News Intel axes thousands of technicians and engineers in sweeping U.S. layoffs — cutting 4,000 positions in the U.S., 2,392 in Oregon

[thestryker]

Not sure TSMC is late rather they believe current EUV capabilities are sufficient for their market needs , as I understand they see 5 year timeline for testing of their machines and readiness for volume production and Intel was targeting 27 , 28?

14A is supposed to be risk production end of 2026 so 2027, but originally 18A was supposed to use High-NA. It seems that delay is based on ASML and later than expected deliveries rather than something wrong with the node.

edit: today (7/16) ASML announced first shipment of the 5200B which is the first production model High-NA machine: https://www.asml.com/en/news/press-releases/2025/q2-2025-financial-results

 

[abufrejoval]

Intel's fabs are the new West Virginia coal mines.
TSMC's fabs are doing just fine!

AFAIK West-Virginia had the best coal in the US.

It didn't help them much, because the issue wasn't being best, but the end of coal, which even in the 1950's quite a few people couldn't see coming.

To assume that a given need will just exist and grow over a century or longer is short sighted and TMSC's past may be longer than its future.

Even the AI bubble depends on its ability to get consumers to pay for it. If they lack income, it can't go very far.

Robots and drones don't earn salaries, don't buy good and don't pay taxes. And IMHO it's the already stagnating market around non-AI computing which is robbing Intel of a chance for a come-back tomorrow.

They won't be the last, but actually I'd just love to be wrong.

 

[derekullo]

AFAIK West-Virginia had the best coal in the US.

It didn't help them much, because the issue wasn't being best, but the end of coal, which even in the 1950's quite a few people couldn't see coming.

To assume that a given need will just exist and grow over a century or longer is short sighted and TMSC's past may be longer than its future.

Even the AI bubble depends on its ability to get consumers to pay for it. If they lack income, it can't go very far.

Robots and drones don't earn salaries, don't buy good and don't pay taxes. And IMHO it's the already stagnating market around non-AI computing which is robbing Intel of a chance for a come-back tomorrow.

They won't be the last, but actually I'd just love to be wrong.

AI is just a tool.
When the hammer was invented, the value of nearby heavy rocks went down.
Hammers also don't buy goods or pay taxes.
I do see your point in that without anyone having income due to job loss, people won't be able to buy many goods.

But that only allows us to take this to the extreme.
If you remember the movie WALL-E, humans could no longer function on their own and had robots catering to their every need.

Having a hypothetical super powerful AI able to do every human task possible and is able to be replicated so that every human has access to it, this would indeed deal a harsh blow to consumer spending due to massive job loss.

In a world like that we would most likely rely on some kind of government AI subsidy/assistance with the majority of jobs not being economically viable for humans to perform.

Financial laws would have to be rewritten due to the inevitable concentration of wealth in the few companies not able to fully "AI accelerated" and the companies responsible for making and maintaining AI and associated products.

It took about 20 years for horses to replace cars.
With how fast technology is advancing, AI could become a much larger part of our lives on a much quicker time scale.

That kind of world may seem dystopian for some, but on our current path, that could be our future.