Tag Archives: AI

The wrong focus

Two messages passed me by today. The first one was given to us by CNBC (at https://www-cnbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2025/12/17/oracle-stock-blue-owl-michigan-data-center.html) with the headline ‘Oracle stock dips 5% as Blue Owl Capital pulls out of funding $10 billion data center’ and I wonder why the headline wasn’t ‘Blue Owl Capital pulls out of funding $10 billion data center’ with the optional added “the project remains “on schedule” but that Blue Owl was out of funding talks.” And as we see “Blue Owl had been in talks with Oracle about funding a 1-gigawatt facility for OpenAI in Saline Township, Michigan, according to the Financial Times.” And when we see “the plans fell through due to concerns about Oracle’s rising debt levels and extensive artificial intelligence spending, the FT reported, citing people familiar with the matter. This comes as some investors raise red flags about the funding behind the rush to build ever more data centers. The concern is that some hyperscalers are turning to private equity markets rather than funding the buildings themselves, and entering into lease agreements that could prove risky.” I am wondering why the focus is Oracle and not Blue Owl Capital. Even as others give us ‘Blue Owl Capital (OWL) Is Down 7.1% After Liquidity And BDC-Merger Lawsuits Surface – What’s Changed’ (at https://simplywall.st/stocks/us/diversified-financials/nyse-owl/blue-owl-capital/news/blue-owl-capital-owl-is-down-71-after-liquidity-and-bdc-merg/amp) with “Blue Owl Capital has faced multiple securities class action lawsuits alleging that it misled investors about liquidity pressures tied to redemptions and the planned merger of its business development companies, following weaker-than-expected third-quarter 2025 results and contentious merger terms for OBDC II shareholders.” As well as “Beyond the legal claims, the controversy has highlighted how liquidity constraints, redemption limits, and potential valuation “haircuts” inside key private credit vehicles can affect confidence in Blue Owl’s broader fee-based asset management model.” So the setting could be “Oracle dips because Capital Asset Management cannot get their settings right” it is a speculative statement, but it does hold water in light of what we are shown, so why CNBC focusses on Oracle and not on Blue Owl Capital is beyond me. Is it because kicking a true innovator is more sexy than a Capital Asset Management player? I feel slightly protective of real innovators and as far as I can tell Oracle has been a power for innovation for over 45 years (yes I am that old).

So when we see “Blue Owl Capital’s narrative projects $4.2 billion revenue and $5.1 billion earnings by 2028. This requires 17.5% yearly revenue growth and about a $5.0 billion earnings increase from $75.4 million today.” And there is the real culprit, players like Blue Owl need to make money and the entire setting for what they call ‘AI’ will not show revenue for over 2 years and that is what is hampering these players (as I personally see it).

So when we see “The person added that Blue Owl was also concerned that local politics in Michigan would cause construction delays. Oracle later responded to the FT report, saying the project was moving forward and that Blue Owl was not part of equity talks.” I reckon that Blue Owl will move out of at least one other project, as such some players need to step up and it goes without saying that these ‘money makers’ will see stretch marks in their projected revenue womb and it will be a nasty setting for those that are relying on profit per quarter and that was the setting I foresaw almost a year ago and a setting that will bare scrutiny because there are trillions invested and some makers of money will start to realise that as they aren’t making enough money for their shareholders, they will become nervous and as I see it, Google has the inside track now and those relying on OpenAI and Sam Altman will start to see their revenue falter, it is no longer a one player game and that is before we consider where Huawei is going in all this. 

The second article ‘Amazon Set to Waste $10 Billion on OpenAI’ (at https://247wallst.com/technology-3/2025/12/17/amazon-set-to-waste-10-billion-on-openai/) the question becomes. Is it really wasted? We see the first setting “OpenAI, which until recently has been the leading artificial intelligence (AI) company in the world, has raised money from a long list of investors. Some are venture capitalists who are simply writing checks to get returns. However, another list consists of money or strategic deals with Microsoft, Oracle, Softbank, Nvidia, and, soon, Disney.” This part raises a question “Some are venture capitalists who are simply writing checks to get returns” the question is part of a timeline. When they get the money is another part of this equation and time is  the factor that holds these money loving parties in check, or not as the timeline shifts towards 2028/2029. So as we consider “Bloomberg reports, “OpenAI is in initial discussions to raise at least $10 billion from Amazon.com Inc. and use its chips, a potential win for the online retailer’s effort to broaden its AI industry presence and compete with Nvidia Corp.” Amazon is a tiny player in the AI chip business. Nvidia Corp. (NASDAQ: NVDA) dominates, with a market cap of $4.33 trillion, which makes it the most valuable company in the world. Put plainly, the Amazon deal is part of the dangerous “round tripping” that goes on in the industry. One company invests in another. The company that gets the investment uses the money to buy products or services from the investor.” I see something else. Whilst we get that $4.33 trillion is an important part, the larger setting is becoming “Amazon deal is part of the dangerous “round tripping” that goes on in the industry” this implies that “a company selling “an unused asset to another company, while at the same time agreeing to buy back the same or similar assets at about the same price.”” I see it as double dipping, so we have now (apparently ) arrived to the point where the double dipping is greedily seen on 10 billion, whist the invested setting is over 900 times larger. I personally see that as a new venue towards the bottom of the creamy barrel that everyone wants to dip their wallet in, the setting is spend and the money is gone (or at least locked into a set stage of non-revenue) and that is the second setting I see breaking the economic settings apart in 2026, because this will erupt into something a lot less nice long before we reach 2027 and that is close to 2 years ahead of incoming revenue. Do you still think I am boasting? This is not a boast. It is disappointment, because that setting was clear to me almost a year ago when I wrote ‘And the bubble said ‘Bang’’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/01/29/and-the-bubble-said-bang/) So I saw this coming a mile away and the others were in the dark? I am not that intelligent, I am pretty clever sop these high paid economists should have see this long before me, or were they hoping that THIS time they could outsmart others? Greed is a vicious circle and will only propagate further greed a game without winners and all who play it lose, or they sell others down the river to get their goods. So how did that end in 2008? The movie Inside Job has a few markers, but who ended the game with a full purse tended to be awfully little and they wasted trillions on that idea and now we get a setting more intense and with more money at play all whilst the previous setting is still hurting a lot of people. Now, the impact will be a lot more dangerous with too many people relying on the setting others give whilst not giving them the full story. How does that usually go over?

A stage that could sink America as I see it, but perhaps I am just a radical depressed individual. Have a great day you all. My Friday begins in less than 5 minutes.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

Orchestration

That was on my mind when I was considering a few settings. Orchestration by the media no less. To get the full view to this, I need to explain a few items. The media has NO responsibility to print (or news talk) on any given subject. And there is something called Defamation by omission. 

So it does exist, but the setting is extremely difficult to prove. There are more provisions, but they will not be applicable to this setting. As such I leave them by themselves. So two weeks ago we got all that Code Red settings in regards to OpenAI, they were not giving us that they would have to WOW the audience, or was that me saying that? So a few days ago ChatGPT released 5.2 and as far as I can tell there are several dozens of articles, but only Wired gives us some of the goods

With: “OpenAI has introduced GPT-5.2, its smartest artificial intelligence model yet, with performance gains across writing, coding, and reasoning benchmarks. The launch comes just days after CEO Sam Altman internally declared a “code red,” a company-wide push to improve ChatGPT amid intense competition from rivals. “We announced this code red to really signal to the company that we want to marshal resources in one particular area, and that’s a way to really define priorities,” said OpenAI’s CEO of applications, Fidji Simo, in a briefing with reporters on Thursday. “We have had an increase in resources focused on ChatGPT in general.”” Publication and presentation talk, Sam Altman is great at that. But the media? Where are they? Who actually looked at them for the last few days? Where are those articles? 

I am not out for blood, or out to get Sam Altman, I am out to get the media. They are all about the danger setting, but this is becoming out of balance and the media loves their digital dollar raking, but enough is enough. They need to fess up to the settings and do something about it all. If ChatGPT 5.2 is great, fine. I don’t mind, but I want to get the goods and the media is falling short in several ways. Venezuela, OpenAI, Israel, Saudi Arabia and that list goes on, they are (as I personally see it) catering to their need for digital dollars as long as it agrees with the stakeholders they are reporting to.

The Wall Street Journal (at https://www.wsj.com/articles/openai-updates-chatgpt-amid-battle-for-knowledge-workers-995376f9) gives us “The release comes about a week after Chief Executive Sam Altman declared a “code red” effort to improve the quality of ChatGPT and to delay development of some other initiatives, including advertising. The company has been on high alert from the rising threat of Google’s latest Gemini AI model, which outperformed ChatGPT on certain benchmarks including expert-level knowledge, logic puzzles, math problems and image recognition. The new OpenAI model was described by the company as better at math, science and coding benchmarks.” And as I see it, nearly all the media gives exactly the same lines and no one is actually looking into how good ChatGPT is now, or even whether it is or is not. There are investors with Trillions on the line and the media is playing the “distancing game”, only when things go bad they are tripping over each other giving us the lines and at that point the stakeholders have the like it or lump it.

Is no one noticing that part of the equation? 

So, is GPT-5.2 the WOW result everyone is banking on? Did it defeat Gemini 3? I don’t know but the media should have been all over this and they aren’t. As I see it, this is a form of orchestration but to where I don’t know. Is it about the trillions invested (I see that as liability towards investors) is it about the absence of excellence (I see that as liability towards both Google and OpenAI) and there is the liability towards the readers or listeners of whoever they service. So this isn’t defamation, because in all, the media did nothing really wrong. But they sold us short whilst claiming they are there for us and they are not.

So is it me? Or is there is larger setting that is ignored by too many?

I know that some will not agree with me, but after the days of the Code Red, where are the media results of what OpenAI/Sam Altman produced? Not the same hundred words they all seemingly give us, but the real results, the real tests and the real impressions. I haven’t seen one result from them. Even with my limited knowledge (I never used ChatGPT) I could drum up a few tests in seconds and I would put both Gemini 3 and ChatGPT5.2 on the road. I could let them lose on a few of my articles and see what they both come up with and how long it takes them. Something EVERY baboon working in media (sorry, not sorry) could have come up with in mere seconds. Isn’t it lovely that they never came up with that? Think about that for a moment when they give you another runaround on Oracle, like Quartz ‘Oracle’s big AI dreams are freaking out Wall Street’ and Forbes with ‘Oracle Stock Down 14%. Why Higher Risk Makes $ORCL A Sell’ all whilst no one is looking at the true and real value of Oracle. No, the investors must be spooked (for whatever reason). So you all have a great day, we are nearly all in Saturday now and I am a mere 170 minutes away from Sunday. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

A Peter Sellers world

That is what hit me when I saw ‘How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bubble’ (source: Bloomberg) which comes from Dr Strangelove where we get “How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb” it started a larger set of thoughts. 

I didn’t use that article as Bloomberg uses a paywall. And it starts with yesterdays article in FXLeaders (at https://www.fxleaders.com/news/2025/12/07/oracles-ai-bubble-bursts-peak-glory-at-345-now-a-217-hangover/) where we see ‘Oracle’s AI Bubble Bursts: Peak Glory at $345, Now a $217 Hangover’ we are given “ORCL ended the week at $217.58, up 1.52 percent, but it still had a 37 percent hangover from its 52-week high of $345.72. This is a microcosm of growing concerns about debt loads, AI infrastructure spending, and whether the “infinite demand” narrative for AI compute can withstand real-world economics.” As well as “Oracle’s recent decline in stock value reflects broader market concerns regarding the high valuations of AI-related companies, as its forward price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio exceeds 33. The company projects revenues of $166 billion from cloud infrastructure and $20 billion. Investors adopted a “sell the news” mentality, raising questions about the sustainability of these forecasts. Oracle’s fundamentals remain solid. The company experienced  52% growth in cloud infrastructure and has $455 billion in remaining performance obligations (RPO), largely due to its partnership with OpenAI. Currently, the stock is trading at 13.9 times projected earnings for the end of this decade, leading some investors to view the decline as a potential buying opportunity.

As I see it Oracle passed their burst bubble setting. And whilst we see ups and downs, I would unreservedly trust the Oracle stock to be a beacon of steadiness. It might not be sexy, but it is a trustworthy sign for those who need a decent return on investment.

Or as Peter sellers would say:
As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden. Yes! There will be growth in the spring!” (Source: Being there) it was a better time and weirdly enough the age of Peter Sellers applies to the days that 2025 brings. And from that setting we get to MyNews (at https://sc.mp/ihj4g) where we see ‘Why 2026 will be the year AI hype collides with reality’ an opinion piece that gives me “The reckoning ahead for the AI bubble promises to reprice expectations, force economic trade-offs and call out circular deals” but the stronger setting is given with “Speculative assumptions guiding trillions of US dollars in AI investments are colliding with real-world obstacles. Escalating costs, stratospheric stock valuations, tenuous collaborations and energy bottlenecks are compounding the inevitable challenges when new technologies struggle for profitability. Many are worried the bubble may be bursting. Morgan Stanley projects that the cumulative amount spent worldwide on data centers could exceed US$3 trillion by year-end 2028. China’s AI investment could hit 700 billion yuan (US$99 billion) this year, 48 per cent more than last year, according to Bank of America, with the government supplying US$56 billion.” There is a setting for both ‘AI investments are colliding with real-world obstacles’ and ‘worldwide on data centers could exceed US$3 trillion by year-end 2028’ the weird feeling I have that it will not get this far, this entire setting will implode before the end of 2027, investors will stop feeling lovingly towards the boom that is not coming and will start feeling pressured that the terms required that will grow erratic setting for the need for greed and that is the setting that comes along long before 2027 is reached. 

Then we get to AOL who gives us (at https://www.aol.com/finance/goldman-sachs-issues-warning-ai-103249744.html) where we are given ‘Goldman Sachs issues a warning to AI stock investors’ where we are given ““Our discussions with investors and recent equity performance reveal limited appetite for companies with potential AI-enabled revenues as investors grapple with whether AI is a threat or opportunity for many companies. While we expect the AI trade will eventually transition to Phase 3, investors will likely require evidence of a tangible impact on near-term earnings to embrace these stocks. Unlike Phase 2, there will likely be winners and losers within Phase 3,” Goldman Sachs US equity strategist Ryan Hammond wrote in a new note on Friday. Hammond thinks AI investment as a percentage of capital expenditures could be nearing a climax. In turn, that sets the stage for overly upbeat AI investors to be let down if earnings don’t come in strongly in future quarters.” As I see it, when we are given these settings everyone seems to get concerned, so when we get in addition “Salesforce (CRM) and Figma (FIG) got drilled on Thursday after their earnings reports didn’t wow. It’s clear that the hype on their earnings calls wasn’t enough to paper over soft areas of the earnings reports. Growing concern on the Street centers around the pace of AI demand by corporations, given what looks to be a slowing US economy.” As I stated this before, the need for greed overwhelmed everything. When the setting of NIP (Near Intelligent Parsing) is not clearly laid out and it is caught in the waves of board of directors and Investors believing that they have the AI solution everyone is looking for you gets a larger setting, consider that and consider what happens when OpenAI “fails to wow” the investors, or even a delay and it all comes to a large shutdown and that is even before we see 9 News giving us “A Sydney data centre that will host ChatGPT is being hailed as a win for Australia, but an expert warns the country lacks the energy supply needed to power it reliably” I gave a few months ago that there would be an energy problem on numerous levels and now we are seeing that whilst we are dealing with the the fallout of other settings. And less than an hour ago Deutsche Welle gives us ‘Google raises AI stakes as OpenAI struggles to stay on top’  with “Given those strengths, Adrian Cox sees “a very high probability” Google will have the leading model at least into next year — not OpenAI. OpenAI’s priority, he says, is identifying a business model capable of funding a user base that could soon approach a billion people per week.” This is not about OpenAI, I did that already, the larger frame is set in the perception of whatever the bubble is and I believe that there are two factors that the media doesn’t want or is avoiding to include. First there are the doom sayers trying to early burst confidence in favor of short gains and then there are people trying to short on whatever they can so that they can get another jolt of profit and they are all out trying to set social media on their side. 

So if this is the prologue of what is about to unfold we are in for a jolly good time, and as I see it, there is a chance that Christmas for some will be a disaster.

I wanted to include more of Peter sellers, like the Party or the Pink Panther but I am running out of juice. But there was one more thing and I got it from the Independent about an hour ago. It states ‘OpenAI rushes out new AI model in ‘code red’ response to fears about Google’ (at https://ca.news.yahoo.com/openai-rushes-ai-model-code-105822611.html) that was the snippet I was hoping for. With “The ChatGPT creator will unveil GPT-5.2 this week, The Verge reported, after OpenAI CEO Sam Altman declared a “code red” situation following the launch of Google Gemini 3 last month. Google’s latest AI model surpassed ChatGPT in several benchmark tests, including abstract and visual reasoning, as well as advanced knowledge across scientific disciplines.” But that comes in a setting, you see, I stated in ‘TBD CEO OpenAI’ two days ago (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/12/06/tbd-ceo-openai/) “in a software release any of a hundred things can go wrong and they all need to go right at present.” And when things are rushed out things will go wrong. But there is a snag, for this to happen The Independent article had to be correct and as they are the only one giving us this, there is no real verification available. But when you are in a stage when bubbles go boom (or plop) all the available facts become important. And I massively wish that a Peter sellers setting would help me out. And perhaps in view of this, his classic phrase “It’s no matter. When you’ve seen one Stradivarius, you’ve seen them all.” Especially when looking at NIP software. But that is also the snag. I have seen excellent applications and I have seen lesser ones. I reckon that it amounts to who plays the violin, if it is a creative person that person will find new life in whatever that person. applies NIP to, if it is a salesperson it will be about maximizing greed and that setting tends to have limitations on several degrees. In addition we are given “The new model was originally scheduled to launch in late December, but will now be released as early as 9 December.” I understand the pressures that come with this but they better understand that early launch bring dangers and investors don’t really like to be spooked (they also don’t like them) What we see is open to interpretation and it is a valid thought that my views are also open to interpretation. 

So in this I leave you all with a presenting view not unlike Peter sellers would say “To see me as a person on screen would be one of the dullest experiences you could ever wish to experience” and 

As you I have never been in a movie (at least I don’t remember being in one) you are spared that dull experience. So have a great day and don’t forget to love the bubble (if you haven’t invested your wealth there).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

TBD CEO OpenAI 

That is the thought I had, yesterday, 5 hours after I wrote my piece, I still saw the news appear all over the media, some on it was getting a ridiculous amount of attention, so I decided to take another look at some of this. First there was the Business insider (at https://www.businessinsider.com/openai-code-red-chatgpt-advertising-google-search-gemini-2025-12) giving us ‘OpenAI’s Code Red: Protect the loop, delay the loot’ where we see “Focus on improving ChatGPT, and pause lower-priority initiatives. The most striking pause is advertising. Why delay such a lucrative opportunity at a moment when OpenAI’s finances face intense scrutiny? Because in tech, nothing matters more than users.” This was followed by “Every query and click fed a feedback loop: user behavior informed ranking systems, which improved results, which attracted more users. Over time, that loop became an impenetrable moat. Competing with it has proven nearly impossible.

ChatGPT occupies a similar position for AI assistants. Nearly a billion people now interact with it weekly, giving OpenAI an unmatched new window into human intent, curiosity, and decision-making. Each prompt and reply can be fed back into model training, evaluations, and reinforcement learning to strengthen what is arguably the world’s most powerful AI feedback loop.” All this makes sense, it comes with the nearly mandatory “Google’s Gemini 3 rollout has lured new users. If ChatGPT’s quality slips or feels cluttered, defecting to Google becomes easier. Introducing ads now risks exactly that. Even mildly irritated users could view ads as one annoyance too many.” Whilst in the background we are ‘sensitive’ to “OpenAI has already committed to spending hundreds of billions of dollars on infrastructure to serve ChatGPT at a global scale. At some point, those bills will force the company to monetize more aggressively.

If OpenAI manages to build even half of Google’s Search ads business in an AI-native form, it could generate roughly $50 billion in annual profit. That’s one way to fund its colossal ambitions.” This gives OpenAI a two sided blade in the back. It was a good ploy, but that ploy is deemed to be counter productive and I get that, but dropping the ads might sting with the investors as It was the dimes that they were seeing coming their way and ChatGPT needs to make a smooth entry all the way to the next update, which will be near impossible to avoid in several ways. Google has the inside track now and whilst there are a few settings that are ‘malleable’ for the users, the smooth look is essential for ChatGPT to continue. And that is before other start looking at the low quality data it verifies against. Google has, as I see it, exactly the same problem, but as I see it, ChatGPT gets it now in advance. 

Newcomer (at https://www.newcomer.co/p/openais-code-red-shows-the-power) gives us “In truth, as Newcomer’s Tom Dotan wrote back in April, Google, with all of its formidable assets, was never very far behind. Nor is it currently very far ahead. Anthropic too has always been essentially neck-and-neck with OpenAI on the core technology. The capabilities of the big foundation models, and even some lighter ones like DeepSeek, are broadly similar. Marc Benioff, himself a skilled practitioner in the arts of attention, even claimed this week that the big models will be interchangeable commodities, like disk drives. Yet the perception of who’s on top matters quite a lot at a moment when consumers, enterprise technology buyers, and investors are all deciding where to place some highly consequential long-term bets. That brings us back to Altman’s “Code Red.”” Is a truth in itself, but the next part “while the alarm came in a company-wide memo that wasn’t officially announced publicly, we can stipulate that the “leak” of the memo, if not necessarily orchestrated, was almost certainly part of the plan. A media maestro like Altman surely knew that a memo going out to thousands of employees with charged language like “Code Red” was all but guaranteed to make its way to the press. Publicizing a panicked internal reaction to a competitor’s new product might seem like a counter-intuitive way to maintain your reputation as the industry leader.” As I see it, someone in Microsoft marketing earned his dollars in marketing that day, but this is a personal feeling, I have no data to back it up. It is now up to Sam Altman to deliver his ‘new’ version in the coming week and it better the a great new release, or as I see it, there will be heads rolling all over the floor and Sam Altman knows that the pressure is up. I don’t think he is scared as some media says, but he is definitely worried, because this setting will set the record of $13 billion straight, into or away from Microsoft and Sam Altman knows this, as such he is probably a little worried and in a software release any of a hundred things can go wrong and they all need to go right at present. 

Then we get “Altman and OpenAI are so good at making news that it’s sometimes hard to tell what’s real.” So, isn’t that the setting all the time? I have always seen Sam Altman as a bad second hands car salesman, That is my take, but I have had a healthy disgust for salespeople for over 30 years. I am a service person, Technical support, customer support. That was always my field. I am not against sales, merely against cleaning up their messes. At times this comes with the territory, shit happens, but those salespeople overselling something just so that they can fill their pipeline and make their numbers are not acceptable to me. To illustrate this, A little setting (devoid of names and brands) “A salesperson came to me with what he needed. We could not do that and I told him, so off he goes calling every technical support person on the planet until he found one that agreed with him and then he sold the solution to the customer and hung that persona name on this. I had to clean up the mess and set up a credit invoice, but after I went through the whole 9 yards making it over 30 days ensuring him that he kept his commission” that is the type I am disgusted with because the brands as a whole suffers, all for the need of greed. It is short sighted thinking. I goes nowhere, but his monthly revenue was guaranteed. And I feel that Sam Altman is not completely like that, but it is the ‘offset’ of salespeople that I carry within me. For me protecting the product and the customer are first and foremost on my mind. 

Then we get Futurism (at https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/openai-is-suddenly-in-major-trouble) where we see ‘OpenAI Is Suddenly in Major Trouble’ OK, is this true? We are given “The financial stakes are almost comical in their magnitude: The company is lighting billions of dollars on fire, with no end in sight; it’s committed to spending well over $1 trillion over the next several years while simultaneously losing a staggering sum each quarter. And revenues are lagging far behind, with the vast majority of ChatGPT users balking at the idea of paying for a subscription.” I don’t agree with this setting. You either pay, or you see advertisement that is the setting. There are no free rides and the sooner you realise this, the easier this gets. Then we are given “Meanwhile, Google has made major strides, quickly catching up with OpenAI’s claimed 800 million or so weekly active ChatGPT users as of September. Worse yet, Google is far better positioned to turn generative AI into a viable business — all while minting a comfortable $30 billion in profit each quarter, as the Washington Post points out.” I agree with the setting the Washington Post sets out with and Google does have an advantage, but that is still relying on the fact that Sam Altman does not get his new version seen as stellar in the coming week. He still has a much larger issue, but that is for later. All this comes at the price of being in the frontrunner team. Easy does it, there is no other way and the stakes are set rather high. So then we are given “In a Thursday note, Deutsche Bank analyst Jim Reid estimated staggering losses for OpenAI amounting to $140 billion between 2024 and 2029.” This is probably true, but where are the numbers. $140 billion over 5 years is one, but what revenue is set against it? Because if this is still set against a revenue number that OpenAI keeps making they are going decently sweet, the numbers were never in debate, the return on investment was and these stakes are high and there is no debating that, these numbers are either given or they are not. 

Then we are given something that makes sense ““OpenAI may continue to attract significant funding and could ultimately develop products that generate substantial profits and revolutionize the world,” he wrote, as quoted by WaPo. “But at present, no start-up in history has operated with expected losses on anything approaching this scale.” “We are firmly in uncharted territory,” Reid added.” I agree, in several ways, but the revenue is not given as such the real deal is absent. Consider YouTube, did anyone see the upside of a $1.65 billion acquisition 20 years ago? It now generates $36.1 billion in annual revenue (2024), Microsoft and OpenAI are banking on that same setting and Microsoft needs it to get a quality replacement for Clippy and they are banking on ChatGPT, this will only happen if they win over Google and I have my doubts on this. There is no real evidence because the new version isn’t ready yet, but it really needs one hitch to make it all burn down and Altman knows this. The numbers or better, the statistics are not on his side. And as I haven’t see a decent software price fight for a while, so I am keeping my thumbs up for Altman (I am however a through and through Google guy). This is a worthy fight watching and I am wondering how this might evolves over the next week.

The stakes are high, the challenge is high, lets see if Sam Altman rises to the occasion. It’s almost Sunday for me so have a great day you all, I reckon that Ryan Reynolds is about 6 hours from breakfast in Vancouver now.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

The rockstar wannabe

There is a setting we at times ignore. When so called ‘important’ people hide behind movie settings like Sam Altman is when he calls for ‘Code Red’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/dec/02/sam-altman-issues-code-red-at-openai-as-chatgpt-contends-with-rivals) I tend to get frisky and a little stir crazy, but as we see the Guardian, we are given “According to a report by tech news site the Information, the chief executive of the San Francisco-based startup told staff in an internal memo: “We are at a critical time for ChatGPT.”

OpenAI has been rattled by the success of Google’s latest AI model, Gemini 3, and is devoting more internal resources to improving ChatGPT. Last month, Altman told employees that the launch of Gemini 3, which has outperformed rivals on various benchmarks, could create “temporary economic headwinds” for the company. He added: “I expect the vibes out there to be rough for a bit.”” So after all the presentations and the posturing by OpenAI’s CEO Sam Altman, we are now confronted that the CEO of Google, Sundar Pichai smirking and devouring a Beef Vindaloo with naan bread casually passed Sam Altman by and overtook his setting of ChatGPT with Gemini 3. 

We are given “Marc Benioff, the chief executive of the $220bn (£166bn) software group Salesforce, wrote last month that he had switched allegiance to Gemini 3 and was “not going back” after trying Google’s latest AI release. “I’ve used ChatGPT every day for 3 years. Just spent 2 hours on Gemini 3. I’m not going back. The leap is insane – reasoning, speed, images, video … everything is sharper and faster. It feels like the world just changed, again,” he wrote on X.” And if a BI guy like Marc Benioff makes that jump, a lot of others will do too and that is what is truly frightening to Microsoft who owns a little below 30% of all this, it is nice to have a DML solution that has a population of zero, OK, not zero but ridiculously small because as ever (and not surprising) Google is showing his brilliance and overtook the wannabe.

So whilst Sam Altman decided that he was the next Elon Musk we see (at https://gizmodo.com/sam-altman-wants-his-own-rocket-company-2000695680) that ‘Sam Altman Wants His Own Rocket Company’ and we see here “Altman was reportedly considering investing billions into Stoke Space, a Seattle-based startup that’s developing a reusable rocket, to gain a controlling stake in the company, according to The Wall Street Journal. The talks between Altman and Stoke took place over the summer and picked up in the fall. Although no deal has been made yet, Altman intended on either buying or partnering with a rocket company so that he would be able to deploy AI data centers to space.” So whilst Sammy the Oldman, sorry Sam Altman was turning his focus towards space Sundar Pichai surpassed him in the DML field because Sundar, beside his need for Beef Vindaloo was seemingly focussed on the Data matters of Google, allegedly not with his head in space.

And now we see (at https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/sam-altman-code-red) that ‘Sam Altman Is Suddenly Terrified’ and now we are given “The all-out brawl that followed in the subsequent years, with AI companies trying to outdo each other with their own offerings as investors threw tens of billions of dollars at the tech, has shifted the dynamics considerably.

And now, the tables have officially turned: OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has declared his own “code red” in a memo to employees this week, as the Wall Street Journal reports, urging staffers to improve the quality of the company’s blockbuster chatbot, even at the cost of delaying other projects.” So as I see it, Sam Altman was ready to be the next rockstar of Microsoft surpassing all others, but Google (say Sundar Pichai) had been sitting on a throne for the better part of two decades, they had relented the Console war (their Google Stadia) towards Amazon with the Amazon Luna. And that might have been a sore loss. So when another ‘upstart’ comes with a great idea, Google recounts and Gemini was the result, or that is at least how I see it. And by the time version three was ready, Gemini was back in the lead or so they say.

So now Sam Altman is in a bind, he needs to evolve ChatGPT and that might have been be in what some call a pickle, so whilst Sam Altman was looking at the sky, Google took the time to overtake Sam Altman with Gemini 3. And now the storm has reached the shores of the financial industry. Now Microsoft is in a pickle, because the OpenAI is now due to the investment marked the start of a partnership between the cloud computing firm and the AI research company that has since grown to more than US$13bn in total commitments. Microsoft and OpenAI are bound to ChatGPT to the nihilistic setting of these firms losing 13 billion in value, so when that happens, what more will unfold? I am not stating that this will burst the AI bubble, but as I see it Sam Altman will see his halo decrease looking a lot like a zero, and Microsoft sees the tally of failures increase to two, first builder.ai, now we see that Microsoft is surpassed again by Google, which is not a great surprise to me. 

And as Futurism gives us “Google, though, has a major financial advantage by already being profitable. It can afford to spend aggressively on data centers, at least for the time being. That’s besides Google Search having been the de facto search engine on the internet for decades, giving it access to a vast number of existing users who could be swayed by its AI offerings.

Altman claimed in the memo that the company has an ace up its sleeve in the form of an even more powerful reasoning model that’s set to be released as early as next week, according to the WSJ, likely a direct response to Google’s Gemini 3.” So is this a simple setting of a little time gap, or is OpenAI now in more trouble than anyone think it is? I actually do not know, but there is a setting that I personally like. I was always Google minded. I was struck in my soul when they dropped the Google Stadia as I had a plan to give it 50,000,000 subscriptions in stage one and rally add to that beyond that, knocking Microsoft of its illusionary perch. But alas, it was not to be and Amazon had the inside track from that point inwards. And I personally feel that the stage of “to be released as early as next week” is likely want-to-be-real presentation, Sam Altman is trying to get any moment he can get and that is fine, but as I see it, it might be timing and people like Sam Altman will try to get any way to keep their cushy setting. I am not judging, but the stage that Gemini 3 is surpassed is likely, will it be? I doubt it, using the words from Marc Benioff stating “not going back” and that is a powerful setting, one that creeps fear into the hearts of Sam Altman and Satya Nadella as I personally see it.

Have a great day, my weekend has begun and Vancouver will join us in 15 hours.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Science

Aftermath

That is a setting I never really contemplated, but the Guardian did and they did a terrific job, they even had a reference to the 49’ers, which will make Jeremy Renner happy. The article ‘The question isn’t whether the AI bubble will burst – but what the fallout will be’ by Eduardo Porter (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/dec/01/ai-bubble-us-economy) hands us a few sides, a few I never considered as I was looking at the techno stuff, but here we see: “300,000 people flocked there from 1848 to 1855, from as far away as the Ottoman Empire. Prospectors massacred Indigenous people to take the gold from their lands in the Sierra Nevada mountains. And they boosted the economies of nearby states and faraway countries from whence they bought their supplies.” 

Which gives root to the expression 49’er and it continues giving us “Gold provided the motivation for California – a former Mexican territory then controlled by the US military – to become a state with laws of its own. And yet, few “49ers” as prospectors were known, struck it rich. It was the merchants selling prospectors food and shovels who made the money. One, a Bavarian immigrant named Levi Strauss who sold denim overalls to the gold bugs passing through San Francisco, may be the most remembered figure of his day.” 

And then we get the first sliver “How else to explain Nvidia’s stock price, which more than doubled from April to November, based entirely on the expectation, nay hope, that AI will produce a super-intelligence that can do everything humans do but better. Nvidia – like Levi Strauss back in the day – is at least selling something: computer chips. The valuations of many of the other AI plays – like Open AI or Anthropic – are based largely on the dream.” 

But there is a missing cog, this technology needs dat storage and that is where I saw the failing of others and the failings of those overlooking data technologies. Oracle is intrinsically connected to that, Azure needs it, Snowflake prefers it and pretty much every data vendor is connecting to Oracle to get it all done in the background, and that is the sliver. Oracle is intrinsically connected to it all and it is the tamer of the data beast or better stated the data demon. As Oracle brings out tools and optionally data settings within their AI storage settings to handle validation and verification, all others will need to adhere better and deeper to the Oracle foundation to even survive. Pretty much all the sources that see the dangers of what some call AI and is clearly nothing better than a DML/LLM engine will see that these two elements are essential to get the LLM engine to do anything that matters and that is where the bonus of Oracle currently resides (as I presumptuously see it) To show this, I will take you back to 1984

User comments

See here, this is what chess computer’s looked like. You press the chess piece you want to move and you push the square where it lands. That is the foundation of the chess computer. In the ‘underground’ of that chessboard are (figuratively speaking) two chips. One had the knowledge of chess, the second chip (mainly memory) has every chess match known to mankind (basically all games all grandmasters have ever played), the program sees what moves are made and that setting is translated to a ‘position base’ and it will look at all the matches who it can foresee what moves are coming. This is great for the player, as it now needs to make an illogical move to throw over the thinking of the computer and make it their bitch. This was pretty much the fist stage of Machine Learning and as todays computers are more clever, there resolution is no way better, It can only set foundation of what it learned, that is the simplicity of knowing that AI doesn’t yet exist.

So back to the story “As I pointed out in my last column about AI, Gita Gopinath, former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, calculated that a stock market crash equivalent to that which ended the dot-com boom would erase some $20tn in American household wealth and another $15tn abroad, enough to strangle consumer spending and induce a recession.” And I have no way of knowing that setting, but as I see it, like Levi Strauss and the makers of bubbles (like in image one) someone has to supply the soap water and more important the jeans to not put once ass out to frolic and in that second setting Oracle comes in and even as I see the ‘panic drivers, saying that Oracle is dangerous’, there is another setting. Whatever comes out of this, whatever survives, most only survives on Oracle solutions. And that is what is left unspoken. Should Oracle add the Validation and Verification tables, they will be the only one raking in the gold when True AI comes, because it is not merely the missing part I discussed earlier, someone needs to set the record straight on what is optionally to be trusted and that is where Oracle sets the mark.

Which leads to “AI could produce a similar landscape. A critical determinant is how much debt is at stake. It wouldn’t be such a problem if the bubble were financed largely from the cash pile of Alphabet and Amazon, Microsoft and Facebook. They might lose their shirt, but who cares. The worrying bit is that it seems they are increasingly relying on borrowing, which means the prospect of a bursting bubble would again put the financial system at risk.” These systems are using the data as currency, as I see it, Oracle is putting its technology up for usage and that is a pretty safe way to do this. This is whyI have faith in Oracle, that is why I see Oracle as the one surviving the goldfish like a champion, because they are doing what Levi Strauss did. These data vendors are relying on data to clothe them, but if that data is not properly managed, they end up having nothing. Yes, Microsoft will survive, but at a level that is likely 2 trillion lower than it is now. And that is mainly because it wanted to be on top of things and they got (I think it was) 24% of OpenAI, but as that bursts, Sam Altman will have even less than I have now (and I am ridiculously poor) and that cargo train of debt will hit Microsoft square in the face, Oracle will get some damage, but not nearly as much and the world will need their data solutions. Why do you think everyone wants to connect to Oracle? It is the Rolls Royce of data collecting and data storage. And that is perhaps the only issue with that article, there is zero mention of Oracle.

So as we get “Big Tech has raised nearly $250bn in debt so far this year, according to Bloomberg, a record. Analysts at Morgan Stanley suggest that debt will be needed to fill a $1.5tn funding gap to ramp up spending on data centers and hardware. Problematically, it is getting hard to follow the money, as Nvidia, Open AI and others in the ecosystem buy into each other, clouding who, in the end, will be left holding the bag.” And there is one think wrong with this. Stargate is said to be $500bn, so there is a gap in all this and I reckon that the damage will be significantly worse, that is beside the small non mentioned fact that America at present has 5,427 data centers, how many of them and to what degree are they all set to ‘their version of AI’? So what is set in what some call Blue Owl solutions (like Meta) and what happens when those solutions ‘bubble out’ (collapse might be a better phrase) so when that happens, how much damage will that bring, because as I see it (not wearing glasses) the $1.5tn funding gap won’t even be close what is required. But that is just me speculating, so feel free to (I insist) that you get your own verifiable numbers. I reckon that between now and 2029 the return of a backlogged $4 trillion return on investment is required. So taking “a banks perspective”, an inaccurately amount of $292,500,000,000 in revenue needs to be shown for that bubble not to come and that is out of the question, but the setting that Eduardo Porter gives us, is what comes next and he gives it to us as “the Superhuman – can only come about by dropping LLMs – which are essentially massive correlation engines – and switching to something else called a world model architecture, where machines develop a “mental” model of the outside world.” It is a nice sentiment, but I do not completely agree with that. Correlation engines have their use and there is use in a DML/LLM setting, but identify it as such, not claim ‘AI does it’. Because it won’t and it can’t, but there are options in Oracle to upgrade the data you have and that is instrumental in surviving this bubble burst. And I have seen the folly in several places and that might set a better station down the road, because when true AI cones, it still needs data and if that data was managed, validated and verified in Oracle (preferably), half the war of that solution bringer is solved. 

So I need a different hobby, slapping Microsoft and AI evangelists is nice, almost a public service but I need a new idea for gaming IP, because that makes me happy and I like feeling happy. So whilst some think that “Nvidia, Open AI and others in the ecosystem buy into each other” is the hard core evil stuff (and it might be) there is a setting it reminds me of, it was in the 90’s and these ‘consultants’ were all into the need of funny money in the form of assignments, the issue was that when they had to show results they immediately took another job and took their ‘knowhow’ to greener shores and all the time this happened the shores were all becoming less and less green. This has the flair of that setting and to some degree the feel. 

I might be wrong on that last part, but that is what I feel on this, especially as the big players are buying into each others solution and handing each other pieces of paper that in the end has as much value as a roll off toilet paper.

It might not be eloquently phrased, but there is a time for that and this is not it, as speculated shit is about to hit the walls and if you are lucky it happens after Christmas (that is almost certain) but in the end, the invoice is due and that is where the CFO’s will show that as they embraced the Blue Owl solution, their company is saved. I would depend on and side with whatever Oracle has, it is not based on facts, it is a feeling and that feeling is strong at present. And in support I see (9 minutes ago) ‘Ooredoo Qatar announces strategic partnership with Oracle to deploy Oracle Alloy sovereign cloud and AI platform’, they didn’t go towards Microsoft, AWS of a few other settings, they trust Oracle and that is what plenty of others need to do.

Have a great day, I am now 8 hours from midweek, not a bad deal for me today and as the sun is shining brightly, I might hide in a winterly Hogsmeade whilst playing Hogwarts Legacy. Gaming is not a bad hobby to have in this case. Because the bubble is out of my control and I am happy to watch it all explode a day later (of whenever that is), most of the garnish news has been drowned out by real news at that point.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Science

It’s starting to happen.

This is a decently great day for me. The BBC, gave me ‘news’ that shows that I was right all along (one of many times), of course that is a debatable setting, but it comes with benefits for me. You see, on November 9th 2024 I wrote ‘The easy lesson’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/11/09/the-easy-lesson/) and some disagreed, some always do. But I saw the potential of that device and I wrote about it, I also gave the direct setting that Ubisoft could benefit greatly from this. Now the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/reel/video/p0mjvr33/experience-life-aboard-the-titanic-like-never-before) shows us all a different approach to that same solution. It allows the people to see life abroad the Titanic (that one that sank in 1912) and it looks nice and spiffy, I think it could be better, but this might have been a beta. I reckon that under Unreal Engine 5 it becomes truly magic, but that takes serious cash to develop and that might have been out of reach (for now), but the important part is that this is being implemented now. After Apple lost his marbles and thoughts for innovation, Meta with the Meta Quest 3 is all that remains and they have the setting to sweep the board. I reckon that they will optionally make a few side ventures or buy the Stadia, but then the entire solution will be under the hands of Meta (say: Facebook) a setting I saw a year ago and now as things are starting to move, those claiming to be innovators are left in the rubble of their own spin. As I see it, it is about to become a clear win for Meta and others could benefit too. 

They merely need to talk to Ubisoft and see what is possible, and that comes with a massive influx of revenue, so whilst all the winner (soon to be losers) are aiming for AI, other settings are developing and they are left in the field looking for their golf balls in the mud. So whilst others are trying to reinvent the wheel, there are a small numbers of people who are starting actual innovative waves.

People like Karl Blake-Garcia are setting new boundaries. Personally I never thought of the Titanic in that way and that makes it wondrous. Others are on the same shoes as I am, but see different applications and that is fantastic. In that meantime He saw the idea of a ship and he might have been influenced by James Cameron and that is OK. I saw the implementation of languages and the teaching vibes the world needs and that is OK too, I also saw an implementation (in the pre dump Apple Vision Pro days) where Apple had options and saw a game as well, but it seems that Meta has all the marbles in its corner now. I wonder if Ubisoft is making the jump from games to education, but that might be asking for too much, someone needs to talk to Yves Guillemot and Mark Zuckerberg is the most likely person he wants to talk to. 

The important part is that the world is looking into the AI corner (the one that doesn’t exist yet) and they are wondering when it is coming, all whist the realist are stating that there is no real revenue coming before 2028, which is nice but the interest on 4 trillion dollars will be due at some point before that. Still as we are shown “Over the next decade, Auto-ML will become even more user-friendly and accessible, allowing people to create high-performing AI models quickly without specialized expertise. Cloud-based AI services will also provide businesses with prebuilt AI models that can be customized, integrated and scaled as needed.” Over the next decade? That will bring it to 2035 and I’ll most likely be dead at that point. Thank the lord that people like Karl Blake-Garcia (and myself too) exist who are looking to alternative money makers, preferably venues not dependent on AI. Its too bad that Apple wasted all that time and effort without looking forward. But still Meta saw this venue and now while some wait for the Meta Quest 4, the previous generation is ready now and the systems are being adjusted to future that solution. To the best of my knowledge there are close to a billion people ready to globally start learning languages and that solution could soon be shown to classrooms and homeschoolers. Innovation is all in the mind and where it takes you. No AI was required. The real AI is between your own two ears, time to use it to show others what is possible.

So when others are seeing that there is a marker in Data validation and Data verification the BI industry might open up to a much larger field, we can only hope so because if I have to read another produced article on shipping where we see “standard deviation is a statistical measure of how spread out a set of data is from its mean (average)”, whilst the actual setting is “the difference between true North and magnetic North” I am gonna bloody lose it. And it could have been avoided if Data verification was actually working, but shipping is so out of touch with reality, isn’t it?

So whilst some might see this as a excellent setting to see what the Titanic actually looked like, there is a tidal wave of applications coming into that realm, I wonder who is seeing the options to innovate.

Have a great day, and as I see it, taking the plane (especially an airbus) might have its own lack of innovative applications according to some. So have a safe flight.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Science

And Grok ploughed on

That happens, but after yesterdays blog ‘The sound of war hammers’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/11/27/the-sound-of-war-hammers/) I got a little surprise. I could not have I want to planned it better.

You see, the article is about the AI bubble and a few other settings. So at times, I want Grok to take a look. No matter what you think, it tends to be a decent solution in DML and I reckon that Elon Musk with his 500,000 million (sounds more impressive then $500B) has sunk a pretty penny in this solution. I have seen a few shortcomings, but overall a decent solution. As I personally see it (for as far as I have seen it) that solution has a problem looking into and through multidimensional viewpoints. That is how I usually take my writing as I am overwhelmed at times with the amount of documentation I go through on a daily basis. As such I got a nice surprise yesterday.

So the story goes of with war hammers (a hidden stage there) then I go into the NPR article and I end up with the stage of tourism (the cost as the Oxford Economics report gives us) and I am still digging into that. But what does Grok give me?

The expert mode gives us:

Now, in the article I never mentioned FIFA, the 2026 World Cup or Saudi Arabia, so how did this program come to this? Check out the blog, none of those elements were mentioned there. As some tell us Grok is a generative artificial intelligence (generative AI) chatbot developed by xAI. So where is that AI program now? This is why I made mention in previous blogs that 2026 will be the year that the class actions will start. In my case, I do not care and my blog is not that important, even if it was, it was meant for actual readers (the flesh and blood kind) and that does not apply to Grok. I have seen a few other issues, but this yesterday and in light of the AI bubble story yesterday (17 hours ago) pushed this to the forefront. I could take ‘offense’ to the “self-styled “Law Lord to be”” but whatever and I have been accused of a lot worse by actual people too. And the quote “this speculation to an unusual metaphor of “war hammers”” shows that Grok didn’t see through my ruse either (making me somewhat proud), which is ego caressing at best, but I have an ego, I merely don’t let it out to often (it tends to get a little too frisky with details) and at present I see an idea that both the UAE and Saudi Arabia could use in their entertainment. There is an upgrade for Trojena (as I see it), there are a few settings for the Abu Dhabi Marina as well. All in a days work, but I need to content with data to see how that goes. And I tend to take my ideas into a sifter to get the best materials as fine as possible, but that was today, so there will be more coming soon enough. 

But what do you do when an AI system bleeds information from other sources? Especially when that data is not validated or verified and both seem to be the case here. As I see it, there is every chance that some will direct these AI systems to give the wrong data so that these people can start class actions. I reckon that not too many people are considering this setting, especially those in harms way. And that is the setting that 2026 is likely to bring. And as I see it, there will be too many law firm of the ambulance chaser kind to ignore this setting. That is the effect that 8 figure class actions tend to bring and with the 8 figure number I am being optimistic. When I see what is possible there is every chance that any player in this field is looking at 9 or even 10 figure settlements, especially when it concerns medical data. And no matter what steps these firms make, there will be an ambulance chaser who sees a hidden opportunity. Even if there is a second tier option where a Cyber attack can launch the data into a turmoil, those legal minds will make a new setting where those AI firms never considered the implications that it could happen.

I am not being dramatic or overly doom speaking. I have seen enough greed all around me to see that this will happen. A mere three months ago we saw “The “Commonwealth Bank AI lawsuit” refers to a dispute where the Finance Sector Union (FSU) challenged CBA for misleading staff about job cuts related to an AI chatbot implementation. The bank initially made 45 call centre workers redundant but later reversed the decision, calling it a mistake after the union raised concerns at the Fair Work Commission. The case highlighted issues of transparency, worker support, and the handling of job displacement due to AI.” So at that point, how dangerous is the setting that any AI is trusted to any degree? And that is before some board of directors sets the term that these AI investments better pay off and that will cause people to do silly (read: stupid) things. A setting that is likely to happen as soon as next year. 

And at this time, Grok is merely ploughing on and set the stage where someone will trust it to make life changing changes to their firm, or data and even if it is not Grok, there is all the chances that OpenAI will do that and that puts Microsoft in a peculiar stage of vulnerable.

Have a great day, time for some ice cream, it was 33 degrees today, so my living room is hot as hell, as such ice cream is my next stage of cooling myself.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

The sound of war hammers

It is a specific sound, nothing compares to that and it isn’t entirely fictional. Some might remember the Walter Hill movie Streets of Fire (1984) where two men slug it out with hammers, but that is not it. When a Warhammer slams into metal armor, the armor becomes a drum and that sound is heard all over the battlefield (the wearer of that armour hears a lot more than that sound) but is distinct and I reckon that some of those hammer wielders would have created some kind of crescendo on these knights. So that was ‘ringing’ in my ears when NPR gave us ‘Here’s why concerns about an AI bubble are bigger than ever’ a few days ago (at https://www.npr.org/2025/11/23/nx-s1-5615410/ai-bubble-nvidia-openai-revenue-bust-data-centers) and what will you know. They made the same mistake, but we’ll get to that.

The article reads quite nicely and Bobby Allyn did a good job (beside the one miss) but lets get to the starting blocks. It starts with “A frothy time for Huang, to be sure, which makes it all the more understandable why his first statement to investors on a recent earnings call was an attempt to deflate bubble fears. “There’s been a lot of talk about an AI bubble,” he told shareholders. “From our vantage point, we see something very different.”” So then we get three different names all giving ‘their’ point of view with ““The idea that we’re going to have a demand problem five years from now, to me, seems quite absurd,” said prominent Silicon Valley investor Ben Horowitz, adding: “if you look at demand and supply and what’s going on and multiples against growth, it doesn’t look like a bubble at all to me.” Appearing on CNBC, JPMorgan Chase executive Mary Callahan Erdoes said calling the amount of money rushing into AI right now a bubble is “a crazy concept,” declaring that “we are on the precipice of a major, major revolution in a way that companies operate.” Yet a look under the hood of what’s really going on right now in the AI industry is enough to deliver serious doubt, said Paul Kedrosky, a venture capitalist who is now a research fellow at MIT’s Institute for the Digital Economy.” All three names give a nice ‘presentation’ to appease the rumblings within an investor setting. Ben Horowitz, Mary Callahan Erdoes and Paul Kedrosky are seemingly mindset on raking in whatever they can and then the fourth shines a light on this (not in the way he intended) we see “Take OpenAI, the ChatGPT maker that set off the AI race in late 2022. Its CEO Sam Altman has said the company is making $20 billion in revenue a year, and it plans to spend $1.4 trillion on data centers over the next eight years. That growth, of course, would rely on ever-ballooning sales from more and more people and businesses purchasing its AI services.” Did you see the setting. He is making 20 billion and investing $1.4 trillion, now that represents a larger slice and the 20 billion is likely to make more (perhaps even 100 billion a year. And now the sides of hammers are slamming into armour. That still will take 14 years to break even and does anyone have any idea how long 14 years is and I reckon that $1.4 trillion represents (at 4.5%) implies that the interest is $63,000,000,000. That is almost the a year of revenue and that is the hopefully glare if he is making 100 billion a year. So what gives with this, because at some point investors make the setting that the formula is off. There is no tax deductibility. That is money that is due, the banks will get their dividend and whomever thinks that all this goes at zero percent is ludicrously asleep and that is before the missing element comes out. 

So then in comes Daron Acemoglu with “A growing body of research indicates most firms are not seeing chatbots affect their bottom lines, and just 3% of people pay for AI, according to one analysis. “These models are being hyped up, and we’re investing more than we should,” said Daron Acemoglu, an economist at MIT, who was awarded the 2024 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences.” He comes at this from another angle and gives us that we are investing more than we should. All these firms are seeing the pot at the end of the rainbow, but there is the hidden snag, we learned early in life that the rainbow is the result of sunlight on rainwater and it is always curves t be ‘just’ beyond the horizon and it never hits the ground and there will be no pot of gold at the end of it according to Lucky the Leprechaun (I have his fax number) but that was not the side I am aiming for, but it gives the idiocy we see at present. They are all investing too much into something that does not yet exist, but that is beside the point. There are massive options for DML and LLM solutions, but do you think that this is worth trillions? It follows when we get to “Nonetheless, Amazon, Google, Meta and Microsoft are set to collectively sink around $400 billion on AI this year, mostly for funding data centers. Some of the companies are set to devote about 50% of their current cash flow to data center construction.

Or to put it another way: every iPhone user on earth would have to pay more than $250 to pay for that amount of spending. “That’s not going to happen,” Kedrosky said.” This comes from Paul Kedrosky, a venture capitalist who is now a research fellow at MIT’s Institute for the Digital Economy, and he is right. But that too is not the angle I am going for. But there are two voices, both in their field of vision, something they know and they are seeing the edges of what cannot be contained, one even got a Nobel Memorial Prize for his efforts (past accomplishment) And I reckon all these howling bitches want their government to ‘safe’ them when the bough breaks on these waves. So Andy Jassy, Sundar Pichai, Mark Zuckerberg and Satya Nadella (Amazon, Google, Meta and Microsoft) will expect the tax system to bail them out and there is no real danger to them, they might get fired but they’ll survive this. Andy Jassy is as far as I know the poorest of the lot and he has 500 million, so he will survive in whatever place he has. But that is the danger. The investors and the taxpayers (you and me) get to suffer from this greed filled frenzy. 

But then we get “Analyst Gil Luria of the D.A. Davidson investment firm, who has been tracking Big Tech’s data center boom, said some of the financial maneuvers Silicon Valley is making are structured to keep the appearance of debt off of balance sheets, using what’s known as “special purpose vehicles.””, as well as “The tech firm makes an investment in the data center, outside investors put up most of the cash, then the special purpose vehicle borrows money to buy the chips that are inside the data centers. The tech company gets the benefit of the increased computing capacity but it doesn’t weigh down the company’s balance sheet with debt.” And here we get another failure. It is the failure of the current administration that does not adapt the tax laws to shore up whatever they have for whatever no one has and that is the larger stakeholder in this. We get this in an example in the article stating “Blue Owl Capital and Meta for a data center in Louisiana”, this is only part of the equation. You see, they are ’spreading the love’ around because that is the ‘safe’ setting and they know what comes next. You see the Verge gave us ‘Nvidia says some AI GPUs are ‘sold out,’ grows data center business by $10B in just three months’ (at https://www.theverge.com/tech/824111/nvidia-q3-2026-earnings-data-center-revenue) and that is the first part of the equation. What do you think will power all this? That is the angle I am holding onto. All these data centers will need energy and they will take it away from the people like you and me. And only 4 hours ago we see ‘Nvidia plays down Google chip threat concerns’ and it is all about the AI race, which is as I said non-existent, but the energy required to field these hundreds of thousands of GPU’s is and no one is making a table of what is required to fuel these data centers because it is not on ‘their plate’ but the need for energy becomes real and really soon too. We do not have the surplus to take care of this and when places like Texas give us “Electricity demand is also going up, with much of it concentrated in Texas due to “data centers and cryptocurrency mining facilities,”” with the added “Driving the rise in wholesale prices next year is primarily a projected 45% increase at the Electric Reliability Council of Texas-North pricing hub. “Natural gas prices tend to be the biggest determinant of power prices,” the EIA said. “But in 2026, the increase in power prices in ERCOT tends to reflect large hourly spikes in the summer months due to high demand combined with relatively low supply in this region.”” Now this is not true for the whole world, but we see here a “projected 45% increase” and that is for 2026. So where are these data centers, what are their energy surpluses and what is to come? No one is looking at that, but when any data centre is hit with a brownout, or a partial and temporary drop in voltage in an electrical power supply. When that happens any data centre shuts down, energy is adamant for all its GPU’s and their better not we any issue with energy and I saw this a year ago, so why isn’t the media looking into this? I saw one article that that question was not answered and the media just shoved it aside, but as I see it, it should be on the forefront of any media setting. It will happen and the people will suffer, but as I see it (and mentioned) is that the media is whoring for digital dollars and they need their advertisement money from these 4 places and a few more, all ready for advertisement attention and the media plays ball because they want their digital dollars (as I personally see it).

So whilst the NPR article is quite nice, the one element missing is what makes this bubble rear its ugly head, because too many want their coins for their effort and it is what is required. But what does the audience require? And the audience is you an me dear reader. I have set a lot of my requirements to energy falling short, but there is only so much I can do and it is going to be 32 degrees (celsius) today, so what happens when the energy slows down for 5.56 million people in Sydney? Because the Data centers will make a first demand from their energy providers or they will slap a lawsuit worth billions on that energy provider. And we the people (wherever we are) are facing what comes next. Keeping data centers cool and powered whilst we the people boil in our own homes. As such that is the future I am predicting and people think I am wrong, but did they make the calculation of what these data centers require? Are they seeing the energy shortfalls that are impeding these data centers? And the energy providers will take the money and the contracts because it won’t coexist to this, but that is exactly what we are facing in the short run and the investors? Well, I don’t really care about them, they invested and if you aren’t willing to lose it all with a mere card to help you through (card below), you aren’t a real investor, you are merely playing it safe and in that world there are no bubbles.

Remind me, how did that end in 2008? The speculated cost were set to $16 trillion in U.S. household wealth, and this bubble is significantly larger than the 2008 one and this time they are going all in on money, most of them do not have. So that is what is coming and my fears do not matter, but the setting that NPR gives us all with ‘Here’s why concerns about an AI bubble are bigger than ever’ matters and that is what I see coming.

So have a great day and never trust one source, always verify what you read through other sources. That part was shown to be when we all see (from various sources) that “The United States is on track to lose $12.5 billion in international travel spending this year” whilst my calculations made it between 80 and 130 billion and some laughed at my predictions a few months earlier and I get that. I would laugh too when those ‘economics’ state one amount and I come with a number over 700% larger. I get that, but now (apparently) there is an Oxford economics report that gives us “Damning report says U.S. tourism faces $64 billion blow as Trump administration’s trade wars drive away foreign visitors and cut spending”, so I have that to chase down now, but it shows that my numbers were mostly spot on, at least a lot better than whatever those economics are giving you. So never trust merely one source even if they believe to be on the right track. But that is enough about that and consider why some bubble settings are underexposed and when you see that the NPR gave you three additional angles and missed mine (likely not intentional) consider what those investment firms are overseeing (likely intentional) because the setting that they are willing to lose 100% is ludicrous, they have settings for that and as the government bailed them out the last time, they think it will save them this time too.

Have a great day today, I need an ice cream at 4:30 in the morning. I still have some, so yay me.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science, Tourism

The call of reality

That is what seems to be happening. The first one was a simple message that Oracle is doom headed according to Wall Street (I don’t agree with that), but it made me take another look and to make it simpler I will look at the articles chronologically. 

The first one was the Wall Street Journal (4 days ago), with ‘Oracle Was an AI Darling on Wall Street. Then Reality Set In’ (at https://www.wsj.com/tech/oracle-was-an-ai-darling-on-wall-street-then-reality-set-in-0d173758) with “Shares have lost gains from a September AI-fueled pop, and the company’s debt load is growing” with the added “Investors nervous about the scale of capital that technology companies are plowing into artificial-intelligence infrastructure rattled stocks this week. Oracle has been one of the companies hardest hit” but here is the larger setting. As I see it, these stocks are manipulated by others, whomever they are Hedge funds and their influencers and other parties calling for doom all whilst the setting of the AI bubble are exploiters by unknown gratifiers of self. I know that this sounds ominous and non specific, but there is no way most of us (including people with a much higher degree of economic knowledge than I will ever have) And the stage of bubble endearing is out there (especially in Wall Street) then 14 hours ago we get ‘Oracle (ORCL): Evaluating Valuation After $30B AI Cloud Win and Rising Credit Risk Concerns’ (at https://simplywall.st/stocks/us/software/nyse-orcl/oracle/news/oracle-orcl-evaluating-valuation-after-30b-ai-cloud-win-and/amp) where we see “Recent headlines have only amplified the spotlight on Oracle’s cloud ambitions, but the past few months have been rocky for its share price. After a surge tied to AI-driven optimism, Oracle’s 1-month share price return of -29.9% and a year-to-date gain of 19.7% tell the story: momentum has faded sharply in the near term. However, the 1-year total shareholder return still sits at 4.4% and its five-year total return remains a standout at nearly 269%. This combination of volatility and long-term outperformance reflects a market grappling with Oracle’s rapid strategic shift, balance sheet risks, and execution on new contracts.” I am not debating the numbers, but no one is looking to the technology behind this. As I see it places like Snowflake and Oracle have the best technology for these DML and LLM solutions (OK, there are a few more) and for now, whomever has the best technology will survive the bubble and whomever is betting on that AI bubble going their way needs Oracle at the very least and not in a weakened state, but that is merely my point of view. So last we get the Motley Fool a mere 7 hours ago giving us ‘Billionaire David Tepper Dumped Appaloosa’s Stake in Oracle and Is Piling Into a Sector That Wall Street Thinks Will Outperform’ (at https://www.fool.com/investing/2025/11/23/billionaire-david-tepper-dumped-appaloosas-stake-i/) we see “Billionaire David Tepper’s track record in the stock market is nothing short of remarkable. According to CNBC, the current owner of the Carolina Panthers pro football team launched his hedge fund Appaloosa Management in 1993 and generated annual returns of at least 25% for decades. Today, Tepper still runs Appaloosa, but it is now a family office, where he manages his own wealth.” Now we get the crazy stuff (this usually happens when I speculate) So this gives us a person like David Tepper who might like to exploit Oracle to make it seem more volatile and exploit a shortening of options to make himself (a lot) richer. And when clever people become self managing, they tend to listen to their darker nature. Now I could be all wrong, but when Wall Street is going after one of the most innovative and secure companies on the planet just to satisfy the greed of Wall Street, I get to become a little agitated. So could it all be that Oracle was drawn into the ‘fab’ and lost it? No, they clearly stated that there would be little return until 2028, a decent prognosis and with the proper settings of DML and LLM finding better and profitable ways by 2027 to find revenue making streams is a decent target to have and it is seemingly an achievable one. In the meantime IBM can figure out (evolve) their shallow circuits and start working on their trinary operating system. I have no idea where they are at present, but the idea of this getting ready for a 2040 release is not out of the question. In the meantime Oracle can fill the void for millions of corporations that already have data, warehouses and form settings. Another are plenty of other providers of data systems.

So when we are given “The tech company Oracle is not one of the “Magnificent Seven,” but it has emerged as a strong beneficiary of artificial intelligence (AI), thanks to its specialized data centers that contain huge clusters of graphics processing units (GPUs) to train large language models (LLMs) that power AI.

In September, the company reported strong earnings for the first quarter of its fiscal 2026, along with blowout guidance. Remaining performance obligations increased 359% year over year to $455 billion, as it signed data center agreements with major hyperscalers, including OpenAI.

So whilst we see “Oracle is not one of the “Magnificent Seven,” but it has emerged as a strong beneficiary of artificial intelligence (AI)” we need to take a different look at this. Oracle was never a strong beneficiary of AI, it was a strong vendor with data technologies and AI is about data and in all of this, someone is ‘fitting’ Oracle into a stage that everyone just blatantly accepts without asking too many questions (example the Media). With the additional “to train large language models (LLMs) that power AI”, the hidden gem is in the second statement. AI and LLM are not the same, You only partially train real AI, this is different and those ‘magnificent seven’ want you to look away from that. So, when was the last time that you actually read that AI does not yet exist? That is the created bubble and players like Oracle are indifferent to this, unless you spike the game. It has stocks, it has options and someone is turning influencers to their own use of greed. And I object to this, Oracle has proven itself for decades, longer than players like Microsoft and Google. So when we see ‘Buying the sector that Wall Street is bullish on’ we see another hidden setting. The bullishness of Wall Street. Do you think they don’t know that AI is a non-existing setting? So why go after the one technology that will make data work? That setting is centre in all this and I object those who go after Oracle. So when you answer the call of reality consider who is giving you the AI setting and who is giving you the DML/LLM stage of a data solution that can help your company.

Have a great day we are seemingly all on Monday at present. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science