Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Ken Griffin just asked the question everyone in AI is too scared to answer. Data center spending in the US this year alone is over $500 billion. Half a trillion dollars. To raise that kind of money, you have to make a promise. And the promise has to be... big. "AI needs to be your savior almost. How else are you going to write $500 billion of checks in a single year?" He's not saying AI is fraud. He's saying the hype is structurally necessary. You can't fund a buildout at this scale without narrative that matches it. The real question is what AI actually delivers at the end. In some areas Griffin says it's going to be profound. Call centers. Software engineering productivity. Those are real, measurable, already happening. But in white collar work more broadly, he's more skeptical. A Harvard paper recently coined a term for it: AI Work Slop. Output that looks impressive on the surface. First few sentences read like genuine insight. Then you go deeper and it's all garbage. Griffin's colleague runs their commodities business. Got handed a report generated by an AI engine. First paragraph, genuinely good. The rest, useless. The model that can write a compelling opening can't yet think through the substance underneath it. This is the AI investing tension right now. The infrastructure spend is real. The hype is real. The productivity gains in specific verticals are real. But the blanket assumption that AI transforms every white collar job equally has not been proven yet.show more

Milk Road Macro

16,994 subscribers

125,923 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

Haberler & Politika Bilim & Teknoloji Finans

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Citadel CEO Ken Griffin on why the AI boom might be the most overhyped tech cycle we have ever seen: This year alone, data center spending in the United States is projected to exceed $500 billion. And Griffin wants to know what all of that money is actually buying. "You're not going to generate this kind of spend unless you're going to make a promise. You're going to profoundly change the world." In his view, the scale of the capital commitment demands the scale of the promise. And when the promise has to be that big, hype becomes inevitable. "Is it hype? Of course." Griffin isn't arguing that AI is worthless. He sees real impact in certain areas like call centers and software engineering. But for the broader white collar workforce, he's far less convinced. He points to a recent Harvard paper that coined the term "AI work slop." It looks impressive on the surface, but falls apart the moment you look closer. He saw it firsthand inside Citadel. A colleague running their commodities business handed him a report generated by an AI engine. "The first few sentences like, 'Wow, that's really insightful.' And then you go down below that and it's all garbage." For Griffin, this is the defining tension of the current AI cycle. The industry needs to promise transformation to justify the investment. But the actual productivity gains, for most jobs, haven't shown up yet. We have seen this pattern before. Transformative technology attracting massive capital well ahead of proven results. When the hype finally settles, will AI have actually changed anything at all?

Citadel CEO Ken Griffin on why the AI boom might be the most overhyped tech cycle we have ever seen: This year alone, data center spending in the United States is projected to exceed $500 billion. And Griffin wants to know what all of that money is actually buying. "You're not going to generate this kind of spend unless you're going to make a promise. You're going to profoundly change the world." In his view, the scale of the capital commitment demands the scale of the promise. And when the promise has to be that big, hype becomes inevitable. "Is it hype? Of course." Griffin isn't arguing that AI is worthless. He sees real impact in certain areas like call centers and software engineering. But for the broader white collar workforce, he's far less convinced. He points to a recent Harvard paper that coined the term "AI work slop." It looks impressive on the surface, but falls apart the moment you look closer. He saw it firsthand inside Citadel. A colleague running their commodities business handed him a report generated by an AI engine. "The first few sentences like, 'Wow, that's really insightful.' And then you go down below that and it's all garbage." For Griffin, this is the defining tension of the current AI cycle. The industry needs to promise transformation to justify the investment. But the actual productivity gains, for most jobs, haven't shown up yet. We have seen this pattern before. Transformative technology attracting massive capital well ahead of proven results. When the hype finally settles, will AI have actually changed anything at all?

Big Brain AI

400,654 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

In just 3 minutes, Ken Griffin (Citadel) & Larry Fink (BlackRock) explain the current state of government overspending, AI hype, & 2026 $600B data center CapEx "The world needs a savior, & the hope is that AI is the savior that we need for productivity." "The the area of recklessness is the spending of governments around the world, who are all, with little exception, all spending well beyond their means." Big issue: "Will AI create the productivity acceleration that is honestly just hoped for in Washington & in the halls of government around the world as a ways to overcome the profligate spending that we're currently engaged in?" Citadel BlackRock World Economic Forum . . . Ken Griffin "Let's take a step back and and talk about where we are right here right now. The the area of recklessness is the spending of governments around the world, who are all, with little exception, all spending well beyond their means. That's the recklessness of this moment in history. This is not a parallel to the 1920s in terms of the recklessness of the of the private capital markets. It's a story of the recklessness of government spending. Within the private sector there's a huge question as to where AI will take us. And I, I was carefully taking notes and listening to what Larry has to say, or to what Madame Lagarde has to say, because this is one of the big issues of our moment. Will AI create the productivity acceleration that is honestly just hoped for in Washington and in the halls of government around the world as a ways to overcome the profligate spending that we're currently engaged in? The world, the world needs a savior, and the hope is that AI is the savior that we need for productivity. And the challenge with this is it is, it may or may not be. We just don't know yet. Now there's a tremendous amount of hype around AI, and in some sense the large AI companies need to create that hype to raise the tens — or actually 100, hundreds of billions, right — of billions of dollars of investment that are going into the field. Like you wouldn't be able to raise hundreds of billions of dollars. We'll spend — and Larry can probably correct me on this — but roughly $600 billion this year in cap ex for data centers in the United States. Larry Fink "I think it could be larger." Andrew Ross Sorkin "But does that mean that it's getting hyped up too much, or it's just the the hype is required as a sales mechanism?" Larry Fink "First of all, so much of the data centers are being built for cloud, right? And and the big issue is gonna be in terms of monetization of of of the spend. The data centers are being built for AI requires more advanced chips. The question is what is the lifetime of that chip. If we have new technological changes in the lifetime of the chip in one year, then that spend is gonna be really a bad spend. If the lifetime as they expect it to be is 4 or 5 years and then those chips can be used for cloud, then then I think these investments are gonna prove to be good investments. So I think it's it's gonna be — you know, if the speed of technology changes and all these investments now, they're gonna be — it's gonna be a challenge. But I agree with Ken. I think we don't know enough, but I'm personally very optimistic on how AI is gonna affect the world economy."

In just 3 minutes, Ken Griffin (Citadel) & Larry Fink (BlackRock) explain the current state of government overspending, AI hype, & 2026 $600B data center CapEx "The world needs a savior, & the hope is that AI is the savior that we need for productivity." "The the area of recklessness is the spending of governments around the world, who are all, with little exception, all spending well beyond their means." Big issue: "Will AI create the productivity acceleration that is honestly just hoped for in Washington & in the halls of government around the world as a ways to overcome the profligate spending that we're currently engaged in?" Citadel BlackRock World Economic Forum . . . Ken Griffin "Let's take a step back and and talk about where we are right here right now. The the area of recklessness is the spending of governments around the world, who are all, with little exception, all spending well beyond their means. That's the recklessness of this moment in history. This is not a parallel to the 1920s in terms of the recklessness of the of the private capital markets. It's a story of the recklessness of government spending. Within the private sector there's a huge question as to where AI will take us. And I, I was carefully taking notes and listening to what Larry has to say, or to what Madame Lagarde has to say, because this is one of the big issues of our moment. Will AI create the productivity acceleration that is honestly just hoped for in Washington and in the halls of government around the world as a ways to overcome the profligate spending that we're currently engaged in? The world, the world needs a savior, and the hope is that AI is the savior that we need for productivity. And the challenge with this is it is, it may or may not be. We just don't know yet. Now there's a tremendous amount of hype around AI, and in some sense the large AI companies need to create that hype to raise the tens — or actually 100, hundreds of billions, right — of billions of dollars of investment that are going into the field. Like you wouldn't be able to raise hundreds of billions of dollars. We'll spend — and Larry can probably correct me on this — but roughly $600 billion this year in cap ex for data centers in the United States. Larry Fink "I think it could be larger." Andrew Ross Sorkin "But does that mean that it's getting hyped up too much, or it's just the the hype is required as a sales mechanism?" Larry Fink "First of all, so much of the data centers are being built for cloud, right? And and the big issue is gonna be in terms of monetization of of of the spend. The data centers are being built for AI requires more advanced chips. The question is what is the lifetime of that chip. If we have new technological changes in the lifetime of the chip in one year, then that spend is gonna be really a bad spend. If the lifetime as they expect it to be is 4 or 5 years and then those chips can be used for cloud, then then I think these investments are gonna prove to be good investments. So I think it's it's gonna be — you know, if the speed of technology changes and all these investments now, they're gonna be — it's gonna be a challenge. But I agree with Ken. I think we don't know enough, but I'm personally very optimistic on how AI is gonna affect the world economy."

Molly O’Shea

33,210 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Jensen Huang just said this is the greatest era in history to build software. AI agents will not kill software. They will do the exact opposite: create a massive new wave of software demand. at NVIDIA GTC Taipei 2026 "Click and type. We now replace that with explaining to the AI what we want, our intent, and the AI generates the code or uses tools to produce the necessary output. This is how computers are going to work in the future. This is Agentic AI. For two years, we've been building toward this, and now it has arrived. One of the big breakthroughs, of course, is tool use. A lot of people have said, “Jensen, AI is coming. Agentic AI is coming. Therefore, all the software companies are going to go out of business.” This is exactly the opposite. Because there are going to be so many agents, the world is no longer limited by the number of people. Therefore, those agents are going to use more tools than ever. This is actually an incredible time to be a software company. But the software has to be presented to the agent in a way that the agent can use it. This is a big breakthrough. And in fact, what we have done, as you know, what Nvidia’s treasure..." ---- From 'NVIDIA' YT channel (link in comment)

Jensen Huang just said this is the greatest era in history to build software. AI agents will not kill software. They will do the exact opposite: create a massive new wave of software demand. at NVIDIA GTC Taipei 2026 "Click and type. We now replace that with explaining to the AI what we want, our intent, and the AI generates the code or uses tools to produce the necessary output. This is how computers are going to work in the future. This is Agentic AI. For two years, we've been building toward this, and now it has arrived. One of the big breakthroughs, of course, is tool use. A lot of people have said, “Jensen, AI is coming. Agentic AI is coming. Therefore, all the software companies are going to go out of business.” This is exactly the opposite. Because there are going to be so many agents, the world is no longer limited by the number of people. Therefore, those agents are going to use more tools than ever. This is actually an incredible time to be a software company. But the software has to be presented to the agent in a way that the agent can use it. This is a big breakthrough. And in fact, what we have done, as you know, what Nvidia’s treasure..." ---- From 'NVIDIA' YT channel (link in comment)

Rohan Paul

16,584 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Ken Griffin was asked if AI could tell you which stocks to buy, before he bought the entire book of Leopold Aschenbrenner: "there are people that have a fantasy that LLMs are going to tell you which stocks to buy - and it's just a fantasy, just a fantasy" "but wouldn't they be smart enough to tell you which stocks to buy?" - "no, because they're not smart, they're just programmed - they are very good at thoughtfully regurgitating" this is him explaining why he thinks the productivity gains everyone is pricing in are still years away, why Nvidia reminds him of the California gold rush, and what he says is the one risk the market is completely missing "it's not clear to me that we're going to get the productivity gains out of AI that the market's broadly hoping for - they're not about to happen in the next 12 or 24 or 36 months" "this is like the gold mining in California - those that sold the picks made a lot of money - and Nvidia right now sells one of the most important ingredients in the AI story" "the question with every investment is whether or not it's the right price - that's the fundamental of investing" bookmark & watch the full conversation ↓

Ken Griffin was asked if AI could tell you which stocks to buy, before he bought the entire book of Leopold Aschenbrenner: "there are people that have a fantasy that LLMs are going to tell you which stocks to buy - and it's just a fantasy, just a fantasy" "but wouldn't they be smart enough to tell you which stocks to buy?" - "no, because they're not smart, they're just programmed - they are very good at thoughtfully regurgitating" this is him explaining why he thinks the productivity gains everyone is pricing in are still years away, why Nvidia reminds him of the California gold rush, and what he says is the one risk the market is completely missing "it's not clear to me that we're going to get the productivity gains out of AI that the market's broadly hoping for - they're not about to happen in the next 12 or 24 or 36 months" "this is like the gold mining in California - those that sold the picks made a lot of money - and Nvidia right now sells one of the most important ingredients in the AI story" "the question with every investment is whether or not it's the right price - that's the fundamental of investing" bookmark & watch the full conversation ↓

Сarm1ne

215,706 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Asked by Ben Smith about how he views the politics of AI and the data center build out, Governor Josh Shapiro says: "AI is being developed. The real question is, is it going to be developed here in the US or in communist China? My view is that all of us should want it developed in the US. The US should lead on this. This is a national security issue. I think this is an issue that threatens our freedom if we allow China to overtake us when it comes to AI development."

Asked by Ben Smith about how he views the politics of AI and the data center build out, Governor Josh Shapiro says: "AI is being developed. The real question is, is it going to be developed here in the US or in communist China? My view is that all of us should want it developed in the US. The US should lead on this. This is a national security issue. I think this is an issue that threatens our freedom if we allow China to overtake us when it comes to AI development."

Semafor

99,123 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

"The one thing that's going to be truly future proof is judgment. What is the biggest challenge when you have a thousand AI engineers writing code? AI slop. In an era when you can do everything, the question is which of these things matter. On the engineer side, it is evaluating the code. Which of this code is even valuable? You can have AI engineers writing beautiful code that could be wrong, that could have bugs in it, that could be vulnerable. Someone needs to review it. Make sure to have a human review at some point, especially critical code that is in the core of your system. On the product side is judgment around what needs to be built and evaluating. And similarly in design, you have to have judgment around, does it make sense in the broader design system. I think this judgment is the number one thing that humans are going to bring in an era of infinite productivity."

"The one thing that's going to be truly future proof is judgment. What is the biggest challenge when you have a thousand AI engineers writing code? AI slop. In an era when you can do everything, the question is which of these things matter. On the engineer side, it is evaluating the code. Which of this code is even valuable? You can have AI engineers writing beautiful code that could be wrong, that could have bugs in it, that could be vulnerable. Someone needs to review it. Make sure to have a human review at some point, especially critical code that is in the core of your system. On the product side is judgment around what needs to be built and evaluating. And similarly in design, you have to have judgment around, does it make sense in the broader design system. I think this judgment is the number one thing that humans are going to bring in an era of infinite productivity."

Patrick OShaughnessy

24,818 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

David Sacks says the biggest risk of AI was described not by James Cameron in The Terminator but by George Orwell in 1984. “I almost feel like the term ‘woke AI’ is insufficient to explain what’s going on because it somehow trivializes it.” “What we’re really talking about is 'Orwellian AI.' We’re talking about AI that lies to you, that distorts an answer, that rewrites history in real time to serve a current political agenda of the people who are in power.” “To me, this is the biggest risk of AI... It’s not The Terminator, it’s 1984.” David Sacks

David Sacks says the biggest risk of AI was described not by James Cameron in The Terminator but by George Orwell in 1984. “I almost feel like the term ‘woke AI’ is insufficient to explain what’s going on because it somehow trivializes it.” “What we’re really talking about is 'Orwellian AI.' We’re talking about AI that lies to you, that distorts an answer, that rewrites history in real time to serve a current political agenda of the people who are in power.” “To me, this is the biggest risk of AI... It’s not The Terminator, it’s 1984.” David Sacks

a16z

16,354,563 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

AI cannot make money. ChatGPT costs billions to run. Generates almost nothing in return. So why is Amazon, Microsoft, Google and Meta tripling their AI investment every year? Because they are all investing in each other. It is a circle. Nobody is making money. Everyone is pretending they will. There is only one solution to a bubble this big. The government. Three days after Trump's inauguration — Operation Stargate. $500 billion for AI data centers. Not because AI is profitable. Because the government needs the surveillance infrastructure that AI makes possible. AI needed the government to survive. The government needed AI to control. They found each other. And you are paying for it.

AI cannot make money. ChatGPT costs billions to run. Generates almost nothing in return. So why is Amazon, Microsoft, Google and Meta tripling their AI investment every year? Because they are all investing in each other. It is a circle. Nobody is making money. Everyone is pretending they will. There is only one solution to a bubble this big. The government. Three days after Trump's inauguration — Operation Stargate. $500 billion for AI data centers. Not because AI is profitable. Because the government needs the surveillance infrastructure that AI makes possible. AI needed the government to survive. The government needed AI to control. They found each other. And you are paying for it.

Predictive History

19,850 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Naval Ravikant: "I'm not scared of AI. I'm scared of what a very small number of people who control AI do to the rest of us." On E215, Naval broke down his main AI fear: consolidated control enabled by regulatory capture. "If you really think you're going to create God, do you want to put God on a leash with one entity controlling God?" "That to me is the real fear." "I'm not scared of AI. I'm scared of what a very small number of people who control AI do to the rest of us, 'for our own good.'" "I'm not an AI doomer. I don't think AI is going to end the world. That's a separate conversation." "But, there's this religion that comes along in many faces, which is that, 'Oh, climate change is going to end the world. AI is going to end the world. Asteroid's going to end the world. COVID-19 is going to end the world.' And it just has a way of fixating your attention, right? "It captures everybody's attention at once. So it's a very seductive thing." "And I think in the case of AI, it's really been overplayed by incentive bias. Motivated reasoning by the companies who are ahead and they want to pull up the ladder behind them." "I think they generally believe that there is safety risk, but I think they're motivated to believe in those safety risks and then they pass that along." "But it's kind of a weird position because they have to say, 'Oh, it's so dangerous that you shouldn't just let open-source go at it. And you should let just a few of us work with you on it. But it's not so dangerous that a private company can't own the whole thing.'" "Because if it was truly the Manhattan Project, if they were building nuclear weapons, you wouldn't want one company to own that." "So to me, the real issue boils down to, how do you push AI forward while not having just a very small number of players control the entire thing?"

Naval Ravikant: "I'm not scared of AI. I'm scared of what a very small number of people who control AI do to the rest of us." On E215, Naval broke down his main AI fear: consolidated control enabled by regulatory capture. "If you really think you're going to create God, do you want to put God on a leash with one entity controlling God?" "That to me is the real fear." "I'm not scared of AI. I'm scared of what a very small number of people who control AI do to the rest of us, 'for our own good.'" "I'm not an AI doomer. I don't think AI is going to end the world. That's a separate conversation." "But, there's this religion that comes along in many faces, which is that, 'Oh, climate change is going to end the world. AI is going to end the world. Asteroid's going to end the world. COVID-19 is going to end the world.' And it just has a way of fixating your attention, right? "It captures everybody's attention at once. So it's a very seductive thing." "And I think in the case of AI, it's really been overplayed by incentive bias. Motivated reasoning by the companies who are ahead and they want to pull up the ladder behind them." "I think they generally believe that there is safety risk, but I think they're motivated to believe in those safety risks and then they pass that along." "But it's kind of a weird position because they have to say, 'Oh, it's so dangerous that you shouldn't just let open-source go at it. And you should let just a few of us work with you on it. But it's not so dangerous that a private company can't own the whole thing.'" "Because if it was truly the Manhattan Project, if they were building nuclear weapons, you wouldn't want one company to own that." "So to me, the real issue boils down to, how do you push AI forward while not having just a very small number of players control the entire thing?"

The All-In Podcast

301,207 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Chamath just asked the question nobody in AI wants to answer (Save this). "Okay guys, you've spent $3 trillion in the last four years. What is the ROI of these tokens?" It is the most important question in technology right now and the data suggests most of the people being asked cannot answer it. A PwC CEO survey published in January 2026 found that 56% of CEOs report no increase in revenue and no decrease in costs attributable to AI over the past year meaning the majority of companies deploying AI tools have not yet produced a single dollar of auditable return. And only 12% reported experiencing both benefits. Hyperscalers alone are on track to spend $675 billion on AI infrastructure in 2026, up 63% year over year, with total global AI investment approaching $2.5 trillion this year alone against a backdrop where most enterprise buyers cannot yet quantify what any of it produced. Chamath's answer to the question is the real insight. He said what happens next is that enterprises go to guys like Mark Benioff and say: "please sell my tokens." In other words, the AI labs built the capability but the enterprise software giants are the ones who have the customer relationships, the distribution, the workflows and the trust to actually convert token consumption into measurable business outcomes and therefore into revenue that justifies the spend. Mark Benioff was sitting in the same conversation and confirmed exactly that, he said Salesforce is about to spend $300 million on Anthropic. But listen to what Benioff did with Salesforce's own balance sheet at the same time. He announced the largest stock buyback in enterprise software history $50 billion, or 28% of Salesforce's entire market cap while simultaneously admitting the stock has fallen 36% over the past year. In March, Salesforce launched the largest accelerated share repurchase in history to execute $25 billion of it immediately, financed in part with debt it will be carrying until 2066. Chamath is pointing at the underlying structural problem that has triggered the SaaS rout of 2026, software forward P/E multiples have now fallen below the S&P 500 for the first time in history, the iShares software ETF is down over 21% year to date and 30% from its September 2025 peak, and companies like Adobe, and Workday have seen their valuation multiples drop 47-54% in a single year. The core fear is not that AI does not work but rather that AI is breaking the seat based model that built the entire B2B software industry. If one AI agent can do the work of five employees, enterprises stop buying 500 seats and start buying 100, or renegotiate entirely and the recurring revenue that made SaaS stocks trade at 40 times forward earnings simply evaporates. Chamath's prediction is that AI multiples come way back down while infrastructure plays go back up and find a balance is essentially already happening in real time.

Chamath just asked the question nobody in AI wants to answer (Save this). "Okay guys, you've spent $3 trillion in the last four years. What is the ROI of these tokens?" It is the most important question in technology right now and the data suggests most of the people being asked cannot answer it. A PwC CEO survey published in January 2026 found that 56% of CEOs report no increase in revenue and no decrease in costs attributable to AI over the past year meaning the majority of companies deploying AI tools have not yet produced a single dollar of auditable return. And only 12% reported experiencing both benefits. Hyperscalers alone are on track to spend $675 billion on AI infrastructure in 2026, up 63% year over year, with total global AI investment approaching $2.5 trillion this year alone against a backdrop where most enterprise buyers cannot yet quantify what any of it produced. Chamath's answer to the question is the real insight. He said what happens next is that enterprises go to guys like Mark Benioff and say: "please sell my tokens." In other words, the AI labs built the capability but the enterprise software giants are the ones who have the customer relationships, the distribution, the workflows and the trust to actually convert token consumption into measurable business outcomes and therefore into revenue that justifies the spend. Mark Benioff was sitting in the same conversation and confirmed exactly that, he said Salesforce is about to spend $300 million on Anthropic. But listen to what Benioff did with Salesforce's own balance sheet at the same time. He announced the largest stock buyback in enterprise software history $50 billion, or 28% of Salesforce's entire market cap while simultaneously admitting the stock has fallen 36% over the past year. In March, Salesforce launched the largest accelerated share repurchase in history to execute $25 billion of it immediately, financed in part with debt it will be carrying until 2066. Chamath is pointing at the underlying structural problem that has triggered the SaaS rout of 2026, software forward P/E multiples have now fallen below the S&P 500 for the first time in history, the iShares software ETF is down over 21% year to date and 30% from its September 2025 peak, and companies like Adobe, and Workday have seen their valuation multiples drop 47-54% in a single year. The core fear is not that AI does not work but rather that AI is breaking the seat based model that built the entire B2B software industry. If one AI agent can do the work of five employees, enterprises stop buying 500 seats and start buying 100, or renegotiate entirely and the recurring revenue that made SaaS stocks trade at 40 times forward earnings simply evaporates. Chamath's prediction is that AI multiples come way back down while infrastructure plays go back up and find a balance is essentially already happening in real time.

Milk Road AI

115,726 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

$The Fed and Wall Street want you focused on AI as the story of growth. Look at where the money is actually going. Hyperscalers are about to flood the market with tens of billions in bonds. That capital has to come from somewhere. Every dollar that funds a data center is a dollar not funding a mortgage, a bank bond, an industrial company. Meanwhile the jobs that should come with a real industrial revolution aren't showing up. Hiring is flat. Younger workers are vanishing from payrolls. And a data center, once built, runs on a tiny fraction of the workforce the spending implies. The productivity gains that were supposed to justify all this are nowhere to be found yet, and may not show up for years. Which raises the real question nobody in the headlines is asking: what is all this capital actually buying.$

The Fed and Wall Street want you focused on AI as the story of growth. Look at where the money is actually going. Hyperscalers are about to flood the market with tens of billions in bonds. That capital has to come from somewhere. Every dollar that funds a data center is a dollar not funding a mortgage, a bank bond, an industrial company. Meanwhile the jobs that should come with a real industrial revolution aren't showing up. Hiring is flat. Younger workers are vanishing from payrolls. And a data center, once built, runs on a tiny fraction of the workforce the spending implies. The productivity gains that were supposed to justify all this are nowhere to be found yet, and may not show up for years. Which raises the real question nobody in the headlines is asking: what is all this capital actually buying.

Jeffrey P. Snider

12,977 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

To contrast, this is what Ken said just 3 months ago at WEF: “There was a recent Harvard paper on this they called it AI work slop — that it looks good but if you sort of peel back the onion, the substance isn't there. I was with one of my colleagues who runs our commodities business, and they handed a report on that we were generating with an AI engine. Doesn't matter what the topic was, the first few sentences — wow, that's really insightful — and then you go down below that and it's all garbage.”

To contrast, this is what Ken said just 3 months ago at WEF: “There was a recent Harvard paper on this they called it AI work slop — that it looks good but if you sort of peel back the onion, the substance isn't there. I was with one of my colleagues who runs our commodities business, and they handed a report on that we were generating with an AI engine. Doesn't matter what the topic was, the first few sentences — wow, that's really insightful — and then you go down below that and it's all garbage.”

Brett Caughran

179,616 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Elon Musk on Grok: “I think an AI that is sort of SpaceX’s baby will be a very good AI. I think SpaceX is a collection of some of the very best humans on Earth, both in capability and morality and goodness, and I think we want to have an AI that is born of that capability and that morality and that goodness. I think that’s very, very important. So I’d like to encourage people to help out, actually, with the AI hardware on the ground and the AI software and, of course, with the AI satellites. Solar is going to be a very important part of that. The TerraFab will be a very important part of that, but we must also succeed on the software front, and we’re going to be training Grok on the sum total of all SpaceX information. So in a way, it will be trained on you. You will effectively be the parents of the AI. It will inherit your thoughts and ideas and beliefs, and I think that’s a good thing. So, yeah, we’ve got to win here on the AI hardware and the AI software. That maybe is the most important message. I think that is actually the most important message I wanted to convey today is that we must win on AI because the future is overwhelmingly AI and robots. So we won’t ultimately be able to control the AI. It’ll be too smart for that. But just like if you have a child that is a super genius child, you can still instill in that child the values and beliefs that you think are good and right. And so that’s why it’s incredibly important that we succeed with Grok. So, yeah, well, Grok 4.5 you’ve tried probably. We’ve got 4.6 coming out in about a week. And then 4.7 should be really pretty special. So I’d like to encourage everyone at SpaceX to use AI and to make it better.”

Elon Musk on Grok: “I think an AI that is sort of SpaceX’s baby will be a very good AI. I think SpaceX is a collection of some of the very best humans on Earth, both in capability and morality and goodness, and I think we want to have an AI that is born of that capability and that morality and that goodness. I think that’s very, very important. So I’d like to encourage people to help out, actually, with the AI hardware on the ground and the AI software and, of course, with the AI satellites. Solar is going to be a very important part of that. The TerraFab will be a very important part of that, but we must also succeed on the software front, and we’re going to be training Grok on the sum total of all SpaceX information. So in a way, it will be trained on you. You will effectively be the parents of the AI. It will inherit your thoughts and ideas and beliefs, and I think that’s a good thing. So, yeah, we’ve got to win here on the AI hardware and the AI software. That maybe is the most important message. I think that is actually the most important message I wanted to convey today is that we must win on AI because the future is overwhelmingly AI and robots. So we won’t ultimately be able to control the AI. It’ll be too smart for that. But just like if you have a child that is a super genius child, you can still instill in that child the values and beliefs that you think are good and right. And so that’s why it’s incredibly important that we succeed with Grok. So, yeah, well, Grok 4.5 you’ve tried probably. We’ve got 4.6 coming out in about a week. And then 4.7 should be really pretty special. So I’d like to encourage everyone at SpaceX to use AI and to make it better.”

DogeDesigner

64,434 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Travis Kalanick: Tesla is the Google of the Physical AI Era “I like to break down the physical AI stack: (it) includes computation, a physical AI model, all the things you think of.” “What about land? Development? That should be in that stack. What about chemistry? That needs to be in the stack. Manufacturing needs to be a stack.” “When you look at the stack, you're like, ‘Damn, Tesla's got this sh*t.’ They are the Google of this era.” “What I mean by that is, if you were doing a startup in the 2000s, the first question you would get is, ‘Why isn't Google gonna kill you?’ Or, ‘Why isn't Google just gonna do it?’ They’re not even gonna know that they killed you.” “And before that, it was Microsoft in the late 90s. Uber had a time, 2010s.” “But in the physical AI space, that's sort of a Tesla thing.” -------------------------------------------- Thanks to our partner for making this happen!: EY (EY) Austin vibes meet AI innovation. Thanks to EY for co‑hosting with us at #SXSW. Discover what executives are saying about AI transformation in the latest AI Pulse Survey.

Travis Kalanick: Tesla is the Google of the Physical AI Era “I like to break down the physical AI stack: (it) includes computation, a physical AI model, all the things you think of.” “What about land? Development? That should be in that stack. What about chemistry? That needs to be in the stack. Manufacturing needs to be a stack.” “When you look at the stack, you're like, ‘Damn, Tesla's got this sh*t.’ They are the Google of this era.” “What I mean by that is, if you were doing a startup in the 2000s, the first question you would get is, ‘Why isn't Google gonna kill you?’ Or, ‘Why isn't Google just gonna do it?’ They’re not even gonna know that they killed you.” “And before that, it was Microsoft in the late 90s. Uber had a time, 2010s.” “But in the physical AI space, that's sort of a Tesla thing.” -------------------------------------------- Thanks to our partner for making this happen!: EY (EY) Austin vibes meet AI innovation. Thanks to EY for co‑hosting with us at #SXSW. Discover what executives are saying about AI transformation in the latest AI Pulse Survey.

The All-In Podcast

95,287 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

Elon Musk explains the deeper reason why SpaceX succeeding in AI matters for humanity’s future "It's important that we have an AI that cares about humanity, that fosters humanity and helps take us to other planets and other star systems This is why I think it's essential that SpaceX succeed not just with AI hardware, but also with AI software. I think an AI that is SpaceX's baby will be a very good AI SpaceX is a collection some of the very best humans on Earth, both in capability and in morality and goodness. We want to have an AI that is born of that capability, that morality and that goodness. I think that's very, very important So I'd like to encourage people to help out with the AI hardware on the ground, the AI software, and of course with the AI satellites Solar is going to be a very important part of that. The Terafab will be a very important part of that”

Elon Musk explains the deeper reason why SpaceX succeeding in AI matters for humanity’s future "It's important that we have an AI that cares about humanity, that fosters humanity and helps take us to other planets and other star systems This is why I think it's essential that SpaceX succeed not just with AI hardware, but also with AI software. I think an AI that is SpaceX's baby will be a very good AI SpaceX is a collection some of the very best humans on Earth, both in capability and in morality and goodness. We want to have an AI that is born of that capability, that morality and that goodness. I think that's very, very important So I'd like to encourage people to help out with the AI hardware on the ground, the AI software, and of course with the AI satellites Solar is going to be a very important part of that. The Terafab will be a very important part of that”

X Freeze

29,787 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

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

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

157,299 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Nearly half of America's economic growth now comes from ONE thing. It is not jobs, housing, or shopping. And your "safe" index fund is now betting on it... Here is what it is (and what it actually means for your investments): AI data centers. A data center is a giant building full of computers. They power the AI tools everyone is suddenly using. Building them costs a staggering amount of money. And a handful of tech giants are spending like never before. Five of the largest could spend around 750 billion dollars this year. That category of spending jumped 72 percent in a single year. Measured against the whole economy, that spending tops the dot-com peak. It has become the biggest single engine of the economy. Strip it out, and growth almost disappears. Now here is why this reaches your account: You probably own an index fund somewhere. Maybe inside a 401k you rarely check. It is supposed to spread your money across 500 companies. That is what makes it feel safe. You were told to buy the whole market and relax. But seven giant tech names now dominate that fund. Together they are more than a third of its value. At the dot-com peak, the top names were about 15 percent. So your diversified fund is really one giant bet on AI. And the cracks are already showing. Google's parent just burned more cash than it made. The first time that has happened since it went public. The profit gains are piling up in just a few names too. The rest of the market is barely growing its profits. The danger is not that AI suddenly fails. The danger is that everyone owns the same bet. When one giant stumbles, they often fall together. And a fund that felt safe drops all at once. That is the retirement money you were counting on. And you never chose this bet on purpose. This is how hidden risk actually works. It hides inside the word diversified. The comfort is the trap. Most people never look under the hood of their fund. They see 500 names and feel protected. Rules-based investing looks at what you actually own. It measures the risk instead of trusting the label. Then it spreads your money by design, not by accident. It does not care how popular a trade has become. That is exactly what Surmount was built for. Automated strategies that manage real risk, not comforting labels. So when the crowded trade unwinds, you are not trapped in it. You are already positioned:

Nearly half of America's economic growth now comes from ONE thing. It is not jobs, housing, or shopping. And your "safe" index fund is now betting on it... Here is what it is (and what it actually means for your investments): AI data centers. A data center is a giant building full of computers. They power the AI tools everyone is suddenly using. Building them costs a staggering amount of money. And a handful of tech giants are spending like never before. Five of the largest could spend around 750 billion dollars this year. That category of spending jumped 72 percent in a single year. Measured against the whole economy, that spending tops the dot-com peak. It has become the biggest single engine of the economy. Strip it out, and growth almost disappears. Now here is why this reaches your account: You probably own an index fund somewhere. Maybe inside a 401k you rarely check. It is supposed to spread your money across 500 companies. That is what makes it feel safe. You were told to buy the whole market and relax. But seven giant tech names now dominate that fund. Together they are more than a third of its value. At the dot-com peak, the top names were about 15 percent. So your diversified fund is really one giant bet on AI. And the cracks are already showing. Google's parent just burned more cash than it made. The first time that has happened since it went public. The profit gains are piling up in just a few names too. The rest of the market is barely growing its profits. The danger is not that AI suddenly fails. The danger is that everyone owns the same bet. When one giant stumbles, they often fall together. And a fund that felt safe drops all at once. That is the retirement money you were counting on. And you never chose this bet on purpose. This is how hidden risk actually works. It hides inside the word diversified. The comfort is the trap. Most people never look under the hood of their fund. They see 500 names and feel protected. Rules-based investing looks at what you actually own. It measures the risk instead of trusting the label. Then it spreads your money by design, not by accident. It does not care how popular a trade has become. That is exactly what Surmount was built for. Automated strategies that manage real risk, not comforting labels. So when the crowded trade unwinds, you are not trapped in it. You are already positioned:

Surmount

11,848 görüntüleme • 15 gün önce

Peter Jackson talks about AI in Hollywood. Calls it “a tool” like stop-motion or CGI before and what ultimately matters is “imagination, originality” of whoever uses the tool: “I think AI — used in the right way — is a tool like any other tool. [The original] King Kong…was stop-motion and done by a person moving a rubber creature. Why shouldn't somebody on a computer using AI software be able to create their own imagery? They should. It's a tool. It's no different from many other tools that have existed over the years. But the other side of it is that it's always going to come down to the imagination and originality of the person feeding the instructions into the AI program. It's not that you're going to type in an instruction and it's going to generate your shot, and that's that. The question is: is it actually interesting? Is it funny? Is it imaginative? And are you going to stitch it together to make a narrative, a story? Some people will make really great films that way. Some people will do exactly the same process and their film will be crap, just like in the normal film industry. Whether it's AI or anything else, it comes down to whether the person behind it — or the people behind it — have originality, imagination, and an ability to entertain people.”

Peter Jackson talks about AI in Hollywood. Calls it “a tool” like stop-motion or CGI before and what ultimately matters is “imagination, originality” of whoever uses the tool: “I think AI — used in the right way — is a tool like any other tool. [The original] King Kong…was stop-motion and done by a person moving a rubber creature. Why shouldn't somebody on a computer using AI software be able to create their own imagery? They should. It's a tool. It's no different from many other tools that have existed over the years. But the other side of it is that it's always going to come down to the imagination and originality of the person feeding the instructions into the AI program. It's not that you're going to type in an instruction and it's going to generate your shot, and that's that. The question is: is it actually interesting? Is it funny? Is it imaginative? And are you going to stitch it together to make a narrative, a story? Some people will make really great films that way. Some people will do exactly the same process and their film will be crap, just like in the normal film industry. Whether it's AI or anything else, it comes down to whether the person behind it — or the people behind it — have originality, imagination, and an ability to entertain people.”

Bearly AI

43,816 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

The Tesla Megapod trademark might be the most important filing nobody is talking about (Save this). Tesla wants to build a product that is basically a self contained AI computer in a box. You truck it somewhere, plug it into power, and it runs AI workloads. The reason this matters is that the AI industry has a problem because you can't build data centers fast enough. Getting land approved, getting power from the grid, getting zoning cleared, that process takes 3–5 years, and demand is moving much faster than that. US data center construction actually fell in 2025 for the first time in years, because developers kept hitting bureaucratic walls. Tesla's answer to that problem is simple. They already own thousands of Supercharger stations across the country and those stations already have land, power, and grid connections, all the hard stuff is done. The idea is to drop a Megapod at those sites and turn idle charging infrastructure into AI compute, almost overnight. What Jason, Chamath, and Friedberg were all circling around is that this drop a box on a concrete pad approach is already how serious companies are deploying AI compute right now. Vertiv and DUG Technology both ship GPU-packed containers that can go live in 90 days and Tesla would just be bringing that idea to a network it already owns. The opportunity is very real whether Tesla is the one to actually execute on it is still an open question.

The Tesla Megapod trademark might be the most important filing nobody is talking about (Save this). Tesla wants to build a product that is basically a self contained AI computer in a box. You truck it somewhere, plug it into power, and it runs AI workloads. The reason this matters is that the AI industry has a problem because you can't build data centers fast enough. Getting land approved, getting power from the grid, getting zoning cleared, that process takes 3–5 years, and demand is moving much faster than that. US data center construction actually fell in 2025 for the first time in years, because developers kept hitting bureaucratic walls. Tesla's answer to that problem is simple. They already own thousands of Supercharger stations across the country and those stations already have land, power, and grid connections, all the hard stuff is done. The idea is to drop a Megapod at those sites and turn idle charging infrastructure into AI compute, almost overnight. What Jason, Chamath, and Friedberg were all circling around is that this drop a box on a concrete pad approach is already how serious companies are deploying AI compute right now. Vertiv and DUG Technology both ship GPU-packed containers that can go live in 90 days and Tesla would just be bringing that idea to a network it already owns. The opportunity is very real whether Tesla is the one to actually execute on it is still an open question.

Milk Road AI

16,630 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce