After criticising Google's past two Google foldable phones with no improvement made in the new model, Zack Nelson (JerryRigEverything) experiences a battery explosion while testing the new Pixel 10 Fold.
i think the problem is more people punching numbers into the calculator and presenting the answer, without the faintest idea if it is even right (or having the ability to check).
it kinda worked in a way. AMD offered OpenAI 160 million stock options.
With AMD's stock jump today it's net worth increased about $35billion, close enough in value to those stocks option they gave away (if it was redeemed instantly).
It's too much of a coincidence so I'm guessing market makers and institutional shareholders priced it in their trading today.
Aging is characterized by a deterioration of stem cell function, but the feasibility of replenishing these cells to counteract aging remains poorly defined. Our study addresses this gap by developing senescence (seno)-resistant human mesenchymal progenitor cells (SRCs), genetically fortified to enhance cellular resilience. In a 44-week trial, we intravenously delivered SRCs to aged macaques, noting a systemic reduction in aging indicators, such as cellular senescence, chronic inflammation, and tissue degeneration, without any detected adverse effects. Notably, SRC treatment enhanced brain architecture and cognitive function and alleviated the reproductive system decline. The restorative effects of SRCs are partly attributed to their exosomes, which combat cellular senescence. This study provides initial evidence that genetically modified human mesenchymal progenitors can slow primate aging, highlighting the therapeutic potential of regenerative approaches in combating age-related health decline.
yeah same thing when I tried their Huawei phones. their mobile phone market is much more innovative due to the competition it's a bit of a shame the monopolies stifle competitors to grasp their crown a little longer
As one of the top level comments say, the images are all from https://randomuser.me/ which is suspect. If you don't have a profile picture of them, then I'd suggest not using it. Or link to actual sources of feedback (Google Workspace reviews, LinkedIn posts, tweets etc)
What a mess. When they have to write about how “circular financing” became highly regulated in the future, I hope they know that the problem was not confusing in the big picture.
Maybe I can get quoted in a sidebar:
“Hey Econ students, we normal people could see that the AI market was extremely gamed. We can see the investment feedback loop. It is just that the organizations continuing it have control over so much money, they don’t have to stop and ask society in general for permission to continue. Really this is a symptom of the wealth inequality crisis that they covered chapter…”
This method of financing is not novel. But anytime you see an unnecessarily complex deal like this, one should think very carefully about why they didn't opt for a simpler method, e.g. simply selling stock in the open market.
The reasoning behind such a deal are usually not a good sign for the underlying health of the companies involved.
I'm assuming this is what you mean by 'simply selling stock in the open market' so correct me if I'm wrong but Why would Open AI go public when they can raise so much private money they're valued at 500B ?
It certainly wouldn't be for fear of a lack of investment. AMD is up 30% from this announcement alone.
Openai can't go public at present. They have an irregular non profit structure. They've been negotiating with Microsoft but can't convert out of their current structure without getting a new deal from Microsoft accepting the conversion.
Oh, we saw it before. 1998-2000. Cisco, Sun, et al, "investing" in the dotcoms so those dotcoms could turn around and use the funds to buy servers and routers from them.
Not really. This is AMD investing in OpenAI (albeit in an unusual way, with stock options) not the reverse. Same as the Nvidia deal. Same as hyperscaler investment in OpenAI and Anthropic. The people selling stuff to the AI Labs are the same ones funding them.
I understood it as, OpenAI is giving AMD money, by buying 6GW of GPUs from them.
But if it results in their stock reaching 600$, then AMD will give back the money that OpenAI spent on GPUs as 10% stock options into AMD.
Which sounds like, no one is really investing in each other, they're both like exchanging money back and forth, where both hope to gain some extra money by propping up the AMD stock with the announcement, hoping it helps make AMD more competitive on the GPU landscape.
The real, sustained value creation for AMD is if their GPUs can be competitive with Nvidia for inference or training. The market is currently betting that AMD will get that "spillover" effect from working with OpenAI to get their chips + software in a state that openAI can use at scale.
So day 1 valuation is mostly hype, but that hype may translate into real value later.
Nvidia owns a piece of OAI, and now Nvidia would own a piece of AMD. I am just waiting for Samsung type of circular ownership structures here in the US.
The good part is that the next financial crisis when OpenAI sinks probably won’t be a systemic one, it will definitely drag others down and the stock market will readjust, but hopefully the US economy will remain afloat
Can you explain why you think that is? The SP500 has never been more top heavy and when those 7 or so all AI associated incest stocks falter I can't see anyway it's not going to be a bloodbath of the decade long type.
I don’t know, just intuition. Each crisis is different and impossible to predict, otherwise I’d be retired, which I’m not.
Completely agree, I’d expect all of those to take a big hit, and some more than others, but I don’t think Microsoft or Google would disappear. As for the SP issue, if this trend continues, people might start seeing the SP as the opposite of diversification (at least in the stocks market sense) and will have to start looking for something else.
BTW, I’m almost an all-in SP investor myself so I’ll have to navigate that dip too, lol
With some booms you have something to show for it, for example, a railway network. With others, such as tulips, there is nothing to show.
After the predicted bloodbath, do we get some infrastructure and products worth keeping at the end of it? If so, does that mean the system can limp on, after even more money has printed, or do we get to another big fork in the road where systematic change is required?
No one implied they were doing this altruistically. It's noteworthy simply because they bucked the conventional wisdom (offshore everything, US manufacturing cannot compete etc etc) and succeeded financially.
reply