this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2026
379 points (96.1% liked)

Technology

87597 readers
3505 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] rozodru@piefed.world 252 points 2 months ago (9 children)

"If a company isn't making as much money as quickly as it, and investors, thought it would" that's the sign, saved you the click.

[–] hopfi@lemmy.world 104 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Exactly what I expected from Business insider..

[–] Danarchy@lemmy.nz 41 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I’m beginning to think they don’t actually have anyone on the inside at any businesses

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Opposite... The call is coming from INSIDE the business!

[–] inari@piefed.zip 33 points 2 months ago

Incredible insight

[–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago (2 children)

But that isn't how greater foolism works. It doesn't matter how stupid one is, as long as there are others more stupid.

[–] Supamanc@sopuli.xyz 21 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent!

[–] Flower@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And the question is always when the market switches from irrational to rational, and the answer is "nobody knows."

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rothe@piefed.social 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Which is a useless metric in today's market, since none of the AI companies have made a single cent yet, in fact they are bleeding billions, but are still receiving billions in investments, most of it from other AI-involved companies.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago

The companies being talked about are the picks and shovels guys. Sandisk, Crucial, Nvidia, Oracle. The ones that should actually be making money now, and so far have been.

Jesus Christ, it's not even a long article, you can just read it and know this stuff before you comment.

[–] benjirenji@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Duh, aren't we passed this situation yet? Millions and even billions of workers should've been replaced by now. Many problems including coding: solved.

Or are investors really this patient and resilient when it comes to hollow hype?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] DandomRude@lemmy.world 43 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

If even the goddamn BusinessInsider comes to this conclusion, I wonder why they don’t also realize that all stock market transactions work this way today. None of this has the slightest connection to the real world anymore. Stock prices are determined purely by how many billionaires—or rather, their concentrated capital—are betting on which companies. And here’s the key: They always win, because even with the most absurd business ideas, they can drive up the price, which only crashes after the super-rich have sold their shares.

This makes it very easy to understand why the dumbest people in the world never lose money, as long as they’re rich enough.

Humanity is footing the bill for this, and it’s now becoming very clear just how high that bill is.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 28 points 2 months ago (11 children)

That will result in massive order cancellations at NVDA, MU, AVGO, SNDK, etc., because no one needs the chips, networking, memory, or processor power," he added.

Well that is just false as there is pent up demand in the consumer markets that should be more than enough to make chip makers good money but I guess they don’t consider us regular folks real customers anymore

[–] C4pt41n_Pr0xy@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago (5 children)

But graphics cards, CPUs, RAM, and other components needed in data centers are a far cry from the same components used in home and office desktops and laptops. It’s like trying to sell parts used in F1 race cars on the consumer car market. Technically, there will be buyers, but the vast majority of these parts will remain unsold because demand for such specialized components is negligible in the general consumer market.

[–] StarryPhoenix97@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

I'm not sure if it's fully a bubble, or if the bubble is partly being used as a smoke screen to hide the upfront cost of redesigning computing infrastructure.

A lot of the time, I think AI is just the branding layer. The real goal is top-to-bottom SaaS.

Like, they're letting these AI companies hold the bag for building datacenters which will then get scooped by various companies like microsoft and google to offer virtualized home computing through a client.

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 3 points 2 months ago

Didn't we fight a cold war over this? The Soviets wanted a top down internet and it was more expensive and less capable

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Especially since those parts carry a significantly higher premium than consumer parts.

and you know nvidia isnt gonna sell the shit at a reasonable price.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

and these chips arnt compatible for personal/customer use too, so it will be wasted.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mirshafie@europe.pub 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It's not interchangeable though. I don't need an A100 at home.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I keep hearing this from people and it's not true. People want GPUs for playing games not running AI so the backlog of chips isn't useful to anyone.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If nvidia had 0 AI chip buyers I will guarantee you they will come running back to consumers until the next fad.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah but it'll be months before they can get production up and running. They've foolishly completely abandoned the consumer market which means they don't have the factories set up to produce consumer chips.

They also have nothing they can do with their own stock so it's not like there's going to be a glut of components.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] whereitsat@lemmy.zip 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

market research firm lol. get a real job.

[–] Bakkoda@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

To anyone who has imposter syndrome: Imagine being able to say shit like this and call it a career?

You can do it. I have faith in you.

[–] impairedimperator@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 months ago

Imagine being able to say shit like this successfully and earn enough to call it a career.

That skill is not very common.

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago

When financial publications are giving advice on how to trade inside a bubble, that's a leading indicator that the bubble is about to pop.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 14 points 2 months ago (7 children)

Yeah, been hearing this for a year.

Starting to worry it's all... doomerism hype?

Nah.

[–] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 27 points 2 months ago (2 children)

When there’s a bubble, at first you hear “hmm this is weird maybe it’s a bubble”. Then more people start saying ,”yeah it looks like a bubble”. Then more people start analyzing how it IS a bubble. All the while big investors are like, “ I know it’s a bubble but right now I’m making bank, so…”. Finally, after those investors decide it’s been a good run, they cash out and the bubble truly starts bursting.

So right now everyone knows it’s a bubble. What we’re seeing is the big investors trying to squeeze every last billion out of it.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Finally, after those investors decide it’s been a good run, they cash out and the bubble truly starts bursting.

This time they wasted so much money that they're trying to foist the bad investments on retail investors with overblown valuations and IPOs before cashing out.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 6 points 2 months ago (8 children)

Yeah, heard it all before, and I'm very familiar with the structural "curiosities" of the existing investment landscape.

Very few people correctly called the problems with 2007-2008. Not none, but few. And with soooooo many people mindlessly on the "it's a bubble!" bandwagon so early, a lot of accuracy and legitimacy is lost months or years beforehand for no other reason than why conspiracy theory people say "we'll get UFO disclosure this year!" Or "This year the Cubs/Arsenal/Red Sox will do it!" It's just the thing they say until one time they're right.

I'm not telling you it won't happen in a sense... But it's not going to happen how or when you think. IMO, you're looking at a partial stuttering effect maaaaaybe late winter like Q1 2027, and that's about it. There's to much alternate demand for everything LLM companies are already buying up to create a full and similar bubble like the Dot Com bubble.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Dot-com bubble took about 5 years before it burst, and that was crazier. Why would you think this one would pop quicker?

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 8 points 2 months ago (4 children)

You're talking about from buildup to crash, though. As if everyone just looking at literally any large investment and saying "it's a bubble!" is dong anything other than being a broken clock right twice a day.

I follow conspiracy theories extensively, and people have always predicted a huge, massive economic collapse next year - every year. On Art Bell, it was a constant, reiterated prediction every year from 1994 until 2013. It's only the ones that happened to say it in 2006 or 2007 that rode the credit of "actually predicting the 2008 crisis!" Even the ones saying it before the Dot Com bubble didn't get it right because their doomerism made all predictions "end of the world" level.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Except people did predict the crash, they could see it coming and they made bank out of it. They made a movie about it.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 2 points 2 months ago

That movie was about 20 people copying one guy

[–] TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I haven't heard this much bubble talk ever. It's not the same prediction made by the same people again this time. I don't even know anybody irl who likes vibecoding (myself included) who thinks this is sustainable.

Even the ones saying it before the Dot Com bubble didn't get it right because their doomerism made all predictions "end of the world" level.

I don't know what you're trying to say. People had bad takes about that bubble so all bubble scepticism is discredited? But it popped, which means all these investors had bad takes as well. So...

Nobody worth listening to thinks this bubble is going to be worse than the dotcom bubble. It's simply not that big to begin with. I guess there's some wishful thinking too, but what's the alternative to this investors-expected AI growth? Everything except the AI market crashes?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

We heard about the debt derivative crash coming from 2006. If you said it was coming people laughed at you and called you stupid, mostly Harvard grads.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

this is far worst, and makes '08 look like a flu.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Millions die of flu every year.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yeah and 08 was pretty bad.

And this will be worse.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

Paul Krugman was predicting the 2008 crash as far back as 2004.

The markets can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent, as the saying goes.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Terrible headline. The AI bubble will definitely burst, but stocks being undervalued is not "exactly" (or even approximately) "how the dot-com bubble burst". The bubble refers to overinvestment by overly optimistic opportunists overestimating the market, and it burst when thousands startups that failed to make a profit ran out of venture capital at about the same time. This is what's going to burst the AI bubble - it's just a question of when. The stock value thing, as the article itself explains (kind of), is just a symptom that investors are starting to sense/fear this getting near.

[–] NottaLottaOcelot@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago

I find it problematic that they are using forward PE as a comparison, because forward PE in and of itself is a guesstimate based on numbers a company puts out to attract investors. Sure, they can be audited, but there is plenty of creative accounting done to improve optics

load more comments
view more: next ›