which has grants for chipmakers to build in the US. When Trump took power he basically stopped issuing these grants to companies that were set to get them.

      My understanding is that basically Intel will give 10% of itself if Trump stops blocking the grants it was already set to get. I guess Intel’s thinking is that if they make the US a part owner, then Trump won’t obstruct the company so much.

      This might sound like good news (kind of) in that the government is getting equity in return for the money, but I doubt Trump will enforce the original requirements and purpose of the grants, so Intel probably won’t end up finishing many of the factories it was supposed to build. It also sets a precedent that you can’t rely on goverment grants to do things as future parties may change the terms of the deal retroactively, even after you already started.

        • iopq@lemmy.worldEnglish
          11·
          16 days ago

          In case of war the country needs national supply of chips to put in rockets, planes, everything really.

          If you make everything in Taiwan and that’s the place that’s getting blockaded by enemy Navy…

          • NoodlePoint@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            16 days ago

            For that matter, it was the same problem the US then faced back when it was getting much of their electronics from Japan, as the Soviet threat loomed so large.

        • Ross_audio@lemmy.worldEnglish
          5·
          15 days ago

          Because Biden paid them with grants to build in the US. It’s that simple.

          Beyond that there’s stability and the likelihood of not being invaded or facing natural disasters.

          There’s meant to be government, legal, and financial institution stability too.

          As well as intellectual property defense, trade secrets and NDAs.

          Material supplies are meant to be stable too.

          When you’re investing in something as specialised as chip manufacturing, labour is a fraction of your concern. Both short and long term.

  • byte_0verflow@lemmy.mlEnglish
    11·
    17 days ago

    Right when I was thinking of buying an intel cpu and gpu to support the company and do my little part in helping increase competition in the cpu and gpu sector. Guess I will stick with amd this time around.