This reads like such diffuse nothing-speak. “We will do less but remain committed.” It’s a contradiction. Doesn’t help that one person gives a speech then the company makes clarifications which read like pulling back or lying/delaying about where leadership is pushing towards.

The article does a decent job exploring what it could mean.

Neither closed core nor malicious runtime-platform switches are in the spirit of open source, or can be called truly or fully open source.

They should have made a concrete plan first, and then announced and implemented that. But I guess we can be thankful we can see signs of where they may be headed, and that could push negative feedback or make people more cautious and aware of their practices and changes.

And so it begins/ends.

Already was planning on never buying Intel due to their ties with American government and having a fab in Israel, so go ahead Intel, dig that hole a little deeper.

It’s interesting to see Intel pondering building walls around its garden. That’s the kind of thing they could do if they don’t plan to exist in 10 years. It might make a buck or two for their quarterly.

People still use Intel chips? Gross.

Lol

Intel needs to GPL huge parts of its codebase /j /s

Final nail in the coffin.