Re: A.M.D. to Split Into Two Operations

Robert Myers wrote:
> On Oct 11, 8:46 pm, Del Cecchi` <dcecchinos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
>> OK, here we go with tbird.  Don't blame the current finance fiasco on
>> "free markets".  After all the soviets and the chinese had to adopt
them
>> to have any semblance of a working economy.  You do remember the
>> collectivization of the kulaks and the great leap forward?  Rather it
is
>> the result of bad assumptions carried to extremes, augmented with
>> government interference in the form of fannie and freddie and the
desire
>> of politicians to bring the joy of home owner****p to everyone.
>>
>> In many ways it was cross between LTCM's brilliant nobel prize
>> mathematical models and the dotcom bubble of 2001 only on a much larger
>> scale.  Why rational rating agencies would assume that house prices
>> would never go down in the face of historical evidence to the contrary
>> is a mystery to me.  And the companies and employees who went along and
>> made the loans have been punished by the loss of their investment,
>> including all the smaller banks encouraged by the government to buy
>> fanny and freddy preferred
stock.http://dailybriefing.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/09/08/fannies-preferr...
>> Note that fannie was a "GSE", and had many politicians and ex
>> politicians on the payroll in one way or another.
>>
>> But that is outside the scope of this newsgroup and a sure way to
finish
>> it off.
> 
> I don't think you're following closely.  This newsgroup *is* finished
> off.  I didn't do it.  The only reason there is traffic now is because
> of comments I've made.

ok, whatever.  That is still no reason to inject politics.
> 
> I've learned from you and I respect you, but on this one you're way
> off the mark.  What I'm opposed to is religious belief in anything
> other than God.   I'm opposed to religious belief in free markets or
> any other false god.  This nation has been wor****ping false gods with
> the guidance of false prophets.  I mean all of this in the exact sense
> as it would be interpreted in the most common western religious
> traditions.

Why do you think belief in free markets is religious?  Couldn't it be 
emperical, like belief in the "laws" of thermodynamics?
> 
>> So I will not be responding further on this tissue.
> 
> Again, Del, I respect you, but your choice of subject matter won't
> determine mine.

Again, whatever.  I said what I was going to do.  I said nothing about 
you.

> 
>> As for " you need to put your IBM stuff away", I don't understand what
>> you are getting at.  Could you explain?
>>
> Sure.  The Intel jealousy among the IBM'er's here is just too plain.
> IBM has sup****ted AMD in every way that it possibly can without
> running afoul of the DOJ.  It's all pretty transparent.  Why do you
> need me to explain it to you?

Actually over years of watching IBM and Intel I would come to the 
opposite conclusion.  IBM was very late in selling systems with AMD 
processors, even when it was clear they had some advantages over Intel. 
    IBM built a considerable business in Intel based servers, and 
invested much more than they did on AMD systems.
> 
> I admire IBM, otherwise I would have been excoriating in my criticism
> of their behavior.  IBM protected Power by propping up AMD.  That's
> the IBM we all know and love.  Had IBM not done so very much to atone
> for those sins, I would be loathing IBM right along with AMD. 

Fantasy.  IBM helped AMD with fab projects and SOI, for which IBM 
received considerable money.
> 
>> As for AMD being a waste of time and talent, if it wasn't for AMD we
>> would all be typing on Itaniums.
> 
> As I have explained, that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.  Again,
> Del, I respect you, but if you don't care to read what I write, then
> don't expect me to repeat myself for your benefit.  I've been through
> some pretty tough times, and I'm way past caring what people think of
> me.
> 
(snip)

Sorry for your pain.

I hope things get better for you soon

del