SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD)
AMD 203.14-0.8%Jan 9 9:30 AM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: fastpathguru who wrote (259269)3/31/2009 1:32:25 PM
From: Elmer PhudRead Replies (2) of 275872
 
That does not prove that AMD was aware of and sanctioned his actions.

No it doesn't prove it. Will you apply the same standard if there is no evidence that Intel, as a company, has a policy of encouraging illegal business practices? There's the problem. You've already convicted Intel in your mind so why wait for proof?

The problem here is that you're equating the FBI prosecutors saying that there is no evidence in the espionage case, with your own ignorance of what evidence exists in the antitrust case

Quite the opposite. You're the one who is imagining evidence where none exists. AMD's own customers are saying there is no smoking gun and AMD should give it up.

In the AMD stolen IP case, you are saying that because the FBI could find no evidence that proves AMD had no involvement. We already know AMD has a history of stealing IP from Intel and those actions were with the full support and approval of upper level management. It's not much of a stretch to say that AMD is once again doing what they have already been shown to have done in the past. In the Intel case, you have absolutely no evidence that Intel upper level management had any involvement or knowledge of any illegal activity and they have no history of such, yet you believe they are guilty because your mindset demands it.

Absence of positive proof means AMD is innocent, absence of any proof means Intel is guilty.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News