AI dilemma:
When you build a bridge , it stays where you put it.
When you build an engine, it turns off when you cut the fuel.
But AI - designed to learn- is beginning to escape the creators hands.
Chris Olah (Anthropic), Pope Leo meeting and their statements should worry everyone about AI.
You are reading the wrong script.
This is not a shocking discovery for the Albanian government.
That move is a calculated structural pivot to manage intense domestic blowback and escalating geopolitical friction.
Prime Minister Edi Rama's administration fully knew what this deal entailed when they pushed through the 2024 legislative reforms to strip the Vjosa-Narta wetland of its protected status.
Here is what is actually happening on the ground:
⁉️No Frozen Foreign Assets:
Albania’s Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SPAK) has opened an investigation, but no assets belonging to Kushner or Affinity Partners have been frozen. The $4 billion project hasn't collapsed.
⁉️Insulating the Capital:
Prime Minister Rama is explicitly protecting the core investment, recently stating there is "absolutely no chance that the investment will stop." The strategy here is classic political insulation: protect the foreign capital by sacrificing domestic players.
⁉️The Domestic Fall Guys:
To appease public fury over barbed-wire fences and environmental destruction, SPAK is turning its crosshairs inward.
They have already targeted local administrators and seized accounts of a domestic land firm.
The government is simply running a playbook to throw local bureaucrats and mid-level cogs under the bus.
By offering up local sacrifices to satisfy public demand for accountability, they cleanse the legal process, appease EU critics, and ensure the underlying $4 billion engine keeps running.
This is a stark reminder that no matter how advanced, complex, or digital our society becomes, physical infrastructure remains the ultimate bottleneck.
If you cut the fiber-optic lines, disrupt the cooling systems, or sever the grid connections to those specific coordinates, the "all-powerful" algorithms instantly stop running.
Everything now stands on Code and Data.
Trump and Netanyahu have coordinated closely on Iran and speak almost daily. But officials on both sides have been cognizant that there could be a point when the allies' interests and objectives diverge.
Some in Netanyahu's camp worry that time is now. https://t.co/0Q1SsslIkX
BREAKING: SpaceX plans to sell approximately 555.6 million shares at $135 per share in its upcoming IPO, according to new SEC filings.
At that price, the offering would raise $75 billion, making it the largest IPO in history by a wide margin.
This would value SpaceX at $1.77 trillion.
Michael Burry is right in his own view.
But dont you think NVIDIA'S legal and financial experts are all aware of this?
Jensen Huang and Nvidia's executive, legal, and accounting teams are some of the sharpest operators on the planet.
In fact the reason Michael Burry has that information is because NVIDIA team has filed it with SEC.
But NVIDIA is betting on CUDA - their proprietary software ecosystem that developers have spent nearly two decades building on.
NVIDIA has 3 strong counter-arguments to Michael Burry "finger on the trigger" theory:
1: The 3 hyperscalers/ customers have no where else to go in the short term.
"Even if our top three customers build a cheaper physical chip, their internal software layers cannot match CUDA's efficiency for training next-generation, frontier models."
If Nvidia maintains a monopoly on the absolute highest tier of raw performance, those top three tech giants must keep buying Nvidia hardware to avoid losing the AI arms race to each other.
2: Backlog :"If the Big Three Drop Out, Others Are Waiting."
There are Nations (Saudi, UAE) and mid tier enterprise companies and specialized cloud providers (like CoreWeave and Lambda Labs) that are standing in line begging for chip allocations.
If the 3 major customers drop out, NVIDIA will pivot to global customers who have been locked out of supply for years.
3: Contracts- non- cancelable trap.
NVIDIA has not entered into contracts with the big 3 in a vacuum.
Nvidia structured their sales agreements to mirror their liabilities.
Many of those shipments destined for the top three customers are tied to non-cancellable, front-loaded down payments and strict allocation contracts.
So, if Nvidia's executive team is completely aware of the risk and managing it, why is Burry still short?
Because views do clash.
Nvidia's view:👇
👉The risk is high, but the payoff is total market control.
👉Nvidia knows exactly what bridge they are crossing.
👉Nvidia believes they can sprint across the bridge before the structural wood rots out from underneath them.
Burry’s View:👇
👉No corporate management team, no matter how brilliant, can outmaneuver a structural macroeconomic cycle.
👉Burry is betting that gravity and macroeconomic numbers win every single time.
The Nvidia Perspective:
👇
"Velocity Beats Volatility"🎯
The Burry Perspective:
👇
"The Ledger Never Lies"🎯
They are both right in their views.
Michael Burry is short Nvidia, 1 million shares. His case: three customers now owe it 64% of receivables, and the biggest is paying slower while buying less. The same three are building their own chips to need it less. He calls it a finger on the trigger.
Michael Burry is right in his own view.
But dont you think NVIDIA'S legal and financial experts are all aware of this?
Jensen Huang and Nvidia's executive, legal, and accounting teams are some of the sharpest operators on the planet.
In fact the reason Michael Burry has that information is because NVIDIA team has filed it with SEC.
But NVIDIA is betting on CUDA - their proprietary software ecosystem that developers have spent nearly two decades building on.
NVIDIA has 3 strong counter-arguments to Michael Burry "finger on the trigger" theory:
1: The 3 hyperscalers/ customers have no where else to go in the short term.
"Even if our top three customers build a cheaper physical chip, their internal software layers cannot match CUDA's efficiency for training next-generation, frontier models."
If Nvidia maintains a monopoly on the absolute highest tier of raw performance, those top three tech giants must keep buying Nvidia hardware to avoid losing the AI arms race to each other.
2: Backlog :"If the Big Three Drop Out, Others Are Waiting."
There are Nations (Saudi, UAE) and mid tier enterprise companies and specialized cloud providers (like CoreWeave and Lambda Labs) that are standing in line begging for chip allocations.
If the 3 major customers drop out, NVIDIA will pivot to global customers who have been locked out of supply for years.
3: Contracts- non- cancelable trap.
NVIDIA has not entered into contracts with the big 3 in a vacuum.
Nvidia structured their sales agreements to mirror their liabilities.
Many of those shipments destined for the top three customers are tied to non-cancellable, front-loaded down payments and strict allocation contracts.
So, if Nvidia's executive team is completely aware of the risk and managing it, why is Burry still short?
Because views do clash.
Nvidia's view:👇
👉The risk is high, but the payoff is total market control.
👉Nvidia knows exactly what bridge they are crossing.
👉Nvidia believes they can sprint across the bridge before the structural wood rots out from underneath them.
Burry’s View:👇
👉No corporate management team, no matter how brilliant, can outmaneuver a structural macroeconomic cycle.
👉Burry is betting that gravity and macroeconomic numbers win every single time.
The Nvidia Perspective:
👇
"Velocity Beats Volatility"🎯
The Burry Perspective:
👇
"The Ledger Never Lies"🎯
They are both right in their views.
Critics of AI are ignoring current ffundamentals.
This is not 1999.
During dot-com companies spent huge to market their products.
AI sector is not starved of customers.
In this age , people are more informed and want AI.
People compare this to dot-com; but that comparison is disconnected from the current reality.
Where that comparison actually falls short—is that the internet was fundamentally an infrastructure of distribution.
AI is entirely different.
AI is an infrastructure of compute and power.
A Infrastructure Bubble, is Not a Tech Bubble.
The world is not illiquid.
Wall Street has $8T in money markets. That cash can be redeployed as and when needed.
Sovereign funds and Venture Capital are pouring more money in AI sector.
@ShaykhSulaiman Netanyahu is playing 3 different games :
👉🏼 The Domestic Game: National Pride and Sovereignty
👉🏼 The Washington Game: Getting Ahead of the Narrative
👉🏼 The Geopolitical Game: Becoming "Super-Sparta"
The reality is that this is a long term game - not overnight.
This is not 1999.
There is huge difference between dot-com bubble and current AI Sector.
Here is the huge difference :👇🏼
👉🏼 The Dot-com bubble was driven by speculative startups with no track records, no profits, and zero fundamentals.
👉🏼 Today's AI sector is anchored by established tech giants with proven track records, robust fundamentals, and massive profitability.
🚨 THERE IS VERY LITTLE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE AI BUBBLE AND THE DOT-COM BUBBLE.
Microsoft invested $13 BILLION into OpenAI, OpenAI then spent that money back on Microsoft Azure servers, and Microsoft booked it as cloud revenue.
Amazon and Google are running similar loops with Anthropic while reporting massive paper gains from rising AI valuations.
OpenAI reportedly burns over $60 BILLION annually on compute while generating only $25 BILLION in revenue.
This is dangerously similar to the 2000 Dot-Com bubble, when telecom companies inflated revenues by selling assets and network capacity to each other before the entire system collapsed.
There is very big difference .
Here is the difference :
👉🏼The Dot-com bubble was driven by speculative startups with no track records, no profits, and zero fundamentals.
👉🏼In contrast, today's AI sector is anchored by established tech giants with proven track records, robust fundamentals, and massive profitability.
This isn't 1999.
That historical rhyming is disconnected from current reality.
Thousands of Albanians took to the streets of Tirana on Tuesday night to protest Jared Kushner’s €1.4 billion luxury resort project on a protected stretch of Albania’s Adriatic coast—Reuters