“Because it doesn’t seem to be the companies who are buying the GPUs. It doesn’t seem to be the AI companies.”
Our reading:
Neither the companies buying GPUs nor the AI companies appear to be making a profit from AI.
Assessment: Can’t be checked
What happened
Not graded on evidence
Outcome: Can’t be checked
An opinion, a recommendation, or too vague to test. Listed, not scored.
Evidence up to . Checked .
Why
The sentence is hedged. He says it 'doesn't seem' that the companies buying GPUs or the AI companies are profiting. He says this as part of a rhetorical question about who profits from AI. He gives no measure of profit, no time period and no named companies. The evidence packet notes that hyperscalers do not report AI profit separately. Any verdict would depend on a split of AI costs and revenue that he did not specify. Scoring the claim would mean adding a metric, a period and a set of companies that he did not supply. So the claim is not adjudicable.
Caveats
- No evidence was gathered for this claim. The packet lists no sources.
- A narrower, unhedged version, such as one about the reported net income of named AI labs over a named period, could be checked. That is not what he said.
Evidence (0 items)
Claims like this aren’t scored, so there is no evidence to show.
How we judged it
- Kind of claim
- Observation
- Deadline
- None given. We don’t add one.
Where we had to interpret
- He frames this as an impression ('doesn't seem'), given as part of a rhetorical question about who profits from AI. It is not a flat statement of fact.
- 'Getting a profit out of this' has no named measure. It could mean AI-attributable profit, return on AI spending, or company-level profit. GPU buyers such as hyperscalers do not report AI profit on its own, so testing it would need a cost allocation he never supplied.
- Turning the impression into a scored profit claim would mean adding a metric, a period and a set of companies he did not name. So it is treated as not adjudicable.
We don’t grade claims like this. We only check the quote and who said it.
We found 40 claims in this post. See them all.
Full record
Source and dates
Where's Your Ed At, Why Are We Still Doing This?, paragraph 75.
- Said
- We read the source
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence up to
- Checked
We read this wording on 2026-10-28. The post may have been edited after 2026-03-17.
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the posts we read.
: Where's Your Ed At, Why Are We Still Doing This?
Because it doesn’t seem to be the companies who are buying the GPUs. It doesn’t seem to be the AI companies.
- Where
- paragraph 75
- Published
- 2026-03-17
- We read it
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Versions
- Current: Can’t be checked. Evidence up to 2026-10-28.
What happened to this record
PublishedBy us
Published after both AI reviews and the final check passed.
Held backBy us
The final check failed: the write-up said more than the evidence showed.
Held backBy us
A reviewer said our test wasn’t fair to what was actually said.