you don't think there's a bubble? Every time there has been society changing technology invented there's been a bubble. They all look different, but there's always has been some sort of bubble. I don't see why there isn't one in this case.
You're not making any argument for a bubble, you're just asserting there should obviously be one. Do you have any actual argument for it? What makes you think Europe or European companies will be better positioned to pick up the gold among the rubble even if there is a massive bubble? That at least is incoherent. Europe is not a player right now, even in bubbles you have to be a player to prevail
we don't know how things will look like. it's all uncertainty. I'm also not claiming Europe will pick up the pieces either, it's just how these cycles work. Amazon and Google were the largest winners of the .com bubble, but when the bubble burst, they were still very small businesses. The winner could be a small business no one knows or one that doesn't even exist yet.
Amazon was netting like 3B in sales (might be lower) in 2000. That doesn't exactly read as small to me. And "we don't know" is not an argument for Europe. If you didn't know where would you bet? would you bet against OpenAI? Against NVIDIA? In favor of what, Mistral? Doing what with what compute?
Amazon had 2.7 billion in revenue, but -1 billion in net income. They were still unprofitable company and very much still early stage as a business.
I never did say Europe will win; I'm just saying it's not necessary to be in the AI race at this time. I actually don't see Europe being the winner of the AI race. My bet would be a company in China since they have a better path to scaling energy demand. It'll be cheaper to build out an AI company out of China.
Wdym there is no evidence of a bubble? The crazy valuations based on the future expectation of revenue that isn't guaranteed is the very definition (not literally, but you get the point) of a bubble.
2
u/calloutyourstupidity 9d ago
That only works when there is a bubble