debdeb

AI + marketing wizard ✨
ADHD-fueled brain ⚡
building a tech start-up 💡
and making games at @wwizardgames 🧙‍♂️

[debdeb @debdeb]

@zackpaid cook

[debdeb @debdeb]

I was in Cambridge yesterday and can confirm very loud boom!

[NASA Space Alerts @NASASpaceAlerts]

#MeteorSighting: Eyewitnesses in New England and @NOAA’s GOES-19 satellite reported a bright fireball on Saturday, May 30, at 2:06 p.m EDT accompanied by a loud noise. The meteor appears to have fragmented at an altitude of 40 miles over northeast MA and southeast NH. The energy released at breakup is estimated to be equivalent to about 300 tons of TNT, which accounts for the loud noise.

Eyewitness accounts supplied by the American Meteor Society.

[debdeb @debdeb]

@aryanXmahajan clients

[debdeb @debdeb]

@aryanXmahajan opus

[debdeb @debdeb]

@chhddavid guide

[debdeb @debdeb]

@Manu_Sisti Asset

[debdeb @debdeb]

@Zephyr_hg autopilot

[debdeb @debdeb]

@gametime__jay @AlexHormozi yeah I feel like it's only a matter of time before lots of people will be using AI to reply to text messages from friends and family, kind sad just thinking about it.

[debdeb @debdeb]

@AydevOnceAgain @AlexHormozi 😆yeah so much AI generated posts and replies, it is insane, but still some thought provoking gems in the comments of posts like this one

[debdeb @debdeb]

@DemaniSide @AlexHormozi in closed systems where the AI systems are created, fine tuned, and approved with some human judgement, AI can definitely accelerate things in a smart way, but people in the wild using AI is creating a lot of armchair "experts" doing dumb sh**.

[debdeb @debdeb]

@billwolfe @AlexHormozi agree, but I do think a smart person can much more rapidly learn new skills with the caveat that you can't just use any random AI skills or prompts, you still need to make sure they were created or are reviewed by people that know what they are doing

[debdeb @debdeb]

@thegamblingtrut @AlexHormozi yes, it's frustrating and scary how many "Guides" there are that have been created by AI by someone with zero domain expertise. AI doesn't put in the passion that comes from years of living it.

[debdeb @debdeb]

@thekevinjon video

[debdeb @debdeb]

@Zephyr_hg SALES

[debdeb @debdeb]

@nicktheriot_ DESIRE

[debdeb @debdeb]

this is why you can't just automate your <insert business function here> by downloading workflows from the internet or asking Claude Code to just build something you know nothing about - critical thinking, human judgement and expertise are still very much needed.

[Alex Hormozi @AlexHormozi]

Many people are using AI to do dumb things…faster.

[debdeb @debdeb]

@AlexHormozi sadly AI does help people do dumb things faster, especially when ChatGPT asks you if you want it to be "cheerful" and "encouraging" and then everything you say is all sunshine and rainbows 😉🌈 and "what a great idea, I like where this is going"

[debdeb @debdeb]

@TommiPedruzzi KDP

[debdeb @debdeb]

@ericosiu yup agree.

[Ricardo @Ric_RTP]

Microsoft just banned its own engineers from using AI.

The tool was literally costing MORE than the humans it was supposed to replace.

They lied to you about AI adoption and now the whole narrative is blowing up:

Microsoft gave thousands of engineers access to Claude Code six months ago and encouraged them to use it.

Engineers loved it and adoption exploded. But then the invoices arrived.

Token-based pricing means every query, every code review, every debugging session costs money. At scale across 100,000 engineers, the numbers became so large that Microsoft issued an internal order to cancel nearly all Claude Code licenses by end of June and force everyone onto their own cheaper tool instead.

The company that invested $5 billion in Anthropic just told its own people to stop using Anthropic's product because it costs too much.

Uber's story is even worse...

Their CTO Praveen Neppalli Naga told The Information that the budget he planned for the full year was "blown away already" by April.

Uber had rolled out Claude Code in December 2025. By March, 84% of their 5,000 engineers were using it with 70% of all committed code coming from AI systems.

Heavy users were burning $500 to $2,000 per month each. Naga himself spent $1,200 in a single two-hour demo session.

The company had even built internal leaderboards ranking engineers by how much AI they used. They literally gamified the spending and then ran out of money.

Now look at what Nvidia's own VP of applied deep learning Bryan Catanzaro said to Axios last month. Direct quote:

"For my team, the cost of compute is far beyond the costs of the employees."

This is a VP at the company that SELLS the chips saying that using AI is more expensive than paying humans.

Think about what this means for the entire AI narrative.

Every CEO on every earnings call for the past two years has said the same thing:

AI will make us more efficient, reduce headcount, and cut costs.

The stock market rewarded every company that said it.

Fired workers, stock goes up. Announced AI adoption, stock goes up.

But the actual companies deploying AI at scale are discovering the math doesn't work. The MORE employees use AI, the HIGHER the bill.

Goldman Sachs forecasts a 24x increase in token consumption by 2030 as companies adopt AI agents. Gartner just published a report showing that even though individual token prices will drop 90% by 2030, total enterprise AI costs will go UP because agents consume exponentially more tokens per task than basic tools.

Meta built an internal dashboard called "Claudeonomics" to track which employees use the most AI. Amazon started pushing engineers to "tokenmaxx," their internal term for consuming as many AI tokens as possible.

Both companies are spending hundreds of billions on AI infrastructure this year alone.

And Microsoft, the company that bet its entire future on AI, just told 100,000 engineers to stop using the tool they liked best because the per-token bills got out of control.

The companies building AI are telling investors it saves money. The companies using AI are finding out it costs more than the humans it was supposed to replace. And even the company that makes the chips just admitted it through its own VP.

This is the gap nobody on Wall Street is pricing in.

$725 billion in AI infrastructure spending this year across Big Tech. And the first companies to actually deploy these tools at scale are already pulling back because the economics don't work.

What do you think?