- Bakkoda@lemmy.worldEnglish4 hours
To anyone who has imposter syndrome: Imagine being able to say shit like this and call it a career?
You can do it. I have faith in you.
- Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.worldEnglish3 hours
Terrible headline. The AI bubble will definitely burst, but stocks being undervalued is not “exactly” (or even approximately) “how the dot-com bubble burst”. The bubble refers to overinvestment by overly optimistic opportunists overestimating the market, and it burst when thousands startups that failed to make a profit ran out of venture capital at about the same time. This is what’s going to burst the AI bubble - it’s just a question of when. The stock value thing, as the article itself explains (kind of), is just a symptom that investors are starting to sense/fear this getting near.
- Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.worksEnglish7 hours
That will result in massive order cancellations at NVDA, MU, AVGO, SNDK, etc., because no one needs the chips, networking, memory, or processor power," he added.
Well that is just false as there is pent up demand in the consumer markets that should be more than enough to make chip makers good money but I guess they don’t consider us regular folks real customers anymore
- C4pt41n_Pr0xy@lemmy.worldEnglish6 hours
But graphics cards, CPUs, RAM, and other components needed in data centers are a far cry from the same components used in home and office desktops and laptops. It’s like trying to sell parts used in F1 race cars on the consumer car market. Technically, there will be buyers, but the vast majority of these parts will remain unsold because demand for such specialized components is negligible in the general consumer market.
- StarryPhoenix97@lemmy.worldEnglish4 hours
I’m not sure if it’s fully a bubble, or if the bubble is partly being used as a smoke screen to hide the upfront cost of redesigning computing infrastructure.
A lot of the time, I think AI is just the branding layer. The real goal is top-to-bottom SaaS.
Like, they’re letting these AI companies hold the bag for building datacenters which will then get scooped by various companies like microsoft and google to offer virtualized home computing through a client.
5 hoursEspecially since those parts carry a significantly higher premium than consumer parts.
and you know nvidia isnt gonna sell the shit at a reasonable price.
- Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.worksEnglish5 hours
What I meant was changing their production capacity to consumers.
My point was that chip manufacturers will have customers besides AI, not that the data center chips will have other customers
- Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish5 hours
I keep hearing this from people and it’s not true. People want GPUs for playing games not running AI so the backlog of chips isn’t useful to anyone.
- Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.worksEnglish5 hours
If nvidia had 0 AI chip buyers I will guarantee you they will come running back to consumers until the next fad.
- 6 hours
No business does anymore. I maintain that’s why all the cars are the same 4-6 colors these days. Black, white, grey, and silver aren’t offensive to the corporations that buy fleets. Blue and red have to be there so they can do “patriotic” displays.
Oh, and I’m really quite sorry to all of you that hadn’t noticed that all the cars are the same colors these days. Once you see it, you can’t unsee it.
- Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish5 hours
They’re all going with weird grey clay colours. Often in mat. It’s really weird and I don’t like it.
I should be able to tell someone what colour my car is, I don’t want to have to go, oh well it’s a sort of dull concrete but slightly bluer.
- 5 hours
That was the biggest thing I liked about my SAABs. No matter what color they were, no other car in the lot looked like that.
- theyoyomaster@lemmy.worldEnglish6 hours
And here I am with my douchebag orange car right next to my super candy apple green wrapped wagon…
Yeah, I can’t stand cars in colors that aren’t colors.
- Jax@sh.itjust.worksEnglish6 hours
It’s been this way for decades, this is not a new phenomena and it is not a conspiracy - these things are driven by consumers.
- 6 hours
I know it’s been a thing for decades, but even in the '80s I could still walk on a lot and find yellow, green, orange and purple cars. These days it seems those are all special order.
Yeah, been hearing this for a year.
Starting to worry it’s all… doomerism hype?
Nah.
- anon_8675309@lemmy.worldEnglish10 hours
When there’s a bubble, at first you hear “hmm this is weird maybe it’s a bubble”. Then more people start saying ,”yeah it looks like a bubble”. Then more people start analyzing how it IS a bubble. All the while big investors are like, “ I know it’s a bubble but right now I’m making bank, so…”. Finally, after those investors decide it’s been a good run, they cash out and the bubble truly starts bursting.
So right now everyone knows it’s a bubble. What we’re seeing is the big investors trying to squeeze every last billion out of it.
- aesthelete@lemmy.worldEnglish2 hours
Finally, after those investors decide it’s been a good run, they cash out and the bubble truly starts bursting.
This time they wasted so much money that they’re trying to foist the bad investments on retail investors with overblown valuations and IPOs before cashing out.
Yeah, heard it all before, and I’m very familiar with the structural “curiosities” of the existing investment landscape.
Very few people correctly called the problems with 2007-2008. Not none, but few. And with soooooo many people mindlessly on the “it’s a bubble!” bandwagon so early, a lot of accuracy and legitimacy is lost months or years beforehand for no other reason than why conspiracy theory people say “we’ll get UFO disclosure this year!” Or “This year the Cubs/Arsenal/Red Sox will do it!” It’s just the thing they say until one time they’re right.
I’m not telling you it won’t happen in a sense… But it’s not going to happen how or when you think. IMO, you’re looking at a partial stuttering effect maaaaaybe late winter like Q1 2027, and that’s about it. There’s to much alternate demand for everything LLM companies are already buying up to create a full and similar bubble like the Dot Com bubble.
- TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zipEnglish10 hours
Dot-com bubble took about 5 years before it burst, and that was crazier. Why would you think this one would pop quicker?
You’re talking about from buildup to crash, though. As if everyone just looking at literally any large investment and saying “it’s a bubble!” is dong anything other than being a broken clock right twice a day.
I follow conspiracy theories extensively, and people have always predicted a huge, massive economic collapse next year - every year. On Art Bell, it was a constant, reiterated prediction every year from 1994 until 2013. It’s only the ones that happened to say it in 2006 or 2007 that rode the credit of “actually predicting the 2008 crisis!” Even the ones saying it before the Dot Com bubble didn’t get it right because their doomerism made all predictions “end of the world” level.
- TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zipEnglish2 hours
I haven’t heard this much bubble talk ever. It’s not the same prediction made by the same people again this time. I don’t even know anybody irl who likes vibecoding (myself included) who thinks this is sustainable.
Even the ones saying it before the Dot Com bubble didn’t get it right because their doomerism made all predictions “end of the world” level.
I don’t know what you’re trying to say. People had bad takes about that bubble so all bubble scepticism is discredited? But it popped, which means all these investors had bad takes as well. So…
Nobody worth listening to thinks this bubble is going to be worse than the dotcom bubble. It’s simply not that big to begin with. I guess there’s some wishful thinking too, but what’s the alternative to this investors-expected AI growth? Everything except the AI market crashes?
- Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish5 hours
Except people did predict the crash, they could see it coming and they made bank out of it. They made a movie about it.
- rozodru@piefed.worldEnglish1 day
“If a company isn’t making as much money as quickly as it, and investors, thought it would” that’s the sign, saved you the click.
- 6 hours
It really was a waste of an article. I think I am dumber for having read it. It failed to provide any real information on what was seen preceeding the dotcom bust. Just some super generalizations of no value.
Also, it refers to these mythical investors who supposedly think about earning potential and all that. Most really don’t. They invest because they think the stock will go up. And usually that has more to do with if they think others will buy it than the Financials of the company. SpaceX is a great example of that.
- Rothe@piefed.socialEnglish14 hours
Which is a useless metric in today’s market, since none of the AI companies have made a single cent yet, in fact they are bleeding billions, but are still receiving billions in investments, most of it from other AI-involved companies.
- Voroxpete@sh.itjust.worksEnglish11 hours
The companies being talked about are the picks and shovels guys. Sandisk, Crucial, Nvidia, Oracle. The ones that should actually be making money now, and so far have been.
Jesus Christ, it’s not even a long article, you can just read it and know this stuff before you comment.
- NottaLottaOcelot@lemmy.caEnglish5 hours
I mean, I agree that the market left fundamentals behind years ago. But when increasing numbers of transactions are handled by robo-advisors all working on similar parameters and institutional ownership is something like 71% of the DOW, can we expect the same result as in 2000?
Billionaires aren’t going to roll over and go bankrupt - they will manipulate the stock market to make it look like the economy isn’t failing. A crash and government intervention isn’t impossible, but I suspect we are already wallpapering over the mess - note that central banks say “markers of recession” rather than “recession”, because then it can’t possibly be real. They would prefer that the 30% of shares owned by us plebs aren’t panic sold so the problem stays invisible, but if it is, they will buy up the shares at a discount and continue to trade them among themselves with fictional dollars that have been loaned into existence.
- benjirenji@slrpnk.netEnglish16 hours
Duh, aren’t we passed this situation yet? Millions and even billions of workers should’ve been replaced by now. Many problems including coding: solved.
Or are investors really this patient and resilient when it comes to hollow hype?
- pinball_wizard@lemmy.zipEnglish16 hours
Or are investors really this patient and resilient when it comes to hollow hype?
Yes. They’re the salt of the Earth - you know - morons.
- Danarchy@lemmy.nzEnglish23 hours
I’m beginning to think they don’t actually have anyone on the inside at any businesses
But that isn’t how greater foolism works. It doesn’t matter how stupid one is, as long as there are others more stupid.
- 🌸𝓯𝓵𝓸𝔀𝓮𝓻🌸@sh.itjust.worksEnglish23 hours
And the question is always when the market switches from irrational to rational, and the answer is “nobody knows.”
- justaman123@lemmy.worldEnglish13 hours
It’s when someone figures out they can make a lot more money if these companies fail
If even the goddamn BusinessInsider comes to this conclusion, I wonder why they don’t also realize that all stock market transactions work this way today. None of this has the slightest connection to the real world anymore. Stock prices are determined purely by how many billionaires—or rather, their concentrated capital—are betting on which companies. And here’s the key: They always win, because even with the most absurd business ideas, they can drive up the price, which only crashes after the super-rich have sold their shares.
This makes it very easy to understand why the dumbest people in the world never lose money, as long as they’re rich enough.
Humanity is footing the bill for this, and it’s now becoming very clear just how high that bill is.
Well, if they were to start doing this on a large scale, everything would probably collapse pretty quickly.
If, for example, BlackRock were to pull its billions out of AI companies, “the market” would be terrified and smaller investors would start asking about the business model—then they’d quickly realize that it doesn’t add up at all, and they’d want to sell their shares as well, because even this giant player has lost their trust.
The result would likely be the collapse of the global economic system, since such absurd amounts of money are at stake here that a crash would make the 2003 banking crisis look like a minor slip-up.
The bitter truth is that this will almost certainly happen sooner or later—and this time, governments will no longer be able to step in to bail out the “systemically important” megacorporations, because the sums involved are so vast that even the richest countries in the world can no longer foot the bill.
- yesman@lemmy.worldEnglish1 day
When financial publications are giving advice on how to trade inside a bubble, that’s a leading indicator that the bubble is about to pop.
- 17 hours
