@AlexNoonan6 The problem with the discourse on AI is it's written by members of the media and young technologists - neither group ever having worked in the real world.
@oguzerkan Multiply $500b by their probability of failing and you get a rough approximation of the market value. Investing is not a straight line, but rather a constant aggregation of expected future scenarios.
@EricHippler@firesidealpha Fair point, but then you'd see increases in revenue per employee, which we're also not experiencing. These two KPIs will determine whether AI is a productivity tool. Today it's not.
@nicolasfulghum@grok describe the difference in cost for the average EV versus ICE in Netherlands after government incentives for EVs.
Is it fair for @nicolasfulghum to be concluding this is a natural market phenomenon?
@MarkMaddenX I'm more positive on it than the crowd. I actually think it makes the random regular season games between unranked or barely ranked teams more exciting. It gives Northwestern and Pitt fans like myself hope every seasons - versus none previously. I like it.
@EnigmaNepali@grok@JEBistline@michaelxpettis You’re misunderstanding my point. The landed cost at the Nepali port is artificially low due to what’s happening in China. The taxes exist on car purchases, independent of whether they’re EV or ICE.
The scale of AI's buildout requires analytical support to justify the investments (at some point) and today, we're still awaiting the "AI dividend", let alone super-abundance. https://t.co/u9PrK9W9UK
@nicolasfulghum China has financed its EV industry with nearly $300 billion of subsidies and continues to incentivize exports through structural imbalances in its economy. These metrics are actually indicators of poor policy choices versus organic technological revolution.