Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by brian_herman__ 2096 days ago
Hasn't the ship already sailed? It was sold to softbank and now NVidia? It seems a too late for this.

edit: Get rid of little to late and change to too late.

2 comments

Apparently; when ARM was first sold to Softbank, Softbank made several guarantees to the UK. Nvidia has made no agreement to continue those guarantees.

> At that time, Softbank announced it had agreed to legally binding commitments to increase investment, headcount and preserve its headquarters in the UK.

> It is not too late for the government to impose conditions, but conversations on whether to impose them or what they might be have not even started.

I would assume Nvidia bought (by obligation) those commitments too?

Otherwise it would be pointless having them in the first place, you'd just get out of it (if you wanted to) with some creative corporate governance.

[I used to work at Arm, but not on creative corporate governance.]

Uhm, no...? The obligation was on Softbank, not on ARM.

> you'd just get out of it (if you wanted to) with some creative corporate governance

... aand you've just "discovered" how large companies routinely get out of their commitments to politicians.

> The obligation was on Softbank, not on ARM

Plausibly the obligation on Softbank could require them, when selling, to require the new buyer agree to the same obligation.

The UK is not in a position of strength at the moment.

Brexit might give us back 'control' from Brussels but does not exactly give us the upper hand in commercial negotiations with the US.

Now, I'm sure that Nvidia will want the deal to close smoothly and will thus be willing to give similar guarantees. Of course the trick is that these guarantees usually (and sensibly) come with a time limit, which also suits governments, so don't mean that much in fine.

> Nvidia has made no agreement to continue those guarantees.

Hasn't Nvidia has actually increased those guarantees with everything they have agreed on for buying ARM?

Do you have a source for this?
The actual nvidia announcement linked in the original post? (https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-to-acquire-arm-for...)

I could quote the whole post, but to satisfy UK regulators, NVIDIA committed to:

> NVIDIA will expand Arm’s R&D presence in Cambridge, UK, by establishing a world-class AI research and education center, and building an Arm/NVIDIA-powered AI supercomputer for groundbreaking research

which is much more than Softbank ever did. And the list of things they commited to goes on, and probably will continue to increase as the US and China get their says on this.

They should move HQ to Ireland to maintain easy access to the European talent pool.
Great Britain is now much more desperate. It needs to compete for market share and access to markets like a 3rd world country but without the associated cheap labour so high tech is one of the few anchors where Britain might have USP. But as you say with ARM that ship has sailed with the previous sale to SoftBank. The only chance to salvage some of the know how (not the IP) would be if these specialists could find similar jobs in Cambridge but there simply isn’t enough opportunities especially as the broader market is dire battered by brexit covid and general stagflation. Not an enviable position- bit like Japan a few years back.
I don't know if any of those things are fundamental limitations.

Israel manages to run a thriving high-tech industry, despite not belonging to any currency or trading bloc. As a standalone economy, the Shekel has far less global standing and negotiation power than the Pound Sterling. Yet, Tel Aviv is probably the most successful tech center outside the US or China.

I think the biggest thing holding back the British tech sector is the country's harsh bankruptcy laws. The UK's creditor friendly laws discourages risk taking and startups, which are the necessary pre-conditions for tomorrows tech giants.

To add to this comment(might be biased as I live and work in the UK): salaries here are just not on the USA level, while costs of items are the same, if not higher(check Apple products price difference on the official website, clothing etc). For many of high demand engineers the choice is London/Manchester or move to the USA
Like most tech people I know in the UK, I've worked for North American companies my whole career. I'd love to work for a UK company and support investment in the UK more, but the pay and working conditions just aren't even remotely competitive (how crazy does that sound, saying I have to go to North American companies to get better working conditions but it's true.) Thankfully more and more let you work remotely from the UK now.

I might be misremembering and exaggerating but I think I looked at ARM internships a decade ago and they were paying about the same daily rate as the hourly rate I got from an American company. Guess where people went?

> I'd love to work for a UK company and support investment in the UK more, but the pay and working conditions just aren't competitive (how crazy does that sound, saying I have to go to North American companies to get better working conditions but it's true.)

Why is that crazy ? From what I've seen the standard of living in the US is actually really good if you're a skilled professional in a high demand field and the labor market is more competitive - better than the EU IMO.

Which is why I'm not sure why I see so much US negative comments around here and this smug EU stance - like just recently I heard from two former coworkers that got a job at similar role/experience level one in Munich and one in Chicago - the guy that went to Chicago got 60% higher salary and his cost of living is roughly similar (didn't go in details TBH).

Also on a personal and cultural level I prefer working with Americans - with Europeans there's so much posturing and pretending to be professional and formal (with skills usually lacking).

> Why is that crazy ?

Because people think the big benefit of being at a European company that balances the worse pay is more vacation, more reasonable working hours, better work-life balance, working autonomy.

But that's not true. It's the opposite.

I get far better vacation, working hours, work-life balance, working autonomy at North American companies. And better pay. So what's the benefit of working for a European company?

Do you work in the US or UK?

I read your original post as working in the UK for an American company, but now I'm not so sure

How much vacation did you take last year?

What are your working hours?

> Which is why I'm not sure why I see so much US negative comments around here and this smug EU stance

Because not only the (relatively) rich matter.

Sure but the US has plenty of advantages over EU and EU is quite bad in some regards as well (especially with regards to equality across the EU - US is usually grouped together but people seem to be talking west Europe and Scandinavian countries when discussing EU, meanwhile I just saw a report how in eastern Europe women are doing surrogate pregnancies as a paid gig because of their living conditions ... if you travel through parts of EU like Bulgaria you'll quickly encounter some medieval living conditions)
>how crazy does that sound, saying I have to go to North American companies to get better working conditions but it's true

Same for my time in Germany. I got way better working conditions(not talking about money) working for US companies who had offices there than for German ones.

If you're a high demand engineer, you're probably right but SV is special. If you compare London to NY or Birmingham to Altlanta the gap isn't really there. Esp check taxes and healthcare in the US. I've worked both and I'm living in NY based on what I saved when I worked in London, money wise the USA has been surprisingly bad.
You sure? I just did a quick search for EE salaries in London[1] compared to Detroit[2] (the closest large city to me) and Detroit comes out ahead by a lot. And I'm sure rent is cheaper.

However, I agree that salaries are ridiculous in some cities. I'd love to give living in NYC or LA a shot, but the salaries I see for EE jobs are marginally more than what I make in the middle of nowhere.

1: https://www.indeed.co.uk/salaries/senior-electrical-engineer... 2: https://www.indeed.com/career/engineer/salaries/Detroit--MI

You're right. Detroit is higher than I expected. I guess low GBP rates make a difference, when I was in London 1 GBP = 2 USD. (Rent in London is definitely not cheaper.) London isn't a great place for EE. Software in Banks had/has crazy demand.
1) You are comparing London, the largest city and the capital of the UK, to Detroit, which is not the capital nor the largest city.

2) Check out numbeo https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/

That was the point. Despite London being a much larger population center with much higher cost of living, engineers are still paid more in Detroit.
LOL, that's rich, engineers in the UK feeling underpaid when you have the best market for SW engineers in Europe(London).

Wanna see underpaid? Come to Austria.

I haven't been to Austria but numbeo seems to suggest what you say is incorrect on majority if not most of parameters https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?cou...
Income levels wise, Numbeo is just a mish-mash full of noise and can't be taken seriously to judge salaries of skilled professionals(that's what we're talking about right?)

Sure, poor people have it better in Vienna because it's cheaper and has better social services than London but skilled professionals(developers and engineers) have it worse as underpaying is rampant in the tech industry there.

Sources: me living there and my friends living in the UK

Do your friends on the similar level save more per month after all bills and taxes than you? Genuine question

PS will they be saving more in the situation where both of you had promotions?

What about health care costs. Education costs. Amount of vacation time. Pension.
Not sure if your comment is asking about those things or implying that what I said is incorrect.

Healthcare costs: I personally do not have experience with USA healthcare system. In terms of UK healthcare system I have mixed feelings: key reasons(short list):

1) While it's free, getting many basic things(like blood, urine tests, ultrasound scan) is complicated if you have no symptoms. It's much cheaper and better for the health to treat things at the earliest stage possible and it's not always easy to do so in the UK, even with some private health insurance.

2) Relatively long waiting times for procedures, A&E[1] etc

3) Biased(and potentially selfish) reason: healthcare costs need to be looked both in terms of general population and personal level. If you are healthy and young your chances of using healthcare services are lower.

Education: can't comment as haven't studied in the USA and people from outside of the UK(me) had to pay tuition fees in the UK

Vacation(I might be wrong on this one): from my understanding speaking to some tech working from the USA, amount of days is only 5-10 days lower than than of the UK for many tech companies.

Above does not mean UK is better or worse than USA, I love it here, I love British countryside,it is majestic! [1] https://www.nhs.uk/using-the-nhs/nhs-services/urgent-and-eme.... [EDIT] First sentence replaced "what I wrong is incorrect" with "what I said is incorrect" and added some commas

> While it's free, getting many basic things(like blood, urine tests, ultrasound scan) is complicated if you have no symptoms.

I feel like you've misunderstood this.

If you don't have symptoms but are asking for testing then you're asking for screening. We have strict criteria for screening because it has potential to cause harm.

https://www.gov.uk/topic/population-screening-programmes/pop...

Here's a blog that explains why testing people who don't have symptoms causes more false positives. https://www.jackiecassell.com/moonshot-moonshine-and-false-p...

> It's much cheaper and better for the health to treat things at the earliest stage possible

This is often incorrect.

>I feel like you've misunderstood this.

>If you don't have symptoms but are asking for testing then you're asking for screening. We have strict criteria for screening because it has potential to cause harm.

Blood/urine test =/= testing. Also from the link you provided: "Screening is the process of identifying individuals who may be at higher risk of a disease or condition amongst large populations of healthy people." People who are not at risk might want to do blood/urine test to check if they currently have underlying issues.

> Here's a blog that explains why testing people who don't have symptoms causes more false positives.

The link you provided talks about Covid19 situation, don't think that was part of the discussion.

>> It's much cheaper and better for the health to treat things at the earliest stage possible

>This is often incorrect.

Last time I checked that was the thing suggested, can you please clarify and elaborate why you say so?

I was trying to search online to compare student debt in UK vs US. Any idea why the below link shows a high student debt in England?

From https://www.statista.com/statistics/376423/uk-student-loan-d...

> In 2020, students graduating from English universities will have incurred an average of 40.28 thousand British pounds of student loan debt...

From https://studentloanhero.com/student-loan-debt-statistics/

> It’s 2020, and Americans are more burdened by student loan debt than ever.

Among the Class of 2019, 69% of college students took out student loans, and they graduated with an average debt of $29,900, including both private and federal debt. Meanwhile, 14% of their parents took out an average of $37,200 in federal parent PLUS loans.

Can't comment about Wales and Norther Ireland but can make an educated guess about England and Scotland.

University cost of English unis are higher than of Scottish unis. Eg please see Edinburgh university link https://www.ed.ac.uk/tuition-fees/find/undergraduate/2020-20.... For "Artificial Intelligence and Computer Science (BSc Hons)" the cost for Scottish students is £1,820, where for Home - RUK its £9,250. I would assume that many Scottish families can cover the £1,820 cost, where £9,250 is more difficult to cover for more families

That's the thing, for a high skilled position, the American salary will more than cover all of that.
With access to a high paying job, like software engineering, all of those are better in the USA.
One problem I have with Cambridge is that, IMO, it's a small island in the middle of nowhere, which has to limit its attractiveness at some point.

Sure, there is a fast-ish train link to London but Cambridge itself is quite small and there is close to nothing at all around it.

Edit: Sorry guys! Obviously many people from Cambridge here.

I live in (or near) Cambridge and it is rubbish. It's different if you went to Cambridge University, though. A lot more doors are open for you. But it's far too expensive to live in so most people live miles away and do a horrible commute every day involving crawling traffic and general anger and frustration.
I don't live in the UK but I know that feeling of living in a small but wealthy European college town. It looks nice in photos but job opportunities are scarce for those who aren't doctorate alumni of the local university and also rents are expensive, there's no subway so everyone is bumper to bumper in cars.
Cambridge is small enough, and cycle-friendly enough that nothing is more than 15 minutes away. Bumper-to-bumper is a choice (assuming you live reasonably near the centre)
Is it really cycle friendly? Before I moved here I had this idea that it would be like Amsterdam or something. It's not even close. The roads are potholed and badly designed for bicycles. When I used to cycle in from the edge of the city I'd overtake hundreds of cars, as usual, but barely see any other cyclists. Really no different from anywhere else I've lived in the UK except there are, inexplicably, loads of bike chained to railings everywhere.

As for living in the city, you either have to share with someone or pay exorbitant amounts for something tiny. And what are you even getting for the money? In London you get to live in a world-class city with the best public transport in the country. What do you even get in Cambridge? It's only famous for its university, and that is off-limits for plebeians.

Well yes, if you're a student or a researcher working at the University and living in Cambridge then yes, you can get everywhere by bike easier, been there done that myself.

The problem is when you get a job at one of the surrounding companies as most of them are outside the city and once you start planning a family you tend to move out of the city as well.

Then your car is your only way to get to work basically as the city and surrounding region is not dense enough to warrant implementing good public transportation.

Cambridge used to be very easy to access from mainland Europe with direct flights by Suckling Airways!

Flying low over waves of the North Sea, you were guaranteed to not be bothered by passengers sitting next to you because the noise of those 2 propellor engines made any conversation impossible.

(Funny enough, I took that flight for 30 minute meeting at ARM headquarters. Great trip: the night before was that famous England-Argentina games with David Beckham’s red card. Good times at the local bar!)