Locator: 48866CHIPS.
Updates
August 16, 2025: WSJ links --
- Intel's move toward nationalization won't work; risks great harm to the US tech sector; link here;
- the White House is a sideshow; Intel must decide what it wants to do; link here; on the blog here.
Original Post
Link here.
Just one of the reasons I subscribe to Barron's.
We'll come back to this later. Family commitments now.
Huge "positive" for TSMC.
How does one say that Intel's turnaround will fail without saying Intel's turnaround will fail.
From the linked article:
Applied Materials’
disappointing outlook is bad news for chip equipment makers, as more of
the industry’s buying power consolidates toward Taiwan Semiconductor
Manufacturing.
Late Thursday, Applied Materials forecast a range of revenue for the
October quarter with a midpoint of $6.7 billion, below the consensus
view of $7.33 billion.
Analysts say the executive is likely signaling the growing buying power
of TSMC as Intel has begun to pare back the size of its future capital
expenditure investments.
Intel has hoped to win more advanced chip manufacturing clients away
from TSMC but [Intel] has thus far failed to win big customers for its latest
manufacturing process 18A.
Last month, the company dialed back investment plans in its foundry
business strategy.
Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan stated in an internal memo:
“There are no more blank checks. Every investment must make economic
sense.”
Intel’s move is bad news for advanced chip equipment makers—including
Applied Materials, KLA
, and Lam Research. That’s because any decrease in factory spending plans will lower
competitive pressure on TSMC to keep investing in new equipment, while
also giving the Taiwan-based company the ability to win better deals
from vendors.
*****************************
The Book Page
I'll be reading bits of several books this weekend but the primary book of interest:
The Immortal Game: A History of Chess or How 32 Carved Pieces On A
Board Illuminated Our Understanding of War, Art, Science, and the Human
Brain; David Shenk, c. 2006.
I don't read enough about chess and I play even less, so I can't make any comments one way or the other regarding this book. I'm reading it mostly for the history of the game. Absolutely fascinating. I was completely unaware how much the game changed in the 15th century in Europe, probably Spain.
The modern movement of the queen in chess, combining the powers of the
rook and bishop, emerged in
Spain in the 15th century.
The change is widely believed to have happened during the reign of Queen
Isabella I of Castile. Her influence likely inspired the chess queen's
transformation from a weak piece, which initially moved only one square
diagonally, into its current powerful form.
The earliest known writing describing the modern queen's movement, along
with the bishop and pawn, is "Repetición de amores e arte de axedres
con CL iuegos de partido" by Luis RamÃrez de Lucena. It was published
during Isabella's reign. A Valencian poem from 1475 called "Scachs
d'amor" showed a chess game featuring the queen with her modern moves.
For translation of above "quote," see wiki. I find this incredibly interesting, incredibly fascinating.
The author has an interesting way of telling the story. Each chapter -- twelve chapters divided among three parts -- is, in turn, divided into two parts. The chapters are arranged chronologically. The first part of each chapter tells the story and the history of chess, from its beginnings to its present day. The second part of each chapter follows what is referred to as "The Immortal Game." Each vignette is a single move by both players as the "immortal" game is played.
The Immortal Game was supposed to be a forgettable practice game, a throwaway. No one, least of all the two players, had any idea that they were about to produce one of chess's all-time gems, a game some would consider the most remarkable ever played.
The game: London, June 21, 1851, Adolf Anderssen vs Lionel Kieseritzky.
From wiki:
The Immortal Game was a chess game played in 1851 between Adolf
Anderssen and Lionel Kieseritzky during the London 1851 chess
tournament, an event in which both players participated.
It was itself a
casual game, however, not played as part of the tournament.
Anderssen
won the game by sacrificing all of his major pieces while developing a
mating attack with his remaining minor pieces.
Despite losing the game,
Kieseritzky was impressed with Anderssen's performance.
Kieseritzky
published the game shortly afterwards in La Régence, a French chess
journal which he helped to edit.
Ernst Falkbeer published an analysis of
the game in 1855, describing it for the first time with its sobriquet
"immortal."
The Immortal Game is among the most famous chess games ever played. As a
miniature game, it is frequently reproduced in chess literature to
teach simple themes of gameplay.
Although Kieseritzsky himself indicated
that the game ended before checkmate, the Immortal Game is frequently
reproduced with a brief continuation involving a queen sacrifice—a
further loss of material—leading to checkmate. This continuation is
commonly presented as part of the complete game, as if the final moves
were actually played as part of the real historical game. Some authors
also permute certain moves, deviating from Kieseritzky's report,
although such permutations typically transpose to distinct lines of play
that eventually return to the moves and positions reported by
Kieseritzky.
Other connections:
***************************
The Sports Page
Wow, wow, wow! No staggered start at next week's FEDEX PGA championship. It will be an "even" playing field for all thirty competitors. No advantage given to those who performed best throughout the season. Makes the championship much more competitive. It will be very controversial. I think it's the correct decision.
