Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

SITUATION EXPLAINED: Why are OpenAI and Anthropic suddenly buying tiny data centers? • OpenAI and Anthropic are both looking at deployments of 20 to 30 megawatts • Anthropic has sounded out agreements in that range across the UK and the Nordics. OpenAI has been exploring the Nordics too •...

MTSlive's profile picture

MTS

529,805 subscribers

22,882 views • 11 days ago •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

3 Comments

Rune's profile picture
Rune11 days ago

👀

GGUFzy's profile picture
GGUFzy11 days ago

I still cannot tell when inference alone starts needing those tiny sites.

More Tulips's profile picture
More Tulips11 days ago

Yes it matters. Nordics high up north almost no cooling costs because of temperature.

Related Videos

OpenAI and Anthropic are expected to IPO in 2026. OpenAI is targeting a $1T valuation. Anthropic at least $500B. Jensen Huang $NVDA says investing could be like buying $AMZN, $GOOGL, or $META in the early stages 👀 Too expensive — or generational opportunity?
0:33

OpenAI and Anthropic are expected to IPO in 2026. OpenAI is targeting a $1T valuation. Anthropic at least $500B. Jensen Huang $NVDA says investing could be like buying $AMZN, $GOOGL, or $META in the early stages 👀 Too expensive — or generational opportunity?

Daniel

214,145 views • 7 months ago

SITUATION EXPLAINED: American AI labs are worth ~$1T each. Chinese AI labs are worth tens of billions. What explains the gap? • Moonshot AI (Kimi) raising $2B at $30B, its third financing in six months • OpenAI and Anthropic: both around $1T • DeepSeek and Moonshot: tens of billions... one to two orders of magnitude smaller • DeepSeek rumored at ~$200M ARR • Chinese models don't compete on capability, they compete on price Theo Jaffee: "Markets are probably pricing in OpenAI and Anthropic kicking off recursive self-improvement first. The niche of DeepSeek and Moonshot is not that they're better... it's that they're much, much cheaper. Which is good for enterprise applications. But it's not as good for kicking off the singularity."
1:55

SITUATION EXPLAINED: American AI labs are worth ~$1T each. Chinese AI labs are worth tens of billions. What explains the gap? • Moonshot AI (Kimi) raising $2B at $30B, its third financing in six months • OpenAI and Anthropic: both around $1T • DeepSeek and Moonshot: tens of billions... one to two orders of magnitude smaller • DeepSeek rumored at ~$200M ARR • Chinese models don't compete on capability, they compete on price Theo Jaffee: "Markets are probably pricing in OpenAI and Anthropic kicking off recursive self-improvement first. The niche of DeepSeek and Moonshot is not that they're better... it's that they're much, much cheaper. Which is good for enterprise applications. But it's not as good for kicking off the singularity."

MTS

11,559 views • 3 months ago

Dylan on why Anthropic leading on models doesn't mean OpenAI loses. Even the tier 2 and 3 labs will sell out of tokens: "Everyone's like Anthropic won. They had Mythos, Opus 4.7 and their revenue is adding $10 billion a month all before OpenAI's alleged Spud release. So clearly Anthropic is in the lead and OpenAI is cooked. Anthropic has such bounds on compute, they can only grow it so fast. Dario used to gloat about how OpenAI was being too aggressive on compute and Anthropic was more sensible in their scaling. Now Anthropic is like I wish we had a lot more compute. OpenAI just raised a ton of money to get incremental compute in addition to the irresponsible levels of compute that they were buying. By the end of the year, let's say a 4.6 Opus tier model, the economy would spend $100 billion on. Anthropic won't have enough compute to do that. And presumably OpenAI and Google will hit that tier soon. Anthropic may get to charge 70%+ gross margins but if OpenAI hits it next, they charge 50% gross margins. They still get all of this incremental demand. There is such demand for these tokens and such limitations on compute. It's pretty clear even the tier 2 or tier 3 lab are going to be sold out of tokens. The economic value that the best model can deliver is growing faster than our ability to actually serve those tokens to people via the infrastructure."
2:33

Dylan on why Anthropic leading on models doesn't mean OpenAI loses. Even the tier 2 and 3 labs will sell out of tokens: "Everyone's like Anthropic won. They had Mythos, Opus 4.7 and their revenue is adding $10 billion a month all before OpenAI's alleged Spud release. So clearly Anthropic is in the lead and OpenAI is cooked. Anthropic has such bounds on compute, they can only grow it so fast. Dario used to gloat about how OpenAI was being too aggressive on compute and Anthropic was more sensible in their scaling. Now Anthropic is like I wish we had a lot more compute. OpenAI just raised a ton of money to get incremental compute in addition to the irresponsible levels of compute that they were buying. By the end of the year, let's say a 4.6 Opus tier model, the economy would spend $100 billion on. Anthropic won't have enough compute to do that. And presumably OpenAI and Google will hit that tier soon. Anthropic may get to charge 70%+ gross margins but if OpenAI hits it next, they charge 50% gross margins. They still get all of this incremental demand. There is such demand for these tokens and such limitations on compute. It's pretty clear even the tier 2 or tier 3 lab are going to be sold out of tokens. The economic value that the best model can deliver is growing faster than our ability to actually serve those tokens to people via the infrastructure."

Patrick OShaughnessy

295,307 views • 5 months ago

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS. OpenAI and Anthropic are losing money on every dollar they make. OpenAI generated $20 billion in revenue in 2025 and is projected to lose $14 billion in the same year. Internal forecasts project cumulative losses hitting $44 billion by 2028. The company's own CFO warned executives in April 2026 that OpenAI might struggle to finance upcoming computing deals if revenue growth slows. Anthropic reached $4.3 billion in annualized revenue in April 2026 against $19 billion in total costs. It spends $3 to make $1, and is not expected to stop burning cash until 2027. Now look at what these two companies have committed to spend. OpenAI and Anthropic together have committed $1.05 trillion in cloud spending to Microsoft, Oracle, Google and Amazon, making up 43 to 54% of each provider's entire future revenue backlog. - Microsoft: $627B total backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic account for 49%. - Oracle: $553B total backlog. OpenAI alone accounts for 54%. - Google: $467.6B total backlog. Anthropic accounts for 43%. - Amazon: $464B total backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic account for 51%. The entire cloud industry's future revenue is a bet on two companies losing billions every quarter. Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta and Amazon are collectively expected to spend $725 billion in capex in 2026, almost entirely on AI infrastructure. Combined hyperscaler capex from 2025 to 2027 is projected at $1.15 trillion, more than double what was spent from 2022 to 2024. What is the return on all of this? McKinsey's 2025 State of AI survey found that only a minority of companies reported AI meaningfully increased revenue or reduced costs. Enterprise generative AI spending grew from $1.7 billion in 2023 to $37 billion in 2025 and most CIOs still describe their initiatives as pilots without clear ROI metrics. Microsoft's AI business is running at a $37 billion annual revenue run rate with 123% year over year growth. That sounds impressive until you realize most of the capex funding is justified by expected future AI revenue rather than current AI profit. The internet burned money for years before it became the most profitable industry in history. But right now $1 trillion in committed cloud spend, $725 billion in annual capex, two loss-making customers making up half of every major cloud provider's revenue backlog, and the enterprises writing the checks cannot tell you if any of it is working.
0:22

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS. OpenAI and Anthropic are losing money on every dollar they make. OpenAI generated $20 billion in revenue in 2025 and is projected to lose $14 billion in the same year. Internal forecasts project cumulative losses hitting $44 billion by 2028. The company's own CFO warned executives in April 2026 that OpenAI might struggle to finance upcoming computing deals if revenue growth slows. Anthropic reached $4.3 billion in annualized revenue in April 2026 against $19 billion in total costs. It spends $3 to make $1, and is not expected to stop burning cash until 2027. Now look at what these two companies have committed to spend. OpenAI and Anthropic together have committed $1.05 trillion in cloud spending to Microsoft, Oracle, Google and Amazon, making up 43 to 54% of each provider's entire future revenue backlog. - Microsoft: $627B total backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic account for 49%. - Oracle: $553B total backlog. OpenAI alone accounts for 54%. - Google: $467.6B total backlog. Anthropic accounts for 43%. - Amazon: $464B total backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic account for 51%. The entire cloud industry's future revenue is a bet on two companies losing billions every quarter. Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta and Amazon are collectively expected to spend $725 billion in capex in 2026, almost entirely on AI infrastructure. Combined hyperscaler capex from 2025 to 2027 is projected at $1.15 trillion, more than double what was spent from 2022 to 2024. What is the return on all of this? McKinsey's 2025 State of AI survey found that only a minority of companies reported AI meaningfully increased revenue or reduced costs. Enterprise generative AI spending grew from $1.7 billion in 2023 to $37 billion in 2025 and most CIOs still describe their initiatives as pilots without clear ROI metrics. Microsoft's AI business is running at a $37 billion annual revenue run rate with 123% year over year growth. That sounds impressive until you realize most of the capex funding is justified by expected future AI revenue rather than current AI profit. The internet burned money for years before it became the most profitable industry in history. But right now $1 trillion in committed cloud spend, $725 billion in annual capex, two loss-making customers making up half of every major cloud provider's revenue backlog, and the enterprises writing the checks cannot tell you if any of it is working.

Crypto Rover

58,862 views • 4 months ago

Elon Musk’s xAI “is not in the game with OpenAI and Anthropic to the extent that he wishes they were”, Theo Wayt reports. “This is a company that was merged with SpaceX last month at a valuation of $250 billion… and here he is saying the company wasn't built right.”
1:05

Elon Musk’s xAI “is not in the game with OpenAI and Anthropic to the extent that he wishes they were”, Theo Wayt reports. “This is a company that was merged with SpaceX last month at a valuation of $250 billion… and here he is saying the company wasn't built right.”

The Information

19,101 views • 6 months ago

There are at least 2,700 data centers nationwide that are mostly run by big tech firms. In 2022, the centers consumed more than 4% of all electricity in the U.S. and that's projected to more than double by 2030. Ben Tracy looks at the data centers driving our digital lives.
3:09

There are at least 2,700 data centers nationwide that are mostly run by big tech firms. In 2022, the centers consumed more than 4% of all electricity in the U.S. and that's projected to more than double by 2030. Ben Tracy looks at the data centers driving our digital lives.

CBS Evening News with Tony Dokoupil

25,447 views • 2 years ago

"You can break AI down into 5 tiers." - George Hotz "Data centers - tier 1, fabs - tier 2, Nvidia/AMD - tier 3, OpenAI/Anthropic - tier 4, and completely worthless things like Cursor and Windsurf, which are tier 5." "OpenAI and Anthropic will eat all the value from the Cursors and Windsurfs of the world. I argue that the tier 4s (OpenAI/Anthropic) aren't even going to have value." From his June 2025 appearance, George Hotz 🌑 really raised eyebrows with this clip when it hit the timeline.
2:25

"You can break AI down into 5 tiers." - George Hotz "Data centers - tier 1, fabs - tier 2, Nvidia/AMD - tier 3, OpenAI/Anthropic - tier 4, and completely worthless things like Cursor and Windsurf, which are tier 5." "OpenAI and Anthropic will eat all the value from the Cursors and Windsurfs of the world. I argue that the tier 4s (OpenAI/Anthropic) aren't even going to have value." From his June 2025 appearance, George Hotz 🌑 really raised eyebrows with this clip when it hit the timeline.

TBPN

1,052,145 views • 11 months ago

“A few years ago, every community wanted us to come build data centers in their community. [...] And then that really changed.” A June Reuters poll found that just a third of Americans approve of the pace of data-center construction, and only 14% are comfortable with a data center being built nearby. In an interview with TIME, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman addressed the data-center backlash and suggested AI companies should respect it by building data centers in less populated areas moving forward. TIME got unparalleled access inside OpenAI in August. Read more from our interviews here:
0:50

“A few years ago, every community wanted us to come build data centers in their community. [...] And then that really changed.” A June Reuters poll found that just a third of Americans approve of the pace of data-center construction, and only 14% are comfortable with a data center being built nearby. In an interview with TIME, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman addressed the data-center backlash and suggested AI companies should respect it by building data centers in less populated areas moving forward. TIME got unparalleled access inside OpenAI in August. Read more from our interviews here:

TIME

60,703 views • 29 days ago

This is the best take I have heard around the existing AI landscape today Fantastic explanation around the constraints at OpenAI and Anthropic, focus on enterprise business models, and the doomerism narrative in AI From former AI czar David Sacks "Even though Anthropic's revenue has followed this exponential graph very predictably, it cannot do that ever. The reason is that as you hit new levels of scale, you encounter new problems. You are simply going to run out of compute, electricity, data centers, and infrastructure. There are limits to the physical world you are going to hit. And there is already evidence that Anthropic is hitting some of those limits."
4:27

This is the best take I have heard around the existing AI landscape today Fantastic explanation around the constraints at OpenAI and Anthropic, focus on enterprise business models, and the doomerism narrative in AI From former AI czar David Sacks "Even though Anthropic's revenue has followed this exponential graph very predictably, it cannot do that ever. The reason is that as you hit new levels of scale, you encounter new problems. You are simply going to run out of compute, electricity, data centers, and infrastructure. There are limits to the physical world you are going to hit. And there is already evidence that Anthropic is hitting some of those limits."

Boring_Business

236,523 views • 5 months ago

“In the old days, and by old days I mean, like, two years ago, a large data center might have been five megawatts. A new data center for AI might be 1,000 megawatts. It's, like, 200 times larger. So the scale is much different,” explains University of Texas professor Michael Webber.
0:58

“In the old days, and by old days I mean, like, two years ago, a large data center might have been five megawatts. A new data center for AI might be 1,000 megawatts. It's, like, 200 times larger. So the scale is much different,” explains University of Texas professor Michael Webber.

60 Minutes

48,282 views • 9 days ago

SF Compute CEO evan conrad on his contrarian thesis that OpenAI and Anthropic won't eat the world, everyone will become OpenAI and Anthropic instead: "Our impression is not that OpenAI and Anthropic will eat the world, it's that everyone will look like OpenAI and Anthropic. That's simply the way that companies work now." "Every single company in the world that is of meaningful scale will look like a frontier lab. There is this belief that the large labs have won it all, and they've got this compounding advantage. The default assumption of that is assuming nobody else will do anything." "The bottleneck was there's 100 people, and they know how to train the models. Or you thought, the problem is compute. The problem of compute is credit. And OpenAI and Anthropic are not unique to having credit. In fact, they don't have as good credit as other people." "If you assume the problem is not the researchers, that that problem's basically gone away the moment you got to auto research, then what you should assume is that pretty much every other company is going to swap the way they work to look like a frontier lab. It won't be OpenAI and Anthropic take the whole world. It's that everyone's OpenAI and Anthropic now." San Francisco Compute
1:32

SF Compute CEO evan conrad on his contrarian thesis that OpenAI and Anthropic won't eat the world, everyone will become OpenAI and Anthropic instead: "Our impression is not that OpenAI and Anthropic will eat the world, it's that everyone will look like OpenAI and Anthropic. That's simply the way that companies work now." "Every single company in the world that is of meaningful scale will look like a frontier lab. There is this belief that the large labs have won it all, and they've got this compounding advantage. The default assumption of that is assuming nobody else will do anything." "The bottleneck was there's 100 people, and they know how to train the models. Or you thought, the problem is compute. The problem of compute is credit. And OpenAI and Anthropic are not unique to having credit. In fact, they don't have as good credit as other people." "If you assume the problem is not the researchers, that that problem's basically gone away the moment you got to auto research, then what you should assume is that pretty much every other company is going to swap the way they work to look like a frontier lab. It won't be OpenAI and Anthropic take the whole world. It's that everyone's OpenAI and Anthropic now." San Francisco Compute

MTS

135,154 views • 1 month ago

There are RVs parked for miles in Abilene, Texas They are used for temporary housing for thousands of construction workers building massive AI data centers Abilene is in the middle of a huge AI data center boom, projects include OpenAI, Oracle, Crusoe, Microsoft, and more. These are multibillion dollar campuses, some valued at more than $26 billion+ The power needs for these data centers in this area will exceed 1 million average homes They’ll use about 8 million gallons of water
1:03

There are RVs parked for miles in Abilene, Texas They are used for temporary housing for thousands of construction workers building massive AI data centers Abilene is in the middle of a huge AI data center boom, projects include OpenAI, Oracle, Crusoe, Microsoft, and more. These are multibillion dollar campuses, some valued at more than $26 billion+ The power needs for these data centers in this area will exceed 1 million average homes They’ll use about 8 million gallons of water

Wall Street Apes

335,708 views • 4 months ago

Gabe on why he doesn't think Anthropic or OpenAI will own finance: "The reason people get confused when they look at app layer businesses like mine or Harvey or Legora or Sierra is because there's a spectrum of perpendicularity to what the labs are building. There's a whole bunch of stuff underneath the surface that the labs are never going to build, that we need to build for finance. All of finance is a collection of different niches with different data sets, different regulatory requirements. And we can get to $5 billion in revenue by going deep across those things and creating the systems of record that help manage them. That for Anthropic would be like stopping on the side of the road to pick up a penny, because they're on the pathway of trying to go from $100 billion in revenue to a trillion in revenue. Say you are a big public company buying another big public company and you need to send data back and forth. You actually need some sort of data room, something that is compliant, safe and secure. And I don't think OpenAI or Anthropic will ever want to build a data room business. If you actually want to be the exchange for all of high finance, you don't just need to own the intelligence, you need to own the transaction venue, the communication venue, the workflows, and all the data inputs that go into it. Think about the fundamental difference between Claude Code when it came out versus ChatGPT. The models were actually fairly similar, but the harness and the way that it was presented from Claude was far better. The way that you harness these models is so, so important."
0:48

Gabe on why he doesn't think Anthropic or OpenAI will own finance: "The reason people get confused when they look at app layer businesses like mine or Harvey or Legora or Sierra is because there's a spectrum of perpendicularity to what the labs are building. There's a whole bunch of stuff underneath the surface that the labs are never going to build, that we need to build for finance. All of finance is a collection of different niches with different data sets, different regulatory requirements. And we can get to $5 billion in revenue by going deep across those things and creating the systems of record that help manage them. That for Anthropic would be like stopping on the side of the road to pick up a penny, because they're on the pathway of trying to go from $100 billion in revenue to a trillion in revenue. Say you are a big public company buying another big public company and you need to send data back and forth. You actually need some sort of data room, something that is compliant, safe and secure. And I don't think OpenAI or Anthropic will ever want to build a data room business. If you actually want to be the exchange for all of high finance, you don't just need to own the intelligence, you need to own the transaction venue, the communication venue, the workflows, and all the data inputs that go into it. Think about the fundamental difference between Claude Code when it came out versus ChatGPT. The models were actually fairly similar, but the harness and the way that it was presented from Claude was far better. The way that you harness these models is so, so important."

Patrick OShaughnessy

85,168 views • 7 days ago

Ed Zitron says there is no post-dotcom-style recovery here, because outside OpenAI and Anthropic all of AI barely sells $22 billion against a trillion spent "The post-dotcom bubble thing people say is, well, after that there was demand from the internet." "That's very different to demand for generative AI." "Right now the demand we have for generative AI is predominantly subsidized, and most people who experience it are not paying the real cost." "On top of that, we already have all of the possible marketing in the world." "We have the largest, most disingenuous marketing campaign in the history of man, pushing this up the hill." "We have the apex predator of cloud software, Microsoft. They can only get single-digit billions from selling AI software." "And Christ almighty, outside of OpenAI and Anthropic, we barely get $22 billion." "And the thing is, $22 billion is a large amount to you and me. It's not a large amount of money when you spent a trillion-plus dollars." "When you have Anthropic and OpenAI with $1.1 trillion worth of cloud commitments, and on top of that, how does this turn into a post-dotcom bubble thing?" "A data center built today is going to be as expensive to run in 2050 as it is today unless there's some breakthrough in electricity."
1:08

Ed Zitron says there is no post-dotcom-style recovery here, because outside OpenAI and Anthropic all of AI barely sells $22 billion against a trillion spent "The post-dotcom bubble thing people say is, well, after that there was demand from the internet." "That's very different to demand for generative AI." "Right now the demand we have for generative AI is predominantly subsidized, and most people who experience it are not paying the real cost." "On top of that, we already have all of the possible marketing in the world." "We have the largest, most disingenuous marketing campaign in the history of man, pushing this up the hill." "We have the apex predator of cloud software, Microsoft. They can only get single-digit billions from selling AI software." "And Christ almighty, outside of OpenAI and Anthropic, we barely get $22 billion." "And the thing is, $22 billion is a large amount to you and me. It's not a large amount of money when you spent a trillion-plus dollars." "When you have Anthropic and OpenAI with $1.1 trillion worth of cloud commitments, and on top of that, how does this turn into a post-dotcom bubble thing?" "A data center built today is going to be as expensive to run in 2050 as it is today unless there's some breakthrough in electricity."

Fireside Alpha

127,520 views • 1 month ago

Today I sat down with John McQueeney, State Representative for House District 97 in Tarrant County, Texas and member of the State Affairs Committee covering power grid and electric policy. In the last six weeks alone, John's committee has run three interim data center hearings. He is also drafting the Data Center Responsibility Act for the January 2027 session - the bill that will set the framework for how Texas handles the data center build-out for a generation. Texas has 440 gigawatts of applications in the queue against roughly 110 gigawatts of current peak capacity. Someone has to sort out what's real, what's speculative, and who pays for the grid when it all comes online. John is one of the people doing that work. I hope you enjoy this episode as much as I did. Timestamps (0:00) Intro (02:27) Why Data Centers Are a "12 Out of 10" for Texas (08:17) A Day Without a Data Center (09:34) Inside Stargate: Lancium, Crusoe, Oracle & OpenAI (14:34) When One Data Center Funds 30% of a City's Budget (17:03) The Vicious Restudy Cycle & the Batch Zero Fix (28:55) 440 GW of Applications Chasing 105 GW of Capacity (35:53) The 75 MW Threshold & Going Behind the Meter (48:36) Drafting the Data Center Responsibility Act (54:19) North Texas's Hidden Risk in Batch Zero (01:08:35) Who Actually Pays for the Grid Buildout? (01:14:32) Data Centers Are a National Security Issue (01:18:12) Data Centers in Space & the Long Arc
1:20:39

Today I sat down with John McQueeney, State Representative for House District 97 in Tarrant County, Texas and member of the State Affairs Committee covering power grid and electric policy. In the last six weeks alone, John's committee has run three interim data center hearings. He is also drafting the Data Center Responsibility Act for the January 2027 session - the bill that will set the framework for how Texas handles the data center build-out for a generation. Texas has 440 gigawatts of applications in the queue against roughly 110 gigawatts of current peak capacity. Someone has to sort out what's real, what's speculative, and who pays for the grid when it all comes online. John is one of the people doing that work. I hope you enjoy this episode as much as I did. Timestamps (0:00) Intro (02:27) Why Data Centers Are a "12 Out of 10" for Texas (08:17) A Day Without a Data Center (09:34) Inside Stargate: Lancium, Crusoe, Oracle & OpenAI (14:34) When One Data Center Funds 30% of a City's Budget (17:03) The Vicious Restudy Cycle & the Batch Zero Fix (28:55) 440 GW of Applications Chasing 105 GW of Capacity (35:53) The 75 MW Threshold & Going Behind the Meter (48:36) Drafting the Data Center Responsibility Act (54:19) North Texas's Hidden Risk in Batch Zero (01:08:35) Who Actually Pays for the Grid Buildout? (01:14:32) Data Centers Are a National Security Issue (01:18:12) Data Centers in Space & the Long Arc

Chris Powers

15,875 views • 4 months ago

ABC News investigated and found more than 3,000 data centers are already operating nationwide At least 1,000 more planned Residents near data centers are seeing much as 50%+ increases on their electric bills “ABC7 has also been covering public meetings over proposed data centers and there are questions about water use and the environment. The i-team in ABC News studied this private company's data center map and found that there are at least 4,302 data center projects across the U.S. Large and small. Of those, 3,038 are currently operational with another 1,203 either under construction or plan for construction. 61 have acquired land. In Illinois, there are 164 operating data centers with another 81 planned for construction. The largest state project plan is in Yorkville. It would be 2 gigawatts and according to the ABC7 data team would use the same energy that would power approximately 1.7 million homes more than every home in the city of Chicago.”
4:21

ABC News investigated and found more than 3,000 data centers are already operating nationwide At least 1,000 more planned Residents near data centers are seeing much as 50%+ increases on their electric bills “ABC7 has also been covering public meetings over proposed data centers and there are questions about water use and the environment. The i-team in ABC News studied this private company's data center map and found that there are at least 4,302 data center projects across the U.S. Large and small. Of those, 3,038 are currently operational with another 1,203 either under construction or plan for construction. 61 have acquired land. In Illinois, there are 164 operating data centers with another 81 planned for construction. The largest state project plan is in Yorkville. It would be 2 gigawatts and according to the ABC7 data team would use the same energy that would power approximately 1.7 million homes more than every home in the city of Chicago.”

Wall Street Apes

152,438 views • 7 months ago

Chris Camillo made the most bullish case on $AMZN. Everyone worried when Amazon raised their capex to $200 billion Camillo believes they might make that $200 billion back on their Anthropic investment alone when Anthropic IPOs. What Amazon has done in the last 18 months is remarkable in scope. They didn't try to win the foundation model race against OpenAI and Google directly. They went a completely different direction, positioning themselves as the infrastructure underneath everything that is AI. Trainium chips, cloud buildout, advertising integration and equity stakes in two of the three most important AI companies on the planet. First Anthropic. Now $50 billion into OpenAI on top of that. And that OpenAI investment isn't just a financial bet. It ties OpenAI into Amazon's cloud ecosystem, probably permanently. Two of the big three AI labs now run on Amazon infrastructure. Google is the only one that doesn't. The market has spent two years debating who builds the best model. Amazon decided to own the plumbing those models run on and bought equity in the winners while they were at it.
1:25

Chris Camillo made the most bullish case on $AMZN. Everyone worried when Amazon raised their capex to $200 billion Camillo believes they might make that $200 billion back on their Anthropic investment alone when Anthropic IPOs. What Amazon has done in the last 18 months is remarkable in scope. They didn't try to win the foundation model race against OpenAI and Google directly. They went a completely different direction, positioning themselves as the infrastructure underneath everything that is AI. Trainium chips, cloud buildout, advertising integration and equity stakes in two of the three most important AI companies on the planet. First Anthropic. Now $50 billion into OpenAI on top of that. And that OpenAI investment isn't just a financial bet. It ties OpenAI into Amazon's cloud ecosystem, probably permanently. Two of the big three AI labs now run on Amazon infrastructure. Google is the only one that doesn't. The market has spent two years debating who builds the best model. Amazon decided to own the plumbing those models run on and bought equity in the winners while they were at it.

Milk Road Stocks

41,351 views • 2 months ago

Chris Camillo just made the most bullish case on $AMZN. Everyone worried when Amazon raised their capex to $200 billion Camillo believes they might make that $200 billion back on their Anthropic investment alone when Anthropic IPOs. What Amazon has done in the last 18 months is remarkable in scope. They didn't try to win the foundation model race against OpenAI and Google directly. They went a completely different direction, positioning themselves as the infrastructure underneath everything that is AI. Trainium chips, cloud buildout, advertising integration and equity stakes in two of the three most important AI companies on the planet. First Anthropic. Now $50 billion into OpenAI on top of that. And that OpenAI investment isn't just a financial bet. It ties OpenAI into Amazon's cloud ecosystem, probably permanently. Two of the big three AI labs now run on Amazon infrastructure. Google is the only one that doesn't. The market has spent two years debating who builds the best model. Amazon decided to own the plumbing those models run on and bought equity in the winners while they were at it.
1:25

Chris Camillo just made the most bullish case on $AMZN. Everyone worried when Amazon raised their capex to $200 billion Camillo believes they might make that $200 billion back on their Anthropic investment alone when Anthropic IPOs. What Amazon has done in the last 18 months is remarkable in scope. They didn't try to win the foundation model race against OpenAI and Google directly. They went a completely different direction, positioning themselves as the infrastructure underneath everything that is AI. Trainium chips, cloud buildout, advertising integration and equity stakes in two of the three most important AI companies on the planet. First Anthropic. Now $50 billion into OpenAI on top of that. And that OpenAI investment isn't just a financial bet. It ties OpenAI into Amazon's cloud ecosystem, probably permanently. Two of the big three AI labs now run on Amazon infrastructure. Google is the only one that doesn't. The market has spent two years debating who builds the best model. Amazon decided to own the plumbing those models run on and bought equity in the winners while they were at it.

Milk Road Macro

55,169 views • 4 months ago

🚨 JUST IN: JD Vance helps to clarify President Trump's stance on data centers, highlighting his desire for data centers to put power BACK into the grid "I think probably 99% of the backlash to data centers has come in areas where building a data center means higher utility and higher electricity for the people on the ground." "If you build a data center, you should be putting power back into the grid, not taking it out, and if that is happening, I don't think the data centers are that controversial."
0:51

🚨 JUST IN: JD Vance helps to clarify President Trump's stance on data centers, highlighting his desire for data centers to put power BACK into the grid "I think probably 99% of the backlash to data centers has come in areas where building a data center means higher utility and higher electricity for the people on the ground." "If you build a data center, you should be putting power back into the grid, not taking it out, and if that is happening, I don't think the data centers are that controversial."

Nick Sortor

217,808 views • 1 month ago

OpenAI just admitted Anthropic is KILLING their business. Their own applications chief told employees it was a "code red." Said Anthropic was a "wake-up call." Then admitted OpenAI had been "spreading efforts across too many apps" and it was "slowing them down." This is an internal confession. Here's why Anthropic is eating up OpenAI: 12 months ago, OpenAI owned 50% of all enterprise AI spending. Today it's just 27%. Anthropic went from nearly ZERO to winning 70% of every first-time enterprise AI deal. Seven out of ten companies buying AI tools for the first time are choosing Claude over ChatGPT. A year ago, one in 25 businesses on Ramp paid for Anthropic. Today it's one in four. OpenAI just had its biggest single-month adoption decline ever recorded. And Anthropic literally charges MORE than OpenAI for roughly the same performance. And businesses are STILL choosing them. In enterprise software, that never happens. The cheaper product usually wins. But Claude became something OpenAI never figured out how to be: Cool. Celebrities publicly switched to Claude. Senators are tweeting about using it. Engineers are shipping entire products with Claude Code in hours that used to take weeks. It started to became an identity signal. Like blue bubble vs green bubble in iMessage. Choosing Claude says something about you now. Meanwhile OpenAI went the opposite direction: They took the Pentagon contract that Anthropic refused. Greg Brockman donated $25 million to fund wars. ChatGPT uninstalls jumped 295% in a single day. Reddit posts saying "Cancel and Delete ChatGPT" got 30,000 upvotes. Anthropic said no to mass surveillance and autonomous weapons. Got blacklisted by the Pentagon. Trump called them a "Radical Left AI company." And their downloads went to #1 on the App Store the next day. Turns out refusing to build weapons is good marketing. But the real damage isn't consumer downloads. It's the MONEY. Claude Code hit $2.5 billion in annual revenue in six months. OpenAI's competing product Codex just barely crossed $1 billion. And Anthropic literally cannot meet demand. They're turning away paying customers because they don't have enough compute to serve them. A company REJECTING revenue because it's growing too fast. While OpenAI scrambles to consolidate. Last week OpenAI announced they're merging ChatGPT, Codex, and their browser into one "superapp." But what this really means: "We launched too many products, none of them worked well enough alone, so now we're cramming everything together and hoping it sticks." And remember their video tool Sora? Launched standalone. Hit #1 on the App Store. Usage flatlined within weeks. Now they're forced to shut it down. Their browser Atlas? Still hasn't launched publicly. Their IPO? Polymarket odds dropped from 55% to 35%. OpenAI has 900 million users. Anthropic has maybe 10 million daily actives. But here's the thing... OpenAI won the consumer war. ChatGPT is where your mom asks about recipes and your cousin makes memes. Anthropic won the war that actually MATTERS. The developers. The engineers. The enterprises writing 7 figure checks. OpenAI built the biggest chatbot on Earth. Anthropic built the tool that companies can't stop paying for. This is Yahoo vs Google all over again. Yahoo had the users. Google had the product. And we all know how that ended. OpenAI has 12 months to prove the superapp works, land the IPO, and stop the enterprise bleeding. If they can't, the most valuable startup in history becomes the most cautionary tale in tech. 900 million users don't mean anything if the people who actually pay are walking out the door. What do you think?
2:25

OpenAI just admitted Anthropic is KILLING their business. Their own applications chief told employees it was a "code red." Said Anthropic was a "wake-up call." Then admitted OpenAI had been "spreading efforts across too many apps" and it was "slowing them down." This is an internal confession. Here's why Anthropic is eating up OpenAI: 12 months ago, OpenAI owned 50% of all enterprise AI spending. Today it's just 27%. Anthropic went from nearly ZERO to winning 70% of every first-time enterprise AI deal. Seven out of ten companies buying AI tools for the first time are choosing Claude over ChatGPT. A year ago, one in 25 businesses on Ramp paid for Anthropic. Today it's one in four. OpenAI just had its biggest single-month adoption decline ever recorded. And Anthropic literally charges MORE than OpenAI for roughly the same performance. And businesses are STILL choosing them. In enterprise software, that never happens. The cheaper product usually wins. But Claude became something OpenAI never figured out how to be: Cool. Celebrities publicly switched to Claude. Senators are tweeting about using it. Engineers are shipping entire products with Claude Code in hours that used to take weeks. It started to became an identity signal. Like blue bubble vs green bubble in iMessage. Choosing Claude says something about you now. Meanwhile OpenAI went the opposite direction: They took the Pentagon contract that Anthropic refused. Greg Brockman donated $25 million to fund wars. ChatGPT uninstalls jumped 295% in a single day. Reddit posts saying "Cancel and Delete ChatGPT" got 30,000 upvotes. Anthropic said no to mass surveillance and autonomous weapons. Got blacklisted by the Pentagon. Trump called them a "Radical Left AI company." And their downloads went to #1 on the App Store the next day. Turns out refusing to build weapons is good marketing. But the real damage isn't consumer downloads. It's the MONEY. Claude Code hit $2.5 billion in annual revenue in six months. OpenAI's competing product Codex just barely crossed $1 billion. And Anthropic literally cannot meet demand. They're turning away paying customers because they don't have enough compute to serve them. A company REJECTING revenue because it's growing too fast. While OpenAI scrambles to consolidate. Last week OpenAI announced they're merging ChatGPT, Codex, and their browser into one "superapp." But what this really means: "We launched too many products, none of them worked well enough alone, so now we're cramming everything together and hoping it sticks." And remember their video tool Sora? Launched standalone. Hit #1 on the App Store. Usage flatlined within weeks. Now they're forced to shut it down. Their browser Atlas? Still hasn't launched publicly. Their IPO? Polymarket odds dropped from 55% to 35%. OpenAI has 900 million users. Anthropic has maybe 10 million daily actives. But here's the thing... OpenAI won the consumer war. ChatGPT is where your mom asks about recipes and your cousin makes memes. Anthropic won the war that actually MATTERS. The developers. The engineers. The enterprises writing 7 figure checks. OpenAI built the biggest chatbot on Earth. Anthropic built the tool that companies can't stop paying for. This is Yahoo vs Google all over again. Yahoo had the users. Google had the product. And we all know how that ended. OpenAI has 12 months to prove the superapp works, land the IPO, and stop the enterprise bleeding. If they can't, the most valuable startup in history becomes the most cautionary tale in tech. 900 million users don't mean anything if the people who actually pay are walking out the door. What do you think?

Ricardo

35,020 views • 6 months ago