Generally speaking, that's incorrect. That's like saying "I don't like cars, and don't see the value in cars, therefore the market for cars is fraudulent".
In AI, buyers are getting what they want. The demand is real. YOU might not value what they're getting, but that doesn't make it fraudulent.
This is why people misunderstand why AI isn't a bubble. A bubble is asset prices rising due to speculative demand far beyond what the actual demand is.
AI - specifically chip and memory markets feeding AI - is a demand shock on par with World War 2 in its impact. NVIDIA is legitimately forecasting demand of $1 trillion in their chips+memory by the end of 2027.
This is actual, real, shipping physical product: not vapor, not something that will disappear, not something that will "crash" suddenly.
Yes, there is some speculation among AI providers training new models in the race to AGI, but that is not the majority of demand, inference is 65-80% of demand. If the current pace of training slows, that excess capacity for training will get easily sorted out through resale markets.
> Generally speaking, that's incorrect. That's like saying "I don't like cars, and don't see the value in cars, therefore the market for cars is fraudulent".
It's arguable that the car market is indeed fraudulent and the result of years of lobbying, destroying public transportation and car-centric architectures.
There are circular deals, the product is heavily subsidized. Managers are promised the moon and are deceived about the actual capabilities of the product.
Mythos is marketed like a nuclear weapon to make people jealous.
AI model government approval is floated, perhaps in preparation for a government bailout justified by "national security".
Kushners are invested in OpenAI.
There is a lot of fraud going on.
> This is actual, real, shipping physical product: not vapor, not something that will disappear, not something that will "crash" suddenly.
"Not X, not Y, not Z, just A" works better than "Actually A, not X, not Y, not Z".
Generally speaking, that's incorrect. That's like saying "I don't like cars, and don't see the value in cars, therefore the market for cars is fraudulent".
In AI, buyers are getting what they want. The demand is real. YOU might not value what they're getting, but that doesn't make it fraudulent.
This is why people misunderstand why AI isn't a bubble. A bubble is asset prices rising due to speculative demand far beyond what the actual demand is.
AI - specifically chip and memory markets feeding AI - is a demand shock on par with World War 2 in its impact. NVIDIA is legitimately forecasting demand of $1 trillion in their chips+memory by the end of 2027.
This is actual, real, shipping physical product: not vapor, not something that will disappear, not something that will "crash" suddenly.
Yes, there is some speculation among AI providers training new models in the race to AGI, but that is not the majority of demand, inference is 65-80% of demand. If the current pace of training slows, that excess capacity for training will get easily sorted out through resale markets.
The world has changed.
> Generally speaking, that's incorrect. That's like saying "I don't like cars, and don't see the value in cars, therefore the market for cars is fraudulent".
It's arguable that the car market is indeed fraudulent and the result of years of lobbying, destroying public transportation and car-centric architectures.
There are circular deals, the product is heavily subsidized. Managers are promised the moon and are deceived about the actual capabilities of the product.
Mythos is marketed like a nuclear weapon to make people jealous.
AI model government approval is floated, perhaps in preparation for a government bailout justified by "national security".
Kushners are invested in OpenAI.
There is a lot of fraud going on.
> This is actual, real, shipping physical product: not vapor, not something that will disappear, not something that will "crash" suddenly.
"Not X, not Y, not Z, just A" works better than "Actually A, not X, not Y, not Z".