If Intel had trotted out Chip and then announced it would be creating a universal basic income scheme based on the savings the company was amassing by using Chip, then I’d be clapping along with the audience. As it stands, it just seems like bad taste during a difficult time.
I’m not sure the author of the article has a realistic understanding of Intel’s role or ability to affect change public policy.
PunkRockSportsFan@fanaticus.social 4 weeks ago
So they’ll lower prices. Right?
Ulrich@feddit.org 4 weeks ago
Something a lot of people don’t understand (you obviously do) is that pricing is not based on what something costs. It’s based on the absolute maximum a consumer is willing to pay. If they cut costs somehow, they just pocket the difference. If it costs more to make than a consumer will pay they just don’t make it.
ripcord@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
In theory, it would allow them to reduce costs to compete better with rivals and sell more.
But usually it’s the thing you said. Capitalism fundamentals are pretty broken in most markets.
pikmeir@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Padme: Right?
einkorn@feddit.org 4 weeks ago
Anakin:
dinckelman@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
It’ll take another massive quality scandal, or just a generation of shit products, but sure
toastmeister@lemmy.ca 4 weeks ago
Their margins are being squeezed by AMD, so they already are.
pulido@lemmings.world 4 weeks ago
Nah. This just increases profits.
slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org 4 weeks ago
But it also lowers yhe quality