The US is behind other democracies which have required photo id for social media and other content. And even if I disagree with these laws, surely you jest that showing a proof of age is not the same thing as surveilling and scoring.
Outside of Taiwan TSMC foundries are just pumping out already developed non leading edge fab processes. Everyone who matters to TSMC tech development is in Taiwan.
Huge order for... what? DoD's needs for chips are quite modest in quantity. Truth is that the US Gov doesn't need the volume which requires Intel to keep afloat.
GF is a zombie company. Micron and TI are both far far away from leading edge. There is only one American company which is both developing and manufacturing leading edge nodes.
We did so because having all laboratories be government run was inefficient so in WW2 we decided to split the costs with private and public universities who will maintain labs, equipment, and the federal government will pay directly for the research.
The feds are funding research, which elite schools have the best faculty and scholars who are conducting the very best research. May as well as why are VC’s funding promising startups instead of less promising ones, when those promising ones have already wealthy founders who have exited their previous venture.
Obama threatened, but did not make good on those threats. Trump is threatening and actively withholding funds even to Columbia which bent the knee, because these are institutions which are seen as political enemies by the administration.
Amtrak's ridership has been growing and hit an all time high. The Northeast Corridor is a profitable route which is held back by century old infrastructure. If it actually had real high speed spanning the whole route it's ridership absolutely go up. Moreover your comments on not wanting to go from city center to city center are very off. Going from Union Station DC to Penn Station Philly, or NYC is really nice. Have you ever rode Amtrak, specifically that route?
Except the policy in question was never actually abused as the student did not receive an API key as requested. A proportional response would be a simple denial for API key and reminder of policy. Not preventing a student from graduating. Unless the student is lying here, this is an outrageous response on the part of UW.
Of all of those, only Amazon has a design planned for 18A. Just because chip designers exist doesn’t mean that their business is going to go Intel. If they had customers lined up they wouldn’t have been delaying their new fabs.
Vultures are circling and with Intel trading at below the value of it's assets there's been an onslaught of articles suggesting that it would be best to cut up the company.
This would doom American leading edge fabrication and Intel as a whole.
Intel split apart will not survive. The fabs do not have customers with volume required to survive. They need Intel Design to be using them. With the Arrow Lake launch we're seeing that Intel Design, even with the latest TSMC node is behind AMD in performance. Raptor Lake, for all it's unfortunate voltage spike woes, was able to be very close to AMD when it came to performance in spite of being several nodes behind. This spoke to how well optimized Intel's designs were as an IDM for their own fabs. It's also why in spite of 18A being a very promising node has failed to pull many clients away from the TSMC ecosystem. Small advantages were built up over years which turned into larger ones.
Intel's new Fabs in AZ started construction in 2021, before the CHIPS act has passed. It has had a gross profit in the tens of billions yearly and right now has ~$30Bn cash on hand. Not a single penny has yet been given from the CHIPS act to Intel [1]. So no.
Why split Intel in the first place? Intel fabs die without the volume of Intel Design, and looking at the disaster that is the Arrow Lake launch, without the cost advantage Intel Design will also die.
Funny thing about deterrence conversations in the west is that it’s so often characterized as a one way street. That the west can be deterred limitlessly and that others like Russia are impervious to deterrence. As if Putin were some fearless automaton with complete confidence. Because if anything spells confidence it’s having 4 out of 5 of your latest in service ICBM tests fail, including the most recent. Just how confident is Putin, having personally fostered such an endemically corrupt society, in his recently manufactured pits? Russia’s pursuit of a nuclear powered drone that would attempt to be a weapon of mass destruction by virtue of creating an irradiated tsunami reveals an intense fear of the credibility of their current deterrence.
Drone on drone is very inefficient. There is plenty of work on going for anti drone capabilities for small caliber cannons, direct energy, and aps. I would not hand wave mitigation as defeating.
And then a cheaper APS round disables your $10K drone, while a direct energy weapon for dollars of electricity can destroy swarms in one go. The car and mouse nature of weapons technology has always existed. Even at the advent of tanks there were anti tank weapons. That didn’t mean they were useless.
The US invaded Iraq, because of the phantom prospect of a nuclear proliferation. A state which was just created and gave up Crimea without a shot fired in 2014 was not about to fight to keep nukes which were not theirs in the 90’s. With the combined forces of the West and Russia breathing down their necks there was zero chance that they would be able to keep them.
Vietnam war was fought on the other side of the planet, an ocean away. Ukrainian war is fought on the border of Russia and has resulted in Russian territory being occupied by a foreign power for the first time since WW2. These are very different things.
The closest near peer to the US is China which strategically is significantly inferior to the US and would very much not like to get into a nuclear exchange. But conventionally it has more vessels than the USN, and with nearly all of them near China while the USN is all over the world, they have an advantage early in a Taiwan war. Conventional wars between nuclear powers can be fought and won.