| One of the things before AI in the market was that capital had limited growth opportunities. Tech, which was basically a universe of scaled out crud apps, was where capital would keep going back into. AI is a lot more useful than hyper scaled up crud apps. Comparing this to the past is really overfitting imho. The only argument against accumulating GPUs is that they get old and stop working. Not that it sucks, not that it’s not worth it. As in, the argument against it is actually in the spirit of “I wish we could keep the thing longer”. Does that sound like there’s no demand for this thing? The AI thesis requires getting on board with what Jenson has been saying: 1) We have a new way to do things 2) The old ways have been utterly outclassed 3) If a device has any semblance of compute power, it will need to be enhanced, updated, or wholesale replaced with an AI variant. There is no middle ground to this thesis. There is no “and we’ll use AI here and here, but not here, therefore we predictably know what is to come”. Get used to the unreal. Your web apps could truly one day be generated frame by frame by a video model. Really. The amount of compute we’ll need will be staggering. |
We've technically been able to play board games by entering our moves into our telephones, sending them to a CPU to be combined, then printing out a new board on paper to conform to the new board state. We do not do this because it would be stupid. We can not depend on people starting to do this saving the paper, printer, and ink industries. Some things are not done because they are worthless.