> Ed Zitron is a blow hard and frequently overstates things to the point where it is hard to take seriously, but so are the AI industry leaders.

Except that the AI industry leaders actually have skin in the game/are in the trenches and competing in the market. Ed Zitron wants you to subscribe to a newsletter so that you can read doom and gloom and...?

If you invested based on his advice, you'd have missed huge gains and/or lost money.

And I say this as a person who thinks most of the "AI industry leaders" are ethically questionable, at best, and ethically bankrupt, at worst, and that the stock market should be approached with caution due to valuations.

▲

RachelF 4 hours ago | parent [-]

The fact is there is BullSh_t and hype on both sides.

Both Zitron and AI execs have good points, but both are trying to sell you something. The murky truth lies between the two extremes.

IMHO, having Zitron around is a counter to the AI leaders. Is he the best? No. Is he the loudest? Yes.

▲

ElProlactin 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Anthropic's ARR is reportedly now above $60 billion. OpenAI's is reportedly above $40 billion. Countless people and businesses are using AI to create tangible value and reduce costs.

We can debate whether the level of investment in AI is excessive and what any malinvestment will eventually cost when the market has to recognize it.

But Zitron is selling you a $70/year subscription to a newsletter that constantly reminds you that AI is a bubble and the technology is worthless. The AI people aren't selling you the same thing Ed is.

And let's be honest here: it's not like Zitron has any credentials of substance that are relevant. He's not an accountant and constantly demonstrates that he can't read a balance sheet or financial statement, doesn't understand basic account principles, etc. He's not a technologist, so he can't speak credibly to AI tech and how it's being used. He never worked in AI, even in a non-tech role, so he has no first-hand experience that's unique.

Basically, he's a former PR shill who, from what I can tell, saw an opportunity to profit by hitching himself to the AI zeitgeist as a naysayer.

I'm sure his grift is keeping his bills paid, but anyone taking action based on his doom and gloom thesis has missed out on one of the biggest investment opportunities in history. And just to be clear: this is not to say that stocks will go up forever, that valuation concerns aren't legitimate, or that there aren't aspects to AI infrastructure financing that are a bit concerning. But if you had ignored Ed from the minute he started whining and sold all of your AI investments tomorrow, you'd be much wealthier.

▲

RachelF 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Very true. The problem is mainstream business media hasn't asked the questions that Zitron has.

So, much like current US politics, we're left with hype on both sides. That's all that gets the clicks/attention, and little balanced analysis in the middle.

	▲	ElProlactin 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This isn't true though. There is significant discussion in the financial media about the valuations of AI-related companies, the financing of the AI infrastructure buildout, etc. Academics are talking about it. Investment banks are talking about it. Policy people are talking about it. Zitron is one of the loudest voices and he attracts attention because his thesis is so black and white: it's all a scam, there's no value, it's all going to $0, the sky is falling. As a PR shill, he was obviously clued in to the fact that a lot of people prefer black and white, oversimplified and bombastic theses. To buy into Zitron's ideas (and pay him $70/year), you don't need to understand how AI works. You don't need to understand the difference between capex and opex. You don't need to know how to read a balance sheet or financial statement. All you need to do is believe that everything is a massive fraud.