Micron CEO says low-price push by customers fueled the memory shortage
neowin.net
neowin.net
PC gamers aren’t Microb’s customers lol, nor is the CEO referring to gamers/consumers. Think Apple.
Sounds like "blame the victim" mentality to be honest.
It's a pretty straightforward argument; I'm not sure why it seems so difficult for you to understand.
This is some next level gaslighting. AI companies significantly increased the demand and have deeper pockets than most consumers. He who bids most gets the product.
> Mehrotra also said the memory shortage could last into 2027 and beyond because fabrication plants take years to build, and the next generation of memory is even more complex to manufacture. Micron is now investing up to $200 billion in manufacturing and R&D, including new memory fabs in Boise, Idaho, and Syracuse, New York.
When the AI bubble pops, and supply significantly outpaces demand, we'll then see them close tonnes of fabs.
Too many people seem to believe that the AI bubble popping means something like "the total volume of the activity will precipitously drop and whole centers will be abandoned forever".
I don't believe that. I was an adult when the dot-com bubble popped. What happened then was that a lot of unsound businesses went under, and the healthier players (like Amazon) expanded into the resulting void. Ultimately, the relentless march of digital technology didn't even slow down back then, although the inflow of risk capital definitely did. But the existing resources were mostly taken over by someone else.
If/when the current bubble bursts, it will be similar. All that infrastructure will be resold and re-rented to healthier players. By now, machine learning has reached a level of usability/maturity which is genuinely useful and the economy at large won't abandon it any more than it abandoned e-mail or WWW back then.
> Too many people seem to believe that the AI bubble popping means something like "the total volume of the activity will precipitously drop and whole centers will be abandoned forever".
I think that many of them will fail. We have several data centers being built nearby to me, where the UK has some of the highest energy prices. I don't know how AI companies can make it make economic sense, let alone any normally operating company (like a Cloud service provider).
> I don't believe that. I was an adult when the dot-com bubble popped. What happened then was that a lot of unsound businesses went under, and the healthier players (like Amazon) expanded into the resulting void. Ultimately, the relentless march of digital technology didn't even slow down back then, although the inflow of risk capital definitely did. But the existing resources were mostly taken over by someone else.
I think the difference between this and the dot-com crash is enormous. Every part of our economy is now entangled in this. A significant part of the US's GDP is based on the idea that Nvidia can keep expanding their market cap past several Western nations. Your pension likely has large buy-ins on the AI hype. Everybody at every level is very exposed to this.
> If/when the current bubble bursts, it will be similar. All that infrastructure will be resold and re-rented to healthier players. By now, machine learning has reached a level of usability/maturity which is genuinely useful and the economy at large won't abandon it any more than it abandoned e-mail or WWW back then.
I have my doubts that anybody will be liquid enough to buy what remains at reasonable prices. And the impact of that is obvious, why buy RAM from Micron when LLM Corp are selling it for 50% of retail value?