The Hater's Guide To The AI Bubble
We recorded 21 claims from this post. 21 can’t be checked. 11 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (21)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“In short, I believe the AI bubble is deeply unstable, built on vibes and blind faith, and when I say "the AI bubble," I mean the entirety of the AI trade.”
Our reading: The AI bubble, meaning the whole AI trade, is deeply unstable and built on vibes and blind faith.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Forecast
“Google's $1.1 billion in workspace service revenue came from a forced price-hike on those who use Google services to run their businesses, meaning that this is likely not a number that can significantly increase without punishing them further.”
Our reading: Google's $1.1 billion Workspace AI revenue came from a forced price hike and probably cannot grow much without further punishing customers.
No horizon
Qualifier: without punishing business customers further
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Forecast
“There is a shareholder vote for Tesla to potentially invest in xAI, which will probably happen, allowing Musk to continue to pull leverage from his Tesla stock until the company's decaying sales and brand eventually swallow him whole.”
Our reading: Tesla investing in xAI via a shareholder vote will probably happen.
No horizon
Qualifier: pending shareholder vote
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“Yet after that, generative AI feels more like a feature of cloud infrastructure rather than infrastructure itself.”
Our reading: Generative AI feels more like a feature of cloud infrastructure than infrastructure itself.
No horizon
Qualifier: feels more like
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“Businesses powered by generative AI do not seem to be popular.”
Our reading: Businesses powered by generative AI do not appear to be popular.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Forecast
“Cursor misled its customers, and its current revenue is, as a result, highly unlikely to stay at this level.”
Our reading: Cursor misled customers, and its current revenue is highly unlikely to stay at its current level.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“These are the single-most-popular consumer software subscriptions in the world — and OpenAI's 15.5 million subscribers suggest that it can't rely on them for the kind of growth that would actually make the company worth $300 billion (or more).”
Our reading: OpenAI's 15.5 million subscribers suggest it can't rely on them for the kind of growth that would make the company worth $300 billion or more.
No horizon
Qualifier: suggest
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“In any case, it doesn't seem like you can really build a consumer AI startup that makes anything approaching a real company.”
Our reading: Apart from ChatGPT, it does not seem possible to build a consumer AI startup that becomes anything like a real company.
No horizon
Qualifier: other than ChatGPT
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Causal claim
“As a result, it's very, very difficult for a company to build something unique.”
Our reading: Because all generative AI companies rely on LLMs with inherent limits, it is very hard for any of them to build something unique.
No horizon
Qualifier: because they all rely on LLMs with inherent limits
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“My Rot-Com Bubble thesis suggests we're out of hypergrowth ideas, and yeah, I think we're out of ideas related to Large Language Models too.”
Our reading: He thinks the tech industry is out of ideas related to Large Language Models, and his Rot-Com Bubble thesis suggests it is out of hypergrowth ideas generally.
No horizon
Qualifier: my thesis suggests
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Rhetoric
“The term "agent" is one of the most egregious acts of fraud I've seen in my entire career writing about this crap, and that includes the metaverse.”
Our reading: Calling AI products "agents" is one of the most egregious frauds the author has seen.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“In any case, every single company you see using the word agent is trying to mislead you.”
Our reading: Every company that uses the word "agent" is trying to mislead you.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“Nevertheless, none of these products are autonomous agents, and anybody using the term agent likely means "chatbot."”
Our reading: None of the 'agent' products he discussed (such as Salesforce Agentforce, ChatGPT agent, Glean, ServiceNow and coding agents) are autonomous agents, and anybody using the term 'agent' likely means 'chatbot'.
No horizon
Scope: these products (those discussed)
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Conditional forecast
“the most important company in the entire AI industry needs to convert by the end of the year or it's effectively dead”
Our reading: If OpenAI does not convert to a for-profit structure by the end of 2025, it will be effectively dead.
Deadline passed Evidence as of
Only if: OpenAI does not convert by the end of the year (2025)
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“Any and all stories about AI replacing jobs are intentionally manipulative attempts to boost stock valuations and suggest that models are capable of replacing human workers at scale.”
Our reading: Stories about AI replacing jobs are deliberately manipulative attempts to boost stock valuations; models cannot replace human workers at scale.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“To be abundantly clear, the manipulative suggestion here is that these models are autonomous or conscious in some way, which they are not.”
Our reading: AI models are not autonomous or conscious; stories about them scheming are deceptive.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Causal claim
“Large Language Models are too expensive to run, and have limited abilities beyond the ones I've named previously, and because everybody is running models that all, on some level, do the same thing, it's very hard for people to build really innovative products on top of them.”
Our reading: LLMs are too expensive to run and have limited abilities beyond those he named, and because everybody is running models that all, on some level, do the same thing, it is very hard to build really innovative products on top of them.
No horizon
Qualifier: on some level
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“The money isn't there, the users aren't there, every company seems to lose money and some companies lose so much money that it's impossible to tell how they'll survive.”
Our reading: Generative AI lacks money and users, every company appears to lose money, and some lose so much that their survival is in doubt.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Causal claim
“Large Language Models authoritatively state things that are incorrect because they have no concept of right or wrong.”
Our reading: LLMs confidently state incorrect things because they have no concept of right or wrong.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Conditional forecast
“Perception matters just as much as actual numbers, and sometimes more, and a shift in sentiment could start a chain of events that knocks down the entire house of cards.”
Our reading: A shift in sentiment about NVIDIA could set off a chain of events that brings down the whole AI trade.
No horizon
Only if: a shift in sentiment around NVIDIA
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Recommendation or value judgment
“Sam Altman, Dario Amodei, Satya Nadella, Sundar Pichai, Tim Cook, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and Andy Jassy have overseen a needless, wasteful and destructive economic force that will harm our markets (and by a larger extension our economy) and the tech industry writ large, and when this is over, they must be held accountable.”
Our reading: Once the AI bubble is over, the tech CEOs who drove it must be held accountable.
No horizon
Qualifier: when this is over
Held from this post (11)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The criteria are ambiguous. Our reading, not assessed: If Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, Google, and Tesla keep their spending promises, by the end of 2025 they will together have spent over $560 billion in capital expenditures on AI over 2024 and 2025.
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: OpenAI and Broadcom will not build their custom AI chip (ASIC) in 2026.
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently