654
Microsoft doesn't know what to do about the memory pricing crisis Microsoft is causing
(www.pcgamer.com)
this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2026
654 points (99.2% liked)
Technology
85553 readers
4496 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem is it doesn't solve the core issue. What's to stop an AI data center buying up all the startup's stock and future stock also.
If you're the one funding the startup you can just reject that
Doesn't that go against Microsoft's fiduciary responsibilities to shareholders to maximize profits? At the very least, it would be contentious among the shareholders. Leaving money on the table? This is the kind of thing would need a very brave (or cavalier) CEO to risk a personal lawsuit.
You don't have shareholders until you ipo. Startups have not ipoed.
But Microsoft does. And those shareholders would want to know why money that could be going to them is frittered away on a startup that is constitutionally set up to leave money on the table.
I mean Microsoft invested in OpenAI back when they were still claiming to stay non-profit. There are ways such as just treating them as an exclusive subcontractor in order to keep your main business. Microsoft is not a chip company afterall but needs them to have product at prices people will pay.
In that case they would be locking down their subsidiary even further to just one client. I guess it all comes down to the plausibility of their argument for making this investment, rather than, say increasing dividends or ploughing that money back into other investments for the business. I guess they were able to justify the OpenAI investment along these lines. If I could hazard a guess, it would be something along the lines of:
I suspect, OpenAI presented itself as a turn key solution to get a foothold in this brave new world and maybe steal a march on Google.