Your argument appears to be that the stock market won't drop because stocks are held by members of the public whose opinions are controlled by technology? Or... that robots are holding the stock?
It doesn't have the rhetorical punch, but my boring traditional economics opinion is that it's probably a bubble because realized profit from these overvalued stocks is too far out in the future to buffer the inevitable liquidity shocks inherent in modern economies. Eventually someone will come up short and have to dump, and we'll get a feedback loop.
But admittedly robots are more fun.
You just need to save the bubble with an even bigger bubble.
If you're trying to compete with some country who can do things that you can't and there's nobody to be found who knows how to do the thing, isn't teaching your people the obvious thing to do?
The cost of not doing so will be cumulative, so sooner or later the ROI will be there. It's just a matter of how bad things need to get first. That is, unless there's something else we've got going for us that we can fall back on, but I'm not sure what that thing might be--we've been busy dismantling contenders for the job lately.
In Existence, Brin explores a speculative solution to the Fermi Paradox — the question of why we see no signs of extraterrestrial intelligence. The novel suggests that advanced civilizations create memetic or AI-based “message entities” — self-replicating digital ambassadors designed to spread across the galaxy to preserve their creators’ legacy or recruit new species.
This notion applies to other activities -- but basically, when a society puts all its resources to something other than its preservation then it expires in short order.
While many “small” businesses offering similar products compete on a marketplace subject to the law of supply and demand, large centralized monopolies compete for money producing “slots” often allocated through a political process. The political figures in control of these systems are often free from material needs and thus less motivated by profit.
At the extreme of political economy, money ceases to matter in the internal sense. A state can simply order workers to work without pay or be punished, burn debt that they don’t want to pay, or lock traders into a room with orders to buy. There is still an economy, but it becomes one of political favor which is earned through multiple mechanisms.
Without irony, this is my observation for how corporations work internally. The currency between teams is backscratching.
The USSR was a big corporation with a license of coercive force.
it is just simpler to claim that AI is useful hence the investment instead of a roundabout explanation with power.
This bubble will pop either way, but it could continue like this for years.
But those big companies going out of business won't be how the bubble pops. It'll be the 95% of projects / startups that don't have any ROI.
OAI all over the place and doesnt seem to have a direct thing its focused on executing, which only makes the idea of a bubble more real.
Bubbles can grow fine so long as no one wants their money back. But eventually they will, and then valuations will be real. When all these boomers draw their savings and buy themselves annuities, what's going to happen?
One pet theory of mine is that the US market goes up so much because of it's population growth. DM in Europe for example don't see this net inflow of people saving for retirement, instead the pressure is rather pensioners pulling money out.
Eventually though even the US stock market will have a reality check, and who knows what happens then.
If the Tesla Optimus will actually work (big if), you will be able to send that to beat down protests in Portland instead of the National Guard.