undefined | Better HN

0 pointsandsoitis19h ago0 comments

> The name of this CPU is bordering on securities fraud.

No. For it to be securities fraud, Arm would need to make a materially false statement of fact that misleads investors. Naming the CPU in this way doesn't clear the bar because:

a) the name is clearly product brand, similar to how macOS Lion, or Microsoft Windows, or Ford Mustang, or Yves Saint Laurent Black Opium don't mean literally what they say)

b) Arm explicitly defines it as silicon "designed to power the next generation of AI infrastructure", with the technical specs fully disclosed

c) sophisticated investors, the relevant standard for securities fraud, can read a spec sheet

d) Arms' EVP said "We think that the CPU is going to be fundamental to ultimately achieving AGI", framing it as contribution towards AGI, not AGI itself

0 comments

croon19h ago

I was on board with A through C, but then with D it's either clearly a lie or stupidity. I guess it's not a lie technically if they believe it though, so the latter then. But I also don't want to assume someone in their position to be stupid, so then I'm back to the former.

andsoitisOP19h ago

So D undermines A - C in your mind? That doesn't make sense.

croon18h ago

Huge IANAL disclaimer to start, but your post started off with:

> No. For it to be securities fraud, Arm would need to make a materially false statement of fact that misleads investors. Naming the CPU in this way doesn't clear the bar because:...

The EVP statement doesn't say "our CPU does AGI", sure, but is it unfair to suggest it makes some form av AGI claim, which isn't there from the naming alone?

It's no longer your point A) "clearly product brand" if the established usage of the term "AGI" comes out of the EVP's mouth.

And yes, their (albeit very vague) claim is clearly wrong IMHO.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse