Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

"Nvidia is undervalued...Because the future is much bigger...." ~ SoftBank Founder Masayoshi Son says. And now, imo, Nvidia is most proly going to become the 1st $1T company. Masayoshi assumes that in 10 years AGI or ASI will replace 5% of global GDP (which is actually the most pessimistic...

rohanpaul_ai's profile picture

Rohan Paul

152,919 subscribers

813,469 views • 9 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & PoliticsScience & TechnologyFinance
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

CATHIE WOOD SAID TESLA IS THE LARGEST AI PROJECT ON EARTH. "WE BELIEVE THE ENTIRE ECOSYSTEM OF AUTONOMOUS TAXI NETWORKS WILL GENERATE $8–10 TRILLION IN REVENUE OVER THE NEXT 5–10 YEARS. TO PUT THAT IN CONTEXT... THE ENTIRE GLOBAL GDP TODAY IS ABOUT $113 TRILLION." ELON MUSK BELIEVES AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES COULD HAVE A NOTICEABLE IMPACT ON GLOBAL GDP WITHIN THE NEXT 1–2 YEARS.
0:43

CATHIE WOOD SAID TESLA IS THE LARGEST AI PROJECT ON EARTH. "WE BELIEVE THE ENTIRE ECOSYSTEM OF AUTONOMOUS TAXI NETWORKS WILL GENERATE $8–10 TRILLION IN REVENUE OVER THE NEXT 5–10 YEARS. TO PUT THAT IN CONTEXT... THE ENTIRE GLOBAL GDP TODAY IS ABOUT $113 TRILLION." ELON MUSK BELIEVES AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES COULD HAVE A NOTICEABLE IMPACT ON GLOBAL GDP WITHIN THE NEXT 1–2 YEARS.

Vivek Sen

59,002 views • 14 days ago

Cathie Wood says Tesla is largest AI Project on Earth. “We believe that the entire ecosystem associated with autonomous taxi networks is going to worth $8-10 Trillion in terms of revenue generation in the next 5-10 years. To put that in context, the entire GDP of the world today is $113 Trillion. So $10 Trillion is going to move the needle.” Elon Musk thinks autonomous vehicles will have a noticeable impact on GDP growth in the next 1 to 2 years.
0:43

Cathie Wood says Tesla is largest AI Project on Earth. “We believe that the entire ecosystem associated with autonomous taxi networks is going to worth $8-10 Trillion in terms of revenue generation in the next 5-10 years. To put that in context, the entire GDP of the world today is $113 Trillion. So $10 Trillion is going to move the needle.” Elon Musk thinks autonomous vehicles will have a noticeable impact on GDP growth in the next 1 to 2 years.

Nic Cruz Patane

7,040,659 views • 1 year ago

.Elon Musk "I think we'll hit AGI in 2026", and he is confident that "AI will exceed the intelligence of all humans combined by 2030". AGI this year, ASI ~2030. We are in for a wild ride.
1:41

.Elon Musk "I think we'll hit AGI in 2026", and he is confident that "AI will exceed the intelligence of all humans combined by 2030". AGI this year, ASI ~2030. We are in for a wild ride.

Chubby♨️

41,973 views • 6 months ago

ELON MUSK ANNOUNCED A CHIP FACTORY 10 TIMES THE SIZE OF TESLA'S GIGAFACTORY 🤯 HE CALLS IT THE TERAFAB. THE ENTIRE GLOBAL AI CHIP INDUSTRY IS ON TRACK TO PRODUCE AROUND 100 GIGAWATTS OF COMPUTE PER YEAR. MUSK WANTS A SINGLE FACTORY TO PRODUCE 1 TERAWATT PER YEAR. THAT'S 10X THE OUTPUT OF THE ENTIRE GLOBAL INDUSTRY. THE GOAL? BUILD ENOUGH AI COMPUTE TO POWER ORBITAL DATA CENTERS. MOST PEOPLE THINK IT'S A DECADE AWAY. MUSK THINKS IT STARTS NEXT YEAR. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY CRAZY.
3:27

ELON MUSK ANNOUNCED A CHIP FACTORY 10 TIMES THE SIZE OF TESLA'S GIGAFACTORY 🤯 HE CALLS IT THE TERAFAB. THE ENTIRE GLOBAL AI CHIP INDUSTRY IS ON TRACK TO PRODUCE AROUND 100 GIGAWATTS OF COMPUTE PER YEAR. MUSK WANTS A SINGLE FACTORY TO PRODUCE 1 TERAWATT PER YEAR. THAT'S 10X THE OUTPUT OF THE ENTIRE GLOBAL INDUSTRY. THE GOAL? BUILD ENOUGH AI COMPUTE TO POWER ORBITAL DATA CENTERS. MOST PEOPLE THINK IT'S A DECADE AWAY. MUSK THINKS IT STARTS NEXT YEAR. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY CRAZY.

Vivek Sen

84,095 views • 4 days ago

Elon Musk announced a chip factory 10 times the size of Tesla's Gigafactory. The goal is to produce enough AI compute to equal twice the entire electricity consumption of the United States. He called it the Terafab. Here is the number that stopped me cold. The entire global AI chip industry right now is on track to hit around 100 gigawatts per year of compute. Every Nvidia GPU, every Google TPU, every chip from every company on earth combined. 100 gigawatts. Musk wants one factory to produce a terawatt per year. A terawatt is 1,000 gigawatts. Ten times the output of the entire global industry. From a single building. To put the scale in physical terms, the Terafab would need to be around 100 million square feet. You would need Starship point to point transport just to get from one end to the other. But the reason for the scale is not ambition for its own sake. To launch meaningful AI compute into space, you need a billion chips per year running at a kilowatt each. That is not a number the current industry can produce. The Terafab is the only way to get there. The timeline he put out: a gigawatt of space AI compute annualized by end of next year. Then 10x per year from there. 10 gigawatts by year two. 100 gigawatts by year three. A terawatt beyond that. Most people think orbital data centers are a decade away. Musk is building the factory to make them possible by next year.
3:26

Elon Musk announced a chip factory 10 times the size of Tesla's Gigafactory. The goal is to produce enough AI compute to equal twice the entire electricity consumption of the United States. He called it the Terafab. Here is the number that stopped me cold. The entire global AI chip industry right now is on track to hit around 100 gigawatts per year of compute. Every Nvidia GPU, every Google TPU, every chip from every company on earth combined. 100 gigawatts. Musk wants one factory to produce a terawatt per year. A terawatt is 1,000 gigawatts. Ten times the output of the entire global industry. From a single building. To put the scale in physical terms, the Terafab would need to be around 100 million square feet. You would need Starship point to point transport just to get from one end to the other. But the reason for the scale is not ambition for its own sake. To launch meaningful AI compute into space, you need a billion chips per year running at a kilowatt each. That is not a number the current industry can produce. The Terafab is the only way to get there. The timeline he put out: a gigawatt of space AI compute annualized by end of next year. Then 10x per year from there. 10 gigawatts by year two. 100 gigawatts by year three. A terawatt beyond that. Most people think orbital data centers are a decade away. Musk is building the factory to make them possible by next year.

Ihtesham Ali

316,910 views • 1 month ago

Demis Hassabis's new interview: "Society needs to hear that because we don't have long to prepare for what that means. We are standing in the foothills of the singularity now. ..which is AGI. I believe that we are only a few years away from that, maybe around 2030, plus or minus a year. " ~ Demis Hassabis, Co-Founder and CEO of Google DeepMind It is going to be enormously profound, I think. The future, in my view, is still to be written. But these next few years are going to be very critical as to which way that will go, and how we collectively want that to look.” --- IMO, The real disruption is not whether AGI arrives exactly in 2030, plus or minus a year, but whether institutions can adapt, as in post-AGI world, technology will change much faster than human systems can respond. Schools still train people for stable professions, companies still organize work around human bottlenecks, and governments still regulate after harm becomes visible. AGI, if it arrives anywhere near the frontier-lab timelines, compresses that lag into a dangerous gap. ---- From "Stanford Graduate School of Business" YouTube channel, (link in comment)
0:50

Demis Hassabis's new interview: "Society needs to hear that because we don't have long to prepare for what that means. We are standing in the foothills of the singularity now. ..which is AGI. I believe that we are only a few years away from that, maybe around 2030, plus or minus a year. " ~ Demis Hassabis, Co-Founder and CEO of Google DeepMind It is going to be enormously profound, I think. The future, in my view, is still to be written. But these next few years are going to be very critical as to which way that will go, and how we collectively want that to look.” --- IMO, The real disruption is not whether AGI arrives exactly in 2030, plus or minus a year, but whether institutions can adapt, as in post-AGI world, technology will change much faster than human systems can respond. Schools still train people for stable professions, companies still organize work around human bottlenecks, and governments still regulate after harm becomes visible. AGI, if it arrives anywhere near the frontier-lab timelines, compresses that lag into a dangerous gap. ---- From "Stanford Graduate School of Business" YouTube channel, (link in comment)

Rohan Paul

70,642 views • 1 month ago

Jensen Huang says Dario Amodei's prediction of $1T in AI revenue by 2030 is too conservative. "I believe Dario and Anthropic are going to do way better than that. Way better than that. And the reason for that is the one part that he hasn't considered: I believe every single enterprise software company will also be a value-added reseller of Anthropic's tokens. And they’re going to get this logarithmic expansion. Their go-to-market is going to expand tremendously this year." --- From The All-In Podcast YT channel (link in comment)
0:37

Jensen Huang says Dario Amodei's prediction of $1T in AI revenue by 2030 is too conservative. "I believe Dario and Anthropic are going to do way better than that. Way better than that. And the reason for that is the one part that he hasn't considered: I believe every single enterprise software company will also be a value-added reseller of Anthropic's tokens. And they’re going to get this logarithmic expansion. Their go-to-market is going to expand tremendously this year." --- From The All-In Podcast YT channel (link in comment)

Rohan Paul

98,822 views • 4 months ago

#WATCH | Delhi: When asked about his reaction on private capital expenditure (CAPEX) not coming in and growth is happening only because of Govt CAPEX over the last 3-4 years, Neelkanth Mishra, Executive Director for India at the World Bank Headquarters, says, "In the economy, investment to GDP, as reported by the CSO or the MoSPI, is 32% of GDP. Central government CAPEX is 3.2% of GDP. So the central government is one-tenth of overall CAPEX. Central government CAPEX as a percentage of GDP, in the last three years, has moved by 10 basis points. So you think that all of CAPEX is happening with the centre? Just because it is in the narrative and every media house is based in Delhi, it doesn't mean that the only central government is handling the economy. A large part of CAPEX happens when houses are built. Household CAPEX, capital formation, is where people add a room to their house or a floor to their house. Then someone gets a son who is married, someone, two brothers separate, and they build separate floors. Those are things which are at a population scale substantial for capital formation. Look at what is happening with steel. I mean, the other day I saw this compilation of some 100 million tons of steel capacity being planned in Odisha. That's massive. That is how CAPEX happens... CAPEX has picked up power generation. Corporate credit is starting to pick up. All these narratives that private CAPEX is not happening are like this..."
1:52

#WATCH | Delhi: When asked about his reaction on private capital expenditure (CAPEX) not coming in and growth is happening only because of Govt CAPEX over the last 3-4 years, Neelkanth Mishra, Executive Director for India at the World Bank Headquarters, says, "In the economy, investment to GDP, as reported by the CSO or the MoSPI, is 32% of GDP. Central government CAPEX is 3.2% of GDP. So the central government is one-tenth of overall CAPEX. Central government CAPEX as a percentage of GDP, in the last three years, has moved by 10 basis points. So you think that all of CAPEX is happening with the centre? Just because it is in the narrative and every media house is based in Delhi, it doesn't mean that the only central government is handling the economy. A large part of CAPEX happens when houses are built. Household CAPEX, capital formation, is where people add a room to their house or a floor to their house. Then someone gets a son who is married, someone, two brothers separate, and they build separate floors. Those are things which are at a population scale substantial for capital formation. Look at what is happening with steel. I mean, the other day I saw this compilation of some 100 million tons of steel capacity being planned in Odisha. That's massive. That is how CAPEX happens... CAPEX has picked up power generation. Corporate credit is starting to pick up. All these narratives that private CAPEX is not happening are like this..."

ANI

26,715 views • 1 month ago

Elon Musk's biggest competitor is secretly paying him $1.25 BILLION per month. SpaceX just revealed its financials for the first time in 23 years of existence. And buried deep in the S-1 is a detail that changes how you should think about the entire AI race. Anthropic, the company building Claude, the company that positions itself as OpenAI's biggest threat, the company valued at over $100 billion, is paying SpaceX $1.25 billion EVERY SINGLE MONTH for compute capacity through May 2029. That is $15 billion a year flowing directly from Elon's top AI competitor into Elon's bank account. Think about what that means: Every time Anthropic trains a new model, improves Claude, or lands an enterprise customer, a massive chunk of that revenue goes straight to the guy who owns the competing AI product. Anthropic is literally funding the war against itself. And that's just the beginning of what this filing reveals... The entire SpaceX IPO is structured around a bet most people haven't figured out yet. In 2025, SpaceX spent $20 billion in capex. 60% of that, roughly $12 billion, went to AI infrastructure. Rockets and satellites got the leftovers. In Q1 2026 alone, $7.7 billion out of $10 billion in total capex went to AI. The "rocket company" is spending like an AI company. Meanwhile, xAI, the division that houses Grok, generated $3.2 billion in revenue for the full year of 2025. But its R&D costs TRIPLED to $5 billion. It's burning cash at a pace that would have destroyed it as a standalone company. Which is exactly why Elon merged it into SpaceX two months before filing the IPO. And Starlink is the engine that makes the whole thing work: $11.4 billion in revenue, $4.4 billion in operating profit, and 10.3 million subscribers across 164 countries. It's one of the most profitable subscription businesses on the planet right now. But the average revenue per user DROPPED from $99 per month in 2023 to $66 per month in March 2026. Subscribers quadrupled but each one is paying a third less. Starlink is growing by getting cheaper. SpaceX has lost $37 BILLION since it was founded. Net loss in 2025 was $4.9 billion. This is a company that has never turned an annual profit in 23 years of operation, and it is about to IPO at a $1.75 trillion valuation. And the total addressable market SpaceX claims in the filing is $28.5 trillion. That is a QUARTER of global GDP. So here is what investors are actually buying when this IPO prices: They are buying the most profitable satellite internet business in history, stapled to an AI lab that is burning cash, wrapped inside a Mars colonization pitch that requires building a permanent city on another planet, funded by monthly billion-dollar payments from a direct competitor who has no other option for compute at that scale. This is the kind of thing only Elon could pull off.
2:03

Elon Musk's biggest competitor is secretly paying him $1.25 BILLION per month. SpaceX just revealed its financials for the first time in 23 years of existence. And buried deep in the S-1 is a detail that changes how you should think about the entire AI race. Anthropic, the company building Claude, the company that positions itself as OpenAI's biggest threat, the company valued at over $100 billion, is paying SpaceX $1.25 billion EVERY SINGLE MONTH for compute capacity through May 2029. That is $15 billion a year flowing directly from Elon's top AI competitor into Elon's bank account. Think about what that means: Every time Anthropic trains a new model, improves Claude, or lands an enterprise customer, a massive chunk of that revenue goes straight to the guy who owns the competing AI product. Anthropic is literally funding the war against itself. And that's just the beginning of what this filing reveals... The entire SpaceX IPO is structured around a bet most people haven't figured out yet. In 2025, SpaceX spent $20 billion in capex. 60% of that, roughly $12 billion, went to AI infrastructure. Rockets and satellites got the leftovers. In Q1 2026 alone, $7.7 billion out of $10 billion in total capex went to AI. The "rocket company" is spending like an AI company. Meanwhile, xAI, the division that houses Grok, generated $3.2 billion in revenue for the full year of 2025. But its R&D costs TRIPLED to $5 billion. It's burning cash at a pace that would have destroyed it as a standalone company. Which is exactly why Elon merged it into SpaceX two months before filing the IPO. And Starlink is the engine that makes the whole thing work: $11.4 billion in revenue, $4.4 billion in operating profit, and 10.3 million subscribers across 164 countries. It's one of the most profitable subscription businesses on the planet right now. But the average revenue per user DROPPED from $99 per month in 2023 to $66 per month in March 2026. Subscribers quadrupled but each one is paying a third less. Starlink is growing by getting cheaper. SpaceX has lost $37 BILLION since it was founded. Net loss in 2025 was $4.9 billion. This is a company that has never turned an annual profit in 23 years of operation, and it is about to IPO at a $1.75 trillion valuation. And the total addressable market SpaceX claims in the filing is $28.5 trillion. That is a QUARTER of global GDP. So here is what investors are actually buying when this IPO prices: They are buying the most profitable satellite internet business in history, stapled to an AI lab that is burning cash, wrapped inside a Mars colonization pitch that requires building a permanent city on another planet, funded by monthly billion-dollar payments from a direct competitor who has no other option for compute at that scale. This is the kind of thing only Elon could pull off.

Ricardo

208,495 views • 2 months ago

BREAKING: Elon Musk says the Market for Humanoid robots like the Tesla Optimus Robot will be 1 Billion units per year, and Tesla can make $1 Trillion a year selling them. He predicts that they will ultimately sell for around $20,000 at a cost of $10,000, and Tesla will take at least a 10% market share of the humanoid robot market. Pretty impressive and the world is about to change. Musk believes that there will be at least 1 robot per human and perhaps much more than that.
1:43

BREAKING: Elon Musk says the Market for Humanoid robots like the Tesla Optimus Robot will be 1 Billion units per year, and Tesla can make $1 Trillion a year selling them. He predicts that they will ultimately sell for around $20,000 at a cost of $10,000, and Tesla will take at least a 10% market share of the humanoid robot market. Pretty impressive and the world is about to change. Musk believes that there will be at least 1 robot per human and perhaps much more than that.

Brian Krassenstein

2,692,710 views • 2 years ago

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 views • 2 months ago

Tom Lee says semis and AI infrastructure stocks are going to rip higher later this year. “Semis and infrastructure companies are at the center of one of the most important strategic initiatives for the US, which is AI and AI infrastructure, and that runway has years ahead. The last couple of weeks have been a rough ride. I think those names are going to bounce later this year. I don’t think the trade is over. It’s just taking a beating.” We don’t know who will ultimately build the best AI model. But we do know which companies are building the infrastructure that will make the AI revolution possible. That’s why I’m buying $CRWV, $ORCL, and $IREN.
0:42

Tom Lee says semis and AI infrastructure stocks are going to rip higher later this year. “Semis and infrastructure companies are at the center of one of the most important strategic initiatives for the US, which is AI and AI infrastructure, and that runway has years ahead. The last couple of weeks have been a rough ride. I think those names are going to bounce later this year. I don’t think the trade is over. It’s just taking a beating.” We don’t know who will ultimately build the best AI model. But we do know which companies are building the infrastructure that will make the AI revolution possible. That’s why I’m buying $CRWV, $ORCL, and $IREN.

Daniel

109,820 views • 15 days ago

First Tucker says Dearborn Michigan is Christian lol. Let’s leave that aside and just answer his question since he can’t do basis research. Well Tucker I’m glad you asked since you can’t engage in basic journalism anymore. Aside from the fact that more than 75% of the money that we give Israel, they have to spend with our military in industrial complex which provides 20,000 jobs to American families this is the estimated cost we would have to pay if we didn’t have an MOU with them for the security services we need in the Middle East. What would cost the U.S. to replace what Israel provides: ∙Intelligence replication: $10-30+ billion/year (wildly uncertain) ∙Combat data and weapons testing: $2-5 billion/year ∙Avoided troop deployments and basing costs: $5-10 billion/year ∙Missile defense co-development savings: $2-4 billion/year amortized ∙Cybersecurity and counter-terrorism cooperation: $1-3 billion/year Again, these are just rough estimates because we actually have no idea how much it would cost because we depend on them for so much of this stuff.
0:44

First Tucker says Dearborn Michigan is Christian lol. Let’s leave that aside and just answer his question since he can’t do basis research. Well Tucker I’m glad you asked since you can’t engage in basic journalism anymore. Aside from the fact that more than 75% of the money that we give Israel, they have to spend with our military in industrial complex which provides 20,000 jobs to American families this is the estimated cost we would have to pay if we didn’t have an MOU with them for the security services we need in the Middle East. What would cost the U.S. to replace what Israel provides: ∙Intelligence replication: $10-30+ billion/year (wildly uncertain) ∙Combat data and weapons testing: $2-5 billion/year ∙Avoided troop deployments and basing costs: $5-10 billion/year ∙Missile defense co-development savings: $2-4 billion/year amortized ∙Cybersecurity and counter-terrorism cooperation: $1-3 billion/year Again, these are just rough estimates because we actually have no idea how much it would cost because we depend on them for so much of this stuff.

Insurrection Barbie

25,218 views • 5 months ago

Phillip: The $400,000 annual salary that Trump says he gave up is obviously a drop in the bucket compared to the $2.2 billion he reportedly made during his first year in office. Now, just to put that number into context for you, the presidential salary would have been just 0.018 of a percent of his total earnings just last year.
0:26

Phillip: The $400,000 annual salary that Trump says he gave up is obviously a drop in the bucket compared to the $2.2 billion he reportedly made during his first year in office. Now, just to put that number into context for you, the presidential salary would have been just 0.018 of a percent of his total earnings just last year.

Acyn

95,648 views • 1 month ago

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, there is no hedge on earth that saves him from bankruptcy. The math is brutal: if the growth rate is 5x a year instead of 10x, or if he is just one year off on timing, it is over. This is the AI race nobody talks about honestly. The capital requirements are so extreme that even the CEO of one of the most funded AI companies in the world cannot make the bet his own brain is tempted to make. The winners will not just be the smartest. They will be the ones who got the timing exactly right.
0:48

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, there is no hedge on earth that saves him from bankruptcy. The math is brutal: if the growth rate is 5x a year instead of 10x, or if he is just one year off on timing, it is over. This is the AI race nobody talks about honestly. The capital requirements are so extreme that even the CEO of one of the most funded AI companies in the world cannot make the bet his own brain is tempted to make. The winners will not just be the smartest. They will be the ones who got the timing exactly right.

Uncover AI

19,877 views • 2 months ago

.tylercowen says he doesn't expect AI to grow the economy more than 1% per year: "About half of our economy right now is totally, perpetually sluggish. Look at government, look at most of the nonprofit sector, look at higher education, parts of our healthcare sector. Add that up, you're at 50% of GDP." "GDP is a huge mound of stuff, most of which is produced by people who are neither white- nor black-pilled on AI, and it will take things a long time to change."
1:14

.tylercowen says he doesn't expect AI to grow the economy more than 1% per year: "About half of our economy right now is totally, perpetually sluggish. Look at government, look at most of the nonprofit sector, look at higher education, parts of our healthcare sector. Add that up, you're at 50% of GDP." "GDP is a huge mound of stuff, most of which is produced by people who are neither white- nor black-pilled on AI, and it will take things a long time to change."

TBPN

22,694 views • 6 months ago

Jensen Huang thinks Dario Amodei's prediction of $1T in AI revenue by 2030 is too conservative. "I believe Dario and Anthropic are going to do way better than that. Way better than that. And the reason for that is the one part that he hasn't considered: I believe every single enterprise software company will also be a value-added reseller of Anthropic's tokens. And they’re going to get this logarithmic expansion. Their go-to-market is going to expand tremendously this year." --- From The All-In Podcast YT channel (link in comment)
0:30

Jensen Huang thinks Dario Amodei's prediction of $1T in AI revenue by 2030 is too conservative. "I believe Dario and Anthropic are going to do way better than that. Way better than that. And the reason for that is the one part that he hasn't considered: I believe every single enterprise software company will also be a value-added reseller of Anthropic's tokens. And they’re going to get this logarithmic expansion. Their go-to-market is going to expand tremendously this year." --- From The All-In Podcast YT channel (link in comment)

Rohan Paul

137,326 views • 2 months ago

Morgan Stanley just raised their 2027 AI capex forecast to $1.1 trillion and that number still doesn't include SpaceX or a lot of the other AI companies (Save this). When you factor those in, the real 2027 figure is probably closer to $1.5 trillion and AI lab inference revenue combined is tracking toward $300 billion in 2027. On its surface that ratio sounds alarming, spending $1.5 trillion in capex to generate $300 billion in revenue. But the framing collapses the moment you examine two things the bears consistently ignore, gross margins and the revenue trajectory. Gross margins on inference revenue are running at 60 to 70 percent. That means the $300 billion in inference revenue generates $180 to $210 billion in gross profit and that number compounds rapidly as utilization scales on infrastructure that is already built and paid for. The Capex is not being deployed against today's revenue but rather being deployed against a revenue trajectory that has shown no signs of decelerating. To understand how aggressive that trajectory actually is, consider that Morgan Stanley's $1.1 trillion hyperscaler forecast is nearly double what analysts projected for the same year just twelve months ago And they described the demand as inelastic, meaning it is not slowing down regardless of rising costs, tighter financing conditions or geopolitical risk. The AI industry ended 2025 tracking well over $200 billion in combined inference revenue and the growth rate since then has continued to accelerate rather than flatten. Anthropic alone scaled from negligible revenue to a $30 billion annualized run rate in approximately 18 months while OpenAI is tracking toward $280 billion in annual revenue by 2030 from $13 billion in 2025. There is also a structural reality in the capex number that the bears never account for. Roughly 35 percent of total AI spending goes toward training, building the next model generation which is not revenue-generating in the current period. That means only about 65 percent of the $1.5 trillion in capex is actually deployed against the inference infrastructure that earns revenue today. When you apply the 60 to 70 percent gross margin to the revenue that sits on top of that 65 percent figure, the economics look substantially better than the headline capex to revenue ratio implies. Every CEO who has been closest to this buildout has consistently underestimated it and Jensen Huang projected $1 trillion in AI capex two years ago and was called delusional. Dario Amodei said in early 2026 that AI revenues would reach the low hundreds of billions by 2028 and trillions before 2030 and given where Anthropic's own revenue trajectory is today, he is likely revising those numbers upward. The pattern here is consistent, every time someone models the revenue ceiling, the actual number breaks through it faster than expected. Come join Milk Road Pro for our full breakdown, the real unit economics of the AI inference buildout, how the capex to revenue ratio evolves over the next three years, and our entire AI thesis! Link below!
4:04

Morgan Stanley just raised their 2027 AI capex forecast to $1.1 trillion and that number still doesn't include SpaceX or a lot of the other AI companies (Save this). When you factor those in, the real 2027 figure is probably closer to $1.5 trillion and AI lab inference revenue combined is tracking toward $300 billion in 2027. On its surface that ratio sounds alarming, spending $1.5 trillion in capex to generate $300 billion in revenue. But the framing collapses the moment you examine two things the bears consistently ignore, gross margins and the revenue trajectory. Gross margins on inference revenue are running at 60 to 70 percent. That means the $300 billion in inference revenue generates $180 to $210 billion in gross profit and that number compounds rapidly as utilization scales on infrastructure that is already built and paid for. The Capex is not being deployed against today's revenue but rather being deployed against a revenue trajectory that has shown no signs of decelerating. To understand how aggressive that trajectory actually is, consider that Morgan Stanley's $1.1 trillion hyperscaler forecast is nearly double what analysts projected for the same year just twelve months ago And they described the demand as inelastic, meaning it is not slowing down regardless of rising costs, tighter financing conditions or geopolitical risk. The AI industry ended 2025 tracking well over $200 billion in combined inference revenue and the growth rate since then has continued to accelerate rather than flatten. Anthropic alone scaled from negligible revenue to a $30 billion annualized run rate in approximately 18 months while OpenAI is tracking toward $280 billion in annual revenue by 2030 from $13 billion in 2025. There is also a structural reality in the capex number that the bears never account for. Roughly 35 percent of total AI spending goes toward training, building the next model generation which is not revenue-generating in the current period. That means only about 65 percent of the $1.5 trillion in capex is actually deployed against the inference infrastructure that earns revenue today. When you apply the 60 to 70 percent gross margin to the revenue that sits on top of that 65 percent figure, the economics look substantially better than the headline capex to revenue ratio implies. Every CEO who has been closest to this buildout has consistently underestimated it and Jensen Huang projected $1 trillion in AI capex two years ago and was called delusional. Dario Amodei said in early 2026 that AI revenues would reach the low hundreds of billions by 2028 and trillions before 2030 and given where Anthropic's own revenue trajectory is today, he is likely revising those numbers upward. The pattern here is consistent, every time someone models the revenue ceiling, the actual number breaks through it faster than expected. Come join Milk Road Pro for our full breakdown, the real unit economics of the AI inference buildout, how the capex to revenue ratio evolves over the next three years, and our entire AI thesis! Link below!

Milk Road AI

21,141 views • 1 month ago

“We have an AI bubble.” Edward Dowd just revealed an uncomfortable truth about AI data center spending. GDP growth for Q4 2025 came in at 0.7%. But … “If you back out the data center AI GDP number, about 1.5%, which doesn’t really add to the labor force, we were negative GDP.” AI capital expenditure has been “driving a lot of the GDP, and especially Nvidia.” But Dowd warns that that’s about to change. “AI CapEx is gonna be rolling over very soon.” “We just made the power complex that much more expensive.” “We don’t have enough electricity and water to fund all this CapEx for AI.” “It’s already starting to show signs of cracking because the debt markets are questioning the ROI on the whole complex.” “There’s not enough revenue to support this CapEx spend.” Edward Dowd Jeffrey A Tucker
1:46

“We have an AI bubble.” Edward Dowd just revealed an uncomfortable truth about AI data center spending. GDP growth for Q4 2025 came in at 0.7%. But … “If you back out the data center AI GDP number, about 1.5%, which doesn’t really add to the labor force, we were negative GDP.” AI capital expenditure has been “driving a lot of the GDP, and especially Nvidia.” But Dowd warns that that’s about to change. “AI CapEx is gonna be rolling over very soon.” “We just made the power complex that much more expensive.” “We don’t have enough electricity and water to fund all this CapEx for AI.” “It’s already starting to show signs of cracking because the debt markets are questioning the ROI on the whole complex.” “There’s not enough revenue to support this CapEx spend.” Edward Dowd Jeffrey A Tucker

Brownstone Institute

23,331 views • 1 month ago

The AI supply chain has the craziest value cascade of any industry in the world. thinks that over the next five years, the biggest bottleneck to deploying AI will be EUV machines. ASML sells EUV machines for $300-400 million. You need about three and a half machines, so $1.2 billion, to produce a gigawatt of compute each year. So $1.2 billion of ASL and ML machines are producing $35 billion worth of NVIDIA chips a year (and of course those machines can be used over many years). Then those Nvidia chips can generate $100s of billion of token revenue for AI labs. Or think about: over the last three years, TSMC spent $100 billion on CapEx. A small fraction of that went to building the fab capacity used for Nvidia's chips. Nvidia turned that fraction into $216 billion of revenue last fiscal year alone. Relative to the value of the thing they’re producing, TSMC’s CapEx looks crazy small. So why aren’t ASML/TSMC/etc juicing up margins to capture more of the value they’re generating? And why aren’t they scaling up CapEx so that they can take advantage of the crazy AI growth worlds? Dylan Patel says that it’s because these upstream players aren’t AGI-pilled enough. They’re still looking for stable, gentle long-term growth. The insane demand signal is taking a long time to percolate up the supply chain.
2:02

The AI supply chain has the craziest value cascade of any industry in the world. thinks that over the next five years, the biggest bottleneck to deploying AI will be EUV machines. ASML sells EUV machines for $300-400 million. You need about three and a half machines, so $1.2 billion, to produce a gigawatt of compute each year. So $1.2 billion of ASL and ML machines are producing $35 billion worth of NVIDIA chips a year (and of course those machines can be used over many years). Then those Nvidia chips can generate $100s of billion of token revenue for AI labs. Or think about: over the last three years, TSMC spent $100 billion on CapEx. A small fraction of that went to building the fab capacity used for Nvidia's chips. Nvidia turned that fraction into $216 billion of revenue last fiscal year alone. Relative to the value of the thing they’re producing, TSMC’s CapEx looks crazy small. So why aren’t ASML/TSMC/etc juicing up margins to capture more of the value they’re generating? And why aren’t they scaling up CapEx so that they can take advantage of the crazy AI growth worlds? Dylan Patel says that it’s because these upstream players aren’t AGI-pilled enough. They’re still looking for stable, gentle long-term growth. The insane demand signal is taking a long time to percolate up the supply chain.

Dwarkesh Patel

78,103 views • 4 months ago