Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login
Trump Issues Order to Block Broadcom’s Takeover of Qualcomm (bloomberg.com)
215 points by coloneltcb 11 days ago | hide | past | web | favorite | 116 comments

If you look at CNBC video on the deal (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/12/us-tells-broadcom-it-confirm...) which talks about the Government concerns there are two parts:

1) Its a foreign company takeover. This will not hold as Broadcom is domiciling in the US soon.

2) Broadcom has publicly stated that it intends to do private equity style management. They are going to add $100B in debt - which might make them cut R&D. For its size, Qualcomm spends significantly more on R&D and has been a pioneer of many technologies. CFIUS contends this is a natural security concern. Any reduction in US R&D spend on key technologies like 5G will lead to China filling the void.

CIFUS doesn't exist to force US companies to spend money on R&D.

CIFUS advises the President on deals by foreign companies which are threats to national security. They strongly feel this deal falls in this bucket.

This is good, as it seemed Intel was about to buy broadcom after it bought Qualcomm. Considering they're all the main competitors for chipsets and such, this prevents [complete monopolization] of those markets. These companies remaining under different companies at least lets fail and succeed with their own style

From what I've heard the Intel to buy Broadcom rumor was absurd and never going to happen.

But Broadcom is an American company.

Avago was spun out of HP in 1999 (American). They were acquired by KKR and Silver Lake Partners in 2005 (both American). Listed on the NASDAQ in 2009. Bought CyOptics in 2013 (American). Bought LSI in 2013 (American). Bought PLX in 2014 (American). Bought Emulex in 2015 (American). And finally bought Broadcom in 2015, closing in January 2016 (American). Then they renamed themselves Broadcom. They moved their legal address from Singapore to Delaware in 2017. Sure their current CEO (Tan Hock Eng) was born in Malaysia, but he has been an executive at various American companies for decades.

They are American all the way down.

Not true. Moving your legal address to the US doesn't make it a US company. The headquarters is currently in Singapore.

Wasn't Broadcom founded by a few UCLA folks in the early 90's?

Broadcom was acquired by Avago, which then changed its name to Broadcom.

Yes. The founders still have some involvement in the company that acquired Broadcom a couple of years ago.

They're owned by American capital, they're controlled and influenced by a lot of American interests, sure. They're not domiciled in the US any longer. That's a critical legal aspect for CFIUS as it pertains to national security and jurisdiction.

It'd be like if Yahoo and SoftBank controlled the majority of Alibaba presently (SoftBank for its part still has 29%). That still wouldn't give them control of Alibaba due to the broader context of China. The fact of the matter would be, Alibaba would still a Chinese corporation that operates under Chinese law.

Brocade (American)

Will Broadcom still move their HQ to the US?


And will Intel buy any of the companies involved?


Yes, it's practically guaranteed Broadcom will still relocate to the US. For at least two reasons.

1) The domicile issue nearly prevented Broadcom from acquiring Brocade previously. They're going to continue to get blocked, as CFIUS gets more aggressive. There's zero benefit to remaining in Singapore for Broadcom. Their corporate income tax rate is barely lower than the US now as well.

2) Broadcom may want to attempt another shot at acquiring Qualcomm later, or perhaps another large US tech trophy. They won't be able to do that from Singapore.

Rumour about Intel fighting the merger just broke a couple of hours ago... https://www.recode.net/2018/3/12/17107910/intel-broadcom-qua...

With the dearth of positive news coming out of this administration, I'll take this win.

That a boy, Trump.

The better term is "national interest". Qualcomm is a world leading wireless technology innovator and it's domicile and ownership in the US is in the national interest.

Manufacturing has already been lost to China, so has solar tech. China also edges US in areas where regulation is hairy, like genetic hybrids, cloning, etc. Henceforth, it's important to guard American leadership in technologies where it leads

Sorry that's a myth, Chinese growth isn't a zero sum game. In fact U.S. manufacturing has never been stronger:


You've proven American manufacturing increased output despite outsourcing. You didn't prove that outsourcing hasn't cost America leadership in domains, and jobs.

Until recently, the armed forces weren't able to procure clothing manufactured in the US, per federal law. That's how dire certain domains have gotten

lol, what? Look at the graph in the article, output is only slightly above 2000 levels. What portion of the world's consumption of manufactured goods is made by the US? What portion of the US's own consumption? Those would give a better estimate of relative strength.

If you make most of the product in China, then bring it to the us to put the final touches on it (https://imgur.com/PuyCZ), the final product counts as "US manufacturing output". Does that mean the US manufacturing sector is as strong as ever?

Oh, the production of electronics is up! You make the IC in Taiwan, the circuit board and the power supply in China, the display in Korea, the case in China again, but you put them all together in an assembly line in the US. And because there's more people and more demand for gizmos, you can say that you make twice as many widgets now! Does that really mean American manufacturing has gotten "stronger"?

Thanks! I wish Europe would realize that as well...

Am interested that they also blocked the sale of Lattice, as I just started teaching myself the icestorm toolchain for coding their fpgas.

This is the right decision, but is it normal for M&As to be blocked by executive order rather than by a DOJ decision, or is this a Trump thing?

> Trump acted on a recommendation by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S.

Seems legit.

I know we all love to bash Trump, but he might not be entirely evil. Sometimes he's not treated fairly, that said it's all well deserved that's for sure :)

Or, his random chaotic approach may accidentally do the right thing sometimes out of shear probability. A broken clock is right at least twice a day, a random clock is right randomly.

Or, he isn't operating on a random chaotic approach.

No rational person actually believe that POTUS really is 'random' and 'chaotic'.

This type of comment has no purpose except as a cheap shot at a disliked president. It simply lowers the S/N ratio and brings HN closer to reddit.

Also, correct spelling is 'sheer'.

Speak for yourself. Trump acts almost entirely on impulse which is close enough to random.

In fact, he described his own thought processes perfectly in the quote: "I don't stand by anything." [1]

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/05/...

As everyone here is saying the merger would create too much concentration and not enough competition, but that's not the justification that the White House put forward. They said national security which seems far-fetched.

If the merger had gone through, and national security was a concern, I'd imagine someone could make good, reliable money by manufacturing chips in the US for the government at a small scale.

National security here is an excuse to stick it to China.


Many problems with this post.

First, you're assuming that Trump had sex with Stormy Daniels. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but it is very difficult to differentiate between 'please go away with your bullshit because it is distracting' agreement, and a 'here is some money so you don't talk' agreement. If you have special insight into this matter that has not been reported on, please do share it.

Second, you're saying he is 'completely devoid of ethics and morals' because he allegedly cheated on his wife when she was pregnant. Has no one with morals or ethics ever cheated on their wife? Do you lose your ethics and morals by cheating on your wife, or are they just never there?

Finally, let's assume this did happen. Do you know the relationship status of Donald and Melania? What if they both agreed to have a sexually open marriage before they got married? It wouldn't be too out of left field - Trump was a known playboy.

The length Trump supporters will go to spin his behavior. Cheating on a pregnant wife is now acceptable.


Personal attacks are not allowed on HN, regardless of how wrong someone may be. Would you please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here?

Please try to make a point in this discussion instead of contentless ad hominems, and I'll respond to it. It may be hard, but I'll be here for you when you finally make it.

Please don't respond to a hostile comment with another hostile comment. That just makes this place worse.


> First, you're assuming that Trump had sex with Stormy Daniels. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but it is very difficult to differentiate between 'please go away with your bullshit because it is distracting' agreement, and a 'here is some money so you don't talk' agreement. If you have special insight into this matter that has not been reported on, please do share it.

I'll bet you a dollar he did, happy to negotiate terms.

> Second, you're saying he is 'completely devoid of ethics and morals' because he allegedly cheated on his wife when she was pregnant. Has no one with morals or ethics ever cheated on their wife? Do you lose your ethics and morals by cheating on your wife, or are they just never there?


> Finally, let's assume this did happen. Do you know the relationship status of Donald and Melania? What if they both agreed to have a sexually open marriage before they got married? It wouldn't be too out of left field - Trump was a known playboy.

Everyone knows it was and remains a business transaction.

> Everyone knows it was and remains a business transaction.

Then why would having sex outside of a loveless, business-transaction of marriage make you 'completely devoid of morals and ethics' as OP indicated?

Boy, I'm impressed with all this insider Trump knowledge that has been coming out in this thread. All of you guys should get together and hand these stories to Michael Wolff, as they all exist with approximately the same level of vetting.

So, are we betting a dollar or not?

Sure, I bet on coin flips, so why not? If you're willing to transact over XLM?

Let's say the bet comes due Nov 7, 2018(day after midterms)?

Also, please keep in mind that the point of my post is that it is unknown if Trump slept with Stormy Daniels, and even if he did, you still don't know what arrangement if any exists between Melania and Donald to be able to say that he is "completely devoid of ethics and morals"

Don't care about the point of your post, and I made no value / moral / ethical judgment in my reply regardless.

You just agreed to a bet. I said "bet you a dollar he did" and you said "sure."

I agree - my point was that the bet and the point of my post were orthogonal. It was not intended to have any kind of consequence on our bet.

You go from trump cheating on his Wife to being funded. If we take the first bit away this is basically every single president and politician America has had for god knows how Long and will continue to have for ever. No decision is made because it’s the right decision. They are made cos someone slips an envelope under the table.


Just because you and your social group continually assert in any marginally relevant forum that Trump is "completely devoid of ethics" and a "completely evil man"(to take two choice quotes from this thread) doesn't make it true - no matter how much you wish for it.

Just to be clear, we're talking about the same guy that settled a fraud case for $25M right as he was taking office and said that the judge on the case couldn't be fair because he's of Mexican decent.

Don’t forget the $30M bribe son-in-law Kushner received while acting as a member of the administration, or the money he’s been funneling into criminal organizations. Just search for:

Kushner israel money

Do we really need to be clear, or are you just trying to make a poor point about a legal strategy that was used by his lawyers?

Also, I wasn't aware that a settlement was an admission of guilt. Why are you treating it as such? Does no innocent person ever settle?

Does doing something as a legal strategy automatically make it ethical?

Would you not say that it is fair (if not correct), based on Trump's history of other questionable ethics (birtherism, infidelity, lying), to assume that his settlement is likely evidence of further unethical behavior? Or should we use the court system as the infallible dispenser of all truth and ethics? If so, I think the American public owes O.J. an apology.

I'm not attempting to take sides, but the judge was documented to be heavily involved in the local Mexican community, which certainly could suggest a bias in judgment against a president who wanted to build a wall to stop illegal immigration from Mexico.

I would say that it is tenuous at best.

The validity of both arguments assume the existence of evil. That is not a given.

Unless you were born on February 29.

It has happened 4 times before, once by the current administration: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_on_Foreign_Investmen...

My previous employer (Sourcefire) was blocked from being bought by Checkpoint by CFIUS. Though the president didn't sign an order, the deal got a lot of scrutiny and likely would have been blocked.


I wonder how many cases there were like this.

> "There is credible evidence that leads me to believe that Broadcom Ltd." by acquiring Qualcomm "might take action that threatens to impair the national security of the United States," Trump said in the order released Monday evening in Washington.

> The government said it feared Broadcom would cut investment in research and development in order to increase short-term profits. That could allow Chinese companies to become the dominant supplier, the U.S. said.

The definition of "national security" keeps getting looser over the years.

I suspect the issue is that, if whole classes of chips that are important for military purposes (wireless communications, for example) are made exclusively by China, they could put in backdoors and other traps that would compromise U.S. military hardware. I haven't seen anyone discuss this angle openly, though, so either I'm off base somehow or it's not something the U.S. wants to loudly discuss (because they're likely doing it too.)

I'm not seeing it in this case, but the American exclusiveness is hardly a secret.

The government does not source critical tech to third-parties with international ties. Our soldiers only carry weapons made by American suppliers. Our police only drive American vehicles. Even government software needs to run on domestically-produced platforms (Xbox, generic PC).

It's not because we live in a Tom Clancy novel; we don't want to put ourselves in a position where services we depend on for safety or national security experience shortage or unavailability because of beefs with our suppliers. And we don't want Huawei or Lenovo backdooring things like routers and laptops that might be used in sensitive deployments.

That's a fair angle, but no need to "suspect", the reason has been provided: simply that it threatens being #1.

Nobody is looking at it from that angle because Broadcomm is not a Chinese company. So, yes, you are way off on this. The Trump admin is essentially running on exophobia to push all their trade policies (eg, steel tariff where Canada and Mexico are the top exporters.

Your implication that only Chinese companies can plant backdoors seems exophobic to me. If we are going to go with the 'only China can backdoor things', Broadcomm has corporate offices in Singapore - why couldn't someone amenable to the Chinese cause, or a lot of money, help get a backdoor in? The same is still possible with US citizens running a US enterprise in the US, but the punishment in America for treason against America is pretty severe and well known. What is the punishment in Singapore if you help put a backdoor in a product which ultimately goes to the US military?

I guess, to xenophobes, everything looks xenophobic. Sure, there are national security threats from many other foreign actors, but in this particular case, the poster to whom I responded wants to specifically discuss hypothetical threats posed by Chinese interests and companies that are geo-politically close to China.

"What's good for General Motors is good for America"?

And let's not talk about where the term "Banana Republic" originated.

Moving away from the US - thus it has always been. The good old East India Company springs to mind.

"Supply chain" seems pretty central.

That doesn't seem too far off the mark. On the craftiness of nation states scale that's maybe, what, a 2?

Good. Broadcom is far too happy to release undocumented garbage.

Is Qualcomm better?

Qualcomm gpus have so many webgl bugs and they never get fixed via driver updates. I have run into 3 different ones in my three.js work. Now getting acquired by broadcom probably wouldn't have changed things.

It is curious that Qualcomm continues to develop their own closed source driver instead of throwing their weight behind Rob Clark's Freedreno initiative.

Broadcom at least pay someone to develop a FOSS driver for the VideoCore IV and V, as found in the rPi.

I mean, they are paying.. one guy. And god knows he has done a better job than their 10s of in-house developers, but then again this is also an ancient chip and Broadcom doesn't even do graphics silicon anymore.

Curiously Qualcomm have been submitting more and more, big, patches for the MSM subsystem, the Linux in-kernel part of the Freedreno graphics driver. I think someone has finally woken up and told management that Linux doesn't take two drivers for the same hardware, and once that reverse-engineered stuff was in the tree, you are royally fucked because you now have to play by the rules of whoever is maintaining it if you want to have any hope of upstreaming your proprietary driver.

This is pretty much the situation for the Vivante polluters. They have been so ridiculously ungrateful for the Linux stuff that makes the chips run for the SoC companies that want to integrate their silicon that by now there is a reverse-engineered driver (Etnaviv) in the tree. They are shut out. And on a longer timescale, the same is coming up for ARM and it's Mali (Lima project).

The situation has historically been the exact opposite for WiFi drivers, where Broadcom is the obstinate closed-source vendor and Qualcomm-Atheros is the most open-source friendly vendor in that market.

Atheros -WAS- great, before qualcomm took them over, open source drivers, great chipsets and even open source firmware.

Post qualcomm takover, their new chipsets are all heavily locked down, and only functional with a huge closed source driver-esque firmware megablob that is buggy and preforms poorly. You cant even set your mac address anymore.

Tying qualcomm to the atheros reputation for open source friendly chipsets is an insult.

Atheros and Intel are by far the best WiFi options for Linux. However, Atheros lean heavily on a giant closed baseband processor blob that does most of the heavy lifting. I’m not sure how true this is of the Intel chipsets.

Atheros only started using proprietary firmware with their 802.11ac generation. (Some of the older USB adapters also needed firmware but there's open firmware available.) Intel's been using proprietary firmware blobs basically forever.

Everybody uses proprietary firmware for their 802.11ac adapters. Mediatek has gotten some interest because the firmware for some of their 802.11ac chips is fairly minimal and doesn't get in the way of substantially improving the open-source drivers.

iwlwifi (and iwn on the BSD side) have always non-free.

Interesting times for upstream Linux support; Qualcomm also hopes to acquire NXP - the chipmakers inside the etnaviv-driven Purism phone.

NXP is also the company inside a pretty huge range of smartcard systems (eg travel cards, credit cards, etc)

I sincerely hope that this was Trump's reasoning for the ban. He was so sick and tired of having to muddle through Broadcom's undocumented garbage that he just got fed up and decided to spike their acquisition.

"FAILING Broadcom keeps churning out illegal garbage. Loser Dems call it "undocumented silicon" - complete BS. Sad!"

(I'm wary of redditifying HN but I just had to let this out.)

I choose to believe this is the latest battle in Trump's fight against undocumented foreigners.


This comment breaks the HN guidelines. Would you please read them and keep this kind of thing off this site in the future? We're hoping not to go up in flames like so much of the internet.


Both of the companies need a lot of competition. Nice.

I believe Jacobs family at the top were not going to let this M&A happen at any cost, especially giving control over to Hock Tan. They are very shrewd business folks (Jews aren't they), unfortunately, the heir to the empire turned out to be a bit more than play boy resulting in business going south.

This whole episode showed how important Qualcom is for United States national security. It still looks like a potential acquisition target with a price tag set by Broadcom. If Intel acquires Broadcom (thus making it an American company) then it may go after Qualcom. Otherwise, Intel or someone with deep pockets may also try to acquire Qualcom directly.

Hah... Trump just gave a warm reception to Broadcom ceo at the oval office only four months ago, as a reward for moving their HQ from Singapore to the US! Great to see that commitment rewarded

When someone visits your home, they are your guest, and they treat it as a privilege to be there. If they don't, you kick them out and don't invite them back.

It was Broadcom CEOs privilege to be a guest in the White House, not the other way round.

Is there a free market argument in favor of the take over? Seems like almost nobody wanted this. How did the market go wrong here?

The takeover going through is the logical conclusion of free markets - a monopoly is very profitable for shareholders. All signs pointed to the market wanting this deal to go through, there was a Bloomberg article a couple weeks ago saying that half the votes counted indicated that all of Broadcom's candidates for the board would win.

The market is made of fallible humans with their individual goals, agendas, egos, whatever. It's not an organism of its own.

There's nothing about market systems that typically prevent stupid decisions. The market system, in theory and often in practice, delivers consequences from stupid decisions (see: IBM's current weakened condition and recent 23 straight quarters of contracting sales, while they blow all their profit on share buybacks and further concede the cloud biz - which they were early on - to AWS/Azure/Google).

There are no systems that do not consist of fallible humans. Whether we're talking traditional Socialism, Communism, Fascism, mixed systems, quasi free market, laissez faire.

Well... I guess even a broken clock is right twice a day.

What nonsense. Now any unilateral measures can be imposed in the name of “national security”.

If national security doesn't work, interstate commerce has been working pretty well for both parties whenever it suits them too.


Patriot act, et. al.

How is the situation now different than it has been in the past?

It's good news. State-sponsored 5G in the USA would be great, and unprecedented. Hopefully we can agree on that.

Perhaps you could explain why you assume that to follow as a consequence of this action. as it is, your comment seems like a non sequitur.

In an effort to be brief I grouped all the thoughts on 5G in the USA together, but the State-sponsored 5G has nothing to do with this really. Many tech enthusiasts are actually advocating for a state-sponsored solution, however, and such moves have worked in the past for other nations (Australia was the first nation with 3G thanks to a state-sponsored move that has now been privatized [now run by Telestra]). As long as we're on the topic of 5G at all I figured I'd voice my support as a coder and generally well-informed individual.

It's rather odd watching the same group that wants Net Neutrality and municipal broadband disagree with you.

Trump's nationalized 5G idea is brilliant in that it consolidates all efforts, but also serves to protect freedom. Under the privatized approach we use now, wireless ISPs spy on us, and sell the data to the government. That's constitutional and legal, because the government didn't do the spying. Under a nationalized plan, it would be unconstitutional for the government to conduct dragnet spying.

Do we drive on corporate owned highways? No, and we have the most extensive highway system in the world. For comparison, look how well privatized rail worked out. You're right. Privatized infrastructure sucks.

U.S. freight rail is completely privatized and it is the finest system anywhere.

"our freight rail is the envy of the world, carrying over 40% of our intercity cargo. Trains carry much less of Europe’s freight, which is why trucks clog Europe’s highways. And America’s rail-shipping rates are the world’s lowest, reducing the cost of doing business in the U.S.; they’ve fallen 45% in real dollars since the industry was deregulated three decades ago."


Good freight rail and good passenger rail seem to be more or less mutually exclusive. Japan has one of the lowest rates of freight rail usage in the world, and yet the Shinkansen and the extensive urban metros and suburban railways with their absurdly high schedule reliability are basically an element of national identity...

No, it is all policy-driven. Japan's passenger rail companies are private businesses. The U.S. used to have the finest passenger rail too. But then the feds subsidized interstates, which collapsed U.S. passenger rail in the 1960s, and in turn nationalized the private companies into Amtrak. So the government killed the opportunity to reinvent U.S. passenger rail. Amtrak is a disaster, it is grossly undercapitalized and forced to maintain massively unprofitable long-distance rail.

Nearly all of the Japanese rail system was created directly through the government. Everything JR was once owned by the national government. Even as "private" companies the major subway companies in Tokyo are partnerships between the national and Tokyo government.

Japan used smaller gauge track for passenger. Combined with the need to keep freight from interfering with high speed trains (the opposite of the American situation) probably makes the case for your argument. Good passenger rail and priority screws cargo where good cargo screws passengers. Unless you can build two separate systems, optimization’s are not compatible.

UK seems to do both pretty competently.

> Do we drive on corporate owned highways? No, and we have the most extensive highway system in the world. For comparison, look how well privatized rail worked out. You're right. Privatized infrastructure sucks.

You mean the highway system that's been underfunded for the past several years even before you take into account the fact that much of it is in dilapidated condition and needs unbudgeted replacement? In contrast to the freight rail system that Europe wishes it had?

Do we drive on corporate owned highways

A good chunk of the national interstate system consists of toll roads, some of which have been privatized (ex: Indiana Toll Road). And the quality of the interstate highways varies greatly by the state. I wouldn't hold out the US public highway system out as an example of how great public infrastructure is maintained...

"A good portion," you say?

Is it 10%? 5?

Not sure I'd call it a "good portion" in this context, but it's 6.2% according to FHWA.

> Today, the 46,730-mile Interstate System includes approximately 2,900 miles of turnpikes.


Depends on the states and the routes... good chunk in some regions, but unheard of in others.

If you go from Philadelphia to Chicago, it's a toll-road the entire way (PA turnpike -> Ohio turnpike > Indiana tollroad -> Chicago). That's an outlier route, but toll roads aren't uncommon, especially in certain states.

No, and we have the most extensive highway system in the world.

That extensive highway system has destroyed communities, alienated us from one another. It destroyed passenger rail (air travel took the high-end of the market, to be sure, but what business does the government have in using taxpayer money to destroy an entire industry?)

If you were a person of color in the 1950s, highways likely destroyed the places you lived in. And you couldn't follow the white people to the suburbs. Racist people used zoning laws to prevent you, and where would you get the money to do so anyway? The vast majority of the high-paying professions were not open to you.


Highways didn’t destroy passenger rail. Cargo destroyed passenger rail in the US. Higher profit, much fewer customers, B2B instead of B2C, long term contracts, and a much lower cost. There is no business advantage to passengers over cargo.

Why? Obviously we all want faster mobile data, but how do you think the government will improve on what telcos would do on their own?

Well, the difference is that I can’t vote AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon out in four years.

I switched to tracfone. They’re run by a mexican firm at least as big and evil as any of the US telcos, but you can choose to use any one of the big three networks, and for about a third of less of what I paid before, so it must be dumping less $$$ into the ethical sink hole that is the cell phone industry.

I strongly recommend sonic.net and unwired ltd if they have coverage where you are (sf, north and east bay, mostly)

I wish municipal broadband was the rule in the US instead of the exception.

It’s much easier to vote your local mayor out than it is to vote the president and majority of congress out, especially over a local government service issue.

I have a hard time seeing how government would do a better job. When I didn't like my 4G coverage by T-Mobile I switched to AT&T, higher price but far better coverage. What recourse do you have against a government gone rogue except to wait 4 years? It sounds to me like you're describing a step backwards

China will get there faster if we leave it up to private commerce, because private commerce must strike a deal to build infra whereas the government can pass a bill. Imagine if highways were private endeavors, we'd never have a road system. Thank Eisenhower (and the threat of the missile attacks) for that. Assuming another [super]power achieves 5G first, not only will their network be faster, but they will control the manufacture of hardware, and could use that for whatever means they see fit.

Hey, now that cars are computerized, can play up the military risk of an EMP, and rebuild the rail system we ripped out?

Applications are open for YC Summer 2018

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact