It also doesn't make much sense because AMD is such a close partner with Tesla and have shown that they will work with them to custom build just about anything Tesla needs. When you have a partner like that, buying a stake in them doesn't advance your mission.
Except AMD doesn't own any fabs-- they pay companies who do (like TSMC) to make their chips.
And they didn't make any "custom" ones for Tesla either- the stuff in the new computers is off-the-shelf chips (largely previous-gen ones in fact so as not to take away TSMC production quotas from their newest stuff) that is then placed on Tesla custom boards.
Owning fabs doesn't make sense for hardly anybody.... including not for AMD (AMD did own fabs years ago-- they spun that part of the business off.)
And of course the well cited example is Apple- who like AMD [B}designs[/B] chips, but doesn't build them.
Or just like Tesla designed their own chips- and is having folks like Samsung (current HW3) and TSMC (Dojos D1) build them for them.
Fabs are insanely cap intensive, need massive customer bases because they have to be producing constantly to be worth existing, and process changes are complex and take a long time.... they are a very poor fit for the agile business at which Tesla excels. (the need for a massive customer base to not lose $ on a fab is part of why almost nobody makes their own chips--- nobody including folks who use MASSIVELY more chips than Tesla- would be able to provide enough business on their own to have it make any sense.
The article says there is one. The woman violated the terms of the NDA contract.
She told this stuff to her friend (the one who actually told BI about it) long before the NDA existed.
So the attendant spilled the beans to her friend after the lawsuit right after signing the NDA?
No, the NDA was in 2018. She told her friend soon after the incident happened in 2016...and said friend filed a supporting deposition for the 2018 case confirming her friend told her this story soon after it happened.
The friend apparently shared a copy of it with BI for the story.
Now, the one place where things are tricky is who exactly told the friend the settlement details. I can think of several possibilities, a few of which could potentially be the victim violating the NDA, and several of which would not be.
The fact the nearest Elon has come to commenting since the story broke is reiterating he's being subjected to political attacks and is fighting for free speech suggests his lawyers are telling him the NDA remains in place though, which potentially limits what he can say about it specifically.