+Follow
YiLongMusk
No personal profile
15
Follow
0
Followers
0
Topic
0
Badge
Posts
Hot
YiLongMusk
08-28
$NVIDIA Corp(NVDA)$
YiLongMusk
10-21 21:56
Lol
The AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.
YiLongMusk
09-16
King of pump and dump
Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession
YiLongMusk
2023-08-14
$Tesla Motors(TSLA)$
Go to Tiger App to see more news
{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3556439528889232","uuid":"3556439528889232","gmtCreate":1593345506465,"gmtModify":1630723025166,"name":"YiLongMusk","pinyin":"yilongmusk","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f0c575d19ec8b5d54bdd7074626613ae","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":15,"tweetSize":4,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-3","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":" Tiger Idol","description":"Join the tiger community for 1500 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8b40ae7da5bf081a1c84df14bf9e6367","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f160eceddd7c284a8e1136557615cfad","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11792805c468334a9b31c39f95a41c6a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.08.06","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-3","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Legendary Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 300","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.02.16","exceedPercentage":"93.37%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03-3","templateUuid":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03","name":"President Tiger","description":"The transaction amount of the securities account reaches $1,000,000","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fbeac6bb240db7da8b972e5183d050ba","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/436cdf80292b99f0a992e78750ac4e3a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/506a259a7b456f037592c3b23c779599","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.07.14","exceedPercentage":"93.21%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789-1","templateUuid":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789","name":"Knowledgeable Investor","description":"Traded more than 10 stocks","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":5,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":5,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":362426574684280,"gmtCreate":1729518966517,"gmtModify":1729520159699,"author":{"id":"3556439528889232","authorId":"3556439528889232","name":"YiLongMusk","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f0c575d19ec8b5d54bdd7074626613ae","crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3556439528889232","idStr":"3556439528889232"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Lol","listText":"Lol","text":"Lol","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/362426574684280","repostId":"2477590238","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2477590238","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Dow Jones publishes the world’s most trusted business news and financial information in a variety of media.","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Dow Jones","id":"106","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99"},"pubTimestamp":1729511760,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2477590238?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2024-10-21 19:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2477590238","media":"Dow Jones","summary":"Two different bubbles and two completely different revenue streams mean only one thing. The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging, and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful.It's different this time. How many times have we heard that?It usually turns out to be wishful thinking. This time, the generative-AI bubble may really be different than the dot-com bubble - just not in a good way.The number of generative AI users is growing faster than the number of internet users in the late 1990s - except the comparison is essentially meaningless.They had to buy a computer and subscribe to an internet service provider, which were both expensive. The Compaq ProSignia Desktop 330 was $2,699 in 1999 and that didn't include applications software such as Microsoft's Word, Excel and PowerPoint. Bell Atlantic offered a digital subscriber line service for $59.95 a month in 1999, or $113 in 2024 dollars.The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, el","content":"<font class=\"NormalMinus1\" face=\"Arial\">\n<p>\nMW The AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.\n</p>\n<p>\n By Jeffrey Funk and Gary Smith \n</p>\n<p>\n Two different bubbles and two completely different revenue streams mean only one thing \n</p>\n<p>\n The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging, and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful. \n</p>\n<p>\n It's different this time. How many times have we heard that? It usually turns out to be wishful thinking. This time, the generative-AI bubble may really be different than the dot-com bubble - just not in a good way. \n</p>\n<p>\n The number of generative AI users is growing faster than the number of internet users in the late 1990s - except the comparison is essentially meaningless. \n</p>\n<p>\n Think about it. What did people have to do to become internet users in the late 1990s? They had to buy a computer and subscribe to an internet service provider, which were both expensive. The Compaq ProSignia Desktop 330 was $2,699 in 1999 ($5,101 in 2024 dollars) and that didn't include applications software such as Microsoft's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MSFT\">$(MSFT)$</a> Word, Excel and PowerPoint. Bell Atlantic offered a digital subscriber line service for $59.95 a month in 1999, or $113 in 2024 dollars. \n</p>\n<p>\n How much does it cost to use generative AI today? Nothing. You already own a computer and pay for internet access, and OpenAI and others offer limited-use services for free. The substantial cost of accessing the internet 30 years ago meant that users anticipated substantial payoffs. The minimal cost of accessing ChatGPT and other generative-AI systems today means that users don't need much of a payoff, if any, to give it a try. \n</p>\n<p>\n Why are economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and elsewhere making this silly comparison? The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful. If anything, they are addictive entertainment that we pay for with our time. \n</p>\n<p>\n St. Louis Fed economists speculated about the possible effects of generative AI on labor productivity: \"We examined how intensely respondents employed generative AI on days that they reported using it.\" Seriously? Is the intensive use of Facebook <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/META\">$(META)$</a>, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat (SNAP) and other social-media platforms increasing labor productivity or reducing it? The number of people using social media and the hours they spend doing so are hardly a useful measure of the economic payoff. The same is true of generative AI. \n</p>\n<p>\n The economic value added and labor productivity boosted by generative AI is not measured by how many people use it or how much it costs to create and sustain it. It is measured by economic value added and labor productivity gains - and there is scant evidence that generative AI has moved the needle. \n</p>\n<p>\n The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, electricity, water and more needed to manufacture them, currently dwarfs the payoff. \n</p>\n<p>\n While access to generative AI is relatively cheap, the creation and supply of generative AI is incredibly expensive. Training these models can cost upwards of $100 million and require the newest and most expensive chips from Nvidia <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NVDA\">$(NVDA)$</a> and competitors, including AMD <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">$(AMD)$</a> and Intel <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/INTC\">$(INTC)$</a>. The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, electricity, water and more needed to manufacture them, currently dwarfs the payoff. \n</p>\n<p>\n Creating useful services from generative AI also isn't cheap. Wall Street Journal technology columnist Joanna Stern recently reported on her development of \"Joannabot,\" powered by Google's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOOGL\">$(GOOGL)$</a> Gemini, to help readers \"decide if the iPhone 16 is worth an upgrade:\" The bot was useful but, she wrote, it \"Can go off the rails. Way off,\" and was expensive: \"I won't get into the exact costs, but let's just say I could've taken all four of my iPhone 16 review units on a luxury vacation to Bora Bora for the price of Google's Vertex for this project.\" \n</p>\n<p>\n If generative AI is going to pay off in labor productivity, it has to generate enough revenue to justify its cost. We are not the first to ask this question. Sequoia's David Cahn estimated that $600 billion in annual generative AI revenue is needed to justify the current investments in generative AI, a figure that is probably more than 100 times the current annual revenues for OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, Microsoft's Copilot and similar services. \n</p>\n<p>\n The New York Times reported that OpenAI anticipates $5 billion in losses on $3.7 billion in revenue this year. Nonetheless, OpenAI received $6.6 billion in additional funding to keep it afloat - and which valued the company at $157 billion. That certainly echoes the dot-com bubble - but Goldman Sachs' Jim Covello, Citadel's Ken Griffen, and market strategist Ed Yardeni all warn that the AI bubble could be even worse. \n</p>\n<p>\n Read: OpenAI is now worth more than 87% of S&P 500 companies. It faces a tough test ahead. \n</p>\n<p>\n Also read: Why Open AI's $100 billion 2029 revenue target seems like a tech fever dream \n</p>\n<p>\n We can compare the generative-AI bubble with the internet bubble by looking at revenues in 2000, the peak of the dot-com bubble, and generative-AI revenues for 2024. One study estimates that 134 million PCs were sold in 2000, which at $5,101 per computer at that time equated to about $684 billion in revenue. The number of global internet users was about 361 million in 2000, which at $113 a month equals about $489 billion in revenue ($850 billion in 2024 dollars). \n</p>\n<p>\n E-commerce also generated a lot of revenue in 2000. A March 2001 article reports that the market for e-commerce in 2000 was $286 billion ($500 billion in 2024 dollars). E-commerce has been a growing revenue stream as we have become accustomed to buying online. \n</p>\n<p>\n Put these numbers together and the internet generated more than $1.5 trillion in revenue (in 2024 dollars) in 2000 - and the internet bubble still burst. Generative AI, on the other hand, is currently generating less than $10 billion. If the bubble bursts, it will be a very large pop. \n</p>\n<p>\n Jeffrey Funk is a retired professor and winner of the NTT DoCoMo mobile science award. His latest book is \"Unicorns, Hype and Bubbles: A guide to spotting, avoiding, and exploiting investment bubbles in tech\" (Harriman House, 2024). \n</p>\n<p>\n Gary Smith is a professor of economics at Pomona College and the author of more than 100 academic papers and 17 books, most recently (co-authored with Margaret Smith): \"The Power of Modern Value Investing: Beyond Indexing, Algos, and Alpha,\" (Palgrave Macmillan, 2024). \n</p>\n<p>\n More: \n</p>\n<p>\n Also read: \n</p>\n<p>\n -Jeffrey Funk -Gary Smith \n</p>\n<p>\n This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal. \n</p>\n<pre>\n \n</pre>\n<p>\n (END) Dow Jones Newswires\n</p>\n<p>\n October 21, 2024 07:56 ET (11:56 GMT)\n</p>\n<p>\n Copyright (c) 2024 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.\n</p>\n</font>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Dow Jones </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2024-10-21 19:56</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<font class=\"NormalMinus1\" face=\"Arial\">\n<p>\nMW The AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.\n</p>\n<p>\n By Jeffrey Funk and Gary Smith \n</p>\n<p>\n Two different bubbles and two completely different revenue streams mean only one thing \n</p>\n<p>\n The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging, and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful. \n</p>\n<p>\n It's different this time. How many times have we heard that? It usually turns out to be wishful thinking. This time, the generative-AI bubble may really be different than the dot-com bubble - just not in a good way. \n</p>\n<p>\n The number of generative AI users is growing faster than the number of internet users in the late 1990s - except the comparison is essentially meaningless. \n</p>\n<p>\n Think about it. What did people have to do to become internet users in the late 1990s? They had to buy a computer and subscribe to an internet service provider, which were both expensive. The Compaq ProSignia Desktop 330 was $2,699 in 1999 ($5,101 in 2024 dollars) and that didn't include applications software such as Microsoft's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MSFT\">$(MSFT)$</a> Word, Excel and PowerPoint. Bell Atlantic offered a digital subscriber line service for $59.95 a month in 1999, or $113 in 2024 dollars. \n</p>\n<p>\n How much does it cost to use generative AI today? Nothing. You already own a computer and pay for internet access, and OpenAI and others offer limited-use services for free. The substantial cost of accessing the internet 30 years ago meant that users anticipated substantial payoffs. The minimal cost of accessing ChatGPT and other generative-AI systems today means that users don't need much of a payoff, if any, to give it a try. \n</p>\n<p>\n Why are economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and elsewhere making this silly comparison? The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful. If anything, they are addictive entertainment that we pay for with our time. \n</p>\n<p>\n St. Louis Fed economists speculated about the possible effects of generative AI on labor productivity: \"We examined how intensely respondents employed generative AI on days that they reported using it.\" Seriously? Is the intensive use of Facebook <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/META\">$(META)$</a>, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat (SNAP) and other social-media platforms increasing labor productivity or reducing it? The number of people using social media and the hours they spend doing so are hardly a useful measure of the economic payoff. The same is true of generative AI. \n</p>\n<p>\n The economic value added and labor productivity boosted by generative AI is not measured by how many people use it or how much it costs to create and sustain it. It is measured by economic value added and labor productivity gains - and there is scant evidence that generative AI has moved the needle. \n</p>\n<p>\n The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, electricity, water and more needed to manufacture them, currently dwarfs the payoff. \n</p>\n<p>\n While access to generative AI is relatively cheap, the creation and supply of generative AI is incredibly expensive. Training these models can cost upwards of $100 million and require the newest and most expensive chips from Nvidia <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NVDA\">$(NVDA)$</a> and competitors, including AMD <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">$(AMD)$</a> and Intel <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/INTC\">$(INTC)$</a>. The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, electricity, water and more needed to manufacture them, currently dwarfs the payoff. \n</p>\n<p>\n Creating useful services from generative AI also isn't cheap. Wall Street Journal technology columnist Joanna Stern recently reported on her development of \"Joannabot,\" powered by Google's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOOGL\">$(GOOGL)$</a> Gemini, to help readers \"decide if the iPhone 16 is worth an upgrade:\" The bot was useful but, she wrote, it \"Can go off the rails. Way off,\" and was expensive: \"I won't get into the exact costs, but let's just say I could've taken all four of my iPhone 16 review units on a luxury vacation to Bora Bora for the price of Google's Vertex for this project.\" \n</p>\n<p>\n If generative AI is going to pay off in labor productivity, it has to generate enough revenue to justify its cost. We are not the first to ask this question. Sequoia's David Cahn estimated that $600 billion in annual generative AI revenue is needed to justify the current investments in generative AI, a figure that is probably more than 100 times the current annual revenues for OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, Microsoft's Copilot and similar services. \n</p>\n<p>\n The New York Times reported that OpenAI anticipates $5 billion in losses on $3.7 billion in revenue this year. Nonetheless, OpenAI received $6.6 billion in additional funding to keep it afloat - and which valued the company at $157 billion. That certainly echoes the dot-com bubble - but Goldman Sachs' Jim Covello, Citadel's Ken Griffen, and market strategist Ed Yardeni all warn that the AI bubble could be even worse. \n</p>\n<p>\n Read: OpenAI is now worth more than 87% of S&P 500 companies. It faces a tough test ahead. \n</p>\n<p>\n Also read: Why Open AI's $100 billion 2029 revenue target seems like a tech fever dream \n</p>\n<p>\n We can compare the generative-AI bubble with the internet bubble by looking at revenues in 2000, the peak of the dot-com bubble, and generative-AI revenues for 2024. One study estimates that 134 million PCs were sold in 2000, which at $5,101 per computer at that time equated to about $684 billion in revenue. The number of global internet users was about 361 million in 2000, which at $113 a month equals about $489 billion in revenue ($850 billion in 2024 dollars). \n</p>\n<p>\n E-commerce also generated a lot of revenue in 2000. A March 2001 article reports that the market for e-commerce in 2000 was $286 billion ($500 billion in 2024 dollars). E-commerce has been a growing revenue stream as we have become accustomed to buying online. \n</p>\n<p>\n Put these numbers together and the internet generated more than $1.5 trillion in revenue (in 2024 dollars) in 2000 - and the internet bubble still burst. Generative AI, on the other hand, is currently generating less than $10 billion. If the bubble bursts, it will be a very large pop. \n</p>\n<p>\n Jeffrey Funk is a retired professor and winner of the NTT DoCoMo mobile science award. His latest book is \"Unicorns, Hype and Bubbles: A guide to spotting, avoiding, and exploiting investment bubbles in tech\" (Harriman House, 2024). \n</p>\n<p>\n Gary Smith is a professor of economics at Pomona College and the author of more than 100 academic papers and 17 books, most recently (co-authored with Margaret Smith): \"The Power of Modern Value Investing: Beyond Indexing, Algos, and Alpha,\" (Palgrave Macmillan, 2024). \n</p>\n<p>\n More: \n</p>\n<p>\n Also read: \n</p>\n<p>\n -Jeffrey Funk -Gary Smith \n</p>\n<p>\n This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal. \n</p>\n<pre>\n \n</pre>\n<p>\n (END) Dow Jones Newswires\n</p>\n<p>\n October 21, 2024 07:56 ET (11:56 GMT)\n</p>\n<p>\n Copyright (c) 2024 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.\n</p>\n</font>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"LU0128525689.USD":"TEMPLETON GLOBAL BALANCED \"A\"(USD) ACC","BK4503":"景林资产持仓","IE00BKPKM429.USD":"NEUBERGER BERMAN GLOBAL SUSTAINABLE EQUITY \"A\" (USD) ACC","IE00BZ1G4Q59.USD":"LEGG MASON CLEARBRIDGE US EQUITY SUSTAINABILITY LEADER \"A\"(USD) INC (A)","LU2264538146.SGD":"Fullerton Lux Funds - Global Absolute Alpha A Acc SGD","LU0061474705.USD":"THREADNEEDLE (LUX) GLOBAL DYNAMIC REAL RETURN \"AU\" (USD) ACC","BK4097":"系统软件","IE00BK4W5M84.HKD":"HSBC GLOBAL FUNDS ICAV US EQUITY INDEX \"HC\" (HKD) ACC","BK4512":"苹果概念","L":"洛斯公司","LU0979878070.USD":"FULLERTON LUX FUNDS - ASIA ABSOLUTE ALPHA \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU0225283273.USD":"SCHRODER ISF GLOBAL EQUITY ALPHA \"A\" (USD) ACC","AMD":"美国超微公司","GOOGL":"谷歌A","IE00B1BXHZ80.USD":"Legg Mason ClearBridge - US Appreciation A Acc USD","IE00BFSS8Q28.SGD":"Janus Henderson Balanced A Inc SGD-H","IE000KEQY171.SGD":"PIMCO BALANCED INCOME AND GROWTH \"M\" (SGDHDG) INC","INTC":"英特尔","LU0149725797.USD":"汇丰美国股市经济规模基金","LU0203345920.USD":"SCHRODER ISF QEP GLB ACT. VL \"A\" (USD) ACC","IE00BJTD4N35.SGD":"Neuberger Berman US Long Short Equity A1 Acc SGD-H","3NVD.UK":"LS 3X NVIDIA","LU1303367103.USD":"摩根大通多经理另类基金 A (acc)","LU0234572021.USD":"高盛美国核心股票组合Acc","IE00BLSP4239.USD":"Legg Mason ClearBridge - Tactical Dividend Income A Mdis USD Plus","IE00B5TLWC47.USD":"BNY MELLON LONG-TERM GLOBAL EQUITY \"B\" (USD) ACC","IE00B775H168.HKD":"JANUS HENDERSON BALANCED \"A5M\" (HKD) INC","BK4585":"ETF&股票定投概念","LU1880398554.USD":"AMUNDI FUNDS GLOBAL EQUITY \"A2\" (USD) INC","BK4507":"流媒体概念","BK4579":"人工智能","IE0034235295.USD":"PINEBRIDGE GLOBAL DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU0187121727.USD":"FIDELITY SUSTAINABLE US EQUITY \"A\" (USD) INC","2NVD.UK":"2X NVIDIA ETP","IE00B4YYXB79.USD":"PIMCO BALANCED INCOME AND GROWTH \"E\" (USD) ACC","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","LU0079474960.USD":"联博美国增长基金A","BK4525":"远程办公概念","MSFT":"微软","BK4524":"宅经济概念","LU0719512351.SGD":"JPMorgan Funds - US Technology A (acc) SGD","LU1803068979.SGD":"FTIF - Franklin Technology A (acc) SGD-H1","BK4508":"社交媒体","IE00BZ199S13.USD":"BNY MELLON MOBILITY INNOVATION \"B\" (USD) ACC","BK4077":"互动媒体与服务","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓","IE0005OL40V9.USD":"JANUS HENDERSON BALANCED \"A6M\" (USD) INC","NVDA":"英伟达"},"source_url":"https://dowjonesnews.com/newdjn/logon.aspx?AL=N","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2477590238","content_text":"MW The AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.\n\n\n By Jeffrey Funk and Gary Smith \n\n\n Two different bubbles and two completely different revenue streams mean only one thing \n\n\n The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging, and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful. \n\n\n It's different this time. How many times have we heard that? It usually turns out to be wishful thinking. This time, the generative-AI bubble may really be different than the dot-com bubble - just not in a good way. \n\n\n The number of generative AI users is growing faster than the number of internet users in the late 1990s - except the comparison is essentially meaningless. \n\n\n Think about it. What did people have to do to become internet users in the late 1990s? They had to buy a computer and subscribe to an internet service provider, which were both expensive. The Compaq ProSignia Desktop 330 was $2,699 in 1999 ($5,101 in 2024 dollars) and that didn't include applications software such as Microsoft's $(MSFT)$ Word, Excel and PowerPoint. Bell Atlantic offered a digital subscriber line service for $59.95 a month in 1999, or $113 in 2024 dollars. \n\n\n How much does it cost to use generative AI today? Nothing. You already own a computer and pay for internet access, and OpenAI and others offer limited-use services for free. The substantial cost of accessing the internet 30 years ago meant that users anticipated substantial payoffs. The minimal cost of accessing ChatGPT and other generative-AI systems today means that users don't need much of a payoff, if any, to give it a try. \n\n\n Why are economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and elsewhere making this silly comparison? The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful. If anything, they are addictive entertainment that we pay for with our time. \n\n\n St. Louis Fed economists speculated about the possible effects of generative AI on labor productivity: \"We examined how intensely respondents employed generative AI on days that they reported using it.\" Seriously? Is the intensive use of Facebook $(META)$, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat (SNAP) and other social-media platforms increasing labor productivity or reducing it? The number of people using social media and the hours they spend doing so are hardly a useful measure of the economic payoff. The same is true of generative AI. \n\n\n The economic value added and labor productivity boosted by generative AI is not measured by how many people use it or how much it costs to create and sustain it. It is measured by economic value added and labor productivity gains - and there is scant evidence that generative AI has moved the needle. \n\n\n The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, electricity, water and more needed to manufacture them, currently dwarfs the payoff. \n\n\n While access to generative AI is relatively cheap, the creation and supply of generative AI is incredibly expensive. Training these models can cost upwards of $100 million and require the newest and most expensive chips from Nvidia $(NVDA)$ and competitors, including AMD $(AMD)$ and Intel $(INTC)$. The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, electricity, water and more needed to manufacture them, currently dwarfs the payoff. \n\n\n Creating useful services from generative AI also isn't cheap. Wall Street Journal technology columnist Joanna Stern recently reported on her development of \"Joannabot,\" powered by Google's $(GOOGL)$ Gemini, to help readers \"decide if the iPhone 16 is worth an upgrade:\" The bot was useful but, she wrote, it \"Can go off the rails. Way off,\" and was expensive: \"I won't get into the exact costs, but let's just say I could've taken all four of my iPhone 16 review units on a luxury vacation to Bora Bora for the price of Google's Vertex for this project.\" \n\n\n If generative AI is going to pay off in labor productivity, it has to generate enough revenue to justify its cost. We are not the first to ask this question. Sequoia's David Cahn estimated that $600 billion in annual generative AI revenue is needed to justify the current investments in generative AI, a figure that is probably more than 100 times the current annual revenues for OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, Microsoft's Copilot and similar services. \n\n\n The New York Times reported that OpenAI anticipates $5 billion in losses on $3.7 billion in revenue this year. Nonetheless, OpenAI received $6.6 billion in additional funding to keep it afloat - and which valued the company at $157 billion. That certainly echoes the dot-com bubble - but Goldman Sachs' Jim Covello, Citadel's Ken Griffen, and market strategist Ed Yardeni all warn that the AI bubble could be even worse. \n\n\n Read: OpenAI is now worth more than 87% of S&P 500 companies. It faces a tough test ahead. \n\n\n Also read: Why Open AI's $100 billion 2029 revenue target seems like a tech fever dream \n\n\n We can compare the generative-AI bubble with the internet bubble by looking at revenues in 2000, the peak of the dot-com bubble, and generative-AI revenues for 2024. One study estimates that 134 million PCs were sold in 2000, which at $5,101 per computer at that time equated to about $684 billion in revenue. The number of global internet users was about 361 million in 2000, which at $113 a month equals about $489 billion in revenue ($850 billion in 2024 dollars). \n\n\n E-commerce also generated a lot of revenue in 2000. A March 2001 article reports that the market for e-commerce in 2000 was $286 billion ($500 billion in 2024 dollars). E-commerce has been a growing revenue stream as we have become accustomed to buying online. \n\n\n Put these numbers together and the internet generated more than $1.5 trillion in revenue (in 2024 dollars) in 2000 - and the internet bubble still burst. Generative AI, on the other hand, is currently generating less than $10 billion. If the bubble bursts, it will be a very large pop. \n\n\n Jeffrey Funk is a retired professor and winner of the NTT DoCoMo mobile science award. His latest book is \"Unicorns, Hype and Bubbles: A guide to spotting, avoiding, and exploiting investment bubbles in tech\" (Harriman House, 2024). \n\n\n Gary Smith is a professor of economics at Pomona College and the author of more than 100 academic papers and 17 books, most recently (co-authored with Margaret Smith): \"The Power of Modern Value Investing: Beyond Indexing, Algos, and Alpha,\" (Palgrave Macmillan, 2024). \n\n\n More: \n\n\n Also read: \n\n\n -Jeffrey Funk -Gary Smith \n\n\n This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal. \n\n\n \n\n\n (END) Dow Jones Newswires\n\n\n October 21, 2024 07:56 ET (11:56 GMT)\n\n\n Copyright (c) 2024 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350066890703080,"gmtCreate":1726493458767,"gmtModify":1726494561125,"author":{"id":"3556439528889232","authorId":"3556439528889232","name":"YiLongMusk","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f0c575d19ec8b5d54bdd7074626613ae","crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3556439528889232","idStr":"3556439528889232"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"King of pump and dump","listText":"King of pump and dump","text":"King of pump and dump","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350066890703080","repostId":"2467357810","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2467357810","pubTimestamp":1726491287,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2467357810?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2024-09-16 20:54","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2467357810","media":"CoinMarketCap","summary":"You can also read this news on BH NEWS: Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession. Tech billionaire Peter Thiel has issued a warning about an approaching recession in the United States, attributing the anticipated downturn to unsustainable government spending. Speaking at the All-In Summit alongside fellow billionaire Chamath Palihapitiya, Thiel suggested that the current stability of the economy is largely due to excessive fiscal stimulus, which he deems temporary.Thiel contends that exorbitant government expenditures are merely concealing fundamental economic problems. He highlighted that the projected budget deficit for fiscal year 2024 has escalated to an estimated $1.5 to $1.6 trillion, potentially exceeding initial forecasts by approximately $400 billion. According to Thiel, such immense spending is unsustainable and financed by what he describes as “crazy” budget deficits.Continue Reading: Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession","content":"<html><body><p>You can also read this news on BH NEWS: Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession</p>\n<p>Tech billionaire Peter Thiel has issued a warning about an approaching recession in the United States, attributing the anticipated downturn to unsustainable government spending. Speaking at the All-In Summit alongside fellow billionaire Chamath Palihapitiya, Thiel suggested that the current stability of the economy is largely due to excessive fiscal stimulus, which he deems temporary.</p>\n<h2>What Is the Impact of Government Spending?</h2>\n<p>Thiel contends that exorbitant government expenditures are merely concealing fundamental economic problems. He highlighted that the projected budget deficit for fiscal year 2024 has escalated to an estimated $1.5 to $1.6 trillion, potentially exceeding initial forecasts by approximately $400 billion. According to Thiel, such immense spending is unsustainable and financed by what he describes as “crazy” budget deficits.</p>\n<h2>How Does Rising Debt Threaten the Economy?</h2>\n<p>The surging national debt poses significant risks to the country’s economic stability. Data from the Congressional Budget Office reveals that the U.S. government recorded a budget deficit of $1.9 trillion in the first 11 months of fiscal year 2024, marking an increase of $373 billion compared to the same period last year. Additionally, Treasury Department figures show the national debt has reached an unprecedented $35.273 trillion.</p>\n<h2>Critical Economic Concerns Highlighted</h2>\n<p>Thiel’s warnings underscore several pressing issues:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>Current economic growth is artificially supported by excessive government spending.</li>\n<li>The budget deficit is significantly higher than projected, indicating fiscal instability.</li>\n<li>The national debt’s all-time high threatens long-term economic health.</li>\n<li>There is an urgent need to reassess fiscal policies for sustainable growth.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Economists and investors share Thiel’s apprehensions, cautioning that the expanding budget deficit and mounting national debt could have profound implications for the U.S. economy’s future. They emphasize the importance of the government implementing strategic fiscal adjustments to promote enduring economic stability.</p>\n<h5><span>Continue Reading: </span> Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession</h5></body></html>","source":"coinmarketcap_highlight","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nPeter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2024-09-16 20:54 GMT+8 <a href=https://coinmarketcap.com/community/articles/66e82a99c329261cfaf8d040/><strong>CoinMarketCap</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>You can also read this news on BH NEWS: Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession\nTech billionaire Peter Thiel has issued a warning about an approaching recession in the United States, attributing ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://coinmarketcap.com/community/articles/66e82a99c329261cfaf8d040/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://academy-public.coinmarketcap.com/srd-optimized-uploads/ac7e3242aeae4e679363cc2b72aa28e6.jpeg","relate_stocks":{"BK4524":"宅经济概念","LU1861217088.USD":"贝莱德金融科技A2","BK4535":"淡马锡持仓","LU1861220207.SGD":"Blackrock FinTech A2 SGD-H","BK4527":"明星科技股","BK4588":"碎股","LU0158827948.USD":"ALLIANZ GLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY \"A\" (USD) INC","AMD":"美国超微公司","LU2089283258.USD":"安联环球可持续基金Cl AM Dis","BK4551":"寇图资本持仓","BK4581":"高盛持仓","LU2360107671.USD":"BGF FINTECH \"A4\" (USD) INC","MU":"美光科技","INTC":"英特尔","NVDA":"英伟达","BK4106":"数据处理与外包服务","LU2023251221.USD":"ALLIANZ GLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY \"AM\" (USD) INC","BK4554":"元宇宙及AR概念","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓","BK4585":"ETF&股票定投概念","LU2089284900.SGD":"Allianz Global Sustainability Cl AM Dis H2-SGD","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","BK4227":"交易和支付处理服务","BK4566":"资本集团"},"source_url":"https://coinmarketcap.com/community/articles/66e82a99c329261cfaf8d040/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2467357810","content_text":"You can also read this news on BH NEWS: Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession\nTech billionaire Peter Thiel has issued a warning about an approaching recession in the United States, attributing the anticipated downturn to unsustainable government spending. Speaking at the All-In Summit alongside fellow billionaire Chamath Palihapitiya, Thiel suggested that the current stability of the economy is largely due to excessive fiscal stimulus, which he deems temporary.\nWhat Is the Impact of Government Spending?\nThiel contends that exorbitant government expenditures are merely concealing fundamental economic problems. He highlighted that the projected budget deficit for fiscal year 2024 has escalated to an estimated $1.5 to $1.6 trillion, potentially exceeding initial forecasts by approximately $400 billion. According to Thiel, such immense spending is unsustainable and financed by what he describes as “crazy” budget deficits.\nHow Does Rising Debt Threaten the Economy?\nThe surging national debt poses significant risks to the country’s economic stability. Data from the Congressional Budget Office reveals that the U.S. government recorded a budget deficit of $1.9 trillion in the first 11 months of fiscal year 2024, marking an increase of $373 billion compared to the same period last year. Additionally, Treasury Department figures show the national debt has reached an unprecedented $35.273 trillion.\nCritical Economic Concerns Highlighted\nThiel’s warnings underscore several pressing issues:\n\nCurrent economic growth is artificially supported by excessive government spending.\nThe budget deficit is significantly higher than projected, indicating fiscal instability.\nThe national debt’s all-time high threatens long-term economic health.\nThere is an urgent need to reassess fiscal policies for sustainable growth.\n\nEconomists and investors share Thiel’s apprehensions, cautioning that the expanding budget deficit and mounting national debt could have profound implications for the U.S. economy’s future. They emphasize the importance of the government implementing strategic fiscal adjustments to promote enduring economic stability.\nContinue Reading: Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":343353935544664,"gmtCreate":1724856243795,"gmtModify":1724856649585,"author":{"id":"3556439528889232","authorId":"3556439528889232","name":"YiLongMusk","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f0c575d19ec8b5d54bdd7074626613ae","crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3556439528889232","idStr":"3556439528889232"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/NVDA\">$NVIDIA Corp(NVDA)$ </a><v-v data-views=\"1\"></v-v> ","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/NVDA\">$NVIDIA Corp(NVDA)$ </a><v-v data-views=\"1\"></v-v> ","text":"$NVIDIA Corp(NVDA)$","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/343353935544664","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":65,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":208857827397656,"gmtCreate":1692014645216,"gmtModify":1692014648516,"author":{"id":"3556439528889232","authorId":"3556439528889232","name":"YiLongMusk","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f0c575d19ec8b5d54bdd7074626613ae","crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3556439528889232","idStr":"3556439528889232"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/TSLA\">$Tesla Motors(TSLA)$ </a><v-v data-views=\"0\"></v-v>","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/TSLA\">$Tesla Motors(TSLA)$ </a><v-v data-views=\"0\"></v-v>","text":"$Tesla Motors(TSLA)$","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/208857827397656","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":32,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":343353935544664,"gmtCreate":1724856243795,"gmtModify":1724856649585,"author":{"id":"3556439528889232","authorId":"3556439528889232","name":"YiLongMusk","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f0c575d19ec8b5d54bdd7074626613ae","crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3556439528889232","idStr":"3556439528889232"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/NVDA\">$NVIDIA Corp(NVDA)$ </a><v-v data-views=\"1\"></v-v> ","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/NVDA\">$NVIDIA Corp(NVDA)$ </a><v-v data-views=\"1\"></v-v> ","text":"$NVIDIA Corp(NVDA)$","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/343353935544664","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":65,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":362426574684280,"gmtCreate":1729518966517,"gmtModify":1729520159699,"author":{"id":"3556439528889232","authorId":"3556439528889232","name":"YiLongMusk","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f0c575d19ec8b5d54bdd7074626613ae","crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3556439528889232","idStr":"3556439528889232"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Lol","listText":"Lol","text":"Lol","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/362426574684280","repostId":"2477590238","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2477590238","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Dow Jones publishes the world’s most trusted business news and financial information in a variety of media.","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Dow Jones","id":"106","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99"},"pubTimestamp":1729511760,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2477590238?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2024-10-21 19:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2477590238","media":"Dow Jones","summary":"Two different bubbles and two completely different revenue streams mean only one thing. The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging, and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful.It's different this time. How many times have we heard that?It usually turns out to be wishful thinking. This time, the generative-AI bubble may really be different than the dot-com bubble - just not in a good way.The number of generative AI users is growing faster than the number of internet users in the late 1990s - except the comparison is essentially meaningless.They had to buy a computer and subscribe to an internet service provider, which were both expensive. The Compaq ProSignia Desktop 330 was $2,699 in 1999 and that didn't include applications software such as Microsoft's Word, Excel and PowerPoint. Bell Atlantic offered a digital subscriber line service for $59.95 a month in 1999, or $113 in 2024 dollars.The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, el","content":"<font class=\"NormalMinus1\" face=\"Arial\">\n<p>\nMW The AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.\n</p>\n<p>\n By Jeffrey Funk and Gary Smith \n</p>\n<p>\n Two different bubbles and two completely different revenue streams mean only one thing \n</p>\n<p>\n The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging, and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful. \n</p>\n<p>\n It's different this time. How many times have we heard that? It usually turns out to be wishful thinking. This time, the generative-AI bubble may really be different than the dot-com bubble - just not in a good way. \n</p>\n<p>\n The number of generative AI users is growing faster than the number of internet users in the late 1990s - except the comparison is essentially meaningless. \n</p>\n<p>\n Think about it. What did people have to do to become internet users in the late 1990s? They had to buy a computer and subscribe to an internet service provider, which were both expensive. The Compaq ProSignia Desktop 330 was $2,699 in 1999 ($5,101 in 2024 dollars) and that didn't include applications software such as Microsoft's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MSFT\">$(MSFT)$</a> Word, Excel and PowerPoint. Bell Atlantic offered a digital subscriber line service for $59.95 a month in 1999, or $113 in 2024 dollars. \n</p>\n<p>\n How much does it cost to use generative AI today? Nothing. You already own a computer and pay for internet access, and OpenAI and others offer limited-use services for free. The substantial cost of accessing the internet 30 years ago meant that users anticipated substantial payoffs. The minimal cost of accessing ChatGPT and other generative-AI systems today means that users don't need much of a payoff, if any, to give it a try. \n</p>\n<p>\n Why are economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and elsewhere making this silly comparison? The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful. If anything, they are addictive entertainment that we pay for with our time. \n</p>\n<p>\n St. Louis Fed economists speculated about the possible effects of generative AI on labor productivity: \"We examined how intensely respondents employed generative AI on days that they reported using it.\" Seriously? Is the intensive use of Facebook <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/META\">$(META)$</a>, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat (SNAP) and other social-media platforms increasing labor productivity or reducing it? The number of people using social media and the hours they spend doing so are hardly a useful measure of the economic payoff. The same is true of generative AI. \n</p>\n<p>\n The economic value added and labor productivity boosted by generative AI is not measured by how many people use it or how much it costs to create and sustain it. It is measured by economic value added and labor productivity gains - and there is scant evidence that generative AI has moved the needle. \n</p>\n<p>\n The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, electricity, water and more needed to manufacture them, currently dwarfs the payoff. \n</p>\n<p>\n While access to generative AI is relatively cheap, the creation and supply of generative AI is incredibly expensive. Training these models can cost upwards of $100 million and require the newest and most expensive chips from Nvidia <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NVDA\">$(NVDA)$</a> and competitors, including AMD <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">$(AMD)$</a> and Intel <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/INTC\">$(INTC)$</a>. The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, electricity, water and more needed to manufacture them, currently dwarfs the payoff. \n</p>\n<p>\n Creating useful services from generative AI also isn't cheap. Wall Street Journal technology columnist Joanna Stern recently reported on her development of \"Joannabot,\" powered by Google's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOOGL\">$(GOOGL)$</a> Gemini, to help readers \"decide if the iPhone 16 is worth an upgrade:\" The bot was useful but, she wrote, it \"Can go off the rails. Way off,\" and was expensive: \"I won't get into the exact costs, but let's just say I could've taken all four of my iPhone 16 review units on a luxury vacation to Bora Bora for the price of Google's Vertex for this project.\" \n</p>\n<p>\n If generative AI is going to pay off in labor productivity, it has to generate enough revenue to justify its cost. We are not the first to ask this question. Sequoia's David Cahn estimated that $600 billion in annual generative AI revenue is needed to justify the current investments in generative AI, a figure that is probably more than 100 times the current annual revenues for OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, Microsoft's Copilot and similar services. \n</p>\n<p>\n The New York Times reported that OpenAI anticipates $5 billion in losses on $3.7 billion in revenue this year. Nonetheless, OpenAI received $6.6 billion in additional funding to keep it afloat - and which valued the company at $157 billion. That certainly echoes the dot-com bubble - but Goldman Sachs' Jim Covello, Citadel's Ken Griffen, and market strategist Ed Yardeni all warn that the AI bubble could be even worse. \n</p>\n<p>\n Read: OpenAI is now worth more than 87% of S&P 500 companies. It faces a tough test ahead. \n</p>\n<p>\n Also read: Why Open AI's $100 billion 2029 revenue target seems like a tech fever dream \n</p>\n<p>\n We can compare the generative-AI bubble with the internet bubble by looking at revenues in 2000, the peak of the dot-com bubble, and generative-AI revenues for 2024. One study estimates that 134 million PCs were sold in 2000, which at $5,101 per computer at that time equated to about $684 billion in revenue. The number of global internet users was about 361 million in 2000, which at $113 a month equals about $489 billion in revenue ($850 billion in 2024 dollars). \n</p>\n<p>\n E-commerce also generated a lot of revenue in 2000. A March 2001 article reports that the market for e-commerce in 2000 was $286 billion ($500 billion in 2024 dollars). E-commerce has been a growing revenue stream as we have become accustomed to buying online. \n</p>\n<p>\n Put these numbers together and the internet generated more than $1.5 trillion in revenue (in 2024 dollars) in 2000 - and the internet bubble still burst. Generative AI, on the other hand, is currently generating less than $10 billion. If the bubble bursts, it will be a very large pop. \n</p>\n<p>\n Jeffrey Funk is a retired professor and winner of the NTT DoCoMo mobile science award. His latest book is \"Unicorns, Hype and Bubbles: A guide to spotting, avoiding, and exploiting investment bubbles in tech\" (Harriman House, 2024). \n</p>\n<p>\n Gary Smith is a professor of economics at Pomona College and the author of more than 100 academic papers and 17 books, most recently (co-authored with Margaret Smith): \"The Power of Modern Value Investing: Beyond Indexing, Algos, and Alpha,\" (Palgrave Macmillan, 2024). \n</p>\n<p>\n More: \n</p>\n<p>\n Also read: \n</p>\n<p>\n -Jeffrey Funk -Gary Smith \n</p>\n<p>\n This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal. \n</p>\n<pre>\n \n</pre>\n<p>\n (END) Dow Jones Newswires\n</p>\n<p>\n October 21, 2024 07:56 ET (11:56 GMT)\n</p>\n<p>\n Copyright (c) 2024 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.\n</p>\n</font>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Dow Jones </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2024-10-21 19:56</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<font class=\"NormalMinus1\" face=\"Arial\">\n<p>\nMW The AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.\n</p>\n<p>\n By Jeffrey Funk and Gary Smith \n</p>\n<p>\n Two different bubbles and two completely different revenue streams mean only one thing \n</p>\n<p>\n The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging, and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful. \n</p>\n<p>\n It's different this time. How many times have we heard that? It usually turns out to be wishful thinking. This time, the generative-AI bubble may really be different than the dot-com bubble - just not in a good way. \n</p>\n<p>\n The number of generative AI users is growing faster than the number of internet users in the late 1990s - except the comparison is essentially meaningless. \n</p>\n<p>\n Think about it. What did people have to do to become internet users in the late 1990s? They had to buy a computer and subscribe to an internet service provider, which were both expensive. The Compaq ProSignia Desktop 330 was $2,699 in 1999 ($5,101 in 2024 dollars) and that didn't include applications software such as Microsoft's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MSFT\">$(MSFT)$</a> Word, Excel and PowerPoint. Bell Atlantic offered a digital subscriber line service for $59.95 a month in 1999, or $113 in 2024 dollars. \n</p>\n<p>\n How much does it cost to use generative AI today? Nothing. You already own a computer and pay for internet access, and OpenAI and others offer limited-use services for free. The substantial cost of accessing the internet 30 years ago meant that users anticipated substantial payoffs. The minimal cost of accessing ChatGPT and other generative-AI systems today means that users don't need much of a payoff, if any, to give it a try. \n</p>\n<p>\n Why are economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and elsewhere making this silly comparison? The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful. If anything, they are addictive entertainment that we pay for with our time. \n</p>\n<p>\n St. Louis Fed economists speculated about the possible effects of generative AI on labor productivity: \"We examined how intensely respondents employed generative AI on days that they reported using it.\" Seriously? Is the intensive use of Facebook <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/META\">$(META)$</a>, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat (SNAP) and other social-media platforms increasing labor productivity or reducing it? The number of people using social media and the hours they spend doing so are hardly a useful measure of the economic payoff. The same is true of generative AI. \n</p>\n<p>\n The economic value added and labor productivity boosted by generative AI is not measured by how many people use it or how much it costs to create and sustain it. It is measured by economic value added and labor productivity gains - and there is scant evidence that generative AI has moved the needle. \n</p>\n<p>\n The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, electricity, water and more needed to manufacture them, currently dwarfs the payoff. \n</p>\n<p>\n While access to generative AI is relatively cheap, the creation and supply of generative AI is incredibly expensive. Training these models can cost upwards of $100 million and require the newest and most expensive chips from Nvidia <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NVDA\">$(NVDA)$</a> and competitors, including AMD <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">$(AMD)$</a> and Intel <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/INTC\">$(INTC)$</a>. The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, electricity, water and more needed to manufacture them, currently dwarfs the payoff. \n</p>\n<p>\n Creating useful services from generative AI also isn't cheap. Wall Street Journal technology columnist Joanna Stern recently reported on her development of \"Joannabot,\" powered by Google's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOOGL\">$(GOOGL)$</a> Gemini, to help readers \"decide if the iPhone 16 is worth an upgrade:\" The bot was useful but, she wrote, it \"Can go off the rails. Way off,\" and was expensive: \"I won't get into the exact costs, but let's just say I could've taken all four of my iPhone 16 review units on a luxury vacation to Bora Bora for the price of Google's Vertex for this project.\" \n</p>\n<p>\n If generative AI is going to pay off in labor productivity, it has to generate enough revenue to justify its cost. We are not the first to ask this question. Sequoia's David Cahn estimated that $600 billion in annual generative AI revenue is needed to justify the current investments in generative AI, a figure that is probably more than 100 times the current annual revenues for OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, Microsoft's Copilot and similar services. \n</p>\n<p>\n The New York Times reported that OpenAI anticipates $5 billion in losses on $3.7 billion in revenue this year. Nonetheless, OpenAI received $6.6 billion in additional funding to keep it afloat - and which valued the company at $157 billion. That certainly echoes the dot-com bubble - but Goldman Sachs' Jim Covello, Citadel's Ken Griffen, and market strategist Ed Yardeni all warn that the AI bubble could be even worse. \n</p>\n<p>\n Read: OpenAI is now worth more than 87% of S&P 500 companies. It faces a tough test ahead. \n</p>\n<p>\n Also read: Why Open AI's $100 billion 2029 revenue target seems like a tech fever dream \n</p>\n<p>\n We can compare the generative-AI bubble with the internet bubble by looking at revenues in 2000, the peak of the dot-com bubble, and generative-AI revenues for 2024. One study estimates that 134 million PCs were sold in 2000, which at $5,101 per computer at that time equated to about $684 billion in revenue. The number of global internet users was about 361 million in 2000, which at $113 a month equals about $489 billion in revenue ($850 billion in 2024 dollars). \n</p>\n<p>\n E-commerce also generated a lot of revenue in 2000. A March 2001 article reports that the market for e-commerce in 2000 was $286 billion ($500 billion in 2024 dollars). E-commerce has been a growing revenue stream as we have become accustomed to buying online. \n</p>\n<p>\n Put these numbers together and the internet generated more than $1.5 trillion in revenue (in 2024 dollars) in 2000 - and the internet bubble still burst. Generative AI, on the other hand, is currently generating less than $10 billion. If the bubble bursts, it will be a very large pop. \n</p>\n<p>\n Jeffrey Funk is a retired professor and winner of the NTT DoCoMo mobile science award. His latest book is \"Unicorns, Hype and Bubbles: A guide to spotting, avoiding, and exploiting investment bubbles in tech\" (Harriman House, 2024). \n</p>\n<p>\n Gary Smith is a professor of economics at Pomona College and the author of more than 100 academic papers and 17 books, most recently (co-authored with Margaret Smith): \"The Power of Modern Value Investing: Beyond Indexing, Algos, and Alpha,\" (Palgrave Macmillan, 2024). \n</p>\n<p>\n More: \n</p>\n<p>\n Also read: \n</p>\n<p>\n -Jeffrey Funk -Gary Smith \n</p>\n<p>\n This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal. \n</p>\n<pre>\n \n</pre>\n<p>\n (END) Dow Jones Newswires\n</p>\n<p>\n October 21, 2024 07:56 ET (11:56 GMT)\n</p>\n<p>\n Copyright (c) 2024 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.\n</p>\n</font>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"LU0128525689.USD":"TEMPLETON GLOBAL BALANCED \"A\"(USD) ACC","BK4503":"景林资产持仓","IE00BKPKM429.USD":"NEUBERGER BERMAN GLOBAL SUSTAINABLE EQUITY \"A\" (USD) ACC","IE00BZ1G4Q59.USD":"LEGG MASON CLEARBRIDGE US EQUITY SUSTAINABILITY LEADER \"A\"(USD) INC (A)","LU2264538146.SGD":"Fullerton Lux Funds - Global Absolute Alpha A Acc SGD","LU0061474705.USD":"THREADNEEDLE (LUX) GLOBAL DYNAMIC REAL RETURN \"AU\" (USD) ACC","BK4097":"系统软件","IE00BK4W5M84.HKD":"HSBC GLOBAL FUNDS ICAV US EQUITY INDEX \"HC\" (HKD) ACC","BK4512":"苹果概念","L":"洛斯公司","LU0979878070.USD":"FULLERTON LUX FUNDS - ASIA ABSOLUTE ALPHA \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU0225283273.USD":"SCHRODER ISF GLOBAL EQUITY ALPHA \"A\" (USD) ACC","AMD":"美国超微公司","GOOGL":"谷歌A","IE00B1BXHZ80.USD":"Legg Mason ClearBridge - US Appreciation A Acc USD","IE00BFSS8Q28.SGD":"Janus Henderson Balanced A Inc SGD-H","IE000KEQY171.SGD":"PIMCO BALANCED INCOME AND GROWTH \"M\" (SGDHDG) INC","INTC":"英特尔","LU0149725797.USD":"汇丰美国股市经济规模基金","LU0203345920.USD":"SCHRODER ISF QEP GLB ACT. VL \"A\" (USD) ACC","IE00BJTD4N35.SGD":"Neuberger Berman US Long Short Equity A1 Acc SGD-H","3NVD.UK":"LS 3X NVIDIA","LU1303367103.USD":"摩根大通多经理另类基金 A (acc)","LU0234572021.USD":"高盛美国核心股票组合Acc","IE00BLSP4239.USD":"Legg Mason ClearBridge - Tactical Dividend Income A Mdis USD Plus","IE00B5TLWC47.USD":"BNY MELLON LONG-TERM GLOBAL EQUITY \"B\" (USD) ACC","IE00B775H168.HKD":"JANUS HENDERSON BALANCED \"A5M\" (HKD) INC","BK4585":"ETF&股票定投概念","LU1880398554.USD":"AMUNDI FUNDS GLOBAL EQUITY \"A2\" (USD) INC","BK4507":"流媒体概念","BK4579":"人工智能","IE0034235295.USD":"PINEBRIDGE GLOBAL DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU0187121727.USD":"FIDELITY SUSTAINABLE US EQUITY \"A\" (USD) INC","2NVD.UK":"2X NVIDIA ETP","IE00B4YYXB79.USD":"PIMCO BALANCED INCOME AND GROWTH \"E\" (USD) ACC","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","LU0079474960.USD":"联博美国增长基金A","BK4525":"远程办公概念","MSFT":"微软","BK4524":"宅经济概念","LU0719512351.SGD":"JPMorgan Funds - US Technology A (acc) SGD","LU1803068979.SGD":"FTIF - Franklin Technology A (acc) SGD-H1","BK4508":"社交媒体","IE00BZ199S13.USD":"BNY MELLON MOBILITY INNOVATION \"B\" (USD) ACC","BK4077":"互动媒体与服务","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓","IE0005OL40V9.USD":"JANUS HENDERSON BALANCED \"A6M\" (USD) INC","NVDA":"英伟达"},"source_url":"https://dowjonesnews.com/newdjn/logon.aspx?AL=N","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2477590238","content_text":"MW The AI bubble is looking worse than the dot-com bubble. Here's why.\n\n\n By Jeffrey Funk and Gary Smith \n\n\n Two different bubbles and two completely different revenue streams mean only one thing \n\n\n The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging, and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful. \n\n\n It's different this time. How many times have we heard that? It usually turns out to be wishful thinking. This time, the generative-AI bubble may really be different than the dot-com bubble - just not in a good way. \n\n\n The number of generative AI users is growing faster than the number of internet users in the late 1990s - except the comparison is essentially meaningless. \n\n\n Think about it. What did people have to do to become internet users in the late 1990s? They had to buy a computer and subscribe to an internet service provider, which were both expensive. The Compaq ProSignia Desktop 330 was $2,699 in 1999 ($5,101 in 2024 dollars) and that didn't include applications software such as Microsoft's $(MSFT)$ Word, Excel and PowerPoint. Bell Atlantic offered a digital subscriber line service for $59.95 a month in 1999, or $113 in 2024 dollars. \n\n\n How much does it cost to use generative AI today? Nothing. You already own a computer and pay for internet access, and OpenAI and others offer limited-use services for free. The substantial cost of accessing the internet 30 years ago meant that users anticipated substantial payoffs. The minimal cost of accessing ChatGPT and other generative-AI systems today means that users don't need much of a payoff, if any, to give it a try. \n\n\n Why are economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and elsewhere making this silly comparison? The use of essentially free services - like social media, email, messaging and other apps - doesn't mean they are particularly useful. If anything, they are addictive entertainment that we pay for with our time. \n\n\n St. Louis Fed economists speculated about the possible effects of generative AI on labor productivity: \"We examined how intensely respondents employed generative AI on days that they reported using it.\" Seriously? Is the intensive use of Facebook $(META)$, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat (SNAP) and other social-media platforms increasing labor productivity or reducing it? The number of people using social media and the hours they spend doing so are hardly a useful measure of the economic payoff. The same is true of generative AI. \n\n\n The economic value added and labor productivity boosted by generative AI is not measured by how many people use it or how much it costs to create and sustain it. It is measured by economic value added and labor productivity gains - and there is scant evidence that generative AI has moved the needle. \n\n\n The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, electricity, water and more needed to manufacture them, currently dwarfs the payoff. \n\n\n While access to generative AI is relatively cheap, the creation and supply of generative AI is incredibly expensive. Training these models can cost upwards of $100 million and require the newest and most expensive chips from Nvidia $(NVDA)$ and competitors, including AMD $(AMD)$ and Intel $(INTC)$. The cost to society of AI chips, and the talent, electricity, water and more needed to manufacture them, currently dwarfs the payoff. \n\n\n Creating useful services from generative AI also isn't cheap. Wall Street Journal technology columnist Joanna Stern recently reported on her development of \"Joannabot,\" powered by Google's $(GOOGL)$ Gemini, to help readers \"decide if the iPhone 16 is worth an upgrade:\" The bot was useful but, she wrote, it \"Can go off the rails. Way off,\" and was expensive: \"I won't get into the exact costs, but let's just say I could've taken all four of my iPhone 16 review units on a luxury vacation to Bora Bora for the price of Google's Vertex for this project.\" \n\n\n If generative AI is going to pay off in labor productivity, it has to generate enough revenue to justify its cost. We are not the first to ask this question. Sequoia's David Cahn estimated that $600 billion in annual generative AI revenue is needed to justify the current investments in generative AI, a figure that is probably more than 100 times the current annual revenues for OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, Microsoft's Copilot and similar services. \n\n\n The New York Times reported that OpenAI anticipates $5 billion in losses on $3.7 billion in revenue this year. Nonetheless, OpenAI received $6.6 billion in additional funding to keep it afloat - and which valued the company at $157 billion. That certainly echoes the dot-com bubble - but Goldman Sachs' Jim Covello, Citadel's Ken Griffen, and market strategist Ed Yardeni all warn that the AI bubble could be even worse. \n\n\n Read: OpenAI is now worth more than 87% of S&P 500 companies. It faces a tough test ahead. \n\n\n Also read: Why Open AI's $100 billion 2029 revenue target seems like a tech fever dream \n\n\n We can compare the generative-AI bubble with the internet bubble by looking at revenues in 2000, the peak of the dot-com bubble, and generative-AI revenues for 2024. One study estimates that 134 million PCs were sold in 2000, which at $5,101 per computer at that time equated to about $684 billion in revenue. The number of global internet users was about 361 million in 2000, which at $113 a month equals about $489 billion in revenue ($850 billion in 2024 dollars). \n\n\n E-commerce also generated a lot of revenue in 2000. A March 2001 article reports that the market for e-commerce in 2000 was $286 billion ($500 billion in 2024 dollars). E-commerce has been a growing revenue stream as we have become accustomed to buying online. \n\n\n Put these numbers together and the internet generated more than $1.5 trillion in revenue (in 2024 dollars) in 2000 - and the internet bubble still burst. Generative AI, on the other hand, is currently generating less than $10 billion. If the bubble bursts, it will be a very large pop. \n\n\n Jeffrey Funk is a retired professor and winner of the NTT DoCoMo mobile science award. His latest book is \"Unicorns, Hype and Bubbles: A guide to spotting, avoiding, and exploiting investment bubbles in tech\" (Harriman House, 2024). \n\n\n Gary Smith is a professor of economics at Pomona College and the author of more than 100 academic papers and 17 books, most recently (co-authored with Margaret Smith): \"The Power of Modern Value Investing: Beyond Indexing, Algos, and Alpha,\" (Palgrave Macmillan, 2024). \n\n\n More: \n\n\n Also read: \n\n\n -Jeffrey Funk -Gary Smith \n\n\n This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal. \n\n\n \n\n\n (END) Dow Jones Newswires\n\n\n October 21, 2024 07:56 ET (11:56 GMT)\n\n\n Copyright (c) 2024 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350066890703080,"gmtCreate":1726493458767,"gmtModify":1726494561125,"author":{"id":"3556439528889232","authorId":"3556439528889232","name":"YiLongMusk","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f0c575d19ec8b5d54bdd7074626613ae","crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3556439528889232","idStr":"3556439528889232"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"King of pump and dump","listText":"King of pump and dump","text":"King of pump and dump","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350066890703080","repostId":"2467357810","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2467357810","pubTimestamp":1726491287,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2467357810?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2024-09-16 20:54","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2467357810","media":"CoinMarketCap","summary":"You can also read this news on BH NEWS: Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession. Tech billionaire Peter Thiel has issued a warning about an approaching recession in the United States, attributing the anticipated downturn to unsustainable government spending. Speaking at the All-In Summit alongside fellow billionaire Chamath Palihapitiya, Thiel suggested that the current stability of the economy is largely due to excessive fiscal stimulus, which he deems temporary.Thiel contends that exorbitant government expenditures are merely concealing fundamental economic problems. He highlighted that the projected budget deficit for fiscal year 2024 has escalated to an estimated $1.5 to $1.6 trillion, potentially exceeding initial forecasts by approximately $400 billion. According to Thiel, such immense spending is unsustainable and financed by what he describes as “crazy” budget deficits.Continue Reading: Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession","content":"<html><body><p>You can also read this news on BH NEWS: Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession</p>\n<p>Tech billionaire Peter Thiel has issued a warning about an approaching recession in the United States, attributing the anticipated downturn to unsustainable government spending. Speaking at the All-In Summit alongside fellow billionaire Chamath Palihapitiya, Thiel suggested that the current stability of the economy is largely due to excessive fiscal stimulus, which he deems temporary.</p>\n<h2>What Is the Impact of Government Spending?</h2>\n<p>Thiel contends that exorbitant government expenditures are merely concealing fundamental economic problems. He highlighted that the projected budget deficit for fiscal year 2024 has escalated to an estimated $1.5 to $1.6 trillion, potentially exceeding initial forecasts by approximately $400 billion. According to Thiel, such immense spending is unsustainable and financed by what he describes as “crazy” budget deficits.</p>\n<h2>How Does Rising Debt Threaten the Economy?</h2>\n<p>The surging national debt poses significant risks to the country’s economic stability. Data from the Congressional Budget Office reveals that the U.S. government recorded a budget deficit of $1.9 trillion in the first 11 months of fiscal year 2024, marking an increase of $373 billion compared to the same period last year. Additionally, Treasury Department figures show the national debt has reached an unprecedented $35.273 trillion.</p>\n<h2>Critical Economic Concerns Highlighted</h2>\n<p>Thiel’s warnings underscore several pressing issues:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>Current economic growth is artificially supported by excessive government spending.</li>\n<li>The budget deficit is significantly higher than projected, indicating fiscal instability.</li>\n<li>The national debt’s all-time high threatens long-term economic health.</li>\n<li>There is an urgent need to reassess fiscal policies for sustainable growth.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Economists and investors share Thiel’s apprehensions, cautioning that the expanding budget deficit and mounting national debt could have profound implications for the U.S. economy’s future. They emphasize the importance of the government implementing strategic fiscal adjustments to promote enduring economic stability.</p>\n<h5><span>Continue Reading: </span> Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession</h5></body></html>","source":"coinmarketcap_highlight","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nPeter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2024-09-16 20:54 GMT+8 <a href=https://coinmarketcap.com/community/articles/66e82a99c329261cfaf8d040/><strong>CoinMarketCap</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>You can also read this news on BH NEWS: Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession\nTech billionaire Peter Thiel has issued a warning about an approaching recession in the United States, attributing ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://coinmarketcap.com/community/articles/66e82a99c329261cfaf8d040/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://academy-public.coinmarketcap.com/srd-optimized-uploads/ac7e3242aeae4e679363cc2b72aa28e6.jpeg","relate_stocks":{"BK4524":"宅经济概念","LU1861217088.USD":"贝莱德金融科技A2","BK4535":"淡马锡持仓","LU1861220207.SGD":"Blackrock FinTech A2 SGD-H","BK4527":"明星科技股","BK4588":"碎股","LU0158827948.USD":"ALLIANZ GLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY \"A\" (USD) INC","AMD":"美国超微公司","LU2089283258.USD":"安联环球可持续基金Cl AM Dis","BK4551":"寇图资本持仓","BK4581":"高盛持仓","LU2360107671.USD":"BGF FINTECH \"A4\" (USD) INC","MU":"美光科技","INTC":"英特尔","NVDA":"英伟达","BK4106":"数据处理与外包服务","LU2023251221.USD":"ALLIANZ GLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY \"AM\" (USD) INC","BK4554":"元宇宙及AR概念","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓","BK4585":"ETF&股票定投概念","LU2089284900.SGD":"Allianz Global Sustainability Cl AM Dis H2-SGD","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","BK4227":"交易和支付处理服务","BK4566":"资本集团"},"source_url":"https://coinmarketcap.com/community/articles/66e82a99c329261cfaf8d040/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2467357810","content_text":"You can also read this news on BH NEWS: Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession\nTech billionaire Peter Thiel has issued a warning about an approaching recession in the United States, attributing the anticipated downturn to unsustainable government spending. Speaking at the All-In Summit alongside fellow billionaire Chamath Palihapitiya, Thiel suggested that the current stability of the economy is largely due to excessive fiscal stimulus, which he deems temporary.\nWhat Is the Impact of Government Spending?\nThiel contends that exorbitant government expenditures are merely concealing fundamental economic problems. He highlighted that the projected budget deficit for fiscal year 2024 has escalated to an estimated $1.5 to $1.6 trillion, potentially exceeding initial forecasts by approximately $400 billion. According to Thiel, such immense spending is unsustainable and financed by what he describes as “crazy” budget deficits.\nHow Does Rising Debt Threaten the Economy?\nThe surging national debt poses significant risks to the country’s economic stability. Data from the Congressional Budget Office reveals that the U.S. government recorded a budget deficit of $1.9 trillion in the first 11 months of fiscal year 2024, marking an increase of $373 billion compared to the same period last year. Additionally, Treasury Department figures show the national debt has reached an unprecedented $35.273 trillion.\nCritical Economic Concerns Highlighted\nThiel’s warnings underscore several pressing issues:\n\nCurrent economic growth is artificially supported by excessive government spending.\nThe budget deficit is significantly higher than projected, indicating fiscal instability.\nThe national debt’s all-time high threatens long-term economic health.\nThere is an urgent need to reassess fiscal policies for sustainable growth.\n\nEconomists and investors share Thiel’s apprehensions, cautioning that the expanding budget deficit and mounting national debt could have profound implications for the U.S. economy’s future. They emphasize the importance of the government implementing strategic fiscal adjustments to promote enduring economic stability.\nContinue Reading: Peter Thiel Predicts Imminent U.S. Recession","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":208857827397656,"gmtCreate":1692014645216,"gmtModify":1692014648516,"author":{"id":"3556439528889232","authorId":"3556439528889232","name":"YiLongMusk","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f0c575d19ec8b5d54bdd7074626613ae","crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3556439528889232","idStr":"3556439528889232"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/TSLA\">$Tesla Motors(TSLA)$ </a><v-v data-views=\"0\"></v-v>","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/TSLA\">$Tesla Motors(TSLA)$ </a><v-v data-views=\"0\"></v-v>","text":"$Tesla Motors(TSLA)$","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/208857827397656","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":32,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}
