The problem with his work is that a lot of the conclusions he comes to are a step too far, but the problems he identifies with how money is moving or how much datacenters cost or how no one has ever built a 1GW datacenter and we're expected to believe they can build a bunch of them, or even a 10GW data center - those are real.

Well he's saying what a lot of people desperately want to believe.

> It's bananas...

Actually, it's lemons (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Zitron).

Sorry, I couldn't resist:)

I feel like it’s been understood that we live in a low trust society for a while now. If not for all of us, at least for a LOT of us.

In a newly evolving situation, you have to assume that it's possible that the laws will change. Typically the way you account for this is hedging or keeping reserves to adapt.

All day every day you make decisions based on things you think you can safely assume, and things you know you can't assume.

The most likely behavior of a political office is just one of the things you know you can not safely assume, that's all.

Let us assume a person cannot change society, they simply do not have the leverage, even if they are a billionaire or most politicians. This is a systems problem, requiring enormous investment of time and resources to change trajectories of. Therefore, the choices available are to continue to live in a low trust society, or move to a high trust society and minimize your exposure to low trust society impact on your life. It's unfortunate. I would very much like to be wrong, please correct me if I am mistaken.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/mapped-where-people-trust-e...

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/self-reported-trust-attit...

There's just no easy way to see what makes LLMs able to duplicate the profits of the entire existing tech sector of the economy. This is the return they need to make based on what they're currently expensing and projecting. Couple that with the circular financing agreements and it's just preposterous. Zitron may have been first and most outspoken to this argument, but like all bubbles it's an open secret.

> the return on investment is going to come from having the largest mind control machine the world has even known

This is what Google already was and continues to be. They didn't need OpenAI and Anthropic as foils to maintain that position or expand Google Cloud. If anything, they did all this work with Gemini despite what's happening on the sidelines.

OpenAI secured their multinational defense contract with Project Stargate. I can easily see the extremely high demand to get rid of so many contractors with security clearances. No government believes that the risk of another Snowden-like whistleblower is worth the mediocre intelligence summaries.

The loser will be Anthropic unless Microsoft buys them out for a lowball price at the last minute in an attempt to make Copilot less terrible. For everyone else, it's business as usual.

So his big insight is that if you take away the two largest customers the demand is much lower? Wow, such informative.

>The GPUs and the high bandwidth memory they use have little use other than to run and train these LLMs.

It's compute, and can be used to compute anything.

> little demand for the AI compute power outside of OpenAI and Anthropic.

I think every other business is going to slowly wake up to how powerful machine learning can be, and or, how important it will be to run your own models you can trust.

I don't doubt that there is a bubble, but once the hardware is built, there will be plenty of customers.

I guess if you overpay for hardware, you can be undercut by data centers built after the bubble pops, but that might just mean your return on investment is slower.

and he wrong on all of those accounts. but he’s got the best gig, he has been writing literally one same article for years, gets LLM to shuffle the words and publishes it under a different title :)