Regulators don’t want to provide arbitrarily detail into their interpretation or likely judgements on issues that may come up for many reasons, good and bad.
One good one is that providing concrete razors for compliant and non-compliant behavior accelerates the gaming of the rules.
This is one of the most sustained bad-faith arguments I’ve seen on HN.
The idea that 4 of the largest investment banks in the US were destroyed is not just utterly false, it’s hard to imagine how one could interpret the outcome in this manner.
Why would anyone be happy that the government offered handouts that were stolen, low-level criminals prosecuted, meanwhile every single principal who was culpable went unpunished?
I don’t need to hear from you how this is off-base or I’m misunderstanding. I’m close to principals involved in the crisis and worked for years in the response to it, and have heard what went on in the meetings dramatized afterwards.
These companies innovate in all of those areas and direct those resources towards building hyper-scale custom infrastructure, including CPU, TPU, GPU, and custom networking hardware for the largest cloud systems, and conduct research and development on new compilers and operating system components to exploit them.
They're building it for themselves and employ world-class experts across the entire stack.
How can NVIDIA develop "more integrated" solutions when they are primarily building for these companies, as well as many others?
Examples of these companies doing things you mention as being somehow unique to or characteristic of NVIDIA:
You're generalizing a failure at delivering one consumer solution and ignoring the successful infrastructure research and development that occurs behind the scenes.
Meta builds hardware from chip to cluster to datacenter scale, and drives research into simulation at every scale, all the way to CFD simulation of datacenter thermal management.
This conception is simplistic, a straw man, and one that appears to be wholly ignorant of the Cosmopolitan tradition and reasonable criticisms thereof.
No, on the balance it is lawyers who protect companies from the people they harm and lawyers who constitute the government officials who perpetually exceed and expand their mandates.
Most of the senate are lawyers and it’s the most frequent occupation of a legislator.