Re: Yes, but in society we can not all operate in our own private reality. I can't just claim that for me, all the traffic lights are green so I am exempt from traffic laws. I will still get a ticket and the judge won't be persuaded by my explanation.
That's not the same thing. Traffic lights are out in the open. You can look at the traffic light any time you want and know whether it's red or green. Not so with Intel's conduct behind closed doors. For the latter, prudent people tend to look at external evidence. This kind of evidence has been discussed many times in other conversations, so I won't repeat it here.
Instead, consider a different analogy. Pretend you have your traffic light example, except it's in a town where all the citizens have red-green color blindness. Someone can go up to you and try to convince you that the light is red, but you'll tell them that no, it's not, because traffic is flowing at that point. The other person might tell you that you could be wrong, and that all the motorists are also wrong; after all, the majority isn't always right. You could point out that the light on the bottom of the traffic light is on, and you know that means the color is green, but the other person could argue that the traffic light *could* be upside-down, such that the bottom light is red. You just don't know, since you can't see the color. Only people outside of your town know the actual color, but they're not around to point out the truth to the stubborn individual. I think this kind of whacky logic is exactly like the kind of logic you see from the zealots who argue that Intel has immoral business tactics, even though time and again it cannot be proven.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
