valueseek Posted February 5 Posted February 5 7 hours ago, NnnnotSoSmart said: Damn the torpedoes... the data on weekly or daily active users and total queries, etc. says about 60%+ to OpenAI. Imo ChatGPT is poor vs. Gemini on multi-modal (audio/video) and the ecosystem disadvantage. Imo Gemini is poor vs. ChatGPT in thinking, reasoning, understanding, decisions related stuff.
Sweet Posted February 5 Posted February 5 3 minutes ago, rogermunibond said: Amazon $200B capex guide Lol. Investors are happy.
nsx5200 Posted February 5 Posted February 5 (edited) This Claude panic sure rhymes with the DeepSeek panic about a year ago. Mr. Market sure is bipolar. I also see a rise of 'hackers' that target these AI packaged answers and exploits the market when the AI packaged answers are incorrect. New areas for humans to explore, or could that be automated by AI? Edited February 5 by nsx5200 added hacker section
Dalal.Holdings Posted February 6 Posted February 6 3 hours ago, rogermunibond said: Amazon $200B capex guide The tech stocks used to be high ROIC asset light businesses. Now, maybe with the exception of Apple, they are all going balls to the wall on capital spending...
MungerWunger Posted February 6 Posted February 6 https://newsletter.semianalysis.com/p/claude-code-is-the-inflection-point?r=3vocpk&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true&triedRedirect=true
UK Posted February 8 Posted February 8 (edited) https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/anthropic-buys-super-bowl-ads-slap-openai-selling-ads-chatgpt-2026-02-07/ https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce3edyx74jko Edited February 8 by UK
Spekulatius Posted February 8 Posted February 8 (edited) On 2/5/2026 at 5:58 PM, nsx5200 said: This Claude panic sure rhymes with the DeepSeek panic about a year ago. Mr. Market sure is bipolar. I also see a rise of 'hackers' that target these AI packaged answers and exploits the market when the AI packaged answers are incorrect. New areas for humans to explore, or could that be automated by AI? Mr Market is bipolar because nobody knows anything. For now, we have no idea who the winner is in this high stakes horse race (Gemini, ChatGPT, Claude) as each try to outrun each other by outspending. Economics even for the winner are unclear as well. Edited February 8 by Spekulatius
NnnnotSoSmart Posted February 9 Posted February 9 20 hours ago, Spekulatius said: Mr Market is bipolar because nobody knows anything. There's a very high probability that the massive AI capex spend ($Trillions$) will benefit the pick and shovel providers...at least for the next several years.
NnnnotSoSmart Posted February 10 Posted February 10 46% of the S&P 500 is One AI Bet | Kai Wu on Why It’s Likely the Wrong One (He attempts to address the ROI question) Timestamps: 00:00 The trillion dollar AI question and ROI 00:03 Nadella’s bubble test and economic diffusion 00:06 The AI adoption S-curve and infrastructure phase 00:10 Building an AI ROI framework from earnings calls 00:14 Real examples of AI productivity gains 00:16 Where AI gains are coming from revenue vs costs 00:19 AI adopters and excess stock returns 00:23 Industry-level adoption and sector dispersion 00:26 Infrastructure vs early adopters vs laggards 00:33 AI adoption vs valuation disconnect 00:37 Valuation premiums and market concentration risk 00:39 Historical parallels railroads and fiber optics 00:45 Overcapacity risk and monetization challenges 00:48 AI exposure inside the S&P 500 and alternative indices 00:52 Portfolio positioning and the shift toward early adopters
frommi Posted February 10 Posted February 10 On 2/8/2026 at 7:04 PM, Spekulatius said: Mr Market is bipolar because nobody knows anything. For now, we have no idea who the winner is in this high stakes horse race (Gemini, ChatGPT, Claude) as each try to outrun each other by outspending. Economics even for the winner are unclear as well. This strongly reminds me of the Telekom hype around the year 2000. Imagine what happens when AI is still hallucinating in five years.
rogermunibond Posted February 10 Posted February 10 S&P 493 has no productivity expectations built into the AI trade. Bullish.
gfp Posted February 11 Posted February 11 This post on X is way too wordy but it might help break through some of the completely out of touch AI perspectives on this message board. Maybe skip ahead a bit to save time. There is an "aha" moment for AI skeptics that comes when you realize that the cutting edge AI tools (the ones that will be completely obsolete in 3 months) are better at doing your job than you are. I've heard it referred to as the "Move 37 moment" - a reference to the AlphaGo documentary/competition, where Go champion Lee Sedol realized on 'move 37' that the AI was capable of creativity and far more advanced than he had given it credit for. THAT WAS 2016!!! Truly ancient history in this industry. If you used a free version of ChatGPT 16 months ago for 15 minutes and think you know where AI is today you are who this article is aiming at. https://x.com/mattshumer_/article/2021256989876109403
73 Reds Posted February 11 Posted February 11 27 minutes ago, gfp said: This post on X is way too wordy but it might help break through some of the completely out of touch AI perspectives on this message board. Maybe skip ahead a bit to save time. There is an "aha" moment for AI skeptics that comes when you realize that the cutting edge AI tools (the ones that will be completely obsolete in 3 months) are better at doing your job than you are. I've heard it referred to as the "Move 37 moment" - a reference to the AlphaGo documentary/competition, where Go champion Lee Sedol realized on 'move 37' that the AI was capable of creativity and far more advanced than he had given it credit for. THAT WAS 2016!!! Truly ancient history in this industry. If you used a free version of ChatGPT 16 months ago for 15 minutes and think you know where AI is today you are who this article is aiming at. https://x.com/mattshumer_/article/2021256989876109403 @gfp not to take away from your message but in the legal world, no lawyer who values their license would submit anything AI-generated without thoroughly reviewing and vetting the output. Lawyers have been recently sanctioned for doing just that.
Hektor Posted February 11 Posted February 11 30 minutes ago, gfp said: This post on X is way too wordy but it might help break through some of the completely out of touch AI perspectives on this message board. Maybe skip ahead a bit to save time. There is an "aha" moment for AI skeptics that comes when you realize that the cutting edge AI tools (the ones that will be completely obsolete in 3 months) are better at doing your job than you are. I've heard it referred to as the "Move 37 moment" - a reference to the AlphaGo documentary/competition, where Go champion Lee Sedol realized on 'move 37' that the AI was capable of creativity and far more advanced than he had given it credit for. THAT WAS 2016!!! Truly ancient history in this industry. If you used a free version of ChatGPT 16 months ago for 15 minutes and think you know where AI is today you are who this article is aiming at. https://x.com/mattshumer_/article/2021256989876109403 Interesting read. Thanks for posting @gfp.
gfp Posted February 11 Posted February 11 3 minutes ago, 73 Reds said: @gfp not to take away from your message but in the legal world, no lawyer who values their license would submit anything AI-generated without thoroughly reviewing and vetting the output. Lawyers have been recently sanctioned for doing just that.
Hektor Posted February 11 Posted February 11 (edited) 6 minutes ago, 73 Reds said: no lawyer who values their license would submit anything AI-generated without thoroughly reviewing and vetting the output. I would also assume they would be wary of feeding any document or work into a AI model until Privacy and Security are guaranteed. Edited February 11 by Hektor
73 Reds Posted February 11 Posted February 11 1 minute ago, Hektor said: I would also assume they would be wary of feeding any document or work into a AI model until Privacy and Security are guaranteed. It would probably be easy enough to protect identity and then fill in all protected data later. But competent lawyers may have to spend more time verifying AI-generated product than simply preparing the product themselves.
UK Posted February 11 Posted February 11 1 hour ago, gfp said: This post on X is way too wordy but it might help break through some of the completely out of touch AI perspectives on this message board. Maybe skip ahead a bit to save time. There is an "aha" moment for AI skeptics that comes when you realize that the cutting edge AI tools (the ones that will be completely obsolete in 3 months) are better at doing your job than you are. I've heard it referred to as the "Move 37 moment" - a reference to the AlphaGo documentary/competition, where Go champion Lee Sedol realized on 'move 37' that the AI was capable of creativity and far more advanced than he had given it credit for. THAT WAS 2016!!! Truly ancient history in this industry. If you used a free version of ChatGPT 16 months ago for 15 minutes and think you know where AI is today you are who this article is aiming at. Thanks! But what, in the light of all this, is your thinking about CSU etc then?
gfp Posted February 11 Posted February 11 3 minutes ago, UK said: Thanks! But what, in the light of all this, is your thinking about CSU etc then? I think CSU is in the capital allocation business and will do just fine. I'm a buyer
Pelagic Posted February 11 Posted February 11 37 minutes ago, Hektor said: I would also assume they would be wary of feeding any document or work into a AI model until Privacy and Security are guaranteed. For something like a law firm or medical practice where client/patient confidentiality are paramount and they're mainly handling a lot of documents that are primarily text or images local models make a lot of sense and in their current state are very capable at doing this. I don't know how many firms are racing out to have a local model installed on a cluster of mac-minis or something but price wise for ~$20k or so they'd be able to have Llama 3.1 running internally. Not inexpensive but also not unreasonable for most firms.
UK Posted February 11 Posted February 11 (edited) 53 minutes ago, gfp said: I think CSU is in the capital allocation business and will do just fine. I'm a buyer Merci! All this disruption talk/risk is mindboggling and also starts to scare the shit out of me:). And I am not even sure I am in some kind of offensive mode anymore, basic portfolio survival would be just fine:) Edited February 11 by UK
Hektor Posted February 11 Posted February 11 45 minutes ago, Pelagic said: For something like a law firm or medical practice where client/patient confidentiality are paramount and they're mainly handling a lot of documents that are primarily text or images local models make a lot of sense and in their current state are very capable at doing this. I don't know how many firms are racing out to have a local model installed on a cluster of mac-minis or something but price wise for ~$20k or so they'd be able to have Llama 3.1 running internally. Not inexpensive but also not unreasonable for most firms. Thanks @Pelagic. This could be cloud based too, in my opinion. For example many/most law firms or medical practices use cloud hosted software today. This is made possible by activities other than developing software or evaluating documents, I think.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now