Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Dario Amodei just explained why even he cannot buy his way to winning the AI race. He could theoretically purchase $5 trillion in compute over five years, a trillion dollars a year starting in 2027. But if his revenue comes in at even $800 billion instead of a trillion,...

uncover_ai's profile picture

Uncover AI

9,317 subscribers

19,877 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

The CEO of Anthropic just said we are 1 to 3 years away from AGI. On camera. With 90% confidence. Almost nobody watched it. INSTEAD OF ARGUING ABOUT AI TAKING JOBS. Spend 2 hours watching the CEO of Anthropic explain exactly when and how it happens. The AI compute arms race just got a reality check nobody expected. Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic just did the math out loud: → Revenue growing 10x per year means $100B by end of 2026 and $1T by end of 2027 → At that trajectory you could theoretically buy $5T in compute over 5 years → But if revenue comes in at even $800B instead of $1T, bankruptcy. No exceptions → And if growth slows from 10x to just 5x per year, the entire model collapses by one year This is the most honest thing anyone in AI has said publicly in years. The companies building AI infrastructure are making trillion-dollar bets on growth curves that have never existed before in history. One year off. One multiplier wrong. The whole thing unravels. The AI compute boom is real. The risk underneath it is equally real. The question is not whether AI is the future. It is whether anyone can survive long enough to get there
2:22:19

The CEO of Anthropic just said we are 1 to 3 years away from AGI. On camera. With 90% confidence. Almost nobody watched it. INSTEAD OF ARGUING ABOUT AI TAKING JOBS. Spend 2 hours watching the CEO of Anthropic explain exactly when and how it happens. The AI compute arms race just got a reality check nobody expected. Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic just did the math out loud: → Revenue growing 10x per year means $100B by end of 2026 and $1T by end of 2027 → At that trajectory you could theoretically buy $5T in compute over 5 years → But if revenue comes in at even $800B instead of $1T, bankruptcy. No exceptions → And if growth slows from 10x to just 5x per year, the entire model collapses by one year This is the most honest thing anyone in AI has said publicly in years. The companies building AI infrastructure are making trillion-dollar bets on growth curves that have never existed before in history. One year off. One multiplier wrong. The whole thing unravels. The AI compute boom is real. The risk underneath it is equally real. The question is not whether AI is the future. It is whether anyone can survive long enough to get there

Dami-Defi

16,080 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Anthropic CEO: "If my revenue is not $1 trillion, even $800 billion, there's no force on earth, no hedge on earth, that could stop me from going bankrupt." In a 3-hour podcast, Dario Amodei does the math on his own bankruptcy. Revenue 10x a year. 90% of code written by the model. A country of geniuses by 2028. He can't tell you if it ends in trillions or zero. The most honest voice in AI, or the biggest bubble admitting it?
12:58

Anthropic CEO: "If my revenue is not $1 trillion, even $800 billion, there's no force on earth, no hedge on earth, that could stop me from going bankrupt." In a 3-hour podcast, Dario Amodei does the math on his own bankruptcy. Revenue 10x a year. 90% of code written by the model. A country of geniuses by 2028. He can't tell you if it ends in trillions or zero. The most honest voice in AI, or the biggest bubble admitting it?

shmidt

2,410,662 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Dwarkesh asks Dario a fantastic question relating to how he is so bullish on AGI yet so conservative on data center build out - Dario has an amazing take on this: Dario Amodei details the staggering financial risk of the AI race, explaining that if growth continues at 10x a year, a company could be looking at a $1 trillion revenue run rate by the end of 2027. He notes that to support this, a firm might buy $5 trillion worth of compute. However, he highlights a "ruinous" dilemma: if that revenue is even slightly lower than projected. specifically if it comes in at $800 billion instead of $1 trillion the company would collapse. He explains that if you are off by just a year or if the growth rate drops to 5x, "there's no force on earth, there's no hedge on earth, that could stop me from going bankrupt" after committing to that level of spend. Because of this, Amodei argues that "behaving responsibly" means not just "yoloing" hundreds of billions of dollars. He suggests that some competitors may not have "written down the spreadsheet" and don't fully grasp the existential risks they are taking with these massive, unhedged bets on infrastructure.
4:44

Dwarkesh asks Dario a fantastic question relating to how he is so bullish on AGI yet so conservative on data center build out - Dario has an amazing take on this: Dario Amodei details the staggering financial risk of the AI race, explaining that if growth continues at 10x a year, a company could be looking at a $1 trillion revenue run rate by the end of 2027. He notes that to support this, a firm might buy $5 trillion worth of compute. However, he highlights a "ruinous" dilemma: if that revenue is even slightly lower than projected. specifically if it comes in at $800 billion instead of $1 trillion the company would collapse. He explains that if you are off by just a year or if the growth rate drops to 5x, "there's no force on earth, there's no hedge on earth, that could stop me from going bankrupt" after committing to that level of spend. Because of this, Amodei argues that "behaving responsibly" means not just "yoloing" hundreds of billions of dollars. He suggests that some competitors may not have "written down the spreadsheet" and don't fully grasp the existential risks they are taking with these massive, unhedged bets on infrastructure.

Chris

1,049,043 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Mistral CEO Arthur Mensch walked into the French parliament this week and told lawmakers Europe has exactly two years to build independent AI infrastructure or hand over one trillion dollars in spending to American tech companies. The math he laid out should be front-page news. This is not a technology story. It is a macroeconomic one. Global wages are fifty trillion dollars. AI will cost around ten percent of that. Europe's share is nine trillion. Which means over one trillion dollars in AI spending over the next five years flowing somewhere. Europe already sends 250 billion dollars a year to the US in digital services. Every dollar that leaves funds American R&D. None of it comes back. Mario Draghi's competitiveness report last year made the same point from a different angle. Europe needs eight hundred billion euros in annual investment just to close its existing productivity gap with the US. AI dependency makes that gap structural. You cannot close a productivity gap when the tool driving productivity is owned by your competitor. Mensch compared it to gas. The same way Europe discovered too late what energy dependence costs in a crisis, it is standing at the same crossroads with AI right now. The compute is being allocated today. The chips are being spoken for today. Europe is watching it happen and calling it a technology debate. It is not. It is a sovereignty one. Watch the full podcast on YouTube at CNBC International
2:47

Mistral CEO Arthur Mensch walked into the French parliament this week and told lawmakers Europe has exactly two years to build independent AI infrastructure or hand over one trillion dollars in spending to American tech companies. The math he laid out should be front-page news. This is not a technology story. It is a macroeconomic one. Global wages are fifty trillion dollars. AI will cost around ten percent of that. Europe's share is nine trillion. Which means over one trillion dollars in AI spending over the next five years flowing somewhere. Europe already sends 250 billion dollars a year to the US in digital services. Every dollar that leaves funds American R&D. None of it comes back. Mario Draghi's competitiveness report last year made the same point from a different angle. Europe needs eight hundred billion euros in annual investment just to close its existing productivity gap with the US. AI dependency makes that gap structural. You cannot close a productivity gap when the tool driving productivity is owned by your competitor. Mensch compared it to gas. The same way Europe discovered too late what energy dependence costs in a crisis, it is standing at the same crossroads with AI right now. The compute is being allocated today. The chips are being spoken for today. Europe is watching it happen and calling it a technology debate. It is not. It is a sovereignty one. Watch the full podcast on YouTube at CNBC International

Ihtesham Ali

156,129 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Jensen Huang told a room of global investors that AI is not one industry. It is five stacked on top of each other. Most people are investing in layer four and ignoring layers one through three entirely. He called it the five-layer cake. Layer one is energy. Jensen said this is the single greatest opportunity for the energy industry in a hundred years. The first time in a century that the grid in most countries can actually attract serious capital. Nuclear, solar, wind, hydrogen, it does not matter what form. If it produces energy, it gets funded. Siemens, GE Vernova, Mitsubishi. That is why they are all doing so well right now. Layer two is chips, computers, networking, and silicon photonics. Everything that processes the intelligence. Layer three is infrastructure. Land, power, buildings, data center operations. Every single one in short supply today. Layer four is the model layer. OpenAI, Anthropic. The layer everyone talks about. Layer five is applications. Every startup applying AI to financial services, legal, healthcare, logistics, transportation. Last year alone, a hundred billion dollars of venture capital went into this layer. The single largest VC year in the history of humanity. Then he said the number that stopped me cold. We are putting one trillion dollars into this five-layer cake this year. That sounds enormous. Jensen thinks the AI industry will eventually run at twenty trillion dollars per year. We are one trillion in of a twenty trillion dollar per year ecosystem. Most people watching AI are staring at layer four. Jensen was describing layers one through five as a single compounding system where every layer feeds the one above it. The people who understand that will invest differently than the people who do not.
4:50

Jensen Huang told a room of global investors that AI is not one industry. It is five stacked on top of each other. Most people are investing in layer four and ignoring layers one through three entirely. He called it the five-layer cake. Layer one is energy. Jensen said this is the single greatest opportunity for the energy industry in a hundred years. The first time in a century that the grid in most countries can actually attract serious capital. Nuclear, solar, wind, hydrogen, it does not matter what form. If it produces energy, it gets funded. Siemens, GE Vernova, Mitsubishi. That is why they are all doing so well right now. Layer two is chips, computers, networking, and silicon photonics. Everything that processes the intelligence. Layer three is infrastructure. Land, power, buildings, data center operations. Every single one in short supply today. Layer four is the model layer. OpenAI, Anthropic. The layer everyone talks about. Layer five is applications. Every startup applying AI to financial services, legal, healthcare, logistics, transportation. Last year alone, a hundred billion dollars of venture capital went into this layer. The single largest VC year in the history of humanity. Then he said the number that stopped me cold. We are putting one trillion dollars into this five-layer cake this year. That sounds enormous. Jensen thinks the AI industry will eventually run at twenty trillion dollars per year. We are one trillion in of a twenty trillion dollar per year ecosystem. Most people watching AI are staring at layer four. Jensen was describing layers one through five as a single compounding system where every layer feeds the one above it. The people who understand that will invest differently than the people who do not.

Ihtesham Ali

98,146 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

This is Andrew Feldman, the Cerebras CEO, sizing the AI market the lazy way: one software engineer will burn $50,000 to $100,000 a year in AI tokens. There are 47 million of them. That's $5 trillion. Now do India. We have 5 million engineers. At his numbers, that's $250–500 billion a year in inference — and every rupee of it leaves the country, because we make neither the chips nor the models. India's whole crude oil bill is about $130 billion.
1:25

This is Andrew Feldman, the Cerebras CEO, sizing the AI market the lazy way: one software engineer will burn $50,000 to $100,000 a year in AI tokens. There are 47 million of them. That's $5 trillion. Now do India. We have 5 million engineers. At his numbers, that's $250–500 billion a year in inference — and every rupee of it leaves the country, because we make neither the chips nor the models. India's whole crude oil bill is about $130 billion.

Himanshu Sinha

41,332 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Gavin Baker: "the cheapest producer of intelligence will win the AI race if Anthropic's neocloud and cloud providers were using Arya, maybe they wouldn't have $30 billion in revenue - they'd be at $60 billion" this is him naming the companies he just bought and giving investing advice His words: "I'm a Crusoe, CoreWeave and Nebius shareholder - I love you all" "Apple isn't worth three trillion because they make the cheapest smartphones. Nvidia isn't worth five trillion because they make the cheapest chips - they're just the best - AI is fundamentally different" "why was I one of the earliest investors in Tesla and Nvidia? Musk - said "that's crazy" and put the battery at the bottom of the car Huang - gaming chips and AI chips needed the same math - he bet everything on it" "every 100 millisecond delay in Google search results cost them 1% of revenue" "fortune favors the bold. Be bold" bookmark & watch today ↓
12:08

Gavin Baker: "the cheapest producer of intelligence will win the AI race if Anthropic's neocloud and cloud providers were using Arya, maybe they wouldn't have $30 billion in revenue - they'd be at $60 billion" this is him naming the companies he just bought and giving investing advice His words: "I'm a Crusoe, CoreWeave and Nebius shareholder - I love you all" "Apple isn't worth three trillion because they make the cheapest smartphones. Nvidia isn't worth five trillion because they make the cheapest chips - they're just the best - AI is fundamentally different" "why was I one of the earliest investors in Tesla and Nvidia? Musk - said "that's crazy" and put the battery at the bottom of the car Huang - gaming chips and AI chips needed the same math - he bet everything on it" "every 100 millisecond delay in Google search results cost them 1% of revenue" "fortune favors the bold. Be bold" bookmark & watch today ↓

bodila

178,803 Aufrufe • vor 27 Tagen

JPMorgan's CEO Jamie Dimon just said a financial crisis is coming. Bond yields just hit historic levels in the US, UK, Germany, and Japan simultaneously. The last time this happened was right before the 2008 financial crisis. And Dimon just confirmed that $5 to $6 TRILLION in leveraged loans are sitting out there right now and the companies holding that debt are going to have a very hard time refinancing at current rates. The equity values of those companies would be "considerably less" and a lot of those borrowers didn't hedge for higher rates. Then he said he personally would NOT buy credit spreads at these levels. The CEO of the largest bank in America just told you he thinks corporate debt is mispriced and he would not touch it with his own money. Then the interviewer asked about AI and everyone forgot he said it. Jamie Dimon warns about a recession every single year but this is the first year where the numbers are actually proving him RIGHT: 3 days ago the 30-year Treasury yield hit 5.2%, the highest since 2007. The 10-year is sitting at 4.62%. The US government has $31 trillion in public debt and the average interest rate on that debt is 3.5%. They cannot refinance a single dollar of it at a lower rate than what they are currently paying. And they have $9.7 trillion in securities maturing THIS YEAR that needs to be rolled over. Meanwhile the new Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh was just sworn in on Friday. Traders are now betting there will be ZERO rate cuts for the rest of 2026 and the probability of a rate HIKE is rising. The Iran war has pushed oil to four-year highs. Inflation reaccelerated in April to the highest annual rate in three years. And private credit defaults just hit a record high with a 9.2% default rate in their US private credit portfolio. Dimon laid out exactly how this plays out: He said sentiment can flip overnight and specifically named the crashes of 1973, 1982, 1994, and 2000 and said the setup before each one looked exactly like this. Everyone confident, everyone buying, liquidity everywhere. Then something shifts and people want cash. And when people want cash they sell risky assets at precisely the wrong time. Liquidity disappears at the exact moment everyone needs it. And he also told you where the money is going: JPMorgan had 35,000 employees in New York when he took over. Now it has 26,000. Texas went from 12,000 to 33,000. He said in the 1970s, New York had 120 Fortune 500 companies. 60 of them left in a single decade because of taxes and crime. And when the interviewer asked about the new NYC mayor raising taxes on the wealthy, Dimon basically told him to his face that the erosion has already started. The capital is already leaving. So let's put this together: - Bond yields at 19-year highs - $9.7 trillion in government debt to refinance this year - $5-6 trillion in leveraged corporate loans that cannot refinance at these rates - Private credit defaults at record levels - Inflation reaccelerating - No rate cuts coming - A Fed chairman who hasn't even settled into the chair yet - The CEO of America's biggest bank saying he would not buy corporate debt at current prices - And the same CEO quietly moving his bank out of New York Every single one of these signals was present before the crashes Dimon himself named.
2:57

JPMorgan's CEO Jamie Dimon just said a financial crisis is coming. Bond yields just hit historic levels in the US, UK, Germany, and Japan simultaneously. The last time this happened was right before the 2008 financial crisis. And Dimon just confirmed that $5 to $6 TRILLION in leveraged loans are sitting out there right now and the companies holding that debt are going to have a very hard time refinancing at current rates. The equity values of those companies would be "considerably less" and a lot of those borrowers didn't hedge for higher rates. Then he said he personally would NOT buy credit spreads at these levels. The CEO of the largest bank in America just told you he thinks corporate debt is mispriced and he would not touch it with his own money. Then the interviewer asked about AI and everyone forgot he said it. Jamie Dimon warns about a recession every single year but this is the first year where the numbers are actually proving him RIGHT: 3 days ago the 30-year Treasury yield hit 5.2%, the highest since 2007. The 10-year is sitting at 4.62%. The US government has $31 trillion in public debt and the average interest rate on that debt is 3.5%. They cannot refinance a single dollar of it at a lower rate than what they are currently paying. And they have $9.7 trillion in securities maturing THIS YEAR that needs to be rolled over. Meanwhile the new Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh was just sworn in on Friday. Traders are now betting there will be ZERO rate cuts for the rest of 2026 and the probability of a rate HIKE is rising. The Iran war has pushed oil to four-year highs. Inflation reaccelerated in April to the highest annual rate in three years. And private credit defaults just hit a record high with a 9.2% default rate in their US private credit portfolio. Dimon laid out exactly how this plays out: He said sentiment can flip overnight and specifically named the crashes of 1973, 1982, 1994, and 2000 and said the setup before each one looked exactly like this. Everyone confident, everyone buying, liquidity everywhere. Then something shifts and people want cash. And when people want cash they sell risky assets at precisely the wrong time. Liquidity disappears at the exact moment everyone needs it. And he also told you where the money is going: JPMorgan had 35,000 employees in New York when he took over. Now it has 26,000. Texas went from 12,000 to 33,000. He said in the 1970s, New York had 120 Fortune 500 companies. 60 of them left in a single decade because of taxes and crime. And when the interviewer asked about the new NYC mayor raising taxes on the wealthy, Dimon basically told him to his face that the erosion has already started. The capital is already leaving. So let's put this together: - Bond yields at 19-year highs - $9.7 trillion in government debt to refinance this year - $5-6 trillion in leveraged corporate loans that cannot refinance at these rates - Private credit defaults at record levels - Inflation reaccelerating - No rate cuts coming - A Fed chairman who hasn't even settled into the chair yet - The CEO of America's biggest bank saying he would not buy corporate debt at current prices - And the same CEO quietly moving his bank out of New York Every single one of these signals was present before the crashes Dimon himself named.

Ricardo

187,607 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

🚨 Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei just said the thing most people aren't ready to hear: "AI revenue could hit a trillion dollars before 2030" Read that again. A trillion. Before 2030. And here is the part everyone misses We are not late. We are early. Painfully early. The "country of geniuses in a datacenter" he describes has not even shown up yet. Look at Anthropic itself. Revenue grew roughly 10x every year. 2023: $0 to $100M 2024: $100M to $1B 2025: $1B to $10B That is not one lucky company. That is the signal for everyone. So the real question is not "did I miss it" It is whether you learn this now while it is free, or pay $5,000 for it in 2027 The best move is simple. Understand AI and start using it for real work. This year, not someday. Bookmark this and read my breakdown of 23 free courses from Anthropic, Google and OpenAI below What is the first thing you would automate if you knew how?
0:25

🚨 Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei just said the thing most people aren't ready to hear: "AI revenue could hit a trillion dollars before 2030" Read that again. A trillion. Before 2030. And here is the part everyone misses We are not late. We are early. Painfully early. The "country of geniuses in a datacenter" he describes has not even shown up yet. Look at Anthropic itself. Revenue grew roughly 10x every year. 2023: $0 to $100M 2024: $100M to $1B 2025: $1B to $10B That is not one lucky company. That is the signal for everyone. So the real question is not "did I miss it" It is whether you learn this now while it is free, or pay $5,000 for it in 2027 The best move is simple. Understand AI and start using it for real work. This year, not someday. Bookmark this and read my breakdown of 23 free courses from Anthropic, Google and OpenAI below What is the first thing you would automate if you knew how?

spect

14,410 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

SpaceX is about to shatter the largest IPO record in history. Not by a little. By more than double. The previous record was $29 billion. SpaceX is targeting $75 billion. Two months ago the number was $50 billion. Last week it was $70 billion. Now $75 billion. The filing has not even happened yet. Every time the market recalculates what SpaceX actually is, the answer gets bigger. Goldman Sachs. JPMorgan. Bank of America. Morgan Stanley. All lined up as underwriters. Target date: mid-June 2026. Target valuation: $1.75 trillion. That would make SpaceX larger than Meta. Larger than Tesla. Larger than every company on Earth except five. This is not some startup bleeding cash and calling it strategy. SpaceX made $8 billion in profit last year on $16 billion in revenue. They do not need the money. They are raising it because what comes next costs more than profit can fund at the speed they intend to move. Musk: “There just is no way to do a terawatt per year on Earth.” He ran the math on stage with Jensen Huang. Three hundred gigawatts of AI compute per year would consume two-thirds of all US electricity production. Not total energy. Just electricity. And three hundred gigawatts is not even the target. A terawatt is. More than three times that. Building enough power plants is not difficult. It is not expensive. It is physically impossible. Musk: “You have to do that in space.” Not should. Not could. Have to. Earth does not have the power. Cannot build it fast enough. Cannot cool the hardware. Not within a decade. Not at all. The bottleneck is not silicon. Not software. Not data. It is the planet itself. Musk: “You don’t actually need batteries because it’s always sunny in space. And the solar panels become cheaper because you don’t need glass or framing. And the cooling is just radiative.” No batteries. No night cycle. No weather. Just uninterrupted solar hitting bare panels in a vacuum. Heat dissipates on its own. Huang: “Each one of these GB300 racks is two tons. 1.95 of it is probably for cooling.” Ninety-seven percent of the weight of a supercomputer rack exists to keep it from overheating. Move it to space and that weight vanishes. The machine shrinks to something small enough to launch by the thousands. Running on free energy. Cooled by nothing. Musk: “I think even perhaps in the four or five year time frame, the lowest cost way to do AI compute will be with solar-powered AI satellites.” Not fifty years. Not twenty. Five. The cheapest AI compute on Earth will not be on Earth. It will be in orbit. And only one company can put it there at the cost and cadence required. That is what the market is pricing. Not a rocket company. The only organization on Earth capable of moving intelligence infrastructure off of it. Huang heard the pitch. The math. The timeline. Huang: “That’s the dream.” Musk: “Yes.” A trillion watts of compute. Powered by the Sun. Cooled by space. Launched by SpaceX. Every company building AI on the ground is building under the same ceiling. The atmosphere.
2:27

SpaceX is about to shatter the largest IPO record in history. Not by a little. By more than double. The previous record was $29 billion. SpaceX is targeting $75 billion. Two months ago the number was $50 billion. Last week it was $70 billion. Now $75 billion. The filing has not even happened yet. Every time the market recalculates what SpaceX actually is, the answer gets bigger. Goldman Sachs. JPMorgan. Bank of America. Morgan Stanley. All lined up as underwriters. Target date: mid-June 2026. Target valuation: $1.75 trillion. That would make SpaceX larger than Meta. Larger than Tesla. Larger than every company on Earth except five. This is not some startup bleeding cash and calling it strategy. SpaceX made $8 billion in profit last year on $16 billion in revenue. They do not need the money. They are raising it because what comes next costs more than profit can fund at the speed they intend to move. Musk: “There just is no way to do a terawatt per year on Earth.” He ran the math on stage with Jensen Huang. Three hundred gigawatts of AI compute per year would consume two-thirds of all US electricity production. Not total energy. Just electricity. And three hundred gigawatts is not even the target. A terawatt is. More than three times that. Building enough power plants is not difficult. It is not expensive. It is physically impossible. Musk: “You have to do that in space.” Not should. Not could. Have to. Earth does not have the power. Cannot build it fast enough. Cannot cool the hardware. Not within a decade. Not at all. The bottleneck is not silicon. Not software. Not data. It is the planet itself. Musk: “You don’t actually need batteries because it’s always sunny in space. And the solar panels become cheaper because you don’t need glass or framing. And the cooling is just radiative.” No batteries. No night cycle. No weather. Just uninterrupted solar hitting bare panels in a vacuum. Heat dissipates on its own. Huang: “Each one of these GB300 racks is two tons. 1.95 of it is probably for cooling.” Ninety-seven percent of the weight of a supercomputer rack exists to keep it from overheating. Move it to space and that weight vanishes. The machine shrinks to something small enough to launch by the thousands. Running on free energy. Cooled by nothing. Musk: “I think even perhaps in the four or five year time frame, the lowest cost way to do AI compute will be with solar-powered AI satellites.” Not fifty years. Not twenty. Five. The cheapest AI compute on Earth will not be on Earth. It will be in orbit. And only one company can put it there at the cost and cadence required. That is what the market is pricing. Not a rocket company. The only organization on Earth capable of moving intelligence infrastructure off of it. Huang heard the pitch. The math. The timeline. Huang: “That’s the dream.” Musk: “Yes.” A trillion watts of compute. Powered by the Sun. Cooled by space. Launched by SpaceX. Every company building AI on the ground is building under the same ceiling. The atmosphere.

Dustin

44,710 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Elon Musk built one of the largest AI compute clusters on earth. Yann LeCun just explained why xAI now rents it out to rivals instead of winning with it. Musk has antagonized so much AI talent he structurally cannot hire the people he needs. LeCun is not a critic on the sidelines. He won the Turing Award and ran AI at Meta for a decade. When he talks about who can and cannot build a frontier lab, he is describing his own world. His verdict on xAI was blunt. He called it kind of a failure and did not soften it. His reasoning had nothing to do with money. The founding team left or was fired. There is some uncertainty about which. Either way, the people who started the company are gone. That is the part that matters. A frontier lab is its researchers. Lose them and the compute is just hardware. By March, all eleven co-founders Musk recruited in 2023 had walked out. Researchers who came from DeepMind, Google, and OpenAI. Musk himself posted that xAI was not built right the first time and had to be rebuilt from the foundations up. So Musk is left with one of the biggest clusters on earth and no way to win with it. He rents it out to other companies to recoup the cost. The most expensive infrastructure in AI, built by someone who can no longer staff it. Asked directly if xAI can compete at the frontier, LeCun gave a one word answer. No. What do you guys think about this? Source: CNBC International Live
0:50

Elon Musk built one of the largest AI compute clusters on earth. Yann LeCun just explained why xAI now rents it out to rivals instead of winning with it. Musk has antagonized so much AI talent he structurally cannot hire the people he needs. LeCun is not a critic on the sidelines. He won the Turing Award and ran AI at Meta for a decade. When he talks about who can and cannot build a frontier lab, he is describing his own world. His verdict on xAI was blunt. He called it kind of a failure and did not soften it. His reasoning had nothing to do with money. The founding team left or was fired. There is some uncertainty about which. Either way, the people who started the company are gone. That is the part that matters. A frontier lab is its researchers. Lose them and the compute is just hardware. By March, all eleven co-founders Musk recruited in 2023 had walked out. Researchers who came from DeepMind, Google, and OpenAI. Musk himself posted that xAI was not built right the first time and had to be rebuilt from the foundations up. So Musk is left with one of the biggest clusters on earth and no way to win with it. He rents it out to other companies to recoup the cost. The most expensive infrastructure in AI, built by someone who can no longer staff it. Asked directly if xAI can compete at the frontier, LeCun gave a one word answer. No. What do you guys think about this? Source: CNBC International Live

Ihtesham Ali

323,046 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Jensen Huang just admitted Nvidia is paying for BOTH ends of its own $500 billion deal. Every outlet ran the same headline: Nvidia is putting half a trillion dollars into Korea. The largest AI infrastructure commitment ever announced with a single partner. But when asked what was actually inside that number and whether this is Nvidia spending money in the Korean economy, or SK fronting the capital themselves, Jensen said this: "We're gonna be purchasing memories from them for many years to come. In order to build a trillion dollars worth of Vera Rubin systems, you're gonna have to buy a lot of system memories to go with it. And so we have large purchase agreements and large purchase intentions with SK Hynix. Meanwhile, SK Telecom is gonna become an AI cloud. And in that agreement, we will be selling AI supercomputers to them. So between us, we're gonna do $500 billion worth of business." He literally described two completely different transactions and added them together. Nvidia pays SK Hynix for memory chips. SK Telecom pays Nvidia for supercomputers. Both directions get stacked into one figure and handed to the market as demand. A large share of that half trillion dollars is Nvidia's own money going OUT the door. This is the CEO of the most important chip company on Earth. His silicon runs every serious AI system on the planet. If anyone alive could announce a clean half trillion in customer demand, it's him. Instead he announced a number that counts his own supplier payments as "business." But now this is where it gets genuinely crazy... Bloomberg asked how badly Nvidia needs Korean supply to grow. Jensen said Nvidia does not have enough bits. He said the company is constrained in HBM memory, constrained in LPDDR memory, and constrained in just about every part of the supply chain. Then he named the bottleneck nobody expected: "We're even constrained now with land and power and construction workers to set up the data centers." The company announcing the biggest AI deal in history cannot hire enough people to pour concrete. Then he capped the entire industry. He said the industry has the ability to double each year, and will have a hard time growing much faster than that. Now hold that against the target he set at the top of the same interview: He said the semiconductor industry probably has to become 10x larger than it is today over the next decade. Doubling annually clears that on a spreadsheet. But in reality it only happens if land, power and construction crews cooperate every single year for ten years straight. And the demand justifying all of it is a number most people have not heard yet. Jensen is planning for 100 BILLION AI agents and billions of robots using computers. That is the actual bet. 10x the industry, financed by deals where the vendor is also the customer, and gated by how fast you can find electricians. Korea's market did not celebrate any of this by the way. The KOSPI has been falling hard and SK Hynix and Samsung both slumped while the half trillion dollar headline was running. Jensen listed both directions of money and totaled them on camera because he does not think there is anything wrong with it. Maybe there isn't. Chips have to be bought before systems can be sold. But the market is pricing these announcements as demand, and at least half of this one is spending.
1:21

Jensen Huang just admitted Nvidia is paying for BOTH ends of its own $500 billion deal. Every outlet ran the same headline: Nvidia is putting half a trillion dollars into Korea. The largest AI infrastructure commitment ever announced with a single partner. But when asked what was actually inside that number and whether this is Nvidia spending money in the Korean economy, or SK fronting the capital themselves, Jensen said this: "We're gonna be purchasing memories from them for many years to come. In order to build a trillion dollars worth of Vera Rubin systems, you're gonna have to buy a lot of system memories to go with it. And so we have large purchase agreements and large purchase intentions with SK Hynix. Meanwhile, SK Telecom is gonna become an AI cloud. And in that agreement, we will be selling AI supercomputers to them. So between us, we're gonna do $500 billion worth of business." He literally described two completely different transactions and added them together. Nvidia pays SK Hynix for memory chips. SK Telecom pays Nvidia for supercomputers. Both directions get stacked into one figure and handed to the market as demand. A large share of that half trillion dollars is Nvidia's own money going OUT the door. This is the CEO of the most important chip company on Earth. His silicon runs every serious AI system on the planet. If anyone alive could announce a clean half trillion in customer demand, it's him. Instead he announced a number that counts his own supplier payments as "business." But now this is where it gets genuinely crazy... Bloomberg asked how badly Nvidia needs Korean supply to grow. Jensen said Nvidia does not have enough bits. He said the company is constrained in HBM memory, constrained in LPDDR memory, and constrained in just about every part of the supply chain. Then he named the bottleneck nobody expected: "We're even constrained now with land and power and construction workers to set up the data centers." The company announcing the biggest AI deal in history cannot hire enough people to pour concrete. Then he capped the entire industry. He said the industry has the ability to double each year, and will have a hard time growing much faster than that. Now hold that against the target he set at the top of the same interview: He said the semiconductor industry probably has to become 10x larger than it is today over the next decade. Doubling annually clears that on a spreadsheet. But in reality it only happens if land, power and construction crews cooperate every single year for ten years straight. And the demand justifying all of it is a number most people have not heard yet. Jensen is planning for 100 BILLION AI agents and billions of robots using computers. That is the actual bet. 10x the industry, financed by deals where the vendor is also the customer, and gated by how fast you can find electricians. Korea's market did not celebrate any of this by the way. The KOSPI has been falling hard and SK Hynix and Samsung both slumped while the half trillion dollar headline was running. Jensen listed both directions of money and totaled them on camera because he does not think there is anything wrong with it. Maybe there isn't. Chips have to be bought before systems can be sold. But the market is pricing these announcements as demand, and at least half of this one is spending.

Ricardo

35,609 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

SUNDAR PICHAI: AI IS REWRITING EARTH’S INFRASTRUCTURE IN TWO YEARS Sundar laid it out with quiet certainty: the AI boom isn’t coming, it’s already rewriting the laws of scale: "You know, maybe four years ago Google was spending less than $30 billion per year. This year, that number is gonna be over $90 billion. And if you collectively add what all the companies are doing, we have well over a trillion dollars of investment going in, in building the infrastructure for this moment. And one way I think about it is in the next couple of years, we'll end up building what we probably built in the past 10 to 20 years. So hopefully just in a couple of years. So that gives you the scale at which this is ramping up." It’s the kind of scale that makes empires blink. Alphabet’s AI capex shot from $24 billion in 2021 to over $90 billion in 2025, powered by Gemini, Vertex AI, and an arms race for compute that’s now burning through a trillion dollars across Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta. Source: thewizeai / Sundar Pichai
0:36

SUNDAR PICHAI: AI IS REWRITING EARTH’S INFRASTRUCTURE IN TWO YEARS Sundar laid it out with quiet certainty: the AI boom isn’t coming, it’s already rewriting the laws of scale: "You know, maybe four years ago Google was spending less than $30 billion per year. This year, that number is gonna be over $90 billion. And if you collectively add what all the companies are doing, we have well over a trillion dollars of investment going in, in building the infrastructure for this moment. And one way I think about it is in the next couple of years, we'll end up building what we probably built in the past 10 to 20 years. So hopefully just in a couple of years. So that gives you the scale at which this is ramping up." It’s the kind of scale that makes empires blink. Alphabet’s AI capex shot from $24 billion in 2021 to over $90 billion in 2025, powered by Gemini, Vertex AI, and an arms race for compute that’s now burning through a trillion dollars across Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta. Source: thewizeai / Sundar Pichai

Mario Nawfal

163,412 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Six months ago Ethereum was almost $5,000. Today it's under $2,000. When I put that to Tom Lee in Paris, his response was: "Has anything really changed?" Tom Lee (Thomas (Tom) Lee (not drummer) FundstratDirect.com) is one of Wall Street's most-followed forecasters. While the market wrote Ethereum off, he made the case to me that it's one of the most mispriced assets in the world right now. His framing stuck with me. Gold is worth ~$22 trillion. The stock market over $100 trillion. Real estate ~$300 trillion. And to make those assets composable and move them on-chain, he argues, you run them on Ethereum, which sits at a fraction of that. "If Ethereum is at 300 billion, it's grossly undervalued." We cover: - Why he calls this "crypto spring", fundamentals stronger than ever while price lags - Why tokenization is "not even a question," and what happens when Wall Street actually moves on-chain - Why AI agents carrying wallets and making payments is, in his words, "pretty close to 100%" within three years - Why he can see Ethereum as a 1, 2, or even $5 trillion network "in the next few years" - What most investors are missing at exactly the wrong moment That's his call, not mine, but it's one of the clearest bull cases I've heard on why the biggest move may still be ahead. Full conversation is live. 👇 Is Ethereum the most undervalued asset in crypto right now?
34:28

Six months ago Ethereum was almost $5,000. Today it's under $2,000. When I put that to Tom Lee in Paris, his response was: "Has anything really changed?" Tom Lee (Thomas (Tom) Lee (not drummer) FundstratDirect.com) is one of Wall Street's most-followed forecasters. While the market wrote Ethereum off, he made the case to me that it's one of the most mispriced assets in the world right now. His framing stuck with me. Gold is worth ~$22 trillion. The stock market over $100 trillion. Real estate ~$300 trillion. And to make those assets composable and move them on-chain, he argues, you run them on Ethereum, which sits at a fraction of that. "If Ethereum is at 300 billion, it's grossly undervalued." We cover: - Why he calls this "crypto spring", fundamentals stronger than ever while price lags - Why tokenization is "not even a question," and what happens when Wall Street actually moves on-chain - Why AI agents carrying wallets and making payments is, in his words, "pretty close to 100%" within three years - Why he can see Ethereum as a 1, 2, or even $5 trillion network "in the next few years" - What most investors are missing at exactly the wrong moment That's his call, not mine, but it's one of the clearest bull cases I've heard on why the biggest move may still be ahead. Full conversation is live. 👇 Is Ethereum the most undervalued asset in crypto right now?

Michaël van de Poppe

422,844 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Eric Schmidt says the real limit on AI is cash, and he puts one gigawatt of data center at roughly $50 billion: "A gigawatt data center costs something on the order of 50 billion with a B number." "How could these people in my industry be so crazy to raise all that money and build all the data centers? And the answer is they see the demand." "So absent an AI breakthrough algorithmically, which is a change to what is called the transformer architecture which is invented at Google, thank you, in 2017, we're sort of stuck with this cost structure." "And I think the real limit to AI is not energy. It's actually cash." "Because when you add up the cost of these, if you take 50, just round numbers, 50 billion a gigawatt, so 10 gigawatts is half a trillion dollars." "How many companies, countries, and so forth can hand an industry a trillion dollars of capital? Very, very few." Even at the low end of the published estimates, around $38 billion a gigawatt, his arithmetic still puts ten gigawatts in the hundreds of billions, so the conclusion holds. Very few balance sheets can carry that, which means most companies buying AI capacity over the next few years will be renting it from the handful that can. - Eric Schmidt (Eric Schmidt), Chair of the Special Competitive Studies Project and CEO of Relativity Space, at the SCSP AI+ Expo (@SCSPAI), May 2026.
1:13

Eric Schmidt says the real limit on AI is cash, and he puts one gigawatt of data center at roughly $50 billion: "A gigawatt data center costs something on the order of 50 billion with a B number." "How could these people in my industry be so crazy to raise all that money and build all the data centers? And the answer is they see the demand." "So absent an AI breakthrough algorithmically, which is a change to what is called the transformer architecture which is invented at Google, thank you, in 2017, we're sort of stuck with this cost structure." "And I think the real limit to AI is not energy. It's actually cash." "Because when you add up the cost of these, if you take 50, just round numbers, 50 billion a gigawatt, so 10 gigawatts is half a trillion dollars." "How many companies, countries, and so forth can hand an industry a trillion dollars of capital? Very, very few." Even at the low end of the published estimates, around $38 billion a gigawatt, his arithmetic still puts ten gigawatts in the hundreds of billions, so the conclusion holds. Very few balance sheets can carry that, which means most companies buying AI capacity over the next few years will be renting it from the handful that can. - Eric Schmidt (Eric Schmidt), Chair of the Special Competitive Studies Project and CEO of Relativity Space, at the SCSP AI+ Expo (@SCSPAI), May 2026.

Karl Mehta

39,848 Aufrufe • vor 7 Tagen

🚨 SAM ALTMAN JUST MADE A MASSIVE BET ON THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY His nuclear startup, $OKLO, will power the massive energy demands of the AI revolution. So, Sam Altman is not only betting on AI... He is betting on what will power it. The chart is also within the most critical zone of this entire year right now. This could be huge.
0:29

🚨 SAM ALTMAN JUST MADE A MASSIVE BET ON THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY His nuclear startup, $OKLO, will power the massive energy demands of the AI revolution. So, Sam Altman is not only betting on AI... He is betting on what will power it. The chart is also within the most critical zone of this entire year right now. This could be huge.

Coinvo Trading

18,297 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Bill Ackman manages 25 billion dollars and just said the thing every long-term investor is most afraid of out loud. The risk of two people in a garage destroying your company has gone up enormously, and he spends most of his time on that one problem. That should change how you look at every business you own. His logic is simple. This is the greatest era in history to build a company. There is unlimited access to compute. There is unlimited access to capital. There is incredible talent everywhere. Most people hear that and feel optimistic. Ackman hears it and sees a threat. Because every one of those advantages is available to the people trying to kill your company too. The same tools that make it easy to build make it easy to disrupt. His exact words: the probability of your being disrupted has gone up enormously. So the hardest job he has as an investor is not finding cheap stocks. It is figuring out what cannot be destroyed. That is where he spends most of his time now. Not on upside. On survival. Everyone is asking which companies AI will make. Ackman is asking which ones it will break. The cheapest stock in the world means nothing if two people in a garage are already building the thing that ends it. WATCH THE FULL PODCAST ON The All-In Podcast
2:32

Bill Ackman manages 25 billion dollars and just said the thing every long-term investor is most afraid of out loud. The risk of two people in a garage destroying your company has gone up enormously, and he spends most of his time on that one problem. That should change how you look at every business you own. His logic is simple. This is the greatest era in history to build a company. There is unlimited access to compute. There is unlimited access to capital. There is incredible talent everywhere. Most people hear that and feel optimistic. Ackman hears it and sees a threat. Because every one of those advantages is available to the people trying to kill your company too. The same tools that make it easy to build make it easy to disrupt. His exact words: the probability of your being disrupted has gone up enormously. So the hardest job he has as an investor is not finding cheap stocks. It is figuring out what cannot be destroyed. That is where he spends most of his time now. Not on upside. On survival. Everyone is asking which companies AI will make. Ackman is asking which ones it will break. The cheapest stock in the world means nothing if two people in a garage are already building the thing that ends it. WATCH THE FULL PODCAST ON The All-In Podcast

Ihtesham Ali

20,475 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

2025 will be the year of IP. In the AI race, compute is growing, but data is not. IP is the fossil fuel of AI, the bottleneck where value accrues. The largest AI companies are all forced buyers of IP. There is no better explanation of our situation & Story's vision than this.
31:30

2025 will be the year of IP. In the AI race, compute is growing, but data is not. IP is the fossil fuel of AI, the bottleneck where value accrues. The largest AI companies are all forced buyers of IP. There is no better explanation of our situation & Story's vision than this.

Jason Zhao

123,174 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr