3 ms·

According to the article, at least Herman Hauser believes that ARM will likely do poorly under nVidias control. I think the idea is that nvidia is a particularl

According to the article, at least Herman Hauser believes that ARM will likely do poorly under nVidias control. I think the idea is that nvidia is a particularly bad owner considering arm's buisness model (for a similar reason that having Nokia as the main Symbian participant was a bad idea), rather than that the UK would exert beneficial influence. Indeed, the suggestion is that the UK government invests as part of a group rather than takes a controlling interest.

valuearb 6y ago
How would the UK governments influence be beneficial in any way? The governments influence will be the agenda of individual politicians, who know nothing of chip design or care about it. In the US that’s the type of thinking that’s given us the SLS, an $20B launch system that will cost more than twenty times as much as commercial alternatives, and is required by law to use obsolete 50 year old components from key congressional districts.
- kybernetikos 6y ago
  I think you're agreeing with me. The suggestion is not that the UK government will exert any influence over them at all, just as the Norweigan sovereign wealth fund doesn't exert management control over the 1.3% of global equities it owns. The point made in the article is that that absence of influence will be better than the negative influence that nvidia would apply.
  - valuearb 6y ago
    There is no such thing as absence of influence. Government funding always comes with political influence, and almost always negative. Norwegian sovereign fund is an investment fund that holds a tiny fraction of each public companies stock in its fund. For the UK to engineer a purchase of ARM would require raising $32B, offering to kick in 1.3% would go nowhere. Anyone with 99% of $32B doesn’t need the UK. An alternate deal is only possible if the UK offered to kick in a large part, probably at least $10B, and taking a large minority stake. At that level they’d have to have significant influence, or the politicians who engineer it will get run right out of office. What if the new owner moves R&D from the UK?

valuearb 6y ago

How would the UK governments influence be beneficial in any way? The governments influence will be the agenda of individual politicians, who know nothing of chip design or care about it. In the US that’s the type of thinking that’s given us the SLS, an $20B launch system that will cost more than twenty times as much as commercial alternatives, and is required by law to use obsolete 50 year old components from key congressional districts.

kybernetikos 6y ago
I think you're agreeing with me. The suggestion is not that the UK government will exert any influence over them at all, just as the Norweigan sovereign wealth fund doesn't exert management control over the 1.3% of global equities it owns. The point made in the article is that that absence of influence will be better than the negative influence that nvidia would apply.
- valuearb 6y ago
  There is no such thing as absence of influence. Government funding always comes with political influence, and almost always negative. Norwegian sovereign fund is an investment fund that holds a tiny fraction of each public companies stock in its fund. For the UK to engineer a purchase of ARM would require raising $32B, offering to kick in 1.3% would go nowhere. Anyone with 99% of $32B doesn’t need the UK. An alternate deal is only possible if the UK offered to kick in a large part, probably at least $10B, and taking a large minority stake. At that level they’d have to have significant influence, or the politicians who engineer it will get run right out of office. What if the new owner moves R&D from the UK?