The risk of all risks today is wether OpenAI will survive. I just watched Zitron is convinced they will not [1]. Eisman said OpenAI flop will cause recession [2].
Even if OpenAI goes bankrupt, someone will buy their models in bankruptcy to run them. Also, other companies will be able to hire the people who are laid off to apply the same techniques to get similar models.
So from the point of view of technological / AI progress we'll be fine.
Some investors might lose some money, but humanity will keep going forward.
they're converging on the same brain
facebook poached a few guys and suddenly they have a decent model after a massive flop in less than a year
2019: That bond bailout you didn't hear about
2020: COVID bailout
2022: Various credit/liquidity facilities and the slow-walked rate hikes
2023: Bank bailouts
I dunno what happens this time. So many cards have been played out and a lot of entities seem to be white-knuckling it.
The boom-and-bust cycle is a natural consequence of running an economy on debt: margin leads to speculation which leads to overheating, and then it has to cool off. It is entirely possible to guarantee the public's welfare during busts; you just have to sacrifice not having a ceiling on earnings/wealth.
Would be even really really good if we would start breaking through barriers regarding state spending and allowing more to do so in a way that inflation is not affected.
Like allowing every state on the planet to 'spend' money on certain things like renewable or teachers or care workers.
If a recession was started because someone else is taking your retirement fonds and putting them in companies overvaluated to move money from retirement fonds to random other people, and this is closer to gambling than investment, regulators should step in.
> someone else is taking your retirement fond
> and putting them in companies overvaluated
> to move money from retirement fonds to random other people,
> and this is closer to gambling than investment
1) "I vaguely disapprove of this framing for reasons I choose not to explain?" Or do you mean,
2) "Each step violates any reasonable duty, and wouldn't be taken in a world that punished people for taking wild risks with the money of retirees, or in a world that expected the "risk" that people took when investing in stocks to actually be "risky" instead of ultimately backstopped by the taxpayers?"
I suspect 1.
If they blindly invest in random companies even with P/Es in 3 digits, thats overvaluated.
The move happens because your retirement is getting less in a crash, but that money was moved around because you bought shares and someone else sold them.
What will be the margin? if its a healthy one, its not gambling its investment. If its good, it becomes gambling.
Thirteen since WWII or roughly two per decade.
For some reason the people who hate him the most are the ones most inclined to completely ignore the topics he actually talks about.
They all get hooked on anthropic screeching about ending humanity or some other nonsense and forget that this is a business. A business which is losing gargantuan stacks of cash and is running on the fumes of hype and cope.
Huh? His predictions on both the financial and technical sides (see https://danluu.com/zitron/) have been spectacularly wrong.
ctrl-f "vendor financing" zero hits. yep... why bring up the main theme of most of his rants at all?
most of the time he says "this will end badly. on the few occasions when he gave a time frame he's been very wrong but so what?
the world is divided into people who deny the existence of a bubble at all and people who are wrong about when it will go pop. the latter group are always the ones who get the most shit for being wrong.
If any boosters can provide the type of evidence that Zitron has I’d love to see it.
I agree he's early, but I think the mere fact that Anthropic's IPO is currently tracking a junk rating vindicates a lot of his work.
Now that the company has published their own numbers in the S-1, I've yet to see a credible analysis that paints it as a good investment. It seems like the only reason anyone is bullish is if they think AGI is coming or they think somehow Anthropic is going to be able to edge Facebook, Google, OpenAI, and the Chinese open weight models out of the market.
Both of those outcomes seem highly unlikely to me, but I'm just a moron on the internet.
In a business that's burning money at the rate they are, with future revenue as uncertain as it is, with future energy and regulatory costs being as unknown as they are, surely that impacts their long-term viability.
Not quite an analysis of the S-1 but as a data point, Anthropic’s IPO is oversubscribed (personally I’m unlikely to invest on day 1): https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-11-11/anthropic...