Ricardo
@Ric_RTP • 46,711 subscribers
Private content partner to finance & tech founders | $50M+ in value generated for 35+ clients | I like to share my honest thoughts, don't take it personally
Shorts
Videos
This man stole a country from his own father and spent the next 18 years buying the West with gas money. - He deposed his own dad in a palace coup and left him in exile for nearly a decade - He founded the news network that aired Osama bin Laden's tapes - He built America's largest military base in the Middle East and charges no rent for it - He bought Harrods, the Shard, Canary Wharf, Paris Saint-Germain and 17% of Volkswagen - He won the 2022 World Cup for a country with no football history Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani died this morning at 74. Here's how bought the world: In June 1995, he waited for his father to leave the country, then took the throne. The coup was bloodless. His father spent nearly a decade in exile. Qatar is about one third the size of Belgium, and its population was barely two million, most of them foreign workers. But it was sitting on one of the LARGEST natural gas reserves on Earth. He bet everything on liquefied natural gas. Qatar became the world's biggest LNG exporter and one of the richest countries alive per person. Then he hit the problem every commodity business hits: Gas is gas, anyone with a tanker can sell it, and a tiny country with no army and that much money is a snack for its neighbours. So he bought two things nobody else in the Gulf thought to buy... The first was the world's attention. In 1996 he issued a decree and Al Jazeera was born. Within a few years it was the most influential news network in the Arab world. He owned the loudest microphone in the region and never had to speak into it himself. The second was the American military. In 1996, Qatar spent over a billion dollars building an air base at Al Udeid, outside Doha. It got the longest runway in the Gulf and shelters for nearly a hundred aircraft. Qatar's air force only had about a dozen fighter jets. In 1999 he reportedly told US officials he wanted 10,000 American servicemen stationed there permanently. Then 9/11 happened, and they came. The genius part: Al Udeid is now the forward headquarters of US Central Command and the largest American base in the Middle East, with roughly 10,000 troops. Qatar charges no rent. He built the asset before the customer existed, handed it over free, and bought the one thing cash cannot: The US military parked permanently between his gas and everyone who wanted it. The network broadcasting bin Laden and the runway flying America's war sat in the same tiny country, paid for by the same man. Then he went shopping... He set up the Qatar Investment Authority in 2005: - Harrods - The Shard - Canary Wharf, London's largest property owner, bought with Brookfield for 2.6 billion pounds - 17% of Volkswagen - Paris Saint-Germain All his. In 2017 the Telegraph ran the headline "Qataris own more of London than the Queen." Then 2008 arrived. Barclays needed billions or the British government was going to own it. Qatar wrote the cheque and its stake climbed to 12.7%. Barclays was later charged over how it disclosed that Qatari money. In 2010, FIFA handed the 2022 World Cup to a desert country with NO football history. Corruption allegations shadowed the bid for over a decade, and the treatment of the migrant workers who built it drew brutal criticism. Yet he walked into the opening match in 2022 and the stadium gave him a standing ovation. Every other Gulf state was selling the same molecule at the same price. Hamad spent his money on a newsroom, a runway, a football club and half of London. A country of two million now brokers hostage deals and hosts American presidents. He built all of it in 18 years, and he took the throne from his own father to start. Truly an unmatched legacy.
Ricardo2,138,604 просмотров • 7 дней назад
Xi Jinping just hijacked the rules of AI for the entire planet. Today, Xi walked onto the stage at the World AI Conference in Shanghai. It was his FIRST time attending the event in person since it launched in 2018. Heads of state do not fly in personally for a product expo. The day before he spoke, 29 governments signed a founding charter. It created a brand new international body called the World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization, with its permanent headquarters in Shanghai. China had spent a full year lining up the signatures. UN Secretary General sat in the audience. So did the leaders of Kazakhstan, Cambodia, and Thailand, alongside representatives from more than 100 countries. While the robots and the chips got the headlines, those 29 signatures were what really mattered. Here's why: Whoever writes the rules of a technology decides who gets to win with it. The US is leaning on export controls and voluntary safety pledges. Europe is enforcing its own AI Act. China just built the institution that wants to set the standards for everyone else, and it put the headquarters on its own soil. And look at who signed... The founding members include Russia, Pakistan, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, and Laos. Together, the countries in this new bloc represent a population that dwarfs the entire G7. These are the nations that felt shut out of the AI order the West built, and Beijing just offered them a seat at a table it controls. And Xi framed all of it as a gift to humanity. He pledged 5,000 AI training slots for developing countries. He called on the world to "encourage open source, openness, collaboration and sharing" and warned against any nation placing its own security above everyone else's, which is basically a shot at American chip controls. It was a generous call for openness from the country that just created the rule-setting body and kept the headquarters for itself. On the conference itself, more than 1,100 companies showed off over 3,000 products, including Huawei's Atlas 950, an 8,192-chip supercomputer built to go straight at Nvidia, and what China is billing as the world's first AI agent phone. So while much of the West is still arguing about whether AI is a bubble, China spent this week doing something more lasting: It started writing the rulebook, and got 29 countries to sign. What happens to America's lead if the rest of the world ends up playing by China's rules?
Ricardo183,292 просмотров • 1 день назад
Palantir's CEO just exposed Sam Altman and Dario Amodei for robbing every Fortune 500 company. Within two minutes, Alex Karp took the entire frontier AI industry apart on national television. His exact words: "Every single enterprise in this country, these people are LIVID. They are paying for tokens that create no value. These people are stealing the weights and alpha of my business." He literally said the entire frontier AI business model is intellectual property extraction dressed up as a subscription. Then he also destroyed the pricing model with a single question that Silicon Valley still refuses to answer: "If it was so valuable, let's say I can make you $1 billion tomorrow. Wouldn't I say I'll make you $1 billion and I want 30 percent? Why are they charging for tokens if it's so valuable?" That question breaks the industry. If OpenAI and Anthropic's models truly delivered the productivity gains the labs claim, they would take equity or a share of the profit they generate. They would not sell access by the million tokens. Token pricing is itself the CONFESSION that the product cannot produce reliable value at scale. If it did, they would price for the value. But they price for the compute because that is what they are actually selling. Karp went even further... He called the entire arrangement "a wealth tax that does not help the poor. It just punishes." American businesses are transferring the alpha of their operations, meaning the workflows, the customer data, the strategy memos, the internal models that make them competitive, directly into the training pipelines of a handful of Silicon Valley labs. Once those labs retrain, the customer's own edge becomes the next enterprise product sold back to their competitors. And the part the AI industry does not want anyone thinking about: Every enterprise running its confidential documents, its customer conversations, and its financial models through a frontier model is potentially teaching that model HOW to replace them. The vendor collects the token fee AND the compounding intelligence about that customer's business. That is the mechanism. And that is why Karp used the word "stealing." He claims this is why every executive he meets is furious in private and silent in public. Nobody wants to be the CEO who called out the labs and then discovered their next competitor was built on their own leaked workflows. The entire AI industry has been priced for perfection on one assumption: That frontier labs produce durable, defensible value that justifies infinite compute spend. But Karp just told us that the customers do not believe that assumption anymore. They believe they are being taxed without benefit, watched without consent, and copied without recourse. The moment enterprises stop believing, the whole valuation stack shakes.
Ricardo2,896,522 просмотров • 17 дней назад
In 19 days, a jury in Oakland is going to decide whether the entire legal foundation of the AI industry is built on fraud. Everyone thinks the Musk vs Altman lawsuit is a billionaire grudge match. Two egos, one grudge, a $150 billion damages number designed for headlines. Easy to dismiss. Easy to scroll past. That's exactly what Altman wants you to think. Because what's actually on trial on April 27 is something much BIGGER than Elon's hurt feelings... A jury is going to decide whether you can legally take billions of dollars in nonprofit donations, use them to build the most valuable technology in human history, and then quietly convert that nonprofit into a for-profit company worth $850 billion. If the answer is no, the entire AI industry has a problem. Because OpenAI is not the only company that did this: Anthropic was founded by OpenAI defectors using the same nonprofit-first mission language. xAI pitches itself as building AI "for humanity." Every frontier lab has used the moral cover of "we're doing this for the good of the world" to attract talent, capital, and regulatory goodwill they would have never gotten otherwise. An Elon win doesn't just touch OpenAI. It creates a legal precedent that every AI company built on a nonprofit or public benefit promise becomes vulnerable to shareholder and donor clawback suits. That's why this case matters. And that's why Altman is panicking. Just look at what he did this week: Elon filed a motion demanding the court remove Altman and Brockman from their roles and FORCE OpenAI to return to its nonprofit origins. Then he amended the suit to say if he wins the $150 billion, all of it goes to OpenAI's charity arm. Not him. Zero dollars to Elon personally. That amendment was surgical. It stripped Altman of his entire public defense. He can no longer claim this is about Elon's ego or Elon's bank account. Elon is now legally on record saying he just wants the mission back. OpenAI's response was to panic-write a letter to the California and Delaware attorneys general asking them to investigate Elon for "anti-competitive behavior." Their strategy chief publicly accused Elon of coordinating attacks with Mark Zuckerberg. They called the lawsuit "harassment driven by ego and jealousy." That's NOT the response of a company that thinks it's going to win. Real companies with real defenses don't ask the government to silence the person suing them 3 weeks before trial. They let the evidence speak. OpenAI is scrambling because they know what's in discovery. Elon's team has been building this case for two years. Emails, board minutes, internal conversations about the conversion. The kind of paper trail that juries understand and executives can't explain away. And the timing couldn't be worse... OpenAI is trying to IPO at $852 billion. They just raised $122 billion. Microsoft has $135 billion of exposure to them. A jury verdict that even partially sides with Elon in late April or May would crater the entire IPO runway and send shockwaves through every major AI investor on Earth. This is why Altman spent the last 2 weeks doing press tours and policy blueprints and "super intelligence agendas" aimed at Washington. He's trying to REFRAME himself as the responsible statesman of AI right before a jury decides if he's a con artist. Most people will watch this trial start and think it's celebrity drama. The smart money is watching it and realizing that the legal foundation of the AI boom is about to be tested in court for the first time EVER. And if that foundation cracks, everything built on top of it is at risk.
Ricardo27,878,212 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад
Mark Zuckerberg is bankrupting a $22 billion startup because they refused to sell to him. The company is Kalshi. They run the largest prediction market in the US. Users bet real money on real-world outcomes. Last year, prediction markets did $28 billion in monthly volume across the industry. This month, they did $220 BILLION. The sector literally 8x'd in a single year. Bernstein now projects the entire prediction market industry will hit $1 TRILLION by 2030. Zuckerberg saw the growth curve coming. Last year, when Kalshi was valued at only $2 billion, he sat down with founder and CEO Tarek Mansour to discuss buying the entire company. Mansour said no. Kalshi went on to raise at $11 billion in December. Then $22 billion in March. It is now pursuing a $40 billion round and openly weighing an IPO. Zuckerberg's response: He walked back to Meta headquarters, took every piece of information he learned in that meeting, and directed a small internal team to build a Kalshi clone from the ground up. Meta's version is called Arena. It uses Llama to generate the questions. Every one of Meta's 3.5 billion daily users will get access. And here's where the plan gets ruthless... Meta is deliberately launching with play money. That single decision lets Zuckerberg dodge every gambling regulator on Earth while he trains billions of users to bet on prediction markets. Meanwhile Kalshi is spending millions fighting state gambling laws, the CFTC, an Illinois sports tax, a Minnesota felony statute, and the Department of Justice. Kalshi is the crash test dummy. Meta is the getaway driver. The moment the regulatory war is settled, Zuckerberg flips the switch. Arena becomes a real-money market, and 3.5 billion users are already trained to use it. Kalshi's user base of a few million cannot compete. This is the exact playbook Meta ran on Snapchat in 2016 when Instagram Stories launched. It is the exact playbook they ran on TikTok in 2020 when Reels launched. It is the exact playbook they ran on Twitter in 2023 when Threads launched. The FTC took Meta to court over this pattern last year and called it "buy or bury." The judge sided with Meta. So the playbook is legally protected. Tarek Mansour walked into a meeting with the most predatory copycat in tech history and gave him the entire pitch deck for the fastest growing product in Silicon Valley. Six months later, Zuckerberg is executing on that intel while Mansour is stuck defending his company in courts across America. Kalshi survived Zuckerberg's offer. But it probably will not survive Zuckerberg's clone. Meta ended Q1 with $81 billion in cash. That is enough to buy every prediction market company on Earth six times over. Zuckerberg is choosing to STEAL them instead because he can, and because the courts already gave him permission. The next 12 months will decide whether Kalshi becomes a $50 billion IPO or a cautionary tale about what happens when a founder says no to Meta. What do you think?
Ricardo1,462,418 просмотров • 16 дней назад
Warren Buffett just warned that some of the biggest names in AI might collapse soon. And he said it while revealing he had personally put $31 billion into one of them... Google, Microsoft, and Amazon are now laying out hundreds of billions in capex to stay in the AI race. Buffett called that real money, the kind that was never required back when software was cheap to run. He said these companies have no choice but to keep spending at this scale, because none of them can afford to be the one that blinks. In his own words, they are "playing a game they don't want to play." But the one AI company Buffett actually bought is Google. Berkshire now holds a stake worth more than $31 billion, and for weeks Wall Street assumed the credit belonged to Greg Abel, who took over as CEO in January and ran the position up on his watch. But Buffett admitted he "initiated" the investment. He usually never reveals who makes a call. The Google position already sits behind only Apple and American Express in Berkshire's stock portfolio, and last month Berkshire bought $10 billion of it directly from the company in a private placement. Then he undercut his own trade. When asked why he chose Alphabet over the rest of the Mag 7, Buffett said he does not even like it as much as four or five other businesses Berkshire already owns. He bought it the way he buys anything, as a good company available at a fair price. For years he waved off the Apple question by calling it a consumer company. This time he let the AI label on Google stand, and bought it anyway. Buffett also said the vast majority of what Wall Street pushes, on the order of 90 to 95%, is merchandising, because Wall Street only cares whether it can sell you something. He said he cannot remember the last research report that dug into the actual returns a business earns. Everyone fixates on next quarter instead. He also brought up IBM, which owned its market for decades until a rival offered its customers a better deal and its best business cracked. He brought up A&P, the biggest retailer in America in the 1930s, a company he said held a commanding position that later vanished completely. Buffett was describing the AI leaders as much as anyone: The most dominant company on Earth today is not promised to be dominant in ten years. So the most famous technology skeptic in investing put $31 billion into the AI trade and at the same time warned that the companies leading it are stuck in a war with no exit. What does Buffett see coming that the rest of the market doesn't?
Ricardo215,577 просмотров • 4 дней назад
This AI just exposed the BIGGEST legal insider trading operation in America. A platform called GovGreed built a seven-layer machine learning system that cross-references every stock trade disclosed by every sitting politician against the bills their committees control, the campaign donations they receive, and the companies their votes directly impact. It scored all 540 politicians currently in Congress. And the numbers are crazy: 56% of every stock purchase made by Congress in the last 16 months was on a stock directly affected by a bill the buyer later voted on. That is 6,170 out of 11,016 total purchases. More than HALF of all congressional stock buys are on companies whose fate that same politician is about to decide. 343 of 540 Congress members actively trade stocks while holding access to nonpublic legislative information. That is 63.8% of the entire legislature making market bets with an informational edge that would put any hedge fund manager in prison. The AI identified 752 active "Triple Signals" in the current Congress. A Triple Signal fires when three conditions line up at once: The politician sits on the committee controlling a bill, they traded stock in a company affected by that bill, AND they received campaign contributions from that same industry. Bills carrying these insider indicators pass at 5.4 TIMES the normal rate. Now look at the individual leaderboard: - Nancy Pelosi's estimated portfolio sits at $194 million with a Greediness score of 98.1 out of 100 - Ro Khanna made 13,231 trades across 800+ different tickers - Michael McCaul made 32,302 trades and filed 6,670 of them late - Thomas Suozzi filed 86.4% of his trades late with an average delay of 396 days, meaning his disclosures landed over a YEAR after he made the trade And then there is Lisa McClain, the fourth-ranking Republican in the House. She has made 1,443 trades in three years, more than 98% of all politicians tracked. She violated the STOCK Act twice in a single year, disclosing up to $900,000 in trades months after the legal deadline. Her husband bought up to $250,000 in Elon Musk's xAI, which quietly converted into SpaceX equity before last Friday's $2 trillion IPO. The penalty for all of this? A $200 fine. The number of Congress members ever prosecuted under the STOCK Act since it passed in 2012? Zero. And the cruelest part is this: A bill to ban congressional stock trading was introduced in January 2026. It has bipartisan support. Over 80% of American voters want it passed. But Congress is sitting on it, because the people who would have to vote yes are the same people making millions from the system staying exactly the way it is. They write the insider trading laws, they exempt themselves from enforcement, they trade on the information those laws generate, and when they get caught, they pay a fine that is basically nothing. The AI didn't discover anything Congress was hiding. It just organized what was already public into a pattern so obvious that nobody can pretend it isn't there anymore.
Ricardo1,792,028 просмотров • 1 месяц назад
OpenAI just got OFFICIALLY flagged as a company that might not be able to pay its bills. S&P Global Ratings just cut Oracle's long term credit rating from BBB to BBB-. One more cut and Oracle becomes a JUNK rated company for the first time in its history. But the reason S&P gave is what's really interesting here... They named OpenAI as a "key credit risk" inside the report. OpenAI is a private company. It carries no credit rating and has never been profitable. And a ratings agency just took the risk of that company failing and wrote it directly onto the credit file of a public company held inside pension funds and bond funds all over the world. OpenAI accounts for roughly HALF of Oracle's remaining performance obligations. That's the famous $638 billion backlog every bull points to as the reason to own the stock. Half of the asset is the risk. And then there's the maturity trap: Oracle's data center leases run 15 to 19 years. Its cloud customer contracts run about 5 years. Oracle disclosed both figures in its own annual report. So Oracle is signing 19 year obligations to serve 5 year promises made by a customer that has never earned a dollar of profit. If OpenAI cannot pay, Oracle gets left holding data center leases it may not be able to exit, and may have to re-lease to somebody else on worse terms. That is the entire downgrade in one sentence. The numbers underneath: Oracle spent roughly $55.7 billion on capital projects in fiscal 2026 and posted negative $23.7 billion in free cash flow. S&P now expects the fiscal 2027 cash flow deficit to widen to around negative $42 billion. That is nearly DOUBLE its previous estimate, and the agency admitted it had underestimated how much Oracle would need to spend. Oracle plans to raise up to $40 billion in fiscal 2027, including a potential $20 billion share sale that would add roughly 4.8% to its share count. They literally cannot borrow more without triggering the next downgrade, so shareholders are being diluted to protect the bondholders. And the funny part is that on the day of the downgrade, Oracle's stock went UP 2.65%. But on that same day, the spread on Oracle's BONDS widened. Equity investors looked at the $638 billion backlog and bought. Credit investors looked at the identical company and demanded to be paid more for the risk of holding it. Credit investors are the ones whose entire job is to price what goes wrong, so they just repriced Oracle. For context, Microsoft is rated AAA, Alphabet is AA+, and Amazon is AA. Oracle is chasing the same AI contracts from seven to nine notches further down the ladder. The day after the downgrade, the UK named Oracle, alongside three other cloud providers, a critical third party to the British financial system. Supervision by the Bank of England begins July 13. Oracle is the only one of those four sitting one notch above junk. Now follow the chain: OpenAI has never made a profit. OpenAI is half of Oracle's backlog. Oracle is one downgrade from junk. Oracle is now formally load bearing infrastructure for British banks. The business risk of an unprofitable private startup has traveled through a corporate balance sheet and landed inside the supervisory perimeter of a central bank. Nobody designed that. It happened one contract at a time. And the demand IS real. Oracle's cloud infrastructure revenue grew 93% last quarter. If this buildout works, it becomes one of the great corporate reinventions in history. But the whole structure now rests on one question that no rating agency, no bank and no regulator can answer: Can OpenAI pay its bills?
Ricardo300,087 просмотров • 8 дней назад
Microsoft just banned its own engineers from using AI. The tool was literally costing MORE than the humans it was supposed to replace. They lied to you about AI adoption and now the whole narrative is blowing up: Microsoft gave thousands of engineers access to Claude Code six months ago and encouraged them to use it. Engineers loved it and adoption exploded. But then the invoices arrived. Token-based pricing means every query, every code review, every debugging session costs money. At scale across 100,000 engineers, the numbers became so large that Microsoft issued an internal order to cancel nearly all Claude Code licenses by end of June and force everyone onto their own cheaper tool instead. The company that invested $5 billion in Anthropic just told its own people to stop using Anthropic's product because it costs too much. Uber's story is even worse... Their CTO Praveen Neppalli Naga told The Information that the budget he planned for the full year was "blown away already" by April. Uber had rolled out Claude Code in December 2025. By March, 84% of their 5,000 engineers were using it with 70% of all committed code coming from AI systems. Heavy users were burning $500 to $2,000 per month each. Naga himself spent $1,200 in a single two-hour demo session. The company had even built internal leaderboards ranking engineers by how much AI they used. They literally gamified the spending and then ran out of money. Now look at what Nvidia's own VP of applied deep learning Bryan Catanzaro said to Axios last month. Direct quote: "For my team, the cost of compute is far beyond the costs of the employees." This is a VP at the company that SELLS the chips saying that using AI is more expensive than paying humans. Think about what this means for the entire AI narrative. Every CEO on every earnings call for the past two years has said the same thing: AI will make us more efficient, reduce headcount, and cut costs. The stock market rewarded every company that said it. Fired workers, stock goes up. Announced AI adoption, stock goes up. But the actual companies deploying AI at scale are discovering the math doesn't work. The MORE employees use AI, the HIGHER the bill. Goldman Sachs forecasts a 24x increase in token consumption by 2030 as companies adopt AI agents. Gartner just published a report showing that even though individual token prices will drop 90% by 2030, total enterprise AI costs will go UP because agents consume exponentially more tokens per task than basic tools. Meta built an internal dashboard called "Claudeonomics" to track which employees use the most AI. Amazon started pushing engineers to "tokenmaxx," their internal term for consuming as many AI tokens as possible. Both companies are spending hundreds of billions on AI infrastructure this year alone. And Microsoft, the company that bet its entire future on AI, just told 100,000 engineers to stop using the tool they liked best because the per-token bills got out of control. The companies building AI are telling investors it saves money. The companies using AI are finding out it costs more than the humans it was supposed to replace. And even the company that makes the chips just admitted it through its own VP. This is the gap nobody on Wall Street is pricing in. $725 billion in AI infrastructure spending this year across Big Tech. And the first companies to actually deploy these tools at scale are already pulling back because the economics don't work. What do you think?
Ricardo2,960,360 просмотров • 1 месяц назад
The smartest man in AI just exposed the whole AGI narrative as a LIE. And he used a physics problem from 1905 to prove it. His name is Demis Hassabis. He runs Google DeepMind, and won the Nobel Prize for using AI to crack a problem in biology that had stumped scientists for 50 years. Almost nobody in this industry has a track record like his. He went on the NothingButTech podcast and called out the biggest lie in AI right now: Right now the loudest voices in AI are telling you that AGI is basically here. OpenAI has literally defined AGI as a system that can outperform humans at most "economically valuable work." In other words, if it replaces enough jobs, we have arrived. Hassabis thinks that bar is a joke. He said real general intelligence has to do what the human brain can do, because the brain is the only proof we have that this kind of intelligence is even possible. He called that "a higher bar than just being able to do some useful economic work," which is about as close as a polite British Nobel laureate gets to calling his rivals out. Then he gave the actual test: Today's AI has read everything humans have ever written, including the theory of relativity. So when it explains relativity back to you, it's repeating an answer that already exists. That's not intelligence. So Hassabis proposed a test that makes memorization impossible. Train an AI on only what humanity knew in 1901, four years BEFORE Einstein published relativity. Then ask it to come up with relativity on its own. It can't look up the answer, because in 1901 the answer doesn't exist yet. The only way to pass is to do what Einstein actually did: Take the same physics everyone else had and reason its way to an idea no human had ever had. Hassabis says not a single AI today can, no matter how much it has memorized. Which means what we keep calling "almost AGI" is really just the best librarian in history. It can find any answer that already exists but it cannot create one that doesn't. His second version is even sharper: AlphaGo, the system his own team built, famously invented a brand new move that no human had played in 2,000 years of the game. Everyone called it genius but Hassabis says that still is not the bar. The real test is not whether an AI can invent a new move inside Go, it is whether an AI could INVENT a game as deep and as beautiful as Go in the first place. No model that exists today can do it. The people telling you AGI has already arrived are the same people raising hundreds of billions of dollars on that exact promise. The valuations only work if the finish line is right in front of us. So the finish line keeps getting dragged closer, and AGI keeps getting quietly redefined down to "does useful work," until the products they already sell happen to qualify. Hassabis has nothing to prove and nothing to sell you. He already won the Nobel, and he is telling you the machines still cannot do the one thing that would make them genuinely intelligent, which is have a truly original idea. To be fair to him, he is not a pessimist about it. He believes real AGI IS coming, and he is spending his life building it. He just refuses to pretend it is already sitting in your phone. So the next time a founder tells you AGI is months away, remember that the one man in the room with a Nobel Prize built his test around Einstein, and admitted that nothing we have made can pass it. What do you think?
Ricardo1,284,419 просмотров • 1 месяц назад
Trump just got exposed for running the biggest insider trading operation in American history. Nancy Pelosi traded $5 million in stocks and Congress lost its mind. Trump literally executed $750 MILLION worth of stock trades in ONE quarter while being President. His ethics filing just dropped and the numbers are genuinely unprecedented in history: Between January and March 2026, Donald Trump personally executed 3,700 individual stock transactions worth between $220 million and $750 million. That's roughly 60 trades PER DAY. While signing executive orders, meeting foreign leaders, and making policy decisions that directly impact the companies he's buying and selling. Now here's where it gets really insane: On February 10, Trump bought between $1 million and $5 million worth of Dell stock. Three months later, on May 8, he stood at a Mother's Day event at the White House, thanked Michael Dell by name, and told Americans to "go out and buy a Dell." Dell stock surged 14.6% that day to an all-time high of $263.99. Since Trump's February purchase, Dell is up 96%. And 5 months BEFORE Trump bought Dell stock, Michael and Susan Dell donated $6.25 billion to Trump Accounts, one of the largest philanthropic commitments to a sitting president's signature program in modern history. So the timeline goes: Dell donates $6.25 billion to Trump's program -> Trump buys Dell stock ->Trump tells America to buy Dell from the White House podium -> Stock hits all-time high And that's just ONE stock... The same filing shows Trump bought Nvidia stock on February 10. One week later, Nvidia announced a massive chip deal with Meta. He bought more Nvidia stock one week BEFORE his own Commerce Department approved the sale of Nvidia chips to Saudi Arabia. He bought Intel stock starting in March 2026. The US government already owned a 9.9% stake in Intel worth over $41 billion. On April 30, Trump posted on Truth Social praising Intel, writing that "Intel Stock continues to rise." Intel jumped 3% in after-hours and is now up 140% year-to-date. He bought Palantir stock while his administration was actively handing them billion-dollar government contracts for immigration enforcement and defense. He bought Robinhood stock while his own Trump Accounts program uses Robinhood as the broker. He's currently sitting on over 100% profit on AMD, Intel, Bloom Energy, Marvell Technology, and at least 10 other positions. Every single president since Lyndon B. Johnson has used a blind trust to avoid exactly this situation. But Trump didn't. His assets sit in a trust controlled by his own children, and the filings show a broker acted as agent on several trades. The White House says the portfolio is "independently managed." But here's what independently managed looks like: Buy Dell stock. Three months later, publicly endorse Dell from the White House. Stock hits all-time high. Buy Nvidia stock. One week later, your own government approves their chip sales. Stock rips. Buy Intel stock. Post about Intel on Truth Social. Stock jumps. The government you run already owns a 10% stake. Buy Palantir. Hand them contracts. Buy Robinhood. Route a federal program through their platform. Nancy Pelosi got absolutely destroyed for her husband's stock trades. Her husband's total disclosed trades in his most controversial year were worth roughly $5 million. Trump just disclosed up to $750 MILLION in a single quarter. While making the actual policy decisions that move these stocks. This isn't a left or right issue. We're talking about the President of the United States averaging 60 stock trades per day in companies his own administration regulates, contracts with, and publicly endorses. What do you think?
Ricardo2,092,704 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад
Amazon just got caught running a secret price manipulation operation with Levi's, Home Depot, Walmart, and many more. Every time you "comparison shopped" online, you were looking at prices that were already rigged. Here's what happened: Amazon would monitor prices on Walmart, Target, Best Buy, Home Depot, and Chewy in real time. The second a competitor listed a product cheaper than Amazon, they'd contact the brand directly and tell them to "fix it." And the exact emails are now PUBLIC. Amazon sent Levi's links to two Walmart listings with the subject line "styles of concern." They basically said the prices on Walmart are too low and we have a problem. The next day, Levi's responded: "I talked to Walmart and they have partnered with us to take Easy Khaki Classic fit back up to ladder SPP price, $29.99 immediately." Levi's literally called Walmart and told them to raise the price. Because Amazon told Levi's to make the call. Walmart complied. Then Amazon matched the HIGHER price. Both retailers ended up charging more. The customer paid extra. Nobody competed. Same playbook with Hanes: Amazon sent them links showing Target and Walmart prices were lower. Hanes confirmed they "reached out to Target and Walmart to have the prices increased." Target increased the prices. Walmart increased the prices. Amazon kept their margins. But it gets even worse... Amazon told Allergan (the company that makes eye drops) that their product was "suppressed" on Amazon because it was cheaper on another site. Allergan responded: "Walmart got their price back up to $16.99." Amazon then unsuppressed the listing. They did this with pet treats on Chewy. Furniture on Home Depot. Products across dozens of categories spanning YEARS. The mechanism is simple but terrifying: If you're a brand and you sell cheaper on Walmart than on Amazon, Amazon suppresses your product, removes you from the Buy Box, buries you in search results, and effectively makes you invisible to 300 million customers. Brands can't afford that. So they call Walmart and Target and say "raise your prices or we'll lose our Amazon listings." Walmart and Target comply because they need the brand's products. Amazon captures 40 cents of every dollar spent online in America. That gives them the leverage to set prices across THE ENTIRE internet. Not just their own platform. So turns out, you were never comparison shopping. You were looking at a coordinated price floor set by Amazon through backroom phone calls between brands and their competitors. "Amazon is working to make your life more unaffordable." 3 separate antitrust trials are now scheduled for 2027. The FTC has its own case. 18 states plus the DOJ are piling on. This is literally happening during the WORST affordability crisis in a generation. Groceries up 25% since 2020. Housing unaffordable. Wages flat. And the largest ecommerce company on Earth has been secretly coordinating with brands to make sure you can't find a cheaper price ANYWHERE. "Competition" in retail is just a fantasy.
Ricardo2,922,591 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад
Apple just made every tech giant that went all in on AI look like clowns. For 12 months straight, Apple was the "biggest loser" of the AI era. Its AI team kept losing people. Its Siri overhaul kept getting delayed. And every headline said the same thing: Apple missed the biggest technology shift in a generation. But turns out, the OPPOSITE is actually the case... Apple passed Nvidia to briefly become the most valuable company on Earth again, worth around $4.88 trillion. Apple is up nearly 23% this year. Nvidia is up just 7.3%. Apple is now the best performer in the entire Mag 7. And when you look at why, it's almost funny. Apple won by REFUSING to spend the money everyone said it had to spend. Look at what the rest of Big Tech committed to the AI buildout this year: - Amazon, Google, Meta and Microsoft are spending more than $665 billion combined - Apple is spending about $13.5 billion - That is nearly 50x less than its rivals For a year, that gap was "proof" that Apple had fumbled it. Then the AI trade broke, and the company with no giant AI bill suddenly looked like the smartest one in the room. Apple never took on the risk. It never borrowed the billions to build data centers, and it never had to promise Wall Street that all that spending would pay off later. So when the trade cracked this week, Apple had nothing to crack. It still runs on iPhones and a services business that keeps setting records, not on a bet about AI revenue that has not shown up yet. And the crack itself was real: A Chinese startup called Moonshot dropped a new model that rivals the best from OpenAI and Anthropic, and it messed up the whole market in a single day. Investors are already calling it a Kimi moment, a rerun of the DeepSeek shock that hit these same stocks last year. The Philadelphia semiconductor index fell into a bear market, down 20% from its June peak. The Nasdaq 100 had its worst week in almost a month. Microsoft is now down 20% on the year, its worst stretch since 2022. Every company that went all in on the buildout got hit. Apple, the one that sat it out, is the company that came out on top. Why does this matter? Because for two years the entire market ran on one belief: Spend the most on AI or get left behind. The companies that spent $665 billion were called visionaries. The company that spent $13.5 billion was called a dinosaur. This week the market briefly went the other way. HSBC just upgraded Apple and lifted its price target to $366 from $260. Money that was chasing chips is now hiding in the one megacap with almost no exposure to the thing that just blew up. And the doubts are reaching the top now too: Societe Generale's head of US equity strategy warned this week that the biggest AI spenders are still burning cash so fast that investors are openly asking whether the spending ever pays off. What happens next: Nobody knows if this holds. Apple could lose the top spot again by Monday, and the AI bulls will tell you the buildout always looks reckless right before it pays off. But something bigger happened this week... For one day, the market stopped rewarding the biggest spender and started rewarding the one that kept its wallet shut. If that keeps happening, every board that bet the company on AI has a real problem. And the company that got mocked for doing the least became the safest place to hide from the trade it skipped. What do you think?
Ricardo21,880 просмотров • 1 день назад
Warren Buffett just warned that the US dollar could collapse and admitted he doesn't understand most of the stock market anymore. 95 years old, sitting on $380 billion in cash, and the first time watching from the sidelines instead of actively investing. And what he revealed at this weekend's Berkshire shareholder meeting is genuinely concerning: On the market, Buffett didn't hold back. He compared it to "a church with a casino attached" and said the casino has never been more packed. On one-day options: "That is not investing. It's not speculating. It's gambling. Totally." He pointed to the Avis short squeeze THIS WEEK. A rental car company that's been around for 50 years getting meme-squeezed in 2026. The same behavior that blew up retail traders with GameStop is back, except now it's hitting boring legacy companies with zero business being volatile. "We have lots more regulation now, but people spend their time figuring out how to get around the rules rather than follow the rules." That one sentence explains more about the current market than every CNBC segment combined. When asked why he's hoarding $380 billion instead of investing it, Buffett said something no one expected: "I understand fewer of the businesses as a percentage of the whole than I did 10 years ago. I have not learned new industries for some years. I'm not going to have an edge on a whole bunch of younger people that have actually grown up with it." Think about what he's actually saying... This is a man who made $140 billion by understanding businesses better than anyone alive. And he's telling you the current market is so detached from reality that even HE can't make sense of what's being valued and why. He quoted IBM's Tom Watson Sr.: "I'm smart in spots and I stay around those spots." In 60 years of managing money, he said MAYBE five were "really juicy." Five out of sixty. That means 92% of his career was spent WAITING while everyone else gambled. And he still ended up richer than all of them. Then the conversation turned to inflation and that's where it gets really interesting: Buffett said America is "not immune" from runaway inflation. He brought up countries that went bankrupt "six or seven times" in his lifetime. Compared today to right before Volcker had to rescue the dollar, when Americans were borrowing at 12% to buy farmland earning 6% because they believed the dollar would disappear. "Cash is trash" was the mentality. Nebraska farmers collapsed because of it. Entire communities wiped out not by a recession but by a BELIEF that the currency was dying. And Buffett sees that same energy building again. Then someone asked the question everyone wanted answered: Do you see a crash coming? "If you saw it coming, it wouldn't happen. The things people are talking about and thinking about? It's not going to happen. But there are things that can come out of the blue." He compared it to the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914 that triggered World War I. Nobody was discussing or anticipating it. But it changed the world overnight. "That's particularly true now because of the things that can come out of the sky." A 95yo man who has survived every crash, every war, every crisis of the last six decades just told you the market is a casino, the dollar isn't safe, and the real collapse will be something nobody sees coming. $380 billion in cash is his answer because he believes things are about to get much worse.
Ricardo1,645,128 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад
The real reason the US is invading Venezuela goes back to a deal Henry Kissinger made with Saudi Arabia in 1974. And I'm going to explain why this is actually about the SURVIVAL of the US dollar itself. Not drugs. Not terrorism. Not "democracy." This is about the petrodollar system that has kept America the dominant economic power for 50 years. And Venezuela just threatened to end it. Here's what really just happened: Venezuela has 303 billion barrels of proven oil reserves. The largest on Earth. More than Saudi Arabia. 20% of the entire world's oil. But here's the part that matters: Venezuela was actively selling that oil in Chinese yuan. Not dollars. In 2018, Venezuela announced it would "free itself from the dollar." They started accepting yuan, euros, rubles, anything BUT dollars for oil. They were petitioning to join BRICS. They were building direct payment channels with China that bypass SWIFT entirely. And they were sitting on enough oil to fund de-dollarization for decades. Why does this matter? Because the entire American financial system is built on one thing: The petrodollar. In 1974, Henry Kissinger made a deal with Saudi Arabia: All oil sold globally must be priced in US dollars. In exchange, America provides military protection. This single agreement created artificial demand for dollars worldwide. Every country on Earth needs dollars to buy oil. This lets America print unlimited money while other countries work for it. It funds the military. The welfare state. The deficit spending. The petrodollar is more important to US hegemony than aircraft carriers. And there's a pattern of what happens to leaders who challenge it: 2000: Saddam Hussein announces Iraq will sell oil in euros instead of dollars. 2003: Invaded. Regime change. Iraq's oil immediately switched back to dollars. Saddam lynched. The WMDs were never found because they never existed. 2009: Gaddafi proposes a gold-backed African currency called the "gold dinar" for oil trade. Hillary Clinton's own leaked emails confirm this was the PRIMARY reason for intervention. Email quote: "This gold was intended to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar." 2011: NATO bombs Libya. Gaddafi sodomized and murdered. Libya now has open slave markets. "We came, we saw, he died!" Clinton laughed on camera. The gold dinar died with him. And now Maduro. With FIVE TIMES more oil than Saddam and Gaddafi combined. Actively selling in yuan. Building payment systems outside dollar control. Petitioning to join BRICS. Partnered with China, Russia, and Iran. The three countries leading global de-dollarization. This isn't coincidence. Challenge the petrodollar. Get regime changed. Every. Single. Time. Stephen Miller (US homeland security advisor) literally said it out loud two weeks ago: "American sweat, ingenuity and toil created the oil industry in Venezuela. Its tyrannical expropriation was the largest recorded theft of American wealth and property." He's not hiding it. They're claiming Venezuelan oil BELONGS to America because US companies developed it 100 years ago. By this logic, every nationalized resource in history was "theft." But here's the DEEPER problem: The petrodollar is already dying. Russia sells oil in rubles and yuan since Ukraine. Saudi Arabia is openly discussing yuan settlements. Iran has been trading in non-dollar currencies for years. China built CIPS, their own alternative to SWIFT with 4,800 banks in 185 countries. BRICS is actively building payment systems that bypass the dollar entirely. The mBridge project lets central banks settle trades instantly in local currencies. Venezuela joining BRICS with 303 billion barrels of oil would accelerate this exponentially. That's what this invasion is really about. Not stopping drugs. Venezuela accounts for less than 1% of US cocaine. Not terrorism. There's zero evidence Maduro runs a "terror organization." Not democracy. The US supports Saudi Arabia, which has zero elections. This is about maintaining a 50-year-old agreement that lets America print money while the world works for it. And the consequences are terrifying: Russia, China, and Iran are already denouncing this as "armed aggression." China is Venezuela's biggest oil customer. They're losing billions. BRICS nations are watching a country get invaded for trading outside the dollar. Every nation considering de-dollarization just got the message: Challenge the dollar and we will bomb you. But here's the problem... That message might accelerate de-dollarization, not stop it. Because now every country in the Global South knows what happens if you threaten dollar hegemony. And they're realizing the only protection is to move FASTER. The timing is insane too: January 3rd, 2026. Venezuela invaded. Maduro captured. January 3rd, 1990. Panama invaded. Noriega captured. 36 years apart. Almost to the day. Same playbook. Same "drug trafficking" excuse. Same real reason: control of strategic resources and trade routes. History doesn't repeat. But it rhymes. What happens next: Trump's press conference at Mar-a-Lago sets the narrative. US oil companies are already lined up. Politico reported they've been approached about "returning to Venezuela." The opposition will be installed. Oil will flow in dollars again. Venezuela becomes another Iraq. Another Libya. But here's what nobody's asking: What happens when you can no longer bomb your way to dollar dominance? When China has enough economic leverage to retaliate? When BRICS controls 40% of global GDP and says "no more dollars"? When the world realizes the petrodollar is maintained by violence? America just showed its hand. The question is whether the rest of the world folds or calls the bluff. Because this invasion is an admission that the dollar can no longer compete on its own merits. When you have to bomb countries to keep them using your currency, the currency is already dying. Venezuela isn't the beginning. It's the desperate end. What do you think?
Ricardo4,620,008 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад
JD Vance just admitted the White House plan is to take ownership of every major AI company in America. Steven Bartlett brought up Bernie Sanders' proposal that workers should own 50% of the major AI companies. Vance's response: "The president by the way likes that idea too. He likes that idea." Trump's preferred mechanism, Vance said, is a sovereign wealth fund where the US government takes equity stakes in private AI companies. The Vice President literally just confirmed that an administration is planning the most radical economic policy proposed in modern American history. Partial nationalization of the MOST valuable private companies on earth. And the idea originally came from Bernie Sanders, who Vance said Trump agrees with on this point. This is not a small thing: The US has spent 80 years selling the world on the model where private companies stay private and the government stays off the cap table. The countries that did the opposite, with sovereign wealth funds owning slices of their biggest firms, are Norway, Saudi Arabia, China, and Singapore. And the Trump administration told you on a podcast it wants to do the same to Silicon Valley. But the reasoning Vance gave for it is where it gets really interesting... He said the historical analogy that scares him is the original Industrial Revolution. His own words: "Rich people got way richer. And that led to in Europe fascism and communism." He believes AI will not cause mass unemployment but mass inequality, and that mass inequality is what breaks societies. His fix is that workers need a seat at the bargaining table before the wealth gets created, not a redistribution check after. "I think labor unions are a very important model here." And the other thing about AI that scares him is surveillance. His exact phrase was that AI is "fundamentally a communist technology" because it lets governments and corporations watch and score people in ways NOTHING else can. He said he doesn't want a social credit system, doesn't want a tech CEO deciding whether you can buy a beer based on an algorithm nobody understands, and is afraid of exactly that outcome. So here is the full picture: The sitting Republican administration believes AI will make the rich dramatically richer, that this will radicalize the country the way the Industrial Revolution radicalized Europe, that the answer is government equity stakes plus stronger labor unions, and that the second-biggest threat is the surveillance state these companies are building. That is not a Republican worldview. That is not even a Democratic worldview. This is a worldview that has no political home in the United States right now. Most people are still arguing about whether ChatGPT will take their jobs. But the people with the actual power are already past that argument. They are quietly designing the framework for owning the companies that will. The craziest part is how casually Vance dropped it as a sidenote on a podcast millions will half-listen to in the background. If you have money in OpenAI, Anthropic, or anything like that, you should be watching the full thing yourself. What do you think?
Ricardo502,008 просмотров • 1 месяц назад
Elon Musk just pulled off the biggest AI power grab of 2026. Tesla is capping every employee at $200 a week on AI spending starting Monday, July 6. Media's celebrating it as cost control. But what Elon actually built is an expense policy that redirects his own engineering workforce off Claude and onto Grok, while every competitor gets throttled by internal procurement rules. Here's what happened: Tesla spent the last six months pushing engineers to use AI as aggressively as possible. Leadership built an internal platform called Bottle Rocket that gave employees access to Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok, and Cursor. They gamified adoption by ranking engineers on internal leaderboards by how many AI tokens they consumed. The strategy worked. Software engineers started burning THOUSANDS of dollars a week on Claude and Cursor. Then the invoices arrived and Tesla panicked. But they didn't pull the standard cost-control response... The loophole: The $200 weekly cap does not apply to beta products from xAI. Grok is completely exempt from the cap. Anthropic's Claude, OpenAI's GPT, and Google's Gemini all get throttled at the same $200 line. Four Tesla engineers told Electrek that internal usage overwhelmingly favors Claude over Grok. That preference is about to become financially punishing overnight. The genius part: This quarter SpaceX is closing a $60 billion all-stock acquisition of Anysphere, the parent company of Cursor. The moment that deal closes, Cursor's Composer coding model falls under the same Musk-controlled ecosystem, and any Tesla engineer choosing between a capped Claude session and an uncapped Composer session will pay a financial penalty for using the tool they actually prefer. By exempting only his own products from the cap, Elon is using Tesla shareholder money to build market share for xAI without ever having to disclose that is what he is doing. Because on paper, it is cost control. Now zoom out to what this signals for the wider AI narrative: Uber capped employees at $1,500 a month after burning $3.4 billion in four months. Meta introduced spending caps. Amazon and Walmart pushed staff toward cheaper models. Microsoft canceled Claude Code licenses across 100,000 engineers. Every Fortune 500 that pushed heavy AI adoption in 2025 is now rationing it in 2026. Meanwhile Nvidia is trading at a $5 trillion market cap. That entire valuation assumes enterprise AI consumption is about to explode across the economy. But every company actually deploying AI at scale is telling their own engineers to slow down. One of these narratives is lying. Goldman Sachs still forecasts a 24x increase in token consumption by 2030. Gartner says total enterprise AI costs will keep climbing because agents consume exponentially more tokens per task. Jensen Huang keeps repeating that 100 AI agents will work alongside every employee. And now the CEO of the most agentic company on the planet just told his own engineers they cannot spend more than $200 a week on the tools those agents need to run. Retail investors buying Nvidia and Palantir today are betting enterprise AI adoption compounds without limit. The CEOs deploying AI inside those same enterprises are betting the exact opposite, in writing, by internal memo. Thoughts?
Ricardo187,875 просмотров • 13 дней назад
This company pulled off the most successful scam of the 20th century, and they're finally collapsing. What they did: - Invented the diamond engagement ring to survive a sales crash - Told men exactly what to spend, then doubled it for no reason - Hoarded most of the world's diamonds inside one office in London - Rigged it so the ring you overpaid for could never be resold - Pleaded guilty to price fixing and got shut out of the US for decades Here's how De Beers decided what love costs, and why it is falling apart right now: Go back to the 1930s. Diamond sales had crashed in the Depression. Most American engagement rings had no diamond at all. So in 1938, De Beers hired an ad agency called N.W. Ayer with an unusual order: Do not sell a brand and instead manufacture demand for an entire category. In 1940, only 10% of first-time American brides got a diamond engagement ring. Then ONE sentence changed the industry forever... In 1947, a copywriter named Frances Gerety scribbled four words on a notepad: A Diamond Is Forever. By 1990, 80% of American brides were getting a diamond. Ad Age later named it the single best slogan of the entire 20th century. Think about what that sentence did: It told you the stone was eternal, so your love should be too. It also killed the resale market, because you keep a diamond forever and never sell it. And with no resale market, nobody could discover what the stones were really worth. Then they put a price on your feelings. The "two months' salary" rule was never a tradition. It was ad copy invented in the 1980s with no basis in anything. In Japan, where De Beers moved in during the 1960s, they pushed three months instead. A 1977 De Beers commercial ends with the words on screen: "How else could two months' salary last forever?" The company told men what to spend and called it romance. But the bigger trick was the supply: For most of the last century, roughly 80% of the world's rough diamonds passed through one office in London. De Beers held the stones back, released them slowly, and kept prices high by pretending the things were rare. But they are not rare at all. And when regulators finally moved, the results were ugly... In 2004, De Beers pleaded guilty to fixing industrial diamond prices and paid a $10 million fine. It later paid $295 million to settle a case over fixing gem prices, with $130 million going straight back to the consumers who overpaid. So how does a 137yo empire this powerful actually die? Somebody built a better diamond. Lab-grown stones are optically identical, carry the same certificates, and cost a fraction of the price. Wholesale lab-grown prices have fallen roughly 90% since 2018. The scarcity was always fake, and now anyone can prove it in an afternoon. Anglo American, which owns 85% of De Beers, has written the business down by $6.8 billion over three years. Its carrying value collapsed to $2.3 billion from over $4 billion. In 2025 alone, De Beers lost $511 million at the EBITDA line, 20x WORSE than the year before. Anglo's own filing blamed customers preferring synthetic diamonds. De Beers even opened its own lab-grown brand, then shut it down in 2025. Now Anglo is racing for the exit. It has taken final bids and wants De Beers gone this year, with Botswana and Angola circling the wreckage. The diamonds in those rings are not rare, they were never rare, and the "tradition" behind it was written by one underpaid copywriter in a single night. The most valuable thing De Beers ever mined was your belief. But it's over for them now, after 137 years, no matter how much the CEO pretends otherwise.
Ricardo36,807 просмотров • 3 дней назад
This is the moment Chinese AI beat American AI. One of the largest public crypto companies in the world just DUMPED OpenAI and Anthropic. Coinbase switched to open-weight Chinese models from Zhipu and DeepSeek, and shaved nearly 50% off the company's internal AI spending. The numbers are absolutely ridiculous: Running the same enterprise workload through Anthropic's Claude costs $4,811. Running it through Zhipu's GLM 5.2 costs $544. That's a 9x price difference for equivalent output. OpenAI's GPT-5.5 sits in the middle at $3,357. DeepSeek's V4 lands at $1,071. Moonshot's Kimi at $948. On the actual benchmarks: Zhipu's GLM 5.2 scored 62.1 on SWE-bench Pro, the gold standard for coding. OpenAI's GPT-5.5 scored 58.6. One AI researcher called GLM 5.2 "at least as good as Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5." Another called it "the first open model that can really compete with closed-source systems." The Chinese models are not just cheaper but they are now also beating American models on the benchmarks American companies pay $4,811 per workload for. Coinbase did the math first and reacted - more companies will certainly follow. Now watch what happens to the IPO timeline: Anthropic confidentially filed for an IPO targeting October at a $965 billion valuation. OpenAI followed days later with its own confidential filing. Both companies built their financial models on the assumption that they could keep charging enterprise prices that are 9 to 33x what Chinese competitors charge for the same task. Brian Armstrong publicly proved customers WILL leave. 45% of companies are now spending over $100,000 per month on AI, up from 20% last year. Every one of those customers is one quarterly budget review away from dumping American AI. OpenAI has reportedly already started preparing major token price cuts. Anthropic is expected to follow. And here's the thing... The export controls were supposed to CRUSH Chinese AI. The US government banned American AI chips, restricted model weights, blacklisted Alibaba and Baidu as Chinese military companies, and just banned Anthropic's flagship model from every foreign national on the planet. The entire premise of the American AI valuation bubble is that Washington can keep China two generations behind. But Chinese labs responded by building cheaper, more efficient models on inferior hardware and pricing them at one ninth the cost of the American alternative. And now American companies are voting with their checkbooks. The dominant American labs are valued at nearly $2 trillion combined on the assumption that their pricing power is durable. Coinbase proved it is not, and every customer doing a year-end budget review will be looking at the same math. For investors, the question here is what happens to the Anthropic IPO at $965 billion when the company is being forced to cut prices to defend share against open-weight Chinese models that score higher on the benchmarks. For everyone else, the bigger question is what happens when Washington spent four years and billions of dollars trying to contain Chinese AI, and the only thing that actually shifted in the end was American customers.
Ricardo251,023 просмотров • 21 дней назад
The Yale professor who accurately predicted the entire Iran war just said World War III is about to start with 90% certainty. He explained exactly how it starts, who triggers it, and why NOBODY can stop it. Professor Jiang made 3 predictions in 2024 that all came true: 1. Trump would win the election 2. He would start a war with Iran 3. The US would lose that war Now he has made 8 NEW predictions and every single one is terrifying... The war in Iran was never about Iran. It was about saving the US dollar. America's empire runs on the petrodollar where every country must use dollars to buy oil. But when America froze $200 billion in Russian assets after Ukraine, it told the world the dollar is a political weapon. So Russia, China, and Iran started building a trade bloc to ditch the dollar entirely. These 3 countries cover the entire Asian continent and can build railways connecting their economies while cutting America out. Trump's plan was to bomb Iran's leadership and watch them surrender like Venezuela did in January. But Iran is a mountain fortress with 92 million people and 31 independent armies across 31 provinces each designed so no single strike can wipe them out. 6 weeks in, decapitation failed. Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, attacked US bases across the Gulf, and started charging ships $2 million per crossing to fund their war. And here's where it becomes a world war... Russia's grand strategy is the Third Rome doctrine. If Iran falls, Russia's southern border is exposed and both Russia's trade corridor and China's Belt and Road run directly through Iranian territory. Losing Iran means permanently losing access to the Middle East and Africa. So Russia enters the war. When Russia enters, China follows. They reinforce Tehran from east and north, provide financing, and Russia puts Iran under its nuclear umbrella taking tactical nukes completely off the table. Professor Jiang put the probability at 80 to 90%. And while the world watches the Middle East, North Korea is making its move: The US pulled THAAD missile defense out of South Korea for Iran operations. Seoul sits 20 minutes of artillery from the North Korean border with 25 million people exposed. North Korea doesn't even NEED to attack. They just threaten. South Koreans are rich with everything to lose. North Koreans have nothing to lose. Simple extortion. Nobody is coming to help because America is stuck in the Middle East. But the prediction that will BREAK the internet is this one: Trump gets a THIRD term. Professor Jiang laid out two constitutional loopholes. First is Trump runs as VP under Don Jr. or Vance, they win, the president steps down, Trump takes over through succession. The 22nd Amendment bans being elected president more than twice but says nothing about becoming president through succession. The second option is even simpler: By 2028 America is at war on multiple fronts with a draft in effect so Trump invokes emergency war powers and delays the election just like Zelensky did in Ukraine. And the draft is already real. Automatic registration starts in December. Males 18 to 24 are entered into the system automatically. The Department of War literally PUBLISHED the playbook online: - Secure the Western Hemisphere as US territory which explains Greenland, Canada, Venezuela, Cuba, Panama - Force NATO to fight Russia - Strangle China through maritime choke points - Convert civilian factories into weapons production (the Pentagon already told Ford and GM to prepare to STOP making cars and start making munitions) His final advice was genuinely one of the realest things I've heard all year: We will need leaders. Not politicians or billionaires. Average people who knock on their neighbor's door during a blackout and say let us figure this out together. Because when empires collapse, and he believes America's collapses within 10 years, the people who survive built community before they needed it.
Ricardo923,227 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад