Dylan Patel: uncertainty

Transcript context

…Why? Because of what we've seen already. The public signs all show that this is very much the case. What we see beyond that is more questionable and I'm not sure because I don't know. We'll see how much they progress. If things continue to improve, life continues to radically get reshaped for many people. Every time you increment up the intelligence, the amount of usage of it grows hugely. Every time you increment the cost down of that amount of intelligence, the amount of usage increases massively. As you continue to push that curve out, that's what really matters. It doesn't need to be today. It doesn't need to be revenue vs. how much CapEx. In any time in the next few years, it just needs to be, did that last humongous chunk of CapEx make sense for OpenAI or whoever the leader was? How does that then flow through? Or were they able to convince enough people that they can raise this much money? You think Elon's tapped out of his network with raising $6 billion? No. xAI is going to be able to raise $30+ billion easily. You think Sam's tapped out? You think Anthropic's tapped out? Anthropic's barely even diluted the company relatively. There's a lot of capital to be raised. Call it FOMO if you want, but during the dot-com bubble, the private industry flew through like $150 billion a year. We're nowhere close to that yet. We're not even close to the dot-com bubble. Why would this bubble not be bigger? You go back to the prior bubbles: PC bubble, semiconductor bubble, mechatronics bubble. Throughout the US, each bubble was smaller. I don't know if you call it a bubble or not. Why wouldn't this one be bigger? How many billions of dollars a year is this bubble right now?…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.