If there were a bubble right now, would it be suicide for a professor at the Stanford business school to be quoted by a reporter saying that?
I think there would be lot more pushback if you said that this will go to 10x or 100x or 10000x in a few years... That might be suicide...
> "It is very hard to time a bubble," Prof Admati told me. "And you can't say with certainty you were in one until after the bubble has burst."
This statement is very true. Even if we are in a bubble you should not make the mistake of trying to time it properly.
For example, look at Nvidia during the last cryptocurrency hype cycle. If you predicted that was a bubble and tried shorting their stock, you would have lost since it didn't drop at all at they successfully jumped from crypto to AI and continued their rise.
I am not saying crypto wasn't a bubble, and I am not saying AI isn't a bubble; I am saying it would be a mistake to try to time it. Just VT and chill.
Which prompted the question of whether there would be strong disincentive for any Stanford business school professor to give a non-innocuous response that would be a wet blanket on the AI ambitions surrounding them.
There's no penalty for anyone calling out what might seem like a bubble. If it turns out to be an actual bubble, they can claim to be prophetic visionaries.
If it turns out it's not a bubble, nobody bats an eye.