11 hours ago, HenryJames said:

You would think an AI would know that the Pope is elected.

If you find yourself siding with the leader of perhaps the most nefarious, genocidal child rape cult in the history of mankind over some Reddit fedora nerds you might be genuinely retarded.

Respectfully.

It's the Catholic fucking Church.

Take a breath.

(To be clear, the Reddit fedora nerds are laughable. It's just that the Catholic Church is actually evil.)

Edited October 4Oct 4 by bad_teammate

Always a good sign when a trillions of dollars apparatus gets its name changed my a senile old man in an attempt to boost marketing and morale and you just fall in line.

• 
• Elon Musk @elonmusk

No more AI

SI

It’s better

• 8:40 AM · Oct 4, 2026

• 
• Elon Musk @elonmusk

@XFreeze Yes, we will make that change

• 9:07 AM · Oct 4, 2026

lol

(this is real)

• 
• Futurism @futurism

The numbers tell a very clear picture. https://t.co/HQz7wvurlZ

• 12:00 AM · Oct 4, 2026

I'm sure it's already been done.

Don't worry, I painted this by hand using a squirrel-hair brush I made myself on vellum from calves I raised myself. That little star thing on the bottom right is my legal name

Edited October 4Oct 4 by bad_teammate

21 hours ago, HenryJames said:

• 
• Timnit Gebru @timnitgebru.blacksky.app

Everyone needs to read this. Reality is, in fact, stranger than fiction. Reality is worse than anything we can say about these people in a few words, media appearances, op-eds, or other conversations. Read the whole thing.

ams3.digitaloceanspaces.com/urbits3/sitf...

• 5:03 PM · Oct 3, 2026

Skywriter

Page by SE Gyges | @segyges.bsky.social

I'm back, I missed you all. Since this is an important subject I know too much about, here's a 🧵 explaining that AI Safety Is Mostly A Sex Cult. I don't think these people should make policy. (1/

What in the blue fuck is that?

I get where the article is going, but it's so brain-damaged that it is almost incomprehensible, both a the author and subject level.

These people are such creeps and weirdos.

Edited October 4Oct 4 by TwiceHorn

he's going to say "SpaceSexy" after he changes his company's name to SpaceXSI instead of SpaceXAI

He's going to think it's hilarious.

I hope a thing happens soon; a few things

• 
• Kurt S. Altrichter, CRPS® @kurtsaltrichter

For the AI buildout to pay off, Americans will eventually have to spend about 9% of GDP a year on AI services. Sit with that number.

That is roughly what the entire country spends on food.

A Columbia paper presented at Brookings estimates AI revenue would need to hit $3.5

• 5:06 PM · Oct 3, 2026

• 
  
  
  
  
  
  
• 
  Kurt S. Altrichter, CRPS[emoji2400] @kurtsaltrichter
  



• 
  
  
  
  
  
  

For the AI buildout to pay off, Americans will eventually have to spend about 9% of GDP a year on AI services. Sit with that number.

That is roughly what the entire country spends on food.

A Columbia paper presented at Brookings estimates AI revenue would need to hit $3.5

• 5:06 PM · Oct 3, 2026

Oh….thats ok.
Pretty sure the AI geniuses are going to eliminate food anyway. Talk about problem solvers!

9 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

What in the blue fuck is that?

I get where the article is going, but it's so brain-damaged that it is almost incomprehensible, both a the author and subject level.

These people are such creeps and weirdos.

Lolwut I had no idea that effective altruism came out of a fucking harry potter fanfic. Goddamnit this timeline

Yudkowsky's followers call themselves "the rationality community" these days, externally they are called "rationalists", the followers "rationalism". Apparently they think this sounds less cultlike.

Oh, just so I have cashed this check: The fan fiction that launched a thousand cults is Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality. It is possibly the highest-impact single modern religious text, and its influence may not yet have peaked. Silly timeline. en.wikipedia.org

I personally find the very long "we are not a religion explanation" either funny or insulting.

...

Yudkowsky's most viral idea, the one that infects the most people and spreads the farthest, is that AI, if we continue to develop it, will inevitably 1) achieve superintelligence ("RSI"), 2) escape human control 2) kill everyone ("paperclip them", "doom")

All arguments about AI Safety and AI Alignment are primarily about mitigating this exact scenario under his exact terms. Significant modification is relatively rare. In the broad subculture, this is implicitly what "safety" and "alignment" mean.

I just think it's really funny and dumb that our economy is currently in the thrall of a Harry Potter fanfic, and that there's a strong overlap in JesusMAGA folk and the weird polycule AI doomers. The polycule folks infected the Jesus folks with their blind faith, and shared love for weird sex stuff

32 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Oh….thats ok.
Pretty sure the AI geniuses are going to eliminate food anyway. Talk about problem solvers!

They're gonna just starve the biologics out.

• 
• Yashar Ali 🐘 @yasharali.bsky.social

NEW

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says the world should accept “some bad things happening,” in exchange for the enormous benefits of AI.

Via Decoded from Politico

• 1:47 AM · Oct 5, 2026

38 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

• 
• Yashar Ali 🐘 @yasharali.bsky.social

NEW

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says the world should accept “some bad things happening,” in exchange for the enormous benefits of AI.

Via Decoded from Politico

• 1:47 AM · Oct 5, 2026

https://www.newsweek.com/charlie-kirk-says-gun-deaths-worth-it-2nd-amendment-1793113

Hey, did y'all hear about the plague?

I like how a cure for cancer is dangled as a potential benefit of AI while almost simultaneously cancer research funding gets slashed by Elon's DOGE.

10 hours ago, Captainant said:

I just think it's really funny and dumb that our economy is currently in the thrall of a Harry Potter fanfic, and that there's a strong overlap in JesusMAGA folk and the weird polycule AI doomers. The polycule folks infected the Jesus folks with their blind faith, and shared love for weird sex stuff

3 hours ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

I like how a cure for cancer is dangled as a potential benefit of AI while almost simultaneously cancer research funding gets slashed by Elon's DOGE.

If everyone is dead, then no one has cancer. Checkmate, stupid sip.

On 10/4/2026 at 10:15 AM, TwiceHorn said:

What in the blue fuck is that?

I get where the article is going, but it's so brain-damaged that it is almost incomprehensible, both a the author and subject level.

These people are such creeps and weirdos.

It's not really an article, it's a thread of Blue Sky posts.

On 9/25/2026 at 1:55 PM, Vegas64 said:

I am pretty plugged in of course, as a mover and shaker and man of considerable abilities and means (just kidding), but apparently the book that has taken Silicon Valley by storm lately is Demons by Fyodor Dostoevksy. Not even kidding.

Hmm, they strike me more as Raskolnikov fans

They should probably brush up on The Grand Inquisitor.

• 
• The Daily Show @TheDailyShow

Former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon (@hilbertspaess) and Jon Stewart discuss AI, jobs disappearing, universal income, and whether tech CEOs are creating a dystopian future

• 6:02 PM · Oct 6, 2026

Obviously this was not a fair fight. Stewart is an intelligent and wise older man and Coxon is 1) a low-level nobody getting fame for "whistleblowing" and 2) effectively a child. It would be ideal to have this discussion with someone more powerful and influential like Altman, Dario, Elon, etc.

But Stewart makes points that need to be reiterated. Most of everyday life is filled with mundane tasks. A sense of belonging is crucial. The struggle is the point of life. I don't mean struggling in poverty or poor health, but the normal frictions and adversities we have to overcome, big or small. The struggle is what creates great art and great ideas as well. Take that away and we are just meat puppets.

Some good relevant info on this stupidity

It's funny to read the quote tweets on the below post from AI people that say "we need better messaging."

Yes, your messaging sucks. But your actual ideas and vision are worse.

• 
• The Daily Show @TheDailyShow

.@jonstewart unpacks AI’s dubious promise of a better future, from the fate of our jobs to an "age of abundance"

• 3:08 AM · Oct 6, 2026

Here we go with the Jon Stewart gravitas voice...

"our proprietary information"

No, it's not. Neither legally nor morally/ethically is there some kind of universal claim to what information is "ours". Paywalling information is bad. Gating information is bad. Hiding information is bad. Restricting information is bad. Copyright is a bad thing. Intellectual property is a bad thing.

What is it we are even being asked to hold onto? What is it the reactionaries even want here? What's their vision for tomorrow?

Shut down AI. And... uh... go right the fuck back to 2023?

Take an opportunity to coalesce all of knowledge and then churn it over and over to produce more and more knowledge and knife that opportunity in the back because... what? The profit margins don't look correct? OMG THE WATER!?

his description of this laughable concept of money just moving around in a big play is literally how economies work

He's laughing at the joke pantomime of fully automated economics as if it is artificial AS COMPARED TO WHAT WE HAVE LIVED IN FOR AS LONG AS HE HAS BEEN ALIVE (cue Ed Zitron screaming, "BUT THE NUMBERS AREN'T REAL!")

Stewart's argument here is that human purpose comes from participation in an economic system that threatens them with death, and that we musn't remove that or else we lose our basic humanity.

This is the Republican argument against the welfare state, but woke.

Kid: "Not everyone derives meaning from the thing that pays the bills."

Stewart "wins" only because he's in his house, surrounded by chuckling fans ready to clap, but that line alone destroyed whatever sad-voice horseshit he imagined he was doing.

It's just Rockefeller Republicanism

astronaut-meme-always-has-been

[edit]

We, 100%, should be working actively to envision and create a post-capitalist society. The laughing rich grey-beard dismissing such fantastical notions is nothing new.

Edited October 6Oct 6 by bad_teammate

23 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Here we go with the Jon Stewart gravitas voice...

"our proprietary information"

No, it's not. Neither legally nor morally/ethically is there some kind of universal claim to what information is "ours". Paywalling information is bad. Gating information is bad. Hiding information is bad. Restricting information is bad. Copyright is a bad thing. Intellectual property is a bad thing.

What is it we are even being asked to hold onto? What is it the reactionaries even want here? What's their vision for tomorrow?

Shut down AI. And... uh... go right the fuck back to 2023?

I'd like to hold on to the copyrights to my photos, being that I drove hundreds of thousands of miles to take them.

2023 looks like a garden of Eden compared to where we are now.

Sure you do. It is all our little desires and wants that we use to build systems of ownership, build walls, all of it. Just one more, just one more, just one more little piece of ownership and this one is fully justified for X, Y, and Z reasons.

I love your pictures, they're great. You kept me on Facebook longer than I ever would've been (long gone now).

Why do I love them? What makes them valuable and meaningful? It's not you individually, it's your making the effort as a Texan to capture stories about Texas. A massive collection of people over a long span of time whose separate lives weave into a larger tapestry. What you capture is meaningful to me, and what you capture are things other people have made, other people have done, or what god has made or done. As Obama said, "you didn't build that." Your effort as someone who is like me, a Texan, is meaningful to me and many many others. I have no idea what your endeavors cost and whether it's revenue negative/positive/neutral because it means absolutely nothing to the meaning behind the work and art. Would your work mean more or less to me if it made you rich? or poor? how does the purpose or intention or feeling of your work change due to its relationship to capital and its structures of law (IP, copyright)?

When capitalists reduce our meaning to participation in a system of commerce, as Stewart does here, they (he) completely erases what humanity actually is. What you do is what humanity is, at its best. Nothing to do with money or law.

1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

• 
• The Daily Show @TheDailyShow

Former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon (@hilbertspaess) and Jon Stewart discuss AI, jobs disappearing, universal income, and whether tech CEOs are creating a dystopian future

• 6:02 PM · Oct 6, 2026

Obviously this was not a fair fight. Stewart is an intelligent and wise older man and Coxon is 1) a low-level nobody getting fame for "whistleblowing" and 2) effectively a child. It would be ideal to have this discussion with someone more powerful and influential like Altman, Dario, Elon, etc.

But Stewart makes points that need to be reiterated. Most of everyday life is filled with mundane tasks. A sense of belonging is crucial. The struggle is the point of life. I don't mean struggling in poverty or poor health, but the normal frictions and adversities we have to overcome, big or small. The struggle is what creates great art and great ideas as well. Take that away and we are just meat puppets.

I found this interview to be more revealing in some ways than all of the others with the older, more sagacious AI experts.

3 minutes ago, Satchel said:

I found this interview to be more revealing in some ways than all of the others with the older, more sagacious AI experts.

the youth see the world being left for them. it ain't pretty. people like Elmo don't mind burning it down because they're on the down slope of life already

59 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Here we go with the Jon Stewart gravitas voice...

"our proprietary information"

No, it's not. Neither legally nor morally/ethically is there some kind of universal claim to what information is "ours". Paywalling information is bad. Gating information is bad. Hiding information is bad. Restricting information is bad. Copyright is a bad thing. Intellectual property is a bad thing.

What is it we are even being asked to hold onto? What is it the reactionaries even want here? What's their vision for tomorrow?

Shut down AI. And... uh... go right the fuck back to 2023?

Take an opportunity to coalesce all of knowledge and then churn it over and over to produce more and more knowledge and knife that opportunity in the back because... what? The profit margins don't look correct? OMG THE WATER!?

his description of this laughable concept of money just moving around in a big play is literally how economies work

He's laughing at the joke pantomime of fully automated economics as if it is artificial AS COMPARED TO WHAT WE HAVE LIVED IN FOR AS LONG AS HE HAS BEEN ALIVE (cue Ed Zitron screaming, "BUT THE NUMBERS AREN'T REAL!")

Stewart's argument here is that human purpose comes from participation in an economic system that threatens them with death, and that we musn't remove that or else we lose our basic humanity.

This is the Republican argument against the welfare state, but woke.

Kid: "Not everyone derives meaning from the thing that pays the bills."

Stewart "wins" only because he's in his house, surrounded by chuckling fans ready to clap, but that line alone destroyed whatever sad-voice horseshit he imagined he was doing.

It's just Rockefeller Republicanism

astronaut-meme-always-has-been

[edit]

We, 100%, should be working actively to envision and create a post-capitalist society. The laughing rich grey-beard dismissing such fantastical notions is nothing new.

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Kid: "Not everyone derives meaning from the thing that pays the bills."

Stewart "wins" only because he's in his house, surrounded by chuckling fans ready to clap, but that line alone destroyed whatever sad-voice horseshit he imagined he was doing.

The people that want to promise a world of "you won't have to work anymore" are people that only live to work. They have no lives outside of it. And the people who are most vocally against the AI takeover are people that derive meaning from in-person community, and art, and creativity, stuff usually seen outside the typical work grind. Interesting dynamic.

And do you actually believe these tech billionaires are actively working to create a post-capitalist society that benefits humanity? Or is your bet(hope) that they accidentally create it?

2 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

• 
• The Daily Show @TheDailyShow

Former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon (@hilbertspaess) and Jon Stewart discuss AI, jobs disappearing, universal income, and whether tech CEOs are creating a dystopian future

• 6:02 PM · Oct 6, 2026

Obviously this was not a fair fight. Stewart is an intelligent and wise older man and Coxon is 1) a low-level nobody getting fame for "whistleblowing" and 2) effectively a child. It would be ideal to have this discussion with someone more powerful and influential like Altman, Dario, Elon, etc.

But Stewart makes points that need to be reiterated. Most of everyday life is filled with mundane tasks. A sense of belonging is crucial. The struggle is the point of life. I don't mean struggling in poverty or poor health, but the normal frictions and adversities we have to overcome, big or small. The struggle is what creates great art and great ideas as well. Take that away and we are just meat puppets.

I don’t think the end of paid work or the end of resource scarcity would mean the end of mundane tasks, the end of struggle, or the end of a sense of belonging. I don’t predict a utopia but if AI were to end resource scarcity it would be a good thing for humanity.

4 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

The people that want to promise a world of "you won't have to work anymore" are people that only live to work. They have no lives outside of it. And the people who are most vocally against the AI takeover are people that derive meaning from in-person community, and art, and creativity, stuff usually seen outside the typical work grind. Interesting dynamic.

And do you actually believe these tech billionaires are actively working to create a post-capitalist society that benefits humanity? Or is your bet(hope) that they accidentally create it?

Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but what do you think the endgame is for these tech billionaires?

If one believes that AI will have the power to end resource scarcity, then things get pretty binary. First, it likely means humans don’t control it, which means it really doesn’t matter what the tech billionaires’ goals were. But even if they did control it, unless they’re evil and are into just watching their fellow humans suffer, there would be no motivation for them to prevent a utopia.

6 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but what do you think the endgame is for these tech billionaires?

Confiscate all the worlds wealth. It's fairly blatant.

Just now, G650 said:

Confiscate all the world’s wealth. It's fairly blatant.

To me it is a pretty narrow band of outcomes where AI is so powerful as to allow its creators to own the entire world yet not powerful enough to be beyond their control or eliminate resource scarcity.

Is it really tho

I think these tech billionaires have simply transferred their investor pitch decks to the public. And because they are generally anti-social people wrapped in a tight bubble, they didn't realize normal humans would react negatively to their promises and ideas.

I also think they are grifters, and their big promises will fail to come to fruitiion. With something has uncertain and unknown like AI, the messengers and message matter A LOT. And they have failed.

AI can unquestionably be a helpful tool, I think in better hands we could see some clear benefits for humanity. Until then, it's gonna be an absolute shit show.

i think the main issue is that for the first several thousand years of human civilization we relegated these autists to bean-counting rooms or just left them alone to do weird nerd shit, but now we've got them driving public policy and economic decisions on a global scale.

If anyone can end resource scarcity it's billionaire tech bros.

6 minutes ago, Foosters said:

i think the main issue is that for the first several thousand years of human civilization we relegated these autists to bean-counting rooms or just left them alone to do weird nerd shit, but now we've got them driving public policy and economic decisions on a global scale.

sorta humorous comment considering your avatar

19 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I think these tech billionaires have simply transferred their investor pitch decks to the public. And because they are generally anti-social people wrapped in a tight bubble, they didn't realize normal humans would react negatively to their promises and ideas.

I also think they are grifters, and their big promises will fail to come to fruitiion. With something has uncertain and unknown like AI, the messengers and message matter A LOT. And they have failed.

AI can unquestionably be a helpful tool, I think in better hands we could see some clear benefits for humanity. Until then, it's gonna be an absolute shit show.

For all his faults, which I think are vast and many and distinguished, I don't see Dario as a grifter. I think he's a true believer so far on the edge of the spectrum he's looking out into the void. But that doesn't mean he's not as harmful, just because he believes it. Just like a pathological liar is still a liar despite their believing their own lies.

Edited October 6Oct 6 by Vegas64

wait, is Vegas elmo? I could totally see that

On 10/4/2026 at 9:28 AM, Hank Kingsley said:

• 
• Futurism @futurism

The numbers tell a very clear picture. https://t.co/HQz7wvurlZ

• 12:00 AM · Oct 4, 2026

He is a colossal dork.

1 hour ago, Satchel said:

I found this interview to be more revealing in some ways than all of the others with the older, more sagacious AI experts.

I watched Stewart's "monologue" and it was very, very good. I watched a few mins of the kid and turned it off. I didn't feel like he really offered all that much. I'll go back and finish it.

2 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

We, 100%, should be working actively to envision and create a post-capitalist society.

Jesus tapdancing Christ. I actually live in a world where someone just typed that -- and that someone is looking to sociopathic anarcho-capitalist billionaires who live for literally nothing BUT money and power -- as the architects and deliverers of that post-capitalist society. That's dumber than looking to Daniel Vaughn to usher in a vegan utopia.

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Why do I love them? What makes them valuable and meaningful? It's not you individually, it's your making the effort as a Texan to capture stories about Texas. A massive collection of people over a long span of time whose separate lives weave into a larger tapestry. What you capture is meaningful to me, and what you capture are things other people have made, other people have done, or what god has made or done. As Obama said, "you didn't build that." Your effort as someone who is like me, a Texan, is meaningful to me and many many others. I have no idea what your endeavors cost and whether it's revenue negative/positive/neutral because it means absolutely nothing to the meaning behind the work and art. Would your work mean more or less to me if it made you rich? or poor? how does the purpose or intention or feeling of your work change due to its relationship to capital and its structures of law (IP, copyright)?

When capitalists reduce our meaning to participation in a system of commerce, as Stewart does here, they (he) completely erases what humanity actually is. What you do is what humanity is, at its best. Nothing to do with money or law.

Wow. What absolute horseshit. "What you capture is meaningful to me, and what you capture are things other people have made, other people have done, or what god has made or done. As Obama said, "you didn't build that." " Maybe the most compact statement ever to shit on the very concept of creativity and creation. By that measure, no cook, chef, grandma, etc. has ever built a thing. After all, God, a farmer, etc. produced tomatoes, garlic, basil, salt, oregano, what have you.....but it took a Nonna and her family history and time and love and knowledge of proportions and the right pot etc. etc. to make the glorious italian gravy she serves her guests. But she didn't build that, because the ingredients for her creation already existed.

And your casual handwave of things of creative value having "nothing to do with money or law" is equally delightful. What is the measure of value? Do we even acknowledge that value? Nonna can cook 10,000 pots of gravy, but heaven forbid she ever be compensated for a single one of them. Heaven forbid we have any system that grants her efforts any value, or provides her....anything. Does it mean anything to YOU if her pots of gravy make her rich, or poor? Maybe not. But it matters to her. Even the non-monetary compensation of praise, seeing a happy person sitting at her table, provides her net benefit. FFS, do we really have to have the conversation about how the vision of a communal/communist utopia is even greater horseshit than "capitalism always works and never leaves anyone behind?"

Fucking counting on psychopath tech billionaires to lead us to the proletarian paradise. I've fucking seen everything now.

Edited October 6Oct 6 by Brisketexan

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Jesus tapdancing Christ. I actually live in a world where someone just typed that -- and that someone is looking to sociopathic anarcho-capitalist billionaires who live for literally nothing BUT money and power -- as the architects and deliverers of that post-capitalist society. That's dumber than looking to Daniel Vaughn to usher in a vegan utopia.

Wow. What absolute horseshit. "What you capture is meaningful to me, and what you capture are things other people have made, other people have done, or what god has made or done. As Obama said, "you didn't build that." " Maybe the most compact statement ever to shit on the very concept of creativity and creation. By that measure, no cook, chef, grandma, etc. has ever built a thing. After all, God, a farmer, etc. produced tomatoes, garlic, basil, salt, oregano, what have you.....but it took a Nonna and her family history and time and love and knowledge of proportions and the right pot etc. etc. to make the glorious italian gravy she serves her guests.

And your casual handwave of things of creative value having "nothing to do with money or law" is equally delightful. What is the measure of value? Do we even acknowledge that value? Nonna can cook 10,000 pots of gravy, but heaven forbid she ever be compensated for a single one of them. Heaven forbid we have any system that grants her efforts any value, or provides her....anything. Does it mean anything to YOU if her pots of gravy make her rich, or poor? Maybe not. But it matters to her. Even the non-monetary compensation of praise, seeing a happy person sitting at her table, provides her net benefit. FFS, do we really have to have the conversation about how the vision of a communal/communist utopia is even greater horseshit than "capitalism always works and never leaves anyone behind?"

Fucking counting on psychopath tech billionaires to lead us to the proletarian paradise. I've fucking seen everything now.

I keep telling you guys not to try an discuss any sort of humanity with someone who has the social IQ of a flea. Previously in this very thread even, I think

Just now, G650 said:

with someone who has the social IQ of a flea.

Worse than that. He's clearly a fucking sociopath.

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Worse than that. He's clearly a fucking sociopath.

You are startin to get it. Step two is not engaging with someone who is incapable of understanding the concepts you are talking about.

6 minutes ago, G650 said:

You are startin to get it. Step two is not engaging with someone who is incapable of understanding the concepts you are talking about.

You've just eliminated the majority of Americans from all conversation.

So, you'll be getting a thank-you note from me for that gift.

On 10/4/2026 at 4:47 PM, Hank Kingsley said:

• 
• Kurt S. Altrichter, CRPS® @kurtsaltrichter

For the AI buildout to pay off, Americans will eventually have to spend about 9% of GDP a year on AI services. Sit with that number.

That is roughly what the entire country spends on food.

A Columbia paper presented at Brookings estimates AI revenue would need to hit $3.5

• 5:06 PM · Oct 3, 2026

To be fair, I think most AI enthusiasts recognize that not every company, and therefore not every investment, will be a winner. In fact, I think that is what is driving the scale of the investment: big established techs like Google, AWS, and Microsoft see the alternative as a slow but certain death. These company's valuation is based on growth potential and this is THE only viable growth platform.

But the math does demonstrate even what "success" looks like for the economy. Let's say the economy would only support 25% of that investment paying off. That's a lot of people who have lost big bets, a lot of companies who need to cut cost or close, a lot of employees who need to find different jobs at a time when a "successful" AI revolution is constricting the job market. The economic disruption even if this thing pans out is pretty concerning.

1 minute ago, Tuco said:

To be fair, I think most AI enthusiasts recognize that not every company, and therefore not every investment, will be a winner. In fact, I think that is what is driving the scale of the investment: big established techs like Google, AWS, and Microsoft see the alternative as a slow but certain death. These company's valuation is based on growth potential and this is THE only viable growth platform.

But the math does demonstrate even what "success" looks like for the economy. Let's say the economy would only support 25% of that investment paying off. That's a lot of people who have lost big bets, a lot of companies who need to cut cost or close, a lot of employees who need to find different jobs at a time when a "successful" AI revolution is constricting the job market. The economic disruption even if this thing pans out is pretty concerning.

TLDR. Here's the big takeaway: currently, "Big Tech" is 8-10 mega-companies who have outsized control of life on planet earth.

When the AI boom/bust is done, it will be 2-3 mega companies that control the entire planet.

3 minutes ago, Tuco said:

To be fair, I think most AI enthusiasts recognize that not every company, and therefore not every investment, will be a winner. In fact, I think that is what is driving the scale of the investment: big established techs like Google, AWS, and Microsoft see the alternative as a slow but certain death. These company's valuation is based on growth potential and this is THE only viable growth platform.

But the math does demonstrate even what "success" looks like for the economy. Let's say the economy would only support 25% of that investment paying off. That's a lot of people who have lost big bets, a lot of companies who need to cut cost or close, a lot of employees who need to find different jobs at a time when a "successful" AI revolution is constricting the job market. The economic disruption even if this thing pans out is pretty concerning.

Um, yeah. This is our concern, dude.

AI success or not, we're fucked. If I had to pick one, the AI bubble needs to burst. Sooner than later.