Intel is promising to build a fabrication complex worth around US$20b in the US state of Ohio, turning it into what Intel is calling a "Silicon Heartland" (like Silicon Valley, get it?). Construction begins late 2022 on two "leading-edge fabs" in New Albany and should start spewing out wafers in 2025. Intel isn't saying what process node they'll be kicking off with in 2025, just stating it will be using the "industry's most advanced transistor technologies", which when aligned with Intel's current roadmap is the "18A" process, 4-generations newer than Intel's current leading-edge node. They also hinted at an extra $80b of investment over the next 10 years if the federal government wants to open its wallet to assist. Meanwhile, TSMC is forecasting a US$100b capex spend over 3 years to keep up with demand.
1Password has completed yet another funding round of US$620m (the largest ever for a Canadian company apparently), valuing the password manager at US$6.8b. To coincide with this they've published a "vision of the future", making it clear that all this cash is going to try and cement 1Password as a player in the enterprise space. Think of all the businesses you've worked in where nobody has a coherent way to store passwords, or if they do, it's not used properly and is a user unfriendly piece of shit. Makes sense when you consider Microsoft, Google and Apple have their own baked-in password managers that are good enough for 90% of users. I still use 1Password and have no plans to move away. On desktop I've even ditched the native app and just use the browser extension.
George Defteros, "a solicitor who represented Melbourne gangland figures", successfully sued Google in 2020 for having a story by The Age appear in search results for George's name, that "implied that Defteros crossed a line from professional lawyer to confidant and friend to criminal elements" that he reckons defames him. Google had to pay Defteros $40,000 in damages (dunno if they also had remove the item from their search results), but Google has appealed the case to the High Court, arguing that "Google will be liable as the publisher of any matter published on the web to which its search results provide a hyperlink" if someone complains the contents of the link defames them, "regardless of the quality" of that article.
Josh Taylor over at The Guardian has a practical article about the Online Safety Act, now in effect, with a bit more detail on what constitutes the type of content the eSafety Commissioner can remove. According to the eSafety Commissioner herself, "serious harm could include material which sets out realistic threats, places people in real danger, is excessively malicious or is unrelenting" and that "the scheme is not intended to regulate hurt feelings, purely reputational damage, bad online reviews, strong opinions or banter". When put like that the law sounds useful. Nobody wants to be on the receiving end of a constant barrage of shit from a fixated person or people on social media. The real question is if the eSafety Commissioner is up to the task of filtering complaints, how fast they'll act and how judicious they'll be in applying their massive discretion.
📻 Rock N Roll Is Where I Hide - Dave Graney & The Coral Snakes
😎 The Sizzle is curated by Anthony "@decryption" Agius and emailed every weekday afternoon.
💬 Checked out the paid subscriber only forum? It's a tidy little place to discuss tech with like minded Aussies.
👋 Forums not your thing? The Sizzle has a Slack group you can procrastinate in and chat with other nerds bored at work.
💳 Paid subscriber looking to manage your billing info or change email address? Visit the customer portal.
📚 Browse The Sizzle Archive. A few issues are missing and it's not searchable, but it's better than nothing.
The Sizzle is created on Wathaurong land and acknowledges the traditional owners of country throughout Australia, recognising their continuing connection to land, water and community. I pay my respect to them and their cultures and to elders both past and present.